and it has paid off for this country's national security to have the two pties join arms and work on these problems of nuclear arms control. it's really made a difference both in security policy and in the broader area of working with other countries on a national security problem. i said again and again, how much success we have had. they are willing to be our partners in the arms arena. the way we have been able to extend our cooperationo we are transporting military materials through russia to our troops has about because of our relationship with russia. it's good for whether you're red, blue or in the middle as an

independent. >> madam secretary. if it doesn't happen during this lame duck session? guest: we're looking at delay. we go back to the committee again, the senate foreign relations committee and start over. if it fails and just takes a couple months itill be the spring. no. could be as much as another year or 18 months. we will be 2-1/2 years potentially without a verification regime on the ground. that does not serve our interest. host: the cynic in me says if you give them lead time, they will hide illegal operations. guest: that's a great question. one the things we have learned, we have 15 years of implementing

and the immediate range nuclear forces treaty. yes. you're absolutely right, if you give them an inch, they take a mile. so, and this is something of course that is on us as well. we have to ensure that we have the same procedures because it's a bilateral deal. what happens essentially, these are sort notice, no warning inspections. our inspectors fly into russia. they don't this will them where they're going. they know they're going for an inspection. they say, okay. we're going to go there and within a very short period of time, the russians have to fly them to the base. until the last minute, they don't know which base they're going to or which missile they want to look at.

it's very, very important principle, one we have learned through the school of hard knocks. you have got to have no notice short notice. no notice kinds of inspections. >> last call from ports smith, virginia, go ahead. mike. republican line. caller: yes. good morning. i would like to say, is there anything in the new start deal that affects, mentions like -- [inaudible] they eventually affect our amendment rights. if you decide to sign the treaty so in the un.

guest: no, there's noast on the second amendment. this is a treaty that affects our strategic nuclear arsenal. we are talking about putting limits on missiles, submarine launched missiles. these are national assets under the control of the gornment. it's the kind of, again. the arms control treaty we first start negotiating. it was signed and brought into force in the early 1970's. so many, many years of going about this. there's never been an impact on the second amendment. host: madam, what is your week looking like? guest: working hard to get all the final questions from the

hill answered. get the answers back. make sure we're open for business in terms of coming up next, -- tomorrow on "washington journal," a discussion and a look at and new de reduction plan.

after that we will talk with an offer about his latest book about deregulation of the transportation system. monday, live coverage of stephen shoe -- chu. will talk about climate change. that is starting at 1:00 p.m. eastern on c-span 2. >> take a look at the new members of congress. find a complete list. every new member is listed with their campaigns and any appearances on c-span. in his washington, your way. >> now a discussion with presidential advisers, a republican and democratic on how presidents deal with crises

such as 9-11 and hurricane katrina. this is part of a conference on the bipartisan policy center in new orleans. it is about an hour. >> we are ready for our next panel. thank you for joining us. i want to say thanks to all of the panelists. you have been spectacular. i am blessed to have so many wonderful friends. i think the addition of the democracy project was really important. we are actually doing something, and you young people are thinking of how you can

help. you are very impressive. we are feeling a lot better about everything, so thank you very much. the crisis of politics is the last panel. we cap off the day's discussions about the impediment to democracy, and i was interested to hear the most quoted person today was mark twain, so it seems we have been going through this for quite some time, and we always get through them, and there is a reason, because we love freedom, and we love that you are participating in the furtherance of democracy.

i turn you to my best bipartisan friend for final introductions. [applause] >> thank you, and all the sponsors -- we really want to thank them and all the people in the community who came out for this. this is a good thing to have here, and we are always delighted to show are 68 now costs. it is a big honor to have you here -- to show it off. it is a big honor to have you here. i want to use this for a teaching moment, and it is

important to realize this was a colossal engineering phase -- engineering say. -- fate. what happened on the mississippi gulf coast was a disaster. the last place you want to be is on the eastern side of the pie, so the force that hit the mississippi -- side of the eye, so the force that hit mississippi was larger. there is literally not a pre- 2005 structure that existed, and

our next speaker is a child of the gulf coast but the mississippi gulf coast, and after this happened, refused to be silent and spoke out about what happened at her place in st. louis. i hope brett favre has not tex did you any pictures or anything -- texted you any pictures or anything. [laughter] kathleen has distinguished

herself in journalism and her passion and the reason she dearly loves. she has written a book, rising from katrina, which documents what happened, and it is very important that people understand what happened here, what happened in st. bernard parish, and what happened across the southern tier of the state of mississippi. something you are very schooled in is crisis management. i just want to thank the bipartisan committee and particularly the students. i know we have a lot of loyola

students who have come, and this is a much better deal like we have had to participate. i am going to turn it over to you for the teaching moment. >> i appreciate that so much. we have residents from mississippi and louisiana, so that is important to make the distinction over what happened. immediately to my left, davis. he served as special counsel to president clinton. he served three terms on the democratic national committee and in 2005 was appointed by president bush for civil liberties, and to his left,

hillary is a nationally recognized democratic strategist. she is the former chairman and ceo, widely regarded as one of the most influential executives in the entertainment industry. she is also a sought after advisor for many running for office. i think dan has already been introduced. we will do that one more time in case you missed it. and served under president bush, completing the service as counsel to the president in july of 2007. he is currently the president and ceo with strategy. paul is a democratic strategist

to serve as a political figure to cnn, appearing across the program there. he helped elect numerous local candidates, including president bill clinton in 1992, and finally, congressman cal. he is the first vietnamese american to serve in the united states congress, representing the second district from 2009. he probably has better perspective than most on last week's elections. he also lost his home and his office in the hurricane five years ago. thank you all for joining us.

i covered hurricane katrina, and standing in the rubble of what was left in the middle of the worst natural disaster to strike in modern history, partisan politics was the furthest thing from my mind. at thef all, let's look worst-case scenarios. in the perfect world, we would all get along, lohan said, come together for the good of our country and our fellow citizens --, along -- to get along, hold hands, come together for the good of our country and our fellow citizens. what happened?

>> i remember president bush gave one of the great -- i gave one of the great speeches of my lifetime, and we were all republicans that night. i do think katrina, while it was a terrible tragedy and fingers were pointed, our hearts broke as we watched that, and president clinton brought the country together, so this country does have a history of forgetting about bipartisanship

when it really matters. the focus of an scandal as a political weapon and the focus on using investigations for the misuse of the constitutional monster, which he predicted would become a monster, we went through a time in the 1980's were democrats miss use the system and criminalize political differences and george bush won, and a number of people were innocent victims of the democratic scandal machine of misusing congress to score political points. >> would you say hillary -- have we always gotten it right? have the parties always worked together? >> i remember it a little differently, but i think he is

absolutely right. a couple of us do p.r., and classic crisis is the first thing we do. see what happened, commit to change, get people involved, and transparency with the press. george bush is a classic leader on 9-11, and i remember katrina a little bit differently. i do not remember democrats being quite as generous with george bush as we were pulling together as a country after 9- 11. people were angry about the war.

we were not willing to give president bush the benefit of the doubt, and what we were hearing is that the response was not good enough, and you can see it, and i think we used it a lot against the president going forward. >> did that hinder what you were trying to accomplish? >> we probably spent too much time fighting over things while ours were getting things done, and you that preconceived notions take hold. sometimes you go to the default position, and i think hillary is right -- i think president bush has been very candid.

i think the environment in washington and did not give the benefit of the doubt. the parties through something together, and there are exceptions to that. she came to the white house and said, what can i do to help, there are a lot of acts of bipartisanship, but what is happening is the rallying of fact is getting a shorter cycle , and it does not endure as long as it used to. the most recent one is the financial crisis. use of the parties coming together.

>> let me jump to that. neal was on the program for the last seven months. it is absolutely necessary for the sake of our country and the american people. i have seen washington work, and i know it can work. it sounds noble common and an but what is the lesson? will people next time the reluctant? >> i hope so.

this is way more complicated. yes, there are times we will all unite. americans are good at that. there are other times when the most patriotic thing you can do is to dissent. one idea was to lot of japanese americans and in turn them. let's discriminate against innocent americans and put them in a concentration camp. i think that was an example of too much by partisanship. everybody was trying to do their job, but there was a moment at the end which i thought was

emblematic of the different roles institutions play. senator landry i think is a great senator. the republican leaders were doing their best to help the state and the other states in the region. so the evil republicans will not help my state. she went on cnn and said i first want to thank the republican chairmen. they are really coming through for my state. anderson is coming through here, and there are dead bodies he is stepping through. his job is to keep them honest. he is doing his job, which is to cry b.s. we will seize it out. it is enormously complicated to know when the best dain for our cut -- the best thing for our

country is. $750 billion of tarp money to all the banks with not enough controls, not enough oversight, it probably was not a good idea. >> it is probably going to be $60 billion in the white house and the taxpayers will end up not making a deal. >> it is hard to know. that is the problem. i just think it is more complicated. >> we are talking about katrina. you were here. what is your opinion? did the party get it right? was there enough by partisanship to get the people what they needed? >> i would like to compare it with the bp oil spill.

we see the same thing with regards to go oil spill. it would be push and pull with the different parties. for example, during katrina, the democrats want to take punches in order to take back control of the congress, and you can see it similarly during the bp oil spill, were you have republicans taking punches to get some political points in order to give back.

the is were i saw the bipartisanship come into play. the issue was not whether we wanted to help people, but at the same time, we were pulling punches to get political points to paint the other side not to look bad whenever we could in order to convince people we could have done a better job. >> you and i were discussing -- what happens when a president takes an action that is part ascend -- that is partisan. tell us what you saw. >> one of the concerns i have with respect to the moratorium on offshore drilling, and that was a partisan decision. the president from my perspective might have made a decision to satisfy the left,

but the same time, the decision was very damaging to the people on the gulf coast. we live off of tourism, and much of the gulf, we get oil and gas and seafood, which is our way of life, and often people do not seem to understand the dynamics of how those different pieces fit together, so we were very much frustrated with the moratorium and trying to push for it to end quickly, but we saw the decision was expanded because of partisan politics. >> talk about the media and the role in national crisis. it was interesting, the

statement he said a producer made to him when he was on a talk show and they were trying to discuss serious ideas in a serious manner. we are in a time of national crisis. what responsibility does the media have? >> i think it was clear 9-11, even the financial crisis -- the media i thought was unusually involved in the story, and in some ways it made its more personal. i say standing in front of her was completely natural --

standing in front of her, yelling at her, was completely natural. when you were in mississippi talking about where you were growing up, there was an unusual amount of being part of the story, and i think it -- i do not think it has changed journalism, but it has changed television news in many respects from the this passion, and it was remarked upon for years. >> i am troubled by the absence of distinction between the word

media, which is supposed to be about facts and truth, and objective checking of facts verses media that is the internet and the jungle of people who do not fact check and post and published based on other publications were the truth is not verified, and i speak personally, because recently an organization i am a great admirer of published something about me full of false statements. i called the reporter and said after the article is posted and

enviro -- with a viral, i said, why did you wait until after to post it? this reporter said to me, if it is all over the internet, i think it is legitimate to publish, and this is not atypical. in the world of the internet, fact check second. i would like to ask my panelists were i do see some parallels of intellectual bias

-- in the logical bias, that there is an ideological bias on both sides of these organizations common and where is the fact checking and the distinction -- organizations, and with the fact checking and the distinction? >> i was going to ask how they can help or hurt the crisis. >> reporters are pushing harder and harder because they have to make decisions faster. you hope things turn out right, and sometimes you do not have the luxury.

for people saying, this happened and i will never forget -- i was on airforce one on september 11. we thought we were headed back to washington, but we went west. we landed at the air force base in louisiana. the decision was we were going to convince the side with the presidential package. we had to make a decision about which ones got cut. he went crazy and said, you are

panicking. i am thinking, you are panicking, because you're not going to write about your big moments on being on the plane with president bush on september 11, so you are dealing with it, and it is not healthy. it is going to be more and more difficult. >> you have no idea how many times i walked into the situation room common-law -- situation room, and they are watching cnn to figure out what is going on. the tv stations are calling them to find out what is going on, and it becomes code blue.

i think what anderson cooper did was exactly right. if you step back, the greater risk in the media is when they are on a team. they often get things wrong, but the bigger risk is where they say, we have to put aside our questions and concerns. therein lies much more damage to the republic then too much partisanship from the media. >> i want to talk about the issue of crisis and opportunity. there was an interesting piece called "america, the cameras -- timorous." hergued that americans racist change, pressing the government to act boldly only when national

catastrophe forces it upon them he said, and crisis provides the opportunity to do things you could not do before. what do you think about these pcs, and if they are true, to the parties, ford to make sure the -- ford how do -- how old do the parties come forward -- how do the parties come forward? >> we tend to wait for a crisis to happen before we take action, but the leadership component is where it separates the men from the blaze, which is to use that as an opportunity to bring

people together to look past the five minutes of media headlines to figure out where you need to be in the next 24 hours or the next 36 hours, i think in several places you can see that. in the bp still, they say it careercharlie crist's but resurrected bobby jindal based on how they responded in the first way. i think the leadership component cannot be ignored. when you talk about tarp, it probably cemented john mccain's defeat when he said he was not a player and barack obama was

willing to engage. those moments are what is critical, and that is when the human factor comes in. >> at the moment in time, we have seen that we need to put people back to work, to provide jobs, to do whatever we need to do to bring the economy back, but what i saw was a lack of bipartisanship, a lack of democrats and republicans working together. this has put more of a democratic peace of legislion, the democratic agenda of more spending and

possibly paying back the 2008 election, and we saw a massive spending bill, which right now the country is trying to get back from. >> i have no problems with natural disasters and disasters that are beyond everyone's control, and usually we pull together. sometimes we do not. my problem remains not just because of my ordeal -- manufactured crises that are politically motivated to score points. what the democrats did to george bush in the 1980's, the democrats did to george bush in hate ands, which is

investigation as a political weapon. is there one republican standing up saying this country needs to legislate, not investigated? let's cut out another step of investigating. we are back in another cycle, and unless somebody says that as a manufactured crisis and the media feed on it -- their ratings go up when there is lots of scandal -- this is what made the latest scandal. they merited a full week because of invitations to stay overnight or what we went through with a ron contra -- iran contra.

this is what still worries me. we are not out of the cycle. we are right back in it. >> do you think your successor over reached on the point? >> the public as predicted judge of that usually, and they are saying rahm emanuel famously said, and do not let it go to ways. you are trying to push way beyond. you are trying to make up for 40 years of agenda items they want to put. we are saying, wait a minute. we are focusing here. that is a curtailing of that.

as far as the issue going into iraq, we said, we did not sign up for that. in the beginning there was bipartisanship, but that is when the bipartisan goal started to crumble. you have to constantly understand, what is the mandate. >> that is exactly right. at the worst of it, his job approval rating was 71. it is because they were so appalled. the media loved it. the chairman of the oversight

committee did a presentation of the president's christmas card list. i watched it. it was horrific. the voters said, they did not reward it. he corrected that. it is not fun to go through these things, but days after he had to testify before that grand jury, we had to bom bin laden. we had factional -- actionable intelligence.

the president launched cruise missiles. there were some who accused him of trying to attract attention away the generals and the joint chiefs are not political guys. he was at 71. we did not need to get to 91. we were winning on the scandal, but when people said that, they were quickly punished by their own constituents. they believed the president. we had him, missed him by that much. even when they were busy impeaching him they said, you did the same thing yesterday. citizens were kind of cool about it. they said, i get it. >> this is the last panel of the day, so we are going to questions a little bit earlier.

we have a microphone. if you want to make a brief remark, we are looking for questions. >> i was wondering if you would say something about bush's nemours that came out and why the call was made to do a fly over and meet with leaders. >> the book provides some insight. the president made a lot of controversial decisions in his presidency. there are a lot of big things that took place. it is always encouraging to hear the president's view on those things. the week of katrina was the darkest we give our tenure at

the white house, and we had dealt with a lot. we had a series of gaffes in decision making. again one thing about president bush is the annex of accountability for the mission accomplished sign behind him. i gave approval for the banner, but you hear nothing about that .n the boaok the reason a lot of us are loyal to him is because he is that kind of person. there was a lot of discussion about whether we should fly over or not. i do not care how much technology in you have. if you are managing a crisis coming you have to be in the same place. you cannot make sound judgment

and give good recommendation, so ultimately it was decided it would be good to do that. my old friend and colleague tried to -- decided to write the book, and he talked about the process and the decision- making, and one thing he left out of the book was when i said, what ever you do do not let the press secretary up to the front of the plane to take a picture of him, and somehow they memorialize it. >> we have the clinton days, and in louisiana, we probably got the bitter days.

with respect to the way he handled his situation, have we turned the page in terms of how to handle a crisis or any type of personal crisis in order to be reelected by 18 points? >> can i say i am shocked by how quickly louisiana got over the bitter days. there are two things people hate about politicians. one is hypocrisy. maybe they hate sex more. the media is clearly uncomfortable talking about sex. in some respects, if it was ok for louisiana, people kind of

let it go. people here have stopped talking about it. the difference is they acted differently. >> shut it up and go away. give it all out early. answer all the questions. he did none of that. he retreated to his media base, and he won in part because -- essentially, it was a private

problem. that plus the fact that he did not feed the beast. the panel.ar from >> ibm and not talking about a challenger who also -- i am talking about a challenger who also had a technical and legal problem, so i see it from the perspective of our society as a whole, how we are so entrenched in our way of thinking that we are overlooking the bad things of the candidates in order to vote along party lines. republicans were willing to overlook. the democrats were willing to overlook the character baggage

and to vote democrat. >>hat does that say? >> i would be disappointed. private life ought to be private life. if it impedes, then you can put it in the political arena. somehow, the rules changed. i tried to chase -- to trace fat, but i am one person who said, i am glad that did not bring down senator victor -- vitter. i hope we have moved beyond that, but i do not think we

have. >> my condolences on the election. can you talk about what is your process in trying to act in a bipartisan manner, and why do you think of the republicans were not willing to get an expanded bill of not only extended coverage but to cut costs for a lot of americans who already have it. >> i take tyrolean really seriously -- i take this role

really seriously. when i am confronted with an issue, i go through a number of steps. will this issue of force me to coromise the values i have common and what is my duty with -- i have, and what is my duty with respect to the issues? with resct to the health care bill, even though i was not satisfied with the bill, but because it did not require me to compromise a more personal position than it has, i thought it was my duty to represent my people, but when i was confronted with the senate bill, the one we worked so hard to put in these two types of language to prevent funds from going to

abortion, we were unsuccessful with that. i support this to vote along the constituency, and with respect to the senate bill, i felt i could not vote for it. at the end of the day, i was forced to live with it. there were conflicting moral stance, and i had to take a position. >> in times of bipartisanship, how do we prevent government over -- like the patriot act in war times? >> the fact that you raised it

shows concern. i am very much concerned with government trying to get away with what we can -- to do what we can, but i get most nervous when everyone agrees. i was not freaked out by the patriot act, but a lot of this -- i used to host a show about the war in iraq. i am still mad at the democrat'' report. they were to bipartisan. it is simply the fact that you ask that question but we are going to be ok. if you want to see a country

with no partisanship, go to north korea. we want to get it right though. we want to get kingstown -- to get things done. there is a batting average. there is a far better batting average when we bring people together. there are exceptions. i agree. i am not going to agree the patriot i was one of them. more times than not, bipartisanship -- the tarp was an example of that. people got hurt by it, but it is going to come in under budget, and at the end of the day the public will make money before it is over. >> the patriot act as a good

example because its timing coincided with the internet in a positive way, because i think you will never again for a day -- never again have a day were transparency does not exist. we saw it in the health care process in a way that was overwhelming and completely annoying to the legislators working on it. they could not cut a deal without someone posting it immediately for that deal to be scrutinized, so i think congress is never going to be in a position again to do the kind of back room deals common the late night -- deals, the late night

drafting. it has changed. >> this great organization has brought us here. i do not exactly agree. partisanship is necessary. i started out with a chapter on the immense vitriolic hatred those people had for each other. the fundamental debate of federal power versus state power went right through the election. we can argue issues, and if

somebody stood for democratic principles, married to the daughter of that great president, and he stuck with democratic principles, and he founded the democratic leadership council, which everyone accused him of being a centrist or whatever they called you, but what he stands for and what this council stands for is what all of us stand for -- i am a liberal and unwilling to debate it, but you do it civil -- and am willing to debate it, but you do it civilly, and you try to find compromises that are incremental.

times."

>> what would be your first lecture to this didn't sit your teaching this class? >> it has to be addressed at the most fundamental levels. the military increasingly is becoming defensive in its attitude towards the civilian world. understandon't we each other? gut: we have what i call military metaphysics. after the second world war, the military and civilian world had a great relation with each other. they understood what was going on in the military. now we have an all volunteer force. the military doesn't really

undersnd why it does what -- what it does. host: you write in your book that the military in the u.s., and i want to say civilians, the military and civilians are more and more like partners in a bad marriage, stuck together in a house they develop so long ago they don't even remember why. with no love lost and no real understanding of each oer. how do we get from that, which you say is the current situation, to a better situation? guest: the subtitle of my book is, what each side has to understand about each other. let's start with the civilian

world. the civilian world has to understand what the nature of the military is. to break it down schematically, the civilian world is divided into liberals and conservatives. they do not understand the function in the larger scheme of things. conservatives, if possible, love the military too much. they will give the military a blank check and anything they do is good. both sides of the civilian world have to either warmup for cool off, depending on where you are in the political spectrum. there are a couple of other things that have to understand about the military. i will come back to that. the military has to tell them that they are held to a higher standard. the bottom line, the military increasingly feels itself superior to the civilian world

with its mission to defend. that is a potentially toxic situation. the military is tell the civilians are soft, and the military is hard, and so on. my theory is, the conclusions i have reached our that there is a reason why the military has taken on this bad terminology. you have to understand that the military works with the civilian or a, not the reverse. the military is to defend american interests abroad and so on. the analogy i come up with is the military is the hammer and the civilian world is the hand. we have to have an end about this -- to this talk about we are actually better than the ones we defend. that leaves the people in military clueless as to why they are doing what they are doing. at the naval academy -- the

military has to have a new conception of itself, which i call the military metaphysic. after the second world war, u.n. into the military and did your duty. if you survive, you can add, you were reintegrated. the other possibility is the career military. the hindus had the notion of a military caste. neither of those is the case in the united states right now. we have an all volunteer force, as everyone knows. how the explain to the people that they are potentially out there getting there behind shot off to people who are not a self sacrificing as they are? i have an answer to that. i would not be do my job if i

did not propose an answer. the military has to understand that whether the civilian world is currently responding to them, th have a job to do. the civilian world has to learn to appreciate the military more than it is. the military has to stop thinking it is better than the world in defense. that ithe issue, each side has to understand more about how the other side functions. the military has got to know that civilians are never going to be like the military, and civilians have to understand the nature of the military. the want to know what lector no. 2 is going to be? host: go for it. guest: lecture to is how the

civilian world has to change. i want the president of harvard thinking a little more kindly about rotc. that is what secretary gates was talking about several months ago. we need a recommitment by the coastal establishment in this country for the military. that means things like rotc at universities and so on. i need the president of princeton saying loud and clear, the military is an honorable thing to do. it is a necessary part of our society. nobody likes of war, and what you do when you go in the military is potentially kill people. i don't want that shellac or varnished. i need the civilian world to be more on board. the military world has got to

start changing. here is the change. has to make itself more attractive to all those nice boys and girls. what is the problem with the military? the problem is it is a monopoly. i was a fulbright scholar in west berlin, so i got all the stuff that came from the east side of the wall. the military is a hierarchy, based on getting people to do wh you say just because you say it. it does not tolerate dissent well. it is used to getting its own way. the military is big and loud. so the military has to start reforming itself to a greater degree from within and is currently doing. has to encourage reasonable dissent up the chain of command and has to become too much greater degree than it is an institution not of doing what i said because i told you to do it, but do what i say because i can explain, when the bullet

stop flying, why i took this course of action. that is what i do at annapolis. i am a civilian professor. i work for the military for 24 years, and my job is to make thinking officers. the military has to recommit itself to the kind of rational justification for what it does, and back off on just do what i say because i told you to do it. >> our guest is a professor at the military naval academy in annapolis and arthur of a new book. you heard his synopsis ofhe book and his views. we would like to heafrom you. members of the military, you can call in on any of our political lines, but we have set aside a fourth line just for members of the active-duty military. let's begin with joyce, a democrat in missouri.

caller: good morning. i have just a couple of questions, but first a comment. the first thing that struck me was this painted a picture of liberals versus conservatives and how they support the military. being a progressive liberal, i don't share that opinion, and i converse nomination nine that net -- nationwide network with a bunch of oth liberals and don't ever express the kind of opinions york tochis allow. -- the kind of opinions you talked about. i think that on the other end of the spectrum with

conservatives, where you find a much more hawkish population about go to war, kill the enemy at any cost, that part is most importantly the blood of our soldiers and military service people. so i have a real problem with where you draw that from where you sit in your job at annapolis, maybe you are too far removed from the population that would be able to answer those questions for you truthfully. so i would like to know where you got that information. host: thank you, joyce. guest: the blood of our soldiers is obviously a big cost. it is not just the men and women who come back and boxes that we need to consider. this question of liberal and conservative stuff is not something i am coming up with.

many studies have shown the military has become much more conservative, overwhelmingly republican. that was not te after the second worldar, for example. individuals are statistically meaningless, and individual liberals can be very pro- military, so i am making sweeping generalizations here. if you look at the voting record in congress, obviously everybody supports the military, but the issue th sticks in the craw of the military, for example, the overwhelmingly libal educational institutions that have banned rotc. that is where a lot of that is coming from. you look at the voting records in congress and you will see that instinctively, the

republicans seem to be a little bit me on board with them. host: detroit, on the independent line. caller: this subject strikes particularly close to home to me because i am the father of a son who is serving in the service. this is a complete change in my son when he joined the military, before and after he got through basic training. coming fromn area that has been financially hard hit, there were really no opportunities for him up here. he is soon what is called military bearing, and your guest will know what i mean when i say that. he was kind of smart aleck and got into a couple of times in basic, but he made ithrough with great skills and is now a fire control officer on a

nuclear submarine, havingassed criminal background checks and all that. if he would have stayed here in detroit, he would not have, as they say, assumed military bearing. that is an out f a lot of people, especially in this economy. and there is a military-civilian divide, but not so much. i would like to add to the creek -- thoughts of the previous caller saying that liberals are not in the military. i am a " progressive liberal myself, and i obviously support the military. host: we got the point. bruce fleming. guest: my point is to get people in the military to be justifiably proud of what they do without doing it at the ct of denigrating the people they do it for. i am completely on board with

this notion of military bearing. you are talking about something more general, being locked on and so on. all that is a great thing, and the military can get that young men and women, but i don't want their superior officers to tell them as a result that they are better than the people they are defending. the liberal attitude towards the military is not really what sticks in the craw of the military when we talk about the military-civilian divide. it is even worse than that. it is indifference. it is the fact that we are out there getting our behinds shot off, and the folks back home just don't care. there is something actually worse than dislike for disapproval. i don't think too many people who actively this press the g8 express disapproval -- i don't

think too many people actively express disapproval. the perfect storm is not in itself a bad thing. this topic needs to be brought a little more front and center than it actually is. it is an all volunteer force. they do not have to join. is not wrong to eep do not want it to. byhe same token, -- is not going to hit you if you do not want it to. if it were the early years, we would not have this problem because people would still be all fired up. but the military is beginning to fill ground down. it is a lot less clear to them what they are doing it for. that is the reason why the military h to understand itself better.

i am not sure i have said it as clearly as i need to say it. the military needs to we embrace the conception of ielf as the profession of arms. i go back to the hindu sense of a cast. for them is something you are born into, and for us is not. the military has to stop askg for justification, for people hugging them on the street. the point of the war as they are involved in is a little bit murky to people at home. they are just not going to get that more fuzzy output, the cker-tape parades. host: what kind of dissent is allowed at the naval academy? guest: the last time i was on span was to talk about an op ed of me that was then "the new york times."

professors are allowed to say what they want, but they pay a price. for example, last year at the civilian been attempted to adopt my pay and slap a letter of caution as a disciplinary measure on me. i protested boast but -- both of those things and that is now being wrapped up. i do have ways to protest, but the short version is, you can say what you want to say, so long as it does not actually question of the basis of what is going on. host: calling on the republican line, good morning to you. you are on the air. caller: i am just cfused, and i alwaysonder what part of the

country you get your surveys from, writing your books and that. i am a republican, but i know democrats and i do not know anyone around who does not respect the army. i could run up and hug them, and that is the way everyone feels about it. i am really confused, and i think there should be at distinguish men between older and younger people. maybe the older people who have been there and seen that in world war ii and the korean war and others have a different take on the svice. even the younger people in there, i think i have more respect for. host: take what she said, and take some more divides, male- female, read state, blue state. guest: people do not like to hear generalizations, but they are a good way to start conversations. i am not the one who invented

this feeling of being neglected. it is the military itself. people are calling in saying i like the military. fine, great, that is wonderful news to hear. but that is not the sense inside the military obviously this conservative- liberal stuff is the latest in the red state-blue state thing. i like to say i am the guy in the middle. there is an op ed in today's " washington post" calng for eight centrist party, and i kind of like that. i take the hit from both sides. sure, there is a correlation between your basic political outlook and how you feel about the military. men and women, that is a pandora's box.

gay andl ask about straight and "don't as don't tell". it would be nice to pretend that we all work together in perfect harmony, and we do not. there are clashes between liberal and conservative, between men and women with respect to the military. tell" seemsdon't like it's days are numbered or at least it's months are numbered. i wrote an op ed where i said it is going to be repealed, but i predict it will not go smoothly, either. the military is not good at dealing with dissent. you ask me about women. the short version here is, just take the naval academy for example. unl 1976 they said no way, we are not going to have women at the naval academy, absolutely not. the people at the building right down the road here said yes, you

are. so they had women and they declared the problem solved and they moved on. only it was toxic. they treated women -- it was horrible. the military does not do a pendulumn the middle. that is why they need me, frankly. they do one extreme or the other. it is no way on women, or yes, we love women. now many people feel that wen are being promoted just because they are women, just as a number of people feel that race is being promoted in the military, so there are tensions there. we are not doing anybody a favor by pretending they are not there. host: hugh is calling from new

jersey. caller: i was just calling as far as gays in the military. we have to spend tax dollars to build separate showers and baacks? host:he thing that should happen? caller: i do not want a man looking at me as if i was a female. if that is the case, white not just make everything coed? guest: let me go ahead and try. i have written a whole book about this one called "sexual ethics." the figures i saw work that 30% thought there would be problems.

obviously there are differentiation between individual service at the marine corps, which is the most recalcitrant to change. the fact is that most of what we do in the military is very much like an office situation, and there'll be no problems whatsoever. it does not matter to me who you go home to or who you see after hours. the military's response to that is, things like what we are not talking about, sharing living quarters. in the marine corps, it is a 24/7 kind of thing. there are aspects of the service where there will be potential problems. submarines. these are not problems that

cannot be solved. it is going to happen. i wish i could turn the clock back and do the integration of women better. we are looking at a situation where we have the opportunity to do the integration of openly great big openly gay -- of openly gay service members. if of mail does not want to show with an openly gay guy, he is the one who has an issue. the fact of the matter is, we have segregated bathrooms for reason. your caller has a valid point here. it is not going to be without problems. are they deal breaker problems? nope. canada has no issue with the, for example. i was just up at a conference in canada, and their armed forces do not seem to be falling apart. no big deal, people say, except

when it is, and then you have to talk about it. host: doug from detroit, your honor with bruce fleming. caller: i am an ex-marine, 1977- 1981 there were people in there w were gay. i did not have a problem with it. my biggest problem was in competency of other people. if you look at the foreign relations in it, ting for example open gallop. seems a lot of the problem come from straight, heterosexual people who are just off the leash -- for example, nookinawa. we had a sarate shower. the only time i w subjected to barrks showers was when i was at okinawa.

i do not have a problem with that so much as i do with the pele in the air force. i undstand they are now requiring people to go to church. that is my problem, there are consertive viewpoints that are being pushed that are not being commented on by your book that i think are just as destructive as any kind of liberal agenda. host: thank you very much. guest: people are going to have problems to a greater or lesser extent. i had a gay brother who died of aids. i have many gay friends. it is t an issue. the fact of the matter is, once again, i am not making this up. there are many people for whom it is an issue.

my job is to articulate their point of view as well, because i don't think the military, once it turns the corner, is going to deal with them very well. i think is going to happe. of course there are worse things, but right now, everyone is interested in "don't ask, don't tell". maybe in 10 years we will look back and say i cannot believe we spent all that time on it. host: another member of the milita calling in from fayetteville, north carolina. caller: [unintelligible] we talked about the issue o civilianand military and

affairs. i think one of the primary differences between this war and world war ii was that the entire country was involved. people working in the factories. now have of america is out shopping and enjoying the christmas season in america. that makes it difficult from that point of view. you made a remark about being in the military being an honorable profession. [unintelligible] host: thank you vermuch.

guest: you have done a great job of summarizing the point. the military is out there putting his life at risk, and the people here are going shopping. that is one of the major departure points of my book, that we do have this sense that the war is for somebody else. it is not helping things that the particul war we are looking at now is one we are not sure we see the point of. so absolutely, practically everybody sees the second world war correctly as a just war and this war is a filthy, horrible war. now these are wars of choice. that is threason why i think this book is frankly necessary. the military has to have a new understanding of itself. it is not the world against adolf hitler. that is not the issue. it has to be comfortable being

less than 1% of the population that basically does not care about it. >> you have been teaching at the academy since 1987. have you seen a change in attitudes over some of these issues whave talked about? females, gays in the military, or just in general, what trends have you seen? guest: yes, i have seen trends. insofar as it would seem ethical to do so, i take will in formal polls -- you cannot ask students how they are going to vote, but 24 years ago, it was extremely republican. it is much less so now. i am just as convinced that the military is the cat's meow, the sense of entitlement is very bothersome to me. this is paid for by the taxpayersor the purpose of

producing people who will defend the taxpayers, but midshipmen are being told daily they are the bes and brightest. there is still a sense of entitlement, but more of a drift towards the political center. on the gay issue, you can still be thrown out of annapolis for being gay. i know a gay midshipman who have come to me and asked if this is going to be the week they will be thrown out. the military in general and the service academies in specific are always going to attract a certain type of person. as little as people like to hear generalizations, they are going to be more right wing and left ring. that will become -- people who are more comfortable with authority. a lot of them went to catholic schools. there may be some correlation there. the basic structure of what i am talking about has not changed, which is that the military

attracts a certain type of person. i would like to see more people who turned down -- there are a handful. host: punta gorda of florida, go ahead. caller: i am a vietnam veteran. when i returned in 1966, i did not get a very good welcome. i had one more year of duty to do in california, and the base commander put out an order that the military was not to go on liberty in theirniforms. that was in california. i guess that is where most of the liberals are now. now that i live in florida, i have got more respect and recognition for my service in vietnam. one question for you, mr. fleming, were you in the military?

guest: yes and no. i have never worn a uniform, but i have worked for the military for 24 years. if you want to accept that as military, that is what i have to offer. i put my name in the draft in 1972 when i was 18. my number was not called. bus service has been what i am doing now. you are making a great point. there are parts of the country where you will get a more congenial welcome. when things are not going well, when the war has no purpose, military serviceembers will not be cut in airports. you all have to be told, you cannot make yourself image depends on whether you get a hug on the street. what you are doing is an honorable thing, it is the profession of arms, something the society has decided it apparently needs. part of me is a pacifist at heart. i always think we should give

peace a chance and then another chance and then another chance. but there comes a point when you have to stop giving peace a chance. but we have decided we need a military, and we do. host: how and why did you start working at the naval academy in 1987? guest: i am from the eastern shore of maryland. annapolis has always figured on my radar. i went there when i was a kid. they put on a show. lot of people do not believe me when i say we have serious issues at annapolis. they say it looks so nice. you know what that does to a 10- year-old. i got my ph.d. in 1982 and i taught for two years in west germany and also taught in rwanda before the civil war, before they started killing people. in my early 30's, i said it was time for me to go back home, so

this was the job i got. i have been very happy there. host: or you tenured? guest: that is a great question. that is why i can write things saying the army has a serious problem. i will get flak for what i am about to say, because we are coming up to the army-navy week. the military academies are not doing themselves a favor by engaging in division 1 football. it has been an interesting factor and it lowers hh standards. another thing that is problematic is how we have gone full war behind getting and non- white students, but that is a subject for another conversation. tenure is what allows me to say things like that. host: pd is in the military and is calling from killing, texas. -- killeen, texas.

caller: sometimes i feel like a victim of "don't ask, don't tell", but it is because i am a liberal. andrew cuomo is quoted as saying that having a meltdown has a greater effect than the twin towers coming down. i ask myself, what am i doing in iraq protecting us from terrorist if the terrorists are at home raping and pillaginghe american citizen? in a lot of respects, i feel that we are fighting the wrong war, from the folks for the lead that are tearing down america and making money -- for the

elite that are tearing down american and making money. china has it right. they are making deals instead of fighting wars overseas to develop the world and develop the natural resources where we have problems and enemies. host: we are goi to leave it there. thank you for calling in this morning. guest: that is exactly what the book is about. the military goes over there. you just summarize it, you and one of the previous callers. we have a problem here. the military put this behind on the line and makes great personal sacrifices, and for what? it's what they do seems irrelevant to what is going on at home. it is not the main issue when you poll americans on what their biest concerns are. it is not the war in iraq.

the big clashes between the incredible self sacrifice of the people in the military and the fact that in the larger scheme of things, it does not seem to matter. the only way to fix that is by talking to it to the military. you are not going to fix that by getting everybody in uniform. it is horrendously expensive, and god forbid we should have world war iii. it is a minority force, sometimes working to uncertain purpose. you need guys and gals in uniform to be clear about who they are and whyhey are doing it, without demanding that that be the major issue. as far as being a liberal in the military, you need to talk to the caller from earlier who said there was no problem. host: we have about 30 seconds

left. john is in mississippi. go ahead, john. caller: i am a soldier in hattiesburg, mississippi. i have to disagree with my friend on tv who says we are fighting a war with the purpose. as a soldier who was wounded in iraq, and as a muslim soldier, we are fighting people who would impose their beliefs on the world. i just want to say that i would be willing to go on-site again. i am done. i was just making a statement. host: thank youor calling in. guest: wt you are doing and what you did is a wonderful

thing, so thank you very much. but i did not actually say that the war has no purpose. i said most americans seem to feel that it has no purpose. host:

.

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> he and i had the great honor to work to build a global movement called the third way, which made it sound like we were lost. in fact, what we believe is that progressives should build a government and a partnership with the private sector and partnerships with each other focused on the realities of the 21st century world, not the 20th century world. that government should be about empowerment, creating conditions, and giving people a tool to chart their own course

to make the most of their own lives. that it should be strong, but not overbearing. and that it should always, always advance the cause of liberty. since he left office, he has done what i knew he would. he has continued to do good. hillary and i are -- hilary and i are very grateful that we have known him in a way that politicians don't always know each other. i can tell you that he deserved this award. in the rhythm of this program, in just a few minutes, i'm going to give it to him. but i want you to acknowledge that now we are grateful he is

in philadelphia and the cradle of our liberty. [applause] i ink it is surprisingly interesting that we are giving this award to a famously successful former prime minister of the united kingdom in the city where we declared our independence from his country, where we decided that their common law constitution was not good enough, and we had to have a written one. after we fought a second war with them, and they burned white house after eating dolly madison's dinner, since then it's been all up hill. there has never quite been a

partnership for freedom like the partnership between our two countries. he is in the finest tradition of that partnership. im profoundly grateful because he has been my personal friend, my candid advisor, my colleague in trying to build the partnership when so much in the world would try to drive us apart. and because he is devoting his cause now to peace in the middle east which if successful would do more than anying to drain the swamp of hatred in that region and undermine the silent song of terrorists all across the world. [applause]

>> it is in recognition of his work as prime minister and after ward to put peace and prosperity at the forefront of the united kingdom and far beyond its borders. to bring people together in a world bent on driving them apart that has richly earned him this liberty medal. thank you very much. [applause] >> from abc news, renown anchor of "this week," christiane

amanpour. >> thank you, ladies and gentlemen. it is really great to be here to celebrate this tradition. as a journalist i have covered all over the world so many of the crises and interventions that president clinton just outlined. in fact, that both the president and prime minister were leading at the time. whether it was northern ireland, cose kosovo -- northern ireland, kosovo, and the middle east. during that time, i have seen that very sadly it is often that conflict and bad news that does in fact make the news. it is religious intoll rens -- intolerance that makes the news while the absence of suffering merits such little notice.

there are times and places in the world where the opposite is true, and i have been fortunate enough to cover that as well. where a return to peace and understanding and a return to conflict and an end to injustice, what we think of as normal life is also news. it is good news. this evening we will be looking at a lot of that. so i'm delighted as i say to be here, at this year's medal ceremony. that since 1989 celebrated the freedoms that so many people enjoyed, so much ofs that come here to enjoy the liberties that this country has to offer. we help and we are pleased to join in all the cultural differences of people that never actually experienced freedom. we're here to celebrate all of those people who have. this evening's first performer, i'm delighted to introduce, has been recognized for reaching out in the name of understanding in a region that has known precious

little of either. a region predent clinton just mentioned and that prime minister blair is working hard in and also that secretary of state hillary clinton is working hard in. right now they are in the middle of the latest arab-israeli peace negotiations. so now i'm going to introduce a singer who will sing for us this evening a song called faith in the lithe. it has lyrics in english, hebrew, and arabic. ladies and gentlemen, mira awad.

♪ there are days when i say i wish it would just all go away that it would all just disappear there are days when it is too much when i feel i'm losing touch with anything that makes any sense or that is left of it where can we go from here it has been one long life

where can we go from here ♪ ♪ where can we go from here

♪ where can we go from here this has been one long life give me something to restore my faith in the light tell me that we've done something right ♪ ♪ tell me that we can set things right give me faith in the light ♪ [applause]

>> please join me in thanking mira awad one more time. [applause] >> welcome to the national constitution center. i'm david eisner, c.e.o. and president. this is a great night for all of us. for me personally, tonight is the first liberty medal ceremony since i've become president at the center, and today also happens to be the day that my family moved here from bethesda. their first day in philadelphia. [applause] now the founding fathers endured some pretty tough traveled on

their way to independence hall, which is right there behind you. but on the her hand, those fathers didn't come here with four children and a dog while preparing to host the leaders of the united states and great britain. and now having failed spectacularly to help with the move, let me make up by asking you to join me in asking my wonderful wife, my children, cali, jackson, and jamie, thank you for allowing me to become part of this wonderful center. and i'm glad you're here. my post for five years before coming to the center included running senior core, vista, and the service corps. the terrific program created by

president clinton. [applause] taking on this pog -- position was irresistable to me. this has more potential than any organization in the united states, in my opinion, to activate civic participation of american citizens. not to mention, the opportunity to work with president clinton on another great initiative of civic engagement. the national center is not just a history museum about the people who came here more than 200 years ago to forge a document. it is a living tribute to the power of people to shape society and to change the future through their spirited participation. our vibrant interactive exhibit reminds millions of visitors that we the people have always been and we must continue to be the creators of -- and the

guardians of the liberty that enriches our lives and that makes america a land where all people are free to succeed. a couple hours ago, president clinton led our bored meeting that noke focused on -- that focused on our long-term plan about the constitutional and civic issues of our time. our country thrives on political discourse. we at the center are committed to playing a major role in broadening participation in that discourse. in honoring that commitment, we recognize the liberty medal as the crown jewel in our celebration of the freedoms on which this nation was founded. we describe those for home whom this medal was intended as men and women of courage and

conviction who strive to secure the blessings of liberty to people around the globe. lepolesa was the first medal of liberty winner in 1989, and six other people have gone on to win this medal. the 2006 riments presided over -- recipients presided over an incredible outpouring of support after the hurricane katrina and the tsunami.

we honored the musician bono or scientists that unlocked clues in d.n.a., we honor those who have character ricks on which -- characteristics on which our nation was founded. tony blair is a leader in the middle east peace process, including his participation in the white house zution only a -- white house discussion only the week before last. he has helped in siera leone as

well as other places. it is participation that makes the difference between poverty and despair and -- poverty and prosperity and hopelessness and hope. welcome mr. blair. tonight we welcome you for calling so many to the great call of civic engagement and securing and extending the blessings of liberty around the world. thank you. [applause] >> these words from the good friday agreement. "we the participants believe that the agreement we have negotiated offers a truly historic opportunity for a new beginning. the tragedies of the past have

left a deep and profoundly regrettable legacy of suffering. we must never forget those who have died or have been injuried and their families, but we can best honor them through a fresh start in which we firmly dedicate ourselves to the achievement of reconciliation, toll rens, and mutual trust, and the vindication of all." the belfast agreement brought an end to 30 years of violence which had its roots in political and religious differences that went back several centuries. like the declaration of independence and other declarations, those who wrote their -- this agreement chose to put in writing what they believed would form the foundation for a new tradition of peace and freedom. >> when i was a kid, my father used to take the kids and buy

candy across the border, because it was cheaper. then i think it was about nine years later that the trouble starte >> the history of the trouble in northern ireland, the conflict really started in 1968. people were fighting for civil rights. the basic issues that would be in any society, not unlike civil rights movements of the 1960's in the united states. these were totally rejected. that led to the start of violence by paramilitary groups. civil unrest that led to the deaths of thousands. previous revolutions looked at the united kingdom. we believed it was only looking

at the toe talt of the relationships. so the good friday agreement looked at all the outstanding issues that could possibly arise . there were literally thousands of prisoners that were serving long sentences from both sides. none of the paramilitary groups nor the political wings of these groups were going to leave their prisoners behind. tony blair and i had to make the decision that we would release the prisoners. that was a difficult decision. many of these people committed murder, mass murder. we had to make the judgment that to release prisoners back into society. in fact, the majority never engaged in trouble again, and a large proportion took a very active role in building the peace in their communities. this accepted agreement was, at the broad nature of it, was the fact it covered where representatives would be elected

to. none of the previous agreements have tried to be as far-reaching as that. >> today leadsers on both sides of the struggle have taken a big step forward getting their people to live in peace. >> there is no time to understand the other people's problems. that can only come with time. i think what we proved in northern ireland is a sustained effort of negotiations, of patience, of understanding, can actually build trust, and that the overwhelming majority of people are prepared to move on and live in the new peaceful society. >> blair risked a lot to his reputation. by talking to people he shouldn't have bb -- have been talking to, he finally found compromise. this is a really underrated word "compromise." i think tony bl afmente r -- i

think tony blair understands the word "compromise" better than most. it is compromise that brought about the peace so concretely in northern ireland. ♪ from the first day of january 1892 they entered ellis island and they led the people through across the threshhold of peace many more from ireland would leave isle of peace

isle of tears isle of years but it is not the isle i left behind isle of hunger isle of hunger isle of pain isle you'll never be again isle of peace isle of years it is not the isle i left behind isle of hunger isle of pain isle you'll never be again but the isle of hope is always on your mind but the isle of home is always

on your mind ♪ [applause] ♪ let there be peace today and forever may peace march ahead with hope and pain fear will be ended

when the healing of nation happens let there be peace peace to tend the fields of grain watch the skies and sea walk in sunshine, pouring rain unafraid and free peace in our time and for our children's children god of our father hear us let there be peace peace to tend the fields of grain walk in sunshine or in rain

unafraid and free peace in our time and for our children's children god of our father's hear us let there be peace god of our father's hear us let there be peace ♪ [applause]

>> ladies and gentlemen, the irish tenors, >> over the past few years, people have seen a resource-rich land that could succeed if given an opportunity to become self-reliant. there are thousands forging roads religiously and figuretively to raise up africa and bring hope to a region where none has existed for a long, long time. >> africa, a continent torn by armed conflict. wars between countries, civil wars, ethnic attacks. often fueled by tyranny and

greed. >> we see an area particularl ravaged by war and corruption. >> much of the world knows africa as the dark continent. a continent teeming with poverty, famine, and disease. there soot -- there is another africa. one moving out of the darkness. in need of a helping hand as it struggles toward the light. >> we have been trying to improve the infrastructure and give them their own goff nance -- governance of the country. some countries have helped, but not enough. >> diseases do not recognize board -- borders. we can stop the mother-child

transmission to -- of aids. think about it. what will we do about it? >> this is a great idea, but it has to be translated into reality. what we're trying to do is make sure the reality is replicated. >> tony blair is leading a foundation to develop private industry and to help africans have the know-how to keep it running. organizations such as the tony blair faith foundation and the agricultural panel. >> we have god-given education that will help the support of many crops. we have marine resources that have a huge potential.

>> our countries are about to become major economic powerhouses in the next decades. that will happen. it will help the global economy enormously. a billion more producers and consumers? we really need them. we also need a peaceful africa for our own security. it is remarkable that we should be shouting it from the rooftops, and tony blair should be so proud of his role in this, that there are 40 million more children in school now than there was in 1959. that is an astonishing thing to say. due in part to debt cancellation and new government.

>> this has provided a rallying point for the future of africa. if africa is to succeed, it is ordinary citizens who must rally on her behalf and help light her way along the path way -- pathway to freedom. >> ladies and gentlemen, president clinton. >> it is now my great honor to award the liberty medal to former prime minister and wonderful world citizen, tony blair. [applause]

>> thank you very, very much indeed. mr. president, mr. governor, mr. mayor, ladies and gentlemen, it is a tremendous privilege and honor to receive this liberty medal and to be here with you this evening in philadelphia. i'm so delighted to be in such distinguished company.

of course, foremost, point master of politics, my friend, my partner, my good colleague, president clinton. [applause] he and hillary were great friends to me and my family. and if you will allow me, it is also just a wonderful thing for me tonight not just to be here myself but to have my son and my daughter here with me also. [applause]

whether there is -- when there is an award for freedom given to a former prime minister of england, it can't help but facilitate discussion of other circumstances. look, i'm sorry about what happened in the past. [laughter] one of the things you find as britain's prime minister, after a time, it always reaches this point where they say, well, it was you that did this. it is a great unifying point in diplomacy. you do know, for example, there were many british people, not the least an english man, who

played a great part in the constitution itself. despite all that history those years ago, people look today not just in america but outside of america, too, the u.s. constitution and its celebration of that great engine of human progress the universal desire for freedom, but it is your constitution when we read it we feel a tremendous sense of pride in human achievement. [applause] for me the idea of liberty has always been more than just the idea of freedom. it's also been about the striving of the human spirit.

i think a lot about striving when i'm out in the middle east peace process. just last night i was in jeruslem. sometimes i look at the issue of liberty and striving through the eyes of those in the middle east. just a few weeks before, i visited jacob's well flfment ablus. of course, israel, the word "israel" means to struggle with god. when jacob struggled he showed that liberty is not something passive, it is something active.

now, when i spoke earlier i said, what would y like me to speak about? and he said, i don't know, but make it short. so i will give you in a few minutes my seven lessons of liberty. the first is that every milestone on the road to liberty marks a struggle. liberty is not acquired by accident, it is won by endeavor. no people, no country, no nation has ever won their liberty except by striving. and in creating liberty there is opposition, there is even defeat and occasionly despair -- and occasionally despair along the way. the next lesson about liberty is

it comes from people who lead. my office in london, believe it or not, is in john adams' old house, who was the first ambassador to the united states, and also, of course, president of the united states. he believed powerfully in god as creator, but put aside rligious dogma. he and the work of others and the belief of others made a huge imprint on your constitution. so when we examine the history of liberty, what we find is not some predetermined course of events, but ordinary human beings doing extraordinary things in the midst of earth-changing events. the next step to liberty is this, all people want to be

free. not all people are free, but all people want to be. you know sometimes you hear people say, "it is in their culture"? "it is in their history"? liberty is not something they naturally want or desire. ask them. usually in my experience, when people have tasted freedom, they never want to go back to a life in chains. the next lesson, to be free is to be responsible for the freedom of others. and not just their democratic liberty, but freedom from what? from famine, from poverty, from disease. in the work we do in africa today, we're not just helping governments help people, we're also saying something fundamentally important about our attitude as part of the free

world. when president clinton founded the clinton global initiative, which does such wonderful work in africa, he was making a statement not just of moral conviction, but of a belief that those of us who have freedom have a responsibility, a duty imposed, to help others to the same freedoms that we cherish and hold dear. it cannot be right that a million people die every year from malaria, which is preventable. it is our duty to do that. in doing that, we also strive for liberty. the fifth lesson, liberty requires rules. your constitution, the course, the rule of law, rules that are prickable fairly -- rules that are predictable, fairly applied,

not corrupt. and laws about government, not government about law. in an -- sixth, in an era of global zation -- globalization, liberty requires that we respect differences. out in the middle east, i see every week that i'm there what conflict based on difference can do. and yet, i know that in the end whether jew or christian or muslim or hindu or sikh or buddhist or any other kind of faith, there is a humanity and a common need for what humanity can achieve that unites us. i want to see a world and will strive for such a world in which

people are free to follow their religion without fear or favor and respect those of a different faith to themselves. [applause] with when we in kosovo those years ago acted together, we did so to liberate people who were muslim who were oppressed by the government of a christian country. but we didn't do it because the victims were muslim or the power oppressing was from a christian country. we did it because we believed that whatever our faith, whatever our religious creed, we should be equal before god. seventh is liberty needs optimism.

you know, i've met many pessimists in my life and many cynics, and a few commentateor -- commentators, but no one ever achieved anything by being a cynic or a pessimist. when i saw replayed there the old footage of the northern ireland peace agreement, apart from the embarrassing fact of the aging process being visible -- [laughter] you need not laugh at that, actually. people ask, how did that happen? well, people like president clinton, the leaders in northern ireland gave a hand. but also happened because people felt that it could

happen. that though the history had been one of conflict and misery and suffering, it didn't have to be like that. that it could, in deed, change. that optimism of the human spirit is what drives progress and, in deed, what drives liberty, too. because what is it to be free? in that freedom, to be able to see the possibility and potential of a life lived to the full, of a potential delivered to the full. so when i received this medal this evening, i received it with a great sense of privilege and a great sense of honor, but i also received it in the spirit of hope and opt mism -- optimism for the future. i will finish with a story about the northern ireland peace

process and the spirit of the irish nation. very often we would have a breakdown in norks and we would go away -- negotiations and we would go away for a few weeks to iron out our difficulties. on one of these occasions our -- my wife was expecting our youngest child leo. he is now 10 years old. there was one of the irish delegation that came over and said, your wife is expecting a child. isn't that a wonderful thing? i said, yes it is. she said, what do you think you will be calling the child. i said, i'm not sure, but if it's a boy, i'll call it after my father. she said, well, isn't that wonderful. we finished the negotiation. we went away.

my wife gave birth. we had another one of these negotiations. i see this guy across the room, and he has a wonderful sun tan. now, i don't know if you've ever been to northern ireland. it's a great place, but not necessarily the place you'll get a sun tan. he said, you know that conversation i had with you about your wife and the child? i said, yes. i went down the next day and put $1,000 -- 1,000 pounds on -- to the book maker on the name of the child. [applause] that is the spirit of optimism we need in the peace process. [applause]

thank you so much. [applause] ♪

♪ when i am down when troubles come when i am still and waiting in the silence until you come and sit awhile with me ♪ ♪ you offer hope when all my hopes are dreary

you give me faith to raise my spirits high and yet i'm waiting in the darkness until you come and share your light with me ♪ ♪ you raise me up so i can stand on mountains you raise me up i am strong and i am on your shoulders you raise me up to more than i can be ♪

♪ ♪ you raise me up so i can stabbed -- stand on mountains you raise me up to walk on stormy seas i am strong when i am on your shoulders you raise me up to more than i can be ♪

♪ you raise me up to stand on mountains you raise me up to walk on stormy seas i am strong when i am on your shoulders you raise me up to more than i can be ♪ ♪ you raise me up to stand on mountains you raise me up to walk on stormy seas i am strong when i am on your shoulders you raise me up to more than i can be

you raise me up to more than i can be ♪ [applause] >> thank you for attending the 2010 liberty medal ceremony.

♪ philadelphia freedom ♪

♪ philadelphia freedom gave me peace of mind my daddy never had philadelphia freedom shine on me i love you shine the light through the eyes of the ones shine a light shine the light shine the light won't you shine the light philadelphia freedom

i love, love, love you yes i do ♪ >> congress resumes its lame duck session today. in the house, legislators meet at 2:00 p.m.. on the agenda, a 20% reimbursement rate for doctors who treat medicare patients. they will resume work on the food safety bill which would expand f.d.a.'s oversight of food safety laws. live coverage of the senate here on c-span 2. >> now a look at one of the new members in the senate.

republican mark kirk won with 48% of the vote. the swearing in ceremony will take place in the senate chambers and will be performed by vice president biden. a mock ceremony will take place later in the day with cameras. he will also be sworn in on february 3 to begin his term in the senate. dan malloy is the longest serving mayor of stanford, connecticut. he will take the democratic seat of jody rowe, who chose not to seek