if i want to teach the young scholar today, i would say look to orwell. but also orwell was honest. he is painfully honest. and his painful honesty which makes many of his essays greatly conservative and defending conservative values. and crucially for me, i really think for all of us, perhaps this token future is defense of language as it should be. orwell is one of the first really great offers to focus on the language is a political act and suits, not just democracy but also tearing. that is my short list. i would be happy to take questions. thank you very much. [applause] >> okay. i'm going to give you really good, great good books and really great evil books. that is, i will start with the latter because in a way they are more exciting in perhaps the worst sense. that is, they are easieto get into sometimes been really good book about good things, but as dante recognized, that is always a question about what the state of our soldiers that that should happen. i wrote one book called "10 books that screwed up the world," and harry crocker, my editor made me add five more to that.

is this 1984, george orwell or something? i find the whole pattern here to be upsetting. i do. my gentleman friend from iowa are you running away from us? i was just about to recognize you. did you want to jump in on this? i think -- mr. king: if the gentleman would yield, i appreciate him doing system of there are a number of things that jump out in my mind. that is, yes, this subject matter gets me all animated. i don't know how to pick that up with mid western vernacular, but i wanted to point out the president's vernacular. we have to be careful and listen closely to this president, he's a master of casting ambiguities that couch things in terms where he's not confined by the definition of language. right there. nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage of the doctor you have. remember, for months he said if you like your plan, you get to keep it. and john shadegg said if you like your plan, get ready to lose it, that's the reality. now in his address before congress, i'll point it was september 8 of 2009, the president changed the langua

a company called to expansion, to do more, to regula more, to control more. 60 years ago, george orwellpublished 1984. its method is more relevant now than ever. as orwell foretold, toet the state into a mere monopolization is to guarantee the manipulation and distortion. and we must have a plurality of voices a they must be independent. yet we have a system in which a state-sponsored media, the bbc in particular, grow ever more dominant. that process has to be reversed. if we are to have that state sponsorship at all, then it is fundamental to the health of the creative industries, independent production, and professional journalism that it exists on a far, far smaller scale. above all, we must have genuine independence in the news media. genuine independence is a rare thing. out of governance in the form of committees, regulators, trusts, advisory bodies, is truly sufficient as a guarantor of sufficient. in fact, they curb speech. on the contrary, independence is characterized by the absence of the apparatus of supervision and dependency. independence of action, industrial or politica

it is a very reminiscent george orwell, 1984, but actually i think it is more subtle. it is a beautiful book. actually adults like this book as much as children do. i just crash out here and lie down. i literay lie down sometimes. and just pick one at random off the table. you know, when i needs sort of strong version of that is not political at all and has nothing to do with all the injustices we facei will go through some poetry. and i particula like machiavelli. i like the elizabethan period. and read john done for while or some shakespeare. i have three poets to me are like, i don't know, they are my soul food. >> host: wre back with another hour and 45 m >> host: we are back with another hour and 45 minutes or so with jonathan kozol we will go next to kirk and clovis, new mexico. >> caller: hello. i want to ask you thisuestion. i know you have a distaste for the conservative agenda and the no child left behd, but my question for you is this. is how do you feel about the liberals who should know better, who have turned their backs on this issue of education, especi

government says that a natural part of the atmosphere is a pollutant i feel like i'm moving in a george orwellovel. how can something naturally part of the atmosphere be called a pollutants? i would like to respond, sir. guest: let me just say i'm not a scientist. i'm a local politician. i'm not really in the practice of involving myself in global of issues. for me it is making sure that the streets are safe and services are delivered efficiently. i got involved in 2005 when seattle had a warm and dry winter. the ski season was canceled because there was no snow. it was of particular challenge in our area because we rely on the snowmelt for water into a tizzy. the mayor of to, and i had to urge people to start showering together which even in the northwest is a more radical. -- that was the mayor of tacoma and i. the trend has been downward since the end of world war ii. vast majority of opinion supports the idea that carbon dioxide is having an effect. other greenhouse gases as well. the effect is also caused by human behavior, the changes we have made in how we power industries and transport

reserve, and the debate really was a debate over whether or not we would allow the fed to authority, orwell the regulators to do with the fed had requested. in this case, they were looking at, they quoted at 100-1, and they were saying because of this overleveraged, we face a situation where it wasn't just a systemic risk to our financial system. it was a worldwide systemic risk. so in point of fact, it was the republicans in the senate who supported that position. it was the democrats who opposed over on the outside, i carried that a minute on the house floor. but it was in the senate that the major effort was made. and the reason i bring this up now is because it was an exact example of bifurcated regulation, you see. and if we do this again, and we set up two competing agencies, especially in the face of the concerns that the safety and soundness regulator's themselves have raised, then i think we risk going through the same mistake. given the losses that we faced in housing and giving what a disservice it was, especially for people who were really stretching to try to unveil themselves

where has in world gone, george orwell? how did we get to this place?and i remember walking down to franklin roosevelt's monument and looking at the speech he gave, the four freedom speech, they are rights, freedoms. they are guaranteed. freedom from want and freedom from fear can't be guaranteed by anybody but god and i'm not sure it is healthy to have freedom from want because want is what drives us to produce and be better and our philanthropy causes us to help other people. mrs. bachmann: if the representative would allow me to intervene. there is one want, and that is one organization in the united states that has been given a great abundance and that is acorn. you have done a great dial of work trying to expose acorn. last week, acorn, which has a persistent record of voter fraud was brought under indictment for 11 counts of voter fraud down in the state of florida and there were videos showing that acorn which is a grand recipient of federal money was found facilitating and bringing in underaged girls illegally across not only the state lines but

reserve, and the debate really was a debate over whether or not we would allow the fed to authority, orwell the regulators to do with the fed had requested. in this case, they were looking at, they quoted at 100-1, and they were saying because of this overleveraged, we face a situation where it wasn't just a systemic risk to our financial system. it was a worldwide systemic risk. so in point of fact, it was the republicans in the senate who supported that position. it was the democrats who opposed over on the outside, i carried that a minute on the house floor. but it was in the senate that the major effort was made. and the reason i bring this up now is because it was an exact example of bifurcated regulation, you see. and if we do this again, and we set up two competing agencies, especially in the face of the concerns that the safety and soundness regulator's themselves have raised, then i think we risk going through the same mistake. given the losses that we faced in housing and giving what a disservice it was, especially for people who were really stretching to try to unveil themselves

government says that a natural part of the atmosphere is a pollutant i feel like i'm moving in a george orwellvel. how can something naturally part of the atmosphere be called a pollutants? i would like to respond, sir. guest: let me just say i'm not a scientist. i'm a local politician. i'm not really in the practice of involving myself in global of issues. for me it is making sure that the streets are safe and services are delivered efficiently. i got involved in 2005 when seattle had a warm and dry winter. the ski season was canceled because there was no snow. it was of particular challenge in our area because we rely on the snowmelt for water into a tizzy. the mayor of to, and i had to urge people to start showering together which even in the northwest is a more radical. -- that was the mayor of tacoma and i. the trend has been downward since the end of world war ii. vast majority of opinion supports the idea that carbon dioxide is having an effect. other greenhouse gases as well. the effect is also caused by human behavior, the changes we have made in how we power industries and transporta