sit moral to block self-driving -- is it moral to block self-driving cars to prevent large affected populations like the ones that brought about the socialist revolutions a century ago? >> in terms of trade, it's a matter of economics that for a very long time notwithstanding , the latest protectionist policies that it's good for both parties. both parties in the sense of the individuals engaging in the transaction and good for the countries. if you think about free trade in a most basic terms two willing , individual, one parts with the money, the other parts with the goods, the reason they did so, both thought they'd be better off after the transaction than before. right? another way to think about it is, if you think protectionism makes sense, maybe we should protect ourselves from those marylanders up the road. so we'll put trade barriers between maryland and d.c. to protect our local d.c. people. of course, one of the reasons the united states is such a prosperous country, has been for a long time, is because it's a large free trade zone. people in maryland can trade with people from virgi

in other words, how or why someone earns income or wealth matters morally. as the university of illinois philosophy professor said in his interesting book a short history of distributive justice, this understanding of issues of justice was virtually unquestioned until the 18th century. you can find it by reading aristotle's ethics versus thomas aquinas's theological or adam smith's theory or countless other ones. modern liberals, progressives and socialists largely reject this view. john russ said this especially in his influential 1973 book the theory of justice. to progressives, income or wealth inequality is morally problematic no matter the reason for the any quality because our natural endowments, inclinations, character, family, social background are undeserved. if an individual works hard or smart in school, employment or enterprise and is better compensated than others progressives regard that is unfair. does the intelligence and work ethic involved, largely from genetic, family or social factors. using various principles, guideposts or definitions u

can't get more moral than that. an tiff fa in -- and antifa in the street is all perfectly moral.alls can be moral in the right circumstances but can't protect america. they signed off for borders in israel, egypt and jordan. no problem. but here on behalf of our own people no. americans don't deserve that. they are immoral for asking. those are the parameters to the morality. what religion is this exactly? we are joined by an attorney, radio host, former aide to chuck schumer and he joins us tonight. if you would, i think we talked about this before. nancy pelosi repeatedly called the wall immoral. at first i thought she talks a lot and sometimes you misspeak. i know the feeling. but now she is saying something as the leader officially of the party. so the democrats believe border walls are immoral. what does that mean? >> i don't think she means it in the good versus evil type of morality. but rather this is a waste of money since a ladder and a rope can beat a wall. >> tucker: let me interrupt you. what other sense of immoral is there? by definition immoral describes something

president, on the right we have an example of a barrier the speaker of the house has described as in moral. so now tell me the difference? they are identical. so we went from the obama administration when everybody was supporting the wall just like this to the trump administration where now it is in moral. and then now all of a sudden the democrats are so repulsed they want to prolong the shutdown rather than agree to an additional investment of one tenth of 1 percent of federal spending. identical walls exactly alike when president obama was there. and as i have said it is the same photograph twice basically i did that to underscore the point of the trump administration is requesting funding for the same physical barrier the obama administration was proud to t build and bragged about it. so spacing that allows visibility made with reinforced steel. the same kinds of barriers that custom border patrol produces real results. you can call them a wall or a fence or steel slats but they really are is defective. that's what they are call it what you will they are effective according to the gao

there is no way within reason to figure out what should be the morality everywhere? the great 17th century legal theorist principal author of the petitioner that makes of the principal author of the first draft of the bill of rights and that this has not existed in the history of the world a single philosopher that they cannot disagree. no matter how obvious it seems there are philosophers who are capable of disagreeing. if the most brilliant women in history cannot come to a consensus that it's unlikely we will figure out the answer. the minimum of early modern europe was associated with the ten commandments. both luther and calvin believed the biblical ten commandments were the appropriate basis for natural law and they thought the legitimacy of nations depended if they created in an environment of these - - i understand people don't read the bible anymore let alone think that it could guide us with fundamental morality. but to have a significant argument what the minimum should be some think that maybe there isn't. but the jews and christians we will never give up

which one is a moral?i don't believe that she is for sex-selective abortions. >> tucker: yes, she is. yes, she is. >> that is an overreach of what she is for. >> tucker: in fact she is. >> the more moral use of the funding for the wall is to fix bridges and roads crumbling in the country that need repair and spend a couple of bucks on doorbells for the border securityuc if you're worried about it. it's not as big of a problem. what is immoral is the president making a problem that doesn't exist. >> tucker: really quick. at the same tame, again, that she was pushing against america's ability to defend the borders and for more taxpayer funded abortions in other countries, she's also pushing for more foreign aid for countries some of which would go to border security. we funded with her approval border security and walls in a bunch of other o countries. why were those not immoral but our wall is immoral? >> well,mm when we talk about the israeli wall, and other countries that have walls like that, they are in

i mean i think the morale has been an issue for years i've done reports on this several times you know and the morale comes out many things it comes down to feeling abandoned when you come under attack and when cities are provinces or districts are about to fall there's been several instances where security forces say they didn't get the backup and their help that they needed it it's as simple as you know not getting proper not getting paid on time not getting to leave on time if you are martyred in the fight you know not necessarily having your body deliver to your family activity these sorts of morale issues have been going on for a long time. and it comes from all sides it comes from the fact that you could be killed in this war very clearly and it comes from the fact that you know you while you're fighting this war you don't feel like you're being taken care of. us from kabul thanks very much for the insights. in a few hours' time france and germany will be signing a new friendship pact in the west. this treaty will commit the two countries to increase cooperation on european union

where is our moral ethical nature, our humanity?was one of the defining factors of this country, of why we're here. our country used to take in approximately 90,000 refugees a year. the previous administration had a cap when they left at 110,000. the new administration came and dropped to it 45,000. congress is voting to create a new cap of only 30,000 refugees to the united states of america, less than 1% of the world communities welcoming of these people. we are less than 1% the most powerful country in the world and third-world countries are taking the brunt of this whole thing, economically, a humanitarian crisis-wise and that's not proper. and it's not who we are. who are you morally and ethically? take a walk. be quiet. be by yourself. don't listen to television, newscasts, and podcasts and just ask yourself in private, what is my moral ethical nature and are my representatives mirroring my moral ethical nature? and if they're not, find representatives who are going into the political field that do represent that. and if you d

the moral complexity of their lives. just as we all are morally complicated. douglasis why frederick after the civil war said of to oln, "he was willing pursue recapture and send back the fugitive slave to his and to suppress a slave rising for liberty." that's what it took to preserve the union. i think that's actually an overstatement. mr. lincoln certainly took no active role in suppressing a for liberty but he did give his support to this law. now, ed spoke last night also, rich ecture that had many themes in it, about we need to remember, when we think about knew what was e going to happen. what's we don't know going to happen. so here we come to the vexing story of this fugitive slave law. have a late colleague at columbia coined the term the law of unintended consequences. of ver there was a law unintended consequences it was the fugitive slave law of 1850. himself, who hated the law, and loathed the people who it, it ed it, said of did a great service to the moment.avery it was a gift to the anti-slavery movement. that?did he mean by emerson again, he

the morale is low and i really think that when this contract expires in six months, the morale of the operators will increase. i really do think that the operators had enough. the city and county of san francisco had enough. they've been feeling the impacts the negative impacts of what it means to have an operator shortage. i will not take up any more times. there's a couple of operators here that might want to share their stories on a daily basis. one of the small things that we can do in terms of morale, few days ago, i was over at the cable cart barn, they were telling me about one of our brothers that passed away in 2015. he passed away while he was working on the cable car. i didn't know this, not even plaque was put on the cable car. he was killed while working on cable car 17. i will get with the agency and speak with the director of transportation to see how we can move forward in terms of putting up a plaque on cable car number 17 which is way overdue and these little things that just will end in the end boost morale. >> supervisor brown: i thank you. one of the things that -

number one, a statesman should have a moral compass, a moral framework. number two, a statesman or stateswoman should have vision, the ability to see the opportunity for a great advance in human progress or the ability to see the pretense of grave of grave danger. and third, the statesman or stateswoman should have the capacity, the genius for forming a consensus across party lines. it seems to me, probably, and i wish we could talk about it more so i could get your advice -- you could add that he or she has to have the leadership ability to make it come about. i'm not sure the last is really necessary if you have a marvelous u.s. senator or congressman or parliamentarian who has a brilliant idea and gets consensus, maybe they are not the ones to carry that, but whatever. the fourth element it seems to me important. what about churchill's moral framework? again, you can teach me so much. churchill once said that with respect to religion, he wasn't a pillar of the anglican church, but he was a buttress because he was supported from the outside. [laughter]

i think yesterday we have lost morally but. in the context of international relations what is essential for countries to be able to come together and to face the global challenges we have today the challenges the understanding that we cannot do to little ones multi let's organization. and we need multilateral governance and you need international british picking up the biggest most influential player and the united states french just recently from the human rights council i understand that the optics of it i'm not very positive but in actual terms what kind of a fallout do you expect from that well of course i would strongly prefer they said since it is the first moment at united states which they in the human rights council i believe human rights a text is a very important element in the un human rights is one of the pillars of united nations and i hope that. so little later sooner rather than later the u.s. will be able to come back but as i said i strongly believe that in today's world we need multilateral responses they're

the moral complexity of their lives. just as we all are morally complicated. so this is why frederick douglas after the civil war said of lincoln, "he was willing to pursue recapture and send back the fugitive slave to his master, and to suppress a slave rising for liberty." if that's what it took to preserve the union. i think that's actually an overstatement. mr. lincoln certainly took no active role in suppressing a slave rising for liberty but he did give his support to this law. now, ed spoke last night also, in a lecture that had many rich themes in it, about we need to remember, when we think about the past, no one knew what was going to happen. just as we don't know what's going to happen. so here we come to the vexing paradox of the story of this fugitive slave law. i have a late colleague at columbia coined the term the law of unintended consequences. if ever there was a law of unintended consequences it was the fugitive slave law of 1850. douglas himself, who hated the law, and loathed the people who introduced it, said of it, it did a great service

moral means. it also says that itit is possie to struggle agaiainst an evil, unjust s system, with allll your mimight and withth all your heart, and even h hate that unjust system, bubut yet you maintainin an attitude ofof active goodwill and understanding and even love for the e perpetrators of thahat evil sysystem. and this is the most misunderstood aspect of nononviolence. and this is wherere those who don't want to follow the nonviolent method say a lot of bad things to those of us who talk about l love. but i still go o on and believe in it because i am still convinced that it is love that makes the world go round, and somehow this kind of love can be a powerful force for social change. i'm not talking about a weak love. i'm not talking about emotional bosh here. i'm not talking about some sentimental quality. i'm not talking about an affectionate response. it would be nonsense to urge oppressed people to love their violent oppressors in an affectionate sense, and i have never advised that. w

it's a ridiculous place to have that selective morality of just what you decide is not moral because someone else wants to do it. >> thank you thank you leader and chairman. make no mistake about it there is a humanitarian crisis at our border. we have tens of thousands of people that come to our border every month and they are in it and illegal immigrants and it is not just about our southern border but it is about every community in every town in the united states and it is a human trafficking and it is about illegal weapons modeling and it is about illegal drugs. the majority of the methamphetamine lands on our iowa doorstep and affects our iowa family comes from our southern border. it comes through mexico. we need to secure our border. there is no doubt about it. what we have seen in recent weeks are the democrats and they are stopping movement on the floor and trying to shut the senate down and we have a package in front of us that would reassure our allies in the middle east and it is very important that we have that done but the senate republicans are refusing to do that. i t

in my point of view is that it doesn't shift and morality doesn't become self-righteousness with moral principles. he was one who could finesse the senator about changing his mind he had a lot of contacts. before wilson went to the white house that soul political author did not actually know a lot of people in the democratic party. he was useful in that way. but then he discovered foreign affairs and it's like champagne and he becomes hooked and wants to try every variety that there is. he greatly overestimated his ability the british make fun of him. [laughter] and one of his main strategies to deal with people was flattery but he did not understand people were flattering him so he took at face value all the compliments that people paid him and that was fatal. so he was not useful in foreign affairs and that's too bad because he would tell prime minister so-and-so or the prime minister this or that or tell wilson something else so there was a lot of duplicity. >>. >> he is an unreliable source. >> you can read his feelings and dealings biographers, publishing those excerpts from the d

. >> we live in a moral world that allows this? is that a moral outcome? >> it is not. keep crusading against capitalism. kfc wants to hop aboard the gravy train, compliments to the next level. ♪ >> 15 minutes until the top of the or, the us will formally request extradition of the chinese tech executive accused of violating sanctions against iran according to the globe and mail. the cfo was taken into custody in canada. on behalf of the us in december. he is accused of defrauding banks to get around some sanctions in iran. the situation sparked retaliation and threats from beijing. alexandria kislyak slamming the system that allows billionaires, calling it immoral. >> to live in a moral world allows billionaires? is that a moral outcome? >> it is not. a system that allows billionaires to exist, not only doesn't make economic sense, doesn't make moral sense. >> the democratic socialist making that comment on martin luther king jr. day event in new york adding she doesn't think billionaires themselves are immoral, just working hard. less than two weeks until super bowl l

again from a moral standpoint it is god's creation. we have a moral responsibility to be good stewedwards of it. even if you don't share that view, we all have a moral responsibility to generations to be good caretakers and pass it on responsibly. it's a health issue. it's a public health issue to protect our planet and it's national security issue and it's a financial, economic issue as well. all of these things are connected can. one thing that connects them all our third point in our for the people. to reduce the cost of dark special interest money in politics. [applause] we cited citizens united and other grassroots efforts to advance h.r. 1, the first -- that has the first name, will be one of the earlest bills that we ass in the house and hopefully in the senate and send to the president's desk. it empowers small donors. it stops voter suppression. it has within it passing the voting rights act to correct what the united states supreme court did. the correction between the issues of access to health care and costs, bigger paychec

but president trump is not moral. >> takes morals out of it, but when you take facts -- >> you have toright. >> he has fuzzy facts. >> but here is the difference. if i can say i misspoke, that is different than saying this lie is now true today. and that is what we get today. so i acknowledge she said this is clumsy and i have to clean it up, that is what i'll heareriin her saying. >> but that is not what she's saying. people justify how donald trump speaks inaccurately and lies and makes things up. he never apologizes. he never corrects himself. and some people will say it is the means justify the ends. so what if he is making up how many terrorists come through the border or if he makes up this or that. he means well. that was the exact same rationale she just used. she didn't say what angela said. you should play it again because she never said if i make a mistake that i will correct it and be ankts ally factually acc. she said i'm clumsy. which to me didn't take full ownership of making a mistake. when the "washington post" gives you four pinocchios for something, that is not be cl

morality chart at home, walls are more than moral, in fact laudable when they are built in jordan orsrael or tunisia with american bank it like backing. when they are built here to protect our own population, they are immoral. that's argument number two. his argument number three, anybody who supports the wall is inbred. >> the idea of a physical wall, if donald trump love selling this to his base, and again, these are people who are not sophisticated. they are not bright. they don't understand the complexity -- >> yes, here we go again with condescending to us -- >> if the shoe fits, you have to wear it. >> tucker: its complexity, people who aren't rick wilson just wouldn't understand, who aren't intellectuals like rick wilson. that's what he's telling you on cnn, those are the arguments. what are the actual arguments for and against a wall? we found someone who has the difficult job of overseeing the protection of the border. mark morgan led the order patrol under obama, he did not say, could stay for president trump. he joins us tonight. so the idea that walls don't work, that see

do we create a moral hazard that encourages manufacturers to supply the fda with a lot of information, overwhelming, the most artfully drafted and deliberately and artfully drafted warning, that is reasonably calculated to be refused so it can avoid having shouldered its own costs, internalizing -- what comfort can you give the court that that is not the outcome of the statutory regime you're proposing? >> the fda itself is in the position of having the problem you're describing but doesn't seem concerned about the problem. the other comfort i would give you is we don't dispute that under the statute, both parties, the fda and manufacturer have certain responsibilities. were not trying to absolve the manufacturer of its responsibility, and impossibility preemption case where the fda rejected a proposed warning. the only way to understand the meaning of that rejection and what it means for impossibility is in light of the fda's part of its obligation. the fda has some obligation and where it is provided with a warning it understood to be about relevant risk and reject that. that establ

the question of national morale by 1979. that in theudents old days, you got up to while a phone, you had to get up to change the channel on the tv because they were not remotes. they are shocked. you are trying to explain the demoralization of a country that reaches its apotheosis in the famous speech of president reagan's predecessor. students can't believe it. it's a whole different world to them. what people need to know, and it bears on the title of our panel, we may never get another chance like this. the whole story of getting to that moment is this dramatic, it is moving, it is profound. it testifies to reagan's greatness as a statesman. i stay he was a statesman in the old sense of that word. it is archaic, but it means an attachment to principal and a profound grasp of the circumstances. let me say more about reagan's grasp of the circumstances. it was very profound. one of the key elements there of his many virtues is patience. but there is another sense in which that statement, or title, is wrong. i don't mean in

it is our right to moral leadership of this planet. [cheers and applause] sen. harris: so today i say to you, my friends, these are not ordinary times and this will not be an ordinary election. but this is our america. [cheers and applause] sen. harris: and so here is the thing, it is up to us, it is up to us, each and every one of us. so let's remember, in this fight, we have the power of the people. we can achieve the dreams of our parents and grandparents. we can heal our nation. can hea. we can give our children the future they deserve. we can give our children the future they deserve. we can reclaim the american dream for every, single person in our country. [cheers] sen. harris: we can restore america's moral leadership on this planet. [cheers and applause] sen. harris: so, let's do this! [laughter] [cheers and applause] sen. harris: and let's do it together, and let's start now, and i thank you and god bless you, and god bless the united states of america! [cheers and applause] [cheers an] ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

and it is a moral issue. if you believe that this planet is god's creation, i join with our evaluation gel call community. we are must be good stewards of it. if you don't share that view but you do agree that we owe it to future generation to a responsible way, again, it is a moral issue. that is one of the challenges. have accomplished a climate select committee on climate. this is about creating good paying dream jobs, good paying dream jobs. and ending some of the denials that are there. and secondly, this is something that i think hits home, no pun intended and that is the homelessness issue that exists. have to think in a very drastic way about this. and i'll quote dr. king. dr. king said there is no time to eninjure to take the drug of gradualism. we cannot think incrementally. we have to think big. and maxine waters is the chairman of the financial services thinks big. we need to be working with you to hear your ideas about how we can address the housing crisis and increase the stock and make everythi

the provides a moral and ethical critique of socialism and makes the case for the moral superiority of a free economy. i want to bring to your attention the next two events in the series on november 15 george giller of the discovery institute will give a talk called capitalism, is an information learning system. and november 30 mike monger of duke university will give a talk, and poverty is a real problem in capitalism is the only solution. i would also like to bring to your attention an event that's not part of the series but may be of interest to you on november 16 gregory may will be here to talk about his new book, jefferson's treasure, how albert Ãsaved the new nation from debt. gallatin i think is a seriously underestimated figure. he cut taxes, reduce the national debt by half. he was sort of a one-man omb and funded both louisiana purchase and the 1812. he was both jefferson and madison's secretary of treasury and answered to alexander hamilton.it's his statute that stands in front of the treasure building. onto today's event, it is my pleasure to introduce our speaker today, d

[cheers and applause] >> and we can restore america's moral leadership on this planet. [cheers and applause] >> so let's do this! [laughter] [cheers and applause] >> and let's do it together and let's start now and i thank you and god bless you and god bless the united states of america. [cheers and applause] eric: well arosing speech for a large crowd that you see there in front of the oakland city hall, first term senator kamala harris is going for the white house as you see hugging her husband doug, laying out presidential platform. a speech in which he directly and indirectly criticized president trump, administration policies from immigration and the wall and the economy, talking repeatedly about moral leadership saying people in america are drowning, we are better than this. john joins us, associate editor of wall street journal and fox news contributor. john, considering what we just heard, can her race and candidacy resinate? >> certainly has a potential to. i think what we saw her do here was kind of click off the boxes, progressive wing of the democratic platf

how did your own family's morality and the morality you were raised with here, how did that inform thatthat is part of being the example family for america? did you guys ever talk about that, the pressure of that? >> well, being the first of any-- you know, when you're the first of anything, the bar feels higher. you feel like you have-- you don't have room to make mistakes. one of the things i don't talk about in the book, but i talk about on the road, is that i do remember that at the end-- that last flight that we took out when i was leaving from the we got on air force one the last time. i forgot about this, because i didn't put it in the book. but a friend of mine reminded me that i cried for about 30 minutes. and it was just the release of eight years of feeling like we had to do everything perfectly, that there wasn't a margin of error, that we couldn't make mistakes, that we couldn't slip, that our tone had to be perfect. because that was-- that was the bar that was set for us. but it was also the bar that we always set for ourselves. thinking that, as the first, people will mea

in august morales announced he would not renew c. six mandate which was set to expire in september two thousand and nineteen days later he banned its commissioner colombian prosecutor says from reentering the country. analysts say morale is decision to expel the group violates a constitutional order and international law. why is he doing this firstly he's being pushed by many of these political collaborators who are being tried for corruption he's also received a lot of help from business people who are being tried for corruption and probably the biggest reason the legal process is against him he's brother and the son outside of the constitutional court another group of guatemalans holds a quieter protest they hope that the country's top court will rule against morales decision i guess that has to be with him to things to the commission mafia like business autoglass have been uncovered and that's what they don't like this is going on after the powers that existed since independence is the only entity that's been able to uncover corru

in moral. from badly needed to immoral google spent about president. talk about a pivot. talk about a pivot. my democratic friends wanted fencing and physical barriers in the recent past. there most than prominent leaders actually bragged about voting for physical barriers. thenl only thing that has changd between then and now is the occupant of the white house. steel fencing was fine, even salutary when president obama was in the white house but it is immoral when president trump occupies the office. all of a sudden, all of a sudden democrats have developed this new partisan allergy to t the subject of border security. they are even prolonging a partial a government shutdown jt to avoid getting more of what they themselves have voted for in the past. so, mr. president, this inconsistency doesn't stop with the drawing imaginary lines in the sand between thene board security, that democrats once supported, and the virtually identical measures they decided to oppose today. the inconsistency also extends to the conduct of the senate itself during this tantrum. so yesterday e

king was a moral leader and that is what people adhere to and that is not black or white. guest 1: let me say this. you are right. very few people enslaved to people. it was not just the active enslavement that poison society. it was racism that made slavery legitimate. it was that that continues to pervade our society in many ways. it hits us in terms of interpersonal relationships. it also hits us in terms of policies. one of the best pieces of legislation is the criminal justice reform and it was gratifying to see democrats and republicans come together. ,onservatives and liberals realize that. mass incarceration was built in our society and was institutionalized after the 13th amendment which said that slavery and involuntary servitude were unconstitutional except as punishment for crime. so many african-americans, after the civil war, were almost re-enslaved, incarcerated, to serve as free labor for white people in the south of this country. racialt in motion injustice that reverberates today throughout the black community and society. if we do not come to terms with

natalie morales: and this fire was no accident.ng surveillance at ashlea's apartment. keith morrison: they're going back to the place where ashlea worked? yes, sir. chris cravey: they were going after tens of thousands of dollars. natalie morales: but was money ree omething else? ended up being true. chris cravey: i couldn't believe that somebody could do that to her. just pure evil. [theme music]

for me this is a moral crisis. i will advocate for it whether i'm running for office or running my mouth. [applause] but advocacy has to be real and constant and there has to be consequences. and there is no stronger consequence for a political leader than losing that job. so the first job is to what? >> educate. >> the second is to? >> advocate. ms. abrams: the third one is i usually agitate. i i say activate. >> activate. ms. abrams: once you have educated. once people understand what's at stake, once they understand why the aids rate is going up in the state of georgia, once they understand that rural hospitals are shutting down in ohio and indiana unless you expand medicaid and finally it happens, when you advocate in montana, finally decides to expand medicaid, you are either having trouble with their implementation plan. when states start to join the bandwagon, when we have done the work of education and work of advocacy, activation is necessary. i don't know if you know this, sometimes politicians say things

i think yesterday we have lost morally but at what's better this is. not in football but in the context of international relations what is essential for countries to be able to come together and to face the global challenges we have today that of the domestic challenges understanding that we cannot do it alone one of the multilateral organizations and we need multilateral governance and you need international but is picking up the biggest most influential player in the year on a still the united states french just recently from the human rights council i understand that the optics of it i'm not very positive but in actual terms what kind of a fallout do you expect from that well of course i would strongly prefer they said since of is the first moment that united states would say in the human rights council i believe human rights watch the text is a very important element in the u.n. human rights is one of the pillars of united nations and i hope that. so little later sooner rather than later the u.s. will be able to come back as i said i strongly belie

moral persuasion. you can keep trying to change aa person's heart forever and ever and ever, at some point you may just need to bend somebodies will and change the law, if you can. he loved the politics buddy only shouldered up to it carefully in the 1850s. at first he considered himself a free spoiler. he goes to the first frisson convention in 1848, called him up to speak. he didn't quite know what -- didn't quite know what to do in 1854 although he was kind of excited about, here's a political party and now it is anti-slavery. it is against the expansion of slavery and he begins to develop -- i spent with her chapters on this -- it begins to develop a kind of hard earned pragmatism about the crisis over slavery and he realizes you may have to make relationships with people you do not like, whose principles you can't stand, but they can make things happen. he began to realize the republican party from 54 to 56, 58 and in 1860 when lincoln runs, is causing the south of grief. the enemy of my enemy is

morality is really the issue here. what is moral, a society allows for billionaires isn't moral.ety that allows people to be free, to pursue their interests, to keep what they earn. what's moral is society that treats people as end unto themselves, not means to an end for someone in wyoming with ring worm or whatever she was talking about. the a society protects people right to their own life. that is making america very unique. hatred for billionaires, keep in mind billionaires became billionaires became they create it, earn it. this hatred for billionaires is european and anti-american and so recent in our history. very disappointing. neil: we look at her, see her election of representative of passion for the party and where it is going but the real reason the democrats took over the house, 40 new entrants, 32 were described as moderate, some cases conservative t wasn't thrust forward by the extreme left, but having said that, she has hit a nerve with people, more about setting up the tone and tenor for 2020. then how should republicans respond? >> well, they need to make the e

give him a compassion for those in physical, moral, and spiritual need.guide richard nixon in handling the affairs of the state that the whole world will marvel and glorify thee. o god, we consecrate richard milhouse nixon with the assurance that from this moment on as he and his family move into the white house that they will have the presence and the power of thy son who said, i will never leave thee nor forsake thee. what we pray for president nixon, we pray for vice president agnew and members of the cabinet. may they be given a wisdom and a courage that is beyond their own. bless them as a team to lead america to the dawning of a new day, with renewed trust in god that will lead to peace, justice, and prosperity. we pray this humbly, in the name of the prince of peace who shed his blood on the cross that men might have eternal life. amen. mr. cronkite: because it is now past 12:00 noon and richard nixon has not yet been sworn in, technically -- although it is really not upsetting anyone -- the united states is without a president. i would assume -- i

there's a direct correlation between morale and performance. the next paycheck comes, there's going to be zeros on it. think you will start seeing morale deteriorate. >> this second, you know, paycheck period in january is fast approaching. you know, people who are going without have their fingers crossed that something's going to give soon but the longer this goes on, talk to me more about those stresses, the kind of deterioration, you know, of morale. >> listen this comes down to, you know, leadership of different organizations really have to do some creative resource management to address the stress that the morale has on the ajgency itself and the individuals. i think we've seen different managers addresses those stresses for the state of the union. again this is about resource management. maybe shifting away from, you know, federal employees that are affected, in this unpaid, unappreciated status. may be relying a little more on the military assets who are getting paid who can support the mission for the state of the union address. >> jona

in moral? today my friend the democratic leaders are proposing that a senate shutdown to the partial federal government shutdown and block even more of the people's business, all, all to avoid more of what he already voted for. maybe the democratic party wanted more secure borders before they were against him. or maybe they m are just makingt up as they go along. or maybe there is dead set on opposing this particular president on any issue for any reason, just for the sake of opposing him. now look, walls and barriers are not immoral. how silly. enforcing our laws wasn't immoral back in 2006 when then secretary clinton and senator obama and her friend the democratic leader were proud proud to vote for physical barriers. the only things that is change the current then and the political winds and, of course, the occupant of the white house. so this is no newfound principled objection. it's just political spite, a partisan tantrum being prioritized over the public interest. so for more than two we