crocker's list appear works by machiavelli. is there a fundamental difference between the discourses and the prints? and a second question, you had hobbs as the right-oriented discourse, but aren't most rights discourses today based more on locke than anything else? the sort of right to life, liberty and the state? >> wow. well, i'm going to disagree with my own editor here that i think that machiavelli disourselves on -- discourses on libby is one of the most evil books of all time. [laughter] and it fits perfectly with the print. it was, it brings back the second aspect of your question. oh, the right. i believe that to put it succinctly and these aren't my words, but leo strauss', locke was just hobbs sugar coated. and, yes, you're right, he is the one that mediated hobbs' thought to america and, unfortunately, most conservatives refuse to understand that, and they keep locke as a kind of an icon when they should really understand his foundations. and he is an example of someone who was very devious and, hence, very effectiv