the caller said chalmers johnson. does that say anything to you about that man's politics. >> peter, that's not fair. because -- >> the second part of the question makes -- >> i'm going to be terribly optimistic, and i guess naive. but you know what, it's a book festival so this is an opportunity to be this way. people make the argument that readers only read to confirm their assumptions. i hope that's not true. because then we're only going to deepen the divide. look, i just -- i don't want to go down that road because i don't want to believe that people just read what they believe in. i don't read just what i believe in. and it sharpens my own views by reading a very smart, a scholar who has a different interpretation. it doesn't have to be political by the way to be interpretation. that, i think, makes us smarter. so i would rather not assume anything about this person's politics. and i would hope that he doesn't assume anything by his politics by the book he chooses. >> tim naftali, addressed the last part of the