much as bolsheviks and denies -- sympathizers 20 years later. the love affair with the kaiser, his love affair with nietzsche's, he was not a nice man, h.l. mencken. he and george bernard shaw liked each other. one was a beer drinker, the other was a teetotaling vegetarian. shaw was a very strange man. they both understood they were working the same side of the street. they hated anglo-american culture. for h.l. mencken this led to freshenism and for shoprussian led to stalin. coli is of germany i have doubts about democracy. it dawned on me to my surprise that the whole doctrine i was preaching was fundamentally anti anglo-saxon and if i had a spiritual home at all it must be in the land of my ancestors. one world war i started i began to look for the kaiser and kept it up so long as there is any free-speech left. unfortunately he did suffer -- some of his columns were repressed and he could present himself as a martyr. most of what is written about h.l. mencken today ignores all this. let me jump ahead with one incident with h.l. mencken. does

that was partly because they spoke many languages, they tended to be more literate than most bolsheviks and so on. al e though most jews were anti-communist, there was a small percentage of jews who were salient in communist parties. and that remained the case in russia in the 1920s and 1930s, and then over time stalin increasingly came to use anti-semitism as a tool of restoring or regaining his legitimacy. and that was particularly the case, actually, in eastern europe after 1945. in eastern europe after 1945, most of the jews had been murdered under the nazi occupation. the small number of jews who remained found themselves under situation where they were under soviet occupation by the red army. some of them joined the communist secret services and the communist party in order to try to get back at those people who had assisted in murdering their relatives. and so, again, in the years right after 1945 in eastern europe you had an unusual situation where, again, most jews weren't communists, and most communists weren't jews, but you had this salient group of jews in leadership positio

part was an empire before the bolshevik revolution. in 1974, there was an agreement that the sovereignty of crimea or the control of crimea from the russian component to the ukrainian component. at the time, that was an internal administrative issue. it had no status in the international system. when ukraine became independent in 1991, the borders that had got when the borders the soph yes, it is had given it and that included crimea. >> like giving it? >> in a way, yes. >> and as important a place in, in the russians' own historical imaginations. >> this is a place whereby tradition, christianity, a saint was baptized as a christian but it holds a great deal of importance for other groups, ukrainians, crimeanians and tartars. >> they have enough of a presence in today's crimea to be a part of the debate about the place's future. >> so the crimean tartars who are different than the tartars who live in russia, they were first -- their own enty and part of the ottoman empire and paid tribute to the russian empire. today, they make up abo

the bolsheviks ran against them, and they said they will steal everybody's houses, and this will be great, and they got wiped out. they got wiped out in those areas where people would have said those are labor voters not when you -- not when you threaten my kids or my house or the education. 30 years ago there was very little concealed issue. people allowed being able to carry a gun on them in their purse. today they have concealed carry permits. the person who has made that decision is a different human being than the one who says that we have a government, and if something goes wrong they will draw a circle around me and this will be helpful. the person says i will be in charge of myself. try to take that away from people, try to take that away from people -- that's what the democrats always get in trouble when they talk about gun control because they do not understand their threatening something that you -- that people consider important. we can, by expanding liberty, and that is where half the country that lives in red states are doing all of these expansions of freedom, and the immig

very few were communists and very few economists words used, and jews in the early stages of the bolshevik revolution and the communist regime in the soviet union were often found in a very disproportionately founded salient positions in the communist regime partly because they spoke many languages, more better it. so although most were anti-communist there was a small percentage of jews who were salient and communist parties. and that remained the case in russia. over time stalin increasingly came to use antisemitism as a tool of restoring or regaining his legitimacy. and that was particularly the case actually in eastern europe after 1945. in eastern europe after 1945 most of the jews had been murdered under the nazi occupation. the small number of jews to remain found themselves under a situation where they were under soviet occupation of occupation by the red army. some of them joined the communist party in order to try to get back at those people who had assisted in murdering. and so again in the years right after 1945 in eastern europe you have an unusual situation where again most j

after the revolution, the bolsheviks included crimea, ukraine. they did that without taking into account the composition of the territory. they have handed over crimea and sevastopol. the initiative belongs to mr. khrushchev. what was his motive? maybe he wanted to shift the blame for the repression. he has left historians of all of these issues. that was done behind stages. of course, there is a totalitarian state. they have free will. we will realize through the grand scheme of things that this is a mere formality. we used to belong to one big country, the soviet union. it is inconceivable that sometime in the future russia and ukraine would be divided, different states. that has happened. thoughts that were unbelievable have become a reality. it has unfolded in such a fast way. none of the nations realize the dramatic nature. many people in ukraine and the former soviet republic have believed that the huge commonwealth of states would become [inaudible] that remains just on paper. we have not seen a new country in march. crimea ended up at a d

guest: it was a czarist territory then, but the bolsheviks were taking over. our grandmother came here at 17. because their one cow was taken away. when that was done by the bolsheviks, they couldn't feed themselves, so they came here with nothing. and now i, two generations later, am a member of the congress of the united states. this is such a great country, and only because of the liberty that we have a mileage of stress my opinion on behalf of the people ever present, and also u.s. a member of the free press. this is so precious. this cannot happen in russia. cannot happen still. we hope for a. historians who have written about what president putin has done have been fired from their jobs in russia. our nation is the standard-bearer for liberty globally and let's never forget that. host: how do you view vladimir putin? guest: unfortunately -- [laughter] as someone who is caught in a time warp in the past. we have to keep our hand extended to the president in russia, because russian is a european country. her alphabet is cyrillic, as is the alphabetic ukrai

he says that ukraine benefited from the bolshevik revolution by obtaining large sections of the historical south of russia. he, in effect, is positing that ukraine's territory is invalid. when the president of ukraine asked that the borders be a limited -- be eliminated, russia agreed to it on the favor that there was an assumption that ukraine would remain a good neighbor. however, this is not how the situation developed. he also goes on to say in the same speech that it is also obvious that there is no urgent amid executive authority in the ukraine now, nobody. that is a rather strange thing to be saying about a neighboring country. he assures us in his speech that russian armed forces never entered crimea. which is kind of periods, because we have the impression that somebody did. -- which is kind of curious come up because we have the impression that somebody did. and then he goes on to say, that we understand that our western partners prefer not to be guided by national law -- international law in practical policy, but the rule of the gun. and that we understand what is happening is t

. >> bolshevik, comrade de blasio. >> and you have this girl suing her parents, doesn't want to lives and regulat n regulations of mom and dad. the parents say the new jersey teen has returned home. this is the latest development. >> as far as my client is concerned it is ancient history and done. they have welcomed her back into the house. and we just respect -- we ask that you respect their wishes and give them a chance to resolve it. this is a case that should have never been. okay? there are some cases that don't deserve to see the inside of the courtroom. this was one of them. i'll repeat myself. at the end of the day nothing good can come from this case. >> i actually agree with that. but the idea you would sue your parents because you don't want to live by their rules, too bad. >> i think the people are concerned about the cosmic issue of the child suing her parents. but when you get down to the creepy element, her best friend's father, the lawyer, brought this action against the situation. really? gave her shelter, he enabled this drama to drive. >> how about the kids who don

economists had taken over russian the bolshevik revolution in 1917 and hoover had basically pulled out of russia mining interests before the revolution. they lost a prospective fortune when economists came in and seized the minds and general chaos ensued. it was one of the great lessons he drew from that post-war experience. he saw it as the failure of command and control economies as we would say into use the word socialism bolshevism and so forth especially in russia and he saw this as a great failure but also as a great challenge philosophically to the american way. which probably resulted in his saving more lives than any person who has ever lived. that's a remarkable achievement. after that he returns to united states in 1919 and injured american public life. >> host: that's right and we are going to move through his career very quickly just to brief the reader so we can get to the controversy. he was such a success that those parties vied for his affection. in the end he went republican. he was commerce secretary to president harding and president coolidge and didn't get along ve

there was great turmoil in the aftermath of world war i and the communist taken over russia, the bolshevik revolution in 1917 and hoover had basically pulled out of russian mining interests before the revolution, but he lost a fortune in the communist came in comiskey is the mines and general chaos ensued. he saw one of the great lesson teacher from that wartime in postwar experience, he saw what he regarded as the failure of command-and-control economies as we would say, he used the word socialism, bolshevism and so forth, especially in russia. he thought that it's a great failure, but also as a great challenge philosophically to the american way of doing things. after his humanitarian episode probably resulted in his saving more lives than any person has ever lived. a remarkable achievement. after that he returned to the united states in 1919 and entered american public life. >> host: that's right. we will move through the career to brief the reader so we can get to the controversy. he was such a success that both parties vied for his attraction and in the end he went republican. he was

the communist had taken over rush of the of -- bolshevik rep revolution and hoover had basically pulled out of russia mining interests before the revolution but he lost a perspective fortune in the comments came in and cedes the mines and general chaos ensued. he saw, that was one of the great lessons he drew from that wartime and post-war experience. he saw what was regarded as the failure of command and control of economies as we would say. using the word socialism and all shouldism and so forth especially in russia. he saw that as a great failure but also as a great challenge philosophically to the american way of doing things. after his humanitarian episode which probably resulted in his saving more lives than any person who has ever lived. that has been said of him a remarkable achievement. after that he returned to unite states in 1919 and injured american public life. >> host: we are going to move through his career very quickly just to briefly reader, the listeners of it and get to the controversy. he was such a success that both parties vied for his affection and then he went r

there was great turmoil in the aftermath of world war i and communists had taken over russia the bolshevik revolution in 1917 and hoover had basically pull out of russian mining interests before the revolution but he lost a prospect of which when the communists came in, cedes the lines and general chaos ensued and he saw, that was one of the great lessons he drew from that wartime and postwar experience, he saw what he regarded as the failure of command-and-control economies as we would say he used the word socialism, and so forth especially in russia and he saw that as a great failure but also as a great challenge to the american way of doing things so after his humanitarian episode which probably resulted in his saving more lives than any person who has ever lived, that has been some of them, a remarkable achievement. after that he returned to the united states in 1919 and entered american public life. >> host: we will move through his career very quickly just to brief the reader so we can get to the controversy. he was such a success that both parties vied for his affection. and in the

guest: it was a czarist territory than come but the bolsheviks were taking over.r grandmother came here at 17. because their one cow was taken away. when that was done by the bolsheviks, they couldn't feed themselves, so they came here with nothing. and now i 2 generations later i'm a member of the commerce of the united states. his is such a great country, and only because of the liberty that we have a mileage of stress my opinion on behalf of the people ever present, and also u.s. a member of the free press. this is so precious. this cannot happen in russia. cannot happen still. we hope for a. historian severin about what president -- historians who have written about what president putin has done have been fired from their jobs in russia. our nation is the standardbearer for liberty globally and let's never forget that. host: how do you view vladimir putin? guest: unfortunately -- [laughter] as someone who is caught in a time warp in the past. we have to keep our hand extended to the president in russia, because russian is a european country. her alphabet is cy

the bolsheviks ran against them, and they said they will steal everybody's houses, and this will be great and they got wiped out. they got wiped out in those areas where people would have said those are labor voters not when you -- not when you threaten my kids or my house or the education. 30 years ago there was very little concealed issue. people allowed being able to carry a gun on them in their purse. today they have concealed carry permits. the person who has made that decision is a different human being than the one who says that we have a government, and if something goes wrong they will draw a circle around me and this will be helpful. the person says i will be in charge of myself. try to take that away from people, try to take that away from people -- that's what the democrats always get in trouble when they talk about gun control because they do not understand their threatening something that you -- that people consider important. we can, by expanding liberty, and that is where half the country that lives in red states are doing all of these expansions of freedom, and the immigr

ukraine benefited from the bolshevik revolution by obtaining large sections of the historical south of russia. thatn effect, is positing ukraine's territory is invalid. when the president of ukraine asked that the borders be a limited -- be eliminated, russia agreed to it on the favor that there was an assumption that ukraine would remain a good neighbor. thever, this is not how situation developed. he also goes on to say in the same speech that it is also obvious that there is no urgent amid executive authority in the ukraine now, nobody. that is a rather strange thing to be saying about a neighboring country. he assures us in his speech that russian armed forces never entered crimea. which is kind of periods, because we have the impression that somebody did. -- which is kind of curious come up because we have the impression that somebody did. and then he goes on to say, that we understand that our western partners prefer not to be guided by national law -- international law in practical policy, but the rule of the gun. and that we understand what is happening is that these actions ar

benefitedat ukraine from the bolshevik revolution by obtaining large sections of the historical southof russia. posits of thet theme that ukraine's territory is not valid. whenhe goes on to say that president of ukraine asked that something be limited, russia agreed as a favor on the assumption that ukraine would be our good neighbor. however, this is not how the situation developed. he also goes on to say in the same speech it is also obvious that there is no legitimate executive authority in ukraine now. nobody. that is a rather strange to be saying -- strange thing to be saying about a neighboring country. he assured in the speech that russian armed forces never entered crimea. which is kind of curious because we have the impression that somebody did. then he goes onto say that we understand that our western not to be guided by international law in the practical policies but by the rule of the gun. and we understand that what is happening is that these actions are aimed against ukraine and russia and against eurasian integration. and he also adds -- let me conclude that we have alr

the bolshevik who ran against her for reelection said they would take houses away from them and be socialist. and they got wiped out. in the very areas of people who would have told you, those are labour voters. not when you are threatening my house, my kids' education. was veryago, there little concealed carry, people allowed to carry a gun on them in their purse or in their car. today 9.3 million americans happens you'll carry permits. person who made that decision is a different human being than the one who says, we have a government, and if someone -- something goes wrong they will draw a white chalk mark around and be helpful. the person who says, i will pass on that and be in charge of myself. try and take that away from people. try and take that away. that is what democrats always get in trouble when they talk about gun control. they don't understand they are threatening something people consider important. liberty,, by expanding and that is where half the country that lives in red states are doing all these expansions sf freedom, and the democrat are going, we would not what you do h

it's a saying, politics is, the bolshevik. your enemy. infantile left wing disorder.o's two steps to the left of you is the enemy. the other thing i'd add to that as well is cpac essentially is a kind of side show and so i wouldn't confuse it too much with some stuff that's fairly interesting that's going on in the conservative movement that policy people are working on that may end up being more important. >> this is a failed long-term strategy, right? the people who are paying attention to cpac are far right wingers and lefties who want to discuss it. they don't represent the bulk of what the larger gop wants and needs them to talk about and understand. the fact that marriage equity and marijuana aren't on the table lets us know that this whole three-day exercise is actually missing so much of the meat and potatoes of what larger republicans will recognize will come through in a general election. >> which is why it doesn't matter. >> that's an important point which i want to go to in the next segment. this is supposed to be the conference of ideas. this is the idea

and ben the bolshevik who ran against her for re-election said when everybody gets in, we will steal everybody's house away and be socialist. they just got wiped out in the very areas who the demographic people would have told you those are labor voters. not when you're threatening my house. not when you're throatening my kid's education. or 30 years ago, 30 years ago there was very little concealed carry issue. people allowed carry a gun in their purse or car and swell of your back. today $9.3 million americans have concealed carry permits, starting with my parents. the person who's made that decision is a different unanimous human being than the one who says we have a government and if something goes wrong, they will come and draw a circle, little white chalk mark and this will be helpful. the person who says i will pass on that and be in charge of myself, thanks. try and take that away from people. try and take that away from people. that's why democrats get in trouble talking about gun control because they don't understand they're threatening something they consider important. we

went through, our country went through during the whole 20t 20th century after the revolution, bolsheviksrious ground god judged them. they have created an important part of russia and divided is part and today it's modern these east of ukraine. the decision was made that the country was transferred under ukrainian jurisdiction and transferred along. the initiator of this decision was the head of russian state at this time. waited to be respected by the russian -- or to make some other assurances in the 1930's the historians will deal with it. for us it is an obvious violation of constitutional norms and even in those days, the decision was made in corridors and in conditions of tototalitarian states. the people weren't asked. it was asked why ukraine became part of russia. we have to answer that this decision was accepted as a formality, because the territories were transferred within one large country. it was not impossible to imagine those days that ukraine and russia can be together, can be different states, but it happened. things which initially seemed impossible became reality. the

it's a five times if you include you know world war one and two and actually the bolshevik move that movement as well so the russians have really had a comeback many times to it when they've been ganged up by sort of the nato alliance because that alliance has been there for quite some time well but there's a that's going on right now ukrainians are saying the interim government say to me blame us for wanting to be part of nato like you do you understand why they want to be part of nato of course i mean you look at the way that ukraine is broken up today there's really only about fifteen to twenty percent russians in the major ukraine and about probably sixty percent maybe seventy percent in crimea as predominantly craney and you have a lot of folks there who you know were very anti russian because of the terrible things that stalin did and then you obviously you have the folks that were taken out of the area during world war two because they sided with adolf hitler's third reich so there's a lot of different factions and on the west side you know it's mostly agriculture and on the s