a member of president obama's white house counsel for community solutions. introducing our next panel. [applause] >> thank you. good morning. it has been an exciting morning. are you still with us? i had to say he was the first person i met in college. mar's parents had left him. my parents said, why don't you he treated my parents with such dignity and respect. i learned he was a film producer. as i was watching and stories,

but i thought if we could take those stories to capitol hill and to stay house this and people that are making decisions, it is my pleasure. last november, who we are so thrilled wrote a cover story called how to restore the american dream. i take notes on it. he said the reality is that technology and global polarization -- globalization is challenging. it they heard this challenge and conducted sessions and research. there lessons learned.

look at bright spots of innovation. one thing that surprised us was how much common ground we found with our discussions. and how committed they all were to wanting to boost opportunity and make it a top priority. we brought policy leaders together to share ideas and listen to one another and develop a framework for action. as you have heard, they listen to low income ones and discuss

how worried we have become. having listened to the town hall meeting, they have literally gone into their cars and drove tenor 12 hours to be part of that session. some have been incarcerated. they showed the power of articulate leadership. at 20 pages of notes. it gives you such hope. they are also an

entrepreneurial. we learned an interesting fact from people, that only two% of individuals to finish high school work full time and have stable families. the subjects as how we move the levers of opportunity there public policies in private meetings to help more americans realize the american dream. some laypeople as you will see -- some of the people you see are innovators in developing policy. for let me introduce you now. your eyes and not playing tricks on new. he has guided this for almost 30 years.

backstage, he wanted to confirm this on the far right. there you are. the center for american progress, the new president, congratulations. also, former director of domestic policy and someone who also saw the reality. he is the senior fellow. he is co-author of the book creating an opportunity society with republicans and the bush it mr. raider administrator.

the white house counsel is the former co-chair and ceo. she is the current share of the smithsonian institution and the current chair today hard work here. [applause] these leaders and a coalition helped create the policy. i cannot tell you how excited he was. he threw down the challenge. he said now have a bipartisan set of ideas that will force

action to build. they made their own opportunity process. it is remarkable that we're seeing social mobility. let me turn to you. what do you view -- looking at the explosion of social entrepreneurship, what are the most significant letters of opportunity that can make a difference? what do you think could actually get done? >> we have been working together on the whole idea. as you said, is someone stayed in cool and graduated high

school and college, and if they are in a stable family with a culture of saving, they are likely to achieve some form of the american dream. if they do not, are likely to never achieve the american dream. we recognize that. it is the active saving itself. there's the idea of a savings credit. it is the kind of thing he can do. you can look at the tax system. it is critically important.

they completely agree. grass-roots organizations understand. i have looked international deficits and debt. this is squeezed out. it has squeezed out so many programs that are needed to succeed. we have been on our wake of tour. millions of dollars for the people who do not need it. we have to stop giving to people who do not needed and give it to help people move up the ladder. in many ways, the most important, we must fix our education system. i went through public school in britain. it was a survival course. if you survive, you learned how

to succeed. if you did not survive, you never achieved the american dream. if we have to be innovative in those areas. we have to encourage charter schools, school choice -- if there has to be radical innovation. if we do not do that, and i do not think we can restore the letter to prosperity if the people like me that come from other countries expected america to provide, and is not providing today. >> stuart butler has written a lot of books on destructive innovation. nera, what do you view as the significant leathers for boosting the opportunity -- levers for boasting opportunity and america?

>> in the. of bipartisan cooperation, and reaching across the aisle, and trying to stretch ourselves, to gain greater support, i want to tie two things steps toward butler said. -- stuart butler said. hopefully we can work together on ideas around insuring that our tax system, and the way our government recognizes the need for support of individuals better reflects what was discussed, which is we should be helping people that need it, and a perfect example is the earned income tax credit, a system that rewards work through the tax code that ronald reagan strongly supported, and also eliminate tax breaks for corporations, and i would say restore productivity on the high-end of the taxpayers. one reason why that is important is exactly what was talked about -- there is a reaction in this country that

the game is rigged against average americans and middle class folks. sometimes i feel that way, so i can't imagine many americans feel that way. -- i can imagine americans feel that way. the tax code is just one example where the game seems right. lower income americans who are working three, four jobs, are seen things stacked against them. changing our tax code would restore confidence to some degree in our system. i agree with stuart butler that we should be thinking about ways to innovate in our education system care if we at the center for american progress have led on some of these reforms. in that scenario, we should be

finding common ground. i also think we need to the sink through new levers and ways to reform older programs, job- training programs, etc., where these programs had been born in the 20th century, and we need to reform and reworked them for the 21st century. we need to integrate them more, in insuring that you are seeing the streamlining of programs, ensuring there more customer- friendly. i think there are a variety of ways where we can hopefully find common ground across the ideological spectrum to solve problems people are dealing with. >> thank you. you both could teach washington a lot. patty stonesifer, i want to look at this from a different angle given your background. the millennium development goals have proven much more

successful in decreasing poverty and disease, and boosting education. i know the u.s. context is different, but are there lessons we can learn that are relevant to the opportunity nation efforts here? >> the millennium the element goals in 2000 -- most countries came together to sign a declaration in this town to set eight really audacious goals to end poverty, reduce hunger, reduce disease, improve gender equity, and a series of other important, big goals, matched with specific targets, clear indicators, and getting not only the local leadership to sign up, but those that are donors, those who have policy control, together to say these are objectives we should be willing to hold ourselves to.

since 2000, 10 years later, there is real progress in many countries. the reason is they held hands across their country, and said this is something we all all citizens. we measured. there was a spotlight from the media, the think tanks, and the community organizations to keep pressure on, to keep this ability on these hard data and real improvements. we see results. millions of children with better opportunities for the future. many leaders with bolder plans against some of these problems. >> it is wonderful, this idea of bold, realizable goals, and plans of action to meet them. the opportunity nation plan around education there are these audacious goals of a 90%

graduation rate and a civic marshall plan to meet them, and the highest college attainment level in the world. you have thought about what a broader goal would be. would you share with us, belle sawhill? >> i love the idea of sharing goals. if they create accountability. as mayor bloomberg said, if you cannot measure something, you cannot imagine -- management. by wednesday set a goal for the nation, and use the bully pulpit to talk about that goal. it could have to do with a portion of children that achieve the american dream. we see right now that for less

said vantage children, and i am not talking about the very disadvantaged, i'm talking about the over 40% of children that are born into less privileged families in this country, and over a little over half of them have a realistic possibility of achieving what most of us would call the american dream by the time there are an adult. if that is shocking to me. i think we have to work at every level, whether it is post- secondary, the elementary school, a preschool -- we have to work harder to get more children born into families that are not so disadvantaged. when of the things i want to put on the table is the fact that we have a crisis among 20- something's in this country. they are not getting married. if they do not have jobs. they are getting pregnant. 70% of them are having unplanned pregnancies, and starting families they are not quite ready to start.

i would like to see all little more effort put on making sure parents are ready to parent before they are ready to bring children in the world. >> thank you. you have 20 minutes with the president of the united states, were the leading presidential candidate, which you all have the privilege of doing, actually. what concrete we would you tell them should be done -- the three initiatives, ideas, goals? stuart butler? >> well, a president can do three things. one is set a bold goal. president kennedy did that in the same get to the moon before 1970. we did it. they can instill confidence to ronald reagan did that in 1980 and turned the country around. they can conduct a conversation

about things that need to be faced. bill clinton did that on welfare and social security. that is what i would devise the president to do now. whatever is the president really has to set a bold goals the you heard. it is very important the president goes out and talks about two particular things -- did a culture of savings rooted in this country, which means reducing debt on the other side of the coin. that is why leading a national discussion on that area is very important. a tax code that is considered on fair, that does not reward savings, investment, and works, is not going to be accepted by american people, and if people think it can be gamed, they will not have confidence. there must be a national effort in that area.

thirdly, the president should go to the governors, the mayor, and community leaders and focus on what needs to be done to the education system. the president can and should do that, whichever party they are in. that would put pressure on the congress and the state governments to do the details that are necessary. if you do not set the overall goals, do not instill confidence, and not talk about what needs to happen, it will not happen in the political system. >> wonderful, stuart butler. neera tanden? >> i think we should recognize part of what is creating this overhang on people's sense of whether the american dream will be there for our children and our children's children like it has been for many of oz is we are going through difficult economic challenges right now. we are in the third, for fear of what feels like a recession.

so -- fourth year of what feels like a recession. my advice to the president would be to focus on ways you could insure we have a broader growth. obviously, i think the president is doing that, but ignoring that challenge right now, and only focusing on the long term, i think, would be a mistake for leaders and for ourselves. we should realize that people are hurting right now in ways they have not heard years before because we do not have enough jobs to go around, and i believe policy makers need to address that effect, and not only looked at the long term, although that is important. -- address that fact, and not only look at the long term, although that is important.

so we should focus on education in the long term, and also on house to insure there are letters for the middle class, and how working americans can move off into the middle class tests that is traditional support after the -- class. that is traditional support for the tax code and other means. we should be more mindful of saving now more than we were a few years ago. that is a healthy issue, but we should recognize we are facing a demand problem, and that is something we should be thinking about a growth package helps us do that going forward. >> very good, belle sawhill? >> i would second what neera tanden and stuart butler said about the tax code and the education system, but just a bit more about the tax thing.

the best anti-party, -- policy is a job. we have a crumbling infrastructure. it is true. we could put some many people to work if we would simply invest in that infrastructure that could be done through an independent body a outside of government that would choose those projects on the basis of their merit, rather than politics. when interest rates are low, and people are unemployed, this seems like an ideal time to work on the agenda and it would have a short-term and long-term impact. [applause]

>> can i say one thing? talking about the american dream, america has always meant a big country of big ideas and in this day and age, it might be a small issue, but it is a little embarrassing when i landed in india and the airport looks 100 times better than jfk. we are a country that has done great things. we should be able to do great things. we need to put people to work and face the challenges of the country that will help today's problems and the economy over the long run as well. >> patty stonesifer? >> i will not repeat the many good ideas. the president says he wants to out-educate, and out-innovate, and there are a range of tactics we need to do are wrong those opportunities, but the third one we have been talking about the white house counsel for community solutions is the under-utilization of collaboration in our communities. most change comes at the community level. you can affect hundreds and

hundreds of great programs touting great results, yet they are not moving the needle, across the community and coming together with bold goals, clear objectives, statistics we can measure, and saying we are in this together at the community level to out-educate, to find ways to innovate. the pastor said there were four groups that needed to be at the table. i could not believe the non- profit sector was not in there. [applause] we are 10% of the jobs. if those five groups set at the table and said we had bold goals, and decided to assemble the right resources and put our efforts collectively together, and the president could encourage that a community level with the mayors, the states, those who have the resources, i think we could go a lot further than we are going today.

>> there are hundreds of thousands of young americans that want to serve our country, and i see many in the audience today. we have a bipartisan serve america act. why not need the goal of two hundred 50,000 americans in full-time national service? [applause] >> you put a productive surface -- service to the country. the time has run out, but i want to open it up. could we have a couple of questions? if you ask them efficient the, we will get efficient answers.

-- efficiently, we will get efficient answers. >> [unintelligible] this stuart butler, the u.s. economy is roughly 70% consumer- based. >> thank you. the u.s. economy is roughly 70% of consumer-base. if we need to grow to create jobs, and why we would agree with the concept of the savings mindset, we are sort of caught in a trap of growth through consumption. does this economy not crater, and we reduce jobs if we focus on savings and not consumption? >> if you look across the world and back in history, those countries, including china, that have very high savings rates,

and think of the future in terms of savings are those that prosper over the long run. countries and people that focused only on spending and getting into debt do not prosper. so, i do not think we have a problem in america that we saved to much where are we going to pay for the -- saves too much. where are we going to pay for the new infrastructure unless we are holding resources for the future? that is why savings is important. as a cultural matter, even if you save a little it means thinking about the future, and if you do not think about the future, and do not think the future can be positive to you, you will never achieve that, and you will never get the dream. that is why i strongly feel it will be a mistake if we stop saving and spend everything we have to turn around the economy. that is not the road to a positive future, and historically, and internationally, the evidence is on my side could >> that will be the last word. i am getting a strong -- side. >> that will be the last word. i am getting a strong pop.

i would love to continue the dialogue. first of all, let's give a warm round of applause to the panel. we all continue to work really hard together and with a coalition of organizations, to take this agenda to the next phase. you will hear an exciting announcement this afternoon about the next iteration of this. please stay with us. soon, you will go to the breakout panels to dig further into the policy ideas, bright spots of innovation. the questions posed are what actions can we force within the next year. one year from now, what would be the opposite we give to the nation on progress in boasting opportunity in america, and what does an opportunity society look like in america five years from now? there is a sticker on your name tag identifying your breakout

session. we will have father larry snyder of catholic charities. first, we will take a moment to hear from an extraordinary person who spent two hours less might listening to young people -- last night listening to young people. such a strong signal of success to them. powerful source of opportunity, please welcome major general marcia anderson. [applause]

>> thank you. in 1957, a couple of things happened. mafia gibson won the women's singles title at -- the first women's singles title at wimbledon. dorothy heights became the president of the congress of negro women, and in a zip code of 53511, in southern wisconsin, i was born. my parents, my father, was a korean war veteran. what he really wanted to do while he was serving was work with airplanes, whether it was to fly them, or work on the cruise. because of the limited opportunities at the time, he was a truck driver. my mother was one of the first women, young women, to integrate catholic high school in saint louis, missouri. she was a clerical worker. they had me.

my first years of life time managed to flunk kindergarten. that is true. i did kindergarten twice. i like to think that i was left- handed and the teacher did not like left-handed children. maybe there was another reason, but i was tagged them as being slow, and that followed me into first grade at the school there in 53511. i was put into the slope less. if you remember, we had reading one, two, three, or a, b, c. i used to sit there and watch the kids in the fast group go through the lessons with the teacher. i would get my work done, and be staring at them, wondering why i was still waiting. one day, as teachers did in those days, the teacher had an empty chair for the first group, and wanted to fill it with someone.

she said as anyone else done, and i raised my hand. it was interesting. she did not give me one of the books they were reading, so we are sitting there, and there is always a point where they ask what is the word we learned today. if it were all sitting there, and she put the word on the board, and no one could pronounced it. i raised my hand, and i said the word is he prepared -- secret. she was taken aback. i was not supposed to know that. i did not have the books, and i was one of the slow kids. that was a turning point. if the teacher pay attention to me after that. fest for a few years. my parents are no longer -- fast forward a few years care of my parents are no longer together. we moved to a new zip code in illinois.

let me tell you about about this city in illinois. in 1950 it was one of america's best cities, it made the list, but by this time 75% of the population was on some form of public assistance. one-third of the families subsist on less than $7,500 a year. even today, the median income is less than $11,000. it was once described as america's way full. 98% of the population is african-american. that is where i grew up. my mother scraped together the money to send us to catholic school. she scraped together the money so we could have magazines to read in the house like "newsweek's" and " time " called and of course, "ebony" and "jett."

my eighth grade teacher, who studied with math tutor me on algebra because i was awful, i took advantage of that opportunity. i was still mad at the teachers that said i was slow. when i went to college, i enrolled as a soft market if i had an ulterior motive. if i could not afford to go to four years of college, so i was calling to do it in three, which meant i were a lot of part-time -- so i was going to do it in three. which meant a lot of part-time jobs.

back in the old days, up in the gym, and you signed up for class as part i desperately needed a science class. -- class is. i desperately needed a science class. i had night jobs, so there was not much left. as i wander around, i see a training -- a officer that's the reserve officer training corps, military science. i asked him, and he said it was a science credit. you have to watch are for those recruiters. [laughter] >> it was all good. that was also something that provided me with an opportunity. i had an associate professor of military science there. i wanted to go to law school. i did not have a plan, but i wanted to go. i was sweating a class, and he said to me, no one will ask you what grade you got in philosophy, but what will matter is what you did in the

intervening 15 years of your life. so, the american dream is available. there are people out there that will support you every step of the way. the way i look at it is opportunity means i can, and i did. for all of you young people here, opportunity means you can, and i know you will. [applause] >> for all of us seasoned people in the room, the thought leaders and business leaders, opportunity means we can and we must.

[applause] >> for america, opportunity means we can or else. [applause] >> i want to leave you with fund -- one final thought from a citizen soldier. many of you recognize ignatius loyola. he charged his priests with the following. i choose to take literary license and say that opportunity, and this is where he said, opportunity means go forth, and said the world on fire. -- set the world on fire. [applause]

>> the motion picture association on the life and legacy of ronald reagan. then, anita hill testimony 20 years later. then, a profile on gerald ford. friday on c-span, supreme court justices stephen briar and antonin scalia on the role of supreme court justices. -- supreme court justices breyer and antonin scalia. then, a discussion on actors and

activism. >> there was 8 flood in fort wayne. they were trying to keep the river. they could have a motorcade down to the flooded area. my memory is that he filled a three sandbags and said hello to everyone, got back on the plane. what was in the airways was not three sandbags, it was reagan filling sandbags with his shirt off. >> sam donaldson, andrea mitchell, and chris dodd talk about the legacy of ronald reagan. michael bloomberg and marianas huffington discuss opportunities in the u.s.. -- and arianna huffington

discuss the opportunities in the u.s. >> the story of the civil rights movement cannot be told without birmingham, alabama. we look behind the scenes and literary life of the city. september 15th, 1963, a bomb rocks a baptist church killing four young girls. that story through the eyes of a survivor and friend. people fought to work at the cotton mill in jacksonville. the day after the mill closed. then, jonathan pass on how

martin luther king jr.'s letter from a birmingham jail set the tone for the civil-rights movement. then, and blast furnace that has been open since 1851. there will be a discussion on birmingham during the great depression. this weekend on c-span 2 and 3. >> next, a look at the life and legacy of ronald reagan. the mpaa recently honored the life of the former president. we will hear remarks and out of a former white house chief of staff, who highlighted how reagan's pactiv to replace a life in his political career. this is a little more than an hour.

>> welcome, all of you, and thank you for coming by the motion picture association of america to our screening room to participate in a daylong set of activities in which we recognize the contributions of rhatigan as the leader of our country, but also as someone -- of ronald reagan as the leader of our country, also a similar plan and iconic world in the film industry, including television. this being the 100 anniversary of the president's birth, how can we celebrate his contribution to our country, but also to this remarkable industry that has affected all of our lives in so many different ways. the idea is that we would gather together people who knew him and worked with him to share their thoughts about his life as president, as governor, but how to almost 30 years of his life in radio, television, and film affected those years of public service.

thank you for being here to lead us through this conversation. we will be bringing together a lot of people who serve in the administration with president reagan to celebrate his life. once again, this is the 100th anniversary of his birth. but me begin by asking the chairman of the board of trustees of the ronald reagan foundation, as well as the chairman of the centennial commission to recognize the -- centennial commission recognizing the president's contributions to kick us off. >> thank you. and thank you to the mpaa for hosting a series of events. i think many of you have heard rhatigan say, in hollywood, if you did not sing -- ronald reagan say, in hollywood, if he did not sing or dance, he became a breakfast speaker. [laughter] this year, his centennial is being celebrated, being examined and universities across

the country and around the world from garver square in london and freedom square in budapest. and we are delighted that something so important his development, his years in hollywood, could be addressed by the nba. it is terrific there is such a distinguished group of people -- addressed by the mpaa. in this regard there is such a distinguished group of people here. there are a lot of people that our journalists and worked with him on his staff and are his friends. i'm sure we can keep this panel on this. [laughter] and i'm delighted that my colleagues who will help keep everybody honest. john, i'm glad you got the extra work. with that, thank you for hosting this series -- series of events. >> thank you. john, the program is yours.

>> it is an honor to be here. as fred noda, he is chairman of the reagan library, but also my boss at the mpaa. i will like to say his interest -- internet remarks were brilliant, as i knew they would be. [laughter] i came of age politically during the reagan era. being a little kid i was always interest in politics but it was not until the reagan era that i started to follow politics more. the 1980 election occurred when i was a senior in high school. my first presidential vote was in the 1984 election. i have a deep interest in the

understanding of the reagan presidency. one thing that struck me was at the time, much of the coverage seemed to look at politics as ronald reagan's second career. he was an actor and then he made a turn and began a political career. it seemed to me that in the years since then, we have developed a more sophisticated understanding which puts the emphasis not on a second career, but on continuity between the two careers. much of what made reagan and effective politician flow from what he understood in his entertainment industry career. and many of his strong ideological beliefs took root in those years. our understanding of reagan has changed, and i understand as someone who has covered the white house and then overseas and covering the white house even still that our understanding of the presidency itself has changed thanks to ronald reagan.

we now understand this is a supreme communications job, a storytelling job. barack obama had a much shorter public career than ronald reagan coming to the presidency, but he was seen as somebody who was picked precisely because he had those communication skills. now that he is stumbling we tend to put the accent on that he is stumbling in part because he has lost control of the narrative, as they say. that analysis itself flows from our understanding of the reagan presidency, how president succeed in the modern era.

we have a great panel here to talk about these issues. we will open it up to the audience, with some time left to get your questions. i should also say, welcome to our c-span audience. one day i will say to you panelists is, give us stories. we may not appreciate just how much time marches on. ronald reagan is a figure of fascination to today's young people. my colleague at politico wrote his college thesis on ronald reagan and is looking to possibly publish that into a book. james, like other people of his generation, has no contemporaneously memories of the reagan presidency, and that is true of many. those old chestnuts that you have been telling for years, these are valuable things. [laughter] >> it is a good living. >> i know. i encourage you to all share your recollections because they are supremely valuable. let's start out with a general question and i will go down the panel. what was the most important thing ronald reagan took from his time in the film industry that informed how he behaved as president, and dry at? -- andrea?

>> i do not think there was just one. >> by the way, place yourself in those years. you were there. >> as a kid. i was a junior reporter. [laughter] i actually came to the white house in september of 1981. i was covering energy issues and general assignments and then, of course, the assassination attempt and the aftermath of that. and then in september of 1981, i came to the white house and was there for the duration for the really historic and exciting events afterward. i think his philosophy clearly changed by his experiences in the industry. we can talk about his view towards taxes and the burden of taxation and toward the labor movement. a new contract that through his experiences with the screen

actors and going forward. eventually, what i thought was the defining moment of his presidency, the petco decision. -- padco decision. you see the way he performed as an actor and his theatrical experience was really dominant. it takes him right through the years with general electric theater when he was on the road on factory floors come out and about really learning some of the fun and -- on the factory floors, out and about really learning about some of the fundamental issues. one of the experiences that, for me, defined him in terms of foreign policy was when we first went to the dmz. there he was looking out over this village, this fake village that the north koreans had set up, blasting propaganda back at our g i's and the south korean army. and he is wearing camouflage and has few glasses, and i was there

an dandala was the are casting that morning. and you shark out, mr. president, what do you see out there? and with perfect timing he lifts the field glasses and looks out and i'm like one of his predecessors, he took the lead scott -- event capped off of the glasses. [laughter] he looks out and he says, well, it looks like a hollywood back lot, only less important. [laughter] that was sort of the synthesis as actor and politician and as strong anti-communists. that was a moment. >> ken, how would you answer that?

>> before reagan became president everybody used to say, how can you be an actor and be president? reagan, again in perfect timing, would say, well, how can you be a president cannot be an actor? -- and not be an actor? right on target. his views on tax cuts came from hollywood. he used to remind the staff that when he was a "b" movie actor, the marginal tax rate was 9%. if you would get tax rates down, i would work more. credit and 10 cents on the dollar. and if i work more, more jobs would be created. not just jobs in hollywood, but

assures when you use the pressure is in theaters and -- ushers when you used to have ushers in theaters and popcorn maker's. his work with the screen actors guild was fundamentally important in his willingness to lead negotiations. tip o'neill used to say i don't like compromising with ronald reagan because every time a compromise with him, president reagan gets 80% of what he wants. and reagan will -- with sigel i will take a% every time and come back the next -- and reagan would say, i will take 80% every time and come back next year for the other 20%. these routes fundamentally began in hollywood. you see the sense of timing. everybody remarks about the reagan signature line at the berlin wall, but if you go back

and look at the tape, it was the skill of an actor that delivered that last line. because as he said, "mr. gorbachev, come to this wall" and a place erupted. and he said, "mr. gorbachev" and he was drowned out by applause and noise. and he stopped. and then he said, "mr. gorbachev, tear down this wall." it was the actors' timing. >> were you there for that? >> yes, at that time i was deputy chief of staff before becoming chief of staff. the last comment i would make would be what andrea talked about with the bond the president had with the american people. i remember being with him in a limo in the autumn of 1988

campaigning in new jersey for an unsuccessful senate candidate and for vice president bush. and we came around a bend in the road and an old, old lady with a babushka on had a handmade sign that said "we love you in death valley days, but we love you more as our president." he turned to me after spotting it on the road and said, that is the second-best sinai have ever seen -- signed i have ever seen. and of course my play the straight man and ask him what the best one was. and he said, ohio state university, 1984, 10,000 students and a cute one in the front row who held up a sign that said, "he is old, but he's cute." [laughter] it is the thing with the

american people that he always thrived on. he loved audiences. he was energized by people. my last comment, lyn nofziger, god bless him, said to me in my years in the white house, president reagan spent most of his time in the oval office. when i was coming back to work for president reagan he said, open the door to the oval office because president reagan does better when he can make eye contact, when he can see facial expressions, when he can hear the into nation. yes, he will read all of the briefing papers, but he gets personal contact, he feeds off of people. i know i said my last comment. to set him up, the best part of acting was, "i can't hear you, sam." [laughter] >> he heard every word. >> until he heard a question he wanted to enter. -- answer.

[laughter] >> i have come to believe the presentation in life, particularly politics, is well over 50% of the game. if you do not have sought -- have ideas that make sense, you will get caught up. >> you covered the carter beat and stayed on through the reagan presidency. >> that is right. >> you were there for the whole darn thing. >> i covered the harding administration. [laughter] >> you are old, but cute. >> you can have great ideas that can save this country, but

no one will listen to you because you are not interesting and you do not project, it does not matter because we will not know your name. reagan had good ideas as well as the presentation. but the presentation, as we have all said, is so important. we have been to so many occasions there where it was a staging by the great mike deaver, god rest his soul, did by peggy noonan, delivery by the old actor. and i mean no dismisses of him by saying that. let me give you one and move on. remember in 1984, those of us of a certain age in the first debate with the -- with walter -- walter mondale, he fell apart. his wife said he was overtired and had not been briefed. and we thought he was falling apart. should we reelect this guy? so he came up with a wonderful line about how words are important. and when he was asked about that, his punch line was, "i will not make my opponents

those are the words, but it was the pictures i remember. the camera was on walter mondale. he laughed, not at ronald reagan, clearly, with ronald reagan. a mistake, walter. and then with the camera on ronald reagan, he took up a glass of water and took a sip and put it down with a sense of satisfaction on his face. at that moment, it was game 7, match. it was over. we saw this so many times where ronald reagan would win the day. this is the last thing i would say. but neither of us has gone longer than bill clinton when he said, "one more thing in conclusion." [laughter] he would ignore as when we would ask him questions. sometimes it did not work, but usually it would. he asked the president in the fall of 1982 when ronald reagan's gallup approval rating was 37% -- barack obama is 44% today and we wonder if he is going to be reelected.

at that point, white house correspondents are really tough. when they are down, you kick them. he called on me and i said, mr. president, tonight you have blamed the continuing recession on congress and the mistakes of the past. doesn't any of the blame belongs to you? yes, he said, for many years i was a democrat. [laughter] >> andrea, when you were covering the white house, did you have a sense that you were a supporting actress, an extra on the set? >> at times, yes. >> how did you feel about that? >> many times i was coming in behind other correspondence and i was doing the weekend shows. i told them that i felt i had to be at every event ronald reagan had because i had to really observe him and get to understand him better and understand his reactions so i could anticipate reactions.

this is what we did back in those days working seven days a week by choice just because i did not want to miss an opportunity to see him in public. we did not see president very often in private, and still don't. but he really redefined the public presidency. i thought that was very important. during the mondale campaign in the rose garden from i shouted out ... in the rose garden, i shouted out and he heard you very much when he wanted to. and i shot it out, "what about mondale's charges?" and without skipping a beat he said, well, tell him he should pay them. [laughter] which tells you something because he could not have anticipated the question precisely. for those who said he was not

sharp and on point, just completely missed the point of this man. the fact that he could draw upon the precise story -- they were old chestnuts, many of them, but he would come up with an anecdote to portray what he wanted to portray and it tells you how much in the moment he was throughout those years. the performance was part of the political effect. i felt very strongly this was a very creative politician, but at the same time, someone who was not afraid to be totally transparent and honest about his lack of interest in something. for instance, 1983, his first summit chairing what was then the g-74 russia was admitted to the then g-8 -- g7 before russia was admitted to the bench-day. margaret -- to the g-eight. margaret thatcher had not yet been admitted and between mineral and trudeau he was out flying toward a bit.

there were protests everywhere in europe. he was over schedules -- over schedule. debose profound over scheduling where he fell asleep with the pope. it was one of those days were israel went into lebanon the sunday night of the summit. he flew to rome in the early hours and fell asleep at a statement -- steak dinner at windsor castle. i think everybody learned that was not the way to scheduled president. sunday night he was given a big screen by the then chief of staff and other members of the camera -- cabinet. this is his moment on the world stage.

monday morning comes and they go, mr. president -- said jim baker -- any questions about the briefing? and he said, well, boys, i did not open the briefing book. "sound of music" was on television last night. [laughter] that was perfect reagan. he knew what he liked and he wanted to watch "sound of music pier -- sound of music." >> the debate in 1980, the report -- important with jimmy carter. ronald reagan was slightly behind in the polls in october of 1980. but people wondered, could we trust this guy? is he going to get us in iran nuclear war with the the soviet union and tear up our social security card and all that? if you read the transcript, at one point, jimmy carter has nailed him on his past believes and what he said when he was doing ge and all of that, social security should be disbanded. it sounded like the earlier. -- i mean, a few weeks ago. [laughter]

carter nailed him and it is reagan's turn to answer the charges and he said, "there you go again." he does not answer the charges at all, but he won the audience. >> billing on sam's story about nuclear, the question was, was at reagan close -- crazy enough to push the nuclear button? and reagan reminded us, it helps if the opposition thinks i'm a little bit crazy. it makes all the sense of the world. that gives me some leverage. it is andrea's comment about the

anti- seven summit. -- the g-7 summitt. reagan laid out his economic package and everybody pooh- poohed it except for a margaret thatcher. she came to his defense. when they left the dinner that evening he caught up to our and said, thank you. it was really unnecessary, but i appreciate you coming to my defense. and reagan would tell the story, and maggie just tapped me on the elbow and said, it is okay, running, it is just boys being boys. [laughter] every incident had a moral to it, had a story attached to it. one of the things we are skipping over is, every saturday morning now the president of the united states speaks to the american people. that was conceived by ronald reagan. his five minutes to not go through sam andria and have a straight shot to the american people -- sam and andria and have a straight shot to the american people. and he would spend a lot of time on the scripps.

he developed the idea of what he wanted to say. the speech writers work did and invariably, he wrote all of those groups. and then used to fuss -- was it four minutes and 52 seconds? he used to sit there in the oval office with a stopwatch to make sure he got it right. actors training. this is my opportunity to speak directly to the american people. >> the thing we know about great athletes, great actors, they only make it look easy. a lot of what makes them good comes from hard work, preparation honed over time. what reagan talk about that? the specific techniques that made him an effective public presenter?

>> that reminds us of several things. one was, never fear after a puppy or a cute kid. number two, always leave them laughing or crying. number three, figure out a story that makes sense for the moment so people can relate. >> would he say these things? >> no, but he would say, i'm going to do this or i am going to do that. for example -- and maybe rick perry should listen. reagan taught us all, never say, i want to make three points. he would say, i have several points to make because invariably he would get lost.

even a st. skilled actor -- even a skilled actor. you pick up all of these little things. it is also the best communicators study, rehearsed, rehearse again. on the way to the berlin wall, he was reading his text for the last time. he knew it. he knew it cold, but he was reviewing it. and he got to that last famous line and said it is going to drive the state department boys crazy, but i'm going to leave it in. the state department had objected to the line, a "tear down the wall, mr. gorbachev." but he always rehearsed it. that is the skill of an actor, a great communicator but more fundamentally, i think, president reagan understood that the job of president is to build consensus in america, not a consensus in washington. if you build consensus in america, you will get a consensus in washington. the more he could get out there and sell a vision, sell his ideas and explain himself, not by demonizing the opposition, but by speaking to his positive vision and what this would mean

to each joann doretta six-pack -- joe and joanna six-pack, the more comfortable he was as president. >> we think about cinema and staging, i want to bring up what is arguably one of the great legacies, this relationship with gorbachev and the arms control agreement, which admittedly came in the second term because when sam or someone would ask him why haven't you met with a soviet leader he would say, well, they keep dying on me. [laughter] we get to geneva in november of 1985 and you may recall there had been some controversy in the run-up to the summit written in the style section of the

"what -- washington post" written by the then chief of staff about his views about women and arms control. sam and i were primed for the first full opportunity where they would have the two leaders together and sam asked a question of gorbachev, who did not quite understand what was going on. would you agree that women do not care about arms control and things like that? in the first round, it was a little bit of a hiccup. but grant staging, which mike deaver and the foreign policy team so brilliantly constructed around that house in geneva -- the walk in the lake, which was completely prepared. the fact that gorbachev, the younger man, arrived with a hat and muffler and overcoat on a very chilly day in november, but our older president stepped out to greet him, of course, with just to suit -- his suit and got wrapped up and looking younger and more rigorous.

and they did the walk around and there was a place to sit and a fireplace and a chance to bond. his advisers knew that not on the intricacies of arms control, but on the human connection that ronald reagan, if there were to be any chance for the two men to bond and bridge their adversarial stances, would be a man to man. years after president reagan dyed by oust gorbachev, what was it about him? how could you connect with him? and he said, i liked him. it went back to that november day. and i could not have seen jiabao in crear faces when it all fell apart. -- angrier faces -- i cannot have seen two angrier faces when it all fell apart.

but if ronald reagan had not had a profound belief in reducing the number of nuclear weapons -- he came to it from a different place and with the help of his national security advisor and the state department and others, and primarily because of his wife, nancy reagan, and her view, and the way she persuaded him. but none of the staging would have been possible if the bedrock beliefs were not there. >> you said he came across as a very likable man, because i think he was. it stood him in good stead. people said he was a regular guy. however, he understood he was president of the united states. we want to have him over for dinner, but that guy is really smart.

but we want our presidents to be a little bit better than us. on all occasions -- are not talking about a party or something -- when he enter the room, an announcer would say, "ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states." and "hail to the chief" would play. it is a catchy tune. and he would come out smiling and waving, but you knew the president was there. things are done a lot of different now. when it comes to the supreme court, the reason they fight cameras there, they want the mystique. they are not just ordinary judges. like mr. marshall has made his

decision their orders have to have the weight of that. i think reggaeton will always have that one final story about how he understood -- reagan will always have that one foust for about how he understood how to do it another way. coming back from california one day, there was a flood. it was in fort wayne. people were filling sandbags trying to keep the river back. air force one stopped. reagan had a motorcade down to the flooded area. he took off his jacket. my memory is that he filled three sandbags, said hello and hi to everyone, got back in the car and went back on the plane. but that night, what filled the airwaves was not 3 sandbags. it was reagan filling sandbags with his shirt off. for all we knew, it could have been 48 hours. >> [unintelligible]

[laughter] >> i saw him on the way to honolulu in the asian summit in the surf. his shirt off. >> if you think back to after the assassination attempt, we jumped out of the motorcade -- we flew there and landed in fort wayne, and i remember to this day running up on this horrible pile of dirt. and we were not dressed for this occasion. nobody had mud boots. i could barely walk on the way back. the mud was kicked up to here in high heels running up with him because it was not just to get the picture. it was to always be around him. if he went out to dinner on christmas eve to charlie wakes house at the watergate or whatever it was, i would be there or sam would be there. the chief correspondent, sam donaldson, would be back on the street until he was back in a limousine. >> why was that so important? >> because he has survived a series of assassination

attempts. we did not even know how many there have been. it was not just one producer and cameraman. it was all 23 networks. >> i was standing 5 feet away from john hinckley jr. when he shot ronald reagan and three other people. it was a serious experience -- forget me, for them. before that, even with jimmy carter, you wanted to be around. >> but also, president reagan understood the press and we were family. and yes, we ran adversaries, but the king that took place --

we were adversaries, but the kidding that took place, we all understood. there were some days that we made sure the helicopter engine did not stop so that the president would not be lying "i cannot hear you, sam" because he did not want to answer questions that day, and so the helicopter engine kept going. the other thing that sam left out of the fort wayne story is that we were criticized for either being in palm springs or santa barbara. >> palm springs. >> we have heard about the flood, obviously. it was devastating. and the president said, let's

stop in fort wayne to see if we can lend a helping hand. yes, it was nice knowing we could get on network news that night, but was also the president's instinct of this is doing the right thing. >> let me include you on this because you are on capitol hill at that time promoting a different agenda, quite different -- >> occasionally. [laughter] >> we were using -- what were you thinking -- these guys must have given you to destruction of the time over theatrics of why you would have thought was the wrong substance. >> i was in the house and running for senate in 1980. i was on the ballot to the fall. at the end of the election there were two of us, democrats elected to the senate, 16 republicans.

sam was right, in october, jimmy carter was still slightly ahead. and of course, the president went on to win that race. i remember the republican convention and the likelihood that ronald reagan would get the nomination, the getting is among democrats that they had chosen this -- the giddyness among democrats that they have chosen this actor. how wrong they were. i've come to know this in the last eight or nine months in coming back over reagan's film and television crear and becoming more familiar than i ever was. this was the person who was elected seven times to be the president of sag. and popular, standing ovations ahman sag members -- among sag members when he was leaving. his ability to run a comprehensive, large organization with a lot of conflict and it gave him a high

degree of confidence, he plans, to get elected as governor and run something that was as complex and confusing as the screen actors guild was. i did not have many personal stories. i was a very junior member of the congress of the time. but i recall a bill signing after the 1984 debate, which sam properly described as a rough night for the president. there was a bill signing at about 8:00 that morning i thought, i've got to get down there. how was this guy going to look? he had a rough night. there are those nights were you just want to crawl and disappear. i got there and a receptionist said, why don't you go on in. the president is in the oval office. i was there about 50 minutes before everybody else. i will never forget this. the president said, come on in. let me give you a cup of coffee. it was as if he had gone to a movie the night before. it was the most stunning reaction, in a way.

in a sense, that was last night, but this is today. i wish i would have done better, but it is a new day and we go forward. i remember how important that notion was to him, to take each day as it comes and to be positive about it. and of course, in the historic meetings with tip o'neill appeared i remember it wonderful night at kennedy's home. i think it was raising money for a charity. >> for the kennedy library. >> it sounds almost archaic in a way to talk about a community that could actually disagree, but get along. ronald reagan had a lot to do with that. it did not happen naturally. it happened because someone understood the importance of personal relationships, and ability to get along with other people, even with people with whom you disagree, and the ability to move from day to day and not carry yesterday's problems forward.

it is an incredible lesson for anybody in any walk of life, but particularly in a public life. and his ability to get along in all those years, 30 or 40 years in television and film, to work with the screen actors guild, to develop those personal relationships that he had that stayed with him from the very beginning from the early 1930's all the way to the 1960's. you get a better dimension of the person and to understand the continuum that his presidency and his governorship or not separate pieces of his life, but that seamless garment that was his life that began in those years that was his public career on television. a biographer wrote that it was the actor's background that somehow made reagan detached from people, with the exception of nancy.

he wrote that it did not matter to him who was in the supporting cast. actors had come and gone, as they did in hollywood, without altering his purposes or changing his conception of himself. he remained serene in the center of the universe awaiting his next performance. what you think of that? did his acting background and your group to him being some -- somewhat aloof, or was that part of his natural temperament? >> when he walked into a room, you knew ronald reagan was there. it was a presence. he was not just one of the guys. he was comfortable in his own skin. he knew what he wanted to communicate. people used to say he is a great communicator and he would say, no, just communicating great ideas. we all helped him, but he was the boss. he was in charge. he set the pace. we filled in. i would say throughout the years he had lots of us around to help him take care of everything else and he wanted to focus on cutting taxes, rebuilding the national defence, cutting regulation, and trying to cut

spending. and he achieved so many of those for the simple reason that he had everybody taking care of all of the other things so he could focus his attention primarily on what he wanted to accomplish, and that is the reason he ran for president. let me go back a minute and expand at a little bit. -- it a little bit. again, the bond with the people. when we arrived in moscow with the summit -- for the summit meeting with gorda jeff -- order to have, the first thing he did was to go to the famous shopping street in moscow.

and i remember our only concession to the secret service is that we would drive within two blocks of the ambassador's residence. and he and nancy got out of the limo and they were mobbed. are remember him waving to the people, and this little old lady up there, and somehow we found an oxcart for him to get on and to waive. and everybody just came to him. to the point that the secret service was frightened by it and we moved him back out. when we were in moscow over those few days i happened to be in the limo with him occasionally. and pres. reagan always said that he had heard that previous presidents when they're going down the street focused on their work and did not wave of people. why?

if people came to pay respects to the presidency, i owe it to them to read these try to make eye contact with them and waved back. so even in moscow he would wave at everybody. on the last day of the summit as we prepared to go home, he turned to me and said, i think we are doing great. and i said, why? and he said, remember day one on the street, everybody was down here. and now they are up here. they are giving the salute to the american presidency. they're giving a salute to america. we must have accomplished some things. does that make him aloof? no, does that make him a man of the people? no, but he can relate to people, knows what he wants to accomplish, and then -- >> may i pick up where he is the boss? >> yes. >> i had only covered in a

couple of times before he came to the white house. i was a little skeptical. here was a man who did not recognize his own hud secretary. he once introduced someone as a chairman -- as his german who turned out to be the -- as a chairman who turned out to be the president of siberia. someone asked him, governor reagan, what about this and that and the other and he said, i don't know. they have not told me yet. and i said in a tone i should not have used. -- have used, well, governor, you should get them to tell you what is going on. i have been told he tried to get out to confront me, but they kept him back. he came over to me later at the hotel and said, sam, i want you to know, they don't tell me. i tell them. and i thought, i'm going to have to take another look. for all of the nice guy and forgetting names and everything, he was the boss, wasn't he?

>> absolutely. >> and people should not forget that they were staff. people who may be thought they were peers, once they were in the white house, they were staff. and if they were cabinet, that did not mean they were = to the president. there was one notable exception, the chief of staff who forgot that. press one line of the resignation letter, how contentious. -- >> one line of the resignation letter, how contentious. >> let's take some questions from the audience. >> i see bud mcfarlane here, too. how are you doing? people are nervous to ask this

first question, so go on to the second question. >> i will ask the second question. what do you think the current presidential learn, and are there examples to be taken from president reagan? >> that we had some of my own interest in that. you, andrea, or someone who made a transition from the old era of 3 network broadcasts, to the cable era where you have your own show, but it speeded everything up. the news cycle is much more intense. washington is much more intense and polarized. are reagan's relevant today where so much has changed? -- our ratings lessons relevant today were so much has changed? >> i think they are relevant. what senator dodd said it is rather profound here.

ronald reagan came to washington out of a whole environment in washington, out of his experience with ge theater, out of his connections with people in both political parties, and yes, out of some adversarial times as governor of california. but he came out with the willingness and desire to work across party lines when it was to his advantage and it was also to relate to people across party lines. it was the apocryphal story about tip o'neill and ronald reagan both being irishman and being able to put back a drink in the oval room after hours is not apocryphal. it is true. he enjoyed people to the extent that he wanted to get to know people, and he would read chris dodd as a junior house member on a particular morning in 1984, whether he was important to him for a particular vote or not. the fact is, he was interested in people. and that is something that is

terribly important to every president, president obama or anyone else, the of reach. i find it surprising to hear that he and mr. mcconnell for 18 years had not met one another one on one after his election. that is surprising. you can have group meetings, are you have to connect to your adversaries. and find what are common ground you can. this is no criticism of the white house or anyone else. i just think people on both sides, the people in leadership on the hill and the people in the white house have to understand that because we are reaching a point -- i don't want to idealize what happened in the 1980's. there were some tough moments there. a lot when on that was very vindictive. >> may i put you on the spot? ronald reagan raised taxes at least 16 times. he did not call it taxes sometimes, but he raised taxes. he would compromise.

he did not fall off the cliff with all flags flying. he would move things forward. he worked with the other party on a number of occasions. could he be nominated with today's republican base? >> yes. >> why? >> well, like ability for one thing. and i think he was able to explain compromise in not just creative ways, but he could make it understandable to people of hong. why, as he say -- as he would say, the sound around my feet is the concrete cracking. he would explain the virtues of the tax reform act of 1986. he just intuitively was a good politician. >> and one other thing, some of those adversaries that he was dealing with were in his own white house. do not forget the first term. he was urging? even among his own staff. >> we always like to think

everyone is going to analyze every one of our positions in great detail. and that is a great point. but to begin that process, they will never even listen to you if they do not like you. if you do not understand who they are and what they care about, that is fundamental. if you never crossed the bridge, you never get to the point of the details of where you are communicating and ronald reagan had taken -- had an incredible capacity to talk to people. that is why to this data talk about him across party lines in favorable terms because he was a great human being. he enjoyed the company of people that he fundamentally disagreed with. that made him a compelling and

appealing figure that transcends partisan politics and so forth. >> the idea of telling stories, the idea of listening, one of the things that i think he learned from hollywood was, as occurred of a talker as he was, he was -- as a good of a talker as he was, he was a better listener. by listening to people, by listening to their stores, all of a sudden it came -- became part of a story that he could relate to an audience. >> he and nancy would go to camp david and watch two or three movies. but what of the fun things that -- one of the fun things that we did in the last year president reagan is that we had a film festival. and there were people that came over to watch a ronald reagan movie. the first thing we did was open for hellcat of the navy." -- was "help task of the navy."

and before the movie, president reagan got up and explained the role he played. and it was the first time there was an on-camera kiss between president reagan and nancy davis, nancy reagan. and i remember him saying, come on up here and let's reenact it. and in front of everybody, the two of them embracing, you know, you can take whatever you want from the most liberal democrat, that night, you were rooting for ronald reagan. i remember pulling into wisconsin in the 1988 campaign one night and the white house had contacted the owner of a hotel. "welcome, mr. president. showing tonight, hal katz of the navy."

one thing we have not mentioned is invariably, "win one for the gipper." that was hollywood. >> when ronald reagan and pat o'brien are arrived at the campus of never gained for the premier of new rockne, i imagine that.

thousands of people arrive by train for the opening of the movie. andrea mentioned in geneva when he met gorbachev, before he was going to geneva, we asked him at a news conference, mr. president, are you nervous about meeting a soviet leader? and he said, oh, no, i once starred opposite errol flynn. [laughter] >> he did love movies. i went to the archive and this was a list of all of the movies they saw at camp david in 15 years. they went there just about every weekend, or most weekends. and the selection of movies is very surprising. it is worth checking out. >> i remember going to camp david and watching movies periodically and sitting in the president's cabin and passing around popcorn and you are just focus on the movie as if he were in someone's never met and you were comfortable and focus on the movie.

>> those stories are making sure that up to the date, current movies were coming out. and he loved that knowledge of the film industry. >> and invariably he would say on monday morning, when it comes out, you have to go see it. he was a good salesman. [laughter] >> thanks to each of you for the

reminiscence. two things i have missed so far, and one of them was courage. when you look back to 1983 and the notion of launching this star wars idea in the context of national security and what had worked, whether you like man or not, for 35 years it had kept the peace. and to launch a -- an idea that was so profoundly different, to move away from audits, albeit, a threat to -- from offense,

albeit a threat to blow up the world, to defense was a serious exercise in intellectual experience. margaret thatcher, al gore, and reagan did it because essentially of a moral underpinning. but in full knowledge that he was going against a tide of sentiment in the congress, allies, but he did it anyway because it was the right thing to do. and the other quality that impressed me on a number of occasions with discipline. and you have commented on how disciplined he was about all of his public appearances and so forth. one was kind of funny. after he was attacked and was coming back with rehabilitation, we were on the way to center barbara and he came back to the staff compartment and he said

i'm taking all of my suit out to mike taylor, and nobody said anything, assuming he was developing a bit of a bolshoi like the rest of us. and he said, i have added to 4 inches to my chest and 3 inches to my biceps. if and we said, get out of here. [laughter] .

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

x now remarks from any hill. -- anita hill. then a look at the life of gerald ford. later, the host of discussion of online accuracy. >> tomorrow, the impact of the economic recession on holiday shopping. in the investigative project and terrorism. there are prospects by american citizens. after that, charitable giving in u.s. having an effect on the amounts this holiday season.

>> simon winchester became an american citizen. >> >there were plenty of friend. i feel like a fool describing it to you. it should be. >> the latest atlantic's/

>> id has been 20 years since ani -- it has been 20 years since anita hill spoke to congress. she spoke at hunter college for about an hour. >> thank you so much, so much. thank you, pat, for that wonderful thank you for that wonderful

introduction. i wanted to chant that book in a moment. i wanted to begin because i know that you wanted to talk about how your team was put together. hearing, and to the knowledge so many of the people who are here today from the opening salvo in history. did you want to say just a few things? >> i always like to say thank you. i did testify, and many of you have this vision, the image of me sitting there by myself at that long table with all ofhe senators lined up in front of me, but i also want to remind you that i had some wonderful people who, as i say, had my back, who came together really, because they believed in

the process, the integrity of the court, as i did, and they wanted to make sure that at best i could be fairly treated as best as they could help me. one of those people -- i see one of those people i know, judith resnik, who you heard from this morning. prof. judi resnik. professor charles ogle three who you also heard from -- ogletree who was also heard from. professor and a jordan is mewhere in the audience. there were so many others. janet napolitano, john frank, warner gardner, kim crenshaw, who i am looking forward to hearing this afternoon, i kim

taylor thompson, who is here in the city teaching at nyu. maybe some of her students are here in the city today. so many people came together. many of those people were my colleagues in teaching. as pat said, there were so few of us in lot teaching, and these wonderful individuals, including judith resnik, who knew me when i was student at yale law school, all came together. people talk about our hot shot team. it was a pretty hot shot team, but it was n the high-powered la firm that people make it out to be. i just want to say, 20 years later, thank you, thank you, thank you to all of them, and for what you do now. [applause] >> i know you mentioned that two members of your team have passed on, warner gardner and tom frank.

-- john frank. i wonder if you could share that moment when you realized that this was something beyond a single moment of testimony. >> when i look at into today's audience, and certainly in the immediate days following the hearing, i have lots of support from women. but john john frank had been an expert on the supreme court and the confirmation process. he was there, he volunered and came from arizona. i did not know he was going to come. at the end of my morning testimony, he came to me in tears and he said, "i know this is very hard for you. i know this is a challenge, but you have no idea of how important this is to our

country." i was at that point trying to get through the rest of the day. i do not think i fully appreciated then exactly what he was saying to me. here was this man who had been at yale many years ago in the practice of law and studied the supreme court. he was saying to me that this was an important moment in our country's history. it was as if so he looked into the future and had seen you today. i really do want to remember him especially. it was in a little way may be preparing me for what was to come, but i do not thi anything could prepare me for today.am steering geaseeing hee is wonderful. >> i think this moment could

allow us to forget extly what you did go through when you say this is difficult. this was traumatizing as well. as alan simpson promised, in addition to all the accusations, waving the bible talking about exorcisms -- >> that was a moment. [laughter] >> but he did not go awayith the hearing. if followed you for quite some time. there were security issues, practically emotional torture to the extent that even friends of yours were forced to move from oklahoma. little packages of what you described as a fecal matter were sent in the mail to you. there were constant security issues for you for quite a bit of time and even to the present.

>> it is a testament to my friends and colleagues that i was able to continue. there was pressure at the university of oklahoma for me to be fired. it was coming from officials, legislators, state legislators. when that did not work, there were threats to the existence of the law school and the funding of the law school. that was an effort for my colleagues to turn against me. one of the women who was on the faculty then -- i believe she is here. shirley was with me on the team and came with me from oklahoma to help out in any way that she could. she ultimately did leave oklahoma and went on to have a great career. 20 yea is a long time to keep

people together. the people who were on that team in the beginning are still with make. the witnesses who were friends of mine back in the early 1980's are still my friends today. there are all kinds of pressures th are put on people. and the of you who have gone through these kinds of claims and problems and issues in your own workplaces or attempted to critique correct problems knows that you can lose people along the way. i have been very, very fortunate not only to keep those people about also to really engage with a lot of supporters threw out these last 20 years that have made what i do in my survival possible.

you talk about the difficulty -- it was very difficult. when you return from a testimony that has become this event that you reay had no idea what it was going to be what it was -- i would walk out onto the street. ey did polling immediately after the hearing, and it showed that 70% of the population thought that i had perjured myself. in addition to the pressures i was having on the job, the threats to me personally, bomb threats, the law school at my home, i had to go to the grocery store and realize that seven out of 10 ople that i would

encounter at the supermarket thought that i had perjured myself and my testimony. so, psychologically, the pressure was difficult. of the pressure at work was difficult. and the fact that your famil is going through this with you in a very public wy was difficult-- public way was difficult. i was also quite fortunate. >> at one point you said you wanted your life back. i remember hearing you describe having to give that up as a part of the healing pcess and moving on. do you mind sharing more about that? >> i think that was very much the toughest part for me and initially. ok, i have given this testimony.

a week or so later, the vote was tan. i wanted to say, ok, it is over. enough is enough. i want my life back. i really resented that i could not get it back. once i let go of that idea and said, you know, it is not going to happen that way. i have a different life now. the question i had to ask myself is what life do i want? i could accept that it was not going to be the life that i had. it was a pretty good life. i like it. i knew it was not going to happen again. out of this, what am i going to have that i can shape, that i can claim for myself so i can continue to do wt i do to be productive, to care about the

things that i ca about and continue to live? that happened perhaps six months or so after the hearing. i had to figure out really what my resources cannot my talents were, what i could do, and what my options and opportunities were. and what kind of support i would be getting to move forward with this new life that i had a chance to shape. those were all things that i had to really sit down and account for. the other thing that i had to do was to say, you know what? it was an important event. it is helped to shape my life, but it is just an event. it is not me. it is not who i am.

so, i had to get back and understand who i am and why i was on this earth in order to move forward. >> i want to turn toour story. i want to say that i feel's about the tm feel possessive about the term "anita's story." i remember barbara underwood came to yale law school and she describedhat is very common for women of my age. there were no ladies' rooms so she was assigned to the janitor's closet to go to the bathroom. my conference story is apparently -- j assigned a security guard to theen's room here just outside the hall to keep all of us from taking it

over. [laughter] i love this are: times. -- ark of time. >> i am the real anita. [laughter] [applause] >> as contained in your book, which is a phenomenal ok -- i cannot say enough what a gorgeous writer. she writes like a dream. in the title, you use the word "home." tomorrow will be the 100th anniversary of your late mother. you dedicate this book to her and your grandmother and your great-grandmother. i wonder if you could talk a

little bit about the framing of the discussion of the housing crisis in terms of the women in your life. you told me a story about ken burns. i wonder if you could start with that. >> we have all seen the wonderful documentary's that ken burns does on pbs. after the conclusion of the one on jag, i had a conversation with the filmmaker. it was really a moving conversation for me because what he said was that he had grown up -- he and i are roughly the same age. he had grown up during the civil rights era of. -- era. i believe he lost his mother at that te when he was about 12 years old. so this was a very emotional

time in his life and a time that had stuck in his memory. when he came up with the trilogy, the first was the civil war, the second was baseball, and the third was jazz. for him, each of those were metaphors about race in america. i found that very moving. if you think about it, it makes sense. but then again, it does not. my question to him was well is there and metaphor for race? is there a way for us to think about and talk about race that is not so male-dominated? if you think about the civil war, jazz, or music, most of the stores were about male artists. baseball, of course, the first

league formed after world war ii. how do we have a conversation about race and that includes women? -- race that includes women? his response was i did a piece on it susan b. anthony to talk about gender. well, that is a little problematic, too, because we know in the suffrage movement, there was a marginal causation of african american women. other women of color just did not even appear, because nive americans were not included in women's suffrage. how do we then have a conversation about gender that is not racialized? so, i started thinking about ways to do that.

what is our metaphor for thinking about equality that does not rely on male domination nor racialization? how can we have an inclusive conversation about the quality? there is one element that looms large in our quest for equality, and that is "home." the finding of the home,hether it is the establishing of a place that one cause their own when we think about stories like "a reason in the sun," and how significant the home is. for those of you who do not know sun," therehe is a more popular reference -- "the jeffersons."

in order to show that "the jefferson's" had made it, they moved on up to the upper east side. it was not just any place on the upper east side. it was a "de luxe apartment in the sky." [laughter] they did not even eat the same kind of food anymore. this was the symbol of them having made it. but you also kno and maybe have not thought about this that when louise jefferson has made it, she becomes a stay at home mother, and what does she do? she getse a maid who is a black maid. all of these issues about the significance of home and how we define it and how it figures and

are inking about the quality really was in my mind. than the housing crisis hit. and the collapse of the housing market really devastated communities and send some many people really in chaos. and i started reading the stories about how it was being read in the press, and so few of the stories included the impact it was having on women. women of color in particular, women living on their own, trying to buy homes on their own. i realized that the housing crisis is not only a set back economically. is a setback in our social advances for women -- it is a

setback in our social advances for women. women were out there buying homes on their own for t last 20 years. this was a social advancement for women because we were finally saying, "look, we can do this on our own. we do not have to wait until we have a spouse or a partner." that was an important movement that was occurring in the year 2005. so i wanted to tell the story of the significance of home without really having to tell it through the lens of male domination, to really tell the story through the eyes of the women i talk about in the book. >> yet this story has been so under-stated in the media. at one point, you point out why

it is so ignored. >> it has been ignored in some ways because the presumption is that the home includes two parents and children, and teh assumption is it is a man and a woman. that is how we have thought about the home and home policy. so, that is what the media has followed. they have not a dog and and look atho is a new home buying market was -- they have not dug in and looked at who the new hombuying market was. when i look back at my own family stories, i realize that when my grandparents homestead in arkansas in 1895 -- it was a

significant milestone in our family achievement. my grandfather had gone from being born a slave to owning property. that was significant. that was a significant milestone. they lost that farm. circumstances that were not unlike what is going on today. bad credit options, a poor economy, racial and unrest and violence. that was significant, too, and it had an impact on my mother as well as our family. for generations to come. when i look here at a college and i think about young people today, i realize that this home in security that we are experiencing now will indeed have an impact on their future. it may be even having an impact

on their present whether or not they are able to get student loans through their parents because of what is going on now. all of these things we need to begin to address, and that is what came together. >> you pointed out the dirt. -- the degree to which the statistics are lacking because the statisticns do not know whether to count women because they are counted as a divorced or widowed, but the frame of reference is to a man. >> it is ssignificant because what we know now is that that dynamic, the family dynamic, is just not representative of a huge part of t population of where we are. the real things that i think about when i write this book is people say that we know you as

your testimony 20 years ago. that is very much a part of who i am. but i have also been teaching for those 20 years. what i really enjoyed about this book was that it brings together so many parts of my life. it brings together in my life as a teacher. it brings together my life as an ancestor -- i mean as a granddaughter of a slave. a great granddaughter of a woman who was a single mother for 10 years when she moved from slavery to being a free person even though she lived in the same place for those first 10 years.

it brings together my history. it brings together some of the impact that the hearings had on me. it really brings to me the issue of the quality that i care about. sexual harassment is one of those issues. what i try to do in this book is to give voice to the people who have not been heard from during this crisis. that is really what i was trying to do -- what i have been trying to do with the issue of sexual harassment for the past 20 years to help people to find their voices, to talk about the issues that keep them from living life fully and asquals. i want to leave some time for questioning, but one final question. you tell a lovely story in your book and i wonder if you could

read a quick paragraph on your definition of "home." >> i do have a vision that i think -- i call it my 21st century vision of the quality. i thought i had a right there on that page. now i have to juggle the microphone. one thing that has happened in the past 20 years -- [laughter] yes, i have the reading glasses now. the final chapter is called "home at last." i define "home" -- i have three definitions. a lens through which one can safely view the world. we know that for some many women, a place inside tehe home is not a safe place.

it is an important element for us to have thahome to view the world safely. the second part of the definition is place where one's ideas, experiences, and work are seen as valuable. that, for me, is home and it symbolizes so much of what is living in the lives of women, the valuing of our work, whatever it is, not that we are trying to emulate anything but how we are trying to be valued for who we are and what we offer, not only for our work but our ideas and experiences as ll. physical body, the being and the place where it is welcomed. it is a physical state of being

as well as a place. in my great-grandmother had to imagine what freedom was like after living her life as a slave. she had to imagine what freedom was like for herself and her son, my grandfather. my mother, when she sent me after college or high school and then to clege into a world that she had no understanding of, she had to imagine for me in 1970 what equality was going to be like for me. she had to help me imagine because it was not her exence having been born in 1911. she sent me out with two sets of luggage. she had to imagine really for

herself and her children what the quality was going to be like. i think we are at that juncture now it. we must imagine for a new generation what equality is going to be like. we have reached the point now, for example, where we have said sexual harassment -- which can raise our voices andomplain about it. but we also should imagine a workplace where it no longer exists. [applause] so, we are constantly working on the quality. we are putting together all the pieces. when we talk about the events going on in the world, the occupation of wall street. when we think about all the issues that we are struggling with today, all of us are urging

us to imagine what the quality is going to be like in the 21st century. we have so much energy in this room today. we have so many ideas. we have heard from so many wonderful people, and we are going to hear from others. all of those a helping us to imagine a better world for the next generation. i could not be more proud than i am today to be a part of that, and i think you. thank you. [applause] >> we are going to take questions now. while people come forward, if you would like to tell the luggage story that begins her book. >> when i was 17 years old and graduated from colle, my mother told me one day that i want you to come with me and we

are going to visit a family friend. the family friend was an african americaneacher who taught some of my siblings english. at the time when i graduated from school, she had gotten older, sick. she traveled fairly widely in her life but was no longer able to travel. she said she had something to give me. it was a set of samsonite luggage. i guess now is called vintage. it h her initials on it. four years later, my mother gave me a gift when i was going off toaw school. that gift was my own sert of samson that luggage.

it was brand new samson night nite luggage. my mother sent moff with two sets of luggage. the older version and now my own set of samsonite. in that, for me,; the symbolism from both of those women who were sending me out to a world that would be so different from their own and the courage that each of them had to say ok i have prepared you i have given you something go out and claim your own life claim your own home and be all that you can be. i think about it today. people say what is the best gift you ever had? i say ait was those two

sets of luggage and what it symbolized for may. that is my story. [applause] i say give your daughters luggage and not baggage. [laughter] >> hi. i wondered in the context of your comments about "me." was your family impacted by the tulsa race riot war? >> we remained on the farm. even though they were in oklahoma at the time of the tusa they were not, really affected by it directly

being out in the rural area. they happened in 1921 i believe. in an urban area in tulsa that was primarily black and quite prosperous. ooted and burned. to this day, many people do not know how many people were killed during those "race riots," which were really mass murders. they had an indirect impact in terms of ople did not go to the city after that. immediate impact we did not have. >> professor hill, what a pleasure to hear you.

>> thank you. i'm fine. thank you. [laughter] >> i spent my time at harvard because they had a really good events. we had a theorist who was there during that year and i turned to her and said it does anybody know if anita hill isk? i want to get to a question about home. d.s. news reported a story last week that one in three americans is a paycheck away from losing their home. we also know that the economic crisis that is a flooding our courts with new money-related cases with foreclosures, unemployment, medicare, child support, domestic violence, and at the same time, money for

legal services is being rolled back a 2000 levels. the administration is not leading a very good fight about increasing its or keeping it at 2011 levels. given the increasing need and decreasing access to justice, i would be interested in hearing your thoughts about closing the justice gap either through advocacy or in terms of using all of these unemployed law students that are running arnd. i would be interested in hearing your thoughts about closing the gap. it is great to see you. >> i do propose a number of things in my book. part of it is through better enforcement of the programs that are out there that are supposedly helping people to stay in their homes.

the problem that i see is about inequalities that the been built into the living system, that haveeen built into it and have become institutionalized because of years and years of discrimination against women, people of color, the way that communities have developed over the past few years. there are even bigger inequalities' when we start talking about women's income. they tend to, becausef the pay differential, are going to have less money to access homes. we also know that women, many of them, will spend about 50% of that lower income on their home. these are the kinds of things -- and that is higher than the rate of men that spend on their home.

these are the things that i think we need to begin to address. what i propose is something that i am calling -- i propose that the administration get involved. i suggested to the council on women and girls should be a place where we can get this conversation started. is there anybody out here who has access to the council of women and girls? yes, i have one hand. can you take that messa to the council because -- it is one agency that is charged with improving access to women and their families. there is no more critical of an issue for women and their

families than homes and housing. so there is a role for the administration to play, but it has to be very comprehensive it cannot simply be just renegotiating mortgages. and using free labor of law student to do that. it haso be really rethinking a lot of the process about how people find homes. thank you. >> thank you. [applause] >> i am a city council member in new york city. [cheers and applause] i was here in 1992. at the end of the conference, i was working for the mayor. you kindly came back to dinner, so i want to thank you for coming that night. >> thank you for finding a. >> you were terrific and as you

are today. we spend a great deal of time now trying to stop cyber bullying and bullying in thes schools. as somebody who has taught for a long time and given your experience, do you think we as a country are doing enough to stop the bullying? >> i think we are beginning to understand the issue of napoleon. there was a piece in the new theytimes at todtoday about why are being bullied. my experience really in terms of dealing with people with workplace issues is that in some ways there is an analogy, that what is going on in the workplace is an extension of the kind of bullying that happens to people when they are in schools.

as charles below road today, it is a lot of ways about identity, perceptions of whether someone is a masculine enough, whether someone is gay or straight. all of these things or ways that we have, using our power over other people in ways that really prevent them from doing what they are hired to do in teh workplace or going to school and learning. have we done enough? i do not think we have because the problem continues. i am not an expert on what more we can do. i think we are starting to become aware of the problem, and that is the beginning. that is the beginning. ank-you. >> hi.

i hope you can bear with my other terror in being up here. what to want to ask is a very personal question, in that how do you deal with having had to deal with so much? how do you deal with fear? not over it, udner it, but through it? >> thank you. [applause] well, thank you for that question. i think you have dealt with fear. [applause] you set out and you asked your question. i think the audience here has demonstrated how i have dealt with my own fear. that is through the help and support of many others.

but the first part really is to walk up and confront . i know there we times when i was afraid. i knew there were times when stepped out and i did not know what was going to happen to me next-- there are many people out

there that will share your story andour fear and be there to help you. i had to learn to reach out. i was always a very private person. the other part of it is you are trained not to show that you have some weakness. because we are all supposed to be strong and tough. and had to let go of some of that. but i thank you because even though you are talking about fear, is an act of bravery to stand up and ask a question. not that this is a hostile group, but this is a group of pretty strong folks. so, thank you so much.

[applause] >> hi. good afternoon and thank you for your time. i am a journalist. in your introduction that was given by ms. williams, she made a reference to the idea of what does credibility look-alike. in light of your posion as a professor dealing with young people, students, and young women, i was wondering how you counsel young women that you encounter on dealing with the idea of being in excellent students, may be great people in the way that they are seen by their peers or are perhaps shot down if they are put in a position like the spotlight that you were put in. >> we talked about organizing this conference -- one of the things i said that i wanted to be sure of is that we had young

people in this room. i wanted young people and people of all ages because i think there is a sharing there. for me, when i talko young people i have the luxury of talking to them one-on-one so i get to sit down and say what do you see as your strength. what do you think you are good at? then build on that. if you go out -- people say i think you should work on your deficiencies. you know, yeah, but that always puts you in a hole. so i like to tell people go out on your strengths. what are your strengths? what do you care about? what are you passionate about?

what do you know that you do well? with that, you can build your confidence. even though there will be circumstances that you will not be expected for all that you have to offer. just knowing what your strengths are and understanding what they are will help get you beyond those situations, realizing which of them are important and those that are not important for you to continue what you need to do. this may sound contradictory. find something that is a challege to you that you really want to do, something that stretches you. because even if you get a little bit closer to that goal, you've started to grow. and that -- there is nothing

more rewarding than facing something that is a challenge to you tha you come closer to because you know you have given everything that you have. even if you do not -- may be your challenge is to win the nobel prize for peace. i would applaud that. you may not win the nobel prize for peace. but if you engage in activity that promotes peace, then that's a victory in it of itself. find things that you are challenged to do, set some goals, and then go out and try to achieve it in your own life and in your own way. again, all of this takes the conversation about who you are and what you care about. so i do not give it very often

generic advice because i think advice ought to be individualized and specific. you are a journalist. do you want to win a pulitzer prize? >> [inaudible] >> how are you going to go about doing it? are you writing now? so you have already started on the road to your pulitzer prize. >> yes. [laughter] >> what is your next step? >> to continue to expand and continue to talk to people like yourself. >> what would make you the happiest? >> i am very interested in issues that affect women. i like to look at allssues from a gender perspective. might thesis was on human trafficking and how it affects women and girls.

>> have you thought about turning that into a book? >> yes. >> have you allied aid? >> yes. [laughter] >> see? you are already there. [applause] those are the kinds of conversations that i like to have. >> thank you very much. [applause] >> that is just the beginning of our conversation. >> good afternoon. it is an honor to hear you. i was hoping that you could tell us a little bit about the experience of getting the voicemail message a year ago. virginia thomas, clarence thomas' wife left a voicemail on your machine, i think asking for an olive branch but basically asking for your apology. what was it like to hear it?

how does it sit with you a year later? >> i will be honest. i did not know that it was her. i thought it was a prank. my first description of it was that it was bizarre. either way if it was a prank or her. as you know, it became a news story. but then, honestly, once it became a news story, i remember within 24, 36, or maybe 48 hours, i got about 500 e-mails about this, how inappropriate was. but what really stuck with me is how passionate people were writing about it. honestly, i started talking to people. kathleen was one of them.

emma jordan at georgetown was 1. i said this issue still resonates with people. [applause] do not lethe moment be captured b something like her voicemail. let's take the passion ourselves. and shape it. and out of this came this conference that happened last week. i am going to be going to detroit. i am going to visit with an all- girls academy in detroit to talk about issues that they are facing. that is my reaction to that voice mail. [cheers and applause] >> i think we are only going to

take the questions of the speakers that are in line. we are running a little bit over time. >> i will answer in short answers. >> i just want to say that when the hearings were going on years ago, i was in hollywood working for a production company. can you imagine what i heard? "you are making the holding up." what astounds me is that recently i learned that there were people who could have corroborated your evidence, and they were not allowed to speak. i think how this resonates to modern-day. i think about the banking crisis, and i think about all the regular people who really have a little say over what information gets out. joe biden decided 20 years ago now we are going to cut the hearing short.

had any of the bankers been held accountable for what they have done? has anyone been held accountable for how they cut you off? for someone like me, when i was 30 years old and i had no idea that there were people willing to testify for you and to tell of their experiences that were similar to yours, it shocks me. i read a lot, too. i am just astounded that the committee work that goes on in the senate when there is usually one man in power who says "we are going to stop it." that sort of thing needs to end. [applause] [laughter] >> i will say that the individual who was ready -- one woman got out of a hospital bed ready to testify. these were not people that i had called. these were people who had come on their own to testify.

yet, it is a travesty. it is a travesty because there was information that was lost. that testimony was not a part of the public record. that is a travesty. it is emblematic of the stories that get lost. but it was also a travesty for those women, personal. it was an affront to them. so, how do we make sure that that does not happen, that we do not just this mess -- "oh, there is another woman so we are not going to bother to call them" -- how do we make sure that we are all heard from? in a way, how do we make sure that all of our processes include our voices? this is a time where we are

dealing with those issues. you are right. that is not just something that happened 20 years ago. we are constantly dealing with how to have a really inclusive demoacy. we are at that time. we have to hold our leadership accountable. including president obama. but we also have to hold oursves accountable. we have to be accountable. cannot sit back and say we are going to wait for the president to do something or my senator to do something. each of us have a responsibility. look at all of the powerful men and women who are here today. what can we do to make sure that every voice is heard? that is the question that i will leave you with. i am going to make it more personal.

what are you individually going to do to make sure that someone who does not have a voice gets heard, considered, and when policy gets made, that their stories are accounted for and included in the decisions that are made? thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [cheers and applause]

a credible resources. that was published. that attracted the interests of media critics across the country -- the new york times became interested. usa today, the associated press, a couple of television networks all began to call and say what about it? then they called jimmy and heat said my rules are anybody can

come on anonymously. i do not know who it is. jimmy and i die on television a couple of times and npr a couple of times. i do not want to say we yelled at each other, but i did not raise my voice. he was as blind as he could be, but he said i do not know. it is against my rules to require people who come to wikipedia to say who they are. the article resulted in a flood of e-mail's, telephone calls, letters -- many of them from people who had been harmed in the same way. some by other websites. but what finally was impressive to me was the flood of attacks.

some of them came by e-mail personally, but so many of them came back to that biography, which somebody was now rewriting, and the most outrageous, venomous, vicious things you could ever imagine were said about me over the next eight months. the last one before jimmy wales finally put a block on might the new biography, to which i refused to contribute anything, the last person said i raped jacqueline kennedy. not so funny, but not a thing i could do about it. then i received a call from a person i had never heard of from san antonio he said, i can help you. the same thing happened to me about three years ago and i started something called

wikipedia watch. wikipedia watch took cases like mine and posted them. he said he believed he could help me. i had researched the i.p. number. i have gone to another site and i have found that the person who did this did it from a business called instant delivery -- rush delivery. he said it was located right in my home town. who ever the s obie was, at least he was a local as obie -- whoever the s.o.b. was, at least he was a local s.o.b.

a man dropped a letter off for me. it was a man named brian chase who work for a rush delivery. they figured i was going to sue them. journalists from all over the country have started calling in as soon as i let it be known that rush delivery is where it originated. he said he did it as a joke. brian chase was his name. i did it as a joke and they fired me. it was just before christmas. i went home triumphantly, telling my wife i had found the scoundrel and they fired him this morning. she did not burst into tears, but she was shocked. she said it is just before christmas, you cannot let them

fire that man because he said something bad about you. i called him back and said who employed you? i said i was sore at him, i do not like what he did, but it is wrong for him to fire -- it is wrong for you to fire him before christmas. my wife dolores said so. they took him back. rush delivery has since gone out of business. i have not heard from brian chase since they took him back. but i tell you that story because it demonstrates in the best way i know about my personal encounter with this ingenious idea called wikipedia. but in the process, i found i am not the only victim. many of these people that e- mailed me -- you may have heard

of an african american actor named sinbad. his name is david atkins. he has been killed several hundred times. he is alive and well, but they have killed him on wikipedia in more ways than i can count on two hands. they killed him in a drive-by shooting. they have killed him in a sexual assault in a public bathroom. he has been a suicide victim. he had a heart attack. again and again and again they killed him. most often they kill him -- there is a place on his biography that they created that gives his birthday. the death date is a blank, but

they felt in that best date again and again. here is a man who relies on his visibility. -- on his visibility to work. and he is victimized by this online at website that is so marvelous in so many ways. there is another name that might be more familiar to you -- fuzzy zoeller. he is a professional golfer. years ago he won the masters. he has won many golf tournaments. fuzzy is a man with a great sense of humor. sometimes he let it get away from him and he says things that are not really funny, but he thought they were before he said them. but one thing about fuzzy zoeller, he is not a drug

addict, he is not an alcoholic, he is not a wife beater, he is not a sexual molester of children. his biography on wikipedia said he was all of those things. his lawyer called and said what do you do when this happens? by i said quite know what you are thinking -- i said i know what you are thinking. i am not going to encourage you to bring a lawsuit because it is a very difficult. he said i am going to sue wikipedia. he did and found out about something called section 230 of the communications decency act. i will come back to that in a

minute. he files of the lawsuit and the court says geb them the name. they gave -- they gave him the name of a company in miami. 49 employees. the company set -- said to his lawyer, we do not know anything about this, but we will help you look for the person who did it. they did try to find a person. i think they interviewed every employee. it could have been some visitor in the building. it could have been somebody who came in off the street. fuzzy could not find out and, so he dropped the suit. i do not know if you remember reading about this, but it was another scandal. it is not just wikipedia that

misleads on line. i will tell you one more tragic story. there is in california, in hollywood, an actress whose stage name chase masterson. chase masterson -- her real name is [unintelligible] . there is in los angeles a thing splash."he metro splashmetro it was a dating board. people who want to date other people can meet on this dating board. somebody in germany, an anonymous source, but on that dating board specific

information on how to reach chase masterson. addresses and telephone numbers. she began to get calls from people looking toward dates and some of those calls were salacious because that post in on dating board was beyond who she was, beyond the fact that she had been a star on the soaps. i think she was on some of the star trek programs. not only to find how to reach her, it invented in 8 salacious wait what are sexual purposes were. she began -- in a salacious wait what her sexual purposes were. she talked to a lawyer.

she sued metro splash. it was a federal suit. it went to court and the judge said -- and this is sort of the. -- sort of the point -- the judge used the word "reprehensible." as reprehensible as it was what happened to her, section -- as reprehensible as it was what happened to her, section 230 protect online services. what the language says is that in matters of defamation if you are an online service provider, you are protected against libel suits. it is different from publishers

or speakers. as i could have been sued when i was a newspaper editor, i could have been sued for saying that about her. a television station or a network could have been sued. it -- the information service protector provider is protected online. unless she could find out who the anonymous source was in germany, and she could not, she had no opportunity to succeed in the lawsuit, so it was dropped. the court dismissed it. reprehensible, but protected. i am a first amendment advocate and i am not interested in having congress passed new libel laws. everytime congress begin to regulate the media, it goes way

too far. some of you will not believe that, but i can tell you i did not want to go down that road. the reason i am happy to be here with you today to talk about this and because of your interest in it, it only reflects a sliver of the opportunity to post vicious, venomous information -- false information, plagiarized information. you know, libraries with access to the internet, like news rooms -- but they really have the world at their fingertips. that keyboard can take you to places and give you information.

other circumstances, you would spend hours, weeks, months digging for to get accurate information. it is there now. it is there and the question is , and you have to ask yourself, is it a credible website? is the blogger honest, honorable, and looking to provide straight, truthful, candid information? what if you are a student and your professor says, "i want an essay on african-american entertainers." you say, i will go to sinbad.

i watched him on television last week. you go to sinbad -- dead. you are a journalist and you have the same assignment. you look up the profile on sinbad -- dead. you go back to the editor and say sinbad is dead. to hell he is, i saw him on television last week. if you saw him on wikipedia, you know he is dead. he is caught in the trap of not being able to answer because the day after day someone answers again and again and again. as one who went through that and tried to laugh my way through it through some tears that dolores had, i can tell you that it is a problem. the great conundrum is this -- what do we do when we have access to this information literally at our fingertips? i am working on a biography of

eight suffragist. i have been working on it for a couple of years. i can sit there in front of a computer and have it at my fingertips, access to information about her, but without that information, i would be here with connie saying help. she would give me all the books written about suffragists and i would be picking and choosing what i know about this little known but her real vote -- but heroic woman who went to prison for seven months, went on hunger strikes in prison, was fed in prison by tubes being injected into her nostrils, butter and milk being pumped into her body to keep her alive, put in and in st. ward by the -- insane war

by the administration. she was examined and was not crazy. she was the same as i am. it tells you something about history. to have the information at my fingertips, including a 700 were oral history she gave before she died at age 91, it is a marvelous world, this new technology, but it is flawed. those of us who rely on libraries and have traditionally relied on libraries with access to accurate, credible information are caught in this catch-22 trapped.

if i go there, is it going to be credible? is it going to be factual? is it going to be reliable? jimmy wales, at one point, after i irritated him, he had a study done and compared himself to encyclopedia britannica. he found that he was almost as reliable as encyclopedia britannica. but, of course, he never considered how much of the content on wikipedia was plagiarized from britannica. [laughter] i had had enough of it and did not want to go there. my friend in san antonio did a superficial survey and said,

yes, plagiarism does affect wikipedia. it is not just a vicious, mean- spirited people, it is also people who want to say something evil or wicked about you. it is also those who are willing to steelwork from somebody else and claim it as their own. -- steal work from somebody else and claim it as their own. i did not -- i do not want to keep you late. i just would ask you to think for a moment about wikileaks. wikileaks drops bombshells on the world. the creator of wikileaks got

access to information, government information, classified information, top- secret information, information about american interactions with people around the world, and most of it was dead, solid accurate. which tells you something else about this wonderful new technology, this marvelous new technology. government secrets are not easily kept. there is a problem with that if you look at rupert murdoch and his son, james, in england. they had career reporters who would hack into your telephone,

fax into your computer -- hack into your computer, and go into information that was deeply personal, often scandalous. i dare say, sometimes, and accurate. the point of it, particularly for those who love libraries, who work in libraries, who want to end -- who want to protect the integrity of libraries, is to remember that those computers that are available to people who use libraries are fallible. they can be misused as well as used to discover the wonders of the world. they can ruin you. they can mislead the people who come to libraries for information. there is going to be at some

point a movement to regulate information online. it is inevitable. you cannot find out about me on wikipedia now, i do not think. what happened to me is superficial stuff compared to what is delivered to politicians. my fear is that when enough politicians are damaged by and and are scandalized by it and find out they have no right to sue, there will be a change in the law. i fear those regulations. i always find that from gutenberg to microsoft, every effort at regulation is in some

way a step beyond what is needed to protect the information and the public. the bottom line i come away with is that there is an awful lot of information out there online that is not part of the wonderful world at your fingertips. if i were advising people who go online, and my grandson does in order to study, research, or to write -- and so many people use libraries for those very things -- i would say there is always a second source. always a third source. if you are still in doubt, there

is a fourth source. in this library at the keyboard they are all right there at your fingertips. i will close with a quotation -- i love when i talk about first amendment issues and, clearly, this is one. i love to quote thomas jefferson or james madison, our most elegant and eloquent spokesman for the right of expression. but there is another founder, one not much identified with rights of free expression. he pointed out -- he said in the

constitution -- he stood and he said, and i paraphrase only slightly, whatever fine words are inserted into a constitution -- and he is talking about freedom of the press -- it always must depend on the general spirit [unintelligible] on public opinion, he said in the general spirit of the people and the government. what he is warning is that you can go the direction of jefferson -- go the direction jefferson and madison said you should go and, if you do, there

will be violations. there will be wrongs done. people will be slandered. people will be insulted. people will be wronged. what you will do, and it was with this in mind and his words in mind that had a major role we started the first amendment series here at vanderbilt -- vendor built -- if you go there, you almost -- you always must worry about public opinion and the spirit of the people and the government. most of my life as i look that public opinion and the general spirit of the people in the government, i worried about may be losing at some point those first amendment rights and values.

i look today at libraries and, once again, i recognize, and we all must recognize, that we must take every advantage of the wonderful world of the media, and as we do it, we must be well aware that as we gain knowledge we can also be undermined by waves of false information. thank you very much quick. [applause] connie asked where you take questions? of course.

you waited this long. i am sure a number of you have to go to the bathroom, but i would love -- if anybody has anything they want to ask. >> did wikipedia offer to let you have a rebuttal or explanation at the same place you put your biography? >> wikipedia is always happy for you, and many people criticize me for not correcting my website. i thought if i corrected my own website or asked my son to, i was simply playing to their system. i did not want to play their game. if you read that biography, if you can find it today -- it may have a block on it -- it is riddled with errors. "there is no longer the slander

or the libel, but it is riddled with errors. people have picked it up from other publications or some of the stuff on the freedom lines, for example. it is just wrong as it relates to my role. some of it is wrong in a way that somebody ought to correct because it projects might roll in a rather he wrote -- protect in a rather heroic way. i am just not willing to play their game, to play jimmy's game. so i did not go in and correct it, but the answer is, yes. i could have. the problem is the day i correct

it, it will be redamaged the next day by dozens of people. he said he had editors and got these servers so every time there is a new entry on wikipedia -- in that first draft of my biography, and i told you john sigyn pollard was the administrative assistant to john f. kennedy in the 1960's -- he had somebody watching. brian chase, who wrote that stuff, misspell the word "early." the editor called it and corrected it, but let me there as an assassin and a defector. [laughter] i decided i would not play the game, but yes, wikipedia rules

do give you the opportunity to say whatever you want to say, but they do not stop somebody else from coming back the next day and putting it right back the way it was or worse. charlie? >> [unintelligible] >> speaking to the microphone, charlie. someone ought to hear from a real technology expert. >> i can send anything i want with your i.p. addressed if i want to. >> as charlie says, that takes the deception another step away from reality and makes the correction even more typical. borderline impossible under those circumstances. i have recited cases here that suggest that i am a consummate

user of technology. i use it every day. i love it, but it is not equal law. i love what is the best of it. it gives me what i need, not just what i want. on the other hand, it also gives me access to that which damages so many of us and damages many of them without their knowledge. you have just about listened me to death. i appreciate the opportunity. oh. pat? >> i just had a quick question about something that happened to vanderbilt recently. over the past summer they

implemented a new feature on the vanderbilt website. there are three rules on this of free speech zone. no organized crime, no paid advertisements, and no hate speech. i particularly have a problem with the no hate speech role. i was curious to hear if you have an opinion on that. >> i have a problem with any eight speech rules. i think hate speech loss are really -- laws are really dicey. i think people were damaged before the legislators put the word hate in front of speech. they were damaged by a vicious speech. i have a hard time identifying what was said about me as hate speech, although with regards to

fuzzy and sinbad, considering who did it to them, and they will never know, i do not think calling that hate speech helps it at all. so i have a real problem with the whole issue of hate speech. i think free expression ought to give you the opportunity to say what you think. i do not want to get caught in some conflict at vanderbilt about a first amendment issue when i have a first amendment center on campus, but if somebody asked me as you just did, i will tell you what i think and i appreciate the question. i think. [laughter] >> if it is so refreshing to hear somebody championed the general spirit of the people again. our friend has done it in terms of the supreme court decisions and now you have done it on

technology. thank you. >> thank you to all of you for coming today. i have enjoyed coming. i talked about wikipedia, wikileaks -- i did not get to wiccans. i look back on my life and some of my best dates owere wiccans. [laughter] [applause] >> before we continue the conversation over at the reception, if i can secure a john's permission, on behalf of the staff of the libraries of at vanderbilt, we would like to enter a book to commemorate today. this is a book from our special collection called "a treatise of law of libel and the freedom of the press."

atshows the law of libel written by a college president. i will not go on because i know you want to get to the reception, but we can discuss that later. if you would allow us, we would like to commemorate the occasion. >> every time i come here to honor me with something else. >> we are very honored because john has announced that his papers will be at vanderbilt's library. [applause] we have offered regularly to help with that and we look forward to the day that they arrive in our collection. i hope you'll join us on the second-floor in the gallery for a reception. we will thank john one more time because that was really wonderful. [applause] >> thank you for coming. thank you. thank you so much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> today on "washington journal," was imposed financial reporter on the economic recession and a holiday shopping. then steven emerson pajamas of the growth of islamic radicalism in the u.s. and the prospect of attacks on american citizens. after that, stacy palmer looks at charitable giving in the u.s. and weather the recession is having an effect. plus, your e-mail's, calls, and tweets. live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c- span. >> last month, there was a discussion on southern jews and race relations. we will hear about racial tensions in the american south through personal experiences and a useful trauma that details the trial and lynching of a jewish factory

superintendent who was accused of murdering one of his workers. this is one hour and 20 minutes.

>> please welcome tonight's panel, alfred uhry, eli evans, julian bond and cynthia tucker. [applause] cynthia tucker is a veteran newspaper journalist. in 2006, she was named journalist of the year for the national association of black journalists. she was editorial page editor of the the atlanta journal- constitution newspaper for 17 years where she led the development of opinion policy. she maintains a column published in newspapers around the country. alfred uhry is distinguished as the only american playwright to win a pulitzer prize. --an academy award, and a tony award. the film version won an academy

award for best adapted screenplay in 1990. his book for the musical won day tony award in 1999. it currently has its washington, d.c. premiere at the ford theater. julian bond was a founder of the student nonviolent coordinating committee. he is a 20 year veteran of the georgia general assembly. he was the founder of the southern law center. he was chairman of the naacp board of directors. he is now chairman emeritus. he is a professor in the department of history at the

university of virginia. he is an advisor to the lincoln legacy project. eli evans served in the white house as a speech writer to president lyndon johnson. he has been with the carnegie corporation of new york and served as the first president of the charles h. repson organization. he is in much demands as a speaker. he is the editor of numerous books, articles, and essays. three of his books have received an exceptional acclaim and remain classes in the field.

please welcome the panel. [applause] cynthia, its all yours. >> welcome to what i think will be a lively and entertaining evening. our panelists have knowledge of southern history and our wonderful story tellers. eli reminded me that the south is no one place. it abbas, from a slightly different south. i will start by telling you briefly that i grew up in a small town you never heard of.

in alabama, it has a population of about 70,000. it is known as the setting for to kill a mockingbird because harper lee grew up there. >> i grew up in atlanta, georgia. i was the fourth generation of jews born there. my family came from germany or around 1846. they say they came before atlanta was named atlanta. i grew up in atlanta. i left to go to college and never lived there again. but my heart is there. >> i was born in durham, north carolina. it was a fairly liberal community. we were eastern european. we used to talk about what it was like to grow up jewish and from the south.

there is something inherently interesting about it. my grandfather was a peddler. i am the grandson of a peddler. eventually, he was asked by the black community -- which was an organized black community. the life insurance business started there. at one time, it was the largest black corporation in the country. that was before detroit and the music started. it was an organized black community. a man came to my father and asked if he would run for mayor.

he agreed to do so. he was elected with two other people, one the daughter of the duke family. this was after the war, about 1950. he began to integrate the town, starting with the fire department and the police department. he moved onto the government. he is a heroic figure in the community. i can tell you why they picked them in the beginning. he had a store with a hot dog counter. it was just a regular hot dog stand. the sheriff arrived one day and said he cannot serve in an integrated way. he would have to close the stand. my father could not stand the

idea of that. he called his lawyers and they said, you cannot serve sitting down. you can do it standing up. they removed all of the seats from the counter. he had the only stand-up hot dog counter in the town. this made a huge a impression on the black community. after that, he always went to the black community and held meetings. he was quite brilliant at all of this. there were a lot of heroes in the south. he is my personal hero. >> my father was president of the fort valley college for negroes.

he lived there until 1957. he moved back to atlanta and became dean of education at atlanta university. he went to morehouse college. he drove me by what i now know to be atlanta university. he said, that is morehouse college. i said, i want to go there. i was a senior at morehouse college when i got engaged in

the movement for civil rights. in the middle of the second semester my senior year, i dropped out of college much to my parents' horror. i did not finish until some years later. i finally did graduate. the legislature was reapportioned in the early 1960's. i ran for one of the new seats and won. i endorsed an anti-war statement. i was expelled from the legislature. i ran for the seat i vacated and won again. i was admitted for the legislature and served there for the next 20 years. i ran for congress. my best friend, john lewis, also ran for congress. you know the results. i decided to move to washington anyway.

i have been here ever since. i am happy to be here tonight. >> it seems to me that historians and popular culture have done a pretty good job helping the nation understands what the lives of black southerners were like over many generations. there haven't been nearly as many stories about the lives of the jewish southerners. did jewish southerners have experiences that would make for good stories? if so, why don't we know more of those stories? >> apparently, we do. i have been making a good living telling those stories for a long time. [laughter] what is interesting in retrospect is that there were black people and there were

white people and there were jews. we were kind of like white people, but not exactly. we were well aware that we did not have been as bad as black people, we were always aware that we were jews. somebody would call you a kike or a dirty jew and you just learn to live with it. what fascinated me as a writer was that we employ domestic help that was black. what did they were able to tell the difference between working for jews or working for not jews, i am not sure. we were in the middle. we were outside the real loop.

it was tricky, but not as tricky as it was for you. when i looked back on my life, i realized i had something to write about. here i am doing it. >> you have written some of those stories as well. >> i am is sitting here thinking where to begin. because my grandfather was a peddler and told those stories that begin in eastern europe and how awful life was for them, he went with a pack on his back in the beginning. he went to the baltimore bargaining house. peddling was something they did in europe. it was a real art form. he made enough money to buy a

horse. he made enough money to buy a wagon. and then the roads that better and the farmer started coming to town and he opened a store. that was the beginning of my family. my father was a real athlete. he was an athlete in high school and he ran track in college and set the record for the half mile for the state of north carolina. when i tell him they ran the half mile in under two minutes, he said we had charcoal tracks. in any event, that was part of my upbringing. wasy mother's side, it different. my grandmother had 8 consecutive daughters. i used to say a straight daughters. i don't say that anymore. [laughter] i was cautioned.

and then a son. she had a baby every two years. it was a big family and my mother was the oldest. the last child was a boy. she was interviewed several years before she died by the daughter who married a rabbi. the most important thing about her was that she met the founder of the women's zionist organization. she founded the first women's hadassah organization. my grandmother wanted to see the holy land. she took my mother to palestine. she passed the torch to her. my mother was the national vice-president of hadassah for

40 years. i grew up in an ardently zionist house. german jews did not dig the creation of a jewish state. i went to israel as a high- school student. i lived on a kibbutz. she kept up with affairs. my mother ran the jewish telegraphic center every week. i had an unusual childhood. i went to the precincts with my father whenever he ran. he was elected six consecutive

times. it was during the whole 1954 decision. he served until 1962. that enabled him to plead for the law of the land. that was unusual at the time. i was going to chapel hill and i sat with a woman on the faculty. the highest-ranking black woman on the faculty. i introduced myself and she said, i know you. my father was one of the 18 year olds that your father used to integrate the department. they all stood as one and toasted your father. i get choked up thinking about that. those stories for all around me as i grew up. they had a huge influence on me and my interests. with regard to the book, i was keeping a diary from a young age. i began to write about what it was like to be jewish at the university and in the south. i began to come to feel that to

be southern and jewish was the unique southern american experience. you had the quality of being an insider and an outsider. you were outside of the culture. i can talk more about that at length. it is something every jew from the south who was born here goes through. we are the state of jesse helms. i do not want to talk about politics. [laughter] that was the state that

produced jesse helms. i can believe i can mention his name without lightning striking. [laughter] in any event, they were tough campaigns. we had a tobacco center. we have a very powerful labor union. this was rugged politics. i could tell a lot of stories about things that happened. my father had a personality that was extraordinary. he could walk into a room and he could meet them all and they would leave in a different order and he could remember every name. i was not good at that. he had a natural gift. when he met people, it was always, there you are. not here i am. he was great that way. he was beloved in a certain way. they would listen. he tried to get the drug stores to serve black students. finally, they did.

he calls the first store that had served blacks at the counter. >> julian, when we talk about the civil rights movement, most people are aware that there was lots of jewish support for the civil rights movement. mostly, the big names, even some of the well known marchers were jewish volunteers. you must have known other jewish activists. jewish activists.