that's what happens in an ideal society that a government fears it citizenry. look at what happened when tyrants and kings abuse their power. look at the world and history and you can see what happened to kings. they see of rulers abuse power, they have something to fear. in a tyranny, the opposite happens. overtyranny, the people whom power is exercised fear the people who are exercising power. i think very much that is what has happened in the united states is the climate of fear that has been created and that is increasing, that is being bolstered all the time and has changed relationship between the citizenry and the government. i want to share an anecdote about when i first really realize this not in a theoretical way but a very visceral way and started thinking about it more. in january 2010, the first time i ever wrote about you organization wiki leaks, devoted to transrency an exposing secret government wrongdoing. january 2010 was a time when almost nobody had heard of wiki leaks, including me. the way that i came to learn about wiki leaks was that the

government needed to cultivate a certain kind of knowledge not just from the leadership class but as a citizenry to carry for these ideas so education for candy came away to help create to see that it would carry forward and looking back and look at the success from that generation were they were very aware that foreign governments and revolutions often failed so washington thought of it as a way to nurture and sustain >> house sectarian were universities? >> they were mixed if you think of some of the curriculum they're really in the business to create the clergy and the theology release centered around a curriculum and the knowledge that at the same time most we're going into the clergy and those institutions that educated on space and got so they themselves were in the process to rethink how they treat theology and their ranges because you get arguments about the relationship between the church in the state with what at the time were public institutions rethink of them as private now but funded by the public purse educating the public in ways and was founded by the public it was just a prior

looks to you to stop the hemorrhaging of the american spirit, to unite once and for all our diverse citizenry on a single american banner and to restore honesty, integrity and responsibility to our government. like you, i firmly believe if we stand united, wee will win. good luck ross, dennis squirmin, delaware. thank you. i will keep it with me during the campaign. i understand it is on loan. i'll get it back to you. never forget to everybody listening today, i can't do this job without your continued support. one person is nothing in a task this large. if millions of you will come together, we can do anything. there is nothing we can't do. it's up to you, it's up to all of us. i promise you, i will give it everything i have. but the final results are in your hands because you own this country and you are the voters. i look forward to presenting these issues day after day to the american people. i would like to thank the american people by choosing me as your candidate, you have given me the highest honor i could ever receive. and in closing, let me say this. i love this country. i love the

you cut them off at the money pass when you have a mobilized citizenry. of, itmes to the point is easier than we think to make real change. the budgets of these groups. look up a staff of these groups. majoron't amount to a bowling league in some new art borough -- new york borough. if we only had congress watchers like we had birdwatchers. it is easy. just for a moment imagine an order to envision real possibilities, what if these groups and others like them had 10 times the budget? advocates.e rigorous what if they had 100 times the budget, 100 times the rigorous advocate, and it's it is still a drop in the bucket compared to what corporate executives get away with. it is still a drop in the bucket in terms of charitable from the american people, over $300 billion a year. there is a distinction between charity and justice, isn't there? charity is supporting soup kitchens. important. certainly immediate relief for people. but why should a country like ours have two kitchens at all? justice develops livelihoods that prevent the need. -- the need for soup

he talks about what undercuts good citizens, and it is a citizenry focused on rights instead of duties, a citizenry the bluesman is perfected are perfectible and therefore you learn through utopia and utopian ideas, citizenship invested in moral relativism, there is no right or wrong. take something like the abu ghraib prison scandal which was terrible, but there is no reason why the new york times had to put it on the front page 32 straight days in a row. there is no home team in america. it is passÉ to say that america is good for passÉ to say that i am an american and therefore support the causes we undertake, even if they are difficult ones and in many ways often controversial and open to dissent. and the 4th is class warfare. roosevelt talks about, he said the end of the republic is at hand in class warfare commences which is what we have seen in many ways. we have seen classes and genders pitted against each other which is toxic to the body politic and to citizenship. we start with citizenship because without citizenship you cannot create the good patriots or bewill be the good p

people so you can make your mark as the president more than over will better reflect the current citizenry you have justices on the court dealing with the issues of so phones can the fbi or police searched the contents? the courts said no but if you listen to the or arguments a lot of the justices don't have a clue about modern technology and all the features that are on their. there was the case a couple of terms ago concerning patent law but they could circumvent cable systems it was clear that scalia had almost no sense of cable tv even though he helped to write that act but no real sense of contemporary technology would be nice to have judges who could rotate with a better sense of those practices. >> early on when they did have lifetime tenure is and tell the 1820s and the supreme court did meet and it did not meet much the justices were writing carriages of respect from courthouse to court house hearing cases that contributed to enormous turnover because it was an arduous way of life and right now pacemakers and justice stevens lived in florida would fly every two weeks or arguments

he will better reflect the current citizenry. you have justices on the court dealing with the issue of cell phones. can the fbi or the police search the contents of their cell phone? the court unanimously said no. when you listen to the oral argument, a lot of the justices don't have much of a clue about modern technology he and the use of cell phones and all the apps and things things that are on their. there was a case a couple of terms ago concerning a case dealing with patent law with little in tendency were able to circumvent cable systems. it was clear that scalia, for example, had almost no sense of cable tv. even though he helped write the cable tv act prior to his appointment as a justice. no real sense of contemporary technology. it would be nice to have judges to rotate off and rotate and you have a better sense of those practices. one of the things early on when judges did have a lifetime tenure was a road circuit. in the 1820s, when the supreme court wasn't meeting and it didn't meet much, the justices were writing r

also talks about what undercuts good citizens and it's a citizenry focused on rights instead of duties, citizenry that believes man is perfectible and therefore you long for utopia and utopian yesterdayses, there is no right or wrong, we see that on the battlefield today. take something like the abu ghraib prison scandal which was terrible, but there's no reason why "the new york times" had to put it on the front page 32 straight days in a row. there is no home team. the american press or other places today because it's pass say to say that america is good. or pass sai to say that i'm an american and therefore i support the causes we undertake. the fourth is class warfare, and roosevelt talks about -- he says at the end of the rfk is at hand when class ware far comment s which is what we have seen in many ways, which it's left, right can blacks, white, mail, female, young, old. we have seen classes and genders pitted against each other in this nation over the least seven years, which is toxic to the body politic and to citizenship. so you start with citizenship because without citizens

, citizen -- duties, citizenry that believes man is perfected or perfectible and you urge for utopian ideas, that there is no right or wrong. of course, we see that on the battlefield today. take, for example, the abu ghraib prison scandal which was terrible, but there's no reason why "the new york times" had to put it on the front page 32 straight days in a row. there is no home team p in america. in many ways it's passe to say that america is good or passe to say that i'm an american and, therefore, i support the causes that we undertake even if they're difficult ones. and in many ways often controversial and open to dissent. and the fourth is class warfare. and roosevelt talks about, he says at end of the republic is at hand when class warfare commences which is what we've seen in many ways whether it's left/right, black/white, male/female, young/old, we've seen classes and yennedders pitted against -- genders pitted against each other which is toxic to the body politic and to citizenship. so you start with citizenship because without citizenship, you can't create the good patriots

looks to you to stop the hemorrhaging of the american spirit, to unite once and for all our diverse citizenry on a single american banner and to restore honesty, integrity and responsibility to our government. like you, i firmly believe if we stand united, wee will win. good luck ross, dennis squirmin, delaware. thank you. i will keep it with me during the campaign. i understand it is on loan. i'll get it back to you. never forget to everybody listening today, i can't do this job without your continued support. one person is nothing in a task this large. if millions of you will come together, we can do anything. there is nothing we can't do. it's up to you, it's up to all of us. i promise you, i will give it everything i have. but the final results are in your hands because you own this country and you are the voters. i look forward to presenting these issues day after day to the american people. i would like to thank the american people by choosing me as your candidate, you have given me the highest honor i could ever receive. and in closing, let me say this. i love this country. i love the

if 1% of the citizenry mobilizes in each congressional district, two and a half million people, and have public opinion behind them and set up full-time offices, they could change congress in a matter of months or a year and a half or two years. that is what lincoln said. with public sentiment, you can do anything. "makingur mottos is change is easier than we think. let's not give up on ourselves. " airbag recall is set to double. host: this is an amazing coverup. look at the volume of car owners that are terrified. taking a wonderful safety feature and turning it into a potential explosive hazard. it is a lot of anxiety. this is a japanese company operating in the u.s., europe, and everywhere. the question is, is it going to be criminal prosecution? not enough to even recall. the question is, how did the too company allow a supplier get millions of defective airbags past them. they are defective because they wanted to use a propellant. where was the quality control people at ford and general motors? story. a fascinating montana, bob is waiting there, independent. caller: mr. nader, i wa

it depends on the engagement of the citizenry. do this and that well.ancreatic cancer, 10,000 bills introduced, 200 past, one was hours to start a program, framework to take on pancreatic cancer. it can be done. >> how important is your philanthropic effort and the things you have done in terms of your legacy? but for you personally, what does that mean? >> and youyou think you're doing something to make the world a slightly better place to make it about yourself. it is not clear just by making more money you are making the world better place. everybody has to make their own judgment. i think i'm happy. >> what has given you the most satisfaction of all your effort? >> probably the feeling that i get very often coming up to me, very modest. giving back to the country is a pleasure. what they see i am doing and hopefully unmotivated for the same. >> the difference between recognition and legacy. >> i would answer that by saying, i believe we are living through a revolution. we may not recognize it, but we are. it will make things differently, use resourc

control and power and anyone who challenges him in the elites is executed and any of the common citizenryst a perceived slight to the regime means jail time and their jails are really horrible. so he's crushing the people and the chinese have decided, this is the first time i've heard that the chinese are actually supporting a u.n. city security council resolution and closed the crossing point between north korea and china and that's that border point that north korea exports to china coal. and coal is important because the chinese are building a coal fired power plant every week. and north korea uses that coal for hard currency with which they then buy all of the materials they need to keep their industry running. so this is a really interesting development. kim is posturing. he's showing he's the big man and anybody who stands up against him in korea winds up in jail or dead. the international community, instead of using those tactics, what he does is he sets off nuclear weapons and fires missiles. >> we remember about his uncle and those reports of being eaten by the dogs. whether or n

but you cut them off at the money pass when you have a mobilized citizenry. that comes to the point of it's easier we think to make real change. because look at the budgets of these groups. look at the staff of these groups. and they don't amount to a major bowling league in some new york borough in terms of numbers. never mind bird watching, which i'm totally in awe of, if we only had congress watchers like we had bird watchers. it is easy. now just for a moment, just imagine in order to envision real possibilities. what if these groups and others like them had ten times the budget? ten times the rigorous advocates. what if they had 100 times the budget? 100 times the rigorous advocates? and it's still a drop in the bucket compared to what corporate executives get away with. and it's still a drop in the bucket in terms of the charitable contributions of the american people which are over $300 billion a year. but there's a distinction between charity and justice isn't there? charity is supporting soup kitchens. important. certainly immediate relief for needy

but you cut them off at the money pass when you have a mobilized citizenry. and that comes to the point of it's easier we think to make real change. because look at the budgets of these groups. look at the staff of these groups. and they don't amount to a major bowling league in some new york borough in terms of numbers. never mind bird watching, which i'm totally in awe of, if we only had congress watchers like we had bird watchers. it is easy. now just for a moment, just imagine in order to envision real possibilities. what if these groups and others like them had ten times the budget? ten times the rigorous advocates. what if they had 100 times the budget? 100 times the rigorous advocates? and it's still a drop in the bucket compared to what corporate executives get away with. and it's still a drop in the bucket in terms of the charitable contributions of the american people which are over $300 billion a year. but there's a distinction between charity and justice isn't there? charity is supporting soup kitchens. important. certainly immediate relief for ne

and then could we harness the power of the citizenry, of citizens? could we harness their power to better -- to improve in monitoring of mosquito pop wlagz? and to distribute -- can we think about, you know going further, using citizen signs using really the power of citizens that understand better what the problem is about, to actually innovate? >> yeah. >> maybe i can start. i think that the issue with the genetically modified mosquitos, there are some evaluations being considered. sew the communities are considering whether they want to go that route or not. in terms of the citizen engagement, incredibly important. this is an area where everybody has a role to play. i don't know that i would say for diagnostic test distribution, i think at least in the u.s. we have a pretty good diagnostic test distribution, but i think in terms of source control, in terms of making sure you cleaned up the neighborhood, cleaned up the back yard, got rid of the standing water, the satires and stuff, clean up the garbage areas, but also in terms of the information.

but it depends on the engagement of citizenry. if citizens get involved and ask their elected legislators or the next president to do this, they will do it. our group as one example in 2012 pancreatic cancer action network there were 10,000 bills introduced. only 200 passed. one of them was ours to instruct the national cancer institute to start a program, a framework to take on pancreatic cancer. it can be done, but people can't sit back and watch tv and tweet. they've got to really get involved. >> how important is your philanthropic efforts and the things that you've done in terms of your legacy? obviously we know how your mom felt. but for you personally, what does it mean? >> well, obviously, when you think you're doing something to make the world a slightly better place, you feel good about yourself. we're only on this earth for a very short period of time and all of us want to feel we're doing something to make the world a better place and it's not clear that just by making more money you're making the world a better place

there is no instance of any danger to our citizenry.no instance of any breach that has been identified. so they were very, very careful. now, she said she's discussed this in the benghazi hearing. she said if i could do it differently i probably would. at the end of the day we need a president who is ready, who gets things done, who has a record to stand on, who understands the complexities of this international engagement as well as our national domestic needs. >> we thank you for your time. we will have to leave it at that. thank you so much for your time. >>> inside the numbers now with the presidential race tightening how decisions and strategies are being made because of new polling data. our new cocktail bitters were doing well, but after one tradeshow, we took off. all i could think about was our deadlines racing towards us. a loan would take too long. we needed money, now. my amex card helped me buy the ingredients to fill the orders. opportunities don't wait around, so you have to be ready for them. find out how american expres

but it depends on the engagement of citizenry.citizens get involved and ask their elected legislators or the next president to do this, they will do it. our group as one example in 2012 pancreatic cancer action network there were 10,000 bills introduced. only 200 passed. one of them was ours to instruct the national cancer institute to start a program, a framework to take on pancreatic cancer. it can be done, but people can't sit back and watch tv and tweet. they've got to really get involved. >> how important is your philanthropic efforts and the things that you've done in terms of your legacy? obviously we know how your mom felt. but for you personally, what does it mean? >> well, obviously, when you think you're doing something to make the world a slightly better place, you feel good about yourself. we're only on this earth for a very short period of time and all of us want to feel we're doing something to make the world a better place and it's not clear that just by making more money you're making the world a better place so i

many decades ago and most important job of the president of the united states is to protect the citizenrye a big job. liz: let's hope he or she will do that. >> particularly she. liz: yeah. stand by with more from warren and charlie. six 1/2 minutes before the closing bell rings. when we come back what the richest minds think will drive america's innovation and future of america and future of berkshire leadership. "countdown to the closing bell" coming back live with warren buffett and charlie monger live from omaha, nebraska. ♪ this weeks btv spotlight features parnell pharmaceuticals, parn on nasdaq. parnell is focused on delivering innovative solutions to unmetanimal health needs in the 70 billion dollar pet market. we have core competences in drug discovery and development, regulatory filings, we have our own fda approved manufacturing facility and we have a significant commercial presence in 14 countries. zydax is our lead compound that we've been marketing in australia zydax affectively regenerates cartilage and can literally save lives. we had one of our sales executives tell us a

life of japan in the early '40s and it suggests japan was prepared for a massive resistant both the citizenry and the military before hiroshima. is there any recognition in japan that is awful and terrible as those bombs were that maybe they were necessary? >necessary? it is no secret that the president administration led by shinzo abe has tried to downplay japan's wartime atrocities because the japanese imperial army was responsible for hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths and a big reason why there is a lot of tension in this part of the world particularly between south korea, china and japan. president obama tried to seize the tension and encouraging the japanese self-defense force to take an active role due to heightened threat from north korea and japan's neighbors are leery of this country remilitarizing after centuries of passivism because they remember what happened at the hands of japanese forces. japanese historians feel bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki were not necessary, that japan was close to surrendering, anyway, but many other historians believe japan would have put up a

we have an informed and responsible citizenry who will go to the polls earnestly and elect the next president of the united states and it will be most likely either hillary clinton or donald trump. what it comes down to, though, we all know this, all of us, republicans and democrats know this, it comes down to essentially probably seven states, 35 counties, in those seven battleground states and independent voters in those counties, swing voters. who is running to win over those swing voters right now? and maybe right now matters less than in september and october. but that's who is going to win this election. and so what is interesting is you see donald trump running to the right after securing the nomination, rather than tacking toward the center. >> thank you for saying for an extra segment. fascinating conversation. thank you. when we come back, the latest on egyptair 804. investigators talking to anybody who might have had access to the plane before take off, from paris. what did they learn? but grandma, we use charmin ultra soft so we don't have to wad to get clean. charmin ultra soft g

once you get new forms of political power, the citizenry see themselves as empowered to hold responsible their new leaders. monarchs never had to be responsible. but when you have leaders coming from the people, there is this need to be constantly watchful, constantly trying to ensure that the power does not get abused. vallon, this idea of counter democracy is not that this watching is against democracy, but that it is a tension that is structural. it's a buttress. it's a way in which this counter-power keeps that wall from falling down. so, what's interesting to think about is that there are two ways that watchfulness can go wrong. ,ne is that it can be too weak and that may be the situation we have right now. we have the great and good groups like the sound -- the sunlight foundation. yes, we can document how much money is in politics, how likely it is this vote is paid for. the danger is that, where the french revolution ends up is invention.illotine's it is literally people who came under surveillance and were found wanting in the eyes of the public, including robespierre. so, what

he always talks about what undercuts good citizens and it's citizenry focused on rights instead of duties, citizens ri that believe that men are perfected and citizenship that is invested in moral relativism and there's no right or wrong, of course, we see that on the battlefield today. there's no reason why "the new york times" had to put it 32 straight days in the row. there's no home team in america. the american press or other places today because it's passe that america is good and we support the causes that we undertake even though controversial. roosevelt talks about -- he says at the end of the republic commences which is what we have seen whether it's left, right, black, male, young old and we have seen classes and genders pitted against each other which is toxic to the body politics and you start with citizenship, because without citizenship you can't be the good patriots on the world stage that you need to be. you guys have all seen the -- i don't know if you've seen the bumper sticker, think globally act locally, it's a popular environmental bumper sticker and i think roosevel

. >> rose: and can you say to the global population or the global citizenry that we have done everything that we can to address climate change and environmental issues? >> oh, no. there's a lot more we can do. in fact, i think today that we're largely talking past one another on policy. >> rose: explain that to me. well, if you think about it, we have a tendency to talk about one issue at a time. we'll talk about that we want low energy prices. one minute we'll talk about we want lower carbon sources. but we don't talk ann about an integrated policy. germany, japan and the united states are shupting down nuclear power plants. i'm not in the nuclear power business, but if your biggest concern were climate change would you be shutting them down. >> rose: why are they shutting them down? >> because of the perceived risk of nuclear power. it's slightly different in each country, but the point is if carbon emissions are the biggest concern, we should be trying to enable nuclear power, we should be trying to enable natural gas. new york city doesn't allow hydraulic fracturing. new york city do

now, that question, what is a legitimate privacy interest of the citizenry, the private citizenry, is a very complex question. it's not easy. there's got to be some to strike the right balance expectation of what is a reasonable expectation of privacy. most citizens knowinglior or unknowingly surrender that privacy every day in the commercial owe sphere and there's sort of an issue of how relevant is that repeated surrender to the question of how much privacy vis-a-vis governments individuals would be entitled to. so there's all kinds of challenges as you get to trying to decide this issue about the scope of a legitimate individual privacy interest. but congress is just not the right body to do that, and we would really be benefitted by a commission of people that include folks who can remember what it's like to have a private sphere. and who would then -- and would also respect the national security interest trying to set that balance. so rather than rush into a solution where we haven't really sussed out the scope of that individual legitimate privacy interest i would say we should

does all of this innovation and collaboration and openness work for a broader segment of citizenry from employment and jobs particularly in the core cities because if you go to most of innovation hubs in the united states and you walk five blocks, you're in an area of high poverty, high depreviousation, are those being made, do we have the right tools and high system systems? it's so organic and so dynamic, most of these institutions only get rewarded based upon a more specific set of data points, so one of the things i think institutions like universities need and others is how do you begin to evaluate whether or not you're seeing success out of that, that's a sort of whole set of policy questions, i think. i think we've always looked at the economic development in the past assort of event oriented and we structured our government and others to celebrate the singular event. the 400 new jobs, 500 new jobs. the whole economy we live is far more dynamic, we are going to see companies grow and lose employment and it doesn't necessarily say anything about the place you live. an economic dev

we're all making about the difference in historical judgment and how one is seen at the time by the citizenry of one's own time. lots of presidents are hated. franklin roosevelt, the whole -- all those people who would refer to him as "that man." but then over time, you know, republicans kind of let go of that. fdr is one of newt gingrich's favorite presidents. they find ways to take what they admire, so lincoln now is kind of on all sides. there are probably a few neoconfederate lincoln haters out there, but that has mostly become an irrelevant point of view. fdr hating mostly irrelevant. even jfk is embraced by the right for his tax cuts and they try to claim his mantel, too. so i think one thing that's a marker of greatness may be that the other side, as it were, kind of comes around and tries to appropriate the legacy, rather than continue to attack. >> it's sort of an interesting how do you view the other side. the fact that people hated lincoln because they thought he was going to end slavery. it's maybe a value judgment, but you have to think about -- i mean, there are some types of a

are all making, the difference between historical judgment and how one is seen at the time by the citizenry of one's own time. a lot of presidents are hated. franklin roosevelt. all of the of people who would refer to have as "that man." they let that go. fdr is one of newt gingrich's favorite presidents. there are probably a few confederate, lincoln-haters. that has mostly become an irrelevant point of view. fdr hating is irrelevant. jfk is claimed by the right for his tax cuts. one thing that is the marker of greatness may be that the other side comes round and tries to appropriate the legacy rather than continue to attack. >> it is interesting -- how do you view the other side? people hated lincoln because they thought he would end slavery. it's a value judgment, but there are some types of programs for which you should be proud to incur -- that is why now when people have come around to the idea that slavery is not a good idea and think that he was right. i would not make somebody the worst president just because a large swath of the population is angry at something he is doing. i would

percent with the legislation that is for you know complete neighborhoods with an economic diverse citizenry'm totally supportive and csa as for halloween that was mentioned by one of the speakers you know, i was around in halloween 25 years and probably starts on polk street but leading against it, it is no fun to be in your neighborhood and afraid to go out when people are murdered the first floor we cancelled for the same reason people come into the neighborhood they don't want to celebrate. >> make trouble those are elements dependent of the project it is 36 they were not cancelled because of the neighbors noise but every year that keeps on changing and projects within the footprint the fair and the loud music and dancing and this is something i looked for wow, you, have a both ways i'd like to see pink saturday come back and the events safer i'm very, very supportive and predict especially the neighbors are hanging in that so thank you. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much i echo a lot of what commissioner vice president richards said about the community engagement we saw las

by and large the citizenry trusts that folks deal with the good tryst for the company.got through. you saw polling people indicated were very concerned about it and disapproval of it, intensity disapproval outside of hard-line partisans on either side, intensity was relatively low. whether or not this deal is perceived as good deal or bad deal come november will be material for hillary clinton. donald trump has said over and over and over again he will make a tremendous deal with iran, the best deals, he would deal with this and he would get, called it the worst deal in history he had ever seen which coming from new york real estate business that's saying something. so he laid down a big marker on that. hillary clinton is going to have to defend it to a certain degree but we are starting to see in hillary clinton as she gets closer to the end of her primary the ability to pivot a little bit. martha: this issue goes to the heart of global security and the debate over which side the united states is to be on in that match in a way that nothing else does in our time right

really emerges during the french revolution, that once you get new forms of political power the citizenry see themselves as empowered to hold responsible their new leaders. monarchs never had to be responsible. but when you have leaders coming from the people, there is this need to be constantly watchful, to be constantly trying to ensure that that power doesn't get abused. so for him this idea of counter democracy is not that this watching is against democracy but that it's a tension that is structural. it's a buttress. it's a way in which this counterpower keeps that wall from falling down. so what's interesting so think about is that there's two ways that watchfulness can go wrong. one is that it can be too weak. and that may be the situation that we have right now. we have the great and good groups like the sunlight foundation going out and saying yes, we can document how much money is in politics. we can document how likely it is that this vote is paid for. the danger is that it also gets too strong because of course where the french revolution ends up is with dr. guillotine's invent

age, but it remains true that freedom, that ordered liberty will remain dependent on an informed citizenry and that requires a serious and a free press. good you journalism, serious journalism that takes actual facts seriously and then grapples with those facts honestly is an important and a high calling. i plan to read about one-fourth of this "new york times" piece into the record but please note that i will skip over many proper names for ease of audible understanding. picking up then about 40% of the way into the profile, the story continues, the job that he, ben rhodes, had been hired to do was namely to help the president of the united states communicate with the public and this job was changing in equally significant ways, thanks to the impact of digital technologies that people in washington were just beginning to wrap their minds around. it's hard for many of us to absorb the true magnitude of the changes in the news business. for 40% of all newspaper industry professionals have lost their jobs inside the last decade. in part because readers can absorb all forms of new news that t

my district, four large medical schools, a number of research institutions and a very activated citizenry. so we get lots of inquiries, lots of calls for assistance, a lot of calls for clarification. and so we spend considerable time not pestering but certainly inquiring of your staff. and i want to thank them for the kinds of sensitivities they have displayed. i also have a very activated medical community, physicians, associations and organizations. just last week i had a meeting with the chicago medical society, but i've heard concerns that under the proposed rule that we're talking about, only a limited number of physicians will meet the alternative payment model or apm criteria to earn the payment bonus. by your own estimation, you have indicated that there may be only 30,000 to 90,000 physicians who meet these terms, which is a tiny fraction of the total eligible medicare doctors in the country. i'm sure we'll hear more from these physician groups. they'd like to know what could make it -- or how likely is it that anything will make it easier for there to be more pathways to qualify

my district, four large medical schools, a number of research institutions, and a very activated citizenry. so we get lots of inquiries, lots of calls for assistance, a lot of calls for clarification. and so, we spend considerable time not pestering, but certainly inquiring of your staff. and i want to thank them for the kinds of sensitivities they have displayed. i also have a very activated medical community, physicians associations and organizations. and just last week i had a meeting with the chicago medical society. but i've heard concerns that under the proposed rule that we're talking about, only a limited number of physicians will meet the alternative payment model or apm criteria to earn the payment bonus. by your own estimation, you have indicated that there may be only 30,000 to 90,000 physicians who meet these terms, which is a tiny fraction of the total medicare-eligible doctors in the country. and i'm certain that we'll hear some more from these physician groups. they'd like to know what could make it -- how likely is it that anything will make it easier for there to be more

justice scalia, i think in the rder citizenry, is best known for his quips. this court has been mistaken for a bit of spite. not be nd state would such a difficult subject that religion were as the court to be, somehinks it voadvoekz that can e indulged in secret, like pornography in people's homes. these things under his knife, yesterday ginsburg, praised him not so much for the language sometimes ut for forcing them to make their own opinions stronger. i think the most memorable one is that it was a love i e to justice ginsburg, if were to ever join an opinion like that, i would hide my head in a bag. united eme court of the states has dissended from the mory to the john aboriginal fortunes of the fortune cookie. that is what makes him so fun to ead but it's the logic of the impeccable reasoning that make him such a long-standing pedogogical tool and also has had a transformative effect everybody else is talking about. i've had my own anecdote with him and he loved the of his tual sparring role in the court but also his role as teacher. i remember some year

it provides a more or less second class citizenry where you have even those women who have chosen to serve, their service is somehow looked at as a little less, not as you weren't a real soldier or a real marine because you didn't go into combat, you didn't have ground combat, and now you're seeing it with this legal restriction being in place that it has really denied a lot of the service that women have actually done. so you see i think that some of us from the panel up here and i know many of you probably have peers where they have done the same thing their male counterparts have done in combat and yet received disequal recognition for it. and so this is really the impetus for why there has been a big push for integration and for equal integration. and you're seeing this played out now in particular with the selective service arguments in that why women should be involved in the selective service or not be involved in selective service. for those of you who are foreign students here, the selective service is frequently also called the draft. i think it's important to take away som

justice scalia, and i think, in the ordinary citizenry is best known for his quips. church and state would not be such a difficult subject if religion were, as the court thinks it is to be, some purely personal application that could be indulged in secret, like pornography in the privacy of one's home. you get these things. even people that came under his directly,nife most justice ruth bader ginsburg, praised him not so much for the language sometimes, but for forcing them to make their own opinions stronger. oneink the most memorable was a love note to justice ginsburg. ever were to join an opinion like that, i would hide my head in a bag. so, those are the kinds of things that embellish his opinions that make them so fun to read, but it is the logic and impeccable reasoning of them that make them such a long-standing tool, but also had a transformative effect that everybody else has talked about. i have my own anecdote. i think he loved the intellectual sparring of his role in the court, but also his role as teacher. i remover some years ago we invited him to give