that's oversimplified with what cease-fire is. it's working in 65 cities and locations from new orleans to chicago to camden to newark so it's in different places. we brought it to baltimore and have had it in oakland also. we are also focusing on violent repeat offenders. we are not arresting neighborhoods and the good thing about cease-fire but also the people who are exacerbating problems with violence out there in our community. our repeat offender program focuses on eventual spot the community not the mass of minority kids out there but focusing on those people we know for a fact or killing other human beings and trying to take them out of our communities. we also focus on groups, we focus on gangs and refocus on cruise. those are a lot of different things. gangs can be the bloods and the crips etc. and that you have groups that come together from neighborhoods to come together to do criminal acts and then you have crews. those can be drug crews who are coming together to sell drugs as a whole so we focus on all these pieces

i said, no, the one problem we don't have is people oversimplify and we don't have a lack of people oversimplifying complex problem. that happens all the time. what i need do is clarify the complexity. not simplify it. i need clarify it. so people understand it so that we can deal with it. when you simplify complexity, what happens is you assume away the hard stuff and the hard stuff is what you gets you in trouble because in the process of simplifying it, you assumed it away so our job here is to clarify it so we can deal with it. we try to throw a very wide net. that's one of the reasons i'm here. this is the first document we're going to have a series of war games after this. and a series of other documents. we are trying to get feed back from as many folks from as wide a genre as we can get. >>. >> the next steps for this, there sort of the big picture, you know, top document. >> right. >> given all of the complexity, do you see this feeding down into many different sort of branches here and is there any -- i don't want to say concern, but is there any feeling that this might get, you know, as

unoriginal, obvious, the story comes first, the science plays a supporting role. .vergeneralize, oversimplifiedow do you respond to that. >> i don't really think of them as criticism. first and the sciences secondary because i come first.ries to story is an incredibly powerful way to communicate ideas. are my books simplify? of course. they are supposed to be. i spent a huge amount of time simplifying. i put my head in my hands and say, that is my intention. if i didn't simplify them, people wouldn't read them. >> critics say don't take him so seriously. >> i would say exactly right. chill out. ideas ought to be a source of joy. that is supposed to be something that brings you pleasure. you can write whatever you want at the new yorker and how do you choose topics? why do you write essays when you could write books? >> new yorker story is the most demanding literary form. it is much harder to write a new yorker story than a book. i am very light to the game here but i don't want to write a book about it. but would it be the kernel of a great article? absolutely. journalistseen start their own c

science plays a supporting role, overgeneralized, oversimplifies. how do you respond?> i don't think of them as criticism. the story comes first in science is secondary and that's because i wanted it to. the stories are incredibly powerful ways to communicate ideas. are my books simplified? of course they are. i spent a huge amount of time simplifying them. when someone says i am simplifying it? that's my intention. it, peoplet simplify would not read them. they would be unreadable. >> critics say not to taken so seriously. >> exactly right. chill out. ideas ought to be a source of joy. think about something in a new way even if you find it unconvincing. it's supposed to be something that brings you pleasure. >> you can write whatever you want now at the new yorker. why are you still writing essays when you could just write books? >> i enjoy it. demanding is the most literary form. it's much harder to write than a book. i've been fascinated with the ignition switch controversy although i'm late to the game here. i don't think anyone would read a book about it. would it

overgeneralize, oversimplified to the point you are wrong. how do you respond to that. >> i don't really think of them as criticism. the story is first and the science is secondary, because i want the stories to come first. story is an incredibly powerful way to communicate ideas. are my books simplified? of course. they are supposed to be. i spend a huge amount of time simplifying. so, when someone says, as a way of criticism, you're simplifying, i put my head in my hands and say, that is my intention. if i didn't simplify them, people wouldn't read them. >> critics say, don't take him so seriously. >> i would say exactly right. chill out. ideas ought to be a source of joy. to think about something in a new way, even if you find it unconvincing. that is supposed to be something that brings you pleasure. >> you can write whatever you want at the new yorker. how do you choose topics? why do you write essays when you could just write books? >> a new yorker story is the most demanding literary form. it is much harder to write a new yorker story

overgeneralize, oversimplified to the point you are wrong.ow do you respond to that. >> i don't really think of them as criticism. the story is first and the science is secondary, because i want the stories to come first. story is an incredibly powerful way to communicate ideas. are my books simplified? of course. they are supposed to be. i spend a huge amount of time simplifying. so, when someone says, as a way of criticism, you're simplifying, i put my head in my hands and say, that is my intention. if i didn't simplify them, people wouldn't read them. >> critics say, don't take him so seriously. >> i would say exactly right. chill out. ideas ought to be a source of joy. to think about something in a new way, even if you find it unconvincing. that is supposed to be something that brings you pleasure. >> you can write whatever you want at the new yorker. how do you choose topics? why do you write essays when you could just write books? >> a new yorker story is the most demanding literary form. it is much harder to write a new yorker story th

i said, no, the one problem we don't have is people oversimplify and we don't have a lack of people oversimplifying complex problem. that happens all the time. what i need do is clarify the complexity. not simplify it. i need clarify it. so people understand it so that we can deal with it. when you simplify complexity, what happens is you assume away the hard stuff and the hard stuff is what you gets you in trouble because in the process of simplifying it, you assumed it away so our job here is to clarify it so we can deal with it. we try to throw a very wide net. that's one of the reasons i'm here. this is the first document we're going to have a series of war games after this. and a series of other documents. we are trying to get feed back from as many folks from as wide a genre as we can get. >> the next steps for this, this is sort of the big picture, you know, top document. >> right. >> given all of the complexity, do you see this feeding down into many different sort of branches here and is there any -- i don't want to say concern, but is there any feeling that this might get, you know, as wi

people oversimplifying complex problem. that happens all the time. what i need do is clarify the complexity. not simplify it. i need clarify it. so people understand it so that we can deal with it. when you simplify complexity, what happens is you assume away the hard stuff and the hard stuff is what you gets you in trouble because in the process of simplifying it, you assumed it away so our job here is to clarify it so we can deal with it. we try to throw a very wide net. that's one of the reasons i'm here. this is the first document we're going to have a series of war games after this. and a series of other documents. we are trying to get feed back from as many folks from as wide a genre as we can get. >> the next steps for this, this is sort of the big picture, you know, top document. >> right. >> given all of the complexity, do you see this feeding down into many different sort of branches here and is there any -- i don't want to say concern, but is there any feeling that this might get, you know, as with all these unkn

i will oversimplify. it is a chocolate cake steady. remember this one? maybe you can help me remember exactly been, but it goes like this. study subjects in a very dramatic get extra risk exposed to elect to undertake an effort to math and some of our last before going into remember a string of numbers. by a statistically significant part in the opposite had hidden and i brought to is the chocolate cake. the ones who didn't choose the fruit. and they factor for these, you know, the causes and what they are coming up with is that when your brain is not even overloaded with information, but taking into account significant information that they have to remember, it affects your decision making. so now bring it back to the telephone and the car. it really sort of thinking about what is going on, anticipating the phone, talking on the phone, you are beginning to end pain a little bit of your decision if economists, cover zepa and brought strength, that is a potentially. ♪ , but it actually capital of the late to the restaurant. she's got to be a quarter of ir

i'm going to guess that the audience has heard of this and i'm this and i'm going to oversimplify but there's a chocolate cake study. maybe you can help me remember but it goes like this. the subjects go in a row and get the choice would you like the chocolate cake for a snack or the fruit and some of these studies are asked to remember a stream of numbers and by a statistically significant margin, the ones that have to remember a member chose the chocolate cake and the ones that didn't choose the fruit and they factor these brilliant narrow scientist factors and what they are coming up with is when we are taking into account significant information that it has to remember that affect your decision making. so now bring it back to the phone and a car and nearly sort of thinking about what is going on with your phone and anticipating the phone, talking on the phone you are beginning to end pinch a little bit of your decision-making power. to cover the broad spectrum, that is a potentially deadly thing in a car but it also can go all the way to the restaurant where you are choosing what

i think business in principle to simple point-to-point is a big problem but to oversimplify what i would think about it like this. the industrial revolution and business on all the wonderful things that business has produced an individual business ultimately is what we are talking about has essentially made the difference between life and death for most people in this country and most people in the industrialized world. so too perhaps oversimplify a bit if it weren't for those two things industrialization and business probably lose it all be dead. or at the very least it make our lives infinitely better. so business is a positive thing to think about this for a moment. think about your own view of business grade in the current context of america is it true to really say to yourself that is a view of business and the pursuit of business. maybe you can abstract away from individual examples and i will give you a couple of examples in a minute that my guess is you are like me and sometimes you are you know what they're a lot of businesses that seem to do the wrong things. there are a lot of

oversimplify, it upheld slavery right. commentators talked about it. but that shows you how just the this idea that be entitled to influence what the government does. how kind of deeply rooted that is. and i think the latest manifestation of that, i earlier --n the talk or maybe it was in the questions -- but it's the effort to amend the constitution. there was a serious effort in monthss just about an ago. it culminated in september. judiciaryate committee, to amend the first amendment so congress could pass, quote, reasonable restrictions on campaign financing, which means reasonable restrictions on the amount of money you spend on means effectively how much you get to talk and whether you really get to talk. and this was -- now, it was theated handily, because republicans -- there was no way they had -- i think they needed it out ofority to get committee. but this issue has come up many decades.at least two and every time, it gains a momentum. more and i look down the road, and sometimes if i'm depressed -- maybe -- i don't know if this is inspirati

i think americans are vulnerable to oversimplify ideologies saying don't tax, the got is not your friend. people who attended the hearing, i think, tend to be of that ideological zealousness, and we need to think of it as a problem. when kids smoke, they do it young. nine out of 10 smokers in the united states got hooked before reaching the age of 19. maybe the ban of tobacco in the small town is a good thing. america was founded on the right of cities and towns govern themselves and be independent. fair. >> smoking kills and brings with it things that affect nonsmokers. is there a legitimate interest in banning tobacco product and shouldn't a town have the ability to do it. >> i think some products are harmful, cigarettes is not the only one, alcohol does, as does fatty food, junk food, and the think the local board has the authority to make the decision. i'm not a lawyer. i suspect it's the case. i wish they wouldn't. i can be an accused of ideology zealotry, but people should be allowed to do what they want, other than in imposing bans. >> patrick how far should governments go, when i

it's oversimplified. >> has there been disappointment by hispanics that went out to vote. big numbers. that he hadn't done more. that he hasn't followed through on his promise. i think if you look at the time line for the national election. if the president had gone ahead and done something as promised, that frustration would have been lower. coming out of the middle of last year, he said the department of homeland security and justice. his people. those people combing the laws to see what the limited power was. obviously it can't change laterally. he was going to work with within the limit of his power as president. then we get to spring 2014, and announces nothing after the election. it was because those were hopes raised in itself. they are not hopes created by activists, by others, where he was silent on the issue. he promised and didn't deliver. if this was done in the hopes that you could save people in dodgy seats. they are going down anyway, you may have taken mark warner down, you may have helped charlie crist. if he comes within a hair of beating rick scott. i am

>> we say that 3 percent is the new percent is the oversimplified version of that. what a lot of people do, they start off with a particular amount of money they think they need and they don't adapt if they have extra or if they have a down year they don't cut back. that's their lifestyle. and the thing they don't plan on are big-ticket items. the next new car they'll need eight or nine years in retirement. >> the reality, you can't predict the health issues you'll face and there are a lot of other expenses too. >> you can't predict a lot. there's a few you can predict or at least have control over. the amount of debt you're carrying over into retirement. high interest credit card debt, you want do eliminate. you want to get down your mortgage to zero. even if it's not high rate. that's going to drag on your investment and what you have left to tap for retirement. >> so wesley, i want to switch you want topic, there's been a big debate going on about whether or not investors particularly people in retirement should use actively managed funds or etfs where they're ta

since that time, the public debate over the situation in the region has often tended to be oversimplified and focused on isis, itself, and the effort to degrade and destroy it. today we step back and look deeper at the complexities in the region today and forces shaping the political situation in iraq, syria, and lebanon, as well as the actions and the policies of neighboring countries in the region. we have an excellent group of carnegie and regional speakers, experts speaking today. our last session will be with deputy national security advisers. that session will begin promptly at 3:00 p.m., and anyone attending will be asked to remain seated until mr. blinken leaves the building. finally, we have c-span and a number of other news agencies filming the conference today. i ask you to please be conscious as you move around in the back of the room. now, with no further adieu, i'll turn the microphone over to vice president of policy and director of the middle east program who will moderate our first panel. thank you. >> thank you very much, kathe katherine and thank you for organizing this

am i oversimplifying your position there? >> i don't think you're oversimplifying. i would say that i think judge starr's baylor, bernard's stanford, notre dame, it is an option to provide four-year scholarships. each of our institutions provide that for our student athletes. that's not universally adopted across the country. and i think for a student athlete not to graduate from a university with a degree in hand is a total disservice. >> thank you. and i think, judge starr, you mentioned something like 86%. could you talk about your graduation rate for your student athletes again very quickly? >> yes. this last year, academic year, 82% did, in fact, graduate. a number did, in fact, as did pat go on to pursue degrees as well. advanced degrees, graduate degrees. and here's the key point. it's individual choice. what is the culture? that's the responsibility of the university. does the university create a culture that encourages the student to do the best that he or she can? there are obviously important issues to be addressed. we completely agree with that and we're

>> oversimplified -- if you have 500 stakeholders in seattle i would find a host and a little in fighting team of folks and hopefully those five in a call with you would work hard to find 20 friends in a room and go out there and do a presentation, not a town hall meeting so much as a literal workshop on starting up a group, and what you would get to support and nurture by being the solution of restarting chapters by finding one of your posts and building and inviting a team and doing a presentation whereby 20 in the room six raise their hand and say we are in, let them be clear what they are in john, and not provide that kind of thing. >> straight out of a campaign playbook. had not elected republicans in 1928 and my district was 74% democrat and what i would do is if i came to your house, have any kind of positive response to my message the first thing i would say is invite your friends and neighbors over and so i can meet with a group in your living room and talk as a group and at the end of it have something specific whether it is a volunteer card or asking people to take a bumper sti

am i oversimplifying your position there? >> i don't think you're oversimplifying. i would say that i think judge starr's baylor, bernard's stanford, notre dame, it is an option to provide four-year scholarships. each of our institutions provide that for our student athletes. that's not universally adopted across the country. and i think for a student athlete not to graduate from a university with a degree in hand is a total disservice. >> thank you. and i think, judge starr, you mentioned something like 86%. could you talk about your graduation rate for your student athletes again very quickly? >> yes. this last year, academic year, 82% did, in fact, graduate. a number did, in fact, as did pat go on to pursue degrees as well. advanced degrees, graduate degrees. and here's the key point. it's individual choice. what is the culture? that's the responsibility of the university. does the university create a culture that encourages the student to do the best that he or she can? there are obviously important issues to be addressed. we completely agree with that and we're

voters, the way that the american system conducts and call it the american system is already oversimplifying, the way that each state conducts its own different voter registration process almost certain impacts more voters, more regularly than the particular rules about voter identification. but i think there's a reason, i think there are several reasons why this issue has become so very, very controversial here. one has to do with a fight, a vigorous fight over the extent to which majorities may set election rolls that burden some minorities. when it comes to the come and il explain this and did it, when it comes to requirements to show particular forms of identification at the polls, mr. von spakovsky is right, most americans have absolutely no problem presenting that documentation. and so it is unsurprising that most americans support rules showing that documentation. on the other hand, some americans have great deal of difficulty showing that documentation. and the fight here is over the extent to which most of us can make the rules harder for some of us. and that is a fight that resonat

so perhaps to oversimplify it, if it weren't for those two things, industrialization, we would probably all be dead. or at the very least, it makes our lives infinitely better. so view this as a positive thing. think about your own view of business in the current context of america. is it true that yes, i does have a positive view of business and the pursuit of business. and i will give you a couple of examples in a minute. my guess is that there are a lot of businesses that seem to do the wrong things. there are a lot of businesses that seem to be using government to benefit themselves and cronyism really impacts that. in fact, that's kind of what i would say is one of the fundamental reasons that people who would otherwise be motivated to view business favorably. some people that work in business will have a kind of mixed view. and it's not really good, it's kind of dirty sometimes. and this issue actually talks about it. let me give you a couple of examples to get you thinking about how you think about business and why this issue affects our thinking. and the tesla cars are really co

about aspects of this that may not be clear or things that you think we may have overlooked or oversimplified. one of the things that training a doctrine command does for the army, we sort of have one of our bumper stickers is we are the architect of the army. we design the army of the future and in the process of doing that, we describe what the future operating environment is like and then we try to come to grips with what role the army has and then determine what capability the army has to have to fulfill its role in the future that we describe. so at this point in time, our history is very exciting to be doing this. as we are coming out over a decade of war. and being intro spective in the army and saying we want to be informed. but a recent multiple years of war but not captive to them. we want to be informed by them as to what insight they can give us as we look to the future and therefore, try to innovate and get out in front of our head lights so to speak, so we are always maintaining that advantage that quite honestly our nation expects of the united states army. the way that trainin

insights about the aspects that may not be clear or things you think we may have overlooked or oversimplified. one of the things that they do for the army, we sort of have one of the bumper stickers. we're the architect of the army. we design the army of the future. we describe what the future operating environment is like. we come to grips with what role the army has on that and determine what capabilities they have to fulfill the in the future that we described. at this time in our history, it's kpiding to do this into the army and saying we want to be informed by our recent multiple years of war and not captive to them. we want to be informed by them as to what they can give us as we look to the future and try to innovate and get out in front of our headlights so that we will always maintain that advantage that our nation has with the united states army. the that we played, we write our operating concepts for the army. that's really our first attempt with regards to all of the products that we produced to say what is it that the army is going to have to do? we try to describe the future an

>> well, i'm concerned people have oversimplified both the problem and the solution.s a very complex system and our understanding is very incomplete. all of the solutions that have been proposed to deal with human-caused global warming are fraught with unintended consequences. so we need to have, open up the dialogue and really try to get more realistic about the challenges and the possible solutions. >> it was our generation, judy, that created earth day. we understand we want to take care of the globe. give me some significant simple examples how the data is being skewed to the point of putting things over that aren't necessarily true. >> it's not so much the data is being skewed. it's how it's interpreted. the data are ambiguous and incomplete. the models are far from perfect. >> give me some examples. >> related to oceans. >> degrees of warming. >> degrees of warming. we've warmed about 0.8, well about 1.5 degrees fahrenheit over the last century. climate models project that we could see very substantial warming, even up to eight degrees fahrenheit in the 21st cen

>> i think you oversimplify what's happening on the ground with what we do to contribute. it isn't just an air campaign that takes place, there is a multifaceted approach to take on the capability, not the least in supporting indigenous ground troops to be able to take on the fight themselves. >> how long do you think it will last? >> i wouldn't like to speculate, but i should perhaps say not to expect anything in months or years. i think this will take a number of years. in the same way that al qaeda is an idealogy, remains with us in the fact that there are this competition that we're seeing between isil and aq at the moment. it still remains with us, even though the leader himself was killed in pakistan a number of years ago. >> forgive me for not being present when you began your evidence. because of obama, when you were asked how long it would take, you said two or three years. >> i'm glad to know robert is in agreement with me. >> i'm sure he's quite relieved as well. >> the question i wanted to ask you is this. how far do you think success would be made easier if th

>> i think you oversimplified what is happening on the ground as far as what we are doing to contribute it is not simply an air campaign taking place. there is a multifaceted approach in order to take on the capability not the least in supporting indigenous ground troops to deal at stake on the fight themselves. >> how long you think it will last? >> i would like to speculate but i should perhaps caution in expecting anything in months or years. i think this is going to take a number of years in the same way that al qaeda has an ideology that remains with us and in fact there is this competition we are seeing between the isil and a few at the moment. it still remains with us even though the leader itself was killed in pakistan a number of years ago. >> forgive me for not being present. it's worth remembering president obama when asked along he was going to take he said something like two or three years so there is some corroboration across the atlantic. >> i was glad to know that mr. roberts was in agreement with me. >> i'm sure he is quite pleased as well. my question is this. how do y

we are oversimplifying it. can get a job further away from your house and commute. >> really, they are going to buy a house? >> inland empire numbers went down dramatically. talking about the riverside area was devastated. immigrants could get no dock loans because they didn't have docks and the commute. sorry. >> commute is still a commute in terms of miles. >> you can commute by yourself. people love to have their cars and their music. >> we've got to get to pisani. >> we almost got to 10% for the year on the s&p which is 2033. fell back a little bit. bob pisani on the floor. >> six points shy of that. nonfarm payroll out, it's a good time to take stock where we stand. i think this is more than a fed-engineered rally here. we've got 5.8% unemployment rate. we've got historic low interest rates. we got a stock market at record highs. earnings at record highs. going to be up 10% in earnings this quarter. low oil prices. this is with a government completely deadlocked. the bad news is the stock market executed a

so to perhaps oversimplify a bit if it weren't for those two , things industrialization and businessobably we would all be dead. or at the very least it make our lives infinitely better. so business is a positive thing . but think about this for a moment. think about your own view of business. in the current context of america is it true to really say to yourself that i have a positive view of business and the pursuit of business? maybe you can abstract away from individual examples and i will give you a couple of examples in minute. but my guess is you are like me, and sometimes, there are a lot of businesses that seem to do the wrong thing. there are a lot of businesses that seem to be using government to benefit themselves at the expense of everybody else. and cronyism really impacts that. in fact that's kind of what i would say one of the fundamental reasons that people who would otherwise be motivated to view business a verbally, and indeed -- favorably, and indeed some people who work in business still have kind of a mixed view. business isn't really good, it's kind of dirty so