speech to my conference this summer, i quoted from kennedy where he conceded the leadership to macarthur in that contested election. i think he finishes by saying that the dream shall never die. and even in recent history, even at the point of his greatest loss, this is the beginning of a tremendous speaker in politics of america. >> for the people in history, in british history for that matter, that you are most fond of? >> the queen, queen victoria,

mrs. thatcher. she was the nancy pelosi of her time. more generally, he was a more progressive leader that we have ever had. he is the one that brought in free comprehensive health care. >> when you look across a pound at the united states, what -- when you look across the pond at the united states, what do you make of president obama? >> it is extraordinary.

he did what others could not do. he went on to defeat george w. bush everything you could think of was thrown at him in the media. there were rumors running on the internet. yet he 01. the 91, the speech he gave, -- the night he won, the speech he gave, he give it in chicago and i was in tears. i was texting people across the world. we were all in tears. it was a fantastically wonderful moment for people of color. >> what do people say who have followed that, who are minorities, the impact of how people view the united states? >> first of all, for people of color, minorities around the world, it has made them think

better of america. the majority were able to rise above their history. but it says something for the american plant capacity for renewal. -- american capacity for renewal. the idea that a black man can live in a free world is a fantastic role model and encouragement for black young people. here you have this wonderful family in the white house, michele, barack, the two girls. it is such a great thing to see. i think, all around the world, whatever happens in the remains of his presidency, all around the world, people of color have

tremendous pride and a sense of ownership in the barack obama presidency. >> will cut a special requirement view put on yourself because you were the first black -- what kind of special requirement do you put on yourself because you're the first black woman in parliament? >> i should behave in such a way, take on the right battles, be brave enough, be courageous enough, so that for the next generation of black women that come after may things will be a little bit easier. >> what did you notice when you were in cambridge? your the only black person in cambridge? >> mostly in my college. all the other black people were postgraduate who had come over from overseas. i never met anybody who was actually black and brought up in britain who got there. it is a very kind of elite university.

cambridge taught me how to handle my >> -- how to handle myself in an elite institution. >> give me an example. >> you do not let it intimidate you. that is the thing. you know that you're no less intelligent than anybody else in the room. it give me the courage to let myself heard. >> so as a shadow cabinet member, your responsibility is public health. describe it. what does that mean? >> it is a range of issues around things like obesity, a around things like alcoholism, around drug abuse, around maternity, about vaccination /immunization programs, poor

areas and rich areas. it is all the health issues that concern the public. >> you have on your web site -- at the bottom, i read this. "advice surgery for constituents." what does that mean? >> every week, i am in my office and constituents can come to me for advice with their problems, with housing, with the police, with their benefits, with their schools. it is just and advise giving session and we have it every week. it helps us to keep close to what is happening on the ground in my district. >> you say housing/immigration and/welfare problems. what happened after the coalition announced you here in

great britain? you promised george osborn was when to announce the cuts. what are people coming to you in this advice session that is a direct result of the cuts? >> they are very frightened. they're very frightened for their jobs. they believe this government is when to make a very big cut in jobs in the public sector. some government departments will lose 20% or 30%. most people in my district to work or for the government in some form or fashion, hospitals, schools, government departments, and they're very frightened for their jobs. that is the big thing. >> what special payments are there in this country for their children or older people -- old people? >> in this country, we have benefit payments for unemployed people. obviously, we pay an old age pension to the elderly. again, the other thing people are worried about apart from

their jobs as the fact that they will cut all of these benefits and people are worried about how they will manage and how much worse the situation will get. >> how much does an older person who retires get a pension? how was it determined? >> you get a standard amount of money. i think it is about 70 pounds a week. >> so you're talking about $110 a week. >> they also get other payments. they can also get other payments. they get a payment to help them with fuel in the winter. but their basic payment is about 70 pounds a week. other payments they could get, whether their payments for medical conditions, help with other things, they could get cut back of people are very worried. they're just worried about how they will manage without a job. people very concerned that the

government has tripled fees the people have to pay. they're very worried about the future. in my district, we have -- i doubled my majority with an increased election. they came out because they want to support me and my party because they knew that this government has come and and will not support poor people. >> to centinela lot about the united states and how we govern. -- you seem to know a lot about the united states and how we govern. what is the difference? the money is considerably different. what else? >> we do not have the religious right. issues like abortion are not party political. we have access to abortion in this country.

people can debate about the timing because you cannot have an abortion in this country easily if the child is -- if the child in the womb is too far events. there is no idea in this country for the right to bear arms. the gun control is not an issue in this country. actually do, they are unusual -- it is unusual for people outside of the country to have the guns in their homes. the number of people who buy guns in london in a year is probably less than somebody would buy fans and a month. abortion, the right to bear arms, the issue of civil

partnerships and gay marriage -- we have had civil partnerships which is like a marriage in this country. these things are not in dispute. lifestyle and ethics issues are not politicized in this country. >> 1 not? >> because the british to not think it is right. the british think these are matters of conscience. there are members of parliament who are catholic, but the majority of mp's are in favor of it. the sinking with the death penalty. we have not had it for -- the same thing with the death penalty. we have not had for years and years. we do not think it is right. >> have you ever had a vote on abortion in parliament? >> we have had it, but the

people who want a woman's right to choose have won easily. >> 20 think you do not have a religious right in this country? parks -- why do you think you do not have a religious right in this country? >> we just do not have a religious right. >> you have an official church in the country and members of the anglican church are members of the house of lords and would that be a predominant religion? >> in my district, i have a large jewish community. i have re group from south asia. we have rabbis and muslims. the british temperament is that we respect religion. we just do not believe in its place in politics. >> you now have a government

that is good to be here for how many years? >> five years. >> these cuts that have been laid down will be for how many years? >> into the foreseeable future. we need to clear up the deficit. they want to eliminate the deficit in the course of this parliament. >> do agree with that? >> i agree with eliminating the deficit, but in order to do that, you have to grow the economy. people have to have jobs. that to earn money so they can actually spend and helped to grow the economy. the sorts of cuts they're making runs the risk -- >> as you know, in the american system, for instance, in the next year, the republicans will control the house and the democrats control the senate. we have a democratic president in the white house and things move a lot slower. once you have big government in

five years here, what do you do to make your case and how can you stop things? can you drop a bill in the hopper and have anybody pay any attention to it when you are in the minority? >> one of the things about the system we have is that, once you win an election, you have a lot more power. but would you do not have is this kind of balance of power. we have a very different system, an unwritten constitution for one thing, and a winner takes all in which the party that wins the election provides the prime minister and the cabinet ministers. but what can you do? well, i think that we will see a lot more activism, a lot more demonstrations. we had people demonstrating a couple of weeks ago. i think people will look to their leadership in parliament

to offer leadership and offer encouragement. >> you're really saying that money is no issue here when it comes to politicians? level, nothe local because the campaign finance laws are so strict. in the course of an election, which is about four weeks, each of the main parties can run three or four ads. it is not three or four ads in the course of an hour. it is in the three or four weeks. you have a limit on how much you can spend. the fact that political action committees and lobbyists cannot run as on your behalf, that

means that many plays a much smaller role in this country's election than it does in america. >> how much do they pay you for your job? >> they pay me about 65,000 pounds. >> that would be somewhere close to $100,000? >> yes. >> is that enough to live on here? >> sure. >> comfortably? >> welle, and if this certainly a lot more than people in my district have. >> you have laid out some insignificant differences to the united states. the money in the campaigns, no abortion, no religious right, no death penalty -- how are we alike? we have taken a lot of what the british mines and history suggested and formulated our own government.

where are we more light than different? >> i think we are like -- you have a written constitution and it means that you have a supreme court, a president, the house of representatives, and they'll balance each other. i think our common history brings us together. i think that fighting in war side by side has brought us together. i think that there is more that we have in common. in some ways, american society is more open than british

society. and -- >> was part of your life here is regulated? do you have a lot of regulatory agencies that regulate the media, energy, all the different aspects of life? >> i do not think it is -- for instance, in the media, you can have is you could not have a station like fox. all the stations have a responsibility to have the news be balanced. >> you think the media is bella's tier? >> sure. >> americans say that this is freedom, the freedom to say

whatever you want to say, the freedom to have a gun in your house if you want to have it, all the things that we've been talking about. the first amendment protect speech. in other words, you'd be able to spend whatever you want to bog politicians and politics. >> it is the freedom at the expense of those who do not have money. it is a freedom at the expense of people at the bottom of the car. it is extraordinary how many americans believe that. it is a freedom to continue things that are misleading. it is a people accustomed to hearing things without contradiction. >> one of the things that you see when you walk around the house of parliament is tight security. when you ride the subways here, it does now look any more secure than any of our subways.

as a matter of fact, you hardly see a policeman anywhere. you had that tragic subway accident where terrorists blew up and killed 150 people or something like that. what has that done to this society? of course, you have the ira and the bonds over the years. >> since the second world war, we were bombed. then of course, we had the ira in the 1970's and the 1980's. the day after we had the attacks on the subway, was on the subway and so is everybody else. we will not let terrorists stop us from taking the subway and going to work. the british are little more phlegmatic. >> what impact has the 9/11 attack in the united states had on the world? >> i think it -- i think it

affected people like tony blair. he stood by george w. bush, what may even though he made a very unpopular in this country. now, he is more popular in the united states than he is in this country. he travels a lot now. we had to cancel some of his book signings because of demonstrations. but, in america, he is very much revered. i think the british just have this thing to keep, and carried -- keep calm and carry on. >> mrs. thatcher was more popular here -- this is such as

more popular in the use then she was here for a time -- mrs. thatcher was more popular in the u.s. and she was here for a time. >> yes. >> some billion pounds are expected to come to the city because of prince william getting married. >> i do wonder, in a comment when everybody is cutting back, people will have -- in a climate when everybody's cutting back, people will have weddings much more modest. of course, the country will wish them well. >> what do your constituents who voted for you think of royalty? >> the people have a lot of respect for the queen. >> why? >> i think this feeling that she is always on her duty.

the younger royals are less. when the queen finally dies and she passes, i think there will be a real debate about the royal family in this country. what would you say? >> we are in the 21st century in a democracy. the type of waunakee that we have is not really appropriate? does that really encourage an egalitarian society? >> you ran for leadership in your party and did not get it. do you have any plans in the future to go back after

leadership or any other job in public life here in great britain? >> i am very glad to be doing the job i am doing. i will see what opportunities arise in the future. my campaign had a fantastic response all around the country from the public. obviously, you wanted me to the expectations of your supporters. >> who is your favorite historical figure in history of all time? >> who is my favorite historical figure? so many. i think perhaps my favorite historical figure is emily prageanker. >> when did she live? >> in the beginning of the 20th century. >> diane abbott, we're out of

time and i think you very much for joining us. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> for a dvd copy of this program, call this number. for free transcripts or to give us your comments about this program, visit us at our website. >> activist phyllis dennis is on the tv this weekend. she is the author of 8 books. join our 3-our conversation with

your phone calls, e-mails, and tweets sunday at noon eastern on c-span 2. watch previous in-depth programs at booktv.org. >> now a groundbreaking ceremony for the new george w. bush presidential center. speakers include former president george w. bush, laura bush, former vice president dick cheney, and former secretary of state condoleezza rice. the complex is scheduled to open in 2013 on the southern methodist university campus. anti-war protesters also conducted an on campus march and rally to coincide with the ground breaking. the ceremony took place in november in dallas, texas on the campus of southern maddest university. this is an hour and 15 minutes.

>> the president of the george w. bush foundation. the chair of the george w. bush institute advisory board and former secretary of state condoleezza rice.

and the 46th vice-president of the united states dick cheney. ♪ >> it has been the privilege of a lifetime to serve as your president. there have been good days and tough days. but every day i have been inspired by the greatness of our country and uplifted by the goodness of our people. i have been blessed to represent this nation and i will always be

honored to carry a title that means more to me than any other, citizen of the united states of america. they put a presidential center that will be a policy institute, a place to promote the ideals of freedom and personal responsibility. ♪ >> today, we renew our

commitment to a world without malaria. we're helping the people of africa turned the tide against malaria. ♪ ♪ >> ours is a country where citizens decide to help somebody in need one heart and one sold at a time. -- one soul at at time.

-- at a time. ♪ >> and now, please welcome the 43rd president of the united states, george w. bush and mrs. laura bush. [applause]

♪ >> ladies and gentlemen, please remain standing for "god bless america" and our national anthem. the choir is under the direction of dr. pamela elrod.

[god bless america being sung]

[national anthem being sung]

>> please welcome the senior minister of highland park united methodist church, rev. mark craig. [applause] >> let us pray. we rejoice, o god, for the george w. bush presidential center at f.w. you. we pray it will be a place to enter the cause to action to make this world a better place. we pray that it will be a sanctuary to enhance learning, inspire patriotism, and offer insight into the world's future. we pray a special prayer of thanksgiving for the leadership of president george w. bush and laura bush.

we thank you for their shared commitment to our country and to the tenants -- tenets of democracy. we pray that this center will be an inspiration to those who choose public service. we pray that those who study and learn in the context of this great institution will have a deeper appreciation for the history and the future of the united states of america. dodd plus us now -- god bless us now and blessed the fabric of this center. in your holy name we pray, amen. >> please welcome the chair of the george w. bush foundation board of director, secretary donald evans. [applause] >> thank you for the blessing

and inspiration of your words. what a wonderful crowd for an incredibly joyous occasion. good morning to all of you. welcome to the ground breaking celebration of the george w. bush presidential center on the beautiful campus of southern methodist university of dallas texas. [applause] what a thrill to be here on this historic day joined by more than 3000 friends and supporters and the bush family alumni. [applause] i would also like to send a word of welcome to the several hundred members of the smu community who are watching down the block as well as supporters around the world who are participating via live website.

representsebration the culmination of work by people around the world. it began with a partnership with the people of smu. the design committee, chaired by mrs. laura bush, designed a building and grounds that will compliment this the campus. we are seeing the establishment and the development of the george w. bush center and its many components. several initiatives were launched and several distinguished fellows were hired. there were donors whose hard work and sacrifice have built a solid foundation for the bush center and the activities moving forward. while much has been accomplished in a short period of time, today

marks a major milestone as we turn our sights to the future. we break ground on a center that will serve as a resource for thousands of visitors each and every year and the epicenter for research, innovation, an action that will result -- to borrow the words of a fearless leader of hours -- that will result in a freer world. today represent a celebration of president and mrs. bush and their service to our country and the principles that motivate their life's work in the future that the bush center will help make possible. and, finally, the celebration of each and every one of you and the love you have for president and mrs. laura bush and the love you have for america. thank you. [applause]

thank you for your friendship, for your service, your generosity, and your commitment that has made this wonderful and glorious day reality. please join me in welcoming to the podium my good friend, the president of the george w. bush foundation, mark langdale. >> thank you, don. we are gathered here on the campus of southern methodist university to celebrate the start of the george w. bush presidential center, an important institution for this nation and the world. it will include the 13th presidential library in the national archives. it will contain the archives and the official records of the 43rd president, a museum that will tell the story of the two terms of president bush, and a unique

presidential library. the bush center will include a policy institute. project has been many years in the planning and would not have been possible without the service to country so many of you gave and the support so many of you here have provided throughout. we thank you for that. we start with an incredible sight. 23 acres on the campus of a respected university that is on the rise in a world-class city. we are grateful to southern methodist university for providing this site and the deep partnership. laura bush has chaired our design committee. kirk jean -- her keen eye and gracious style is reflected in the landscape. one of the greatest living architects in america today has designed a building that is appealing in scale. a design is not a monument

making a statement from the outside, but a building reflecting the important message within, a classically proportioned courtyard with an appealing fountain. freedom hall, the centerpiece of the building, says it all. this is about the message inside, the message of ensuring universal principles that are important to all of us. this project is designed to obtain platinum designation, the high statement in sustainable building and design practices. this sustainable design example will be an important message to send to future visitors. it is also a reflection of what the first couple has always believed. many of the sustainable design elements, judicious use and using stone water for irrigation, use of-landscaping,

are all techniques laura bush used years ago in their design of their crawford ranch house. it reflects the values, substance, and roots of george and laura bush. there will be the country's and risky, the unofficial tree of -- be pecan andebi trees. it place -- it pays homage to the landscape that george and laura love so much. it will reflect the essence of america. in a forward-looking way, it is

a program for the first presidential library of the 21st century. inside, the building will house the official records of the 43rd president, two terms comprised of a long list of key decisions, difficult decisions. these records will be available to scholars and historians to reflect upon the challenges this nation face and how president bush handle them. the records have been transferred to dallas and are being transferred. the center will also contain a permanent museum for those who remember the challenges of the first decade of the 21st century and students who are learning about them for the first time will experience in one space the challenges that president bush faced, from 9/11 to the financial crisis of 2008. the story will be told through the key decisions that present bush made during his presidency

to advance the ideals and principles so important to all of us. president franklin roosevelt dedicated the first presidential library in 1939. he said the purpose of a presidential library is so that future generations can study and learn about the decisions of our presidents so they can make and learn how to make better decisions in the future. we have kept that vision in mind as we have designed the center. we believe it serves that were the purpose right here on the campus of southern methodist university. we will do more than that. president bush commissioned us to develop a policy institute alongside the library as a place for scholars and leaders to gather and work together to improve people's lives. they will do that in offices and conference facilities that will contain the latest technology for conducting and disseminating the good work of the bush institute. and always, the principles that

guided president bush in his presidency, will guide our work here. in fact, they already are. it's too programming began last year. we have 20 scholars and fellows -- institute programming began last year. we have 20 scholars and fellows enhancing economic growth and global health. we are privileged here today to witness a small part of american history and the continuing history of the american presidency, the groundbreaking of the 13th presidential library and the george w. bush presidential center. on a beautiful spring day in 2013, we will return here to dedicate this opening. another presidential election will have taken place and, by tradition, all current and former presidents, a very exclusive club, will come here to commemorate that occasion. the official records of the 43rd president of this nation will be

placed here, testimony to a consequence of time in american history, a history that president bush and laura bush will continue to shape through the work here at the bush center. it is now my pleasure to introduce to you our partner in this project, the official custodian of the historic record of america, the tent archivist of the united states, david ferriero. [applause] >> thank you. president and mrs. bush, vice president cheney and other distinguished guests on this platform, on behalf of the national archives and the directors of all the presidential archives, i want you to know how proud we are to be in dallas today. the presidential library system

was created along with the national archives during the administration of president franklin roosevelt. the intent from the beginning was to help the presidential libraries throughout the country where scholars and school children could learn about their government, the presidency, and perhaps the aspire to public service. the george w. bush library is the 13th presidential library to be a minister by the national archives. the other 12 libraries were created -- to be administered by the national archives. the other 12 libraries did not have features that this one has. thanks to laura bush, another library, to making --for making this the best ever. [applause] first, in addition to large paper artifacts and digital photos, the bush library has

erabytes of electronic information. and as you told me recently, mr. president, not one of them is yours. this is the site of a major digital collection. having an archive of electronic records of the size and complexity as this poses new challenges to us. these challenges will require new solutions and innovations. this information is of tremendous value and will be of interest to generations of researchers and the general public. the museum at the bush center will be quite unique, engaging the audience directly in the experience. the galleries will be arranged by examining key presidential decisions and exploring the principles of freedom, responsibility, opportunity, and

compassion, that president bush has enunciated. within that framework, the exhibit will also show the decision making process the president followed when the many challenges of his administration were before him. the museum will employ interactive digital technology to reach a diverse audience on- site and virtual. finally, the library will work in close partnership with the which institute and southern methodist university. with the astute, we look forward to working with its fellows on research -- with the institute, we look forward to working with it fellows and participating in the research it is doing around the world. we are proud to be a member of the southern methodist university family. we have received a wonderful welcome from the faculty and students here. under the leadership of the president and great students, southern methodist university has reached out to the library in so many ways. we look forward to the many partnership opportunities ahead

with students and faculty. they're up the presidential library system, we seek to educate -- the wealthy presidential library system, we seek to -- throughout the presidential library system, we seek to educate and inspire. >> on behalf of the board of trustees, the faculty, staff, and students, and alumni of the university, i welcome all of you to our beautiful campus, the home of the george w. bush presidential center. we thank you president and mrs. bush for making this day possible at southern methodist university. thank you. [applause] if this is your first visit to

campus, we hope that you will stay with us long enough to be able to experience the energy and vitality of our campus, as well as the beautiful and stately georgian buildings. having the bush presidential center on our campus provides a unique opportunity to develop joint programs involving the faculty, staff, and students of the university with the fellows and the visiting scholars of the bush presidential center. last year, four compasses of the bush institute on global issues resulted in a partnership between the institute and the university and gave us a glimpse of the tremendous potential that is available for the future. in addition, groups of students have already visited the temporary library site and they have enjoyed classroom visits by president bush. some of them barely survived that experience when he walked in.

having the historic resources of the library and the museum will provide remarkable opportunities for research for our faculty and students and for scholars worldwide. close to home, these resources will provide educational experiences for the almost 200,000 students who live in the metroplex. it is the joint programming and interaction with fellows, visiting scholars, and leaders at the institute that will constitute most of the intellectual dialogue and debate that will carry the impact of the bush presidential center far into the future. today is another milestone along with a time line that began for us in december of 2000. we determined to try to bring the bush presidential center to southern methodist university, the all monster of the unit -- of the first lady -- the alma

mater of the first lady. we knew the southern methodist university would benefit from the president's center on our campus. we knew the president would benefit from -- the center would benefit from its association with our campus in the heart of one of the most dynamic regions in the united states. this is a great celebration of the center's opening and the development of a vibrant educational partnership now and for generations to come. it is an honor to have the bush presidential center on the southern methodist university campus. and now to bring greetings from our students, it is a privilege to introduce the president of the student body, jake torres, a senior majoring in english and spanish.

[applause] >> thank you, dr. turner. it is a wonderful day to be a member of the mustang family. it is a pleasure to be here representing the 11,000 students of southern methodist university. it was a great thousand -- it was a great thing to be chosen as the home of the bush presidential center. opportunities for partnerships have already been made available to the students of southern methodist university. over the past two years, president bush has made surprised the existing classes. many of us chose southern methodist university because of its location in dallas, its small class sizes and its excellent faculty. we also chose it because of its

commitment to provide experiences outside of the classroom that benefit and in rich what we are learning inside the classroom. the fact that i am here today enjoyed by several hundred fellow mustangs is a perfect example of how the bush center is enhancing our education and experience in a way none of us will ever forget. thank you for allowing us to share in this special moment. to president and mrs. bush, on behalf of the southern methodist university student body, welcome home. [applause] >> thank you, jake. it is my pleasure to introduce the chair of the advisory board, the former secretary of state, the former provost of stanford, dr. condoleezza rice. [applause]

>> thank you. v thank youery -- thank you very much. thank you for that warm southern methodist univ. welcome. mr. president, mrs. bush, mr. vice president, and my fellow members here on the dais, i could not be more delighted to be with you and more honor to serve as the chair of the george w. bush institute board. on behalf of my fellow institute board members, the advisory board looks forward to continuing the great work that has already begun under the xliv leadership's of jim glassman.

i want you to know that the institute looks forward to continuing to be a place where southern methodist university students phil welcome and where they can participate in the work of the institute -- feel welcome and where they can resist a in the work of the institute and where scullers and -- feel welcome and where the scullers and fellows around the world can come. because every individual is worthy, every individual deserves to live in freedom. the president and mrs. bush believed america had a responsibility to advance freedom for those at home and

for those abroad. it is a belief that free people are most creative and fulfil in free countries where their activities and their creativity can live to millions out of poverty. it is a belief that every individual has a right to be free from ignorance and that the transforming power of education is owed to every child because every child can learn. it is a belief that human beings should be free from disease and that healthy societies are more likely to be partners in peace and prosperity. a belief that society is that do not fully bring the potential of their women to bear will be poorer for it and that, ultimately, societies that treat

women badly are dangerous societies. and the belief that no man, woman, or child deserves to live in tyranny. terry needs to be broken down in every corner of the world. --tyranny needs to be broken down in every corner of the world. the voices of the powerless can be powerful. they have brought down walls and dictators. the institute will seek the best ideas to put these principles into action and go about the work that is left to us. the institute and my fellow advisory board members believe strongly that we are doing this in the believe that while we have to deal with the world as it is, we do not have to accept the cenacle notion that this is the best that we can do. -- the cenacle -- cynical notion

that this is the best we can do. president bush is seen as an idealist. i would say that president bush and mrs. laura bush are more than that. they were out to miss an idealist, but they work -- they realistic.sts and the impossible one day seems inevitable be next. we will do our part to advance to a world not as it is, but the world as it should be. i am really excited and looks with -- and look with great inspiration the work of the institute as part of the george w. bush present the center. it is going to be a great future. thank you. [applause] fulfi

i have the honor of inviting to the podium the 46 vice president of the united states, -- 46th vice president of the united states, richard cheney. [applause] >> thank you. thank you very much. i have often been overlooked during my taurus as vice president. -- during my tours as vice president. i am delighted to be a.

i want to thank the president and condoleezza rice -- i am delighted to be here. flying down here yesterday, i got to thinking about my time as a texan. we love dallas. we miss it sometimes. happily, we have another good reason to come back often, to see america's newest presidential library and the man whose name is on it. the george w. bush presidential center is not much to look at just yet. the workers are ready. construction will move fast after today's groundbreaking. this may be the only show already project in america. [applause]

my congratulations on the start of the center, mr. president, as well as the success of your new memoir. the sales it has already had do not surprise me in the least. a few years after your tour in the white house ended, they were a little more measured. when the critics have been out, you always said you have faith in history's judgment. history is beginning to come around. [applause] 10 years have passed since governor bush at me to be his running mate.

in the days right before that decision point, we spent some time getting to know each other better. i suppose he was taking my measure. i know i was watching him pretty closely, too. there are some basic attributes you look for in a fellow who may become president. to dust off a phrase from the 2000 campaign, i saw those traits in this guy big time. one of the things that struck me from the beginning and continues to impress me throughout our time in office is george bush's refusal to put on airs. it is a happy experience and a rare one to find that the most powerful person you know is the least pretentious. at a commanding height, a man can be so respectful of his office, so serious in his duty and so unimpressed of himself.

it is a virtual for -- it is a virtue for one to walk with kings yet keep the common touch. no one has done so so well as our 43rd president. [applause] i have seen him dealing with the various august figures to come to the oval office. i have seen him dealing with the folks who look after the president of household. it is always the same. we can all four give a present for carrying himself with a certain expectation of -- for give a president for carried himself with a certain expectation a -- forgive a present with a certain expectation of privilege. he needs everyone with an equal. it is an attitude you do not often find in government, much

less at the top. it is american and lovely to see in the oval office. it is familiar to everyone who knows the family. he is courteous, fair minded, and kind, capable of great strength, great gentleness, and very much his father's son. mr. president, when we started our association in austin, we knew that big responsibilities away to us. we cannot have imagined all that was to come. somehow, your life had prepared you for some of the most serious decisions any president ever had to face. when the worst came, you did your job with service, with clarity, and with strength of hearts. when i think of september 11 and the days that followed, one of the images that always comes to mind is the president standing on a flat and fire truck throwing his arm around a recovery worker and saying through a bullhorn that the

people not to those buildings down would soon hear from all of us. far into the future, visitors here will still see that bullhorn. when they do, i hope they will picture the world as it was that day and realize how it was transformed in the months and years ahead. america went from being on the defense against terrorists boy on offense against them. history -- and this terrorists to going on offense against them. you were determined to go after the enemy. we did not suffer another 9/11 or something worse. [applause]

i have a few more thoughts on the man and his presidency. i will save them for when we are back in dallas again for the grand opening of the library. enough for now to say it was a privilege to serve beside him for those a years -- eight years and a daily pleasure to serve in the journey. i know the american people will always think highly of him because they can tell a decent, stand-up guy when they see one. i know all the sections in this audience are ready to leave the chair for our friend, the 43rd president of the united states, george w. bush. [applause]

>> thank you all. thank you all. thanks very much. thank you. for those of you who are not privileged to live in texas, welcome to the great state. [applause] and welcome to one of the finest universities in the whole university -- in the whole united states, southern methodist. [applause] i cannot think dick cheney enough for coming. -- thank dick cheney enough for coming. i have been doing these interviews trying to peddle my book.

i am asked about dick cheney. here is what i say. dick cheney was the right to take in the year 2000. as i stand here, there is no doubt in my mind he was the right bit then. he was a great vice president of the united states and i am proud to call him my friend. [applause] i want to thank all of the people who made this event possible. i want to thank my pal, ambassador mark langdale. i want to thank secretary donald evans. i want to thank ray hunt for been any efficient and effective leader in this effort. i appreciate ambassador jim glassman's leadership at the

institute. i want to thank secretary of state condoleezza rice for joining us. [applause] one reason that smu is such a superb university is that its leadership is superb, starting with the top, gerald turner. [applause] i thank david for joining us and the archivist. i want to thank the student body president, jake torres. [applause] mr. president, a word of advice. it is not too early to start thinking about your memoirs. [laughter] i am proud to be associated with you and the student body.

it is a great group of future leaders for our country. with us today is a man i befriended during my presidency. he is one of the really courageous leaders in the world. someone who understands the importance of democracy and freedom. someone who understands you cannot negotiate with terrorists. that is the former president of colombia. >> mi amigo. >> we are proud that a lot of soldiers from fort good -- ft. hood have joined us today. [applause]

i really do not miss much about washington. but i do miss being your commander in chief. [applause] i want to thank all of the people from our administration who have joined us today. i thank you for your noble service to our country. [applause] i appreciate the 160,000 donors

whose generosity has insured that this building was fully paid for before we broke ground. [applause] and i thank all of the people joining us by webcast. it is hard to believe there is this much excitement about shoveling dirt. today marks the beginning of a journal -- beginning of a journey. this center will be a hub of action based on timeless principles. it is the continuation of a journey that began many years ago. just over one decade ago, the american people went to the polls to choose their president in the 2000 elections. just under a decade ago, we

figured out the results. [laughter] a lot of us in this tent believe i am the only president to have won the same collection five times. [applause] -- to have one gangs the sanity action -- the same election five time. we witnessed our nation attacked and our country united in the resolved. we felt the relief of -- the grief of war and the joy of liberation. we remember young girls going to school in afghanistan and voters waiting purple figures in the air. we saw that with a clear purpose, and accountable action, we can help aids patients live, struggling societies to develop

come and storm victims rebuild. through the triumphs and the sorrows, the good days and the bad, the decisions we made together were guided by certain principles. we we believe that freedom is universal and the hope of every sole and the ultimate -- soul and the alternate path to peace. we believe the free-market will lift people out of poverty. we believe you can spend your money better than the united states government can spend your money. we believe that america's contest -- america's engagement in the world affects us here. we believe the call to serve and the admonition that to those

whom much is given, much is expected. the decisions of governing are on another president's desk. he deserves to make them without criticism from me. [applause] stay out of current affairs and politics does not mean staying out of policy. i strongly believe that the principles that guided our service in public office are the right principles to lead our country in the future. these principles do not to belong to any president or any political party. they are fundamental american

ideals that arise from our founding and have inspired millions around the world. all three elements of the presidential center will play a role in advancing those principles. the archives will preserve the record of our administration's efforts to preserve these principles through historic consequence. the institute will apply these principles to the problems of our time. it will demonstrate with measurable results how they can transform and improve the lives of people at home and around the world. last november, i presented an outline for the institute. i am pleased to report that we had a productive inaugural year. we have recruited a team of world-class scholars and fellows. we developed ambitious plan for

our areas of focus, education, reform, global health and human freedom. for example, we launched an innovative new effort called to the alliance to form educational leadership. it focuses on improving the quality of school principals and administrators. we began a study of new ways to integrate maternal health services on the continent of africa. we started compiling a repository of documents and interviews from freedom advocates around the world. they will spotlight the triumph of dissidents and inspire others to join their cause. the most exciting part of the presidential center is the institute's wittman's the initiative. laura and i believe women are often society's most effective agent of change. one of the institute's core

missions will be to promote the efforts of women to lead a freedom movement in the middle east and other parts of the world. we are fortunate to have laura overseeing these initiatives. i have been a lucky man to have her by my side for 33 years. [applause] it is now my privilege to bring to the podium a fabulous woman and a great first lady, laura bush. [applause] >> thank you very much. thank you so much and thank you george. thank you, everybody. thank you all. thank you so much.

thanks to everyone here for joining us here today. george and i are thrilled to share this moment with so many good friends and so many cabinet members and white house staff. vice president cheney, thank you for joining us. dr. rice, thank you for been here. i want to thank the president of colombia for being here. basilar mark langdale -- ambassador mark langdale and gerald turner, thank you very much. you heard about some of the initiatives to advance education and help women around the world.

the success of each of these important goals will depend on the contributions of women. a vibrant economies rely on the creativity of women entrepreneur. --entrepreneurs. healthy nations depend upon wives and mothers to make informed decisions that will keep themselves and their family said. every successful society depends on women who can read. mothers are our first teachers. that means educating women yields reward for generations to come. as the great egyptian poet said, when you educate a woman, you create a nation. over the past decade, i have been inspired by examples of strong women that i have met across the world. in africa, i met h.i.v.-positive

women who had to help other women so that their babies would be borne hiv-free. in saudi arabia where cancer carries a stigma, a doctor works with the global initiative to raise awareness about breast cancer. in the remote jungles of thailand, a doctor runs a clinic to care for her fellow refugees who are fleeing the oppression military's dictatorship. as ambassador for the u.n.'s literacy decade, i have helped other women who eat healthier, prosperous, informal -- and more fulfil in lives by getting quality education. do it and i hosted a council --

here to lead and i hosted a pound to hear at -- hosted a council here at smu. under the rule of the taliban, when it were subjected to torment and shut out completely from their society. today, afghan women lead as provincial governors and elected members of the national assembly. they work as entrepreneurs, lawyers, and community health workers. they serve in a profession that is close to my heart, teaching. these inspiring leaders remind us that invest in women are always worthwhile. they remind us that laws and customs that deny women their basic rights and that deny society women's contributions are never acceptable. this is a message that we need

to spread. this past summer, americans were horrified by the time magazine cover featuring the afghan teenager mutilated by her taliban husband. last year, the murder of an iranian music student and peaceful protester, who was gunned down on the streets of tehran during protests, showed that other women often paid the ultimate prize in pursuit of freedom. for most of the past two decades, the leader of burma's democracy movement was a prisoner in her own home. the free world rejoiced this week at her release. it came only after she was banned from participating in the normal elections. she was released before only to

be placed back under house arrest by the military regime. this time, we hope she is freed without condition and that she is allowed to continue her peaceful work until the day when all of the citizens of parma lived in freedom. but around the world, all us who live in freedom to condemn a barbaric acts against women. the electorate that shuts out winning is not a democracy and a population that derives -- that denies the rights of women is not a free society. the goal of our when an's initiative is to honor the women who, despite these challenges,

continue their dangerous work. we will join with civic leaders, faith-based corporations to become more engaged and better educated and to be participants in the government, business, and civil society. to a partnership among african nations, western nations, and 's -- o. to delay, nearly 800 million adults are illiterate. two-thirds of them are women. if we want women to be the bedrock of stable democratic societies, they must be able to read. here at the bush institute, the women's initiative will championed literacy and we will keep working to improve the

education that girls and boys receive in school, both here at home and around the world. at the u.s., afghan women's council meeting, one of the participants was an afghan woman. during the taliban years, she operated underground and literacy centers at great risk to her own life. today, she runs more than 40 when's centers across fghanistan -- 40 women's centers across afghanistan. she asked participants to invest in afghanistan and to support the ongoing progress of women. yes, it is difficult, she said. be patient with it. do not feel sorry for us. be with us. through the women's initiative, the bush institute will stand

with her and all who are working to guarantee equal rights for women. thank you very much for your support of the bush institute, and thank you for joining us here today. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, thank you for coming. the speeches are over. it is time to shovel dirt. [applause] >> is joining former president bush to break ground, ray hunt. building architect, landscape architect, chair of the southern methodist board of trustees at, and the director of the george w. bush presidential library.

>> is everybody ready? it is time to shovel dirt. [applause] turn it. [laughter] ♪

thank you for grant -- for attending the groundbreaking ceremony. please exit at the rear of the tent and please travel safely. ♪

♪

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] ♪

>> next, a discussion on the grass roots organization called "no labels." after that, a form on re-entered rating when did veterans into society. next, columbia university host a national leadership meeting for the "no labels" society.

they and to mobilize students against hyper-partisanship. the group plans to expand into all 435 congressional districts in 2011. speakers include newark, new jersey mayor corey booker, democratic congressman joe sestak, and former u.s. comptroller general david walker. this is one hour. >> i am started a movement with seven women and a tax machine -- and a fax machine. i am here, of course, because we are focusing on getting women into leadership in america.

we would be able to do a lot more of the things we have been talking about if we have women who can work across these labels. that is why they are here. [applause] we have paid a lot of attention to this political area. in the last five years, we have been focused on that. we have been able to get 10,000 women to get into politics. they are out there and ready to go. this is the generation that could change this culture. half of this women are women of -- half of these women are women of different racial groups. the young women of america are out there. they are excited.

they want to lead. i want to tell you some other stuff about them. if you want to change the culture, yet to build a culture. if we do not dance at this level, we do not dance. we have been using the film "fair game" to train women about the new s.t.a.r.t. treaty. where are you out there "no labels" leaders? we want to be able to speak in this movement. we are a nonpartisan organization. this is the way we are going to move our agenda forward.

we have lisa burroughs on the board of "no labels." you did not dance as well as i thought you could. this is going to be interesting to see what happens next year because, as i see it, i was a very fortunate woman. i got into politics at a different time. i got into politics when there was a lot of work across all parties. we went to political caucuses together. we made policy changes together. it was phenomenal. it was a very different kind.

i am very lucky because i had a mentor like mary louise smith. she and i lobbied the legislature. why in the world are we joining different parties? i have not heard that question since 1978. now we are in a very different place. we are now at 17% of congressional leaders and 24% of congressional leaders are women. you saw one of them over here. lisa west has organized across

parties. i will tell you the question these women are now asking. am i going to sacrifice my life and my family and it going to be able to make a difference? this is a real question. i take it is something all our sons and daughters want to know about politics right now. that is why we are here with " no labels." when i started doing this work, i went back and read a little bit of john wesley's work. he said when he looked at the past -- some of you probably remember his book -- the world of business fails. they did not know they were in

the transportation business, so their whole business failed. i have thought about that whole thing. i think to myself, even though we are getting the first women into leadership, not to take the place of men, but to leave beside them. what he said has rung true with me. right now we are not trying to get women in four equity's sake. we are in the transformation business. the business we are in it with " no labels" is the transformation business.

i anticipate a great relationship. one where everyone will actually know how to dance. we'll have women in leading side-by-side with men. we thank you for your participation. [applause] >> please welcome the mayor of newark, new jersey, mayor corey booker. [applause] >> i feel like i need to do a howard dean yell to wake you all up. where are the housewives? let's see each other. we have a choice here if this is going to be a moment or a start of a movement. this is the time to move. i want you to see each other.

no one thinks baseball -- a small group of people can change the world. i write history. i studied it going back to the very founding of our nation. we will either hang out together or we will surely hang out together. -- we will either hang together, or we will surely hang together. we are not hanging together around our common principles and our common ideals. i talk about history. there is a a wonderful moment where the city of jerusalem was under attack by the romans.

the romans were told to lessen their seats and they could take the city. inside jerusalem, divisions started breaking out. they started burning different quarters of the city. before you knew it, the roman army came back and took the city with ease, clinging to a historical truth. if there is no enemy within, the enemy without can do you no harm. we as a nation must fess up to the fact that the enemy we face is our inability of pragmatic people to come together to advance this nation forward. this is the frustration of our day and age. i see it in your all the time. there are simple solutions to many of our complex problems if we could just come together. you heard mayor bloomberg up

here on the stage. he gave me the best political allies of all my life. before you become a mayor, become a billionaire. [laughter] brilliant advice. but he actually told a bunch of -- pulled a bunch of neighbors together around the country to talk about violence. we have the virginia tech every day in america. i remember when the decision came down the said b.c. could not ban handguns. all my friends said, "there will be blood running to the streets of washington, d.c." i found out there was only one in shooting in my first term that was done with someone who shot eight -- who had a gun legally. he was a correctional officer

who used his sidearm to shoot himself. i listened to my friends on the other side of the political aisle that think that any kind of gun resolution is an assault on the second amendment. mayor bloomberg and his team of mayors around the country, we pulled to find out about this issue. mayor bloomberg paid for it. [laughter] we found al that over 90% of gun owners support sensible legislation that could curtail illegal guns getting into the hands of criminals. simple things. we have done shows where a criminal could show up with a temporary restraining orders taken out on them, they may be on a terrorist no-fly list. but they can't walk into a gun show and fill their trot up with -- but they can walk into a

gun show and fill their trucnk up with weapons. now we stand in a precarious place in our nation's history. we look around the globe and from brazil to china we see countries outpacing us in education, in economic growth. democracies are born not to fit in, but to stand at out. we should be a light unto other nations. we are falling behind on so many different measures. that is not the american way. we are a country where impossible dreams are made real. [applause] we have choices to make.

we should change our dialogue. compromise is seen as treason. we are reaching across -- reaching across the aisle should be applauded and not denigrated. the future of education in america will be minorities. we as a country have come so far that we haven't healed the racial achievement gap. education retain that can be measured in the church against of dollars in terms -- in terms of gdp. yet, we fail to do it. i reached out to a republican governor. we could write a dissertation on our disagreements. the man is a meat eater. i am a vegetarian for crying out loud. he loves the jets. i love the giants.

thank you very much. we have to find a way to end the war of injustice. we have to find common ground so we can advance ourselves forward. this will be the test. a friend of mine at a party yell at me when i gave a speech last year in new york. now they have become my greatest partner. in newark, we have dropped the recidivism rate. jack -- dies like jack kemp who either came to admire who thought about enterprise zones that are creating wealth in urban areas all across the world. no political party has a monopoly on great ideas. this nation can only go as far as we are willing to take each other. there is no democratic destiny or republican destiny. there is an american destiny.

[applause] we know from all our traditions , christian, muslim, jewish -- the ideal of community. people love their favorite three word phrase, a hallmark of this nation -- e. pluibus unum. we have a choice to make. we can answer the call of our country. we can claim the truth of our nation. if we can realize that america is a nation, but is also a destination. we as a nation must be willing to make the sacrifice. democracy cannot be a spectator sport. you cannot get joy after sitting

at home on our couch looking at msnbc or fox. if we do not get off of that callous every make our nation -- this is the test we have before us. we must realize that we as a people in this nation drank deeply from the wells of freedom. we have an obligation to make a choice to accept reality as it is or take responsibility for change. i visit schools all the time. that is where our future is. i stopped for a moment and i get chills. i listen to our kids. our children, every single day, up from oakland, calif. to newark, new jersey -- all of our children join in a common

course calling to our consciousness, not that we will be a nation of discourse, but we will live up to our means and be the united states. our children say in unison, speaking truth to our resistant years -- they say that we are one nation under god, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. may we claim this truth in our lifetime and make it real once and for all. thank you. [applause] >> please welcome u.s. representative joe sestak from the seventh congressional district of pennsylvania. >> gracias. [applause]

i was asked to say a few words this afternoon. there are two items i would like to talk briefly about. one is accountability. i joined during the vietnam war. i never wanted to be in politics. someone once told me i was a crappy politician. i am. i just want to be a district -- a decent public servant. i got married very late in life. that was my first personal challenge, getting someone to marry me. [laughter] at the age of 47 i did get married. then i had my daughter. she is now going on 22. she suffered with a brain tumor.

i got out of the navy and then i did a payback tour. i ran for congress and work on the health care bill that has caused consternation across the nation. i can remember when i got out and i went to the local county where i was born and raised and talk to the local chairman. i said i was going to run for congress. c.c.c.not know what d. was. i called them and they told me not to get into the race. i called back the next day and they repeated they did not want me to get into the race. this was my first exposure, having changed from being an independent.

it park and to john f. kennedy's words. by serendipity we won. two years later we ran again. the first time we spent $3.50 million. the second time it was $28.5000. somehow we were able to get -- i remember walking out of the pentagon. it was the day 9/11 happened. 20 minutes later, a plane slammed into the building. the men and women i had worked with never came out. the chief of naval operations called and said, "joe, i want

you to set up the anti-terrorism command for the navy." that night we call together everybody. we put everything on the table. two months later, i was on the ground in afghanistan. we do not breed liberals or conservatives in the navy. we breed problem solvers. we put all our years on the table and try to come up with a pragmatic solution. then, as some issues -- as some of you know, i was asked to run against the republican senator in my district. i said i wanted to spend time with my daughter. the republican then became a democrat. the party then said, "no, joe. we do not what you."

i was about to go back to my affiliation as an independent. i went around the 67 counties to try to decide whether to get in when the party said they had changed their mind. i was really taken by how angry and how upset everyone was. that was just the democrats. they wanted to hold someone accountable. i decided to still run as a democrat. the last tory i would like to tell you is about accountability. it is a value our label speaks to. i think there has to be a dose of accountability within the pragmatic leadership.

i believe in compromise, principled compromise. that term, accountability, was taught to me on it -- by a 19- year-old kid on an aircraft carrier i commended. there are 5000 sailors on an aircraft carrier. the average age is 19.5. my mother used to come aboard. she was a high-school math teacher. just like cory said, they are tremendous. on an aircraft carrier when they launch and airplane, it throws you into the air. when the push that button, it is the right of your life.

but sometimes as you are just about to launch, they say stop, shut down the engines, and get out. no pilot worth their salt will ever shut down their engines until they know they have been unhooked from the catapult. it is underneath them and they cannot see it. these kids are great, but they can make a mistake. when they push that button, off you go, and you are not coming out. all the sudden, this young 19- year-old kid watch out to the flight deck under the belly of that plane. the pilot cannot see. he detaches the plane from the catapult. then a young man or woman walks into up -- in front of that plane.

that kid does not move. not until the pilot shut of his or her engines and are safely on deck. that kid has done everything, which i would argue, in addition to a possible compromise -- that kid said, "trust me." i am responsible for having unhooked you from the catapult. but i am also willing to be accountable. if i make a mistake and you start to go overboard to your death, i will go overboard to mind. heaven forbid that men and women

in what she did, d.c., are willing to do a principled compromise. be willing to do the right thing again and accountable way. we came pretty close in pennsylvania. our constituents are angry and upset. they want to hold someone accountable. even more than that, they want to believe again. they want to trust again. i do not care if this is someone with a nra sticker on their car or a student from philadelphia. they are waiting for some very practical leaders who will just do their job for this nation.

even more than a principled compromise is part of the dialogue. thank you very much. [applause] >> please welcome, the state treasurer of pennsylvania, robert mccord. >> i am been warned that there is a need for speed. having -- we are at the time where one more speaker could be 10 more speakers than you need to hear from. i will try to be quick and interesting. i am the highest status speaker of anyone u.s. come before you today. [laughter] let me remind you that many of you are among the smartest

people in the country thinking about politics, trying to organize this kind of free- floating sense that something is wrong with america's political conversation. the work you do is invaluable. part of my what to do is urge you to recruit people who are not already famous. this is not just about senators and members of congress is -- congress -- i am a huge bloomberg fan and think what he is doing is invaluable -- but it is important to start recruiting officers. it is important to talk about issues that seem dull, but are crucial. 15 years from now -- we still listen to rock and roll and call each other brother and so forth. send we will be in our retirement years. the problem will still be there.

you can't listen to good talking points out there. -- you can listen to good talking points out there. here is one for you. do not work. the average person has $67,000. i do not think there are many people in this room who want to hit 65 and live on social security. 5% of $67,000 for 30 years. we have a pension program and he will not get all the way there. the lesser branded elected officials will care if you care. i want to give a confession, a brief war story, and a reiteration of bills.

when my favorite members of congress in history used to say we have gotten to the time in the evening where everything has been said, but not everybody has had a chance to say it. the confession is i did not think this movement would be this successful at this point. i am one of those characters who said, "if i do not raise my hand to get involved, nobody will." are really believe in this goal, so i would give it a try. i had no clue it would be a license to meet people like corey booker who has been a hero of mine for decades. that i would have a chance personally to thank these congressmen for decades of public service and for doing the right thing.

when you go back out there, say there was this skeptical former venture capitalist turd treasurer who said there was no way this would work, but we will give it a try. i am shot to see how many insightful people there are and how many -- and how much media attention this is getting. this could be a robust and valuable response to all of the name calling out there. give yourself a round of applause. [applause] on the war stories front, one is about a republican president, one is a republican state senator, and one is from the private sector. i just met with a gentleman who had the third page of find in america. i wonder how old he was. he was 87-years old.

the sets aside money to send 400 african americans to college every year. he said there are kids out there who mean well, work hard, but they are not at the top academically. the top tier from the ghettos get scholarships. it is that kind of thought leadership, looking at real problems, and courageously providing real solutions. some of you young people in this room will get that wealthy. i want you to remember this moment. i want you to do something for other people when you get to that level. [applause] the next story is one involving a senator. we were hanging out a couple of weeks ago. he said, "the every -- the greatest president i have ever had a chance to work with was george bush of the father."

1, he did the right thing by the deficit and did it in the right way and at the right time. he did it in a way that did not cool down the economy. 2, he is the only bidding american that could have put together that alliance to go into iraq the right way and take a lot of political heat for not going in all the way. he said it was exciting for him was to watch him pulling together that consensus and see that he knew these people for 30 years. when they took the phone call around the world, they reminded me that an important piece of this is not just seeing teleprompter as an speeches or showing up and raising a lot of money, it is about doing the work for decades. we are carbon-based life forms. every business i give to says

not to forget to invest in relationships of trust. we are building relationships for all four people. we do not need to agree with them on every front to say let's work on something we can work together on. i was giving a speech saturday morning. we were celebrating the greatness of pennsylvania by spending a lot of money in new york. [laughter] i am doing my fiscal do the by saying, please, come spend some time in pennsylvania hotels or go skiing or go to pittsburgh. we just get a lot of money in this town. we at the pennsylvania manufacturers association. they had arlen specter and governor rendell and so forth. it is 9% -- it is a 9%

republican audience. i am all against the taxes. it will cool economic activity. we are the only state in the country that does not tax these resources. i am sitting here biking might bet -- biting my bit. i was all for the consensus just cut in washington because i think we are moving forward. we have been making hundreds of millions of dollars in pennsylvania because of various moves by the treasury. i am going to mention the

tuition account program. it is 92% funded. i have enjoyed working with the young, recently elected republicans. i had no idea he was in that audience. he said, "i am just point to do it. let's hold a press conference. you tell them why it is such a good idea." it is just an example in the last 48 hours of help finding a way of reaching across the aisle can be invaluable. it reminds us why we are here. we are here to put aside labels more often. it makes it safer to reach across the aisle. let's be dogmatic. if somebody reaches across the aisle and they are not a member of your party, maybe you find a way to fund raise for them in the next election cycle.

we are seeking common-sense solutions. we have said that 15 times so far today. we are offering uncommon sense solutions. we talk about enterprise zones. that was not a common-sense solution when it was invented. not everybody was thinking about giving scholarships to african- americans. even more important than and common sense solutions, which have to do with price elasticity and demands -- taxing cigarettes is a good idea because you want to make people smoke less. taxing so that is a good idea when you have a four-fold increase in the level of diabetes in america. that is an uncommon conversation because people do not understand the notion of externalized cost. we need some uncommon sense.

we also need uncommon courage, the kind of courage that the congressman demonstrated when they voted for the stimulus package. the kind of physical courage that corey booker demonstrated when he went on a hunger strike. i will end with this. as we sit in one of the finest and intellectual aestheticians in the world, we need to remind people that evidence, fax, and ideas matter. they matter. [applause] too often, especially in government, we set our hair on fire and we put it out with a hammer. it is important to focus on deficit, but it is not the right time to shut off unemployment benefits. if you are going to stimulate

the economy, it is a hard debate. we say we are going to attack wage. this is an important time to be thinking about how to balance this. nobody i have ever heard of has done better than david walker. you hear him in a couple of minutes. he would tell you about his next initiative. we have a delicate balance of competing concerns. when we go out there, we have to talk to these people. politics at its worst is about deceit. it is about education and consensus. you will make that possible. i salute all of you for the time you are taking. thank you for your time and attention. [applause]

>> please welcome, douglas palmer who served as mayor of trenton, new jersey for two decades. [applause] >> good afternoon. i know you are tired. everybody stand up and stretch your legs for a second. my mama is a teacher. i learned that trip from her. there you go. i listened to a lot of people. i just want to say a few things. first of all, i have been blessed to be an elected official for 30 years. i know what you are thinking. i was five out when i got elected. i understand that. [laughter] i was fortunate to be known as a "free holder." i was mayor of my hotel for 30 years.

as mayors, we do not have the luxury of being partisan as other people in congress and other places. use all my ear bloomberg, my hero -- by the way, you heard what mayor booker said. blumberg told them to become a billionaire first. when mayor booker ask me what to do first, i tell him to shave his head first. it will work for you. [laughter] as i look at what "no labels" is about, it takes me back home. you do not work on this is what the republican mayors want to do, this is what the democratic mayors want to do.

we are in the problem solving business. we work on solutions. this is a very important time in our nation's history. quite frankly, "no labels" could not have happened at a more opportune time. it is more than just an election. it is a movement. it continues to move. it continues to move people. we continue to move people by common sense things. i have a colleague who is a republican. i am a democrat. we grew up in the city of trenton. he served as a republican on the board. because we wanted to help the city of trenton, even though we talked about different ways, we came together for the good of

our community. as a result, we have the trenton devils, a aa hockey franchise. we worked together. it takes courage. i can remember going to the suburban areas in our town and people would tell him, because he became a county executive and i became a mayor, they said they were for building a baseball stadium, but not in trenton. we would never get out of there alive. here is a republican whose own party was telling them this and he had the courage and conviction to see what it would mean for the economy and businesses. he said, "it is not not in trenton."

that is what it is all about. common sense solutions. i understand people are mad. people have lost their jobs and their pensions, they are losing their homes, they need college tuition for their children. people are taking it vantage in very partisan ways. it is time for you and i to sit at the table. if you do not have a seat at the table, you'll be on the menu. for too long, the things that we want to say and do for this country have been on the menu. it is time to act. i just want to say this last thing. one of the reporter said, "do you think this will make a difference?" you, i, and many other americans can make a difference.

one person can make a difference. as a mayor, i know this all well and good. we are at the grass-roots level. we are on the front lines. when you are a mayor, you go to the beauty parlors, the barber shops, the grocery stores, the churches, the bars -- you go everywhere. one day i was going into the supermarkets. sometimes they feel like i am sticking around when i am buying certain things. heaven forbid i was buying black flag at enrich killer. people will look in your basket and see what you are buying. one day i was ready to jack l. add another beautiful, black,

baldheaded i came behind me and looked into my basket and look at the razors i bought. the asked if they were any good. i told them they work for me. he goes back and exchanged his blades and got the kind of place i used. i said, that is really something. obviously, if i can influence what goes on in a man's had, -- what goes on on top of a man's head, i can influence what goes on in it. we have to have a dialogue going. we have to get it into people's heads. that is where it will be successful. dealing with the people on the grass-roots level up.

thank you, good luck, and let's be friends. [applause] >> please join me in welcoming the former comptroller general of the university and the founder of the take back america movement, the hon. david walker. >> thank you. it is ashley comptroller general of the united states. it is a pressure to be here with you today. this is a historic moment. all of us have gathered here today in order to create a new movement for "we the people." our country is at a critical crossroads and our political system is broken. 221 years ago the american republic was founded. our nation was based on a few fundamental and timeless principles and values. these included ones like limited

government, individual liberty, opportunity, personal responsibility. at the beginning of the republic, we were governed by citizen legislators to let their occupations for a temporary period of time to do public service and focus on the greater good. they understood and acted to make the concept of the united states, all life. where the art -- where do we stand today? we are the superpower with the largest economy and most mighty military honors. as a nation and a people, we have strayed from the values that made us great. we also face a range of sustainability challenges that literally threatened our country and our family's future. today we are also increasingly governed by career politicians

who may or may not have had a meaningful job in the world before they were elected to office, but once they get to washington, they definitely are not in the real world. too many focus on the short-term interest of their political careers, their party's, or their individual states and communities most of us here today and most of the american people are not pleased with the status quo. we want to help change the nation's course in order to create a better future. we are the mainstream of america. we represent the sensible center and the majority in the middle. our displeasure is not based on a particular party. there is plenty of blame to pass around. our concern is based upon a system that focuses too much on politics and not enough on progress.

what about our nation's finances? the plain and simple truth is that our country's financial condition is worse than advertised. we are headed for a fiscal abyss at breakneck speed. we must change course before we go over a cliff. changing course is also essential if we want to keep america great and the american dream alive. let me briefly review a few fiscal facts. at the old set of our republican 90 -- and 1879, the federal government was less than 2% of the economy. today, the federal government is 24% of the economy. total debt is rapidly approaching 100% of raw economy. if you look at the true data, and you'll find out that the total debt is already worse than

ireland, at the united kingdom, spain, portugal, and we are not that many years away from greece. we are almost -- for almost 200 years, the united states did not accumulate a significant debt burden, as we were at war. today, all too many politicians say that it is ok to run deficits. even that peacetime. even when the economy is strong. this is not a sustainable philosophy. we have more than double the nation's debt in the past 10 years and we're on the track to double it again in the next 10 years. we have gone to the world's largest debtor nation. we have gone from no foreign debt to half of our debt is owned by foreign lenders.

this has literally serve to compromise the future for young people. to their credit, the american people about -- know that we are living beyond our means. they are the leading indicator. the politicians are the lagging indicator. the results of the risk -- of the recent fiscal commission are illustrative. less than one week after we voted for tough choices on spending, taxes, and budget controls, there was a so-called deal done by the leadership in washington up whereby this so- called compromise involved no tough choices whatsoever with regard to fiscal matters, charging over $900 billion to the credit card, all the tax cuts that people wanted, not a dime of spending cuts, and nothing to do with the structural deficit. people call this a compromise?

what kind of compromise is that? what kind of planet are these people on? it is important that the commission's good work of be put to use. it is important that we, the people, make sure that the disparate -- make sure that it is. the people can handle the truth. they deserve the truth. they also do not deserve rhetoric. given the importance of the fiscal responsibility issue, it needs to receive priority attention. the choices that we make or fail to make in the next three-five years will largely determine whether our future is better than our past. everything must be on the table. budget controls, spending cuts, tax reform with additional

revenue is. those rigid be -- they do not have a credible plan to address the deficit. those on the right to say that we can solve our problem without raising taxes are wrong. they, too, did not have a credible plan. it is time for our elected leaders to develop a plan that can be implemented in phases over time where the math works. all of us need to encourage our elected officials to address this issue sooner rather than later. we want to do it before we have a crisis of confidence in the market. in order to make that happen, we need to encourage people to work together and across the aisle spurted 22 help people understand the difference between elected officials want to solve the problem and the officials who are part of the problem. [applause]

as we look to the future, we must not forget her past. america was founded by individuals who pledge their life, liberty, and property to create what has become the greatest country in the history of mankind. they had a dream and they were successful beyond their wildest imagination. however, today, we are mortgaging the future of our future at record rates. this is immoral. it must not be allowed to continue. [applause] in closing, our future is threatened by a range of unsustainable policies and a broken political system. we are here today -- we must

remember the no labels model. not left, not right, for words. we must recognize that the concepts of fiscal responsibility and social justice are not mutually exclusive. we must pursue both. working together, we will make a difference that we will all be proud of. after all, wheat, the people, have the ability to do anything we set our minds to it. our nation's founders and families deserve no less. not left, not right, forward. thank you. [applause] >> that ladies and gentlemen, please join me in welcoming no labels founding leader.

>> you know who is the most popular speaker? the last one. [laughter] i came here today with a lot of really good friends. my best friend, my husband, was here. i'm going home tonight with a whole lot of new friends. i'm a texan. we like to take credit for some things. most of them we have heard. some of them have not. we would like to say, we on the great victory. but lyndon johnson did not bound by himself.

-- did not allow it to buy himself. -- own it by himself. 25 years ago, when i got into politics, i did it because i had an agenda. i still do. i got in it because i was competitive. the reason i do today is for my two kids. our job is to see their future. after today, i know we will see their future. i know i can count on you to go home and make a difference in a way that is going to help me. we cannot do it alone. it will take all of us. i am so proud to be part of a movement that is going to make a better life for my kids. thank you for being here.

it said travels to your homes. -- safe travels to your homes. [applause] ♪ [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> a conversation with the co- founders of the group called no labels. after that, a foreign on we integrating wounded veterans into society. another chance to see a discussion on grass-roots politics. >> tomorrow, the u.s. editor

for the daily telegraph of london and washington bureau chief. they discuss the major international issues facing the u.s. in 2011. readable some looks at what's ahead for politics over the next years. "washington journal" at 7:00 eastern on c-span. >> the one thing we absolutely learned over the last 30 years is that economist and other stages of the economy are not predicting what actually happens. >> robert samuelson has written about politics, the economy, and social issues for over three decades. he will to-sunday night. -- he will join us sunday night. >> the co-founders of the new

labels movement talk about the goals of their organization. this is an hour. it's good joining us, two familiar faces -- host: joining us, two familiar faces, david frum, former assistant to president bush, and william galston, former assistant to president client on domestic policy. how would you frame no labels in a sentence of what you're trying to do? guest: an effort to change the tone and content of our nation's politics so that the big problems that we have can be addressed successfully despite division of power between the political parties. host: mr. frum, why this effort as opposed to others that took on this calls over the years? guest: people say it is worse now than the last in ministration and during the last

of ministration people say it's worse than ever -- they are all right. it is worse each time. we are arriving at a point of institutional breakdown, the inability of american government to work. we had this happen before but never at the time economic problems were so serious. the fact we cannot get a governor of the federal reserve boar confirmed, 1987 and was an annoyance, but it 2010 or 2011 a critical crisis. i will say one more thing. i worked for the bush administration. the things that were said about president bush were so enraging an outrageous and unfair, and i know a lot of my friends and colleagues of around that time say, we cannot wait to serve as we were served. our reaction was, i just want no part of this ever again. the way politics was done then, that should not be the template for ever. that should be a warning for how it must stop. host: as far as the template is concerned, mr. galston, what

would you advisor that you're dealing with -- trying to get consensus done? guest: number one, as the name of our organization suggests, no labels, we are not asking people to forget about the fact that they are democrats, republicans, or independents, that they have views, commitments, or principles. we are asking them to do two things. number one, stop demonizing one another. understand we are all americans, we are all in this together and we will not get out of it until we all work together. number two, ratr than focusing on the differences, which are there, which are important, start with what we have in common and tried to build out. that would really change the tone and conduct of politics. if we ask that question and put that in the forefront. host: what is the main things all of these groups have in common? of the economy?

guest: that is the vote we are all in andt is pretty leakey, right now. not only that, competitors are eating our lunch while we are squabbling over the seats at the table. it used to be time was on america's side and we could afford to waste time. we werereeminent and unchallenged. that is simply not true and most americans understand we are in a tough new competitive world and if we are not moving ahead, we are falling behind. host: as far as getting folks to set aside labels and focus on issues that are more important, how do you work it practical? guest: i run a website a modestly named after mylf, frumforum, and we talk about from a republican point of view how we have an effective system of government, how do we me things work, how do we think of the political decisions republicans have to wait with a view not to cause maximum have it to other side but also making

improvements. can republicans think about ways within our political philosophy to strengthen environmental protections, with our philosophy to raise middle- class incomes, deal with inequality and poverty, to enhance and strengthen the power of nation and individual liberty. we have an affirmative agenda that offers more than just anti- liberalism criticism of liberals, which is unfortunately what you get from all of the other so-called conservative sides. host: our guests are with us for an hour. if you want to ask questions about their effort and related issues -- u.n. to reach us by e-mail --

the efforts that were made in the lame-duck, and the accomplishments, is that a good example of what you are ultimately trying to achieve? guest: well, it was certainly a start in the right direction. i think a lot of people were surprised that the administration and congressional republicans were able to come together -- and many democrats, as well, in congress -- on the question of taxes. obviously that is not a permanent solution, the deal that was worked out. but the fact that there could be that kind of agreement at all i think was an encouraging sign. let me give you another encouraging sign. the conventional wisdom about the president's deficit commission was that it would get absolutely nowhere. it did a lot better than that. because you have the very rare washington phenomenon of certified liberals like senator dick durbin of illinois and certified conservatives like senator tom coburn from

oklahoma, who was once known as dr. no, actually saying yes to the same thing. that is what we are looking for. they didn't leave their principals at the door when they sat down at the table to talk about their fiscal future but they found a way forward together. host: but most of the folks, they even rejected the principals -- guest: not true. 18 commissioners and 11 said yes. technically, 14 were required and you did notet 14 out of 18 people in washington setting gas on a joint plan for where to have lunch. the fact that you had the most of the senators from both political parties -- elected officials, not appointees -- signing on the plan was surprising and a career -- and it provides a foundation on which future fiscal discussions can be built. host: the mechanics of the no labels, where you go from the

formal opening? guest: this ishat i would like to see happening. this is a very loose group. i don't know if it has a lot of the traditional apparatus of executive control and leadership, so i speak oy for myself. one, we need a change in expectations of americans as users and participants in politics. that every institution would build over the past 30 years -- i should not say every, but so many, and powered the angriest minorities. it is not a fact of nature. it did not used to be so. so, you can make institutional changes the way congress works, primaries work, in the culture of what is acceptable. it has always been true, for example, for as long as anyone can remember, by courtesy leaders of the senate would allow an individual senator to block an appointment he or she would not like. senators would use it occasionally.

it is happening more often. a cuural change. the weapon was there but it is being used more than more. you could either -- have a change where people say this is destructive, we will use it less or less or and institutional change where the weapons taken away. it is not in the constitution, not in the law and not even the rules of the senate. host: wonder if i can add to that -- guest: wonder if i can add to that, pedro. no labels is grass roots. at our launch event, 1000 citizens paid their own way. we have a plan. and the plant is to organized citizen groups in all 435 congressional districts. those groups are there to monitor the behavior of elected officials, to hold them to account if they start demonizing each other and appear to be pa of the problem and not part of the solution. we will have town halls inhe

state to throw the country with the greatest density of independence. that is our plan for 2011. in 2012 we will start flex defense and muscles. host: rking with independents? guest: start working with everyone. but focusing initially on stage with greatest density of independents because they are a lot of under estimated voice in american politics. host: how do you ultimately gauge success in this effort? guest: how do you engage success for anything? do things get better? do you see a steady changes in improvement and allows you to look backward and say, things are a little better than before. it is very dangerous to imagine thathange happens as a result of dramatic event, or even necessarily by changing the personalities in politics. you could have the same people behaving in better or worse ways. we have, i think, investment the

past few years, a lot of hope to change the culture by changing the personality. but the culture ends up changing the personality to suit itself. guest: i think the american people will be the ultimate judges. right now trust in government is at historically low levels. trust in congress is hardly unmeasurable, it is so low. it is very bad for democracy. if those numbers start to move back up then we will see something positive is happening. host: our guests are here for an hour. michigan republican line. caller: i am kind of curious -- maybe th can answer when i get off the phone -- how they came up with the name no labels. it just seems ridiculous to me.

i tend to lean more toward the tea party people. i think there are a lot of independent people and they are monitoring and having meetings. i think this isn't like the coffee party which did not work out very well -- is something like a of a part which did not work out very well. there are groups inside the parties that tried to be stealthy, and i think we probablyll read david horowitz's book "radical son." we know what these people have done and change their names. glenn beck getting it out to the masses -- we need to identify people and labeled them who they are and not let them be stealthy, and that is my opinion. host: do you want to start? guest: let me start. you know, one of the changes that has come to the conservative world in my active life -- i have been involved in

conservative politics since the election in 1980. when i started, conservatives have a coherent program of reform and change aimed at upgrading living standards, making the economy more competitive, deregulation of industry, reduction in taxes, strengthening of national defense. we implemented a great part of the program and yielded incredibleesults, and that was the great conservative achievement. i think our inventory is a little thin these days. the result, instead of offering a program, what we too often do -- and in the people the caller admires are examples -- excuses, explanations of the things that of gone wrong, theories about how the assistant secretary of transportation for traffic when he was college studied with this professor, and that tells you everything you need to know about the direction of the obama administration. that is not the way people want to govern the country. when we look at the middle east

and we see conspiracy theories prevalent, we understand that it is a product of the failure of those societies because of they were successful they would have programs offered and competitive elections. that it is a way for me to join with others to change the rules of the game so that we can be more effective in the next 10 years than we were in the last few years. host: wisconsin, you are next. kurt on the line for independents. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. the question i have assembled. -- i have is simple. where were you in 2006 when nancy pelosi said, "we won.

too bad." now all the sudden, these groups come out. i've been to every tea party meeting that is held within 50 miles of my home. i intend to keep going. you will find democrats, republicans, libertarians, independents. everybody comes to them and they are all disgusted with exactly what is behind you in the building. that is what we're going to change. god bless you all. god bless america. have a great day. host: mr. galston? guest: first of all, my hat is off to the tea party movement. it's a genuine grass-roots movement. it has mobilized a lot of energy and a t discontent. americans who want to change the way things are goi and to want

to make things better have been the lifeblood of our country from the very beginning. no labels is no different. we are republicans and democratics and independents, and trying to find a way forward in very dficult times. i would ask you and the people watching this program to suspend your disbelief. we're in very mistrustful times. david frum just talked about a conspiracy theories. the air is filled with them. let's try to cool the temperature a little bit and focus on the real problems that we confront. the real problems are not our political adversaries. they are tou economic problems, a tough educational problems, a tough foreign-policy problems, and a competitor see posture in the world that is slipping. the educational system is not

performing up to world-class stanrds. that's the ball to keep our eye on, and not demonizing one another. host: i will let you both respond to this. this is from twitter, from susan. guest: that's something you hear a lot. let me give you a concrete example of how that's not true. we're in the throes of this terrible economic downturn. beginning in the summer of 2009, there were some signs of hope that things were getting better. the economy did strengthen during that time. someme around 2010, the improvements stopped and the economy slipped backward through the summer. why did that happen? there's a lot of debate. let me point to a powerful indicator. in april 2010, the federal reserve decided the economy had enough liquidity and it stopped making more. why did the federal reserve stop providing leadership at that

time? at that time, the additional governors of the federal reserve could not be appointed. there was a majority in the senate to confirm them. individual senators said -- this pers is not going to have a vote. because that governor did not get a vote, the federal reserve stopped providing liquidity to the economy. the economy stopped growing in april. we fell into a summer of wasted time and discontent. the government has to function. the idea that you are better off by paying for this giant eity, which has a series of important functionto do, and then have them not t them, even though you are paying for them, that's a costly and painful thing. i will agree with the implied view of that writer. the government undertakes to much.

host: mr. galston, what would you add? guest: we have unemployment close to 10% still. underemployment is closer to a 20%. we have a federal budget deficit of more than $1 trillion each year. the long-term ojections are horrible. gridlock is not going to solve those problems. i'm sorry. obviously, no one is in favor of brash action. our political system was set up , designed by james madison and others, to not rely on brash action. we do need to act. host: springfield, va., thank you for waiting. barbara on the line for republicademocrats. caller: this is james from tennessee. host: i'm sorry. go ahead.

caller: yes, i would like to say that the republican party, the tea party, and fox news networks are all one. their sole purpose is to get barack obama out of office. they will do everything they can to hurt some people in the united states to get him out of office. thank you. hostguest: i will be voting agat barack obama, i assume, in 2010. i would also like to get him out of office. you have to have more than that. you have to have some plan of what you will do once you have the responsibility of governing yourself. in the last spell of republican goveance, of which i voted for and participated in, what happens when you're right to

power and you do not have a clear idea of what you want to do. a lot of what went wrong in the obama administration arises from the same problem. theyid not adapt their program to the facts. they inherited this terrible recession. clearly, dealing with the recession was a secondary concern to other agenda items that they made more primary. that's another cause of our general problems. we need parties that are more responsive to the general public. we can make changes in the late primaries work, the way campaign financing works, d the way districting works. host: from mississippi, richard on the line for republicans. caller: good morning.

thank you for c-span. we know why no labels came up. it came up because people are on to liberals. people are on to progressives. people are onto the terms these career politicians have used. now they're down to no labels because they don't want you to know their true beliefs. i'm just a good old boy. i'must an american. progressive, liberal, socialist -- i'm just one of these good old boys with no lel. most of us know what you are doing. guest: i get called a lot of names. i do not know that people call me a liberal. i started my political work in

1980 giving out fliers for ronald reagan in a college town that was not very pro republican. we did not win the congressional seat that year. i was in the bush administration. i spend my life and career in conservative politics. if no labels is a stalking horse for some kind of liberal agenda, they've mada big mistake by including me. host: can i throw in the opinions of frank rich? guest: i have written about them. host: he said --

host: what do you make of the intent, or the accusation? guest: well, as i have written, i think it is an unfortunate accusation. it really does not pay attention to what this movement is about and why people are so interested in participating in it. why are people flocking to our facebook page? why did 1000 ordinary americans come to new york city from every state in the country at their own expense? why is spontaneous organizing cropping up in states around the country? this is not being done around some mysterious directive in washington, d.c. we have hardly any money. the people that got interested in this movement early on consider around this table.

we do t have the power to do anything unless the people are interested in what we're trying to do. i agree with mr. rich that people are fed up. i don't think he is entirely wrong to suggest that. a lot of people feel underrepresented or unrepresented in our nation's politics. can mr. rich and i agree on that proposition and move forwa together now that we have gotten it out of our system? i certainly hope so. host: house the group wanted -- how is the group funded? guest: i've never seen any money spt in the group. i do not think there any actual funds. people pay their own way. some of the early founders have generously put money of their own into it. i do not think there are any

corporate contributions or business contributions to the group. guest: i'm not reay sure, but i can tell you there's not any big contributions to the group. my understanding is that our total spending in the first year of our existence was less than $1 million, which is revealed by the standards of modern organizations. -- which is trivial by the standards of modern organizations. volunteers are not kidding a dime. i have never gotten a penny for the hours i've contributed. i know that others are doing it on a volunteer basis. guest: i spoke at a no labels event in washington and i paid own p. host: jack on the line for independents. good morning. caller: the united states is

looked upon as americans. we have an entire, just like the ooman empir but the romans, and that british. and buyers are expensive and citizens are taxed heavily. -- empires are expensive and citizens are taxed heavily. it is not just the welfare state. we have an empire we have to pay for it. guest: well, there's a big debate among scholars as to whether we have an empire or not. there are many who agree with you, sir. for sure, we have global responsibilities. for example, the united states 's navy is the principal force guaranteeing freedom of the seas around the world. so doing, we are facili

facilitating the global commerce. nations around the world are eager fous to continue to play this role. the alternative is a return to anarchy. yes, it is expensive. there are many americans who wish -- i think, correctly -- that more of the nations that are benefiting from what we're doing around the world would pay something closer to their fair share. this has been a major goal of american farm policy for decades. it's never made very much progress. as americans, i think we need to make a choice. are we willing to continue to pay for the position of coble leadership that we now occupy? would we likether pers, like thehinese, to step up and do it in our place? i know what i think. the's room for legitimate debate. host: rick in fort wayne, indiana on the line for democrats.

good morning. caller: good morning and thank you for c-span. i'm an optimistic person. i believe that a problem, given enough time and solutions, will come into focus. i see a problem and i go into problem solving mode. our political leaders, some of them will look at the same problem and they see blood. they see what kind of harm they can do to the opposing party. they're in conflict mode. i do not think we can get there from here until there is a mind- set shift in our political leaders. i will give you an example. mitch mcconnell is seen as -- as soon as the political race was over, he said his number one priority was to get rid of barack obama. that was surprisng to me.

i thought the top priority was jobs. that is the mindset that they are in. i would like to know what the cost of the war is -- the war that is happening on the hill. we've already had collateral damage from that. loss of homes, loss of jobs, the mother and my ear of the financial system -- mug and mire of the finanal system. host: senator john mccain talked about the notion of compromise on the floor. having listened to what he had to say, and get your response. >> there's a lot of talk about compromise. do you think this bizarreo world that the majority leader has been carrying us in on

cloture votes on this, both on various issues that are on the political agenda of the other side -- do you sehow think the beginning next january 5 we will all love one another? i do not think so. host: a harbinger of the 112th? guest: here's what i found most encouraging from the lame- duck session. president obama, after this defeat, had a decision to make -- how would you respond to it? one response is to get very tactical and create traps for the opponents. give them things that they say they want, but connect them to other things. you can do a lot of damage to the other side, but you destroy your reputation. at also happen to the clinton administration. he managed to persuade republicans that he was so

untrustworthy that there is no deing with him. that is not what is happening this time. there is some temptation to do so. on, for example, the repeal of don't ask, don't tell. that was linked early on to the abortion provisions that the democrats knew would be utterly unacceptable to the republicans. they gave a clean vote on don't ask, don't tell. we saw what happened. we will see if the president will continue to negotiate. he is in a more powerful position than bill clinton was in 1995. the country's problems are much more serious than they were in 1995. every day there are moments in washington to prove good faith or bad faith. host: before we go to the calls, let me play one more clip. this is from president obama. i believe it is from the press

conference before he left f or vacation. >> i will be happy to see the republicans test whether or not i'm itching for a fight on a range of issues. i suspect that they will find that i am. i think the arican people will be on my side on a bunch of these fronts. host: the larger issue, getting people to work together, especially when you have issues that do come up when you talk about policy. guest: we will see, won't we? we will begin to see in earnest when president obama delivers his 2011 state of the union address. that will lay down the template, the path forward, as he sees it, for the next two years of the country and his administraon. my prediction is that after thinking for a strategy and

tactics, he will decide that the path of cooperation is theest, both for the country and for him personally. if he is as smart as i think he is, he will come to the following conclusion. if iet to the high ground and stretch out my hand and invite everyone else to join me here, if they grasp my hand, good for the country and good for me. if they spurn my aunt's ranch hand, then the country can see for itself where the real obstacle is. just to show that no labels is not without internal discord, as a former clintonian, i just have to say that i do not accept that account of what happened during the clinton administration. the record will show that in 1996 and 1997, very important agreents were ached across party lines on issues ranging from welfare to our fiscal

future. apparently, the majority of the republican party during that period reached a very different conclusion. namely, that bill clinton was someone they could do business with, and they did. i think history will record that was not a bad time for our untry. just to show you that we are not all on the same page -- [laughter] host: what about the state of the union? guest: i have an article coming up in the next issue of "esquire" magazine. it goes through what should the president do? host: is there a picture of you? guestyou or a famously well dred conservative. [laughter] guest: he will be fighting an

overwhelming temptation to strategy and traps. the president has the inherent advantage. he is a single decision maker at the top. it's easy for him to coordinate than it is for the members of congress. i hope you'll resist that. host: john on the line for republicans. guest: first, the federal reserve is not responsible for growth. they are responsible for debt fueled inflationary baubles that eventually burst the american public suffers the consequences we have not been telling you that we do not want gridlock. we do not want washington getting bigger and bigger and creeping further and further into our lives and spending more money. i welcome gridlock.

on christmas eve, an omnibus bill was passed that gives the fda to regulate all food growing in the u.s. we do not want you people in our lives anymore. we want gridlock. thank you. guest: one of the real barriers -- conservatives do not understand how much they have won since the middle of the 1970's. if we look back to 1960, the year i was born, it was illegal to own a telephone. the government regulated everything in the country. it regulated telecommunications services. it regulated what was said on the airwaves. the scope of the government is

smaller in every way than it was in 1966. the conservatives could of geora that, i think they would be less apocalyptic -- if the conservatives could absorb that, i think it would be less apocalyptic. i wish the caller would review the recent history of conservativeccomplishments and feel that kind of optimism that makes him think there something better to do as a conservative in washington than simply stopping things from getting done. host: pam on the line for republicademocrats. guestcaller: i think you have tt the money out. given the recent united decision, i do not think that's happening. i think americans would cheer any political group that got

together and started pushing a limit on the times that elections take place. in england, they have six weeks or something like that. we love a shorter campaign season. two, i think you should promo a turntable o cable off day. citizens are being thrown to the lions on a daily basis. as americans, we're sitting around with blood thirsty wating what you people do to each other. i think that promoting a hit to their ratings is one of the only ways to get it to stop. thank you for taking my call. host: mr. galston. guest: let me give you a no labels perspective.

we do not begin in washington with a no labels agenda that we're asking people to sign up to. our hope is that through the citizens' groups that will be organized in all 435 congressional districts -- i can tell you that having attended our launch event in new york', and having listened very carefully to what the citizens who came to the event said, is clear to me that the reform of the political system is high on their list, as it is on yours, and as it should be on the list of americans. there's no question about the fact that our institutional structure, starting as david frum said with the way we organize congressional districts, to the way that we organize campaigns, is not working correctly.

it's certainly not increasing confidence in our government institutions. the confidence is near historical low levels. i share your hope that citizens across the country will develop a robust agenda of political an institutional reform and carry that forward into our nation's politics. host: as far as your organization is concerned, is there a set of principles you're looking for as far as the end results of people coming together? guest: our principles are very simple. one, stop demonizing your opposition, whoever your opposition is. two, search for common ground. 3, bin problem solving mode. four, put the country first. beyond that, it is up to the citizens to come together around solutions. that is why the local organizing will be the principal focus for 2011. we do not need one more

shington center, washington driven agenda. we need a citizen-focused and citizen-generated agenda. that's what we will try to provide the arena for. guest: about what the caller said about cable news, there's obviously a big food fight atmosphere to a lot of people. i worry a lot more, not about the 3 million peopl or 5 million people who watch a lot of cable tv and get too much slanted political information -- i worry about the 125 million people who get much less political information than their parents and grandparents did. we are moving toward a world in which the best informed americans are so much more informed than they were a generationgo, but many americans are much worse informed. it's that kind of information oligarchy that is one of the powerful and destructive forces

in american politics. if you do not know what is going on, you will be taking advantage of. that's the backdrop to the financial crisis. all kinds of decisions were made that were too technical and too boring for people to follow. trillions ofolla turned. the object should not be to get people to tu off cable tv, but persuade the 125 mllion people who do not watch enough political formation to watch more. host: how do you factor in political blogs and web sites? guest: i think that is the minority within the minority. there are probably 500,000 people who also read a lot of blogs and are really informed. back to my parents' generation, they were very well-informed people. they're still well-informed. in 1970, you read a couple of daily papers, and consciously watched the evening news, and

special reports on the weekend, not only were you doing your part, but you were getting as much information as it was possible to get. today, that would be baileybaren appetizer portion. it was almost impossible to avoid the 6:30 p.m. news back then, because you had to get off the couch and turn it off, and do something before prime time began. today, it's easy to avoid and a lot of people are. host: richard on the line for independents. thank you for waiting. go ahead. caller: good morning. i'm concerned about the labeling stuff. if my memory correct, isn't mr. frum one of the speech writers for the bush administration? didn't you come up with the term, "axis of evil"? are we still live in the consequees of your labeling, essentially, and bankrupting this country? guest: as bill said, we have some internal disagreement.

i'm not quite as peace-loving in temperament as some. i do believe, sometimes, if someone throws a punch at you, you throw a punch back. i would argue more about inaccurate and irrational labeling then i would abou labeling altether. sometimes, yes, a lot of people say to me -- sometimes use a tough things. what are doing in this group? sometimes tough things have to be said. one of the real reasons behind a tendency toward extremism in our politics is that people who have -- too often, people who have moderate views on iues, it is naturaly linked to aoderate personality type. every once in awhile, iyou're going to stand up for a broad points of views, you have to

give as good as you get and not say, "gee,'m too moderate to stand up for myself." guest: let me just add to that. this is a widespread misinterpretation. no labels does not mean that people do not have political identities. no labels is not asking people to shed those political identities, if and when they choose to identify with our movement. it is asking them to think about a larger good that includes but also goes beyond the their individual identities. in a lifelong democrat. i have been in sixth democratic presidential campaigns. i served for two and a half years in bl clinton's white house. i'm proud of every minute of it. having said that, i have never claimed that my pay has a

monopoly on either wisdom or virtue. i have never believed that people on the other side of the idaisle were evil. sometimes i have thought they are misguided. i'm sure they've got the same about me. we are not asking people to forget about the fact that they are republicans, democratics, and independents, liberals, moderates, or conservatives, but we're asking them to think harder about what it means to be an american and what it means to practice politics and what it means to be an american citizen. that's all. guest: just before christmas, everyone was talking about the new york jets coach that tripped a player. people thought that was pretty reprehensible. was that man not a good coach?

did that mean he was not committed to the new york jets? there are things wdo not do in competition. it does not help the competitn. it does not make you stronger. it destroys the possibility of politics altogether. the analogy is, there's a difference between playing as well as you can when you're on the field and tripping the players. host: james on the phone from louisiana. caller: good morning. can we please stop calling mr. frum a conservative? a true conservative would never advise the republicans to support the democratic health care bill. after november 2, it does not look like the american people like it so much. take a look at all the waivers the administration has granted. the pre-existing conditions fiasco where 8000 people when they thought it was going to be 135,000 people signing up -- and

now they sneak this end-of-life counseling into the bill in the dark of the night. do you still think republicans should support ts? do you really consider yourself a conservative with these types of policy decisions? guest: i'm sorry. i accept you. second, if you read the piece i wrote in spring of 2010, i'm amazed at how accurate it was. what i said then was this. republicans that everything on stopping the health care bill. they refused to try to introduce their ideas because they were so confident they could stop it. i said they wouldot be able to stop it, so you better try to fix it. republicans did not do that. the result was the health care bill that passed into law. the idea is that the people

rejected my advi were more opposed to the health care bill -- without pat toomy -- republicans rejected it and they did not defeat it. it is here it is here and all of its awfulness. do not tell me about the intensity of your emotions when your methodology has led to this disaster. yes,ca,re -- it would be a much better bill from my point of view. now, passing a repeal through the house of representatives, passing a filibuster, winning a presidential election, and finding a president who will sign it. it is impossible. it is here. host: bingham, new york. kelly on the line for democrats.

caller: good morning. mr. frum and mr. galston appeared to be the only -- people are attacking the idea. people are attacking mr. frum. when you have untries like china, india, singapore zooming past the united states. i jus called american people can educate themselves -- i just hope the american people can educate themselves into the right thing for the country. host: what would you like to see? caller: i would like to see more people pay attention to it and stop cleaning themselves to the media that gives misinformation. there are millionaires spreading a bunch of misinformation.

it is just misinformation. when are they going to pick up a book? wh are they going to reach something from a different idea and stop what is going on? host: mr. galston? guest: thank you very much. have a movement for you movementsir. -- we have a movement for you, sir. i think your last comment was really onto something. for good or ill, the change in the media and information landscape over the past three decades has made it more and more possible for people to live in a world of information and opinion that reinforces and hardens their own prejudic. that is making it harder and harder to have the kind of conversation that we need to have. david frum, a few minutes ago,

referred to the now vanished era where the three networks and the nightly news shows dominated the information flow. that era was not all good, but it did require people to participate in a common pool of information. it did make it possible for the country to have a more robust political the sessiodiscussion s more center seeking then what we have now. the problem with these niche markets is that they are echo chambers reinforcing rather than challenging the opinions that listeners and viewers bring to them. that is not a problem for which i have a solution because the change in the media landscape is a product of decades of technological development, cades of legal development that open up markets. the media, like the airlines, are much less regulated than they were thre30 years ago.

there are many advantages to that. people were avid consumers of information have a lot more available than they did 30 years o. people who have a narrow view simply have those reinforced. guest: i try to counteract this game by joining it. i run a site. we try to offer something that little broader. host: nolabels.org. guest: i was actually promoting my own. [laughter] visit no labels, too. host: if they go to this website, what information can they find? est: they find out what's no

labels -- what no labels is about and how they can get involved. those of the two most critical things. they also have a steady flow of information and commentary from different points of vw. we're trying to build that up and make it more robust. we do not have a lot in the way of resources. we do not have all the bells and whistles that people have become accustomed to, but the basics are there. it is like the old folk story with a pot of water bubbling in the middle of town square. the two stew will be as good as the meat and vegetables at the american people bring to it. host: the people identified with your group, is there a breakdown? guest: we do not have the demographics on that yet. obviously, before we get too far into 2011, we will start to have a better feel. i can tell you this. there's a very healthy mix in

new york forur launch event in the seats and on the stage. host: there will not be any larger events? guest: there will be state and local events. frankly, national events are not what we are about. if this is not a grass-roots movement, it is not a movement. if it's not a movement, it's just a feweople sitting in washington hoping for something better. host: allen, texas on the line for independents. caller: thank you. pedro, please do not cut me off before i have my points made. right now, the calls are -- well, there's a call for,ne twitter for, and me for

seeing through what these people are all about. i commend my people from michigan, wisconsin, susan on the twitter, mississippi, and the article for mr. rich. i did not count that. that is 11 now. host: your point, please. caller: my point is that these people are social engineering. host: we will leave it there. guest: i do not think i am social engineering. host: mr. galston? guest: i've been called a lot of things. social engineer? i do not think so. it is not social engineering. it is grass roots american politics. if i'm accused of participating

in grass-roots american politics, i have to plead guilty. that's what i'm doing. i have said probably three or four times in this hour, and i will say it again, this movement is what citizens who are not satisfied with the concrete issue of our nation's politics are going to make of thait. i have my own ideas. i do not expect those ideas to be adopted. i hope they will be discussed. i hope a lot of ideas will be discussed, too. that is democracy. host: you had a chance to see the no labels national leadership meeting. that will be aired friday aired8:15 -- friday at 8:15. you can see more about it and what it isbout. we invite you to view that

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> tomorrow labeouf, washington bureau chief discuss this if the international issues facinghe u.s. in 2011. reid wilson looks at what is ahead for politics in the next two years. washington journal is live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> next, a forum on reintegrating would give veterans into society. then a discussion on grass roots politics. >> the original documentary has

been newly updated. sunday, you will see the places and those only available to the justices and their staff. he would hear about how the court works. you will hear from elena kagan. it is home to america's highest court, caring for the first time in high definition. case western reserve university about the recovery of wounded veterans and their reintegration into society. this is one hour and 50 minutes.

>> good morning. as you know, if this is the panel on the causes of conflict. ibid like to introduce our distinguished guests. to my immediate right is michael scharf, professor of law. following him is professor paul rboinson, professor at the university of ottawa.

after him is lieutenant-colonel john stark from mount summit in vienna and professor of military science at princeton university and graduate of west point. jeffrey helsing is the dean at the conflict management and peace building at the united states institute of peace. he oversees much of the ov development purda. finally, we have major carlos teixiera. he is in the artillery branch. all of these distinguished guests are going to be talking about the causes of conflict and

the possible resolutions to accomplish. my name is jimmy piven. as someone who studies the history of ideas, i find a confounding how the history of humanity is one soak replete with a violent predatce. toward the end of "hamlet," we see an army marching over a client of verot ground. "what can the purpose of such bloodshed be?" it is attempting to sympathize that history is a madhouse. we have 14,600 recorded wars in human history. how do we explain that?

sometimes, we have very simplistic answers, a cliche answers. some shed light. sen dunite -- some do night. these all seem to make sense. given that history, is it enough to explain our proclivity toward violence? does it explain how soldiers could abandoned babies or force fathers to rape father's? does it explain the belief that what is so evil about the west is that there is a free mixing of they sexes. does it explain the counts of

being they talk about in survivor? there seems to be an incredible access. there is so much to conflict we need to unearth. there are many theories of violence. some see it as the expression of human nature coming out. some talk about the psychological need for enemies and allies. a buddhist philosopher friend of mine talked about the inner that motivate us to attack others. research can talk about humiliation or even the fear of

death that can inspire otherwise seemingly ordinary people to harm those deemed different. i am going to open this up to the group.how do we explain conflct? what can we do about it? >> would you like us to go to any particular order? . am happy to jump in greta i came to this issue years ago when i was attorney adviser at the u.s. department of state. i've worked on the legal issues involving the breakup. those led to a terrible ethnic outbursts, religious fighting

and genocide. they decided to create a responsible.for those i remember the day i was in the courtroom watching as the chief presiding judge, if you had been an american, a former civil rights attorney, and she along with two others where presiding. she looked out at the u.n. and said "i do not understand its." the expert says, "let me try to help you. where are you confused?" she said, "this was a country that had the best level of inter religious marriage of any country in the world, even the

united states. the ethnic groups got along so well it was showcased recently in the winter olympics. all of a sudden there is a conflict. people kill each other and they know people are killing. they are killing their neighbors. they do it. how could it happen?" the u.n. experts look better and thought she had to explain it in a way the judge from the u.s. will understand. she said, "picture what would happen in the united states if all of the newspapers and all of the radio stations and all of the television stations were all controlled by the government and that the government started to beam the broadcast to the population 24-hours, seven days a week stating that -- let's just say that i the african

americans were going to rise up and kill all the white people. and then the government aren't all the white people and peoples of where you giving us guns? and they said comedy african- americans are about to rise up. can you imagine what would happen in the united states under those circumstances?" the judge who was african- american thought about it and says," i see you. play" -- i see your point." there is a thin line from civilization and barbarism. the government he does on the right side of the line and sodas 3 president obama de -- the government stays on the right side of the line. it to be useful to find some kind of an enemy. that is the ingredient for mass ethnic violence.

to answer your question with at least one respect, how does genocide occurred? how does a mass-ethnic-racial violence occurred? the ingredients were proven on the court date in a couple of years later by a tribunal that sits in tanzanian. they've been proven daily in the cambodian tribunals for. we are learning about it. one of the scary lessons is if we do not have a free press, the government can unleash the worst of humankind. that will lead us down this road. .> i will jump in b this is a bit low. a natural part of

human society. people have different interests. the question is why they choose to deal with complex with four nflicts with co force. collectively, it rarely makes sense pa. very few wars make profit. even if you achieve your goal, you normally do so at a price. you often do not even have a goal when you start. it is not clear. from a collective rationality of perspective, it does not make sense pro. it can make sense for certain individuals or groups.

certain people believe it and some profit from it. the problem is often one of structure . it is about power in the hands of certain people. to think in a certain way. american sociologists said the problem was that they were embued with "crackpot realism." the only ever talk to themselves so their realism is completely crackpot. unless you think like that, you will not be taken serious. you are not considered a serious person.

it is not just george bush proposed . there is a way of thinking with in the establishment. it needs to be broken. even though something has been collectively stupid, it happened anyway. that is one problem. imagine if the present is controlled by the government. it is, even in a democracy sprea. the night instead -- united states have 100 foreign correspondents. there in london, paris, tokyo, beijing, baghdad, kabul. the way the modern press write stories is a have a government press releases. they read the reuters or pi and

a plagiarize it. they have to do in 5 minute time. there are fewer and fewer generalists -- journalists. they basically got a pretty o -- copy. it is often the same story in the same words. it is easy to manipulate the press even in a democratic country. you can see this in the iraq war. we are not even as immune to that in our society as the but like to imagine. another point which prevents us from analyzing things rationally, we are not very good at making rational

government. we analyze risks that they produc -- risks extremely badly. you are a million times more likely to be killed in a car crash. car crashes happen every day. we think we can control them. you over react to dangers that are not very dangerous. that is just one. there are a whole bunch of other psychological failings. be like i have an interest in peace that goes hand-in-hand with my colleagues and maybe

even beyond. i've been stationed in i rack. i wear a bracelet and my comrade to have died in combat. i feel very strongly that this event and things like this are very healing for the country. i appreciate the young people who have come here, the veterans, the scholars. it is a great group of americans and international guests. it is great to see you all here. thank you for inviting me. i will give you three ways of thinking about the causes of conflict that are not mine. i am at heart a soldier. uygur of not far from here. i could probably relate to your lives except that you are up in the '70s and '80s with sports and ronald reagan and cold war patriotism and join the military so i could go to college for free. you may not have had to do that. he may have had scholarships. i grabbed in a trailer park. i thought the military was an

enticing way to pay for my education. it has continued to educate me. it sent me to a higher for a phd. i have taught was born in history and at princeton. and teaching a history course. etiquette to provide a historian but i'm also a soldier. there are three ways to get this problem from my perspective. one is very simple. a friend of mine teaches anthropology. he is writing a book right now about the costs of conflict. he looks at human beings as one of many species that engaged in organized conflict or something that looks like war. they get together and wage war on each other. apes do it. what makes humans different? we deliberate about it. we have philosophies about it. we vote on it. and then we do it even if it is

not the only option. this may not give you hope for humans if we are looking like ants and aids. however, there are examples of the vikings. they were very violent people. now you cannot imagine norway and sweeting going to war with each other for t. i think this is interesting. there are two other ways of looking at that i consider more important because people are using them to justify conflict. the clash of cultures is the

idea that we are all in our own culture. you do not like war. the culture is threatened by someone else who grew of doing something different with a different religion or different thought process. they are scared of us and 80 them with ebay and coca-cola and the donald. -- invading them with ebay and coca-cola and mcdonald's. we could probably be fighting each other forever. a harvard scholars idea is that world history is the ninth story

fit into democracy. over time, there has been a growth. democracies do not fight each other. even if hugo chavez come up with a lot of nuclear weapons and barack obama went insane embalms everyone, the people who came out of the case of what democracy because it is such a great system. this is a theory. the end of history is that we have reached the pinnacle of human development be. there will always be someone somewhere else who wants to cause conflict because they do not like the results. i tend to like that theory. i think that is what we are seeing with terrorism.

people do not like the results of democracies. i'm very patriotic. i believe democracy is the worst system of government in the world except for all the rest. you may have heard that before. the clash of cultures is still alive. we are a species with the instinct to fight each other. the answers will not satisfied you can give you something to go home and write these three theories down. that is the way that i look at it. thank you. >> i will try to build on a couple of things that i have heard and greater other ideas out there -- if throw a few other ideas out there. the first thing that jumps out at me when i heard the moderator was he entertained two proclivities, to conflict and

violence. i would agree with the first but not the second. i do not think there is a human proclivity to violence. i think there is a proclivity to conflict. our challenge is to manage conflict in wages that we do not need to use violence. in fact, most human beings do not resort to violence. the problem we have is that out of the fear colonel stark talked about, we often engage in violence. the biggest problem has less to do with those two commit violence than those who are enablers of islands or those who are by standards. what is critical is to develop the institutions and process these locally that enable people

to deal with their grievances without resorting to violence. that is one of the strengths of deep-rooted democracies. fourth they create institutions, balls, procedures that allow for -- they create institutions, laws, of procedures that allow for this agreement. think about the election process. there are a lot of conflict. it is a conflict of ideas, parties, visions. the key is to develop ways in which you deal with those conflicts in peaceful ways. to promote democracy in society

that do not have those institutions and promote elections before people have the confidence that it is not simply a "when or take all" shot at political power, you are going to have conflict. many of the main that have been in this room during the previous session. an interesting activity took place. it was an activity to send messages and hopes for peace around the world via the use of flags, a blessing that was articulated four countries. what was interesting about it f there were al 3 00 ther -- t here were three flags that

holding them up in some areas are actually conflict inducing. of otherst the flags also included? what choices are made about nash? -- nationality? who has a right to become a nation or not? what is critical to think about is a that identity is a critical proponent of conflict. we do not see states and soldiers in uniforms fighting most of the conflicts of the world today. i certainly respect the names on

colonel stark's bracelet. we are in a world were actually few soldiers in a relative sense lose their lives in or. 90% of the casualties are civilians bur. >> that is certainly the case in jordan. >> absolutely. wheen to focus on the impact of violence on people who they themselves are not armed or engaged in violence along the for -- violence. we have seen a world of conflict entrepreneurs, people that benefit from conflict. the ethnic cleansing in bosnia was really the result of those beliefs -- elites you were profiting resources and the

distribution of power where and rudi and power and they were instilling fear in people predicted -- in people. if you look at most complex, even in the middle of that kind of fear, hatred, demonizing the of there, most people are not in ph -- engaged in violence. most people are just scared. they are by standards. they may be enablers. they may help provide public support. they simply believe it cannot them then those people are going to do it to us. one thing that is incumbent upon the international community is to help develop the

means of dealing with in equities, and distribution of resources, and inequities of access. when you think about it, if you are in bosnia, part of the concern was that those other guys were going to gain control for of not just resources such as money or minerals or arms but also who would control education. what about access to health care? what about access to one's livelihood in jobs? if you do not have a system that is equitable, minorities will feel that. they cannot provide for a basic need. one has to look at the structural causes of conflict

that then can be exploited by conflict on 20 wars, a fear mongers -- conflict entrepreneur worst, fear mongers. i think we need to think much more about a more of lockean view the bill as human beings, we can find ways of managing and reducing the negative consequence of conflict h.

too often we look just at the failures. there are successes. one is the crimean war. not the one of the 19th century. the crimean war that did not happen after the breakup of the soviet union in which to nuclear armed country, russia and the ukraine, had a great deal of conflict over the disposition of the crimea partly because there is a majority of ethnic russians in a territory that was under ukrainian sovereignty. there was a lot of effort put into keeping a lid on conflict tensions in crimea and in the mid-1990's. through institutions and diplomacy and working with

russian and ukrainian leaders in the crimea. we do not talk much or teach about that in political science or international affairs abortive the country of o'malley -- affairs. in the country of -- the future was in jeopardy. you have political arrangements. violence was still percolating. through conflict resolution, it percolated upward. it was embraced by the

political process. they have had a peaceful transition of government, changes in power current and -- in power. the techniques are much more prevalent throughout much of society. it was virus that was prevented. i think we have to be wary of being cynical and pessimistic and just say we have a proclivity to violence. that is what we have to focus on. we have to develop strong institutions a piece of building at the local level. >> it is my turn. it is a great honor to be here.

thank you to be here with us. i think that he pointed out a lot of good points about the low-social aspects, political and economic aspects. i wish to point out some psychological aspects that will not be an answer but will surely be another question that will be pointed o ut. -- out. i think that sigmund freud wrote civilization and culture - -he said something that any man

could not kill the beast he had inside himself. there is a piece of na ture that lies behind any social conflict. in latin, we have another reason. it means man is a wolf to man himself. i think this is yet the very main question. this may be the regional beauty of our civilization. that is why were are a species that thinks. we can transform our ideas and

thoughts into evolution and mercy. the social i phenomenons not -- the social phenomena -- there is in it of emotion and some. if you give invitation to our uniforms,it reminds us of camouflage. you can see our badges that are signs of our ranks. you see the medals that symbolize things we have done. also, many times they are a kind

of scar in our own skin. we pay a price many times for that. we can hear this from many veterans here. we do this with fright. we do this because we aboey orders anad want to protect our society and ourselves. conflict will arise on the reflection of these stations that our structure suffers. tensions that we build.

i think that there is really an instinct to survice. not to survive as a body but as a culture and economic and political system. writer remind another to you. he wrote an interesting book. he says that during the last century we had something like solid [inaudible] he tells us that the values and culture at that time was much more reasonable for those peopl

e than it might be now. it was done. decisions were very easy to do. world war ii, it is easy to choose a side. you could be with the good guys or the bad guys . afterwards, we have seen periods of great improvement. we were living a cold war. he tells us tha tin o uur century, we lead a kind of liquid modality. our values are not so stable. they are always changing. we cannot hit them the same way.

why does this happen? maybe we have difficulty understanding the order and diversity. in our society, we have many choices to do. it is easy to remind that in the last century, we did not have too many choices of employment. you would be a doctor, clerk, engineer. nowaday, imagine the diversity of jobs. yet, we are plagued with unemployment. less century, if you had a car

or house, that was almost a lifetime of working. nowadays the wind to change it every time. we must buy new model car we can. we borrow for this. we are getting stuck in borrowing money. so, behind all this liquid values that are ephemeral, we have a little bit lost. we are just fearing something that the society may be does protect us enough. we have to choose. i think that the violence that lives with us when we feel

insecure. we are not so able to calm this beast. on the other hand, i think that this is a very godo momeny for our evolution as a people and as a nation. it forces us to change these values among ourselves and our that wents and needs so can understand better each other and be responsibile for our choices. in this summit, i have observed some testimonies that it is possible -- i have seen

activities of [unintelligible] it is profound. , just thought we as citizens we have disccused. violence is on our cities, our lives. we must remember about the v iolence against children adn women. economic violence, we must heal maybe ourselves.

society it seeking healing. we must treat ourselves. in treating our cell, we will treat society. it would be easier. [applause] >> we have about 15 minutes before we open it up to the floor for questions. i would like to ask my distinguished panel a few questions based on what they said. i found it all extremely fascinating and somewhat perplexing.

at first, i like to address dr. teixiera. if we have this piece inside us, it behooves us to recognize that it is us and not only the other. yes? us to examine ourselves. i have to ask this question. what is the nature of this beast? we have it, but what is it? heated debate in -- even alluded to of this. when he says that life is nasty, solitary, brutish, and short -- why is this the case? why are we so. ? -- why are we so brittle?

we do not know what happens after we expire. some of you dealt on that. dr. dr. stark talked about our fears civilization. fear elping mentioned the yea and intimidation -- where did this come from? what inspires the terror and anxiety and hatred? i am reminded of some experiments that friends have done where they subliminally scared people with reminders of their own death. they could motivate people to be

sadistic to each other without the person realizing they are ripping sadistic to each other. can you imagine? you have short order chess with a pitt twice as much hot sauce and the food they perceive to be in different ethnic groups. more recently, they did experiments where they gave mortality infections and democratic minded people who publish was insane started to support his ideas because the fear acted on them that way. what is this beast? what is the nature of that beast and the complex humanity? dhaka -- i suspect we are

symbolic animals. in this whole discussion, r.i. say to this to my students every year. it is very controversial. there are those [unintelligible] bottom those are genetically the same as chimpanzees but less violence. perhaps they are not. it depends on who you read. this is not just a natural

phenomenon. it is a cultural one. it is how masculinity is interpreted. it encourages people to be good and mergers to give this. it begins as a way of protecting society. honor and sax's are associated this. it -- honor