states, including california, oregon, virginia, washington state, delaware, maryland, a great many others, permit independent corporate expenditures for these purposes? a lot is spent on money for elections in california. have corporations corrupt the process there? >> i think some experiences cannot be more important than the 100-year-old dutchman of congress that these expenditures would -- 100-year-old judgment of congress that these expenditures would cause corruption. >> congress has their own interests. . . in fact, corporate and union money go o

in fact, corporate and union incumbents. this may be the single most -- if you look at the last election cycle and look at corporate pac money and ask where it goes, it goes ten times more to incumbents than to challengers. and in the prior election cycle, even more than that. and for an obvious reason. because when corporations play in the political process, they want winners. they want people who will produce outcomes for them. and they know that the way to get those outcomes, the way to get those winners is to invest in incumbents. and so that's what they do. as i said, in double digits times more than they invest in challengers. so i think that that rationale, which is undoubtedly true in many contexts, simply is not the case with respect to -- >> but, your honor, your

position, if a corporation's "a," "b" and "c" are called to washington every monday morning by a high-ranking administrative official or a high of ranking member of the congress , corporations have lots of knowledge about environment, transportation issues, and you're silencing them during the election. >> well -- >> when other corporations, because of the very fact you just point out, have already been used and are being used by the government to express its views. and you say another corporation can't object to that. >> well, to the extent, justice kennedy, that you're talking about what goes on in the halls

of congress, of course, corporations can lobby members of congress in the same way that they could before this legislation. but this legislation is designed to do, because of this anticorruption interest, is to make sure that that lobbying is just persuasion and it's not coercion. but in addition to that, of course, corporations have many opportunities to speak outside the halls of congress. the public. >> one of the amicus briefs objects response to justice kennedy's problem by saying the problem is that we've got to contribute to both parties. and a lot of them do, don't they? >> a lot of them do, which is a suggestion about how corporations engage the political process and how corporations are different from individuals in this respect. you know, an individual can be the wealthiest person in the world. but few of us -- maybe some -- but few of us are only our economic interests. we've beliefs, we have convictions, we have likes and dislikes. corporations engage the political process in an entirely different way, and this is what makes them so much more damaging. >> well, that's not -- i'm sorry, but that seems rather

odd. a large corporation just like an individual has many diverse interests. a corporation may want to support a particular candidate, but they may be concerned, just as you say, about what shareholders are going to think about that. they may be concerned that their shareholders would rather they spend their money doing something else. the idea that corporations are different than individuals in that respect, i just don't think holds up. >> well, all i was suggesting, mr. chief justice, is that corporations have actually a fiduciary obligation to their shareholders to increase value. that's their single purpose, their goal. >> so if a candidate -- let's take a tobacco company -- and a candidate running on the platform that they ought to make tobacco illegal, presumably that company would maximize its shareholders' interest by opposing the election of that individual. >> but everything is geared through the corporation's self-interest in order to maximize profits, in order to maximize revenue, in order to maximize value.

individuals are more complicated than that. so when corporations engage the political process, they do it with that set of, you know, blinders. i don't mean to be pejorative because that's what we want corporations to do. >> well, i suppose some do, but let's say if you have ten individualskorpgs want us to do >> if you have ten individuals and they each contribute $1,000 to the corporation and say, we want this corporation to convey a particular message, why can't they do that? if they did that as a partnership it would be all right? >> well, it's sound to me like the corporation you're describing is the corporation of the kind we have in this case, where one can assume the members all sign on to the corporation's ideological mission. where the corporation, in fact, has an ideological mission. >> general keegan, most corporations are indistinguishable from the individual who owns them. the local hairdresser. the new auto

dealership -- dealer who has just lost his dealership and who wants to oppose whatever congress, maybe, he thinks was responsible for this happening or whatever congressman won't try to patch it up by getting the auto company to undo it. there's no distinction between the individual interest and corporate interest and that's true for the vast majority of corporations. yet, this law freezes all of them out. >> you know, to the extent we're only talking about single shareholder corporations i would ask why it's any burden on the single shareholder to make the expenditures to participate in the political process in the way that person wants to outside the corporate form. so single shareholders aren't suffering any burden here. they can do everything they could within the corporate form out side the corporate form. they probably don't get the tax break they would get inside the corporation form but i'm not sure anything else is very

different. >> well, smaller corporations, as justice scalia is talking about. they can't even give money to charities sometimes because of ultra -- giving political contributions is not typical corporate activity. >> i remember spending quite a few days one summer reading through a thousand pages of opinion in the d.c. circuit. and i came away pt distinct impression that congress has built an enormous record of support for this bill in the evidence. and my recollection is that it's now a couple of years old. there was a lot of information in that which suggested that many millions of voters think at the least, that large corporate and union expenditures or contributions in favor of a candidate, lead the benefitted political figure to decide why,

specifically, in favor of the contributing or expending organization. the corporation or union. >> yes. >> it was on the basis of that, i think, that this court upheld the law in bikra that we heard from the other side there isn't much of a record on the. so if you can save me some time here, perhaps you can point me we, if i'm right, toes the thousand pages of opinion and tens of thousands of underlying bits of evidence where there might be support for that proposition? >> that's right, justice. in addition to the 100-year-old judgment, that recently, members of congress and others created a gigantic record showing there was corruption and the appearance of corruption. and in that record, many times senators, former senators, they talk about the way in which fundraising is in the front of their mind in everything they

do. the way they grant access and influence and the way in which outcomes likely change as a result of that. >> can i ask, it seems -- to your shareholder protection rationale, isn't it extraordinarily patternalistic for the government to take the position is shareholders are too stupid to keep track of what their corporations are doing and can't sell their shares or object in the corporate context if they don't like it? >> i don't think so, mr. chief justice. i, for one, can't keep track of what my -- where i hold -- >> well you have a busy job. you can't expect -- >> it's not have a have a busy job it's -- >> but it is extraordinary. the idea as i understand the rationale, is that we, the government, big brother, has to protect shareholders from themselves. they might give money or buy shares in a corporation and they don't know that the corporation is taking out radio ads. the government has to keep an eye on their interest. >> i appreciate that.

it's not that i have a busy job. it's that i, like most americans own shares through mutual funds. you don't know where your mutual funds are investing so -- >> i understand. so it is a patternalistic interest. we, the government, have to protect you naive shareholders? >> in a world in which most people own stock through mutual funds. in a world in which most people own stock through retirement plans where they have to invest, they have no choice, i think it's very difficult for individual shareholders to be able to monitor what each company they own assets in is doing or even to know the extent of this. >> in that respect it's unlike the union because the worker who does not want to affiliate with the union cannot have funds from his own pocket devoted to political causes but there's no comparable check for a corporation. >> that's exactly right, justice ginsburg. and the union context it's a

constitutional right that the unions give back, essentially, the funds that any union member or employee in the workplace does not want used for electoral purposes. >> does that mean that unions should be taken out because there isn't the same -- does the shareholder protection interest -- there's no parallel for the union? >> you're right about that. the government believes that with respect to unions, the anti-corruption interest is as strong and that unions should be kept in. i think what your point suggests, the union member point suggests why congress thought there was a compelling interest to protect corporate shareholders in the same way that, let's say, dissenting union members are protected by the constitution. there's no state action, of course, so there's no constitutional right in the corporate context. but congress made a judgment that it was an important value that shareholders have this choice, have the ability, both

to invest in our country's assets and, also, to be able to choose our country's leaders. >> it's not investing in our country's -- >> the argument -- >> in the course of this argument have you covered point two? >> i very much appreciate that. >> i'd like to know what it is so my notes are complete. >> i appreciate that, justice kennedy. that was an explanation of some of the questions the chief justice asked me about what interest the government was suggesting motivated these laws and are compelling enough such that this court certainly should not invalidate these laws. >> i take the we have never accepted your shareholder protection interest? this is a new argument? >> you know, i think that that's fair. certainly, bilotti does not accept it. national right to work is an interesting opinion because national right to work accepts for unanimous court both the

shareholder protection argument and the anti-corruption argument with respect to section 441.b in particular. in later cases the court suggested that national right to work was only focused on contributions. if you read national right to work, that distinction really does not -- it's not evident on the face of the opinion and i think chief justice rehnquist in a later dissent suggested he never understood it that way so national right to work is a confusion on this point. it might have been that -- >> other than that -- and i think there may be some ambiguity there, but i wouldn't say in our is a holding on shareholder protection. so to the extent you abandoned the original rationale in austin and articulated different rash as. you have two, the did prokuo prodetection interest and the shareholder protection interest. >> which we think was in austin. >> austin, i thought, was based

on the aggregation of immense wealth by corporations. >> you know, again, austin is not the most clear opinion but the way we understand austin, what austin was suggesting was that the corporate form gave corporations significant assets other people's money, that when the corporation spent those assets -- >> can you give me the citation of the page in austin where we accepted the shareholder protection rationale? >> i think it comes when the court is distinguishing mcfl and the message of that distinction of mcfl is the shareholder protection interest. but -- >> do the words "shareholder protection" appear in the austin opinion? >> i honestly don't know, mr. chief justice and i don't want to push this too far. >> let's assume they don't, then i'll get back to my question which is, you're asking us to defend the austin or support or continue the austin opinion on the basis of two rationales that

we have never >> i would say on the quid pro quo, of course you have accepted that rationale in many contexts. what has changed since that time is the record that was suggested that was very strong on the notion that there was no difference when it came to corporate contributions and expenditures, that there actually was no difference between the two. >> is that a yes? you are asking us to uphold austin on the basis up to compelling interest we have never accepted. in this particular context, fair enough. >> and to undercut buckley in so doing. >> i do not think so, because i think buckley was about individuals rather than corporations, and buckley was in 1976, not in 2009, after the very extensive record that was created.

i see my time is up. >> one question that was highlighted in the prior argument, if congress could say no tv and radio ads, could also say no newspaper ads, no campaign biographies? the last time, the answer was yes, congress could, but it did not. is that still the government's answer? didn't. is that still the government's answer? >> the government's answer has changed, justice ginsburg. it is still true that bikra 203 which is the only statute involved in this case does not apply to this or anything other than broadcast. 441 b does on its face, apply to other media. and we took what the court's own reaction to some of those

hypotheticals, very seriously. we went went back and considered the matter carefully. and the government's view is that although 441b does cover full-length books this would be quite good as applied challenge to any attempt to apply for 441 b in that context. they have never applied 441 b in that context. so for 60 years a book has never been at issue. >> what happened to the overbreadth doctrine? i thought our doctrine in the first amendment is if you write it too broadly we're not going to pair it back to the point where it's constitutional if it's overbroad it's invalid. what happened to that? >> i don't think it would be substantially overbroad. if i tell you the fcc has never applied this statute to a book to say it doesn't apply to books is to take off, essentially, nothing from the -- >> we don't put our first amendment rights in the hand of

ffc bureaucrats and if you say you're not going to apply it to a book, what about a pamphlet? >> i think a pamphlet would be different. a pamphlet is pretty classic election. this is no attempt to say the 441 b only applies to video and not to print. >> what is the particular -- what if the particular movie involved here had not been distributed by the video on demand? suppose that -- people could view it for free on netflix over the internet? so that free dvds were passed out. suppose people could attend the movie for free in a movie theater? expose the exact text of this was distributed in a printed form. in height of your retraction, i have no idea where the government would draw the line with respect to the medium of that. it could be prohibited. >> well, none of those things, again, are covered. >> no, but could they?

which of them could and which could not? i understand you to say books could not. >> yes. i think what we're saying is that there has never been an enforcement action for books. nobody has ever suggested, nobody in congress or nobody in the administrative apparatus has suggested that books pose this problem. >> so you're a lawyer advising somebody that's about to come up with a book and you say, don't worry. the fec has never tried to send somebody to prison for this? this statute covers it but don't worry. the fec has never done it. will that comfort your client? i don't think so. >> but this statute don't cover books. >> that's exactly right. the only statute involved in this case does not cover books. so 441 b which -- >> does cover books. >> -- which does cover books except what i just said that

they would be a good as applied challenge and there has been no minimum administrative practice of ever applying extra books. and also only applies to expressed advocacy. 203 has a broader category of the functional equivalent of expressed and one can't meet this as the court understood that. >> i'm sorry we suggested some in the last argument. you have a hisself rf of union organizing in politics and the last sentence says -- in light of all this, vote for jones. >> i think that wouldn't be covered, mr. chief justice. the fec is very careful and says this in all its regulations to view matters as a whole. and as a whole, that book would not count at express advocacy.

>> thank you, general? >> mr. waxman? >> mr. chief justice and may it please the court, the requirement that corporations fund electoral add okay si, the same way individuals do, that is with money voluntarily committed by people associated with the corporation is grounded in interests that are so compelling that 52 years ago, before buckley was decided. before feca was enacted. before buckley-style quid pro quo corruption was ever addressed this court explained that, quote, what is involved here is the integrity of our electoral process and not less,

the responsibility of the individual citizen for the successful functioning of that process. if the court now wishes to reconsider the existence and extent of the interests that underlie that sentiment, expressed for the court by justice frank forter, supporting political candidates, it should do so in a case in which those interests are forthrightly challenged with a proper and full record below. . >> one of the amicus briefs, maybe professor hayward, suggested that the history of this 1947 provision was such that it really wasn't enforced because people were concerned about the first amendment interests. and that the courts, to the extent cases were brought, did everything they could to avoid enforcing the limitations.

>> well, i don't recall who the professor was either, mr. chief justice but i recall pretty well the history that was recounted -- i would say the history recounted by this court in the autoworkers' case, in cio, in the pipe fitter's case, which is quite inconsistent with that. we've never had a case until this court supplemental order. we've never had a case that challenged directly, quote, austin and austin-style corruption, which is a term i think that is quite misleading. when the sober-minded root was moved to stand up in 1894, and urged the people of the united states and urged the congress of the united states tone act legislation that would address, quote, a constantly-growing evil which has done more to shake the confidence of plain people of small means of the country in our political institutions, than

any practice which has ever obtained since the founding of our government, he was not engaging in a high-level discussion about political philosophy. >> but he was talking about contributions in that context? is that clear? >> with all due respect, justice kennedy, i don't think there was any distinction whatsoever in that time, between the distinction that this court came to understand as a result of feca and its adjudication of it and the prehistory of taft-hartley, between contribution expenditures. what it said, and i'm quoting from the speech which is partly reprinted in this court's opinion in mcconnell, the idea is to prevent the great companies, the great aggregations of wealth from using corporate funds directly or indirectly to send members of

the legislature to these halls in order to vote for their protection in the advancement of their interests as against those of the public. >> great aggregations of wealth? the brief think chamber of commerce, the amicus brief by the chamber of commerce points out that 96% of its members employ less than 100 people. these are not aggregations of great wealth. you're not talking about the rail road barons and the trusts of the root era. you're talking mainly about small business corporations. >> justice scalia, i take your point and i think you've made this point forcefully many times before. a unanimous force if national right to work committee concluded that congress was entitled to make the judgment that it would treat, in order to

address this root evil, a problem of such concern it goes to the very foundation of the democratic republican exercise. that is, the notion of integrity and representative government. now this case, of course, is not a case that is -- >> i don't understand that answer. if that's what they were concerned about they could say all corporations with a net worth so much or whatever. that isn't what congress did. it said all corporations. >> and you cities, scalia, if a small corporation or any corporation of any sort wants to bring an as-applied challenge to 441 b or a state law analog and say, you know, i am not the problem that theodore roosevelt and lsu root was addressed at. there isn't a compel compelling interest because i only have three employees and $8 in a bank

account. that's fine. buts what truly extraordinary, given the sentiments that underlay the tillman act and the taft hartley act is that we're having a discussion today about the koconstitutionality of a la that's bon on the books that no corporation has ever raised the challenge. >> it's been on the books forever. number one, the phenomenon of television ads where we get information about scientific discovery and environment transportation issues from corporations who, after all, have patents because they know something, that is different. and the history you applied applied a contributions not to those kinds of expenditures. >> justice kennedy, first of all, i think it is actually true that patents are owned by individuals and not corporations. but be that as it may, there's no doubt -- i'm not here saying that this court should reconsider bilotti on first

principles any more than i'm saying it shouldn't consider austin on first principals. corporations can and do speak about a wide range of public policy issues and since the controlling opinion was issued in wisconsin right to life, the kind of campaign-related speech that corporations can't engage in the pre-election period is limited to the functional kwif lept of expre-- equivalency of advocate -- >> this is pe4rplexing. it sounds like the sound bytes you hear on tv. the fact of the matter is the only cases that are being re -- that may possibly be reconsidered or mcconnell and austin and they don't go back 50 years or 100 years. >> my point here is, jaw city alito, and i don't mean to be demeaning this court with sound bytes, the point is that what austin was to be sure, the very

first case in which this court had to decide actually had to decide whether or not the prohibition on corporate-funded campaign speech could be properly limited and supported by a compelling interest. all i'm suggesting and i hope if you take nothing else from this today is this -- we have here a case in which the court has asked a question that essentially goes to the bona fide -- factual predicates of the interests that have been viewed as compelling in austin and in mcfl and in mcconnell itself. whether you call it the corrosive effect of corporate wealth. whether you call it, quote, shareholder protection -- >> and my point is that there's nothing unusual whatsoever about a case that the party says, my

constitutional rights were violated and there's no prior in that situation, is it an answer to that argument that this is never been challenged before? the court has never held that it was unconstitutional, it has been accepted up until this point by the general public that this is constitutional? that is now regarded as an answer to that question. rex mr. olson was quite right. one of them was saying that in response to justice sodomite pose the question, there is absolutely nothing in this case -- justice sotomayor's question. any restriction is it imposes must pass strict scrutiny. very tough. the question has to be raised, if boston or the compelling

interest that austin and mcconnell relied on were forthrightly challenged in a ld have e government -- the option to -- >> mr. waxman, the government did that have opportunity and the government compiled a record and when the citizens united, abandoned that position, you're quite right they changed their course -- the government and district court complained it went to all this work to develop this record and yet we hear nothing about what the record showed. >> that's because -- i assume i have your permission to answer? >> yes. >> the only challenges that were litigated in the district court -- and they were largely related to disclosure -- were very direct as-applied challenges that did nothing whatsoever to implicate the foundation of mcconnell or austin. and all i'm saying is that if you want to re-examine the

predicates, the interest that congress is going back a whether it's 60 years or 100 years and courts, whether it has been the actual rationale of the decision or a predicate of the rationale of the decision, you ought to do it in a case where the issue is squarely presented so that the government can do what it did in mcconnell and in another context, in michigan versus gruder when it was suggested that adiran undermined this court's controlling opinion. >> thank you, mr. waxman. mr. olson, five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chief justice. the words i would leave with this court are the solicitor general's. the government's position has changed. the government's position has changed as to what media might be covered by congressional power to sensor and ban speech by corporations. now we learn contrary to what we

heard in march, that books couldn't be prohibited but pamphlets could be prohibited. we also learned -- >> that's not the -- the statute we're involved in in this case does not cover those. >> unless they are engaged in, quote, expressed abvocacy. the government says now, that the fec is now willing to recede from its regulations which explicitly covered this corporation and i don't know, as i stand here today, what kind of corporations the government would choose to prosecute. remember, the federal election commission, which didn't even have a quorum and couldn't function at all for six months during the important election year of 2008 -- >> what you have to do is prosecute only those that do not -- who do not rely exclusively on individual

contributions. >> well, that's your question from before, justice stephens, and, a, this corporation accepted a small amount, $2,000 out of the funding of this so that wouldn't solve the problem for my client's corporation. >> but it would solve it forefor the advertising. they are two different things. the hillary document and the advertisements. it would cover those. but they are the only ones that are clearly violatesing the statute. >> the overbreadth of this statute solves the probably saying corporations still can't speak and if you don't have anything to do with them they wear a scarlet letter that says, c, if you accept one dollar of funding and you better make darn sure when a check comes in for $100 from the xyz hardware in the neighborhood it wasn't a corporation you used to make a documentary about a candidate. the other way in which the government's position has changed is we do not know as -- >> does this mean you disagree with the nra's submission?

>> i submit it doesn't the problem. it leads exactly -- >> if it solved the problem as it did for advertising would by the an appropriate solution? >> i can't say it solved the problem because it doesn't solve the problem of prohibiting all corporate speech and i'm submitting, justice stephens that that's unconstitutional. i think what you're suggesting is that some lig limitation, what you're suggesting is not a whole lot different than pack. it would lead -- i think it was an accounting nightmare. it would be -- >> but it's a nightmare congress endorsed in the snow v jefferson -- >> but the wellstone amendment applied. we unanimously held thatd that. >> i think what my response is that that does not solve the problem of inhibiting of one's -- >> you do not endorse the nra's position? >> we don't. and it wouldn't exempt my

clients. the third way in which the government's changed its position is its rationale for 24 prohibition in the first place. is it corruption? is it equalization? with some dispute i heard the solicitor general sas the equalization rationale was something the government disavowed. it wasn't what austin said the government said. and -- >> justice marshall said he was not trying to equalize all voices in the political process. here's a sentence that says that's not what the rationale of this case is. >> with all due respect, justice ginsburg, the words that jump out at me are the words from page 665 that say the they sier to counterbalance those advantages unique to the corporate form is the state's compelling interest in this case. that sounds to me like equalization. i don't know. i'm representing an individual who wants to speak about something that's most important

thing that goes on in our democracy. i'm told it's a felony. i'm not -- and i don't know what the rational basis is. it's overbroad. now i hear about this protecting shareholders. there's not a word in the congressional record with respect to -- which was before the court in the mcconnell case -- about protecting shareholders. at the bilotti pointed out that would be overbroad anyway because this applies to -- >> i just read that sentence as meaning the corporation is an artificial person in respect to which the state creates many abilities and capacities and the free is free to create disabilities and capacities. it's not a statement about balancing rich and poor. >> it strikes me that it is. it follows the words that say, corporations are given unique advantages to aggregate wealth and then we must take away the advantage by equalizing the process. i think that's plain meaning. but my point is, i guess, if i may finish this sentence. >> briefly.

>> my point is that the government here has an overbroad statute that covers every corporation, irrespective of what the stock holders think. irrespective of whether it's big or general -- a big railroad or anything like that. and it doesn't know, as it stands here today, two years after this movie was offered for -- offered to the public for its view, what media might be covered. what type of corporation might be covered. and what compelling ju justification or narrow standard would bewhat type of corporatio be covered. and what compelling ju justification or narrow standard would bewhat type of corporatio be covered. and what compelling ju justification or narrow standard would bewhat type of corporatio be covered. and what the court originally heard this case back in march. the new supreme court term begins on monday, october 5. you can get more information on this case or watch this program again at c-span.org.

just click on "america and the courts." join us saturday evenings at 7:00 eastern on c-span for "america and the courts." >> next, a memorial for cbs anger walter cronkite. then president obama at a health-care rally in minnesota. after that, another chance to see the supreme court oral argument in citizens united versus the federal election commission. >> a memorial service was held for walter cronkite on wednesday in manhattan. cronkite anchored the cbs evening news. he died on july 17 at the age of

92. now, president obama, former president bill clinton, cbs colleagues and others share their memories of cronkite and discuss his influence on journalism. this is about two hours and 20 minutes. >> i would like to welcome you to what i think will be a very fitting and lasting tribute to someone whose stature and influence will never be duplicated. i would like to welcome and thank president obama and president clinton for joining us here this morning, and also walters children, nancy, kathy, and chip. i am also happy to report that walter cronkite the fourth is gainfully employed as an injured -- an intern in our washington bureau, so the cronkite tradition is alive and well at cbs news. [applause]

we begin today with the marines marching band playing stars and stripes, which is appropriate because that was his favorite march. also because walter was one of only two civilians, the other being john philip sousa, who conducted this great band, so thank you very much for that. [applause] my dad, better known as jim mckay, worked with walter in the 1950's, and in 1960, walter was a last-minute replacement for my father, who was scheduled to anger his first olympics, the summer games in rome. i father became ill and unable to travel to rome, and walter filled in for him. years later we talked about how much she enjoyed his exports

assignments, and my desk desire to be a network news anchor. he said to me, if things had worked out differently, perhaps i would have been the sports announcer, and your dad would have been the news anchor. i think they did just fine in their respective careers. in 1972, i accompanied my dad back to his hotel in munich after he had been on television for 18 hours straight reporting on the massacre of the olympic team. i still remember walking into the hotel just as the sun was coming up. my dad asked for his key at the front desk, and being handed an envelope from western union. it said jim, you were superb yesterday, the profession and the industry have reason to be proud of you. congratulations, walter cronkite. it was the very burst of hundreds of notes that my dad received from america, and it was typical walter, simple, but

so perfectly worded. my dad and i just looked at each other, and my dad said to me it is never going to get better than this moment right now. many years later when i got my job at cbs news, i was in my office on the morning of the announcement, calling the various bankers -- anchors and members of the news team. my assistant said walter cronkite was on the phone for me. i stood up at my desk at attention and i took a deep breath, and picked up the phone. i said good morning, and he replied, hello, boss. i literally gasped and said what first came into my mind. please do not, yet, mr. cronkite. the fact that i could somehow be walter cronkite's boss seemed to be the height of absurdity. as soon as we finished our conversation, i immediately called my parents and said you

are not going to believe who just called me boss. [laughter] when i told them, there was a long silence, and i knew we were all thinking of how the family history had come full circle, from the early days at cbs news in the 1950's to the day walter called to congratulate me on my new job. like all moms, mine had the best advice for me. just make sure you call him mr. cronkite and not walter. at our first love, i did call him mr. cronkite, and he insisted that i call him walter -- at our first lunch. those of us in the news business are instinctively influenced every day, not only by his remarkable body of work, but by what he stood for also, integrity, perspective, professionalism, and yes, a

sense of humor. that is why walter fare so well, and why no matter what the story he was covering, his demeanor, his reporting, and his presentation for virtually flawless. his enormous professional accomplishments aside, it is also important to remember that there was a warmth and a compassion about walter that is almost indescribable. those who knew him will also tell you that there was never a better or more loyal friend. all of us at cbs news will continue to ms. walter, but how lucky or week that in some small way, we are able to carry on the tradition and the rock-solid foundation that he built for us, and not just for those of us at cbs news, but for everyone in the news business. in a remembered cent of the new york times, " it was summed up perfectly what the life of walter cronkite means to us all. "some deaths in only a life. some in a generation.

walter cronkite's death in something larger and more profound. he stood for a world and a century and that no longer exists. his death is like losing the last veteran of the world changing more, one of those men who sought to much, but was never embittered by its. walter cronkite's gift was to talk to us about what he saw, and we were very lucky to have been able to listen." i would say we were very lucky indeed. thank you very much. [applause] >> to the cronkite family, his children cathy, and chip, president obama, and all of our distinguished guests, friends, colleagues, and fellow admirers of walter cronkite, it

is a deep honor to be here to pay respects to an extraordinary man who touched the lives of so many in such a simple, yet profound way. remarkable group of people gathered for this event. i am in awe over the feelings of affection and respect that walter continuing to evoke in our nation, and in each one of us as individuals. certainly all of us were always so proud to say that he was a member of our family. throughout his career, and until the end of his life. we also realizes that of any national treasure he belonged not only to us, but the entire

world. but he did make everyone in our business a little bit prouder of what we do for a living. i would venture to say there isn't a person in this room today in the profession who wasn't in some way inspired by walter cronkite to go into the media. it was certainly that way with me. when i was a kid i alwaysed wanted to work at a network. but not just any network. i wanted to work at cbs. it was the great history. "i love lucy," "gunsmoke." the terrific coverage of nfl. especially there was walter. he was there every evening to carry my whole family through the stories that changed our world. the assassination of president kennedy, the moment we landed on the moon, vietnam, watergate.

he told us the way it was with an honestly and unique warmth and humanity that touched all of us so deeply, that he came to be seen not only as most trusted newsman, but as a member of our common family. a next door neighbor perhaps, a friend or cousin, or yet an uncle. like shawn, on my first day at cbs, walter gave me a call. and i said to myself, man, you have a cool job. it was a lovely gesture from my hero, in addition to his major significance as a world figure, he was a true gent and that came through in everything he did. he gave us the news right down the middle, but he did more. he told us it was okay to react, to be human through these massive events.

with the total dignity and professionalism, that was his great gift. he also allowed us to see his excitement, his grief, his pride, and sometimes even his outrage. and this way he guided us through the times we all lived in and shared. i say shared because walter was the center of a community. a community created to our medium. the scene around our tv was replicated in every home around our block and most blocks around america. and in this way walter cronkite helped to create and strengthen our entire nation at the most critical times. and he made us more fully aware of values and culture that we all share together, and the power of broadcasting. that power to bring us together, to teach, to guide, to build a national consensus continues to

this day. but walter cronkite more than any other individual made it happen. we were in his hands as people and as apeople. and he kept faith with that trust. he leaves us with that legacy and that responsibility. we now move forward without him in sadness at our lost and with a gratitude for a life so wonderful. now i introduce the honorable bill clinton. [applause] >> thank you very much. thank you.

thank you. [applause] thank you. thank you. thank you. >> to the cronkite family and his cbs family, mr. president, i think it says a lot about what walter cronkite meant to all of us that on one of the most important days in his young presidency and a very important days in our nation's life president obama when he has his big speech tonight still came to new york to honor walter cronkite. thank you. [applause]

and since walter is not doing the news anymore, he doesn't have to be quite so objective. i think i can say that he and all the rest of us wish you well tonight. and we hope you revail. [applause] i had a very unusual perspective on all of this. i was just a high school kid in arizona who had a tv for less than, oh, five years, i think, when walter cronkite started doing the evening news. and i have to confess, my mother liked huntley and brinkley. until -- until we kept on cbs

all day long on november 22nd, 1963. and after that, we lived with walter cronkite. that's all i knew. years past, 1981 he left. i formed some real opinions as a young student. i thought that he had the most trusted news program because he had an inquiring mind and a caring heart, and a careful devotion to the facts, and because you really senses that in the words of his own autobiography, he had a deep

conversion. he was always looking for the story, not the story line. and there's a big difference. but after he left cbs, i didn't think much more about it. i looked at some of his specials. and then when i became president we were vacationing on martha's vineyard together. and we'd be thrown together at dinner parties or receptions. and he started talking to me about his young years before tv, and when he worked for upi, when like ronald reagan did third-hand radio accounts for sporting events. and in kansas city when it was a pretty hot town, and houston before it was one of our great

atropalesss. i just wound up being crazy about the guy, and it has nothing to do with all of the things we're honoring him about today. i thought he was one of the most interesting man i ever saw. and i saw a lot of his qualities that made him great in television he became by honestly. keep in mind, one of the most moving accounts to me was dancing with his mother on her 100th birthday. and at the end of their dance she said i thought she was exhausted, and she asked me to get her medicine. i came back with it and she said no, walter, i wanted a martini. [laughter] >> so that's the guy i got to know. we continue to see each other,

we'd be thrown together after i left the white house. but i thought he was an astonishing man. i liked his inquiring mind and his caring heart. and he did something for my family that was so simple, and even know it's hard for me to talk about. but in a very tumultuous summer in our personal lives we were up on martha's vineyard and he said we want you to go sailing with us. you and hillary and chelsea. we'll just go out and sail around. he said somebody might take a picture of it. but so what. i'll never forget that. at the time, i could have done with a picture with walter

cronkite. [laughter] >> i saw this because that wasn't something he had to do. he was 81 years old. he was a good man. yes, he was a great journalist. and he lived a fascinating life which made him long to know and understand and to share his knowledge and understanding. he was almost painfully honest. one of the most interesting things to me about his august biography, and personal conversations later about his

role in trying to advance public discourse was what he thought about the limitations of television news. what he spent his whole life doing. i did the best i should. but really i think people should read more newspapers. could you imagine anybody else fessing up to that? [laughter] >> so i'm here to say thanks to his family and his wonderful late wife for a man what was important in all of our lives, a great citizen, and a profoundly good human being. that's just the way it was. thank you. that's just the way it was. thank you. [applause]

>> it is hard to follow bill clinton. i am jimmy buffett. [applause] walter was my sailing buddy, and i cherish that as long as i will live. i always made a pilgrimage up to martha's vineyard, not only to sail with walter, but to figure out what walter thought of the world as it was. as a cbs man and a cbs audience out here, i will relate one thing. as we sailed around, it was obvious that we talked a little bit more about sailing and other things as well, particularly

when we got back to the dock and the rum drinks came out. . . you something. i'm thinking about wearing an earring on "60 minutes." now i saw the earring. but i went "60 minutes." this is going to be good. he said what do you think? what i think, i said, is we should ask walter. i'm going to go sailing with him, and i'll pass on your idea. we went out and had a great sailing day. we came back. we were sitting there at the helm. it was the right time. he said walter, ed called me, he's thinking about wearing an earring on "60 minutes." he said doesn't matter if he wears an earring as long as it's a good story.

but -- he said in the long-john-silver-tone-of voice. if i was going to wear one of those, i'd wear one of those big long dangling ones. so to my sailing buddies. here's a little sailing song. ♪ ♪ ♪ as the sun of -- son of a son of a sailor, i went out for adventure ♪ ♪ expanding the crew for the captain and crew like a man just released ♪ note as a dreamer of dreams ♪ ♪ and a traveling man ♪ well, i chalked up many of miles ♪ ♪ read dozens of books about heros and crooks ♪

♪ hell i learned much from both of their styles ♪ ♪ son of a son ♪ son of a son ♪ son of a son of a sailor ♪ son of a gun notice one step ahead of the jailer ♪ ♪ now way in the future ♪ southeast of the order ♪ you can shake the hand of the mango man ♪ ♪ as he greets you at the border ♪ the lady she hails from the island of the spices ♪ ♪ it's all where you meet ♪ cinnamon sweet ♪ and good-byes for all your advices ♪ ♪ and we'd ride on the wind

♪ hear the bells ring ♪ and sing, it's a son of a gun of a chorus ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ so where this all ends, i can't fathom my friends ♪ ♪ if i knew i just might toss out my anchor ♪ ♪ but i'll cruise along ♪ always searching for something ♪ ♪ not a lawyer, a thief, or a banker ♪ ♪ i'm still the son of a son ♪ son of a son of a sailor ♪ the seas in my band ♪ the tradition ♪ i'm just glad i don't live in a trailer ♪

♪ ♪ [applause] >> thank you, walter. >> we are here to celebrate the life of walter cronkite. this has been a sad summer in

the history of cbs news. above us the stars seem to be going out one by one. walter in july, don in august, and ed bradley three years ago. the three who fought the same battles together proudly and passionately. writers have said that walter's passing is the end of an era. the phrase so often used than it seems to be more eras than years in the century. when it comes to memory, nostalgia is a lier. i believe he deserves his own era. i started as a researcher in 1968. and i stayed at cbs for almost 30 years. since i'm a naturalized american-born citizen worn in whales, but working for a

japanese company now, i have something of a identity crisis. but back in 1968 i knew who i was. many of the best years of my life was spent with walter and his band of journalists. there are, i think, three reasons why walter inspired so much trust both inside and outside cbs news. first his personality which included as many have said a wicked sense of humor, as well as a total lack of pretension. second his self-awareness which allowed him to define the role without letting it twine him. and third the leadership skill which maybe the secret to his longevity and universal respect. as for her personality, he clearly loved the job. he could charm his way through

the mary tyler moore show without compromising one iota of his creditability. i produced my first documentary of walter. it was about the rock feller family. and the first question walter asked who nelson rocker feller was, did you believe in santa clause? the silence was deafening. walter had stumped the billionaire with the kind of manner. people waited to see if the rich were different. and they were. [laughter] sometimes walter's genial nature could trap him. in one such incident, he was

interviewing president lyndon johnson in texas in 1969. walter asked the president about his decision to halt the bombing and directly challenges the president's version of the timetable, as when the custom of the day, the president left the studio and we arranged the room to shoot the reverses. the interview had not gone well. the president was evasive, which each answering lasting at least 30 minutes. at one point the cameraman fell asleep looking through his lens. [laughter] >> the question was clearly the pivotal moment in the broadcast, so the producers suggested in the reverses walter ask that question for forcefully. when the president saw the final broadcast he was furious. that's not the way it happened, he said. walter is too much of a gentleman to address me that

way. under pressure the news president changed the rules for the interview on book of standards. never again without the subject leave the room. inadvertently, the personal character resulted in the change in standards and practices for television news, all for the better. walter was of course a thoroughly decent man. i remember watching his face at luncheon when the president explained how communist behave. they are, like he said, a women who lets you touch her leg. pretty soon they will let you put your hand up her skirt. walter was completely shocked, and didn't know what to say. and he later told me he tried to find a place to hide. walter was untrustedly a man in america, it could have been a

burden who crushed lesser men. he once admitted that the anchorman's role could at times be something of a straight jacket, smothering many of his own thoughts and opinions. he knew there was a price to pay in a media spotlight that burns as much as it illuminates. i believe his family and wife helps to keep him on an even field. a few weeks ago, a senator commented walter's years were easier. the vietnam war arose passions that drove american youth into the streets in search of change or the drive for rare issue equality provided a bookend to the period that still resonates today. walter stood in the eye of that storm exuding a kind of calm that formed the world

anchorman. the scarcity of his reactions were meaningful beyond measure. the tears of sorrow after the assassinations, tears of joy, and the moment of when he declared a stale meat, and he said if i've lost cronkite, i've lost middle america. most of all his leadership skills. many of us grew up with the legend of the merrill boys. they invented radio news. from 1962 to 1981 walter guided and guarded the "cbs evening news" on television. he never lost his bond with

television or colleagues either. aided by key producers there may have been revolutionary thoughts on the street, but not in the newsroom. there were flashes of irritation and anger after a broadcast, but there was solidarity in the studio. not enough has been said about the cronkite boys who handled the complexities of global issues from the vietnam war to the cold war from black america to black september to assassinations to watergate. they stood and kept their integrity and intelligence solidly entertwined. the investigation most admired reporter and later stole "60 minutes." roger who dean of core

correspondence and the power of the state department, dan rather, white house correspondent who would always knock down doors than check to see if they were locked. bob schieffer who reminded peers that if you could report with a smile and not just a sneer. leslie stall, molly safer, who watched zippo lighters ignite a fire at capitol. and jack lawrence, bob simon, the eyes and ears of the middle east, bill plant, charles oscar,

who reminds us that there were thousands of ordinary people still painting the tapestry of america in vivid colors. and walters great friend andy rooney who's trusty typewriter still connects us to the founding years. reporters producers, writers and camera crews were managed and >> it is perhaps the greatest epithet that none of these men and women resented his power or challenged his commitment. they trusted him, too. if history as it has been said is the biography of heroes, then the history of broadcast journalism is surely the biography of walter cronkite. and frankly, for all of us and for his family, as the president said, "that's just the way it is." thank you. [applause]

>> i have listened with envy today and over the last few weeks to those whose friendship with walter lasted nearly a lifetime. mine did not. though we were acquainted from the 1970's, we did not become friends until late in life for both of us. it was some interminable event in southern california. we both escaped to a remote corner and started to talk. and by whatever alchemy determine such things, over the course of that evening we became

friends. we had both been born toe a very different america in the mid south. it had marked us in similar ways. we laughed at the same things, felt the same way about some of the great issues that had washed over us, became reporters as teenagers and never wanted to be anything else. i was not unaware of the disparity of our experiences. and if on occasion i forgot, my wife of 50 years, nina, was there to remind me. for instance, once several years ago, when betsy was still with us, walter and betsy and nina and i went to a favorite restaurant not so far from here, patsy's down on 56th street. lunch started promptly at noon and was still going strong at 3:00. i am told that stock of johnny

walker black went up several points on the willing board that day. i have no independent verification of that. know, however, that as nina and i walked back to our hotel, i very exuberance and enthusiastically said isn't that wonderful, too old news guys telling each other stories? and nina said yep, you told him about the new port kentucky firefighters' strike and he told you about anwar sadat. [laughter] well, perhaps nina and i miss the point. walter wanted to know about that strike. he wanted to know how i got the beat on it. [laughter] it was always about the story, wasn't it? it was about news and reporting. we talked about the last 15

years of his life from coast to coast, then you to the new and even beyond the shores. a memorable vacation, italy as well. of course our time together coincided with a volcanic eruption in our profession. the profession that had been mother and father to both of us. characteristically, walter didn't seem much concerned about the revolution in all these delivery systems. somebody was minding the store on the content. and he didn't just fume about it, did he? no, he got into the fray. he put the towering reputation on the line. he stood at the barricades if you will forgive an old-fashioned word, valiant, valley and to last. a funny thing, of course he was irritated and sometimes outraged at what he saw. but i never saw him pessimistic.

even at his great age, he still believed it all. jefferson's aquarium called nothing was so nearly infallible as the deliberate will of the free people. he believed that. he knew it wouldn't be easy but he thought if we in the news and nation he loved in the deepest corner of his heart were vigilant and courageous enough all would come right in the end. that's when i began to understand something i didn't know before. it was not important that we trusted walter. what was important was that walter trusten -- trusted us and

the behest and burden for those of us left perhaps that was it. his trust in us. there would be one more dinner. it was just this last march and time was running out. betsy was already gone. walter wasn't going out much anymore. we thought we would give it one more try. same restaurant. this time dinner. it took herculean efforts by walter and great friends of his, arlene and joe wan and others. i wasn't sure they would make it. meter was nina. we waited. there they were. they showed up, all smiles. he got to the table before the rest of filled up. walter had his back to their room. i wish you had been there. years fell away. great stories, wonderful laugh, talk about the future and then it was time to go and pulled her

stood up -- walter stubbs and faced the room. for the first time customers knew who they were having dinner with. there was that familiar solent whisper that went from table to table, recognition. and walter walked into the exit. i am sure he didn't see what nina and i did. they went to the exit, we were trailing behind, and as we followed, and as walter walked out the door, one by one of the customers began to stand up. they stood up. they didn't say anything. they didn't applaud, they just stood up because that's what you

do when a gentleman is leaving the room. [applause] [applause] >> thank you. this is tough following the marine band, jimmy buffett, president clinton. but i wouldn't be anywhere else in the world right now. president obama, president clinton, members of walters extended family and across

america, nancy, cathy and chip i know how proud you were to be the children of walter and betsy and i want to begin by thanking you for sharing him with all the rest of us, especially my generation of journalists who in so many ways walter cronkite was he was the godfather who showed us the way to the good journalists, good family man, and good citizens without none of those roles canceling out the others. also, walter cronkite was a seminal force in the transformation of this country. i was personally witness that as a teenager in a remote region of the great plains i didn't see television on till i was 15-years-old and it was a small black-and-white set in the corner of the dining room. but it changed my life. because in many ways, walter

cronkite and all of those early pioneers that lived in the land and chose the wide world and allowed us to understand more clearly and coherently, and in some cases to leave those places and come here. in the past several weeks there have been so many testimonials to walter's long career, his passion to the high standards of journalism, his love of the sea and sailing, his enthusiasm for being walter cronkite, for having the good life that he earned and richly deserved. there is little i can add to all of that. instead today i would like to remember another character of this man who was born in missouri, educated in texas who lived in the world and corrupt to be the most questioned man of america by the vote of his countrymen. i would like to commemorate his capacity for friendship that transcended cultures coming generations, and yes, even

competitive lines. we are witness to that in this remarkable gathering today in this room and across the country of course. not just in the famous faces and big names. to the end of his life, walter also had time for a call or even launch with foot soldiers of cbs news who were long removed from his daily needs. and of course, there were those legendary french ships that went beyond the work day. his university of texas classmate, eli wallach, the great actor is with us here today. [applause] my colleague and great friend, the late gordon manning, and of course -- [applause] and of course, andy rooney, whose friendship with walter -- [applause]

-- his friendship with walter went more than 65 years back to world war ii. personally, to those of us who came along later, the quality of those friendships were lessons as important as the legacy of quality journalism. bob schieffer and i have been friends 35 years and for the rest of our lives we would like to have the kind of friendship that walter and andy rooney had. we just can't decide who gets to play in the ready. [laughter] i was a beneficiary of -- my interview with mikhail gorbachev, the only by a secretary of the party. and modestly is it a big gap and i was concerned how it would be received. as soon as the prime time hour in did, the phone rang and the

first call and a voice said well that was magnificent. in my anxiety i didn't immediately recognize the voice and i said who is this? [laughter] there was a roar of laughter at the eckert and and the familiar voice continued, who is this? it is walter cronkite for god sakes. how soon they forget. [laughter] no homage to walter would be complete without thanks to the women in his life, joe and at the end of course, marlene who could teach rahm emanuel a thing about being chief of staff. [laughter] [cheering] and of course, the memorable and utterly adorable betsy three [applause]

>> meredith likes to remind me often how important betsy was to walter's success because she was fearless about keeping his anchorman's ego in check. there are so many betsy stories, but meredith's favorite was when warmer and betsy moved from a townhouse to a high-rise. and betsy confide today a friend she would miss the townhouse. the friend said, well, of course, so many great memories. and betsy replied matter of factually, no, no, not that. i'll miss the backyard where i buried all those damn plaques and awards that walter keeps getting. [laughter] >> it was always a lift to see them out on the town, they didn't miss much. when nora ephron opened her sweet comedy called "you've got

mail" with tom hanks and megaryan, walter went up to her later and said "that was terrific. just the kind of film we don't see often enough these days." betsy standing off to the side looked at nora and said deadpan, "not me. i wanted more violence, more blood and guts, shoot em up. we don't get enough of those kind of films these days." [laughter] >> and then betsy gave her that cringely little lop-sided smile that made her so endearing. i always thought of walter as a journalist right out of the front page. he had a romantic idea of what it was like to be a journalist. he also had that wonderful, old-fashioned attitude about new york city after dark, a city to be used at all times. he once told me when he was anchoring the cbs morning news, on the way to work he would stop to have breakfast at the copacabana in the wee hours of the morning. i thought to myself, how dashing is, that having breakfast at the

copa. i shared that with a cbs friend who replied, knowing walter's way with a buck, "that just meant that copa was buying his breakfast, tom." [laughter] >> to those of us who follow the era of walter and all the great people at cbs news -- and pardon me but also the legend at nbc, chet and david and all of our great colleagues as well -- there are constant and enduring reminders of how much we owe them. we could hold our heads high because of the high standards that they established. and walter, as i learned personally, that was a standard and a presence that travelled very far. he had been out of the anchor chair for some time when i went to the middle east to report on the israeli return of the sinai to the egyptians. a small group of jewish settlers was holding out in a compound, not allowing anyone to approach.

it was a kind of a general store not too far away, and as it happened it was operated by a man who had watched me in california when he was living in pasadena. he offered to be my interimmediatary. so we said on a two-way radio to the compound, "tom brokaw would like to interview you." there was a background buzz of hebrew. and pardon my yiddish accent here, but the spokesman came on and said, "oh, who is tom brokaw?" my new friend looked at me, winked -- remember he was a merchant, "leave it to me." he leaned into the microphone and he said, "he's the most important and famous journalist in america." there was more hebra ic buzz in the background. the spokesman came back and said, "well, is he as famous and

as important as walter cronkite?" [laughter] i laughed and said to my new friend, "radio them back, no." [laughter] >> and he never will be. god bless you, walter. [applause] [laughter] god bless you, walter. [applause] this is a simple song of remembrance for the man who was the most welcome a visitor in every one of our living rooms. ♪

♪ and that's the way it is forever in my mind ♪ ♪ you would set sail on some adventure ♪ ♪ just to see what you would find ♪ ♪ sailing toward the new horizon ♪ reaching for the distant star ♪ and the nation shares your journey ♪ ♪ boy, we traveled far ♪ in search of truth

♪ the questions were answered and trusting they were right ♪ ♪ yes, you were there ♪ you told our story ♪ and now it is time to say good night ♪ ♪ goodnight ♪ and that's the way it is ♪ i will miss your voice of reason telling us what we should know ♪ ♪ but life is worth of the living ♪ ♪ the truth will keep us free ♪ and we shall keep on sailing ♪ but the wonders we will see

♪ in search of truth ♪ the quests for answers ♪ and trusting that the quest use it was right ♪ ♪ yes, you were there ♪ you told a story ♪ and now it is time for us to say good night ♪ ♪ and search of truth ♪ the quest for answers ♪ and trusting that the quest to use it was right ♪ ♪ yes, you were there ♪ you told a story ♪ and now it's time for us to say good night ♪

♪ we will keep sailing around the bend ♪ ♪ request will never end ♪ and that's the way it is the common good friend ♪ ♪ [applause]

>> and good morning, everyone. it is a joy and donner to be here with all of you today. the summer of 2006 was the summer i got to spend some quality time with a very special guy. walter cronkite asked me to dinner, with all due respect to my late husband i think i had never been quite as excited to go out on a date as i was that august night. we met in the ballroom of the four seasons, and while it was a lovely setting, it made chatting at challenging. the fountain was filled with old faithful, the crowd was huessy and the acoustics were absolutely dreadful. i was worried this was not the perfect place for a man of advanced years who have trouble hearing. his lovely for and joanna was sitting next to walter and

helped reiterate at close range my torrent of questions. mike trepidation and was quickly replaced with relief as we talked about united press where my father had also covered politics, the norbert trials, the war in iraq, the state of journalism, everything from american politics to "american idol." nothing got lost in translation. it was so clear that even as he approached 90, walter cronkite was a brilliant man with an insatiable curiosity about the world and the people in it. i was overwhelmed sitting across from the anchor, the man for whom the term was coined whose very presence defined the job. he could not have been more enthusiastic or supportive. he may have been an older man, but he was never a part of the

old boys' club. history sometimes has a way of placing a filter on memory, a sort of soft lines on the way it really was. mortality and our attention for idealizing those who have died can often transformed even mediocre man into giants. but this passing has required no selective recollection or hyperbole. it's been a pure joy to celebrate and remember walter cronkite for the way he really was. and it's been inspiring over this past month to witness a well-deserved and much-needed rebroadcast of walter's on parallel to life and career. in superlatives what has surfaced repeatedly like a buoy marking his coast line, is his extraordinary sense of fairness, his ever-present humanity, and his complete and utter lack of

pretense. he learned about these things at the early age. his father had zero tolerance for prejudice of any kind. clearly a man ahead of his time in the jim crow texas of the 1920's. in his autobiography walter describes his father's disgust when he watched a man in the so-called poor society punch a young black delivery boy in the face. walter senior quickly said we are going now. his father's indication that young walter wasn't better than anyone gave him appreciation for everyone and he carried with him for the rest of his life. through walter cronkite's eis, the country was an expanded campus of the thomas hart mural, his favorite artist.

it was a hard-working humble americans he most revered and respected. when he chip was a young boy he went to a yankee game with his dad on the subway and vividly remembers how impressed his father was to meet a medal of honor recipient. heroism, hard work and humility trump's celebrity every time. she never missed an opportunity to think a high school teacher or shake the hand of a construction worker. he was an uncommon man who never lost touch with a common man. sorry, my office did in july of here. we've heard much about walters contribution to journalism but the measure cannot be measured in stories broken, declines met or presidents product. the job description journalist his daughter kathy told me was no doubt a big part of who he was, but by no means all he was. he was a husband and father who

could disengage from his job and focus entirely on his family. and although this was we could be tethered to our work by technology something tells me even today he might accidently leave his blackberry in a drawer. he was a man that bought his daughter nancy the lovely ocean by swimming while she climbed on his back like a baby monkey. he was a man that helped shape learn to tail and not by picture this, tying a bag boy will first truffles styles even after he steered the boat. walter was a man who played board games like glue and risk with laser light focus but a notoriously bad speller he avoided scrabble like the p-l-a-g-u-e [laughter] sorry. he could have beaten me i am sure. sometimes the kids enjoyed most

when his dad was recognized for whom he wasn't. everyone at disneyland thought he was walt disney. [laughter] which, for a kid -- [laughter] -- for a kid of course had much cachet. >> walter decided to fire a canyon for every state in the union, underestimating how tedious it was to load it, ram it and fire it. after a few times he decided he would fire it for the 13 colonies instead. [laughter] >> walter's loving and playful relationship with his wife of nearly 65 years was legendary as we've already heard today. his children -- suddenly a song

or piece of music came up in the conversation, taking her into his arms and doing an improm tu waltz around the living room or the boat. as nancy told me, "there are so many wonderful memories. we had so much fun." walter cronkite had an off-camera life that was rich, full and vibrant. in many i was his real-life experiences shaped the man we all knew. no wonder we all thought he was one of us. he was. henry luce once said, "i became a journalist to come as close as possible to the heart of the world." walter found that heart and captured ours. and he'll live there forever. [applause]

>> mr. president obama and clinton, cronkite families, many friends, when the space age was born the story of space flight was often told by the voices of those who reported it as much as those of us who flew. walter cronkite, along with jules bergman and roy neil, told those stories with distinction and clarity, often connecting viewers in ways astronauts and engineers couldn't. flight after flight, walterer was there as a come for thing presence when the mission was a success. and on those painful times when failure came calling, he talked

us all through it all. as each of our missions gained new discoveries and new leadership for america in the great race with russian adversaries, when neil and i landed on the moon walter told viewers every step of our flight, explaining each procedure so that the watching world knew exactly what was coming next. with his usual insight, context and color, he made voyages to the moon very real for the average american. >> storytelling was his passion as flying was mine.

one of my favorite stories is the time when lois and i visited the greek island of rhodes in the summer of 1987. we strolled down a deserted street in a small village. the only other person there was walking towards us. and as we passed each other, we both paused and looked back at the other. "walter, is that you?" i asked. and walter said, "buzz, is that you?" i introduced him to lois and told him we were engaged to be married. when i told him our wedding date was valentine's day, he chuckled and said, "buzz, i didn't realize you were so romantic." whereupon lois spoke up and

said, "walter, he's been on the moon. of course he's romantic." [laughter] >> of all the places to run into this man who described our landing on the moon 40 years ago this july 20th. in quarantine aboard the aircraft carrier hornet, the flight surgeon showed us three the tv videos from around the world cheering on our landing, including walter's speechless with glasses on his brow. i pointed to -- patted neil on the shoulder and pointed up at the view and said, "neil, we

missed the whole thing." [laughter] >> of course. we were out of town. the story of those pioneering flights, mercury, gem my, apollo, and the robot probes that touched the surface of other worlds came alive in the broadcasts of walter cronkite. i was proud to call him a friend. we especially enjoyed a special dinner for lois and me with walter and betsy at their home in martha's vineyard. in addition to his passion for sailing, our legacy in space was his calling, too. all of us who flew in space are

grateful for walter cronkite's belief in science, his dedication to the story and his commanding presence that made every step in space exciting for americans of every age. and that's the way it was, walter, and always will be. [applause] >> the biggest thing of my mind these day is the death of walter cronkite. my life will not be the same without him. walter wasn't the best anchorman there was for me, he was my friend. walter and i met in london in 1944, covering the eighth air

force. we often took the train to bedford with our friends home erbiggart -- i liked walter from the first time i ever met him and we often ate together on fleet street in london where our offices were only two blocks from each other. walter joined cbs in 1950, recruited by edward r. murrow of the. i went to work for cbs in 1948, writing for arthur godfrey. walter left the evening news in 1981 when he was 64 years old. i guess that was the start of his most famous years, too. two or three nights a week, 51 weeks a year, one organization after another would present walter with some kind of an award or honor. one of the best things about giving walter an award was that he always liked it. he was genuinely appreciative when someone gave him something. walter was one of the few people i've ever known who had actually

worn out three tuxedos getting awards. he would have loved to be here now to hear us all say nice things about him. walter wasn't just someone i knew casually, either. when i was suspended from cbs many years ago for some inappropriate remarks i made, walter called me that day and said, "i'd like to use whatever residual goodwill i have with the american people by being seen at dinner with you tonight." i saw walter all the time, of course. he joined me, for instance, in 1976 at a scanned knifian restaurant for a documentary i was doing for cbs about eating out in america. i modestly named it "mr. rooney goes to dinner." >> i ate in the copenhagen one day with a friend. he's a smorgasboard expert. >> this is a danish something. >> boysenberry. >> that's the word i was hoping

for. >> you really take a minimum of -- you go back a minimum of three times. >> i think so, yeah. i think the average guy would probably. any restaurant you go to where the dessert tray is brought in like this, every table reaction is the same. people recoil, they obviously make a statement to their friend, "i shouldn't. oh, no, i shouldn't. no, take that away. i don't want to even look at that." >> but maybe i'll just have a little bit. >> for many years, walter would invite us to join him and betsy on his sailboat, windy. once while we were sailing in maine several years ago we tied up near a little village. and walter and betsy went into a country store. this strange-looking character comes up to walter and asks him a question. walter was always polite to his fans, and with betsy standing there walter said, "oh, sure, we've met several times. we're not really close friends.

i talk to him once in awhile." walter and betsy then went outside. betsy says, "did you hear who he asked you about?" walter who didn't hear very well said, "no, i didn't." well, betsy said, he asked if you knew jesus christ." another time while sailing close to the shore walter was steering his boat when he saw someone onshore waving his arms. he waved back smiling and kept going in. another 30 seconds we hit bottom. walter looked around and said, "what happened?" i replied, "didn't you hear what that guy was yelling? he was yelling low water." he looked at me and said "i thought he was saying hello walter." i have seen wanter in 10,000 situations since 1944. and he was good at almost all of them. he was a great anchorman in the the news business because his greatest contribution was not his knowledge or his expertise, as great as those were, it was his steady holding to what was most important.

every writer, every news man or woman who is worth anything secretly hopes that he or she will have some good influence on the world. it's a preposterous wish, of course, but my friend had it. if it can be said about any individual in our business that he's been a force for good in the world, walter cronkite was that person. [applause] >> i met walter cronkite in 1987 while doing the america's cup, scorer for the america's cup with dr. hussein. i invited him to a grateful he came back at halftime and he said, "i was thinking of 1,000 things, excuses to leave.

but you know, micky, i can't think of one now. you guys really get to people." thank you, walter. and he invited me to his house -- to my home. that's where our love began. 22 years now. he was a great drummer. he loved to drum. this was one of his last real freedoms. and he would say to me very inquisitively, would say, "well, micky, when do we know we have the groove?" [laughter] >> what does it feel like, micky? and i'd try to explain it to him. but it's really hard to explain the power of rhythm, the power of music. i said, "walter, you'll know when you got it." maybe three, four years later we were playing. he played every day after -- before dinner and after dinner, actually, for anybody who walked through the door was subject to the drum as mike wallace can probably attest to. and he looked at me.

we were deep in the groove. all of a sudden he looked at me and he said, "i've got it!" that's all he said, "i've got it." walter, this rhythm was one of his favorite rhythms and we're going to play it for him. walter, my dear friend, bon voyage."

♪ ♪ @@@@@@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @

♪ ♪ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@

♪ ♪

grex the morning. in what seems like a lifetime ago, i was one of alders foot soldiers. the day i was asked to work for him, i cried for joy of having been asked, and from your that executives had made a huge mistake. that is what working for walter and cbs min. back then, it really was not a job, it was more like a calling. for most of us, getting hired by cbs news -- you can probably imagine how it made us feel about the man himself. he was never really had lost. he never really sat me down and set he wanted to show me what to do and how to do it. he did not have to. i could see it every evening on the news at 6:30. walter was our leader.

his dna campaign it is contain the basic ingredient essential for good journalism, curiosity. he was also a workaholic. on many of the nights when i work late, walter would still be at his desk when i left. he led by example, his passion and joy for every day journalism was infectious. so was his basic belief in the news, that in a democracy -- excuse me while i turn this page. it would be unfair and dishonest to say that walter and i were intimates. we were not. i got to know him when he invited me around to his house for thanksgiving. i have no idea why he did it, other than simple kindness and

generosity, but i have never forgotten it. in 1980, a few months after the russians invaded afghanistan, water and i went to pakistan to report on that country's nuclear weapons program and its growing strategic significance. the night walter arrived, i went around to his room to give him a briefing. he came into the room in his boxer shorts and asked if i wanted a drink. now this was the first time i had traveled with walter on the road, and so at first, seeing old iron pants in his boxer shorts was a little shocking. the reason i am telling you this story is because i think it says something about the man. walter was comfortable in his own skin, comfortable with people, especially the people of cbs news. if your paycheck came from cbs, your family. we went to pakistan because walter thought it was important to report that pakistan was potentially dangerous.

remember, this was 20 years before the taliban, al qaeda, and 9/11. walter rest prescient. a furious -- a few years later when i was asked to produce his report on the normandy invasion, i was thrilled, because i knew how much it meant to him. what neither of us knew was what walter meant to the veterans. every time we tried to do a little work, veterans stop what we were doing to take their picture or get his autograph. he said we would never get the story if he hung around, so he left. the story came first. we stumbled across an old veteran searching for a friend's grave and ask if we could follow him. when he founded, he took out a small container of american soil and scattered it over the grave and started talking to his old friend. when we showed walter the tape, he cried. walter was amazing.

he loved his country, he loves people, he left his job, and he loved cbs news. it is hard to believe that it has been 30 years since walter cronkite let the evening news. it is just as hard to believe that since then, three generations have come -- have grown up not knowing his voice. [applause] >> when i went to work for walter, from his perspective, there she is, the first woman producer on the cbs evening news. in all honesty, the fact that i was a woman did not seem to concern walter. what did matter was that i could do the job.

early on, he put me to the test. one day i was assigned to be what we call a catcher. walter was out in the field with a producer, and i was back in new york, assigned to take in the report and match it with pictures. the problem was, and i told the producer in the field this, the narration was not written to the pictures we have. sound familiar? the next thing i knew, the phone rang, and the voice on the other end was one you would recognize immediately, walter. what was the problem, he wanted to know. i took a deep breath and set i think we can make this report better with a few changes. move the sentences from here to there, shorten this paragraph. walter paused for what seemed like an eternity. it was really just a moment. then he said linda, i think we should make those changes, and not because it is a woman's liver thing. -- a women's lib thing.

[laughter] walter had boundless energy for the news, no matter what the story. for a man who covered presidents and men on the moon, he still got excited about the most basic of stories of fire. he loved a good fire. when the alarm rang, the firefighters responded, and soda water. the result, there were plenty of fire stories on the evening news, and he handled each one as special. here's something else that might surprise you. walter was remarkably unaffected by his position, and his biggest -- as big a celebrity as he was, he still got excited about other famous people. once while we were in los angeles, i took him to dinner at trader vic's. in whose name did i make the reservation? mine, which is why we soon found ourselves at the end of a long line. cordially, the major d noticed walter and brought us to the

front. inside the restaurant, walter was soon checking out celebrities, completely unaware that the other patrons for checking him out. i was executive producer of a special called walter cronkite remembers. walter reflected on a career that found him at every seam of almost every news story of the 26. i commented that he was like forest gump. he chuckled. i heard that during the memorial service for ed bradley, walter said, they will never do that for me. well, walter, we did, and we hope you are enjoying it. [applause]

>> like many of you here today, i feel blessed to be part of a profession that gave us walter cronkite. we are keepers of a flame he lighted nearly half a century ago. i worked for walter for six years, until 1980, traveling with him at times, producing pieces for the evening news, and all of us associate producers were very proud to say we work cronkite's. 27 years later i returned as executive producer, and the question people ask me most is what has changed in all those years. my answer is plenty. the technology, the finances, the faces on the screen, and the never ending debate over the future of the evening news. but throughout our profession at the network level, one thing has remained constant, and is that flame, a constant reminder to be true to the standards walter set for us and demanded of us, to be fair and honest in our reporting, to get the story not

only first, but most importantly, to get it right, to be respectful of our viewers, to never talk down to them or take them for granted. back in walters time, we did not begin our evening newscast with headlines. headlines are designed to bring viewers in, to tell them what is special about that night's program and to give them a reason to watch. we did not need headlines for that. all we needed was an announcer to proclaim, direct from our newsroom in york, this is the cbs evening news with walter cronkite. he was what was special about our broadcast. as to the future of the evening newscast, i think walter would scoff at those who think they are on the way out. he might stay there were times they lost their focus, but never their mission. that is to inform the public,

and walter knew nothing is more important to a democracy than that. he took their responsibility very seriously, and we still do. i would like to end with just one story about walters playful side. one night after the evening news, walter came into the fish bowl, and found a number of us taking phone calls. what is going on, he asked. we explain that yours were unhappy with something he had said that night and were calling to complain. -- viewers were unhappy. give me the phone, he said, and he fielded a phone call with dave viewer who was not too happy with him, and also did not know who had taken the bone. walter listened, and we listened, and then walter said, you know, you may be right. maybe walter has gone too far. [laughter]

you cannot make it up. maybe he should be disciplined. walter went on railing about walter, and the caller, amazingly unaware that he was talking to walter, appeared to be changing his tune. now it was the color who began to defend walter. [laughter] and it to chastise this employee's got on the phone and was not being loyal enough to the man who paid his salary. walter let this collor de fin walter for a bit, and then he said, well, maybe you are right. -- he let the caller defend walter. walter thank him and hung up. he looked at us and said, now that is how you do it. [applause]

>> do you know who would have loved this day? walter. what today is. mr. president, and mr. president, members of the cbs family, member of walter's family, the other day, walter's grandson, who is a proud member of the cbs washington bureau now, working this summer as an intern, came into my office and ask me, what was it like when my grandfather was here? i tried to tell him, and the first thing i told him was, it was fun. we all wanted to be there. his grandfathers' enthusiasm captured us all.

walter cronkite was the most curious man i have ever met. he always wanted to know everything about everything, and he wanted to know it before everyone else knew it. that was the spirit that settled on to the washington bureau and the cbs news. there was a downside to this. many of these questions that walter would ask, and he would ask the questions -- he could always come up with questions that nobody else would think to ask. unfortunately, as some of the people who were around in those days would tell you, he always managed to ask these questions about 10 minutes before the news was getting ready to go on the air, and we were all trying to get our pieces together. then we would get one of these questions. we came to call them w.w.'s,

walter wants to know. here are some of the questions he actually asked. how much oil is there in the world? [laughter] in poland, did they call him father christmas' or santa claus? and my all time, personal favorite, how long is greenland? walther used to call us when we were on the beat, and one day he called me and asked a question for the first time since i had been at cbs that i could actually enter. i gave him the answer, and then he said, thank you bob, this old gray head just had a question mark above it. he really talked that way. i tell you that, because walter cronkite off-camera was exactly

like walter cronkite on camera. how many times have we seen people on television, or we have seen them in the movies, and thought they were one way, and they turned out to be another way? not walter. walter was exactly the way we all saw him on television. as someone said, walter cronkite was the way we wanted him to be. he loved news. he loved journalism. he loved to talk about it, and that was the infectious part. that is what set the spirit for cbs news. i never saw walter cronkite be rude to a stranger, and he was not -- it was not just courtesy. walter like to talk about the news, and if somebody came up to him and wanted to talk about it with him, he wanted to talk to them. if there's one thing he liked more than talking about the news to just someone who would approach him, it was talking about the news over a drink.

he loved to get together with his friends and talk about the tall tales of journalism. i shall never forget one night at a book party here in new york. i was standing over in a group and talking to peter jennings and dan rather and tom brokaw. we are having a big time, and i thought it would be a great picture if i could get walter over there with all of the anchors of the day and get their picture together. i asked if he would come over and get a picture with all these guys. he looked at me and said, could you tell them to come over here? i am trying to get a drink, and i do not want to lose my place at the bar. [laughter] he really said that. if walter love anything more than talking about the news, it was getting unused scoop,

especially if it was his scoop. i will never forget, in 1976 there were two big stories that year. there was a presidential campaign, president ford against jimmy carter, and there was a new flu vaccine, and it was making so many people sick that we began to wonder, or these government officials who are telling us all to take this stuff going to take it themselves? in the middle of all this and in the middle of the campaign, president ford came up here to new york one day. they made up some excuse for why he was coming, but the real reason he was coming up here was to be interviewed by barbara walters, who was a host of the today show at that time. in walters mined, his most formidable competitor, a view that i shared at that time. barbara interviewed president

ford, and then apparently she put out the word to the white house staff that if any of them allowed anyone to interview president ford before her interview aired the next morning on the today show, that person would be killed. [laughter] apparently, i mean that is what they told me, barbara. being reporters, we all said about to try to find some way to bust barbarous scoop. i went to the press secretary who said of course not, we have given our word to barbara walters. then the worst thing that could possibly happen, happened. i had to explain to walter that barbara walters was about to do an exclusive interview with him. >> he said i understand that president ford is going to be up at yonkers later today. is there any way i could come up

there and watch him on the campaign trail? >> what was i going to say, no, we have all under control? i said of course, we would be delighted. i knew what was coming next. >> bob, is there any way you could get me an interview with the president? i knew it was going to be tough. i went back to the press secretary and just laughed. i cannot think of anything else to do, so i went to the president's chief of staff. i called him dig in those days. i would later call him mr. vice- president, dick cheney. i said i was in a real bind, walter cronkite is coming up and he wants to interview the president. he said bob, there is no chance whatsoever. we have given our word to barbara walters.

i asked if he could just get walter in to say hello to the president. i said i know that he would get a kick out of seeing walter. he said he would squeeze him in. i said, do you think there is any possibility we could get a camera crew in there with him? just a little souvenir for walter. he said bob, i have towed to, we are not going to authorize an interview. he said all right, i will let you do that, but i am not authorizing in the interview. so at the appointed time, we showed up at the back door and they sneaked the camera crew an altar in there. walter took the microphone in his left hand, while up to the president with his right hand, shook hands, and said hello, mr.

president, are you going to take your flu shot? [laughter] president ford just stifle a laugh and said yes, walter, i am. i really think it is up to those of us in government to set a good example. i am going to take a flu shot. by this time, the white house staff was trying to wrestle the crew to the ground. we were hustled out of their. that night, the cbs evening news began with these words. good evening, president ford told me in an exclusive interview on the campaign trail tonight -- [applause] that he would take his flu shot, and then we actually ran that interview, all nine seconds of it.

my friends, walter cronkite loved the news, and we love walter cronkite for it. what a man. [applause] >> mr. president, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, and of course, chip, nancy, kathy, and the entire cronkite

family. walter had a famous love of ships, all kinds, from his treasured sailboat to even big boats like the historic world war ii aircraft carrier that we have here in new york city, the intrepid. you could often fine motor sitting at the edge of the intrepid pier on the hudson river, watching as the ships came in from around the world, or as the u.s. armed forces arrived for the celebrations here in new york city. he was very gracious to us and was frequently the master of ceremonies for many special international events. he would marvel at the men and women who served on those mighty ships, and was so supportive of their dedication to america. a world war ii correspondent

himself, his face lit up when he met the men who served on the intrepid and who were part of her proud story. he quickly became an honorary member of the intrepid family. when the intrepid's founder, zack fisher, died, walter cronkite agreed to be the master of ceremonies at his memorial service. i phoned maureen adler, who was his trusted an extraordinary chief of staff, and i want to thank her again. where did we find altered? -- where did we find walter? out on his ship. he was sailing when we found him, and we had the coast guard bring him back to new york for the service.

he said to that, oh boy. these men who are on the stage today are part of the 50,000 americans who served on and also courageously defended the intrepid in world war ii. they come here today to honor walter and his family. they are part of the fearless lineage of men whos saved in the intrepid from five kamikaze attacks and one direct scorpio attack. 270 of their fellow sailors sacrificed their lives in service to our country on her helloed deck. sailors like senator john mccain even flew off upper deck in 1961 as a young naval aviator. astronauts were recovered on board the intrepid's plight deck when they returned from space.

after all that, the intrepid flight deck had to be taken out. every bit of it was protected and preserved by these brave men who still come every day, at their own expense, from across the country to take a young children on tours of the mighty ship and to tell their story of their ship and their friends. walter always loved that and appreciated that. the former intrepid crew members wanted to give walter and his family something unique, something that paid tribute to his friendship, his trusted character as our nation's anchor. his steady hand at the helm as he navigated us through uncharted waters, and his position as the most credible newsman of their time. today we will present the flag that was flown at half staff from the main mast of the intrepid on the day of walters passing. when walter told all of us and

the world that president john f. kennedy had died, he spoken to a microphone that looked just like that one. our team members and master craftsman and former crew members wanted to give walter and his family something from within the intrepid, because he was such a great part of it. and indeed, walter was intrepid. the microphone is made from a long leave yellow pine, antique wood from about of the ship. it is wrapped with stainless steel strips from the kitchen dally. the stainless screws come from the captain's gig. the copper riser is a high- pressure line from the aircraft refueling system, and manganese bronze base is a protected cap from an 8 inch naval gun that

blasted away in world blastedii. the flight deck holding the microphone is 145 years old and comes from the bow of the historic in traffic. walter had many titles, son, husband, father, companion, grandfather, anchor, reporter, a sailor, and patriot. one time we want to add to that today is distinctive. it is the title sailors get to people that care about so much and that they love, and that is the title of shipmate. in honor of those men who saved the ship, those who are serving today in a -- in afghanistan and iraq in harm's way that we know walter loeb, and who love walter, we would like to ask the

family of walter cronkite to please come to the stage to represent -- please join us in welcoming to the stage the family of man who millions of americans saw as their shipmate, for some of the very stormy seas of our nation. please join us in welcoming walters family, his children chip, nancy, kathy, and his beloved grandson's, peter, walter, john, and william. [applause]

[applause] [applause] [applause]

[applause] >> my sisters and i and our families thank the intrepid museum, and especially these decorated former crew members for this great honor. dad would have been very proud. he wore the uniform of a war correspondent and reported from the north atlantic, north africa, western europe, southeast asia. he flew in flying fortresses and be 57, landed in gliders, and rode with patton.

wherever and whenever america was at war, my father thought we all had important role to perform. he saw the role of the press as the eyes and ears of the american people at the front line. he saw the role of government as making sure that the press was allowed on the front line. as he wrote in his autobiography, this is neither too much for a free press to ask nor too much for the army of a democracy to give. finally, he saw the role of the american people as recognizing that it is our right, our duty to fully understand what our fighting men and women are being asked to do in our name. thank you, president obama, for your presence here today and for your kind words when dad died. thank you, president clinton, for your friendship over the years. that would have been touched by today's reminiscences of friends and colleagues, pleas by the

musical numbers, and ratified by the splendid occasion organized by cbs, the company work force for almost 60 years. [applause] [applause]

♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ [applause]

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪

♪

♪ ♪ [applause]

[applause] >> thank you. thank you. thank you very much. thank you very much. to ship, kathy, and nancy, who graciously shared your father with the nation that loves him, to walters friends, colleagues, proteges, and only considered him a hero, to the men of the

intrepid, to all of you who are gathered here today, i am honored to be here to pay tribute to the life and times of the man who chronicled our time. i did not know mr. cronkite personally, and my regret is made more acute by the stories that have been shared here today. nor, for that matter, then i know him any better than the tens of millions returned to him each night in search of the answer to a simple question, what happened today? but like them, and like all of you, i have benefited as a citizen from his dogged pursuit of the truth, his passionate defense of objective reporting, and his view that journalism is more than just a profession.

it is a public good, vital to our democracy. even in his early career, walter cronkite resisted the temptation to get the story first in favor of getting it right. he wanted to get it first, but he understood the importance of getting it right. during one of his first jobs in kansas city, his program manager urged him to go on the air reporting a massive blaze, and we just heard how much he loved fires, a massive blaze at city hall that had already claimed the lives. when walter reached for the telephone, his boss asked, what are you doing? get on the air. walter replied that he was calling the fire department to confirm the story. you do not need to convert permit, mumbai is watching the whole thing. -- you do not need to confirm it, my wife is watching the whole thing.

walter discovered it had been nothing more in that a small fire that did not result in any injuries. he lost his job, but he got the story right. walter was not afraid to rattle the high and mighty, but he never dared compromise his integrity. he got along with elected officials, even if they were wary of one another's motives. one politician once remarked, walter, you have to believe me, fully 85% of what i told you today is the absolute truth. [laughter] he shared a complicated relationship with presidents of both parties who wanted him on their side, even as they were convinced that he was not. president johnson called walter from time to time to voice his death -- his displeasure over a certain story, but walter knew

if he was receiving was ever as complaints from both sides, he must be doing his job. his endless in acquisitiveness about our world, i could imagine, came from a mother who sold encyclopedias for a living. as a boy, walter spent countless hours getting lost within their pages, sidelined by new entries that renshaw from one another, fascinated by the world around us and how it worked. that is the way he lived his life, with curiosity, exploring our planet, seeking to make sense of it, and explaining it to others. he went everywhere and he did everything. he raced cars and boats. he traveled everywhere from the amazon to the arctic. he plunged 8,000 feet below the sea, trek 18,000 feet up into the himalayas, and experience weightlessness in the upper reaches of our atmosphere, all with one mission, to make it

come alive for the rest of us. as our world began to change, he helped us understand those changes. he was forever there, reporting through world war and cold war, marches and milestones, scandal and success, calmly and authoritatively telling us what we needed to know. he was a voice of certainty in a world that was growing more and more uncertain. through it all, he never lost the integrity or the plain spoken speaking style heat develop growing up in the heartland. he was a familiar and welcome voice that spoke to everyone of us personally. it may have seemed inevitable that he was named most trusted man in america, but here is the thing. that title was not bestowed on him by a network.

we were not told to believe it by some advertising campaign. it was turned -- it was earned by year after year and decade after decade of painstaking effort, a commitment to fundamental values, his belief that the american people were hungry for the true, unvarnished, and unaccompanied by theater or spectacle. he did not believe in dumbing down. he trusted us. when he was told of this extraordinary honor, that he was the most trusted man in america, he naturally downplayed it by saying that people had not told his wife. --. people had. polled his wife.

after his return, he still ranked first in seven of eight categories for television journalists. he was disability that he had not won the eight categories, attractiveness. [laughter] through all the events that came to define the 20th century, through all or moments of deepest heard and brightest hope, walter cronkite was there, telling the story of the american age. this is how we remember him today, but we also remember and celebrate the journalism that walter practice, a standard of honesty and integrity and responsibility to which so many of you have committed careers. it is a standard that is harder

to find today. we know this is a difficult time for journalism. even as appetites' for news and information grow, newsrooms are closing. despite the big stories of our era, a serious journalist find themselves all too often without a beaket. too often, we fill the void with instant commentary and celebrity gossip and the softer stories that walter disdained, rather than hard news and investigated journalism he championed. what happened today is replaced with who won today. the public debate cheapens. the public trust balder's. -- the public falters. we fail to understand one another as we should.

we seem stuck with a choice between what cuts to our bottom line and what harms us as a society. which price is higher to pay, which cost is harder to bear. this democracy, walter said, cannot function without our reasonably well informed electorate. that is why the honest, objective, meticulous reporting that so many of you pursue with the same zeal that walter did is so vital to our democracy and our society. our future depends on it. walter was no night idealist. he understood the dentation facing journalists.

he was excited about all the high-tech stories that would emerge. we find ourselves wondering how he would have covered the monumental stories of our time. in an era where the news that city hall is on fire could sweep around the world at the speed of the internet, would he still have called to double check? would he have been able to cut through the noise of the blogs and the tweeds and the sound bites to shine the bright light on substance? could he still over the perspective that we value? we have been able to remain a singular figure in an age of dwindling attention spans and omnipresent media? somehow we know that the answer is yes.

the simple values walter cronkite set out in pursuit of, to seek the truth, to keep us honest, to explore our world the best he could. they are as vital today as they ever were. our american story continues. it needs to be told. if we choose to live up to walters example, if we realize that the kind of journalism he embodied will not simply rekindle itself as part of the natural cycle, but will come alive only if we stand up and demanded and resolve to value it once again, that i am convinced that the choice between profit and progress is a false one, and that the golden days of journalism still lie ahead. walter cronkite invited the nation to believe in him, and he never betrayed that trust. that is why so many of you entered the profession in the first place. that is what the standards he set for journalist still stand,

and that is why he loved and valued all of you, but we love and value walter, not only as the rest of men, but as an indispensable pillar of our society. he is reunited with his beloved betsy now, watching the stories of this century unfold with boundless optimism. every so often, punctuating the air with a gleeful "oh boy." we are grateful to him for altering an illuminating our time, and for the opportunity he gave to us to say that yes, we, too, were there. thank you very much. [applause]

♪ ♪

♪

♪ ♪ ♪