a great many loyal is or tories soldiers for great britain and died fighting for great britain during this war. in fact, though we don't tend to remember it, much today, there was a point in 1780 when there were actually more americans fighting with the british army men were members of the continental army under general washington. if you add together the number of americans who died and the number who died on the british side during this war, and look at it on a proportional basis in terms of the population of those two countries at the time, then the death toll which would have been about 80000 actually, would be roughly the equivalent of losing some 2 million people from the american population today. it would be almost as if the place i live, atlanta, georgia, simply was wiped out completely. and it wasn't just soldiers who suffered during this war, but civilians paid a heavy price as well. diseases were brought on by soldiers on furlough. armies which were near civilian areas spread diseases are so that, for example, during the first year of the war at abigail adams, who was the

here's what it says on its web site in britain. with the rapid advances in modern medicine, most people accept no public clip funded health care system, including the n.h.s., can possibly pay for every new medical treatment which becomes available. well, that's right. if the federal government has a monopoly, it probably doesn't have enough money to pay for every treatment that becomes available. the enormous rationing involves means choices have to be made. the qaly, the quality method helps us measure these factors so we can compare different treatments for the same and different conditions. the idea of how many extra months or years of life, of a reasonable person a -- quality a person might gain. each drug is considered on a case-by-case basis. generally, however, if a treatment costs more than 20,000 to 30,000 pounds per quality adjusted life year then it would not be cut, considered cost effective. and they don't give it to you. we have many, many examples of peach in great britain that are denied care because the government

many of the loyalists argued that one of the great reasons for remaining tied with great britain with the combined power of america and great britain, much more rapidly, the angle americans could sweep to the mississippi river and beyond the mississippi river to the pacific, they didn't stop there. they thought in terms of central america and south america so that the whole western hemisphere, north and south america, would be anglo-american in this end. >> you mentioned this what fox. over the years, i have read that it was largely a diversion, that he wasn't significant. would you expand on that? >> historians debate, there is not a uniform interpretation. i think it grows out of the fact that marion was a cantankerous, independent sort, who didn't always work particularly well with the continental army. when green came in and took command of the southern continental army, he had problems with marion. that said, as i tried to argue, the partisan leaders, not just marion, but sumter and others, waged a war that really turned things around, it through the british on the defensive, the

that is why they ration care and great britain. the quantitative a just and life helps us measure these factors of that we can compare different treatments for the same condition. it gives us an idea of how much -- how many extra years of life that a person may gain because of the treatment. each drug is considered on a case by case basis. if the treatment costs more than 30,000 pounds per quality adjusted life year, then it will not be considered cost-effective and they do not give it to you. we have many, many examples of people in great britain that are denied care because the government has decided that the cost of the treatment is more than your quality object -- suggested life here. this is adjusted for age. the older you get, even though the treatment may cost less, if you are less likely to get it because of your age. think about that. if something costs $20,000 in united states and you are 65 years of age and they decide they cannot afford to pay for it, is that what the united states of america is all about? should the go

i would argue there are now serious questions about the quality of justice in britain. since 2003 we've seen repeated attempts to remove the role of juries in fraud trials and coroners' inquests and other criminal trials. and justice hasn't just been eroded at home, we've seen a surrender to further attack from abroad. britain now allows extradition to a range of countries without that other country having to produce any proper evidence that the person in question has committed a crime. so in all these ways our personal freedom has been diminished, the balance of power in our country has shifted away from the individual just trying to live their life and towards the state and its agencies constantly probing, prying and picking on people. so we will make some important changes. the next conservative government will revoke the unjustified powers that let people into your home without your permission, we'll change the law that allows councils to snoop on people for trivial matters, we'll review section 44 and the stop and search powers contained within it, and we'll change

and third, britain takes a very expansion of view of personal jurisdiction. a british court can exercise personal jurisdiction over a liable defendant if his or her statement, wherever it was made or aimed, is said to cause real or substantial harm or injury to reputation of britain. combined with the internet, this expanse of view has rendered american authors and publishers liable to lawsuits in britain. in the internet tainl, -- age, the british liable law can bite you wherever you live. h.r. 2765 will deter liable tourists from taking advantage of these differences in the laws of britain and other foreign jurisdictions and our precious first amendment by imposing important limitation on the enforcement of foreign defamation judgments in our courts. under the bill, a u.s. court cannot enforce a foreign defamation judgment inconsistent with the first amendment of our constitution. or when the foreign courts exercise a personal jurisdiction over the defendant does not comport with our due process requirements. and a u.s. court cannot enforce a foreign defama

that is why the ration care in great britain. it goes on, the quality, quantitative adjusted life year, the method helps as measured these factors so we can compare different treatments for the same in different conditions. this is the idea of how many extra months of years of life of reasonable quality person might be-- gain andy goes on to conclude, each drug is considered on a case-by-case basis. generally however if the treatment costs more than 20 to 30,000 pounds for quality adjusted life year then it would not be cut considered cost-effective and they don't give it to you. we have many, many examples of people in great britain that are denied care because the government has decided that the cost of the treatment is more than your quality adjusted life year. this is adjusted for aids so the older you get, the more the treatment, or even though the treatment may cost less you are less likely to get it because of your age. think about that for a moment. something cost $20,000 in the united states and you were 65 years of age

this is the way it's done in great britain and canada. they don't have enough money to pay for all the health care physicians prescribe, and so they delay some of the care until it's not needed anymore or the person dies, or they deny it. for example, one of the policies was not to prescribe a -- well, the doctor prescribes the drug, but not to fill the prescription for an eye condition until the patient was blind in one eye. and then you could get the drug. americans don't want that. they don't want to have to suffer in that way when the medicines are available to treat them. and what the government agency in great britain has said is, look, we don't have enough money to give you all the care that your doctor says you need. we're going to have to make tough choices. we understand that won't please everyone. but there is no other way to use the limited dollars that we have to provide this free care to everybody within the country. what we're saying is that we don't want american to get to that point where you have to ration the health car

merci [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, the prime minister of grate britain, gordon -- great britain, gordon brown. >> 65 years ago, in the thin light of a gray dawn, more than a thousand small craft took to a rough sea on a day that will be forever a day of bravery. on that june morning, the young of our nations stepped out on to these beaches below and into history. and as long as freedom lives, their deeds will never die. and now, more than half a century on, it is an honor for me to speak, for the british people, alongside friends, president sarkozy, president obama, prime minister harper, and with his royal highness, the prince of weals, each of us representing our nations, we remember those who advanced great h grain of sand by grain of sand, utterly determined amid the bullets and the bloodshed that freedom would not be pushed back into the sea but would rise from these beaches below to liberate a continent and to save a generation. so this is sacred ground. this day marks the triumph of right over wrong, of truth over lies, the victory of human decency over hatred and the hol

and in britain, this was a big splash. it's kind of like geraldo suddenly announcing he's the son of god. it would become a big deal. c-span: do you know anything we don't know? is it -- is that an announcement coming? (laughter) >> guest: i'm not sure! but david icke said, "not only am i the son of god, but the world is about to be destroyed by cataclysmic earthquakes and tidal waves and floods." and what i thought was interesting back in the '90s is that, ok, we were amazed and laughing. but a little bit of us thought, "maybe he is the son of god. maybe he's right." so he went on this chat show, and the whole nation watched and -- and he made these predictions and said that he was the son of god. and the audience was laughing nervously. and i think the nation kind of looked to terry wogan, the presenter, for guidance because part of us thought "maybe this guy is a soothsayer." and terry wogan just said, you know, "they're laughing at you. they're not laughing with you." and there was a huge sigh of relief from the nation

like the medical board in great britain, if farm act doesn't believe it is justified they can refuse to make it available to patients or doctors who want it. one doctoring that farm-act didn't think was worth the cost was herceptin proven to fight breast cancer. although farm act covered it in 2002, it refused to fund the drug for early stage breast cancer. after a public outcry and reevaluation of the decision, farm act allowed it for early staged breast cancer in 2007 but only for a limited amount of treatments. these kind of decisions about which drugs should or shouldn't be covered are based on a method commonly known as comparative effectiveness. comparative effectiveness is not alien to the u.s. health care system. indeed the stimulus bill that congress passed this year included significant funding to lay the groundwork for just this kind of research here in the u.s. and in my view, the more research we do on the effectiveness of drugs and treatments, the better. doctors should have as much good information as possible in dealing with their patients. what americans strenuously

but only 77% of britains. in a -- and a mammogram as well. american women, 86% whereas in the united kingdom, 77%. all of these mainly industrialized powers, allies of the united states, have much lower access to care, even though they have government systems. i yield. mr. murphy: it brings up an important point of how in the u.s. system we handle such things in dealing with breast cancer and cervical cancer. one of the sad stories in this country, the u.s. handles lumps, etc., by providing mass ectmies to women. other countries may not do that. in part it may be that the tests come much more lower, much more difficult to get in other countries but it also brings up the other point, we need to make sure that physicians are empowered to provide that ongoing primary care so they can monitor the patients, get the tests they need. unfortunately we have a system that pays for quantity, not quality. it pays for defensive medicine, not really workg on prevention. let me read you an important quote. this comes from the "new yorker" magazine. it is ab

i have discussed of britain's government board had denied care to cancer patients because the treatmentse too expensive. in one case bureaucrats in britain refused to prescribe cancer drugs that were proven to extend the lives of patients. because the cost to much. the government board explained it this way. although these treatments are clinically effective, regrettably the cost is such that they are not a cost-effective use of resources. i have also discussed of the government run healthcare system in canada routinely delays care. today the average wait for a hip replacement at one hospital in kingston ontario is about 196 days. the replacement surgery at the same hospital takes an average of 340 days. now the american people don't want to be told they have to wait six months for a hip replacement or a year for a knee replacement and that is what could very well happen in a government run healthcare system. finally i discussed how new zealand government-- new zealand's board has ration care by deciding which new hospital medicines are cost-effective. in one case government bureaucrats

it is not just from the votes you took today across the house floor, but from the people of britain whose legitimate anger made the selection happen. i urge you to use it. >> my lords, i beg to acquaint the house that there is an operation -- authorization. her majesty's deprivation is a choice of the comments of the noble john bercow out to be the speaker. -- to be there speaker. -- their speaker. [crowd murmurs] [crowd murmurs] >> let the comments know that the lords commissioners desire their immediate attendance in this house to hear the commission read. >> inspector and the richard -- andy richford, the principal doorkeeper of the house of lords, warrant officer, second class in the guard. also, the sergeant of arms. they have a job share. he has powers of arrest anywhere in the house of lords. they are making their way now for central lobby towards the house of commons, where, as on state opening, the door will be slammed. as the queen is not present, blackrod is wearing a semi-state uniform deceiving. >> no frills. >> no frills. >> a plain, white bow tie. he has no lace cuffs. no m

the sofe yet union, france, united states, great britain, canada, poland, just to name the primary actors here. so again, i would take issue that the soveyts had defeated the germans by the summer of 1944. they actually had not. and there is quite a bit of evidence of the soviet contribution and quite a few good books on that. but many, many others. i would look at john ericson's work and anything by david glants. i highly recommend. because you will get a good look at the eastern front. >> next up is around from caller: i was calling to in defense of the russia. they certainly -- we wouldn't have been able to invade normandy, and we would have done it at a much higher cost if they hasn't taken so many troops away from the east. that's basically all i had to say. thanks. host: thank you. john, go ahead. guest: that's an excellent point. the cost of invading normandyy would have been much higher if the sofeyts hasn't done what they had done over the last two to three years. that was the point stalin was making was, hey, you've got to help me out here. you've got to have a major effort to s

we should be like canada or great britain. that's not the answer. if we have wait times here, we should stop it, not say we might as well be like canada or great britain. americans do not deserve or want health care that forces them into government bureaucracy with its labyrinth of complex rules and regulations. think about the hassles of dealing with the i.r.s. or the department of motor vehicles or social security administration when you have a problem there. then imagine dealing with the same issues when it goes to getting health care. we can't put a panel of washington bureaucrats through rules and regulations, put the politicians in charge of deciding who is eligible for a particular treatment or to decide when and where they can get it. that is wrong for america. it's wrong for the patients in america. and it is the wrong approach to health care reform. republicans believe that there is a better way for health care reform. rather than empowering the government, empower patients. rather than putting bureaucrats in between your doctor and yourse

it is the same in great britain. what happened was that they listed all of those improprieties and unfortunately , many folks, including the former defense secretary, have had tax reimbursements and expense reimbursement issues. it has really hurt gordon brown. host of this is what he said regarding yesterday, -- host: this is what he had to say regarding yesterday. "i would never return to those places or worry about it." he went on to say that under his leadership, labor could win the next election. guest: he has got to say that last statement. if he does not say that, they would be justified in getting a new leader. look, it is very hard to be at the tail end of a large dynasty. major after thatcher, brown after blair, the party is exhausted. everyone has gone native. there tends to be more corruption at the petty level because they have been in power for too long. it's hard to be a leader that shows vigor to the nation at that point. brown has played his hand remarkably badly, including that line about fighting o

is not just to produce a set of conclusions but to allow the people of britain to come to terms with the mistake made in their name. i have met the families of the soldiers who lost their lives in iraq and just an hour ago and asked me to speak in their name and tell him that nothing short of a fully public inquiry held in the open will satisfy them. will this be to knock at least listen to what those grieving families needing? he says the inquiry has to be held in private to protect national security. in this to me suspiciously like he wants to protect his reputation and that of his predecessor instead. why else would he wanted to report after the general election when we could have at least interim reports before then? it is perfectly possible to have a limited number of sensitive sessions in camera retaining the fun of the principal but the vast bulk of the inquiry not just a few public secessions recommended by the conservatives should be open to all. i am grateful he has listened to my representations and extended to cover the fall origins of the war and to give full access to t

this is the place where britain, america, canada, and france came together as one. people talk of europe and that are an ocean apart, separated by thousands of miles of water and hundreds of years of different traditions. but on june 1944, in this place and at that moment, europe and america came closer together than at any time in any century, and we are eternal allies now because of this. allies not free season, but for centuries evermore. immemorial by a shared endeavor and an unshakable faith. those men who risked everything 65 years ago demonstrated that although tyranny may suppress, it cannot endure for ever. they proved that dictatorship make for a time have the power to dictate, but that it will not, in the end, decide the course of the human journey. they enacted the belief that as long as one of us is not free, no one of us is free. they made real the timeless bonds enshrined in the bill of rights, the declaration of independence, the charter of liberty, and the call of liberty, equality, and fraternity. just the hopes of one age, but the dreams of all ag

and then there is -- and there are some immigration books from britain. i think many of you know that putin is changing since it entered the common market and has become a center for immigration allover from eastern europe as well as south asia and two books that represent one it is the road home, she is a british writer who really should be better known in the united states in this takes place in london everyman who is from the former soviet union trying to eke out a living having been in a bleak time in western europe. and then the second book also displays in the kitchen and that is called, in the kitchen. so i think this one, of course, is in paper, the road home, and the new monica ali is in hardback which probably makes a difference to people. finally it monica ali segues into my other favorite genre which is south asian books. i have to hear, one is abraham -- cutting for stone which is about a physician, it is really hard to describe because it is an epic, very fact epic novel. we have gone on so people coming into the store to say how much they l

a secret inquiry conducted by a grandees handpicked by the prime minister is not what britain is. does the prime minister not understand the purpose of an inquiry is not just to produce a set of conclusions but to allow the people of britain to come to terms with a mistake made in their name? i have met not families of the soldiers who lost their lives in iraq and just an hour ago they asked me to speak in their name and tell him that nothing short of a fully public inquiry held in open would satisfy them. would the promised not at least listen to what those grieving families need? he said the inquiry has to be held in private to protect national security. it looks suspiciously like he wants to protect his reputation and that of his predecessor instead. why else would he wanted to report after the general election when we could have at least -- before the next general election? it is possible to have been limited number of centreville magic sensitive sessions on camera by -- and leaving the best principle that the vast bulk of the inquiry, not just a few public sessions, should be

he said his view was that it was britain's interest to be aligned in this way. and he wasn't going to go there. eventually i think he paid a big price in the election. he won, but only 36% of the vote at a historically low turnout but that's what he believed. >> host: and that's why we love him, and sometimes you just, as you were saying earlier in a different context about barack obama giving things space to play sells out. now people don't look as desirably on the outcome of iraq when it now appears to be successful. again, tiptoe back from doing that. let's talk about, when we talk about barack i don't necessarily mean politically and i am not being political in his conversation. he is a huge antipodal an pivot. >> guest: he helped form the new government and effect unity in government. we will see what happens with that government. it's challenging right now in israel. but he is unique. i write here that i learned more from him in any of the other leaders. i have enormous respect from mandela. because he is an unbelievably, i mean, i don't know any political

britain is coming through that by taking the right policies. the opposition party of the first party, they are the first party to go into an election tomorrow with no policy to deal with the economy. >> mr. speaker, is the prime minister aware that is departing and secretary leaves a legacy

. >> i have a member of parliament from great britain. i'll exit and come back. >> you have a member of parliament? >> i have a member of parliament from britain visiting my office. i've made him wait 15 minutes. >> you aren't getting close to that uk medical health care plan. >> i am trying to find out how they -- >> actually, you know what? senator coburn, i actually spoke to sir michael rolings who does run n.i.c.e. and about what worked, what didn't work, what they might rethink and what they are very proud of. i would be interested if you do raise that with your visiting guest. what they think of n.i.c.e. from his -- >> senator, may i just say one thing. i was a very close friend of a member of parliament. used to come visit all the time. and he went in and under their program of n.i.c.e., which is what i guess the acronym is. he had a broken wrist. he doesn't have a broken wrist. he had cancer throughout his body. and he died in two weeks. i don't know the exact details of that, but that's the classic case of what i think we're talk

it led to a kind of chaotic politics within britain because britain is so uncomfortable with the notion of religious faith and expressed publicly. and so it wasn't something he could actually give voice to on till the miami 11 when he was able to then speak about the kind of fundamentalist right and wrong, you know, the fundamental threat facing the space societies. and she was able to speak in religious terms and found his voice and that is when you particularly dealt with in the post-9/11 period and in the iraq period. but, you know, he listened to advice. , i write about this in the book because we actually come apart. largely on how to deal with iraq and george bush in his third election because i argued that he has to show distance, some independents which i suggested by the way with on climate change and that he has to show some new learning of iraq. you can't go to the electorate again, having been to iraq, given what happened with the intelligence without showing some learning. and i did the research and i showed the root forward and i also gave him the notes prior to him giving

2000 9/3 01, which contains a text of a resolution by the republic of korea, united kingdom, great britain, northern ireland the united states and japan. i wish to draw the attention to the document containing a letter dated from the representative of mongolia, said -- addressed to the security council. it is my understanding that the council is ready to proceed to vote on the drive privilege -- resolution before it, unless i hear any objection, i will put the draft resolution to a vote. there is no objection. it is so decided. will those in favor of the draft resolution please raise their hands? thank you. the voting is as follows, the draft resolution received 16 votes in favor, the draft resolution has been adopted as resolution 1874 of 2009. i shall now give the floor to those members of the council who wish to make a statement after the voting. i now. a floor to the representative of the united states >> thinking. the united states welcomes unanimous adoption of resolution 81874. this provides a strong international response to north korea's test of a nuclear device. the message of th

for upgrade many people, the idea that britain could not have won the war was attractive, for the navy, the british army, even for opposition politicians who had opposed the wall or all along, by saying it was an unwinnable war that presented them in a better light. but i don't think that is true. i think the british could have won the war in 1776, and should have won the war in 1776. i think the british -- had the british had a more resolute, more active commander, they would have defeated washington's army on long island or manhattan island, and could probably have ended the war. even in 1777, the british might have won the war. the basic british idea is for an army in 1777, for and army to invade new york from canada while general howell took his army with the royal navy up the hudson river and join withburg:in albany. but then he let him come by himself, and went after washington at philadelphia. it turned out to be an egregious blunder on howell's point. most people think the british could not have won the war after 1777. what i tried to argue in "almost a miracle: the american vi

or the closest to the british -- who tried to educate his own countrymen in britain on the vitality of enduring vitality, the precise difficulty that is always open to discussion, debate and interpretation of the constitution and sometimes when one listens to the historian in chief in the white house who can barely make a speech without invoking, somewhat mournfully, washington staring glumly at the ice fields when crossing the delaware at the inaugural speech, quite a moment for the folks, as freezing as we all were on that great story of the day. you sometimes have the impression that obama is getting supply from a crack cabinet. thomas jefferson and alexander hamilton and abraham lincoln would compulsively identify. the founding fathers debated what america was to become. the possibilities of america. america was founded as an act of separation from the misdemeanors and errors of the miserable old world, it would be a new thing in the world, a place in which you could become an american irrespective of fraud or origin port nation or class, simply by virtue of subscribing to the grea

prime minister of canada, prime minister of the united kingdom, great britain, and northern ireland, the french prime minister, the presidents of the french senate and national assembly, ladies and gentlemen. there were 135,000 of them in thousands of boats. they formed two armies. one was american and the other army a british canadian army. a few hours before, they had been wished well before they left. they were all silent. what were they thinking about, these young soldiers, as their eyes looked ahead, staring at the thin, black strip of coast that slowly merged out of the fog? what were they thinking of? were they thinking about their lives that had been so short? were they thinking about the kiss is their mothers had planted on their foreheads whenever young? were they thinking about the tears that their fathers held back when they left, or the tears that were waiting for them on the other side of the ocean? what were these young soldiers thinking of? the soldiers in whose hands history had placed the fate of so many people. what were they thinking of? other than the fact that a

to, i think many of you know, that britain is changing the since it entered the common market, the has become a center for immigration promote over from eastern europe as well as south asia. to books that represent those two different areas, one is the road home from a british writer who should be no better in the united states and this takes place in london a man from the former soviet union is trying to eke out a living at a very bleak time in eastern europe. then the second book also takes place in the kitchen and it is called in the kitchen. this of course, is in paper and the road home is on hardback which probably makes a difference to people. finally, this book and segue and to my other favorite shawn bridges south asian books. i have two of them hear. one is here cutting four stone which is about a position it is very hard to describe because it is a very fact epic novel and lots of people have been coming into the store to say how much they love this book. the author is a position in the united states that immigrated here actually from ethiopia where his family were protestant

those judgments in israel and the united states, but also in other parts of the world, in france, britain, if those judgments are that i ran is out of control, dangerous, prone to violence, something may be done -- some type of greater action to stop denuclearization of iran. host: the person was touching on outside influences. other muslim countries such as saudi arabia could have an influence on iran. guest: right now, very little. in the philippines, will lead to a successful revolution was that a leader lost popular support. i do not think there is any country in the world that has a degree of influence in iran that we had to the philippines. an outsider is. to be able to intervene. the iranian people need to work out this on their own. host: we have someone on the democrats' line. good morning to you. caller: hello, i got in on the wrong question. into this one. -- answer this one. i think obama should follow the plan he has set. he has the young people on his side. he had these townhouse meetings -- town hall meetings for the people. you could tell by the faces of the people, that t

now the nko is being declared a terrorist group, anti- revolutionary in great britain. so, what they are trying to do is they are trying to say that u.s. and foreign influences are driving this conflict. when that happens, it becomes seditious. they will be hanging from the rafters as they have been. guest: the lady caller epitomizes what the great debates that has been going on in american politics, since the beginning. which is that they get involved in the world or stay home. they have had this debate for hundreds of years. john abbott -- john adams, woodrow wilson. george bush has been closer to wilson. the lady caller is closer to john adams. the fact is that nations and people and nations play critical roles. lafayette of the french held, without them the american revolution might have failed. there is no doubt that what reagan did in the 1980's helped to bring down the fall of the soviet union. ultimately, the people have to fight their own battles. the iranians are going have to fight their own regime. that does that mean that the rest of the world has no intere

about the home grown terrorist threat that seems to be a part of britain. he said we always have to be on our guard, but we have to understand that american and british society are different. the immigrant experience here is different from that of most other countries. he said the average income of islamic americans is above the national average. that is not a commentary on economics. that is a commentary on welcoming. that is a commentary on integration. in another instance, i was with a british partner. i was the director of nsa at the communications headquarters. nsa and the other agency have been working together since world war ii. we invite each other to our nation's. we often try to coordinate our activities. they usually take us to some english country house. we usually take them to the motel 6 in maryland. [laughter] we were trying to spice it up. we took them to gettysburg. we went to the army war college. besides the business meetings, there are cultural events as well. the cultural event was to walk the battlefield. we want someone from the coll

1990 britain and these economically rational programs. the poor majority made the mistake of entering the political arena and the like in their own candidate, aristide, a populist priest and had a standard operating procedures, to undermine the regime and a couple of months later came the military coup in instituting a horrible reign of terror in which was backed by bush, bush won, and even more so by clinton. in .. nothing at all surprising about what followed next. in 1995, u.s. aid wrote a report pointing out, and i'm quoting it, that the export-driven trade in investment policy that washington, d.c. mandated will squeeze the domestic rice farmer. in fact, the neoliberal policies rammed down haiti's throat destroyed, dismantled what was left of economic sovereignty, drove the country into chaos. now, that was accelerated by bush number 2's banning of international aid on totally cynical grounds. in february, 2004, the two traditional tortures of haiti, france and the united states, combined to back a military coup and send president ar

in this morning's financial times britain business press reported the world food program just announced that they are cutting food aid and rations and also closing operations. the reason is that the donor countries have been cutting back funding because of the fiscal crunch and they are slashing contributions. a close connection between in the horrendous food crisis and poverty crisis and a significant but less significant fiscal crisis closing down operations in rwanda and uganda, ethiopia and many others. in 25 percent cut in the budget while food prices are rising and the financial crisis and economic crisis is bring unemployment and cutting back remittances. that is a major crisis. we might incidentally remember it that when britain and landed in what is now bangladesh they were stunned by its wealth and splendor and it did not take long for it to be on his way to become the very symbol of misery, not by an act of god and. the fate of bangladesh should remind us that the terrible food crisis is not just a the result of western a lack of concern. in large part it results from the ver

they do not want the kind that exist in new zealand in great britain that the delay in ration treatmentsavailable. americans want change, but they do not want changes that will make existing programs worse. that is what a government run system would do. the notion of a government run plan is gaining steam. over the past couple of weeks, when democratic leader after another has insisted that it be included as a part of any reform. the reaction to this should tell us something. among those who have mobilized a reaction to this is america's doctors. many americans could be kicked off of health care plans that they currently have as a result. the u.s. chamber of commerce has warned that the creation of a government plan would lead to a government run health care system. the ceo of the mayo clinic ward that some of the best providers could go out of business. -- warned that some of the best providers could go out of business. one of the nation's leading association of small businesses also expressed concern about a government run plan. americans do not want this type of plan that is being pro

. -- there is some rationing in britain. we are not going to have united states rationing in united. -- we are not going to of rationing in the united states. conservatives were against medicare. we got medicare passed under lyndon johnson with almost no republican support. they thought it every step of the way. here we are and medicare is the difference between whether seniors are dying in droves or whether they get recendays and h care. you have to put these conservative ideas aside. they get told what to say by a very high-priced political consultant paid what they say is not show. -- what they say is not so.

but the same is true with france and with india and japan, great britain, so many other countries. why are they doing that? they're doing it because it is unbelievably job creating to have international tourism come to your country. on average, an international tourist spends about $4,500 on hotels and cars and tourist attractions and food. so it's unbelievably job creating and boosting of the economy of the host country. but even more important than that, our country needs to do this and we are not because starting in 2000 -- going to 2008, we now have 600,000 fewer visitors in a year from overseas than we had eight years ago. why is that the case? it's because some people feel that we don't want them to visit our country. quite the opposite is true. and so we suggest rather than keep losing economic opportunities from international tourism, let's at least join the discussion and get in the game by promoting tourism to our country. destination international tourism. let's at least get in the game. and so our bill creates this public-private partnership and establishes the capabi

what is important is what the people of britain said at the polls last night. it would appear today that the prime minister is not prepared to listen to what was said last night. i think it will be repeated tomorrow night and monday morning with the european elections. the people are saying very clearly that they think that this is enough. he has been an out -- a magnificent chancellor. he has not been a very good prime minister. where he has greeted -- created economic stability, we have enormous political instability. the time has come for him to stand down. that is what was said at the polls last night. it is not a question of a rebellion or putting him down, he ought to go with dignity and have the grace to stand down and let somebody who can get stability back into the system go on to the general election. >> i think the pathetic little plot has failed miserably. we may have a weekend of madness, but on monday, let's get back on the job of running the country. gordon brown is the best person to lead us out of this recession. he has proved that so far. the

because it is part of britain and the germans essentially occupied the island. and the third book which really doesn't need me to promote it is unaccustomed earth. and that's the way is into the both, in fact, it represents both the genres that i want to introduce today. one is novels about immigration not. what i find it me -- i find a constantly reaffirming story about people coming to the united states to reinvent themselves and then the other is the great south asian writers and, of course, he represents both of these trends. on immigration i guess i like to start a what burner because it takes place in the 1850's and is about a group of whom mostly americans who were working out issues in the united states trying to settle into the new world, but it all takes place and a few hours in the area around walden pond or a very depressed henry thoreau accidently starts forest fire and everybody in the surrounding area is: in to try to prevent the fire from burning down the beautiful town of concord. and the hero of the day is a norwegian immigrant named osmond

inflicted on descriptions of the united states by many of my friends and by opinions in europe and britainicular with which i was close working as i do for the bbc. among the simplicity's were for example cowboy politics. the same fleecy cliches born of journalistic habits, occupied by coastal positions preferably flying over the rest. it will be a long time before defined one and delude for example. [laughter] and some of this is cowboy politics, american culture is, religion in particular gets at mina was when it is described as a prisoner of the evangelical right when of course religion intensely important and noble part of america's history i speak of some one rather on the side of jefferson state and jefferson, by the way, how many of you think jefferson that's an easy question, there will be an exam by the way they told you that before we let you out. [laughter] timoney if you think the jefferson believed jesus was the son of god? you are so clever. [laughter] i gave you that so you could feel good about yourself. indeed, he ran on the platform. adam says let's see a bottle of burgun

going around the world on the book tour i have done britain, israel, south africa, people everywhere there is a little more open is to pay attention to the leaders, why they did what they did. on the other hand i do not about in more respecting of my profession provide do think it does like a creative sense of mystery and i am fairly blunt in the book about both the descriptions of me and the other leaders that do it. the key piece to this is whether you have a purpose and the leaders you are working for having a purpose paragraph the time i worked for bill clinton, he was a new democratic change, party he made the party more mainstream and middle-class which we were a part of. james was a part of not just the election but it brought me to him from what i was working on and what bill clinton was working on with a lifetime of changes that making a party electable in the south bend national swear was a political project i have no problem with what i do when it is working for leaders of other purpose. >> host: but specifically to polling which on its face is neutral it is a gathering of