it has to be a blend. >> but all the moral debate has not made compromise easy. >> i think moral motivationsin politics are very important. but when you claim that your own views somehow have a divine sanction, you are cutting off all political argument. this should be an argument about outcomes, what is best for the justice and decency of a society. i think a limited government is important to that, and i think a government that provides for the most vulnerable people in society is important to that as well. that's where a lot of americans are. >> alan simpson thinks his former colleagues will head off a national crisis and that their constituents will accept the need for sacrifice. >> i think there are a lot more heroes in congress than we recognize. >> gerson and rivlin say they, too, are at least somewhat optimistic. >> you are going to have to have republican and democratic leaders come together around this. they're very dug in, but there is no other choice. >> there will be a lot of posturing and a lot of difficulty, but we will raise the debt ceilingñand over the next several years. w

its clash of moral visions. one side it's moral for the government to be bigger and taking more away and redistributing wealth between people. the other moral vision is that people should be able to be free. i likes the founders of the united states and their concept of what a moral society was. if you go back to 1776 the declaration of independence, originally was going to say we have unalienable rights, life, liberty and possession of property. they put in pursuit of happiness possession of property is not moral enough for the moral nation on the face of the earth. basically you say if you want to stop cultural problems and solve problems with poverty you do it with a welfare check and you call it social justice. that is most materialistic philosophy possible. >> i love the phrase social justice they argue. if i resist, does that mean i'm for social injustice? i still don't quite get how i answer these people when they say, you can't pursue happiness if you are horribly poor, if you are sick. we need governmen

whew do you mean it is the moral to do? >> hi john. people say it is only fair for rich people to pay more and it is fair to take from people who have more in society and unfair to cut programs especially if they would affect anybody who has less than average incomes. >> and that resonates with people that there is a lot of money and redistribution is the moral thing to do. >> sure. this truth that sounds really good until you start thinking about what most americans think fair is. redistribution is not the definition of fairness to most americans. most americans think that fairness has to do with keeping what you earn. doesn't mean you to penalize poor people or take money away from those that don't have enough but it is not fair to take more away from people just because we can especially when we are robbing our future because we have a spending disorder in our government. it is immoral to be stealing from future generations and taking away their pursuit of happiness because we can do that. the government is treating americans like a

you're almost a critic of the two moral equivalence to morally equal swords which is a group of the fact that there's a revolution occurring in libya and it was being suppressed with the most violent means on a you know until the missiles and bullets were fired at civilians and so if you want to call it a civil war to free to be that ignores the fact on the ground which is that this person or be a civilian population i don't think you know from history. as a civil war feel free to call it what you like ok jim if i can go to you why should nato be in the business of forcefully changing the regime presumably to bring democracy and one has to wonder if it's good to keep the country together is one sovereign state i mean why is that nato mission now. well i think in a way i'm asked police are in it although i think in the wrong way the fact that libya has been singled out in this way the fact that for example our fee has been indicted in the fastest process ever indulged in by the international criminal court and precedented speed whereas no other arab leader and i would single out in this p

whew do you mean it is the moral to do? >> hi john. people say it is only fair for rich people to pay more and it is fair to take from people who have more in society and unfair to cut programs especially if they would affect anybody who has less than average incomes. >> and that resonates with people that there is a lot of money and redistribution is the moral thing to do. >> sure. this truth that sounds really good until you start thinking about what most americans think fair is. redistribution is not the definition of fairness to most americans. most americans think that fairness has to do with keeping what you earn. doesn't mean you to penalize poor people or take money away from those that don't have enough but it is not fair to take more away from people just because we can especially when we are robbing our future because we have a spending disorder in our government. it is immoral to be stealing from future generations and taking away their pursuit of happiness because we can do that. the government is treating americans like a

whew do you mean it is the moral to do? >> hi john.eople say it is only fair for rich people to pay more and it is fair to take from people who have more in society and unfair to cut programs especially if they would affect anybody who has less than average incomes. >> and that resonates with people that there is a lot of money and redistribution is the moral thing to do. >> sure. this truth that sounds really good until you start thinking about what most americans think fair is. redistribution is not the definition of fairness to most americans. most americans think that fairness has to do with keeping what you earn. doesn't mean you to penalize poor people or take money away from those that don't have enough but it is not fair to take more away from people just because we can especially when we are robbing our future because we have a spending disorder in our government. it is immoral to be stealing from future generations and taking away their pursuit of happiness because we can do that. the government is treating americans like atm

not moral enough for the freest nation on earth.talks about redistribution basically says if you want to stop cultural problems you want to solve problems with of poverty do you it with a welfare check and call it social justice. it has nothing to do with individual opportunity. i love the phrase social justice that they argue. if i resist, does that mean i'm for social injustice? it's very hard to fight that i still don't quite get how i answer these people when think say you can't pursue happiness if you are poor sick. we need government to help those people. that's the moral thing to do. hayek once again we talked about a minute ago. economists through the ages including adam smith knew we needed a safety net. we need a basic safety net from the government crazy not paying attention to what we need. it goes beyond, however, help for the vulnerable. i want to help the vulnerable, too. but i don't want middle class wall fair. above the level of basic when people help each other voluntarily. doesn't happen when the government is red

you're almost equating it to to moral equivalence to morally equal solids which will fall in the group of the fact that there is a revolution occurring in libya and it was being suppressed with the most violent means or you know anti aircraft missiles and bullets were fired at civilians and so if you want to call it a civil war feel free to but that ignores the fact on the ground which is that their personal army i were talking a civilian population i don't think that you know if in the history will get and what as a civil war you know i feel free to call it what you like ok jim if i can go to you why should nato be in the business of forcefully changing regime presumably to bring democracy and one has to wonder if it's going to be keep the country together is one sovereign state i mean why is that nato mission now. well i think in a way i was pretty finger on it although i think in the wrong way the fact that libya has been singled out in this way the fact that for example afi has been indicted in the fastest process ever indulged in by the international criminal court unprecedented s

or morally allow the continued bombing of libya and i think that's the point that jim is getting at here but i think well you know we're going to you can you explain to me you know each other ok i'm sorry unless you know we're going to jam go ahead and the bombing of our country i mean you'd be hard pushed for many many libyans complaining of of being on them in not bombing anything you know libyans unself wouldn't want to be gone and not bombing jewel use facilities they're not bombing for the most part i don't find of interest that i would accept but there have been cases where a few civilians have thought it and subsequently civilians dying but oh well and i don't for a very minute the fact that it's the intention behind it is intervention to try to kill civilians but it's beyond the fact that it is not for it is not for this for me to entertain or debate so if on bombing the country almost seems that we're trying to consulate in syria that's not the case it's not the case it's been a success ok amara lamarre i think i referred to you is jim i would go more go ahead you had a poi

a deficit is a moral issue. but how you reduce a deficit is also a moral issue. the backs of the most vulnerable is simply unacceptable. in the real world, we have in the past, exempted low income people, and we are calling on the president and democrats and republicans to simply exempt the most low income people from the cuts, and not going after where the real money is, and it's wrong to go after the poorest who have nobody to defend them while you are allowing the wealthiest to protect their benefits. and that's a moral choice. >> mr. wallace, if it's all right, i would like to have you back on this topic. we ended up with breaking news this morning and i wish we could spend more time with you. it's always good to see and chat with you, but this is something that might get people thinking about the budget in a different way. good to see you as always. enjoy the rest of your sunday. >> good to see you, too, t. j. >> go to cnn.com/belief. >>> candy crowley taking a day off from me today. gloria bowser has to put up with me today. and when it does, men with erect

and the root way to do that is morality.oral people obviously don't rape, pilfer and steal. >> right here in the midst of angola, i have seen change because of the seed of favor of god. >> warden cain's approach to morality works on two levels. one, spiritual and religious. the other engaging employment opportunities. church is optional. work is not. >> i've been editing for really about a month now and been with ls productions about nine months. >> perhaps the most unusual example of innovation at angola is the tv station. the only big house production company in the united states. >> one, two, three, four. >> before we do a shoot, we have to kind of step back and kind of ask, well, if an outside company was doing it, what would they ask? >> choose your behavior, choose your consequence. i chose angola by the lifestyle i was living. i'm not going to lay down, just roll over. i want my life to mean something. and it can even though that i'm in prison. >> every member of the tv station but one is serving a life sentence. >> w

at one time in the middle ages, it was a moral sin to make a profit on a loan. was amazed how that change occurred, and i traced it. and a lot of people said, well, that was just something of economics. so i thought about that. is that true? eventually i plunged into the study over the position of christians on the subject of slavery. and to my surprise, i discovered that for approximately 1800 years, christians fought that slavery was okay. there was no sense for one person to hold another as a slave. it became something of great interest. how did change occurred -- acre in that field? so i went onto slavery with fundamental human relations running wild, not just economics. then from there i had a good of two marriage. i will go into that, if you'd like, in a minute. >> sure. a church that can and cannot change. it is about book -- it is a book about for subjects that are illustrative of how change happens. >> how change is actually happened. i don't pretend that there is any war of change. i just say, look at these subjects were very substantial change occurs,

what is the moral clarity? we and other developed nations to support these principles and more. human rights. free and fair elections, the free flow of information. the ability for people to express themselves freely and associate freely. those are values and principles that we can speak to a moral clarity because they are our boundaries. when people oppressed them in tyrannical ways, we should speak to that. we have more clarity to do that. >> who have dealt with the tension between the -- >> they are universal values as well. >> the security issues that arise, what do you do about a state? you mentioned radical islam early on. would you do to oppose those that oppose the united states and its interests? they have become what they believe they should be and pose a threat to the united states. >> which state would you highlight as an example of that? >> you are speaking about a list of principles by which you would govern, and the tension between freedom and security is a perennial one. at what point do you dra

that is why we need to inquire and how improved the ethics and morals. that is what needs to be done. that is what we are doing. >> thank you. >> across our world, but there are 39 schools. the gender gaps we see are falling. we are securing schooling for 11 million children by 2015. that is more and we ever had in the u.k. this is a good investment for britain and british taxpayers. >> can you explain whether the cost of this reform is set to rise even further? it is even higher. mib partly responsible for the health services. >> well we have actually seen as more and into thousand more doctors. he would see the number going down. it is going in. >> is the prime minister aware? does he not agreed that you cannot put off difficult decisions? >> plan b stands for bankruptcy. we can see what happens if government does not get a grip. that is what this governor is doing. >> says the price minister agree with you. will the prime minister support this sex it is the maximum sentence. >> it is not just because the constituent case. it is death by dangerous driv

absolutely morally opposed. if he does not the government destroys the bank. now the former chairman and ceo. he walked away. he retired. when john glat left the economic world he became an agent for the morality of capitalism, and that is what john allison is now doing. he is in dowling programs at dozens of universities the route the south to teach the morality of capitalism where a sign reading is atlas shrugged. he is doing the work. [applause] last character of the analogy in the real world of want to talk about, and on and-no, back to the fountainhead, everybody remembers the main villain. he was a socialist, scheming to wharf. a newspaper columnist who used his column to tell lies and manipulate. you guessed it, i'm talking about paul krugman now, back to the you can't make it up stuff, the analogies are so striking it is just downright eerie. he now, but socialists. he knows i am an unabashed defender of the welfare state which i regard as the most deepest social arrangement. he advocates a state that offers everyone who is underpaid additional income.

is a terrible position to be in a nicely morally opposed. if he doesn't sign that, the government destroys the bank. so we signed it. he is now the former chairman and ceo of bbnt. he is john galt, walked away, retired. when john galt last economic world he became an agent for morality of capitalism and that is what john allison is doing. he is endowing programs that dozens of universities throughout bbnt's footprint in the south to teach the morality of capitalism, were assigned reading is "atlas shrugged." [applause] said he is doing the work. the last rant carrot for in the real world i want to talk about. i'm going to end on a negative note that the villain, back to the fountainhead. everybody ran to the main villain with ellsworth to be? he was a socialist. he was face teaming dwarf. he was a newspaper columnist who used his column to televise them in the early good you guessed it. i'm talking about paul krugman. [laughter] now, you can't make it up stuff, the analogy between krugman are so striking it is just downright eerie. they are

, this country has a moral obligation to take care of the poor? what was his reaction? >> exactly. we formed a circle of protection, we talked about, which we're going to circle around the programs. we have to really implement here, no matter what the deal is tomorrow, the next day, boehner, obama, the deals have to be guided by principles. which is you don't target those who have already suffered the most. you don't make them hurt more. >> i understand you had a real faithful conversation with the president. but he did not at the end of the conversation say i'm going to protect social security because it's the morally correct thing to do? it's still on the premise of doing a deal? >> well, we said and he said back to us, it would be wrong to make the sacrifices be born by the least of these. he's quoting scripture there. jesus said, you know, as you treat the least of these, you treat me. and that was good. but the devil is in the details. i'm concerned, ed, that even the democrats may defend medicare more than they do medicaid, you know? medicai

>> there is that sense of moral revulsion that we heard from some parliamentarians yesterday. the private investigator at the center of it had to release a statement saying that he was very sorry for any upset that he caused. he attempted to explain this away in the context of the culture. saying that he was under constant pressure for stories. he was not exactly trying to excuse what he had done, but he did try to put the blame on those who were higher up. >> weekend -- we only have to look at the prime minister's questions to see the debate. >> and we are no longer talking about politicians and celebrities. we are talking about terrorist victims, murder victims, having their telephones tapped into. it is disgusting, what has taken place, and everyone here should be revulsed. let me make a couple points. first of all, there is a major police investigation under way. it is one of the biggest police investigations under way in our country and i hope that it does not involve police officers that were involved in the original investigation that did not get to the truth. but i thi

this is a fable about the dangers of being morally fashionable. i think that has produced a certain amount of shame and some kind of self questioning. if people then, undergraduates, academics, people in the church could be so easily misled and think that they were fighting the good fight and think that they had the moral high ground when they did not and were completely fooling themselves about what was right and what was wrong, what does that say today? when you jump on that and lighting, is it the right bandwagon to be on? -- when you jump on that bandwagon, is it the right bandwagon to be on? no one has ever written on this before. occasionally, people have looked at various aspects. it is not that no one has ever written about british involvement. but no one ever attended to write one enormous epic history of all of that together and entered the whole war to see where it fayed. tavis: when you have done it. your new hbo series underscores the fact that you have done it very well. the book is called "war on fire, britain's crucial role in the

can we match that in the world of morality? if you are unconventional in life in one sphere are you going to be unconventional in another sphere? >> is it a phenomenon that can be observed? >> the powerful people, male and female have strong labidos that provide, i probably contribute to the overall composite, personality, energy. does that make any difference? is there any excuse for this? >> well -- >> this man was really bitterness. >> i would preface that by saying i'm not a psychologist. >> but you're a doctor. >> of history. >> you wrote a lot about historical figures. >> certainly there are other great scientists and other great artists who supplement their sexuality in other fashion. >> so supplementation. >> no, he was not given. >> is there anything you detected in any of his writings that would indicate that he felt anything unusual operating in the world of his moral view or his ethics that would come to bear on this? i think this is an important issue because his genius is such that it demands an extraordinary leve

i think there's a moral seriousness that is important for us to explore more today. i think it's time to reevaluate the decade and a think it's time to reevaluate carter and the best way about to do this was to take the speech that he was so well known for and that defined his the and try to exploit again and be a little more critical and reflect good about it. the easiest way to think about this speech is also a critique of consumerism in abundance given in the way for americans understanding the real problems of the energy crisis. there's an argument that we've become so reliant upon fossil fuels and to reliant upon them and we really need to confront this issue, but until we understand our civic crisis, we won't know what to confront the energy crisis. the result is that the money to embark upon a project placed upon americans at this point in time in history and to only two that what we get reliant on foreign oil. now, here is the way i tell the story. whenever you commit to writing a book like this, your fear is that he may have opened yourself up to doing a lot

what is the moral clarity?r developed nations to support these principles and more. human rights. free and fair elections, the freelow ofnformation. the ability for people to express themselves freely and associate freely. those are values and principles that we can speak to a moral clarity because they are our boundaries. when people oppressed them in tyrannical ways, we should speak to that. we have more clarity to do that. >> who have dealt with the tension between the -- >> they are universal values as well. >> the security issues that arise, what do you do about a state? you mentioned radical islam early on. would you do to oppose those that oppose the united states and its interests? they have become what they believe they should be and pose a threat to the unit states. >> which state would you highlight as an example of that? >> you are speaking about a list of principles by which you would govern, and the tension between freedom and security is a perennial one. at what point do you draw the line. >> aut

reed is finally being shut down today and wife herman vons are better than suicide vests but more morally tonight we have until peter of royal robles guaranteed to blow your mind at least four different directions first up is our own jake the negative milk on nancy delivered over says stuff on the balls canadian philosopher molyneux on conservatism versus anarchism then our own lou the crazy truth or reality versus charlie the crazy establishment guy veach on what really happened on nine eleven and if you think you know the truth then i guess your truth are but what do we care about the truth this is television you're watching out on versus the man. ladies and gentlemen that are you all this is nearly upon us. thanks to the mainstream media and the russian sponsored tongue in cheek radio the fervor over the debt ceiling is starting to sound like. that ceiling budget that ceiling negotiations could pass for a fee or emergency that ceiling budget borrowing and spending that. balanced approach. as the august second debt default deadline moves which are killing its international monetary fund

the other is an issue about morality -- a plurality. >> this is not the time for technicalities. we have said consistently throughout this process that this should be referred to the competition commission. this is the right way forward. the prime minister, instead of in gauging -- engaging should do this. i hope he will go off and think again because it is in the interest of the media industry and the public that is properly referred to the competition commission in a way that all other things are dealt with. we also know that world may be a public inquiry, as well as the bid to the public commission, that these were not the actions of a broker individual, but a wider -- pirogue individual, but wider abuses. no one seems prepared to take response so before what happened. no one is denying what has happened. and nobody is denying that it happened on the watch of the current chief executive of news international, who was editor of the newspaper of the time. will he join me that she should take responsibly of her position? >> to deal with this issue of technicalities, when you are

i think athe hrt oou obleisn a nse thchur has lost its moral authority. the church has lost its right to speak out on issues. >> the abuse was a betrayal of trust, pope benedict acknowledged in a pastoral letter last year to irish catholics, his first-ever apology for the sexual abuse of children by priests. this year, during an extraordinary liturgy of lament and repentance at dublin's pro-cathedral, the archbishop of dublin and boston's cardinal o'malley prostrated themselves, asking god and the victims for forgiveness. but it hasn't been enough. >> people are still waiting, i think, for the kind of great atonement and the kind of fundamental change that will convince them that things have changed. there isn't enough evidence yet that things have fundamentally changed. >> it is a crisis, and it's not one of the future. it is one of right now. it's quite extraordinary an organization as big and as -- ancient as the church that we cannot face a crisis that's right at our doorsteps and be able to talk realistically about it. >> the kind of change father fl

people who do out of narcissism and a lack of empathy and truly missing a super ego, missing their moral compass, really could commit a completely heinous crime. no, i think it can be there. what i do know about the human mind is one can so circumscribe, so be in denial and compartmentalize and do heinous things and lie to themselves that i didn't do this, justify it to themselves. we see this all the time. >> dr. gail saltz, thanks for your insights. >>> the key to casey being found not guilty may lie in the prosecution's inability to prove exactly how her daughter died. we'll hear from our crack legal team when we return. ♪

to see if we have the political courage and moral sense to solve our debt crisis. the president and democrats in congress must recognize that their game plan is not working. it is time to acknowledge that more government and higher taxes is not the answer to our problems. it is time for a bolder action and a new plan to redress our current crisis. but for inspiration, they should look outside of washington, and there is no better playbook for getting on the right track than the one used in indiana. the hoosier way is simple, we work hard and live within our means. we understand that you cannot spend more money than you take in. when our state fell off course, a leader stepped up with solutions to spearhead trade in the people of indian respond. the governor, like the president, inherited a weak economy. it into a dozen 5, indiana faced a deficit and had trailed -- in 2005, india faced a deficit and had failed to pass a balanced budget in several years. they cut taxes and pay down their debt. thanks for governor's leadership, our state is now the most attractive pla

you seem to see these cuts in terms of right and wrong almost a moral position but isn't there a bottom line that has to be respected for example they didn't reform and soon it looks like they might not be able to afford teachers or nurses the u.k. economy isn't greece this is the fifth largest economy in the world and if you look at historically the british economy for fifty consecutive years from one thousand nine hundred number it's our debt as a proportion of our g.d.p. was double what it is now then we go millions of houses schools hospitals well first recognizing actually economically these cuts will make it worse far better to cut the deficit by employing people who don't pay tax and insurance rather than throw them onto welfare where actually they depress the economy and we think my friends worse you've said that the government cuts are now just attack on working people. but how do you think the strikes you're proposing will affect the. ruling class is what having three quarters of a million people from four different unions on strike is something that happens hasn't happened in

struggling to save the euro even the leaders around brussels on how morality measures to tackle the greek problem system while many say with her debts academic spreading it is the very future of the single currency that's at stake. meanwhile the e.u. troubles think tire aspiring states from want to join a serbia for has to extradite war crime fugitive hundred to the hague and its latest attempt to become a member of the law. and investigations into the u.k.'s phone hacking scandal intensify would be the moral for the school it is coming on the scrutiny of public betting on here the case might bring down that it's just a. very welcome see this is the line from moscow e.u. leaders have gathered in brussels for an emergency summit on how to come up with a promise counts for a second greek bailout but the epidemic spreading with italy and spain now showing the first symptoms of serious debt a sense of impending doom fills the adams aussies are no reports. the single currency will be big within two years warner lists the european. there's a really. serious threat. to disintegrate. the eurozone