and other for the love of josie mansfield. and so i wrote this book. it's really a book about jessie mansfield and the book is about josie and less about jim fisk. but because it's nominally a history book my publisher wanted to include a photograph of josie mansfield. after all it's a history book and there is a photograph of this femme fatale. let's see it but i didn't want to use the photograph. and i didn't want to use the photograph, because reason one is, if you look at the photograph of josie, it's pretty -- the camera does not capture that essence that drove men crazy. he will look at it and say, really? the other thing is that novels don't have photographs. novels don't have illustrations of the main characters. the whole point of writing is to create a word picture. so if i wrote a description of josie and then had a photograph of josie, either the writing would be, it would either be wrong or it would be redundant and either way it would lose its force, but i editor insisted, and so there is a picture of josie. anyh

so they came to what is known as the chickasaw white house, and they met, and george mansfield who was the legal mentor of the other two, mcmurray and cornish, he determined that upon examining the statutes that if a person made a claimant against both tribe -- or one tribe only, they had to make a claim against both nations in order for the claim to be valid. so what was associated was an agreement through congress known as the supplemental agreement of 1902. and what this did to my knowledge is it gave the chickasaws and the choctaws the only two tribes in united states history the right to determine once and for all who was lawfully on their rolls and who was not. so this was a tremendous victory for the tribe because then they could, through the process, eliminate these courts at their, quote-unquote, court citizens deemed only by the court. and once they were able to, the accounts tell us that there were often cases that it took not more than five minutes to see that the person didn't have a legitimate claim. and in the end what the law firm of mansfield, mcmurray and cornish did

and, you know, harvey mansfield sits down, and he's a very sort of mild-mannered guy, and he just sortf starts talking about plato and courage. [laughter] and i think these women were just like where do we go from here, you know? i thought we were going to talk about gloria steinem, or i thought we were going to talk about some sexist pig that we can start harassing. and i think my point is that, um, you know, so many of the professors that i had i appreciated the fact that their politics were not part of the curriculum. c-span: you say that in 1994 that there was, they could not restrict the age, well, at which you had to retire. i mean, we used to have to retire in this country at 65. it was originally passed back in the 80s schools got to, what, '94 when -- >> guest: yeah. c-span: what has that done to the universities? >> guest: well, it's exacerbated the tenure problem. in fact, many people who say to me why get rid of tenure, why not just reinstitute mandatory retirement? what you have on campus now is a lot of aging baby boomer professors who are not really doing their job very

. >> i've always wanted to give at least one mike mansfield answer. i'm already likely to go on than be as succinct as he is. the answer is yes. whether we're talking to the command leaders here in the u.s. government or the uk government or even the colleagues that i had a chance to work with when i was in the u.s. u.n. in new york. i think there's a great recognition that we've really got to go in a much more creative fashion. one of the thins i've noticed is we tend to be most of us tend to be influenced by our most recent experience. and different from the 1980s where many of us were mostly shaped by bosnia, although there were other catastrophes going on. i think part of it is to make sure we have accumulated the nomg is to make sure we've got it. for me one of the things that's more fascinating is i never know where i'm going to get the parallel experience. i was surprised to find many the congo that there was more haiti than i expected and in angola there was more serbia than i would have thought. but normally we would put regional experts or -

further to the south you have a wet morning commute to cleveland, mansfield, columbus, pittsburgh.tle bit of rain heading for charleston. indiana and kentucky we're starting to dry things out. that's where the worst of the wet weather is. showers for the big cities. very light though. mostly only lasting 15 to 20 minutes. new york, philly, d.c., i don't expect a lot of airport delays from the light rain. as we look to the southeast, typical thunderstorm. 92 in orlando. texas is the other rainy spot. talk about gorgeous weather, middle of the country looks fantastic from oklahoma, kansas, chicago, denver back to the west coast. as far as tomorrow goes, tomorrow will be the last day of this rainy weather sliding off the east coast. after that we're in for a nice traet through mother's day. >> let's move that weather out of here. >>> let's turn to sports now. the nba playoffs. the l.a. clippers, yeah, the clippers, not the lakers, trying to go up 3-1 in their series with the grizzlies and move on in the playoffs. come on. fourth quarter clippers led by 10. grizzlies go on a 11-1. ruby

at the same time, mike mansfield, at the same sort of reservations. he kept his concerns quiet, was very supportive publicly and yet he also didn't help a whole of impact on the debate. so i think the senator faced kind of an acute dilemma about what to do, whether he should stay quiet remake his concerns now in quiet talks or go public. i talked to them in the course of this book many times about his views than he felt that he would have more and by taking a quiet approach. it's certainly a legitimate point of view. there are people who disagree in yankee could've gone and should have gone in a different direction. one of the best airfares i had was chuck hagel, former senator from nebraska who was a huge lugar fan. he believed the senator made a huge and important mistake in not forcing the issue. he said he was very clear the administration was not going to respond to private treaties and the only way to get action was to go public. bucher disagreed, but one should note that several years into the war, in june of 2007 he went to the senate floor an

. >> reporter: that's why nbc visual stylist audrey mansfield spending her day viegz top television folksund the country. take this $200 book. >> in the store it's on sale for $117. at nordstrom it was on sale for $65, the same skirt. >> reporter: finding designer deals inside the walls of a favorite store sometimes means getting to know the people on the inside. >> when you go in to buy something, you make friends with either a personal shopper or an assistant and you ask if it's marked down once, is it going to be marked down again and you ask them to hold it for you and give you a call. most people will help you out. >> reporter: next up, hitting the outlets and the offprice retailers like t.j. maxx, ross, and marshalmarshall's. >> it's the same merchandise that other stores are buying but they're able to work it to a better price and get it to the consumers. >> reporter: it can come from a steady stream of clothing because of ordering mistakes or overproduction by the manufacturers. >> it makes you seem smarter and savvier and you found a deal no one else did. >> reporter: smart shopp

ago this time, dick lugar received the paul douglas award just off the senate floor over in the mansfield room. and he summed up his approach to the senate. and i think after last night, it's important for all of our colleagues to be mindful of his words and to think about them as we go forward into these next six, seven, eight months. dick argued that bipartisanship isn't an end in itself, and it's sometimes mistaken for centrism, compromise, when tsk i in fact s really the way of what he called being a constructive public servant, it is the way they approach their job, with self-reflection, discipline and gauge ifaith inhe good will of others. particularly destructive is the misconception in some quarters that gerning with one vote more than 50% is jus as good or better than government with 60% or 70% support. the problem wit this thinking, he said, is that whatever is won today through division is usually lost tomorw. the relationships are destroy and the ill wilthat is created to make subsequent achievements that much more difficult. a 51% mentality deepens sinnism -- cynicism and dep

drive to elyria and then vote and then drive to norwalk and vote and then to medina and vote and mansfield and vote. people aren't going to defraud the system that way. why? they're going to get caught, probably, and secondsly, they're going to jail, all to take the risk of giving president obama or mitt romney five more votes in the state of 11 million people. that's not going to happen. yet the people that are attacking our voting rights are claiming individuals are going to do things like that to defraud. college students voting in college and then voting back in their hometown. people aren't going to do that because the disincentives are too strong. there is no reason so you can vote one stra extra time you would possibly do that. the new -- the new law repeals -- this is what's disappointing to me, madam president. this new law repeals what was a bipartisan effort in 2006. 2006 in response to some election problems of 2004 and the presidential race where people stood in long, long lines to vote and there were other problems, 2006, the republican house and the republican senate in colu

at the same time, mike mansfield, who was the senate majority leader, have the same sort of reservations. he opted to keep his concerns quiet. he was very supportive publicly. yet, he also didn't have a lot of impact on the debate. i think the senator faced an acute dilemma about what to do, whether he should stay quiet or make his concerns known in quiet talks or whether he should go public. i have talked to him. in the course of this book, many times, about his views. he felt that he would have more impact by taking a quiet approach. it is certainly a legitimate point of view. there are people who disagree and think that he could've gone could have gone and should've gone in a different reaction. one of the best interviews i had in the project was with chuck hagel, a former senator and nebraska, who is a huge lugar fan. he said it is very clear the demonstration was not going to respond to private treaties, and the only way to get action was to go public. lugar disagreed. one should note, that several years in june of 2007, he went to the senate floor and gave a memorable speech in whi

vice president biden saw in youngstown, in lordstown, ohio, what he hear in dayton and columbus and mansfield, and in toledo and rossford, in perform arma, when i hear these workers say they understand that this auto rescue, where the government invested -- these companies are paying these investments back, but the government invested because nobody else would have -- it saved all these jobs. it's why manufacturing is beginning to turn around. there are other factors, of course. one of ne them is the the persis enforcing -- one of them is because the president of the united states is enforcing new trade laws. the preyed stood up to the chinese when the chinese were gaming the system on tubular steel used for drilling natural gas. all of that has mattered to this manufacturing job growth. we're not there yet. we need the administration to step up on a real policy for manufacturing, a real strategy. i think they're starting to do that on better tax law, better trade larks better enforcement of trade laws, on sages manufacturing when we can partner with them, not picking winners and losers but u

at the same time, mike mansfield, who was the senate majority leader, have the same sort of reservations. he opted to keep his concerns quiet. he was very supportive publicly. yet, he also didn't have a lot of impact on the debate. i think the senator faced an acute dilemma about what to do, whether he should stay quiet or make his concerns known in quiet talks or whether he should go public. i have talked to him. in the course of this book, many times, about his views. he felt that he would have more impact by taking a quiet approach. it is certainly a legitimate point of view. there are people who disagree and think that he could've gone could have gone and should've gone in a different reaction. one of the best interviews i had in the project was with chuck hagel, a former senator and nebraska, who is a huge lugar fan. he said it is very clear the demonstration was not going to respond to private treaties, and the only way to get action was to go public. lugar disagreed. one should note, that several years in june of 2007, he went to the senate floor and gave a memorable speech in whi

i have hear letters from board members peter whittaker, jesse robertson, joseph peter, jack mansfield and i would like to insert them for the record, mr. chairman. >> no objections ordered. >> unions have expressed strong independent nuclear safety oversight and i would like to insert those letters also went to the record, please mr. chairman. >> no objections ordered. the 3202 section changes standard of nuclear safety to ensure adequate protections to as low as practicable. so we go from a standard of nuclear safety from adequate protection to as low as practical. this would be a major change in this practice and would weaken standards for nuclear safety and late uncertainty and implementation. the atomic energy commission first establish radiation protection standards in 1957. an amended in 1968 and based upon the recommendations of the federal radiation council and the national commission on radiation protection can the standards are codified in 10, 20 and establish adequate protection, not as low as practicable. the offense board plays an important role in providing independent r

[laughter] i've always wanted to give at least one mike mansfield answer. as you all know, i'm more likely to go on than to be as succinct as he was, but i still admire his skill. the answer is, yes. i mean, whether we're talking to the command leaders here in the u.s. government or the u.k. government or even the colleagues that i had a chance the work with when i was at the u.s./u.n. in new york. i think there's a great recognition that we've really got to go at this in a much more creative fashion. and one of the things that i notice having worked on this for about 20 years and maybe 30 or plus places now is that we tend to be, most of us tend to be influenced by our most recent experience, and i think that puts us at risk in this country because our most recent experience is such a huge one in iraq and afghanistan. and yet i think as dick suggested that this next round of conflicts that we're looking at really have a different flavor, different also from what we saw in the 1980s when where, where of us were mostly shaped by bosnia, although there were,

people individual until rhode island and vermont, but it's also helping every community, it's helping mansfield and toledo and youngstown and cleveland and garfield heights. i just think it's one of those things, there's no real -- it's just hard to understand why we wouldn't do this quickly. and i wanted to ask senator reed, if i could, he explained on the senate floor bun day -- one day how -- you know, republicans have said they're for this now, they don't want to double the interest rate, although i'm not sure of that from some of their activities, but you have talked about the way we're going to pay for this versus the way they want to pay for this. and i know you talked about closing some tax loopholes. they talked about sort of playing off a college student against a woman needing a mammogram, i mean, cutting health care. but talk -- if you would explain that to our colleagues, explain what that difference is. mr. reed: i would be happy to, reclaiming my time, senator brown. first, let me echo what you said about the -- you know, this is about being competitive. and when you talk about t

i wanted to give at least one of mike mansfield answer. i admire his skill. if the answer is yes, whether we are talking hit the combatants in command leaders in here in the u.s. government or the u.k. government's, or the colleagues i had the chance to work with in new york, there is a great recognition that we have got to go at this in a much more creative fashion. one of the things i noticed having worked on this for about 20 years, in many places now, is that we tend to be influenced by our most recent experience, and that puts us at risk because our most recent experience is such a huge one in iraq and afghanistan. as dick suggested, this next round of conflicts we're looking at have a different flavor, and different from what we saw in the 1980's where many of us were shaped by bosnia, although there were other catastrophes going on. part of it is to make sure we are accumulating this knowledge and whether then thinking we have got it. for me, one of the things that is most fascinating is i never know when i am going to get the parallel experience. i am

ago this time, dick lugar received the paul douglas award just off the senate floor over in the mansfield room. and he summed up his approach to the senate. and i think after last night, it's important for all of our colleagues to be mindful of his words and to think about them as we go forward into these next six, seven, eight months. dick argued that bipartisanship isn't an end in itself, and it's sometimes mistaken for centrism, compromise, when tsk i in fact s really the way of what he called being a constructive public servant, it is the way they approach their job, with self-reflection, discipline and gauge ifaith in the good will of others. particularly destructive is the misconception in some quarters that governing with one vote more than 50% is just as good or better than government with 60% or 70% support. the problem with this thinking, he said, is that whatever is won today through division is usually lost tomorrow. the relationships are destroyed and the ill will that is created to make subsequent achievements that much more difficult. a 51% mentality deepens sinnism -- cyni

johnston's residence, which to this day is done as the chickasaw white house, and they met and george mansfield was the legal mentor of the other two, mcmurray and cornish, he determined that upon examining the statutes that if a person made a claimant against both, or want to have, they had to make a claim against both nations in order for the claim to be valid. so what was negotiated was an agreement for congress known as the supplemental agreement of 1902. with his did, to my knowledge, it gave the chickasaw's and the choctaws the only two tribes in united states history right to determine once and for all who was lawfully on the rolls and it was not. so this was a tremendous victory for the tribe, because then they could, through the process, eliminate these courts, as they're called, court citizens. and once they were able, the accounts tell us that they're often case they talk no more than five minutes to see a person didn't have a legitimate claim. and in the end what law firm did was say -- saved chickasaws approximate $20 million of people coming on the rolls. the other really legislat