than gingrich to lay the groundwork.during his two decades in congress he pioneered -- replete with name-calling conspiracy theories and strategic bsobstructionism that poisoned america's political culture and plunge washington to permanent discord. >> guest: i reject that pot. there was animosity between the two parties going back to the civil war when they literally went to war with each other. the republicans were the party of -- t and the result of the fight between the two political parties. gingrich is not to blame for that. he was a tough fighter but he was a fair fighter. he went after corruption when he sought and people saw that too. his motives were mostly all peer andd i talk to many many people who worked for newt gingrich and i talked him ad nauseam. a good man [inaudible] he is liberal and is india's and us opposed to nate gingrich's ideas and stratagems. >> host: pavin keyport new jersey pleaseue go ahead with yr question or comment for author craig shirley. >> caller: thank you. mr. shirley is it customa

nancy pelosi is very critical of newt gingrich area newt gingrich is very critical of nancy pelosi but i have to tell you when iinterviewed newt gingrich for the book , he was criticizing her on policy as a hard liberal but then he started to talk about how much respect he had for her as a politician, as someone who knew how to get and use power for the purposes she had. he said when he looked at nancy pelosi, he saw a fellow pirate and if you're newt gingrich i think the words fellow pirates are intended as high praise indeed. >> over the next several weeks and months congress is going to be dealing with an infrastructure bill with continued response to covid-19, with many significant challenges. if you want to understand how nancy pelosi developed a strategy hto impact and operationalize, you should read madamespeaker , nancy pelosi and the use of power and that will give you the best inside view of her very critical time. what a delight to have you. ladies and gentlemen, may 12 at seven, education and politics with congresswoman rosa delauro, chairman of the house appropriations com

but didn't do the revolutionary things that newt gingrich did. then to go after corruption left and right. much more so than anybody else did. they are similar and different. to understand power better and he understands ideology and movements. teeseventeen the atlantic wrote about this about newt gingrich. for a few figures have done more than gingrich to lay the groundwork for trumps rise during the two decades in congress he pioneered a style of combat replete with name-calling conspiracy theories and obstructionism that poisoned america's political culture and plunged washington into permanent dysfunction. >> i reject that. add animosity for eons. when they really literally went to war to each other 600,000 men died as a result so it had to come to that and newt gingrich is not to blame for that. he is a tough fighter but he was a firefighter. he knew corruption when he saw and defended people who needed defending his motives were mostly if not all. i talked to many people and i acknowledged him. and i came to the conclusion of a good man wit

gingrich weapon rising rhetoric and read promoting religion because in the trump administration, youeople willing to spend trump's worst fantasies every into even worse on the ground and one reason i think that was popular is that it was all about appealing language like pro ice trickling down in all of these rhetorical phrases that don't reflect realities. not just practices, etc. mindset inviting a certain amount of irrationality so unmarred from the empirical evidence and we need to have this for government. >> okay. michael wolf. >> i don't disagree with the caller, i would however say donald trump presents a further separate problem from the problems one mighthe have with e republican party but the separate problem in my mind is h that he's crazy. somehow we managed to elect a president operates in an altogether separate reality not just from democrats but also republicans and i'm not sure we've right come to grips with the meaning of how a crazy man could become president of the united states and exercise such a hold over so many people in the republican party. >> right in the

i think it goes back to gingrich and reed. gingrich rep and while web denies in an promoting religion because you have in the trump administration you had all of these people to spin trump's worst fantasies into even worse on the ground. one of the reasons i think that's popular it was all about this appealing language like pro-life, trickle down, all of these rhetorical reflect the realities. that provision is not just practices to debate we need to have for the government. >> okay and, mr. wolf? i don't disagree with the caller. i would however say donald trump prevents a further separate problem as one might have at the republican party. the separate problem to my mind is he is crazy somehow we managed to elect the president who operate in an altogether separate reality. not just from democrats but often from republicans. and i'm not sure we have quite come to grips with the meaning of this. of how a crazy man could become the president of the united states. exercise such a hole over so many people there public imparted. >>

i think it goes back to gingrich and reed.grich rep and while web denies in an promoting religion because you have in the trump administration you had all of these people to spin trump's worst fantasies into even worse on the ground. one of the reasons i think that's popular it was all about this appealing language like pro-life, trickle down, all of these rhetorical reflect the realities. that provision is not just practices to debate we need to have for the government. >> okay and, mr. wolf? i don't disagree with the caller. i would however say donald trump prevents a further separate problem as one might have at the republican party. the separate problem to my mind is he is crazy somehow we managed to elect the president who operate in an altogether separate reality. not just from democrats but often from republicans. and i'm not sure we have quite come to grips with the meaning of this. of how a crazy man could become the president of the united states. exercise such a hole over so many people there public imparted. >> in

of course, the first, 1994, from nute gingrich was very successful for the republican party then. let's go through what you would like to see. >> i was in high school in 1994. and i remember hearing about the contract. and what i remember hearing is republicans stand for something. and if you look at what the contract became, it was kind of boring and procedural. it was about committee chair assignments and promises to vote on these issues. i think that clear explanation of what they were and going to do was very helpful for the voter. if you look at congress, there's maybe 40 to 60 seats in any election. any midterm or general election, they're going to be up for grabs. most seats are either strongly republican or democrat. so, in those 40 to 60 seats in the middle, you need to talk to those voters. and for those folks, beyond talking to your base. dmgs like to talk to their base, republicans like to talk to their base. to win, you need to address the issues of folks in the middle. i think there's empowering parents with schools, defunding police. we have the scourge of violence

that was newt gingrich in the when he became speaker the house really what he did is change the work week from five days to three so that people could just and he said to his caucus don't move here stay in your state and raise more money there keep your families there and don't franchise with them. you know, let's sleep in your office or get a small apartment with two other republicans, but do not cross the aisle. this is politics is war and that constructed these cross-cutting ties that existed in washington dc for centuries, right? well people would move there with their families their kids would grow up. they keep all that have all these experiences that was taken away now whether gingrich understood the consequences what he was doing or whether it was just about winning the game doesn't matter. it did remove what was a safety net of trust and sufficient rapport not to completely vilify the other and that's missing in congress a lot today. yeah in some ways. it's that confusion between tactical and the deeply strategic what got removed was the relational which is deeply strategic

wired had newt gingrich on the cover. so obviously it is fair to say from your work and the passage that you do feel a connection with that legacy butis what do you think is active today? what should we harvestd from it and what do you think has aged less well? >> it's a great question. it's interesting because i'm from the us originally living in san francisco and then germany the past seven years now. a lot of german thinkers from that time have very similar perspectives from those in the less. of course there is more censorship here allowed impermissible given the history of the country but some have a similar bent with privacy and speech online. i do still hold a lot of the adls that to envision the right things and they foresaw including democracies back early on with more restrictive societies and before social media but with those threats that government posed but at theer same time on this is a pretty unique perspective i think they failed to see the roles that companies would say that then and now they still don'

libertarian those libertarian politics like tyson or 'wired" magazine are evidenced and wired had newt gingrich on its cover. so it's fair to say from your work in the passage that you read that you do feel connection with that legacy, but what do you think is still active today? what should we harvest from it and much as age less well? >> it's a great question. it is interesting. for me i've been into inferences go a few years in germany the past seven years and there are a lot of german thinkers who are very similar perspectives and libertarian thinkers in the us. of course there is more censorship here given the history of the country but nevertheless there is a very similar event with privacy and speech online. so i do still hold a lot of those ideals dear that the early thinkers envision the right things i think they first i would a lot of governments including democracy that i studied restrictive societies early on. so to first see the threats that government pose but at the same time with a unique perspective a failed to see the role that companies play a lot of them then and now still d

and idea brought out by newt gingrich of all people long ago. it also serves to distract the population from urgent problems and certainly talk among them is climate crisis. this is all immature, egocentric wasteful polluting. and i know frankness, i'm not a religious fanatic, but all of this is godless. thank. you >> what is your response there, john? >> well, clearly this is an act of hubris. human ambition. pride, to go and explore other worlds. whether it's a good thing or bad thing i think is the wrong thing to be doing, sharon. and cta certainly, we divert an opinion on that. others see it mining and the moon, yes. the resources from the moon will help undertake this project in the long term. is the moon pristine wilderness? or a resource for humans to use? there truly is human ego involved. nasa does not cost much money. it is less than one have 1% of the federal budget. so, there's a lot -- lots of money left over for things like climate change, which nasa very much is involved in with conservation satellites. so, to me human exploration

a fox news contributor y newt gingrich. i will start with you attorney general, the supreme court recently upheld arizona rules of, with professional ballots and this was a big win. for the court to finally take it up, it was too little, too late but a big win and it took that to you. >> thank you, sean for having me on. i argued this, the supreme court recognizes that election integrity measures, they are consistent with the constitution butti as the constitution recognizes, time, place and manner, and statutes are. the reality is as you pointed out in the beginning that the left is so hypocritical, we literally just argued another case last week by the democrats challenged our laws on volunteering. there are states like new york, connecticut the northeast's rhetoric is basically about dividing this country, and we all agree the common sense election and integrity measures are good not only for arizona but for america. >> sean: mr. speaker, we are calling this the largest democracies is simple. there are people who live in

newt gingrich is on the cover. so i think it's fair to say from your work and from the passage that you read that you do feel a connection with that legacy but what do you think is still active today? what should we harvest and what has aged less well quick. >> that's a great question. it's interesting because i've been in germany the past seven years. there are a lot of german thinkers who have very similar perspective to the libertarian thinkers in the us. of course there is more censorship here that's allowed given the history of the country but nevertheless they have a very similar bent especially with privacy and speech online. i do still hold those ideals dear. the early thinkers envision the right thing and they foresaw what a lot of government, including democracy, early i studied more societies in the way they control the internet for social media. we foresaw a lot of the threat that government posed. but at the same time, i think they failed to see what companies would say. many of those thinkers then and

so-called missions may involve things like mining the moon an idea brought out by the -- by newt gingrich of all people long ago and it also serves to distract the population from urgent problems. certainly top among them is climate crisis. so all of this too many of us is immature ego centric wasteful polluting and outrageous. i am not a religious fanatic, but all of this is godless. thank you. >> what's your response there, john? >> well, i mean, clearly this is an act of hubris, of human ambition, of human pride to go and explore other worlds. whether that's a good thing or a bad thing, well-meaning people can disagree. sharon thinks it's the wrong thing to be doing and she's certainly entitled to her opinion on that. others see it as part of creating a future that has optimism associated with it. mining the moon, yes, the resources the moon will help support this undertaking in the long term. you know, is the moon a pristine wilderness or a resource for humans to use? there clearly is human ego involved in that. nasa doesn't cost much money, it's less than one half of 1% of the federa

newt gingrich i sat down in a conversation about the book but needs case was we just got the majorityand to hold the majority we have to -- he admits that and that was very unhelpful. he said to me as we were talking about it the night before we certainly looked at you but we figured we couldn't take you out. is this because they wanted to take me out because i wasn't responsible wasn't bipartisan? know they wants to take the out because i thought i was one of the members of the democratic team and they were not the majority so that attitude of take out the other side you don't get enough power and you don't didn't reelect it is where we are today. hosts that do you think that congress is currently configured is up to the task of national security and all of the oversight function etc. that needs to be done there lacks >> guest: i think that some members of congress are up to the task. george will accused of being a liberal just wrote a glowing op-ed about jack reed or jack reed is a democrat who chairs the senate armed services committee and has for a long time. he's a former veteran

it goes back to gingrich normalizing rhetoric. you have in the trump administration, you had all these people willing to spin trump's worst fantasies into even worse attacks on the ground. one of the reasons that was popular is it was all about necessary appealing language, like pro-life and trickled down, and all these rhetorical phrases that don't reflect the realities , and that religion -- it is not just practices, it is a mindset that invites a certain irrationality. it is unmoored from the empirical evidence and debate that we need to have for government. host: michael wolff guest: guest:? guest: i don't disagree with the caller. i would present that donald trump presents a further separate problem from the problems one might have with the republican party. the separate problem, to my mind, is that he's crazy. somehow we managed to elect a president who is -- who operates in an altogether separate reality. not just from democrats but also from, often, republicans. i am not sure that we have quite come to grips with the meani

newt gingrich joins us from the d.c. area. mr.ave a xerox machine so they won't be able to vote. >> whole range came out of this african-american leaders who said publicly they are insulted that people like harris think they are too dumb to be able to get an i.d. and they think they are too dumb to know how to go vote accurately and legally. remember, this is a period where the city of new york cast 135,000 blank ballots. steve: right. >> you have a system, the democrats have this model anybody can vote no matter how long they are dead as long as they vote democrat. they are for open elections as long as they can steal them. the average american, including by the way almost all democrats, about 85% of the country, believe you should have to have a photo i.d. you should be able to identify who you are. you know, most americans are for everybody who is legal voting. they are for everybody who is legal being counted. but they also understand that machines steal and the machines are desperate to find a few extra votes even if they are

ainsley: newt gingrich said if they get their way they will cheat.ll see that james clyburn might say that earn leaves in you should have an i.d. that's not what james talarico said. he is the state rep from texas. he was on with pete hegseth. fiery interview. i suggest you find that interview. it's really good. they get in an argument about this and james talarico said i don't believe that you should have to show an i.d. lawrence lawrence exactly. steve: here's the thing when you look at the texas democrats who fled to washington and who knows how long they are going to be there, when republicans in oregon did the same thing in 2019 will vox said they were subverting democracy. kamala harris called it as american as apple pie. you in the difference? one party was one party. the other party, the democrats it's okay. the hope is you do not read it. you do not understand it. but like we just went through, what's so bad about that bill? ainsley: it's not jim crow. everyone can vote in our country. women can vote. it doesn't matter your color. if you are

fox news contributor newt gingrich. i will start with you, mr. attorney general, because you did something quite interesting in the supreme court recently upheld that arizona's voting rules that restrict ballot harvesting and the submission of provisional ballots outside of one's own precinct, this was a big win and for the court to finally take it up -- to me it was a little too little, too late but a big win, a tip of the hat to you, sir. >> thank you, sean, for having me on and i think the importance of that case is it was a 6-3 decision and i argued that the supreme court recognizes that election integrity measures, common sense measures, are okay. they are consistent with the constitution and the constitution recognizes the state 'has time and manner statutes regarding how elections are conducted. that's what the constitution provides for and the reality is as you pointed out in your beginning is that the left is so hypocrite a go. we literally just argued another case last week where the democrats challenged our laws on ballot curing. basic

similar caps are put in place in the mid-90s during the gingrich congress years.nfortunately in recent years we had budget deals with spending caps that were violated. and just for good measure there violated on a recurring basis every year they caps drifted higher along with the level of spending which is another way of saying there was no caps. i don't actually know if this congress is constitutionally capable of budget caps or sequestration, it is worth a try because the woke budgeting is more than an abject physical failure it is a book denigration of the finances of the greatest economy in the world. and we cannot have that. go woke, go broke is a bad slogan and it really needs to be fixed. now, fortunately i'm always looking for the good news reagan used to say you've shown me the manure, where's the pony. i got me a pony, jason smith i ranking republican on the house budget committee and he's looking for conservative six, welcome jason. i'm reading about you and some of your colleagues and your actually talking about bringing back budget caps and i presume

the so-called missions may involve things like minding the moon, an idea brought up by newt gingrich,f all people, long ago. and it also serves to distract the population from urgent problems, certainly double among them is climate crisis. all of this, to many of us, is immature, egocentric, wasteful, polluting and outrageous. i am not a religious fanatic, but all of this is godless. thank you. jesse: what is your response, john? john: clearly this is an active hubris, of human ambition, of human pride, to go explore other worlds. whether that is a good thing or a bad thing, well-meaning people can disagree. sharon thinks it is the wrong thing to be doing, and she is certainly entitled to her opinion. others see it as part of creating a future that has optimism associated with it. mining the moon, yes, the resources of the moon will help support this undertaking in the long-term. is the moon a pristine wilderness, or a resource for humans to use? there is clearly human ego involved in that. nasa doesn't cost much money, less than one half of 1% of the federal government. so there is l

lucky me, i came to congress in the '90s pretty nice a lot of this up close and personal pretty gingrichin the book, i actually was in a conversation with him about the book. on his blog. but his theory of the case was we discussed the majority from the republicans in 1994, we have to be partisan he even said that in that was very helpful and he said to me, as we were talking about his blog, we certainly looked at you so we figured we could not take you out. so i mean, this is because they wanted to take me out because i was not responsible and not bipartisan that was my hope and he said no because i was one of the members of the democratic team. and they wanted so that attitude of take out the other side, you don't get enough power you don't get reelected, that's where we are sadly today. janet: do you think that congress is currently configured is up to the task of national security and all of the oversight function etc. that needs to be done now predict. jane: i think that some members of congress, george will was accused of being a liberal, just wrote about jack reed, who is a democr

but if you abandon the language if freedom makes you uncomfortable newt gingrich or ted cruz you riskthe argument so in their hearts most americans know that simply destroying the ability to govern cutting it to the bone or through the irs cannot audit rich people are using language that the basis us has not helped us it drags people down. i think if we use that language that says freedom is the freedom to live by her own choices but that depends on social conditions on whether you have the strength to participate in the political and economic systems. if you don't and you're just trying to survive working add an amazon warehouse and just getting by you are not free. you cannot participate in the political and economic system and saying that then we will take back language and has been co-opted or debased by cynical people for their own purposes. >> so it's different who are the contemporary cultural that you read and whom you might be arguing with in this book? >> that's a great question. tallahassee codes has had a huge influence both on our culture and on me. in a argue with him a

>> former house speaker newt gingrich, who had engineered the takeover of the house of representativesut, we were once irrelevant. we found our way back. we can do it again. we will do it again. >> they basically plot out a campaign of opposition, in effect, to say, we can't give him victories. if we do that, we lose our relevance as a republican party. >> at the very conclusion of the evening, speaker gingrich said to everyone, we will look back on this day as the day that the seeds of triumph in 2010 and 2012 were sewn. >> this was a president who has no idea of the storm that's coming. republicans have really essentially mapped out their plan to get back the white house. and one we discover. one that's been tamed and one that's forever wild. but freedom means you don't have to choose just one adventure. ♪ ♪ you get both. introducing the wildly civilized all-new 3-row jeep grand cherokee l. ♪ ♪ ♪ limu emu & doug ♪ all-new 3-row jeep grand cherokee l. oh! are you using liberty mutual's coverage customizer tool? sorry? well, since you asked. it finds discounts and policy recommendation

republican tactic of demonizing the other side had not yet taken hold in the senate, although new to gingrichatives for years at that point. little did we know at that point that the senate was mounting the last stand against the politics of demonization, some democrats wanted to try the tactic. on august 11th 1994, when the clinton health care bill was being debated on the senate floor with finance committee each moynahan as the floor manager of the bill and me with a front row seat on the senate floor beside the chairman, we had those luncheon gatherings with senators like the one president biden attended today. the president never attended those luncheons then, but often sent high ranking representatives from the white house, the official who joined us that day told us that the message of the day on the senate floor should be, demonized oil. nothing about the policy in bobbed oils republican health care bill that was competing with the clinton health care bill on the senate floor, just demonized doyle. the white house was understandably frustrated that the clinton health care bill was stuc

language to them and if the word freedom of eggs you uncomfortable because reagan used it or newt gingrich or ted cruz, then you will lose that argument. i think in their hearts, most americans know that simply destroying our ability to govern, whether by cutting it to the bone or denuding the irs so it can't audit rich people, or simply using language that debases us, has not helped us. it has not brought people up. it has dragged people down. if we use that language in a way that says freedom is the freedom to live by your own choices, but that ability depends on social conditions, on whether you have the strength to participate in our political and economic systems. if you don't, if you're just trying to survive, if you're working at an amazon warehouse, the night shift, just getting by, you are not free. you can't participate in our political and economic system. and i think if we keep saying that, we will take back language that has been co-opted and may be debased by cynical people for their own purposes. thomas: this is a good question, different than who you are reading as a fan. i

at the fcc as a general counsel when the new republican majority in congress by newt gingrich targeted the tax certificate for the repeal, and it was tragic because there was widespread supportd for it as he knows when he constructed it everybody loved the tax certificate. it created a lot of opportunity. and so i think it's great to hear that there's an effort to bring it back. the only thing i would mention about this general topic of the ownershipri in the media defined broadly as we havee to recognize the media landscape is changing dramatically and the technologies we grew up with radio, television, cable tv, even over satellite it's all being transformed by the internet and by streaming technologies. so i think it's important for all of us and especially organizations to skate where the puck is going. content creation is going to be to create content for these new platforms. that's why i think the discussion that's happening in washingtongt about bottlenecks o the delivery of the large platform is important because if we are going to envision the next generation of minority produ

the first from newt gingrich, it was very successful. what would you like to see in that contract?st: i was in high school in 1994. armor hearing about the contract. there's is something that republicans will do. the contract back then, it was boring and procedural. just promises to vote. i think the clear explanation of what they were was very helpful for the voter. 40-60 seats in any election will be up for grabs. the seats are either strongly republican or strongly democrat. you need to talk to your voters. to win control, you need to address those issues with the folks in the middle. i see different issues you can take. the parents with schools is one issue. defunding the police, we have a scourge of violence going on right now. many others that i could add such as the broken border and immigration. issues with big tech, elections. before the election in 2020 yahoo! news found their paul only -- only found 22% of americans believe the americans would be free and fair. host: do you think it was? guest: i do. i'm looking forward to the midterms now. because of the pandemic you ha

. >> that was new gingrich, what he did was change the workweek from five days to three so that peoplecould just -- he said to his caucus, don't move here. stay in your state. do not fraternize with them. sleep in your office or get a small apartment with two other republicans. do not cross the aisle. that deconstructed these crosscutting times that it existed in washington, d.c. for centuries. people would move there with their families, their kids would grow up, they would have all of these experiences. that was taken away. whether he understood the consequences of what he was doing, it does not matter. it did not remove what was a safety net of trust and sufficient rapport not to completely vilify the other. that is missing in congress a lot today. >> being between tactical and the deeply strategic. deeply strategic. for ethical purpose of a given moment. i think that should give us all pause. another one that comes to us, a question from one of the folks listening is this challenge of our moment where we are facing a lot of historic injustices. the george floyd moment in the midst

the so-called missions may involve things like mining the moon, an idea brought out by newt gingrich of all people long ago and it also serves to distract the population from urgent problems. certainly top among them is climate crisis. so, all of this to many of us is egocentric, wasteful, and i am not a religious fanatic but all of this is godless. thank you. host: what is your response, john? guest: clearly this is an act of hubris, of human ambition, of human pride to go and explore other worlds. whether that is a good thing or a bad thing, well-meaning people can disagree. sharon thinks it is the wrong thing to be doing. she is certainly entitled to her opinion on that. others see it as part of creating a future that has optimism associated with it. mining the moon, yes. the resources of the moon will help support this undertaking in the long-term. you know, is the moon a pristine wilderness or a resource for humans to use? human ego is involved. nasa does not cost much money. it is less than one half of 1% of the global budget. there is lots of money left over for addressing iss

the so-called missions may involve things like mining the moon, an idea brought out by newt gingrich of all people long ago and it also serves to distract the population from urgent problems. certainly top among them is climate crisis. so, all of this

the so-called missions may involve things like mining the moon, an idea brought out by newt gingrichall people long ago and it also serves to distract the population from urgent problems. certainly top among them is climate crisis. so, all of this to many of us is egocentric, wasteful, and i am not a religious fanatic but all of this is godless. thank you. host: what is your response, john? guest: clearly this is an act of hubris, of human ambition, of human pride to go and explore other worlds. whether that is a good thing or a bad thing, well-meaning people can disagree. sharon thinks it is the wrong thing to be doing. she is certainly entitled to her opinion on that. others see it as part of creating a future that has optimism associated with it. mining the moon, yes. the resources of the moon will help support this undertaking in the long-term. you know, is the moon a pristine wilderness or a resource for humans to use? human ego is involved. nasa does not cost much money. it is less than one half of 1% of the global budget. there is lots of money left over for addressing issues

it goes back to gingrich normalizing rhetoric. have in the trump administration, you had all these people willing to spin trump's worst fantasies into even worse attacks on the ground. one of the reasons that was popular is it was all about necessary appealing language, like pro-life and trickled down, and all these rhetorical phrases that don't reflect the realities , and that religion -- it is not just practices, it is a mindset that invites a certain irrationality. it is unmoored from the empirical evidence and debate that we need to have for government. host: michael wolff guest: guest:? guest: i don't disagree with the caller. i would present that donald trump presents a further separate problem from the problems one might have with the republican party. the separate problem, to my mind, is that he's crazy. somehow we managed to elect a president who is -- who operates in an altogether separate reality. not just from democrats but also from, often, republicans. i am not sure that we have quite come to grips with the meaning o

you've got newt gingrich coming into office when he said rome wasn't burned in a day.al thinking on the right fits in with a natural part of its politics but i think it has to do more with a shift in where power actually is located in society. a story i like to tell is the guy who works for that other magazine you were talking to earlier, i went to a seminar of theirs. it was a bunch of people talking about the evils of capitalism and how it's oppressing people and how people who work, white men, couldn't achieve any power in society and it was sponsored by facebook, google, chase bank and a few places like that. so you've really seen a change in where cultural power resides, including in areas that are traditionally thought of as being allies of conservatives, like big business, particularly banking and finance and now technology. >> you know, it's very interesting, kevin, you talked about how all hippies dressed the same, the punks all dressed the same. my son's theory the most punk song ever was "sweet home alabama" because it went so far against the tide of attacki

it was our performance against newt gingrich that ran him out of power.-- you know, i do believe you're going to have good candidates. we have a lot of good candidates. i just endorsed one. and i think that we are going to hold onto our majority in the house and i think we're going to increase our numbers in the senate because we have good candidates that can run the kind of campaign that meets with the acceptance of the vast majority of the american people and i think we'll do well. >> jim, this weekend, obviously we're going to be celebrating as a nation the fourth of july. and you have given so much of your life to this country and to actually -- and you have fought hard and suffered and kept fighting to make sure that this country moved closer to the promises of the declaration of independence. you and gene both from south carolina, both of you in different stages saw the sting of segregation. i'm just curious, with the last year behind us and with us looking at some of the challenges that are in front of us, what are your thoughts, what will you be t