a whole. that's an important part of our process. >> and i would agree with that also. epsilon has that. >> ok. 16 seconds, i thank the witnesses again for your time, and at the risk of getting crosswise with the chairwoman, go, mavericks. >> thank you. >> chair recognizes mr. harper for five minutes. >> thank you, madam chair. >> why did it takes only approximately seven days to notify customers that their personal data had been compromised? >> it was to find right balance of notifying customers as soon as we had some things that something had gone wrong, but not being irresponsible in creating undue stress or concern within the customer base. we immediately began an investigation and we are able to notify customers within a couple of days that we had had an

unauthorized external intrusion, but it took several more days to be able to clearly discerned what information had been taken, and even get that point we were not able to allow the possibility that credit card immigration had been back in. nevertheless, we would have been made a public statement regarding the potential of those losses. >> august want to be clear. how long was that before any customers got notification? >> we first discovered unusual activity on the 19th and we shut down the network on the 20th of april and notified consumers on the 22nd of april. >> did you notify all the consumers at that point? >> at that point we were intensely involved in this investigation to try to figure out what to notify the customer is about. at that time we notified coming utilizing of blog that we believed there had been an intrusion. beginning on the 26 when we made

a lot of public announcements related to specific information that may have been lost, we initiated through new channels, obviously our block, as well as through direct mail campaign to the customers detailed information about the laws. but how many notifications did each consumer receive? >> understanding that there should have been 77 he mails with regard to the sony playstation intrusion. >> where they notified more than one time as too large additional information? >> we provide update on the block on a regular basis as to the current state of affairs. in terms of the e-mail notification regard to the potential of the data, that was the one time event. >> do you believe the news that was passed on, looking back now, do you believe it was done quickly enough?

>> we tried very, very hard to find the right balance there. i believe that if we had responded earlier, it would have probably been irresponsible. even to this day we question whether we should have taken a little bit more time to finish the investigation with regard to credit our liberation. i believe we probably struck the right balance, but was a tough call. but you indicated there is no evidence of misuse of the customers' personal information that was access during that break. we are a month passed that point. if that still your position? >> the credit card companies have told us they see no signs of unusual activity related to this breach. >> do you know where the attacks originated? at this time, we do not. we are working with law enforcement to try to figure that out, but at this time we do not have a clear idea. crack there are many reports for speculation, one report

initially suggested that amazons paper used for this may have been used. is there any accuracy to that? >> i know that the fbi is investigating that report. at this time, i do not have any other information about whether that is true or not. >> the only on-line entertainment and network entertainment, are they using the same security protections? >> we comply with the same types of industry practices and are subject to the same policies as far as being part of sony corp. the specific architecture of age are this is probably different because the types of services we provide are different. across the industry, must internet servers providers or building their services out of wars with the same basic components. >> i yield back the balance of my time.

back at this point we are going to read -- recessed the committee and are indigenous to return as soon be as we can. it should be about 45 minutes is my guess, but things could change. the subcommittee stand recessed until after the last vote on the court. -- on the floor. the subcommittee will reconvene and come to order. i want to thank you very much for indulging us and i apologize that there has been a change of plans with the minority headed over to the white house for a very important meeting with the president. we agree that we would conclude with questions, but first i would like to offer the to view the opportunity to give you any final thoughts you might have and any recommendations for legislation as we move forward in the process.

>> we would greatly appreciate the opportunity to work with you and your staff and any members of your subcommittee to create a national data breach notification standard. the details would have to be worked out as we think through all the ramifications. clearly, i would not be the only one with experience, but we would love to work request -- work with you on that. >> i want to thank you again for the opportunity to come and speak today and thank you for all working at dawn to build and grow our business. as you heard in our testimony

today and in the private session where we share more technical details regarding the breach yesterday, despite taking what we believe to be extremely appropriate and substantial steps to build a safe and protected network, hackers were able to get into the network. the thing that is writing about this is that it is easy to focus on sony and look at the things we might be able to do in the future to shrink in our network. the reality is, because we are all building our network that the same basic ingredients, if there is a weakness in the way buildings, chances are the weaknesses may lie in the components we rely on from the variety of vendors that we all use. i think we are working together as industry to try to strengthen our practices and our technologies. the conclusion not leave you with today is that without further assistance from the government, i think we are all

on to have a world of hurt in this internet economy and we really would appreciate and request your assistance in regarding the specific legislation. we would welcome the opportunity to contribute and speak to you further regarding its development. i think about very much. i want to address the comment earlier about the question of whether it would file suit began to protect your intellectual property. i want to commend you on your answer and i'm glad you did it then. too often, people are right up being hacked and the retribution because of the decisions you make. >> it can be a lovely place. >> thank you both very much for the spirit with which you came before us -- it can be a lonely place. we have the unique opportunity as the subcommittee to make certain that the picture, cyber attacks will never again be a silent crime.

members have 10 business days to submit questions for the record and ask witnesses to please respond promptly to any questions they receive. the hearing is now adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> next, from the right and freedom congress, presidential candidate rick santorum, virginia attorney general ken cuccinelli, and former ohio secretary of state kim blackwell. prospective 2012 republican presidential candidate rick santorum was among the people at the bank and freedom second annual conference. the group is held a meeting in washington d.c., and the former pennsylvania senator is expected to announce his candidacy on monday.

we'll also hear from virginia attorney general ken cuccinelli and former ohio secretary of state ken blackwell. this is about an hour and 10 minutes. ♪ [applause] >> thank you. thank you very much. it is great to be here. it is even better that you are here. it is vitally important that you are here. greg referred to the time magazine article, which still cannot figure out being one of the top 25 most influential evangelicals and america. i was, because of is doing what you are doing, coming here to washington d.c. and standing up for the values that made this country the greatest country in

the history of the world. [applause] people say that as someone who was a leader on both issues, when i talked to the media now as i travel around the country, people always say you are the social conservative candidate. i said yes, i am very proud of the fact that i was the point man in the united states congress on issues where i believe they are vitally important to the future of this country, that i showed the passion to lead. i have always been pro-life and for traditional marriage, but i had always been like a lot folks that were not here last year that came this year, to come and make the pledge, about the social goods are to is that they will check the boxes, they will be for the things that social good targets care about.

ladies and gentlemen, i don't just take the pledge. i stand out in front and lead, to make sure that the voices of those who do not have always are out and brought and being included in the national debate. what is misunderstood by those in the national media, and if they would just come and listen to the enthusiasm and support or not just the issues of marriage and why, but all the issues that social conservatives care about. i, too, have been a passionate point man on all of those issues. i came to the u.s. senate as a leader on welfare reform. social conservatives believe in the dignity of every human person. at the moment of conception, but also for the poor in our society, for those on the margins of society. they believe that poverty is not the ultimate disability.

they understand that we need to provide an opportunity for everybody in america to rise and fulfill got potential for them. when i lead on welfare reform, i led social conservatives who engaged in the debate to make stronger families because they understood that what government was doing by involving themselves and subsidizing this party was destroying the family and the very foundations of our community. these were social conservatives who went out and did something that had never been done. we ended a federal entitlement. [applause] it is a great lesson to learn, that we can in federal entitlements if we paid a vision that is not just about dollars and cents. america is not just about dollars and cents. social and started understand that. we can reach out across the aisle and across the ideological

spectrum that bring people together and paid a vision for this country that is positive and uplifting because social conservatives believe in that. we believe in limited government. social conservatives understand that the bigger the government, the smaller the person and the more repressed the family. believe in the power of the individual. they believe in the necessity of strong families and understand that government can be a destroyer of that. social conservatives are leading on these issues. we need to understand that social conservatives also are out and concerned about our national security. there is no greater brand to the state of israel and social conservatives in america. no greater brand.

i've stood and fought for the state of israel, not because, as i do believe, that israel is a vital place for jews to be in this country for safety and security, or people that have been repressed throughout the course of centuries, millennia, but also by art a strategic partner for this country. and so i have fought, candidly assessing who the enemy is that we confront in the middle east. who attacked us on 9/11? >> in the summer of 2006, i've been out and gave a speech and said that even president bush got it wrong when he labeled the enemy as an enemy that -- calling them a terrorist spirit is like calling those who attacked us at pearl harbor

kamikazes were those who we fought in germany. there is a tactic, it is not the enemy. the enemy or radical islamists who want to destroy us. they want to destroy us not because of what we do, but because of who we are. there is a foundational difference between what we believe and they believe, and they believe that what we are is evil. they want to destroy us. what did i do in the united states senate? i bought the syrian accountability act which helped it syria out of lebanon and relieve pressure from the northern border of israel at the time. i thought president bush. at three major meetings with the

president. he kept saying no. i kept pushing and pushing and finally he said yes, and the bill became law. i went back in 2004 before anybody had even heard of the threat of iran. i offered a bill and went out and fought with president bush and condoleezza rice. out went to the floor of the senate and fought with joe biden, who blocked my bill for weeks. i continue to fight up until the last they are within the united states senate, but it eventually passed. we passed increased sanctions on iran. i have been out there fighting for the causes that social conservatives care about, and it is not just cut social conservative causes. they are causes about who we are as a country. i think this electric -- this election is probably the most consequential one. people say to me, you have been out of politics.

you have seven children. why are you objecting yourselves to this type of scrutiny? i said because i have seven children and i am concerned about the future of this country. [applause] ladies and gentlemen, this is a great country. it is a great country because it was founded a great country. there is one statement that everyone in this room should remember the president of the united states sums it up on how you look that america. he said about six weeks ago. he was talking about medicare, medicaid, and unemployment insurance. he said, talking about these three programs, that america is a better country because of these programs. i will go one step further. america would not be a great

country without these programs. ladies and gentlemen, america was a great country before 1965. [applause] social goods are routed to understand that america was a great country because it was founded great. our founders calling upon the supreme judge, calling upon divine providence, saying what with at the heart of american exceptional with -- ism.ptionally a thum our founders understood that we were going to take the principal, judeo-christian principles that had been out

there for centuries and it do something radical. we were going to actually found a government on these principles. they had come from countries that did not believe that rates came from god and given to every individual. the came from countries where people were not equal. there were boards and subject. there was no equality. they took this radical, biblical concept and placed it in our founding document and said that we are going to do something radical, and that is establish a government and a constitution ultimately lose one responsibility was to keep people freak so they could pursue their dreams -- keep people free so they could pursue their dream. it is the right that god give

you that america is here to protect. [applause] ladies and gentlemen, that experiment changed the world. that experiment in believing in the american people transformed the world. i remind everybody that up until 1776, from the time of jesus christ, life expectancy in the world remained basically the same. but once america believe a new and let you rise to heights without punishing you are criticizing you for being successful, and tolerated failure, tolerated the fall of people so they could learn lessons of the could again

succeed -- without that, we would not have changed, and life expectancy in the 200 years of america has doubled. why? cause we believe in you. what is at stake in this election is a president who believes that the greatness of america is in government taking things from you and redistributing to others that he and others believe in washington are more disturbing. people ask me what is the most important thing is this election. i say repealing obama care. it is not taking care of those on the margins of society. it is not taking care of those who are needy. it is a program that says to every working man and woman that we are going to tell you how much money you are going to spend, how you are going to spend it, what programs that benefit you are going to get. it takes money from you and

gives power to washington. margaret thatcher said she was never able to accomplish what reagan accomplished in transforming britain, for one reason, because people's addiction to the british health- care system. she was never able to break that bond. what do you think they worked so hard and were willing to risk so much, including the last election, to pass that bill? why did they want to jam it down your throat? because they knew it was a game changer. they knew that as the president says, america would not be the same country. ladies and gentlemen, america is a great country, not because of its government but because of its people. in 2010, -- excuse me, in 2008, the american public was looking for a president in a very

difficult time in our history as a result of economic recession and trouble overseas. they look for someone in a president that they could believe and, and i found barack obama. he took that believe -- they found barack obama. he took that believe in him and a centralized power in human nose around him. i believe as i across america, i believe at my court that as i go across america, americans have now realize that what they need is not someone that they can believe then, but they need a president who believes in them. [applause] ladies and gentlemen, as i close, i will say this. as they fellow proud, social

conservative, we need to go out in the next 18 months, no matter who wins the primary, no matter who wins our primary, all across our country, and fight for the future of our country. this is the most important election in your lifetime. this is the election that will determine whether we will hand off to the next generation a country that is free and safe and prosperous, a country that we were given, a country that is transformational in the world. but if we do not win this election, what we will have done was given away the great gift of america. do not, do not let that happen. thank you, and god bless you. [applause]

[applause] >> thank you very much. the first thing in my of the opposite is to defend the u.s. constitution. it is something that takes very seriously. unfortunate, it is the first thing in the of the office for every elected representative in america. for many of them, they are checking the box when i say that zero to assume the office. we have seen the evidence in virginia -- when they say that zero to assume the office. we need to reverse that trend. ronald reagan used to say that

the wisdom of america resides with individual americans, not congress, not universities, not the press, not institutions in our society, but individual americans. we are seeing for the first time actual evidence that he was absolutely right, as individual americans, and prompted by organization or political parties, stepped out, rise up, and take their own country and their own constitution back. that is what is happening in america today. i want to thank you all for being here and having me here with you. you are engaged in issues that are critical to america today and that will be for a long time into the future. your presence here alone showed your commitment to prevailing on of issues, to bringing back the founders' vision for this country in the 21st century.

that is my goal in politics and i know many of you share it. our founding fathers pledged their lives, their 14th, and their sacred honor to creating this great nation. many of them gave up those live and gave up their fortunes. none of them gave up their sacred honor, none of them. no one in this room is going to be called on to make the kind of sacrifices that they had to make to establish this great country. there was nothing certain about what they are doing. it takes much less on our part to save the vision and the foundation of this great country. there is no excuse for any of us to sit idly by at this point in time, when so much of the foundation is at risk and at

issue. i'm glad you are here. i take it as a get -- as a great sign that you are engaged back in your home communities that you are here today. to win, we are going to have to affect these individuals one heart, one mind at a time. it is the phrase used most often in the pro-life movement, but it applies across the defense of liberty. that is how we are going to win. for decades we have asked government to do more for us as a people, and all government ever asked is for a little bit more of our liberty. that is all. and we have politicians and court that have gladly obliged. we have that i lead by as a nation and let it happen. -- we have sat idly by as a

nation and let it happen. we no longer have a federal government of limited enumerated powers. we have a central government, a centralized government that tries to plan and control virtually every aspect of our economy, which also includes is our very lives, from health care to banking to energy to insurance to automobile manufacturing. virginia is still a farming state. it is the biggest part of our economy. those of you who live in northern virginia might not know that, but that is the truth. there is, however, hope. in the last few years, people have finally woken up. ordinary voters, ordinary citizens have woken up and they are pushing back against the federal overreach. it is not just health care. they are demanding

accountability from their politicians and they are measuring that accountability against the yardstick of the u.s. constitution. that is new in our lifetime. they are also demanding that first principle once again be the guidepost for politics and policy in this country. that offers the real hope, not the kind you heard about in 2008, the real thing. if we have people, if we have americans who are thinking in these terms, thinking in first principles terms, before they cast about, before they decide what is a good policy and what is a bad policy, we are going to turn america in the right direction. parties are secondary to that. they are a vehicle to achieve that direction. they are not goal. this reaction by the american

people reaches back to when republicans had both the house, the senate, and the presidency and screwed up. that failed to lead in a principled fashion. there are three ways government exercises more power. more taxes, more spending, and more regulation. republicans did to ibm -- republicans did two of them. saying republicans and white rock and sellers is offensive -- to drop and sellers. he was absolutely right -- when the democrats take over, they make republicans look like pikers in the spending category.

expansion of government power, which we saw with republican spending and regulation, has burst the boundaries of a wall in the constitution. that was the natural course that we were on. you cannot blame just the last two years. it is not enough, absolutely not knops to get republican majorities back and a republican president. that is not enough. [applause] i am counting on you all across the country to bring that message and to keep in mind when you are picking candidate to get behind. don't just pick the one most likely to win. pick the one of likely to matter for america. we are seeing federalism, a concept i know you all

understand, reemerge. people want to return to let federal government that is, in fact, ltd., and living within its enumerated powers. and not acting as if it has all power to fix all things characterized as problems. if we just hand over enough of our liberty. that is the trade-off. we all remember economics -- reagan's economic pie. i talked to people about the liberty hyde. it does not grow and it does not shrink, and it has to slices, government power and citizens liberty. everything will gain that government does to increase its power comes directly at the expense of the liberty and

freedom of the citizens of this country. as we confront this head on in many facets, many from the federal government overwhelmingly, we are seeing the state's star as a check, the check in the checks and balances system that james madison talk about. everybody thinks about the three branches of government. to people who actually study the constitution, it is the executive, legislative, and judiciary. is chuck schumer here? how about that? that check and balance is more commonly understood. i think of that as a horizontal

check and balance. the particle check and balance is between the federal government and the state government -- the particle check and balance. it was put there so that either side oversteps, the other has sufficient power to bring it back into line. that is what we are doing as states today. when i sued in the health-care case, it was virginia suing the federal government. [applause] one of the more amusing aspects of the case was when we had our oral argument in october in the district court in richmond. the federal government's lawyer got up and introduced himself.

he said he was for the government, i mean, the federal government. the least anti federalist founding father, alexander hamilton, even noted these courts are here too rapidly these contests of constitutional authority. justice o'connor quoted him all the way back to the new york convention in 1788 in reminding people that the 10th amendment exists and matters and accounts, and she did that. in exercising the state check in this federalism structure, i am proud to play a role as the state attorney general. we are the last line of defense, particularly when the conservative do not have control

in washington. it falls to the state to check federal power. the new health-care law provides the prime example of this. it is historic in that 28 states now are party plaintiffs suing their own federal government for violating the constitution. that has never happened before. [applause] virginia was the first state to argue in court that the individual mandate was unconstitutional. we did that last october. we have argued that federal government's attempt to use the constitution's commerce clause to order people, to dictate to people that they buy private health insurance -- nancy pelosi

has the best title in washington -- former speaker. i really liked that one. we have argued that they may not use the commerce clause to order you to buy their government approved health- insurance, that it goes well beyond the power of congress. when people say this case is unprecedented, it is not just that 28 states are suing the federal government over violating the constitution. it is that our federal government has never in its history ordered americans to buy a product or service under the guise of regulating commerce. that has never, ever happened before. why not? perhaps every congress before the last one and every president before this one knew and respected the fact that they did not have the power to do this. if you go back to the colonial

period, which we do when we are arguing about the boundaries of elements of the constitution and have not been tested before, at least in the way it is being tested here. this is a unique case. lawyers would call the case of first impression. during the colonial period, led by virginia and massachusetts, the colonists were boycotting british good to push for the repeal of the stamp act and the intolerable acts. in response to a massachusetts convention in 1768, the attorney-general, solicitor general of the king, news that in parliament at that time, were asked a question, isn't this boycott trees and -- treason? the answer was, the colonists of

up to the line but they have not crossed it. think about that for a moment. that means that the parliament and king george the third, whom we rebelled against as tyrant, acknowledged they could not order subjects to buy british goods, but we have a president and half of congress that believe they can. that is extraordinary. that is absolutely extraordinary, historically. americans can argue about whatever piece of the constitution means, but every american should be able to agree that the results of the american revolution was that we got a central government of less power than the one we left. a simple venn diagram, a dumb

not, a big circle and a little circle. this congress believed to have more power than king george ii and the parliament of britain to be able to order you to do what they want you to do. the government is arguing that it has the power to order you into commerce. go and read article one, section eight. they have the power to regulate commerce within the state. is that just an argument about half of language? i was an engineer, i am horrible at grammar. go look at the military clauses. power to raise an army out of nothing. that is what the practice constitutional. they can argue -- they can order you to go fight and die under the constitution, but that

cannot or you to buy a product, and there is a reason for that. there is a good reason for that. they say not buying health insurance is as much of an economic activity as buying it is. activity is the word used in all the commerce clause cases. the biggest impediment to a federal victory in this case is a dictionary. it causes them all sorts of problems. in the government's eyes, not buying health insurance is an economic decision to sell the insurer. isn't that pleasantly put? read that sentence again, and it means to do nothing. that is why the district judge ruled for the federal

parliament -- i left her phrase, just because it was so blunt. she said there were regulating meant collectivity -- mental activity. george orwell would be screaming "sequel, sequel." a convenient, 2014. 30 years later than 1994. there are trying to get away from that, but they cannot. they are regulating your decision to do nothing, to sit there and do nothing. is there a more basic definition of liberty than to be left alone? it is very simple. you cannot always be left alone, there is the draft.

that is the trade-off of liberty because they are granted certain powers, but that is the argument that are relying on. it is mental activity, but let's say that a dip for white. they are claiming the right to regulate it bought if they do not like it. surely we can trust this administration with that sort of authority. the same reasoning they use here can be used to force you to buy a car, broccoli, a gym membership. this government has a pretty significant interest in general motors. you have noticed, government motors. . drive a chevy equinoxe

you do not want to own a shabby equinoxes -- a chevrolet equinoxe, trust me. i elected in the garage on the way here. this goes back to reagan. he said that when it stops moving, they want to subsidize it. it is the ones that stop moving that get subsidized. so we have that to look forward to if we lose this case. it is an astonishing got to consider that if we lose this case, there is no constitutionally logical bar to them ordering you to buy those other products. and federalism is dead. think about that. what can the federal government not do that is left to the

authority of the states any longer? it does not take a lot of creativity a pocket or you to buy products and sources, to do almost anything out what to do as a policy matter. thus, federalism is dead. people who predict we are going to lose have said the same thing. jonathan turley said a year ago, he predicted we would lose and it would be the end of federalism. that was his expectation. the mentality was because the federal barbara always wins. in know what? they do not always win. they did not win in virginia in december, the constitution did. it has been mixed results across the country, but these are all

run up to the supreme court for this will be decided. my guess is it will be decided next year. it will be before next november. it will probably be june 2012, , but we willuess see. we will keep pushing in virginia. some courts will not like the ecommerce clause. but came up with it all back argument that the penalty you have to pay it to do not by their government approved health insurance is a tax. what they do that? they have vast taxing power, particularly after the 16th amendment. the court gives them great deference. this is their fallback position. you may recall that when the president was being interviewed

by george stephanopoulos, before the bill became law, he was very irritated with the notion that his opponents were saying this was a tax. his response was that they say everything is a tax. this is not a tax increase, not at all. funny how things change want to go to court. i have almost felt sorry for some of the federal lawyers getting grilled on this point. counsel, you have congressional leaders and a president who's in the whole time this bill was running through the legislative process were insisting it is not a tax. now you are standing here arguing in this court that it is

a tax. can they do this sort of debate and switch? please ask me another question. it has been very uncomfortable for them. and that's that, i almost feel sorry for them. for all the problems on the commerce clause, think of our radical this would be. i'm congress, i can order you to do anything. if you do not, i cannot fine -- i can fine you. it is truly extraordinary. not a single judge has accepted that argument. they are 0 for 6 on that

argument. i mentioned the order was issued in december. we argued last month in the fourth circuit. we are waiting that order. it will come sometime this summer. this past week, they had appellate arguments in cincinnati and in cincinnati, 26 states are arguing the aborted deal in atlanta in the 11th circuit. june 23 there is that for the appellate court arguing it. the appeals courts are rolling through this right now. by the end of the summer i expect we will have some orders and starches the appeals to the supreme court. at some point, the losses will hit the supreme court. in the autumn, i believe the briefing will run into the winter and a decision by the end of the term next june.

that is not expected timeline. for months before election day if it is the last monday in june. but wait until the end for the more controversial ruling. you will hear some on the monday of this month. whatever way the ruling goes, we will appeal to the supreme court. i will tell you some of the reaction because of my role in enhancing the constitution as it was written. what a concept. crazy. i am cast as everything under the sun, not able, awful, terrible, and the guy who wants to tack away everyone's free health care. never mind that all all i have said this case is not about

health care, it is about liberty. because of the implications long into the future, this case is not about health care. it is about liberty. that is what this case is about. [applause] unfortunately, it is one of many examples of this administration crossing the line on the rule of law. before brought the help their case in virginia, we sued the epa, the employment prevention agency, over their greenhouse gas endangerment finding. there is no agency in the federal government that so egregiously ignores their own rules and the loss of life to it bound their authority. that is not enough. when lisa jackson said in

december 2009, i am not to transform the american economy and i have the 15,000 people of the epa you are ready to help me do it. in a statement. no mention of keeping the environment clean in that statement. transformed the american economy. they know what they are doing and how they are doing it. again, we are the last line of defense. the attorney-general in south carolina is fighting to keep those 22 states that are free of compelled unionization. we are a coal state. we are here for a reason.

coming to an internet near you this summer, this is the most brazen one of all. the fec is going to roll out again and ordered to regulate the internet. why is this the month raised -- most brazen one of all? for one simple reason. a year ago, in 2010, they had a court ruling telling them they could not do this. they thought about it and said, we will do it anyway. it is just a court ruling. talk about a brazen this regard, distain for the rule of law. we may not like what courts do all the time, but there has got to be a place where our contests are rep read and thought out. this administration does not just this respect state and

federal law, does not just this respect the united states constitution, but they also have no respect for the courts of this country. it is amazing, and this ruling, this order coming up this summer is the most brazen one of all because of that, because they have crossed one more line so brazenly. you there arell attorneys general that got elected in 2010 all over the country who are now stepping up to the plate and playing a role in defending the constitution, the rule of law in their states and our federalist system. it is happening all across the country. reg abbott from texas has been doing it for years. scott pruett in oklahoma, luther stranger in alabama, allan wilson in south carolina,

the list goes on. it used to realistic account on one hand. not any longer. there is hope, because the burden has fallen to us at the state level to carry the spot for. when i ran for office in 2009, no one had ever run on federalism before, but i did. i said very clearly, if the federal government crosses the line, i will fight back. i got elected and was called all sorts of things. i got elected in november 2009 with all the usual suspects and he is too conservative to win, with more votes than anyone in the history of virginia running for attorney general. [applause] when the federal government crossed those lines, i kept my

campaign promises, and we are fighting them every step of the white. thank you all for fighting where you are from. god bless you and god bless america. thank you very much. [applause] >> good morning. i'm grateful for our time together. my friends, and bring good news. we take heart despite the times. for as imperfect moral beings, we realize that within these ephemeral stream of time by grants of, we will all based file and tragedy, and with his help, triumph and transcend

them. his wisdom string bands and sustains us as we confront the forces of secularism and moral relativism, besieging our cherished institutions of faith, family, community, and country, wherein revives a self-evident truth upon which our pre republic was founded and perpetuated. as a full litany of burial secularism challenges at home and abroad are not the best way to start this beautiful day. a few notches examples must suffice. at home, we confront the elitist forces of big government attempting to force fight from the public square, advance the bitter, in human harvest of abortion, interfere with parents' ability to import their moral teachings to their children, reward the indulgence of will, appetite, and agreed

through the unjust act that was the wall street bailout, and in both an entitlement culture and government dependency upon our ho-- we recall at the horror of those being butchered for their beliefs in sudan and north africa. we are existentialist challenged by the people's republic of talent -- china. ruled by a communist and therefore intrinsically evil regime that still tells people how many children they might have, imprisons people for passing out bibles, compels people to attend only official state churches, proffering a live the people's liberty threatens their security and prosperity. despite these challenges at home and abroad, we still take part

in these times. because we are first in two eternal rarities'. liberty comes from god, not the government. therefore, no good government denies the presence of god. [applause] our knowledge of these true this is and still not by abstract theory, but by the concrete and glass of mercy's found in the institutions of faith, family, community and country that we have inherited from the generations. on my part i inherited it from my mother and my father. my father was born to irish immigrants in detroit. early of my brother died from disease. later, his mother also went to her eternal reward.

with his brother, frank, the father could not care for him. or my father or her sister. raised by the nuns at the st. francis home for boys, he was fortunate to be blessed with athletic ability that has skipped a generation. [laughter] he earned a scholarship to the university of detroit. he later went on to become a teacher. since he has passed, i can say this, that truman democrat never had to witnesses son become a republican. [laughter] although in all candor it is due to my mother and my father, because throughout my life day instilled in me the fact that there is an intrinsic dignity to self-reliance and work and an innate quality to all of god's children. so, however we find our way to

foster and fulfill our faith, rooted in the truth of confronting trials and tribulations, we all take part, despite the times. we will rebuild an america that works. because we understand and embrace the face of that humanity's hope flows from god's heart to our homelands and with his health improved, we will fulfil our moral duty to bequeath to our children and generations of free people yet born, a purposeful, free republic, a virtue in work of wisdom and love. we are americans. it is what we do. may god continue to bless the majestic american people and our free republic as we go forth today to triumph, transcend, and

perpetuate the eternal sparked of liberty. thank you very much. [applause] ♪ [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> thank you, dr. smith, for that generous introduction into our fellow patriots, good morning. i am a natural born conservative. i was born in cincinnati, ohio. i do not know if you know what mark twain said about cincinnati. after his seventh visit he was on a train ride and a young reporter asked him his

impression. he said that it feared the world was ending tomorrow, he would was ending tomorrow -- he would get to cincinnati as fast as he could. [laughter] i told some folks yesterday that my father was so conservative that he prohibited premarital sex because he thought it might lead to slow dancing. [laughter] so, do not be shocked with my conservatism. i have been blessed to be the mayor of my home town, the secretary of state and treasurer for the great state of ohio, representing the united states in that band of confusion, the u.n., as president george h. w. bush's ambassador to the u.n. in charge of the human rights portfolio. i had the opportunity to work with josh bolten.

let me put it to you plainly. elections are about winning. because elections matter. i want to give you a couple of examples and then tell you why i have been spending his time working. working to build, precinct by precinct, word by word, an operation in ohio that can turn out voters who can turn an election. ralph has told many of you that no republican, no conservative has won the white house without carrying ohio. let me give you some perspective. in 1976, the race was between gerald ford and jimmy carter.

carter won ohio by 11,300 boat. there are 13,000 precincts in ohio. if we had overturned one vote per precinct, ford would have won. while he may not have been everyone's cup of tea, he was measurably and demonstrably better than jimmy carter. [applause] fast-forward to 2000, 2004. george bush verses, you know, carry. coming down to ohio once again.

george bush carried the ohio by 118,000 votes. just a tad bit under 120,000 votes. you turn 60,000 votes in ohio for john kerry, and you have a different america than we have and that we had in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008. john kerry was wrong for america. obama is wrong for america. what will make the difference is whether or not we are able to go into every precinct in the country, every ward in every county, turning out the vote. we are going to do a lot this

weekend to motivate you and educate you, but we are depending on you to activate voters. to train and to activate voters and get them out to the polls. that is what we are destined to do. let me tell you more about 2004. it is important. everyone was talking about a retreat on social issues. we would not have had george bush and we would have had senator kerry if, in fact, it had not have been for an issue that social conservatives put on the ballot that year. it was a simple amendment to the constitution saying that marriage in ohio would be recognized as a union between one man and one woman.

interesting demographic to look out across the country. george bush won 10% of the african-american vote. in ohio that year, he won 18% of the african-american vote. it was due to the fact that an issue was on the ballot that was an issue that said there was a difference between john kerry and it was not just a distinction, it was a real difference. and that a basic and fundamental, cultural understanding of what a family is, of what a marriage is, and as many have told you this afternoon, but one of the basic intermediary institutions in our

country, marriage and family, what they are and that they were at risk. african-americans came out and voted for bush in numbers greater than the rest of their colleagues around the country. i would suggest to you that issues matter. and that as one of your speakers said this morning, the only way the to get limited government is by having a strong family and strong churches and synagogues that carry forth of the message that it is our responsibility, not the government's responsibility to craft a kind of future that we want. [applause] in the bible there are a couple

of passages that i would like to share with you. and the first is in john 3. those that want to do evil love to talk to us. in matthew 5 we are told that each and every one of us has an obligation to put our life on a candlestick and not put it under a bushel. to raise it high. so that we can magnify the glorious god. it is, in fact, our responsibility, at this time of economic and cultural darkness in this country, it is our calling not to retreat to the sidelines, but to go to the front lines with our candle on a stick and to lifted high.

and to show that we understand in that dekker ration of independence the second paragraph, quoted time and time from this podium, the central message there is that ours human-rights, our fundamental rights are not grants from government. they are gifts from god. and anybody that tells you to retreat -- [applause] that tells you to retreat, anyone that tells you to call timeout on those issues, they do not understand why we are an exceptional nation. we are an exceptional nation. you know it. i know it. president obama might not know it. [laughter] but we are going to elect a president in his place that knows it. [applause]

but we also know that while we are an exceptional nation, we are not exempt from limits. moral limits. that limits. limits that basically are imposed by moral discipline and folks that understand that you cannot run faith and to god out of the public square and not destroy the very basis upon which our exceptional listen -- i -- sm -- exceptionalism is based. [applause] i had an uncle. his name was d.r. hubbard.

the first african-american to win an olympic gold medal in a track and field event. yes, jesse -- before jesse owens. in 1924 he was to run in the 100 yard dash. there has been a transatlantic debate as to who was the fastest human being on the face of the earth and they were going to resolve it by and paris with my great uncle. when he got to paris, the international olympic committee would not allow him to run in the 100 yard dash for the high hurdles. both that you had to qualify for. that would not let him do this because of his color. as you know, eric little did not run because the final hundred

yard dash was on the sabbath. he told my generation that one of the greatest investments in his life was learned by not participating and by getting to meet, interact, and cray with their acquittal. there was a term that became our clarion call in our family. it was fidelity of faith. fidelity the faith was a system. proud americans. fidelity to faith is what would lead us to take a stand for life. take a stand for marriage. take a stand to end of this

crazy as in terms of the national debt. take a stand for freedom. i asked you to put your candle on a stick. unite and rushed the darkness of our time. just as it derek lowe, we would be winners because of our fidelity to faith. god bless you. [applause] >> c-span's road to the white house coverage continues on monday when but santorum makes his official presidential campaign announcement, live at 11:00 a.m. eastern here on c- span. next, the latest on the may

unemployment numbers from today's "washington journal." this is about 40 minutes. "washington journal" continues. host: kevin hall is the correspondent for mcclatchy newspapers economics. one administration called the economics a bump in the road. guest: is it a pothole, or a gaping hole filling up over the next several months? my instinct is that it is a bump in the road and factors have weighed heavily on the growth, among those the crisis in japan. the automotive is a big part of the manufacturing component. friday appointed to a slowdown

in manufacturing. -- friday had data that pointed to a slowdown in manufacturing. hopefully it will get better as prices come down. host: a lot of people make comparisons on the bigger numbers we saw and then these. is that a fair comparison? guest: no. the average of a three month is about 184. you are still creating more than 150,000 jobs over three months. that is the number you have to create to start eating away at the unemployment rate. and number that is 54,000 is really bad, because it is well below the 150. no one thinks this is a good sign for this year. host: the differences between

describing it as a pothole or a pit -- what do we have to see over the next months as far as whether one of those things comes true? guest: there are a bunch of indicators such as the second indicators such as the second quarter growth numbers. there is a sharp deceleration. the hiring numbers. consumer sentiment, retail sales. durable goods. a bunch of different elements point to whether or not the country is firing or misfiring. is it a slowdown like last year? the question is what ammunition do we have? congress does not want to spend any more money for stimulus.

the federal reserve does not want to buy any more treasury reserves. you are going into a slowdown and god forbid a recession. host: would that be a double-dip recession? guest: yes, that is what it would be if we fell backwards. the problem with sluggish growth is that if something happened to a saudi oil field or violence in europe, and external shock could throw the economy in a tailspin. that is where we are vulnerable. host: you talk about these outside influences. would we see a higher number than what we saw yesterday? guest: i do not think anyone is predicting a gangbusters economy. -- robust numbers in a gang

busters economy. there was a bubble in housing and an employment. people are asking what is full employment? -- full employment. some say 5%. that was the definition. most people are thinking around 7%. that changes the expectation. we as a society have not grasped as low as it has been. expectation is a big part of this. host: we are discussing the economy until 8:30. here is how you can ask a question. the numbers are at the bottom of

your screen. you can reach us on e-mail and a twitter. there was a response from a senator from tennessee talking about private sector jobs specifically. here is what he said. i apply to get your response. >> i want to talk about making it easier and cheaper to create private sector jobs here in america. america. we can start by helping companies make what they sell in the united states -- make in the united states what they sell in the united states. some corporations are making it hard to accomplish. last month, the national labor relations board made the boeing company not build in south carolina, suggesting that it cannot expand its operations in one of 22 states with right to

work laws, protecting the rights of workers to join or not to join a union. host: what are the political elements concerning job creation? guest: debt issue of whether boeing could transfer toth -- that issue of whether boeing could transfer right to work e -- transfer to a right to work area is a factor. homeowners can not bowel -- borrow against your house with expectation. these things have changed the equation for the consumer. that is a fundamental reason why you are not seeing a lot of hiring of people.

without customers, you cannot add work. host: there is a story this out greece lookingbi at their economic situation in the taking out another bailout. the taking out another bailout. year is one line. -- here is one line. you may want to consider a bailout. guest: the message you are sending is not necessarily the expectation. quantitative easing is a fancy term for buying enough assets so you buy down the yield. the treasury bond will pay 1%

instead of 2%. it forces people to take risk taking. expectations are a big part of it. they can try to keep rates lower than what they expect. these are designed to keep things moving along. people should be realistic in their expectations of how quickly this economy can recover. recover. you cannot -- she and a creeg from harvard wrote a book called "this time is different" and they wrote about 800 years of financial crises and each time people made the same mistake, it's different from our economy. we say we're the world's biggest

economy, it's different for us. well, it's not. i worked from mexico during the mexico criteria and we're following the same script. when you have the financial skeletal system of your economy crashed, it doesn't snap back right away. it takes time to reverse imbalances, to work off the debt. homeowners are working off debt. they're not working off by savings. it looks good on paper but a lot of that is banks for giving debt. host: kevin hall with us in the late 30. middleburg, florida, republican line. francisco, good morning. caller: i was in reference is this the employment 1% lower even though they added 54,000 jobs, i'm former navy marine corps, i just got done retiring 22 years of service and graduated from my associates degree and my economics class,

we're discussing a lot of this stuff last year, before the numbers keep changes. our instructors say lie is figure, figure is lie. if these numbers were correct, media and wherever else keep pushing the media. the numbers don't add up. the numbers don't add up. if you sit down and look at the track records, you vote -- you see that something is wrong. 54,000 added jobs at 9.1% unemployment rate and it's supposed to be dropping. no, i don't think so. i look around here where i live at locally. there are so many place houses that fore closed on, it's not even a joke. my property is worthless right now. i cannot sell the property for what it's worth. just like everybody else. we're stuck between a rock and a we're stuck between a rock and a hard place. host: where are you going to school for? caller: i'm going on for computer networking system and administrator. host: was that your first career

or a career switch for you? caller: that was my hope, a career switch but i'm going back to school to get my certification because nobody wants to talk do you when off piece of paper in your hand. host: thank you. guest: it's funny that you mentioned. congratulations on getting you degree. the good news is at least the jobs numbers that you're questioning but in those jobs numbers, one of the areas that are showing consistent growth has been professional and business service and your computer area is one of those that will be continue to grow. you're going to hamper by your geography because you're in a state that has been distressed and home sales are virtually the only sales. and i think that's a problem and one of the things that is characterizing this is that you have people who aren't able to pick up and move to another part of the country because they've of the country because they've got their problem with the house. banks are sitting about a million properties and you've got another million property in

the process and all of this is banks not wanting to lead because two years from now, they're not sure what the house they're not sure what the house is going to be what they're giving mortgage at today. host: health care is an area that saw an increase of jobs. transportation, warehousing, 8,000 jobs and construction, up 2,000 jobs. is that constructive number good? guest: again, you have to look at these moving averages over three and six months and there's nothing that points to a rebound in construction. any positive number is good but i don't think we're about to see an explosion in residential and business construction. the manufacturing numbers have been the most positive over a steady climb and they declined last month but i do think, even the national association of manufacturer said they thought it was a temporary thing. host: now jobs going down, the cheap number is government jobs. 29,000 down followed by retail and manufacturing down 5,000 and

leisure and hospitality down 6,000. guest: yeah. i don't want to defend the administration. someone else can do that. but if you look at what the economic stimulus did, they're going to be arguing next year in the presidential campaign whether it worked or didn't work. one of the things that clearly happened is you're starting to see these job layoffs nowle they would have happened last year, a year and a half ago if not for that stimulus money. if you had layered those job losses on top of the private sector job losses. so you know, a lot depends on how you're measuring success. if you're measuring the stimulus success as the economy roaring back to health, then obviously it was not a success. you're measuring it about keeping a bad situation from spiraling into a really disastrous situation, then you can argue who did that. host: danny on our democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. last night on cnbc, there was a program on about the rise of china. it's on again sunday night.

everybody in this country needs to watch. these job problems were predicted by ross perot. we've seen millions of jobs go off to asia and china and mexico and if we don't six that problem -- the only way we can compete is we lower our wage scales to the equivalent of china and that's about $3,000 a year. i'm not exaggerating. that's the real numbers. this country will go into a this country will go into a revolution. we've got many times and millions of people who are unemployed. we have people who have no hope of get iting a real job. the economist, the big corporations wanted this. they make money by global trade whether they pay cheap products in china and they wanted this. the economists are making predictions based on what they learned from college but they've

broke then supply and demand system. the demand side has been exported to asia. exported to asia. people can't consume in america if their wages are driven down. all they can do is pay their bills these days. host: we'll leave it there. guest: i think a clarification that ross perot was wanting a great second sucking sound in mexico but he's wrong. it was going to china. china's succession to the world trade organization changed everything. the chinese model, the caller is absolutely right to focus on the chinese model. and it's not that we haven't benefited from it. if you read the last chapter of alan greenspan's book, he warned what he thought the world would look like in 15 years when all the benefits of cheap chinese imports go away because china's prices are rising. today, china is not the low cost producer. if you look at a fender guitar or a musical instrument, they're

not made in china anymore. it's made in indonesia. mexico lost jobs to china because it no longer is the low-cost producer. this is the first time in world history that we've had awe these countries doing well at the same time and not having plagues and scourges and wars and in fact, sadly, it's a curse of plenty. host: you mentioned alan greenspan, are you surprised he told cnbc yesterday looking for -- looking again. numbers as far as tax rates are concerned, he said he would support the idea of taxes going back to clinton area levels. did that surprise you? did that surprise you? guest: it surprise med a little bit, i guess, do i think he's right is an interesting question. we did a story that didn't win a lot of friends but it pointed out four different measures that americans by historical standards are undertaxed.

and if you wanted, you know, everybody's talking, the world's coming to an end. we've got to reduce the deficit. it's a way you get all of that done by going back to 1999 tax levels. raising a 3% rise in top tax rate isn't going to cost the sky to fall. we've had a very healthy economy in 1999. arguably, there were other factors that boosted the economy, the goebel situation, but -- global situation, there's so much demagogue in this stuff if you mixed spending cuts with irreparable increase in taxes back to where they were you could get that. host: barry on our independent line, good morning. caller: good morning. i served the military during the vietnam era. when jimmy carter was in, you know, oscar, that he was one of the greatest president ever, he took a bum deal with the iran

situation, but, you know, when i was in new york, i was one of them people that got hired but through the seated program and they had some government programs and they also kept factories, you know, in the cities, in the urban areas, you know, back then and i believe it helped a lot of people get back to work. but one thing about the unemployment rate when you look at it and i think this is under the reagan administration. it only affected people from the -- but i come from the urban city where i seen the unemployment high and you don't count these people when you look at it, it's like 15-20% in the urban cities and some rural areas was basically tore and people don't have the money. so i think the stats is unreal. and i think you can't blame barack obama's administration for what's going on if it's a ongoing thing and you need to tax the rich because they're getting richer and the poor is getting poorer. so let's be real. let's come up with something like the seeded program that is

going to keep these factories and businesses in our neighborhood. if the auto industry came up, then give these other companies a chance to come up and the small businesses are going down. that's what kept our communities going and we need to go back to those days that we can bring back our neighborhoods. host: kevin hall. guest: two point ts that caught me ear with what that caller said. one, being the urban unemployment place. if you look at the northeast, or newark, it's 1-5. there's no easy answer to this. one of the answer is support program, the safety net. all that is under threat with the -- from these steep cuts people are talking about for discretionary spending. there are no easy answers and on top of that, you have a situation where lamar yankees situation where lamar yankees was talking about the boeing situation.

when they start doing away with tax expenditures which are basically tax writeoffs, well, a bunch of american manufacturers get a lot of tax benefits for producing here in the country. what are you going to do about that if you're going to close these tax loopholes? >> the president in toledo, ohio, yesterday talking mainly about the auto industry but made reference to current economy situations. here's what he had to say. >> even though the economy's growing, even though it's created more than two million jobs over the past 15 months, we still face some tough times. we still face some challenges. this economy took a big hit. it's just like if you had a bad illness. illness. if you got hit by a truck, you know, it's going to take a while for you to mend. and that's what's happened to our economy. it's taking a while to mend. and, you know, there's still some headwinds that are coming at us.

lately, it's been high gas prices that's caused a lot of hardship for a lot of working families and then you have the economic disruptions falling the tragedy in japan. you've got the instability in the middle east which makes folks uncertain. there are always going to be bumps on the road to recover. >> and all of that, kevin hall, never mentioning the numbers at all. guest: no. he touched on the number, 2.1 million jobs in the last 15 months. that's a pretty remarkable number and it gets to attention because we lost 8 million jobs. he's got a tough road to haul. you achieve and you're still to an expectation that you know, it's beyond what you can achieve and people need to be realistic about what this president or the next president can do. host: atlanta, georgia, good morning. jim, republican line. caller: yes. good morning.

i'm concerned that so much of the focus is on tactical policies. we voted in politicians that allow these policies to happen where unemployment rate is high and not getting any better. but where is the focus on long-term or strategic initiatives? i have an 18-month-old son and no one is talking about this next generation and what is the unemployment rate going to be like when he's -- when he graduates from school? is he going to be able to find a good job? where's the focus on that? everything is focused on how to get the unemployment better next month and the month after. what about the future? guest: and let me add to this. -- host: jim heinz saying what happened to the president's green job agenda? what's the amendment on that putting fast forward? guest: it's been moving forward at a fairly decent clip. it's what you're going to do that has an effect. there has to be a market.

you can't build something out. it's not like if you build it, they will come. you've seen a lot of good things happening. electric batteries for electric cars. we got next generation batteries. a lot of money has been leveraged for battery research. not so much in the ethanol. there was a lot of talk about alternative fuels. that doesn't seem to have gone anywhere. for your twitter comment, there are some areas that's worked are some areas that's worked well and other areas that's not so well. host: houston, texas, good morning. patty, democrats line. caller: yes. yes, sir. please let me finish, please, because i always get cut off. you know, the reason why i'm calling right now, it seems to me that everything is going on all of this disaster and everything's going on. everything getting blown away like everything. the only company thing has been

blown away and everything else there's a lot of job. and you still is saying but they still put all of the blame on the president right now. well, he's not doing enough. he's not doing this. this is not right at all here. because we did have that war. we had a good, good company when clinton came in. and everything's been happening all disaster right after another. and it seems to me that everybody is just like, well, blame it on -- getting it right away like -- he's 18. how is he going to do when gets a job if we need to start right now. there's people been working all their lives and serving their country and everything else. country and everything else. then they always want to cut the poor, poor, poor peoples off their money. but -- host: valid points. if you're the president, you're going to take the heat. you're going to take the glory and the good times and the glory

and the bad times. do i think obama has made his own situation worse by coming in with an unrealistic projection. he projected an unemployment rate of 8%. i don't think they realized how bad things were. guest: and that's going to be something that will haunt him next year on the campaign trail. i agree with the caller. the gist of what she's saying is people are playing politics when poor people are struggling to get by and are getting hurt. anybody sees this game being played all the time and it does, i feel what she's saying. you do get the sense that people forget the real working people. host: is there any forecast as far as how long we might see the current unemployment number we have? guest: well the federal reserve doesn't see it going below 8% until i think 2015 or 2016. that's five years from now. so that gives you a sense of how unusual a predicament we're in and there are others who see it in 2020. i've got a 9-year-old. by the time my kid gets in

trouble, you're still having an 8% unemployment rate. that's a very dismal short-term future. the future is a long-term horizon but we need to do a few things. a lot of things have to happen at the right time and the right way for us to get back to what used to be, what we consider normal. host: do they have any tools in the tool backs since to apply it at this point for the president and the congress? guest: that's an interesting question pause the stimulus, depending on how you measure it did or didn't help. i don't think there's much appetite and the debt is a real problem. i think we have one of the problems is this is all hitting us a. a time where boomers are going into retirement. 75 million people born in 1946 and 1964 all are about to go into retirement. a lot of them are retiring later. so we're going into it with a structural problem with the medicare crunch but we also did things and people need to remember that we did things that made this worse. we lowered taxes.

we have less revenue coming in and we did the part d medicare where we gave seniors care virtually no pay-in for. those are the things that outsized our budget deficit, not lending to foreign governments or even the wars. host: another response to yesterday's news came from republicans yesterday. a press conference. one of the responsibilities was jeff. >> if you look at the history of recessions in the post-war era, now, you have never seen a longer recession attached to a more tepid recovery. the net which is recurring under president barack obama. by any historic standard, this nation ought to be back to work. there ought to be more money in the pockets of american families to send their kids to college, to start a small business. but there isn't. again, it is another day to point on their failure.

host: the response to the history of that. guest: yeah. again, you can look at it two ways. you can say this is the longest recession attached to a recovery or you can look at it and say this recession and several wall street analysts have note there's been more hiring in a shorter period of time in this recession than any other time. the problem is we have not had an economic impact this great since the great depression and there's a growing body of research that suggests had the fed not moved this aggressively under the bush administration, we would be very close to teetering on recession. people have to be realistic. this sort of talk is the demagoguing that doesn't help in terms of our understanding to this kind of situation we're in. host: independent like, david. caller: good morning. my question is how we're going to recover from the -- from this recession when nobody is addressing the energy situation. right now, the whole economy is

based on the consumption to oil and because we've had so much oil here for so many years, everybody's so spread out in the country and the oil supply is not growing any and now we've got three wars going on over in the part of the world where we get most of our oil from and i think all it's going to take is one catalyst, you know, to drop drive the gas up, 10 bucks a gallon we might see. i'm wrong when this happens, how we're ever going to get out of this recession. host: very good question. guest: the u.s. automakers are doing -- all the automakers are all moving to hybrid cars and hybrid electrics. if we get to one of those crunches where you got a $7 or $10 barrel of gasoline, then the car makers have already put in

place building their platforms to manufacture and where they're going to get these out the doors quickly. that's not going to help people get a new car. but i do think the car makers are thinking about this and i've done a couple of stories on this in the last year of how ford, for instance, is building on a platform for its ford focus that they can do outen a conventional gasoline hybrid or straight electric battery. so they're preparing for any eventual tism that tells you they think the end of cheap oil is coming to an end. host: treasure secretary, you're talking to fram republicans about the situation. whereas far as the arguments from republicans and raising the debts, wouldn't cause any harm to the white house saying it wouldn't, other people in between. where do you see it taking place and what's the harm if we don't? >> guest: if we don't raise the debt ceiling, then the question debt ceiling, then the question is how long has this drag on?

it doesn't mean we stop paying the bond holders. but i don't think the bond market is going to sit tight and do nothing and see what happens. if we get to mid july, the consensus view is if we get to mid july and nothing is still happening, you're going to have the credit agencies give us another one last warning that if you don't get this done, we're going to downgrade your credit. the u.s. credit rating how our bonds are rating in terms of our ability to repay, if that falls, that cascades through the economy. consumer borrowing, business borrowing, everything goes up and once their downgraded, they're not going to upgrade the minute after the congress gets its act together. so i do think they're playing with fire here. again, there's nothing magical about the debt ceiling. it's simply you've done it 10 times in the last decade. i understand the desire for spending cuts and i think what you'll see, you have one or two options. go to the wire and then it's going to -- they'll come up with a deal with steep spending cuts

that extend past the 2012 election, i think that's what the administration would like of the the republicans would like to agree to a six-month election and fight again and then you get political hay out of it. that's the game that's being played but i do think that, you know, it has consequences. host: what's the current credit rating for the u.s.? guest: a.a.a. host: what could it be downgraded to? guest: a.a. it's not like they are going to put us to junk bond status. the united states has always had ale a rating. we quoted the former vice president of the fed. he said once you go down this path, then you've set in motion any time an opposition party wants to really get the president's attention, this is the vehicle to do it. and it's a dangerous road to go down when you're playing with a full face of credit. host: kevin hall joins. he's the national economics

reporter. correspondent west palm beach, florida. waldo, you are on the republican line. go ahead. caller: yes. i'm here. well, i hear your debate and i believe the nice thing in all this matter is it's time for america to -- [inaudible] the president has responsibility of most of the responsibility in all this -- not -- [inaudible] this is coming from their congress. the congress never been actively responsible in any of the issue we got into the economy. it is predictable of what's happening in america because there was plenty of recession when -- honestly, we are in depression. with the public opinion needs to understand is that america will become poor and poor and poor because we facing a big issue that they only want to talk

about us the cost of life nowadays increase in progression nowadays increase in progression [inaudible] they are going to grow in medical. guest: i think the last point, wage votes has been very flat. for a number of years now. and we've got also the income of quality that's widing dramatically and these are things that have transcended either democrats or republicans. as a society, people are beginning to take note of that in terms of being in a depression, it's defined 10% decline in economic growth or more. i don't think in technical terms we're in a depression but i do think the middle class is strained like never before. a whole other question for a whole other day, commodity prices and whether these markets are doing what they're supposed to do, which is determined a

price b.g. versus casino. you look at the volumes that are being traded versus the physical products, whether it's grain or oil. host: maryland, independent line. jake, go ahead. caller: hi. i only have about 30 seconds. so i got speak in generation. so -- generalization. so please take my overall question and not try to pick out one thing. i voted for ross perot twice and i think he was very richingte today it's ron paul who's telling the truth. this ongoing crisis was caused by investment which is caused by loose monetary policy. that economics says that bad debt must be liquidated. you're going to experience pain of this debt liquidation either now or later. the medicine that you have to take just depends on when you're going to take it. so we've had tight stimulus act qe-1 and qe-2 and now we're talking about qe-3 last night on

television. you say the fed sees unemployment high through 2016. if we had taken our medicine in between 2009, we would already be rebuilding. when are you going to start thinking about these type of things? god bless you. host: good question. when you think back to how when you think back to how latin-american crises were solved, it was through what the caller is advocating. guest: raised taxes, have a terrible tough period of one or two years of adjustment and then start growing. there are some evidence that worked in some cases. some cases, it didn't the -- and the political costs are always high. i've spent a lot of my life working in latin america and chili is always the example. chili didn't take that i. i.m.s. advice. they had a rainy day fund and when things got bad, they had an aggressive stimulus program but

it was a program created that -- one of the fair stimulus of our program, a lot of the funds were distributed as they were highway distributed as they were highway funds. when you get that, it's money to use on whatever. it's not directed towards boosting productivity which has an economic belt. it's similar to what the japanese did in their debt crisis. they built bridges that didn't go to anywhere and didn't add a lot to the output of the country. and i think that's a fair criticism of our stimulus as well and you look at what the chileans have done during their down turns and built ports and highways that have opened up new areas. it's a lesson to learn for us. it's a lesson to learn for us. host: boulder, crofrl. kathleen, democrats line. caller: hi, kevin. thank you for c-span. you guys are the best. you tell us whether the banking institutions that bored billons of taxpayers dollars, via the

fed, have they paid those loans back and can you explain, i mean, other than cats having control of some of our congress folks is why there was little to no interest? can you explain that on those loans and whether they paid them back? and i wanted to ask "washington journal" if you folks could have some more programs where you help the american public get some real facts on the israeli plan yin conflicts that keep impeding any kind of real impeding any kind of real negotiate. guest: most of the big banks have repaid all of that. if people want to get out just a quick history, the way it

happened was paulson, the then treasury secretary went to the largest banks, 13 or sa of them and basically got them in a room and said i'm going to give you this money. and wells fargo one that comes to mind says we don't need this money. the government insisted on everybody taking so that markets wouldn't be picking out the next week's -- weak fish because bear stearns went down and lehman brothers was under pressure and people were looking at merrill lynch and everybody ended up marrying up. a big psychologist in the industry and oddly enough created berg sbinities and not a smaller one. but these banks did pay all the big banks except citibank is big banks except citibank is still the last one. if you're suggesting there's a flop the banks, the flop that the fed fund rates has been zero since late 2008, that amounts to

almost free money to the banking system and they're not lending it. they're investing it. they're investing it. i saw something in the "wall street journal" that commod distrading was up 55%. distrading was up 55%. host: one more call. scottsdale, arizona, republican line, steve. caller: i was going to say that maybe we're just looking at this pessimistically. doesn't 9% unemployment mean 90% employment and maybe, you know, because we're in an automation age with, you know, the computers and robots, i mean, isn't it likely we're going to start having more employment just for that reason because of robots doing that now? guest: good question. services, is why you've seen a drop in manufacturing in construction and why the services sector is now the

leading employer and health care in particular. so that is happening. i don't think we're going have structurally 9% with the world's largest economy and most competitive. so i think the expectation is you are in that 5-6% range and that's why 9% is such a painful experience and an anomaly. this is not a normal rate for this economy. host: the next thing you look at as far as the telltale as far as the state of the economy. guest: energy prices. i don't think people appreciate fully how that feeds into the food prices. the federal reserve is worried about inflations but they look at core inflation, they don't measure food and energy but average americans, you know, food and energy is what it's about for most americans and there's a big disconnect there. going forward, what happens there? i mean, we have weak demand. we have -- there's no reason energy prices should be where they are and yet, you know, wall street firms are talking about $ 130 oil in the third quarter of 130 oil in the third quarter of the year.

that doesn't match up what >> a look at the royal social conservatives will play in the election with gary marx. a discussion on the middle east with a person from the university of maryland. later, a discussion on women in politics with jennifer. that is at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. next, a commencement speeches by york city mayor michael blumberg. the first civilian woman to work in japan. and member of the little rock nine. a blind mountain climber, and a neurosurgeon.

>> he was known as a czar. it was not a compliment. he found a flattering. >> during his three terms as speaker, republican thomas reed changed the power structure of the house. >> he was in tuned as a tyrant because he overturned a longstanding custom in the house that the minority would be on equal footing with the majority. >> james grant and his new biography on c-span's q&a. you can download this another podcasts online at c-span.org. classs year's graduating at george washington university heard from michael blumberg. he talked about some of the positive developments after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, including volunteering. he also urged graduates to

defend freedoms and viewpoints that are not the most popular and to take risks. from the national mall, this is 15 minutes. >> good morning, everyone. cropp -- thank you for that introduction. i am honored to be this year's commencement speaker even though i hear i was your second choice. after charlie sheen. [laughter] apparently he was already booked to speak at a board locked -- warlock convention.

i was excited when i got the invitation. i was hoping he was inviting me to stay the night that his legendary farm. not that i'm saying he is full of sheep. i want to be clear about that. i decided not to stay overnight even though some student did offer to grant me his single for $10,000. he said that was half of what he got for the inauguration weekend. i know this is a bittersweet day for all of you who are graduating. it will not be easy to leave a place where you could rub a hippo's knows, breakdowns with big george, sit in einstein's lap, pet a dog named ruffles, or buy a hot dog from a guy named minoush. [applause]

i can see why you love it here. some of you look tired this morning. maybe you have not yet recovered from last night. i promise to be brief. i do not want to be the biggest hurdle between you and your degree. before i offer you some thoughts that you and dad and me remembered decades from now, let me take another important group. i'm talking about the group out there this morning beaming proudly, not even thinking about what a cost to give you this date. y. or what happens if you have to move back home. did your parents and relatives a big hand. [applause] with their support, all of your

joining a distinguished list of alums including jacqueline kennedy and colin powell. take a look at the people on either side. the guy sitting to your left could be a future secretary of state. the girl on your right could be a future president of the united states. [applause] take a moment to look around the national mall. we gather not only at the foot of the washington monument but longin abraham lincoln's shadow. last month, our nation marked the anniversary of the start of the civil war. it was fought to preserve the union, to preserve america's bold experiment self-government. lincoln's war grew into something larger. a struggle for freedom.

while more than a century for equal opportunity would follow his death, his leadership redeemed america's original sin and allowed us to fulfil our destiny as a land of freedom and opportunity. years ago, while many of you were in grade school, the freedom that lincoln secured for all americans and the generations have fought to protect came under attack by terrorists, the most deadly in our history. i'm sure some of you remember where you were. i am sure all of you will remember for the rest of your lives what you have been doing when you heard the news osama bin laden had been killed. there are certain moments that stay with us forever. for my generation, it was the

assassination of president kennedy and doctor martin luther king jr.. for my parents, it was pearl harbor. for my grandparents, armistice day. there have been other moments, the landing of the moon, the explosion of the challenger, the inauguration of the first black president. there will be many more. before this most recent memory becomes a memory, and because all of you had such a big part, let's take a moment to reflect on the legacy of 9/11 beyond the ongoing war and what it means for the future of our democracy. i was elected two months after the attack of 9/11 wall smoke was still rising from the rubble. the conventional wisdom was that it would take new york decades

to recover. businesses would flee and there would be a mass exodus to suburbs and the crime would return. none of that happen. i will tell you why. our city, our country, did not give in to fear. we came together as never before and did everything we could to help the victims and their families. we offered our prayers', we donated our blood, we opened our wallets. firefighters from around the country came to pitch in. people from around the world give support. by making smart investments, we brought the city back faster and stronger. today, bin laden is dead. new york city has never been more alive. [applause] the unity that defined our nation in the wake of the

attacks was critical to revitalizing our city. it has also led to other positive developments for our country. it reminded us that we agree on more than we disagree on. that can be easy to forget. i know many of you in turn on the killer in the white house where in your id badges, and knowing your house makes in the process. you have seen how counterproductive partisanship how -- can be. in new york, we did not bring our city back as republicans or democrats. we brought it back as new yorkers and americans. as we head into the next election cycle, our leaders would do well to remember that although our freedoms give us the right to disagree, they also give us the right to agree.

the conventional wisdom that republicans and democrats hold opposing views and that one is right and what is wrong is not true. you can be a democrat or republican. i have been both. [laughter] or you can be anything else. never make the mistake of thinking that any particular party has a monopoly on good ideas or god is on its side. even though the unity that existed in the wake of 9/11 has had no lasting impact on washington, it did have a lasting impact on americans, especially young people. your generation more than any other before it recognizes the truth of what john f. kennedy said, "sometimes party loyalty asks too much." as usual, the people are a step

ahead of the politicians, especially young people. i believe that it takes a generation to change. i have no doubt that many of you will occupy some of the most powerful seats. you will move the country away from this period of hyper partisanship which is preventing us from accomplishing many needs and toward a new era where more independent thinking allows for consensus-driven solutions. the second was just as encouraging, a growth in volunteering. americans of all backgrounds wanted to do more to help our country so they signed up to volunteer at a school or hospital or in homeless center. volunteering has become a bigger part of our culture. i know they're a lot of service

opportunities here. i'm told you're school far exceeded the challenge that michelle obama set for you last year to perform 100,000 hours of service. that deserves a round of applause. [applause] i would also like to add my applause to those graduates, serving our nation in uniform. [applause] yes. [applause] we can never take their service and sacrifice for granted. we should never make the mistake of thinking that freedom is a concern for the military. the freedom our founding father secured, that lincoln extended, that our armed forces protect, that billions of people yearn to

experience, it is a freedom that all of us must defend, even when it is not popular, especially when it is not popular. we have a responsibility to stand up for the rights of people to express themselves as they wish, to worship how and where they wish, and to love. [applause] that is why i spoke out in support of an artist who was scheduled to open an exhibit in new york city but to was been detained by the chinese authorities. it is why i defended the rights of the muslim community to build a mosque in lower manhattan. [applause] it is why on tuesday i'm going to our state koppel -- state capitol to grant marriage equality to all men and all women. [applause]

the freer we are to express ourselves as individuals, the stronger we become as a nation. earlier i met someone next belt by the rotc program because of his sexual orientation. because he stood up for a change, congress recently passed an president obama sign, a repeal of don't ask, don't tell. [applause] let me give a perspective from somebody older than you. it takes courage to stand up to power. to take an unpopular stand, to risk life and limb for your ideals. that is the courage that led to lexington. to force sumpter, to seneca falls, to alabama, to the stonewall inn. and to this national mall where

martin luther king shared his dream with america and change the course of our history. today, thanks to all of those who had the courage to fight and speak out for freedom, there is no road cannot travel. no future you cannot create. no dream you cannot realize. there are only the limits of your imagination. the question for you is, how will you use the freedom? don't worry if you do not have the answers right now. your life and career path will not be a straight line. when i graduated, and no one would have believed that i would start a company and become the mayor of new york city. even my mother can hardly believe it. [laughter] as you think about your career, don't worry about mapping it all out. don't play it safe.

do not be the person who quit startup before giving it a chance to make it. do not be afraid to start over or change direction. the more risks you take, the happier you will be, even if they do not work out. i can assure you sometimes they will not. i can also assure you this -- no matter what job you have, no matter who your employer is, the harder you work, the luckier you will get. whether you feel ready to begin a career or not, the education receives has prepared you for success. i do not mean just in the classroom. you have heard some -- from some of the most important people of our time. you have been given access to the power of government. i bet you learned a few other things to like what meals to avoid. whenever you will do next, there

will be new rules to master and new frontiers to conquer. my advice is simple -- continue learning, ask difficult questions, think independently, volunteer your time to help others. continue to defend and enjoy the freedoms that make america great. tonight, before you begin this new phase of your life, in join on one last happy hour, one last hot dog, one of last help to the blue. tomorrow the real work begins. congratulates shoot -- congratulation to the wall. best of luck and god bless. [applause]

>> the first american civilian woman to work in occupied japan helped general douglas macarthur right the postwar constitution. she wrote because on women's rights. she was invited to her alma mater to winter in -- to give the commencement address. this is about 25 minutes. >> your commencement speaker was awarded an honorary degree on the occasion of her speech in

1991. if you do the math, you realize that was the year i became president but i did not preside over commencement. i began the summer after commencement. over the early years of my presidency i kept hearing about this amazing woman, who had a very young age, had graduated and gone directly to japan to be a part of the writers of the japanese constitution after world war ii and was the author of the section that guaranteed women equal rights in japan. [applause] for me, the notion that i would

lead my presidency never having heard her speak about her experience, this was selfish on my part because i wanted her to speak on this anniversary for me. i also know that you, the many members of this class, wanted to hear from this woman as well. she is a member of the class of 1943. at the age of 22, she was recruited by general douglas macarthur to create the japanese constitution. she worked in secret at the conclusion of the war and she was there for nine days.

as a young person, she grew up from the age of five in japan, the child of jewish emigres from russia. she was interested in japanese culture. in 1939, she laughed -- left japan to come to mills college. how frightening that must have been. i have heard stories about leaving home. think about leaving home and wondering if you would never go home again because your country was going to war. she did not speak about her contributions until she was asked by the japanese government to discuss the amendments 14 and 24 that proclaimed the essential the quality of the sexes.

her work has inspired so many tributes including a documentary beate, andrifift from her own memoir. she is a performing arts director for the society, she has continued throughout her life to bring connections between asia and the united states and europe and the rest of the world. she currently lives in new york city and lectures frequently at schools, universities, and other institutions. we are going to hear from doctor beate sirota gordon. although we're not bestowing an honorary degree, i think it is time for beate to have a pearl m.

i will be the president to bestow a pearl m on beate sirota gordon. please come forward and bring us your words of wisdom. [applause] i am going to put this on your robe. >> thank you. [applause] board of trustees, faculty, graduating students, ladies and gentlemen, it is a great honor to have been invited to give the last commencement speech under

the eye of a highly respected and beloved president. i think the committee that selected me for this honor was influenced by a mistake the state department made in 1945 when it issued me a passport so i could go to japan and worked at general macarthur's headquarters. on the application, there was a form that had a blank entitled occupation. i wrote down, research expert. [laughter] the state department left out the word research.

[laughter] i ended up with my occupation listed as expert. [cheers] i know japan and the japanese language. i know research. but that was it. i stand before you now as a mills college graduate class of 1943. [cheers] as a mother and grandmother, the first civilian woman to work in the occupation of japan, and as the writer of the women's civil rights clause in the new

japanese constitution. born in vienna, i accompanied my father and my mother to japan for a concert tour when i was 5 years old. my fatherf imperial academyhei, never signed a contract for logger than a year. she wanted the option of returning to vienna. my father did that she had asked and signed a year's contract 17 times. [laughter] so i grew up in japan and, when

ready for college, applied to mills. first because it was a women's college. [cheers] secondly because of by location, it was the nearest college to japan. [laughter] thirdly, because it was one of the few u.s. colleges known in japan. i was not yet 16 when i arrived at mills hall in 1939. the culture shock was strong. we had to wear formal evening clothes for the first dinner of these brigid fall semester.

the dress was wrinkled. i did not know how to iron. when i went into the laundry room, i put my address on the ironing board. i saw the skirt was all in the pleats. i had no idea how to iron pleats. i started to cry. and upperclassmen walked by and ask why i was crying. when i explained my dilemma, she offered to iron the dress for me if i promised to lend her my iron during the coming semester because she did not have one. i was delighted by this exchange

and promised myself never to buy a plea to dress again. -- pleated dress again. i also did not know how to make a bed or do laundry. in japan, we had servants. my classmates were helpful. i soon learned the strange american ways. orillia a henry reinhardt was the college president said that time. she encouraged us to study for a career so we would be able to compete on an equal basis with men. [cheers] women suffered from discrimination, particularly in the business world.

mills was determined to prepare its students for the struggle ahead. i had seen discrimination against women in japan. women had no rights at all. the arranged marriages were often unhappy. the women sometimes did not even meet their future spouse until just before the wedding. women were not trained for careers and could not obtain worked that interested them. women had no inheritance rights, no rights to choose their own domicile. the education i received that mills from my professors, the

speeches i heard on campus about social and economic issues, the exposure i had two men and women dedicated to the advancement of women, profoundly influenced my life's work. my field was languages. i was lucky to have small classes. the biggest one was 14 students in my spanish class. i was the only student in my russian language and my japanese history class. when the war began, and recruiters from government agencies came to mills to look for students to new japanese, i found myself much sought after because at the beginning of the

war, there were only 65 locations and the whole of the u.s. renewed japanese. i accepted the job offer from the foreign broadcast intelligent service. i was to monitor broadcasts from japan and translate them from seven languages seven hours a day. after a year-and-a-half, i switched to the office of war information where i had my own propaganda show with music beamed to japan in which i urged the japanese to stop the war. while working, i was able to finish college but president reinhardt, who felt that my war

effort desert help from the college, she let me finish my senior courses with terms thurber's and examinations without attending class this. in 1945, toward the end of the war, i move to new york city and worked as a researcher on japan at "time." then i got a job as general macarthur's staff in tokyo. i was 22 years old. on a snowy day in 1946, when i came to my office and the government section of general headquarters, the following was

announced at a top-secret meeting. by order of general macarthur, you are now a constituent assembly. you will write the new democratic constitution of japan and you shall write it in seven days. the 20 men and women in attendance were stumped. we knew macarthur had asked the japanese government officials to write a new democratic constitution which they were apparently incapable of doing. for a moment, there was silence. then we rushed to our desks and

waited for the colonel to give us our assignment. i was a member of the political affairs division made up of colonel roost and a professor of japanese history. we were signed to write the chapter on the rights of the people. the colonel said, we cannot write this chapter is a committee. we have only seven days. we must divide the work. the men looked at me and the colonel said, you are a woman. write the clause on women's rights?

ah. i was thrilled. having been well trained in research at mills, i immediately left to the office, got into a jeep to go find some libraries and bombed out tokyo so i could borrow the constitutions of other countries to serve as samples from which i can take inspiration. when i brought 10 constitutions back to the office, i became very popular. [laughter] everyone wanted to borrow them. after all, just like me, they had never written a constitution before.

we worked day and night. we were euphoric to be involved in planting the seeds of democracy in japan. what i presented my draft to the committee, the chairman read it and said, beate, you have given more rights to the japanese women that are in the u.s. constitution. [cheers and applause] i stood up and said, colonel, that is not difficult to do. [cheers] not difficult to do since the u.s. constitution does not have the word "woman" at all.

the colonel also said that all of the welfare causes did not belong in a constitution but in the civil code. i replied that the bureaucratic japanese men who would write the civil code would never put in social welfare causes unless they had already been included in the constitution itself. i cried, this time about a more important item and ironing. that is the first time i cried. realizing i would have to reconcile myself to the fact that the committee would only consider the fundamental rights i had written a suitable for the

japanese constitution. regretfully, i saw my draft reduced. nevertheless it revolutionized the status of women in japan because it guaranteed civil rights based on the equality of men and women. [applause] i thought my work was done. one month later, the colonel asked me to participate in a meeting concerning the constitution with the japanese government. this time i was to act as interpreter. we were going to check on how the japanese had translated our draft and what changes they might have made.

the long arguments about the emperor's powers, the correct words to be used, and many other matters we thought would constitute a meeting lasting a few hours. instead it became a 32 hour about. when at 2:00 a.m., the womens' rights clause came up for discussion, the japanese officials were incensed saying that the article should be completely changed. that it did not fit japanese history, culture, and customs. the colonel had notice that the japanese officials, not knowing i had been the drafter of the article, were favorably inclined with me because i was a quick interpreter and had

helped the japanese team. he took advantage of this situation and said some complimentary things about me ending with, miss sirota has her heart set on the women's rights. why don't we just pass them? [laughter] i think it was such a shock that the japanese said, all right, all right, let's do it. so now you know how has it -- history is made. sometimes. i told you what the beginning that i am not an expert but i do know that we failed to leave you a peaceful world.

although what the end of world war ii we were convinced there would never be a war again, the last 65 years prove us wrong. i hope the class of 2011, so well prepared by the university would not -- with emphasis on multiculturalism, her efforts to advance women's leadership, and all the many other advantages she has given

you at mills. i hope this will inspire you to create a peaceful world. the japanese constitution's peace clause can guide you. it abolishes the belligerency toward other countries. only defense of its own country is permitted. you are well-educated and vote kid graduates -- devoted graduates. my hope is you will heed what w. b. dubois said, "to have a satisfying work and work that the world needs is as near to

heaven as one can get." this is what i wish for you, the class of 2011, from the bottom of my heart. thank you. [cheers and applause] >> thank you so much. thank you, beate sirota gordon, a mills woman who has changed the world. thank you. >> on september 25, nine african-american students faced down a mob and helped integrate little rock central high school. many gene brown was one of the

nine. she spoke in little rock talking about the civil-rights struggle during her lifetime and what they mean to today's graduates. this is about 15 minutes. >> faculty, staff, a graduate, your friends and family, i have asked if i would make people cry. i said this was not about me, this is about them. when i first guarded thinking k, i couldn't think of anything that had to do with a lot. i did not think i knew anything. my doctor reminded me using words that question my mental health that i might know something about the law.

she reminded me i went to jail for sitting in. i may convicted tree hugger. [laughter] i have been known to sit in the front seat of a city bus. and the absolute worst, i took sips from the white water fountain when i was a little girl. [applause] i really am a criminal. but i am in the right place. i believe most of us grew up oblivious, without any real thought about the law. just imagine the pleasure -- the dream i dreamed as a teenager. you are it. if i wanted to do something that was disallowed by jim crow laws, i was told casually that

it would be against the law. no explanation, no discussion. it was just against a lot. -- the law. so i went to church and other places that were open to me. i was expected to become a teacher or i could have become a domestic. when somebody's cousin visited from chicago, and told us, you cannot do anything down here, i thought it was because i was in arkansas. those situations could have narrowed my thinking, predicted my chances. in truth, all laws in the world cannot shut down our mind.

i went every saturday to the colored branch of the library. the librarian was waiting there with her stack of books. she thought i might be interested in them. there was no stopping me. i lived in a world of reading. no matter the the discovered much later that that library had a few volumes while the white library had many. my point is that no matter what restrictions that are put on us in different ways and by different situations, we are responsible for our own education. law school or any other institution only gives us a grounding. the rest is up to us. i would love to give you would vice for your lives. but i am a person who still does

not know what i'm going to do when i grow up. [laughter] i say that because there is so much to learn, people to meet. so why become a larger and different person every day. they call it lifelong learning. let that be your goal. what i know about lawyers as half a century old. as a teenager, i was in the company of some of the brightest legal minds what argued the brown decision. i was sitting in the middle of a gaggle of lawyers who were trying to explain to me that i was part of a situation that was a constitutional conflict. oh my goodness. i came to know that social change happens as a result of

litigation and agitation. i have a poster that i keep in view. at the bottom is a helen keller ", "life is either a daring adventure or nothing." that phrase never fails to make me think. i often laugh, too, about myself. i am a stranger to daring adventures. -- no stranger to daring adventures. what a daring venture in must've been for helen keller to be able to communicate with others, to express her thoughts, to write and to interact with friends, family, and the world.

thinking about that phrase, a question emerges. do we choose daring adventures are do they choose us? the jury is out on that. means thatat phrase i have the memories of what once seemed impossible. then and now it is possible in all its complexity and unpredictability. my dear graduates, you are the proof of that. i bring a completely different set of social knowledge. today we consider egypt, tunisia, libya, as the definitive struggles for freedom. we often do not consider those

turbulent times when many of us of my generation felt the same level of frustration and fear as they feel now. i rarely hear mention of the 5000 children who were arrested in birmingham. we do not talk about the deaths of at least three civil rights workers in mississippi or the 50th anniversary of the freedom rights writers. we may not think that for many of the vote was only granted in 1965. maybe the women struggle has meaning in the modern age when women outnumber men in college. are you aware that in 1972, women earned exactly 7% of lot

degrees -- law degrees? thank goodness you know about such things. i know we do not have to look outside for social struggle. we can look right here. it is important for us to look here so that we know how privileged we are to live in this time of opportunity for all students. you are at the forefront of the possible, my dear graduates. what are our social obligations? we must override our social conditioning, that we are the best, or maybe the worst, that ours is the only way.

that they must be the same as us. the them in us makes us forget we are interrelated, interconnected, and interdependent. i have learned a few things overtime. one was based in working in counseling for immigrant and refugee women. i learned the most about my own culture by hanging out with them. i learned to leave my baggage when encountering these women. it was amazing the rich rewards i received when i discovered that our deeply held the desires for ourselves and all of humanity were exactly the same. i learned to shut up and listen. i ignored my limited knowledge

of the people i was meeting. leaving my limited knowledge is the key. that small knowledge exists in stereotypical images that stop real communication. i find it easy to ignore the sound bites that flat and others and make them one-dimensional. a nigerian author warns us against the single story. she states, "show a people as one thing over and over again and that is what they become." we have to take into account power. the ability not only just to tell the story of another but to make that the definitive story

of that person. the power do determine how stories are told, who tells them, and when they are told and how often. an example is when people say, you do not look like an environmentalist. does the way i look tell you i only have one story, the desegregation crisis? you have got to be kidding. tolawyers, you'll be exposed many social narrative's. poverty, single mothers, daisy, welfare bums. muslims, conservatives, democrats. these social narratives are so powerful, we have a hard time not believing them.

your daring adventure will be to discover how true or untrue such a narratives are. today we are inundated with "lazy talk." no analysis the notion to show how ignorant we are. the careful not to relegate others to a single story. when we do that, we lose the possibility to discover ourselves and others. your commitment to social justice. i checked before i thought about this. i was thrilled to hear how much work you are doing. i think social service,

volunteerism, even a lawyer compose the highest calling. there is a thought that you may do good while you are doing well. purge yourself to see a life as either a daring adventure or nothing. i am proud of you. i am sure that my footsteps into central high school on the road to social justice was not in vain. my dignity is up held by your presence and guaranteed by law. you are the manifestation of everything i could only dream of as a child. i leave you with a poem that i loved. i can throw out platitudes,

gaudy, be the change you want to see. there is something about memory of my own graduation. i return to the university as a very mature student. when i was configuring myself, i realized how important my family was to me. we talked about this family support. i know they you know. one of the things i forgot about in that special moment of endings and beginnings, was the withdrawals i was going to fill later because of the loss of faculty and fellow students. faculty and fellow students.