of commitment to homofeebphobiaa that weapon haven't -- homophobia that weapon haven't seen since ghandi>> jon: i thought he was protesting the british occupation of india? >> i think i would know what he was protesting, okay. >> jon: random nut jobs around the country displaying ignorance? >> there's a lot of hate throughout. >> jon: it's dissipating and rapidly. i don't think we're going to medal this year. >> don't you count us out. don't you give up on us, pony boy. >> jon: sorry pony boy? suddenly it's the outsiders? all right. we're running out of time, assif. it's going to take a lake placid hockey like mere doll pull it out. >> wait, what is that? oh, jon we've got a late goal from the governor of pennsylvania. this could be the one, role it, chuck. >> there was a controversy remark made by a member of your legal team talking about gay marriage and 12 year olds -- >> it was inappropriate. i think a better analogy would be brother and sister, don't you. >> do you believe in ignorance? usa!on: we can do it usa! usa! >> welcome back! you know, there has been a lot after tension paid

. >> it is that ghandi quote. >> it is! >> the proposals we make are structure changes. we recognize that there are deep divides on issues like guns and reproductive rights, and all sort of other issues. and people are well organized to battle on the issues. what we argue is many of the structure changes we propose in an honest debate can find left right coalition that are unexpected. across the country when legislatures have voted to overturn citizens united. ares voted -- republicans voted with the democrats to petition congress to act. we now have a republican cosponsor for a constitutional amendment that walter jones from the carolinas. saying, you know, look as a conservative republican, i think it has to happen. we have to have a fair fight. our argument is that our job is to go out and say, look, we can have honest differences on all sort of fundamental issues. we ought to have a politic that work in this country. i think there's a ton amount of space. we have not begun to occupy that space. we have not begun to make the demands for the structure changes. it's tim

even ghandi did not condemn that he also says that people who engage in that sort of self-defense may even commando level of respect for the kind of grit that it shows. and then he says, for purposes of what we're doing, that is, the freedom, achieving political goals, we have got to press through marching and non-violent demonstration, and that is the way we will achieve our political goals. soaking crystallizes dichotomy. and later roy wilkens still under pressure from lots of people at the branches are in use in the pamphlet called the single issue in the robert williams case, this is not an issue of self-defense. wellcome's looked at what williams said and said, that's not what you advocated. you advocate of political violence. we will have none of this. at the same time roy wilkens says to listen, the naacp cut its organizational teeth on supporting black folk who stood up with firearms and defended themselves. talk about the pink franklin case, the o.c. and smith case. for actually the case that funded the naacp legal defense fund. there was -- steve green is another example. al

. >> it is that ghandi quote. >> it is! >> the proposals we make are structure changes. we recognize that there are deep divides on issues like guns and reproductive rights, and all sort of other issues. and people are well organized to battle on the issues. what we argue is many of the structure changes we propose in an honest debate can find left right coalition that are unexpected. across the country when legislatures have voted to overturn citizens united. ares

on the other hand, i'm not ghandi either. i'm a capitalist but that said. what drives me in pushing sales is trying to get my -- books and arguments in to as many hands as i possibly can. my books are intended to try to affect people's thinking to give them ideas. maybe things they haven't thought about. as i say, i can't imagine other authors aren't thinking the same way. it's the way i'm coming from. i had one of the greatest editors in publishing. his name is mitchell i'veson. he's terrific. he has an eye for this. he might say you may not want to use that sentence or might want to reorganize this chapter or that chapter, but he's also gracious about how he does it. knowing full well i'm a little stubborn like i think most authors are, but i certainly am. you not want include that. i like to bounce things off him. in the end i make the decisions. and has there been head butting? no. have you ever turned in a book where they said go lord, no. they are thrilled to the book because i actually hand them a complete book with all the end notes in the book, wit