the idea of what he was committed to was jeopardized. let me stay around a little bit longer and they developed a relationship with a sandwich the talents came to the floor and i bring this up because why i decided to write this t-shirt. if education is right it's an act of love and about the growth of others and he's absolutely correct by pointing out this question. you see in a lot of my writings one of the things i argue against his ridiculous clichÉ. it means you pay attention to people's strengths and weaknesses. if you've ever been loved, you have other flaws and you won't have that many other way so part of the question is in fact they can be connected also to their strength. the disconnect to at the two the two that i give you to argument that it is connected to a different radical democracy then what it is in the sovereignty is that real freedom is for people to be about to live and exercise their right not only to make the world better but also in the process to be able to take responsibility for their own mistakes. there are al

at the core of sex education was this idea of gender, and how the content and methods are developed are these ideas about school as a place that has forms of gender imprinting. what are the mechanisms. what are the ways that schools reproduce ideas about gender and roles? >> by determining who can and cannot go to a school dance as a couple. prof. chatelain: very good. every so often there will be the students banned from going to a dance together. usually a same-sex couple. the separation of boys and girls during sex education. when we look at the film clip of human growth that comes out of oregon boys and girls together on the same information. we have this understanding of the needing to know different things. >> prom king and queen. prof. chatelain: the school dance. if i was elected princess or queen of all school things i would a ballot dances -- abolish dances. what is the purpose of a school sponsoring a dance? anyone want to make a case? >> out take a shot. it brings those relationships into the public sphere that can be observed and condone. the notion of some dancing that hap

you get the small states naturally liking delaware's idea. the big states virginia's idea. and that is an issue that will pretty much go on for the better part of a month off and on. now, virginia's idea of congress as we have two houses, upper lower house, what becomes our senate and house of representatives. again, it is based on population. but as you start debating it you have others saying -- so eventually, when it seems like there is no answer to be found it would be connecticut that would make the compromise, what we call the connecticut compromise or the great compromise, would give us this question of, a senate where every state is equal, house of representatives where we base it on people. both sides getting some of what they want. and eventually that is what -- how it would go. but not everybody wants that. so, you are not sure if everybody is going to go for that but that is how they slot in for congress. the president, there are multiple ideas of president, of executive. the virginia plan is ultimately a seven-year executive elected by congress. a little bit dif

or under the o system they can say no and the idea dies there. recognizing this is not the most effective way to manage their affairs the ic then moved to another system that looks almost the same this is the poster in annual retreat they have this retreat happens in december of last year february this of this year it's a way to improve the processes for improving and recommending grants the difference between the two charts in the second chart this one here when an idea goes before the sub committee the sub committee has to made a registers of yes or no and either reimburses yes or no are brought back to the full ic for final recommendation. during the retreat they also decided they would set a time limit for the sub committee to take action and bring the recommendations back to the committee as a whole however the time limits has not been set in the last six months or so. >> the last five years we have been deal withing this fund and this organization it has been operating on the first slide organizational flowchart >> that is correct >> and whe

the idea of no taxation without representation. with youth -- with the exception of the district of lovecolumbia. if i recall it was that which fosters the american colonies. [laughter] i dwant therefore, to protect myself. as a member of the house of lords, i do not have a vote in the house of summons. i got my own summons before the election decided who those numbers were to be. the law left the house of lords to become the 16th court of the united kingdom in 2009, neither do i have the right to sit or both on any parliamentary business in the house of lords. so i am doubly disenfranchised. perhaps i should go along with the prisoners and others who don't have the vote in my country. another of my favorite provisions in the original charter is chapter 45. "we will not make justices, constables sheriff's, or bayl -- bailiffs." this is but one of the many embodiments in the charter. the third idea, the idea that the king and his officials were as much subject to the law of the land as were the rest of his people. the rule of law is

i don't know why people think this are rare they got the idea. it is true holy the government can in fringehead -- in french ryan writes all the universities are with speech police and that is a big concern but you have to always err on this side to let people say what they think because if we don't we will never have knowledge. and i quote a harvard psychologist to talks at length about the free speech supporter who was very alarmed and he talks about the philosopher who says in order to have knowledge you have conjecture and that is wholly dedicated on free speech that people can say what they think the matter how crazy or offensive and rigo back and forth and that is how we get knowledge if we take that out we have no knowledge so for anybody who says the debate is over, it is not people need to be able to persuade and convince people if all they can do is name calling there probably don't have a very good argument. >> host: five to tell you the debate is over then therefore is not. [laughter] but the people are treated as harshly as african-am

or under the o system they can say no and the idea dies there. recognizing this is not the most effective way to manage their affairs the ic then moved to another system that looks almost the same this is the poster in annual retreat they have this retreat happens in december of last year february this of this year it's a way to improve the processes for improving and recommending grants the difference between the two charts in the second chart this one here when an idea goes before the sub committee the sub committee has to made a registers of yes or no and either reimburses yes or n

elaborate on that. >> guest: i called in the far left from the liberals i think they do still value the idea of of free-speech in a sense and don't speak to the silence people but the liberal left may, i probably share of what if not most of their policy goals, but when it comes to tactics and tolerance for differing ideas that is where we part ways. with dave barry to is very illiberal touche shutdown and silence people. that is the point of the books that the use the tactics to silence people and one is what you just talked about at the same time to complain about misogyny to call people that they disagree with but not that they don't care for the unborn but at the same time they will watch a misogynist attack against a conservative pullman because they no one heard to be seen as somebody who should be listened to in the public square. >> host: when did this realization as a lifelong liberal when did it happen with that true and traditional left come about or was that gradual? >> i think it was gradual then all of a sudden. one of the things that was happening then something happened where

i think most liberals are very principled and stew them still value the idea of free speech and dissent and debate and aren't seeking to silence people and the illiberal left and i probably share a lot if not most of their policy goals and policy positions when it comes to tap tics and tolerance for different ideas. that's where we part ways. what they do is very illiberal in the sense that they try to shut down debate and try to silence people. that is the point of the book that they use different tactics to silence people. one of them is what you just talked about which is while at the same time they will be complaining about misogyny and calling people who they disagree with misogynist it's not that they care for the unborn but at the same time they will launch a misogynist attack against a conservative woman because they want to delegitimize her. they don't want her to be seen as someone who should be listened to in the public square. >> host: when did this realization as you describe yourself as a lifelong liberal when did this realization of what you do is a separation between the

host: they do a legislate to explain to the audience. >> guest: i was coming off of cleopatra and the idea of women in power and what is threatening about a powerful woman and what do women do with their power and why are men so somehow ruffled by female power and the very curious idea of an adolescent with power brick things that i felt i hadn't worked out with cleopatra and it upsets me after cleopatra. also this was the ability to take a topic we all feel we are well-versed in and show that we know very little about and what we do know is largely -- at this point. it's difficult in the sense that we have some of this talk -- documentation but no documentation in the first person from the girls themselves. what we can infer what's going on in their minds and are tormented souls we get from the courtroom hearings. you wouldn't have been a first choice book for anyone who wanted serious documentation for psychological angle but you work with what you have. >> host: you won the pulitzer prize for leah patrick? >> guest: in fact the question there was can you pry apart the lives of two peopl

some of the marxist ideas say some of the most devastating ideas of capitalism came from the south. there were some devastating critiques of capitalism from the south. their portrayal of slavery is this thing where everybody is happy and it is overoptimistic but in terms of the critique of capitalism, it is pretty devastating. a lot of arguments for critiques were in the southern capital. these are crucial to know. no really story and ignores it. mr. rafuse: we have gone over our time. >> thank you. we will be completing the centennial of the spanish-american war beginning in 2048. [laughter] [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] ? >> the civil war airs every saturday. to watch more of our programming any time visit our website. you are watching american history tv every weekend on c-span3. >> coming up next, from the university of virginia, a conference on the end of the civil war. historians discuss the idea of the l

there's a big difference between murderers and people who litter. >> the idea that the deposit is going to stick something inside you, i mean as a libertarian, i think it's bizarre that you are in favor of this. >> they put an ankle bracelet on you as it is. to keep from you escaping. >> you want to break this tie here? >> well, it just seems ridiculous that you have an escaped -- two prisoners escape a maximum prison. that's the first time i think that particular prison where they were in the maximum side of that where they escaped, and you're going to have a whole revolution based on that. what difference does it make? you lose two prisoners every now and then. big deal. >> let me guess. >> i just want to say, wayne is exactly right. this is an outliar case. it seems like a movie, and it's really exciting in that way, but i just want to say, we don't have an escapeee problem. in 2013 we only lost 2,000 prisoners, and a majority of them were just walk-aways from community centers. this isn't really the main problem here. the problem is that we're imprisoning people who are there for cr

the undesirable work? this is not an undesirable idea. the social forces that are contesting that prevent that from happening we have the basic income right now why isn't that possible? question is kind of do you think the movement towards social radical change we are talking about will that be possible without some kind of radical social forces contesting social upheaval and a further question what do you think the last human job will be? [laughter] >> i will delay that second one. as to whether it will be social upheaval there are good reasons to expect it. history seems to show we are not very good at taking on big problems unless there's a crisis. there are many examples we can point to where we think logically and solve problems. that doesn't seem to be how it works. and concerns about a crisis. it is not so much in the idea that the plutocracy will start to worry about miserable jobs everyone is doing but rather they might come to realize what they need consumers out there. if they eventually come to understand that and realize they

the idea -- just if people don't know the lingo.t of public vulnerability because of what we know about the vulnerability of trans women to violence and harassment on the street. so this is part of what laverne cox talks about. the idea of being drop dead gorgeous from certain lighting angles. being able to embody certain beauty standards. but it might not be about beauty but public safety. >> i don't want to be a debbie downerer. but if we can talk real for a moment. >> yeah. >> trans women of color have been doing this work in the media for a few years pretty intensely. we have a beautiful moment this year with laverne cox on katie co uric where she asked about her private area. >> she flipped it and said i don't talk about that. we need to the change the conversation. people who are most vulnerable. there are so many other things. my friend and mentor talks about we need to kanye this moment. caitlyn, i'm going to let you finish but trans people of color are more likely to be harassed on the street. it's like we are going back to

. >> the chief justice hinted at that in his dissent, the idea that, is this being forced on americanse wind is at their backs of gay people, to have this will there be a backlash? will people close their minds towards gay people? but it doesn't seem like that's happening. it also seems like the nation was ready for it especially with justice kennedy himself. >> who now seems to be a gay rights icon, as far as i can tell. >> for sure. for sure, given where he's been. but the thing is, there are just so many more questions. you know, parental rights vary state by state for adoption questions, custody questions. remember, discrimination against gay men and lesbians is still essentially legal nationwide in other context. >> yeah. you can get married today and fired tomorrow, basically is the way the law works now. it's interesting how the states are going to handle this, as a government matter, as what the state governments do. that seems pretty clear. whether they like it or not they're stuck with it. even some of the attorney generals who fought this very hard, they say, okay, we give u

you can put the disclaimer idea justice o'connor came up with that and the columbus ohio ku klux klan case and i thought that was a pretty good idea. that is we have a disclaimer when you don't like speech and you don't believe it is appropriate. the state can do that. i think that is largely part of the answer. this is not purely governmental because the action of the state is only approval. as to the pleasant city utah case, monument or in fact unique circumstances. this court had decided. ben gordon versus perry from years ago involving justice breyer, but a but a map of the state capitol grounds of the monuments in it. when that case was decided monuments are different than any speech in the park because of the nature of the creation. you'd have less in common with monuments every seven feet which you can't do that. the case turns on those facts and i believe it is absolutely correctly decided. i'm also convinced the board is correctly decided because it started with the statute passed by congress telling the department of agriculture to do something with the marketing material, h

make sure we're doing everything we can for the opportunity for the department to update us with the idea we were just with the land use committee what was it monday commander? yesterday i don't know we were it was monday and the idea that a policeman can be realistic and researchers is dmroiltd dloilthd curling we need to keep an eye on the numbers to make sure we're seeing better results to make sure our streets are safer i want to recognize nicole from walk sf and the bike coalition in advance of the presentations we go over the data it is a great that project sponsor >> commander maddox. >> commissioners, i have a power point presentation and commissioner president loftus stole my first slide. >> in 201335 people 34 excuse me. 34 were pedestrians so what we did in 2014 as the department we decided to really embrace and support the citywide goal of vision zero zero traffic facilities fatalities by 2024 and the district stations are focusing on the preliminary collision factors and additionally, the collision intersections that are occurring within our districts so this is really why we

the idea that the state tells a something. as a texan, if you were from you. >> the cities are created by the states. the state grants the rights to the cities, what we know to have a good economy is we want to protect communities and ability to create jobs. the bill, if you read the bill, it affirms the rites cities have. local control doesn't mean out of control. it doesn't mean anyone gets to do anything they want to do. there's constitutional rites at stake. i might point out many of the minerals are owned by families, whose properties were denied access to. the individuals and families have a right to properties, and the bundle of rights they are entitled to. >> next, hacking america - "on target" takes a trip into the dark web. >> the cops is a legalized gang... it makes me scared for everybody >> fear and distrust in baltimore... >> they've just been pepper spraying people at very close range... >> years of tension between the community and police erupt... >> she was on her way home to her kid, and she never made it...

the idea that the u.s.r any administration focuses on stability and govern ability, i think this is wrong bet. the idea is to question the cost of what -- the cost of how stability is being brought about. this region wants a stability that will not, the expense of people's dignity, freedom, and bread-and-butter issues. the other thing i want to commend on, the idea of thinking about what is going on in the region in terms of a crisis. this is not a crisis or a series of crises. this is a historic transformation. a historic transformation, as we have seen in europe in the 18th and 19th century, and in the u.s., those kinds of historic transformations are messy, they take a long time, and they need to run their course. the idea that they can be addressed or that we can seek mechanic conclusions between what people think and accordingly how we address it -- if we look at egypt and we see uphold -- and we see a poll that bread-and-butter issues are the priority, this should not full less into thinking that peop

and it is forgiven after 20 years. >> the idea but what are some of the ways they could? have not figure

that is the idea that god created people with the moral agency. it links to the christian concept of free will which goes back to saint augustine. of course he would choose to practice religious faith or invest in your religious faith. and then you consider policy measures on the basis of their effect on individual's moral agency. a couple of things it does change in our understanding, one is the role of government. for some people, the larger a government the more the people's liberties are infringed between power and liberty. for these liberals there are some things the government could do that could protect. so that is one. and the second is to suspend the reason to use the most obvious example slavery should be abolished. there is a christian objection to slavery that is not only about the humanness of the slaves for apps only credited with humanity, but also about what is wrong with slavery is they've been robbed of their moral agency. their masters tell them what to do, therefore they don't get to choose what to do. therefore they don't get

your whole book is premised on the idea that we lost jobs available. in the united states there have been a claim of millions of job creation. >> one important thing to understand is that the fact that it is becoming online and more important doesn't mean the business cycle goes away. we also have the business cycle, recessions, and recovery. right now right now we are in the midst of a fairly robust recovery. and so people look at this and say, all say all the stuff about the robots is nonsense. i think that is silly. that would be like me say when the next inevitable recession comes along and jobs are lost if our get up here and say is the robots taking the jobs that certainly is not going to be the case. one way to view this is in the way, it's like a stock market chart if you imagine what a chart of the stock market looks like. i would argue we are, perhaps, in a bear market for jobs. in the stock market you have a downward trend, it does not just go in a straight line. it's about peaks and valleys i think that is the same case with the job market.

>> i suppose the central contradiction is the idea that the united states, if it is unique, the idea of exceptionalism that the united states is not a power like the others, you could take that to mean the united states should not get involved with the quarrels of the others. he did not want the u.s. to get wrapped up in the power struggles of europe. that means the united states has a universal mission to lead not just by example but you can see what would become more or less the truman doctrine after the cold war. the u.s. now has a universal role to play. you can see the appeal of the idea and does undergird a lot of policy. it is interesting that tr nobody really sites him as much of a precedent in terms of foreign policy whereas wilsonian-ism lives. that's not necessarily the best foreign policy for any country to have because i think it is ultimately dangerous. in the end come you have to call your shots but if you are committed to ensuring these ideas are practice universally in the world, there's no and your foreign policy could and. it sounds really expensive. that is ultimat

you know the arguments that are being used to justify a new jail to me are just so nonconvincing the idea you got to do it for the benefit of these families the idea that you got to improve the living conditions of the people that are in there let's speak very frank if you want to help the conditions you don't have to build a new jail to do that there are things we can do to address those conditions now and to the extent there is disproportionate number of money that want to build i understand the infatuation with building we can can build interestingly enough we need to build 2400 units of affordable housing in the mission and guess what? the average cost of affordable housing unit is 250,000. that is $600 million that we're planning on spending on a new jail let's use that $600 million to spend in the mission and build 2000 pour hundred units of affordable housing we need in that neighborhood. (noise ( ( (cheers from the audience) >> i will move that we file item number one and continue to item number two. item number two? >> provide clean and sanitary washrooms for gas station patrons

is that the right idea? >> i think being open and honest about everything is the first step. you have to know what people have for assets and liabilities. do they have student loan debt, you need to share responsibility in terms of your final goals and dreams -- >> and what you're paying for along the way. that's where i think yours, mine, and ours accounts come in. maybe you ha a checking account for yourself, for your spouse, and one join for household expenses. there is an account you talk about it and share in the financial responsibility and another account for financial independence. say you're getting married ladder in life. you have investments you picked up that were your own. do you comingle them, do you keep them separate? >> a lot of people with investment accounts have them for a particular goal. maybe you wanted them for a vacation property, or you have a short-term investment goal that you want to reach. in many cases they want to keep those accounts in their own name. you also want to reap some of the financial goals together. and that's where building investm

and that's one of the old ideas about democracy. you make the decision because you live with the results. so i think we would have had a different distribution of income and wealth in this country; we would have had a very different relationship to keeping the jobs and the production here; and we would have had a very different relationship to the environment. or to make a long story short-- i could go on with examples all night--we would have had a different history as a nation. we'd look different; we'd feel different; we'd relate to one another differently. and guess what. if the gap between rich and poor was narrowed, that wouldn't, then, allow the rich to buy the political system the way they do now, would it? so it'd make a contribution there, too. wow! sounds interesting. let me take it another step. is this feasible? i know some of you may be entranced by the idea but be wondering to yourself, "well, you know, how do you do this?" well, i've already told you about mondragon, which is a very successful corporation composed of

the idea that information is in this phone, that is an old idea. belongs in the cloud, like a cloud-based white pages or yellow pages. we backed entrepreneurs out of stockholm and they have over 1.5 billion phone numbers in the cloud. this is a good idea. emily: kleiner made a bet on cleantech that did not pan out. how much do you worry about making that mistake or missing the next goal or amazon. john: i don't want to make mistakes, but most importantly, i do not want to repeat mistakes. our limited partnership said, we want to pioneer new areas and explore disruptive changes. an example of one i am excited about is augmented, not virtual, but augmented reality. hopefully some time later this year hopefully you will be a ble to put on a set of magic glasses. emily: facebook has made bets on virtual reality, why do you say augmented versus virtual-reality? john: facebook is a great company, but the idea that you will block out everything to get your experience of the world is one approach. the larger one is to see anything overlaid on the world tha

governor ricketts: the idea is we passed the minimum wage law here, but a lot of people taking those minimum-wage jobs are teenagers at entry-level positions. if you have to pay them, it will discourage job creation, so the idea is to help teenagers by allowing businesses to create more of those jobs to help young people get into that first job to start learning how to be a work on time, how to shake somebody's hand, how do, for instance, count change if you are a counter at a fast food place, so it is really designed to create more jobs for teenagers. >> earlier this week the supreme court asked the justice department to weigh in on the case of nebraska and colorado -- nebraska versus colorado. where do you stand on the issue? governor ricketts: the lawsuit is about the supremacy clause. we have a edible government that has certain powers and the administration of dangerous drugs is one of them. the united states has said marijuana is a dangerous drug. if it is going to be used, it needs to go through the fda like any other drug, and states do not have the ability to unilaterally ma

the idea, you're 5 years old and you're really into the black experience. i'm sorry. it's hard to -- >> which, by the way, her parents deny. saying that didn't happen. >> she never drew a picture of herself with a brown crayon. i don't know how to take it or what to make of it. >> if at age 5 she is so down with the black experience that she's drawing herself like that, in those later pictures, as larry said the other night, she's like -- >> i think it's academy jargon. >> the scab that you were picking is very real, particularly to black women. what this is getting at, how this is getting at our identify. in other interview today, when she was asked, does she understand the rage that this is causing black women, she said, yes, i understand. but never did she acknowledge it. never did she say, i understand and i am sorry. i understand this time that we're having this conversation. to not acknowledge this time, this black lives matter moment, and never even say, i'm sorry. i feel your pain. you are not a black woman in this moment if you don't understand that black mot

the rand pauls and of the world like the idea. deal with the problems, not everyone else. you from social media use smi as am i and you post things on that is not in sync with youreninging. time. it's things america can say. if you are going to continue to draw red lines whether it's on i.s.i.s. or russia or syria, you name it, if we are not going to stand up to it, stop drawing the redline. this book is a response to a policy that is not about obama, it's since the soviet union collapse. we overreacted. we said wacamoll. our allies don't know what we stand for, our adversaries are infringing on our interests globally and we have to determine what we think the country stands for. >> what you are describing seemed to work under the regan administration, a place where the foreign policy was clear and the wacamoll was consistent and we were beating people lack. >> look, i think when the soviet union existed even though some presidents were stronger, some weaker, we talked about voice of america, radio free europe making the world safe from communism, n.a.t.o. and others, it w

that was the idea of government. wait for the train. after returning home from all this education madison was stuck in life as a tutor. his father forced him to come home through the power of purse strings and made them become a tutor to his younger children's. great revolutionary movements were a foot and patrick henry is that the head of them. 1775, madison is 24 years old and at home, henry meanwhile leads a mission by his local and of from alisha to seize the colonial gun power, madison and his brother tried to join patrick henry in this confrontation but they were too late, he was so excited by this that he got a commendation wishes father ran commending patrick henry's and bravery. madison himself began practicing firing his musket. he wanted to be a soldier. in 1775 he boasted to his college friend william bradford he was doing such a good job at muscat practice that he should not miss the target at 150 yards. his lifelong battle with anxiety got the better of him. as his father and the men looked on in the first firing drills wi

you bring in error to our attention and we were corrected, but the idea that somehow the findings of the book the general argument of the book officiated by the fact that there is is just a misunderstanding of the nature of investigative journalism and publishing. >> you wrote and the national review if you can control the use and even meaning of words as orwell showed an 84 they cannot be used to express for formulate the thoughts that might inform such intellectual resistance. the left is always understanding the importance of language. >> in your question is. >> explain that. >> okay. the context of the article and which the quote is a cover piece that i published last summer and the national review. scone let your right brain rent-free. and it is -- there was an article announcing it's the emergence of a new wing conservatives, of the conservative movement a cultural wing commander story just very quickly to give you background on this. as i said, i have been a nonfiction nonfiction editor throughout my career, but beginning a few years ago i began to hear from conservative autho

the idea this could happen, working through the courts. the texas legislator wants to promote the industry particularly given the price of oil, how much that sagged how much workers could be laid off. they want to protect the industry. >> the united states as you know is unusual in terms of service rites to private property and mineral rights. when you talk about private property and whose rite it is it's confusing. what are the rights. should oil companies have a rite to what they claim is their gas on someone's property if a city says no fracking. >> it's a federal statute dating back to the 1800s encouraging oil exploration. if you have mineral rights it trumps the rights of mineral openers. you saw oil company arguments that this is their territory first, and they have mineral rites. no matter what you do on the surface it has trumped the rites of service centers. this is working the way through the courts, conventional wisdom says they'll have to win this it speaks to how big an industry and how important it is to texas and others tha