we have david brown and the author of a biography of richard hofstadter.ofstadter is important because he is one of the leading mid-century.he consensus liberalism. he contemplated the clash between new left and its liberal fathers. striking,aph i found the columbia crisis forced him to realize most liberals did not understand liberalism. they believed it was self-perpetuating even in the face of violence. they had no idea of the toughness and effort required to sustain it against enemies. he noted the style of liberalism was not liberal at all. it was soft, weak, and inconsistent. rather than serve as a consensual middle ground for the majority of americans, liberals were tilting to the left. abandoning their liberalism. i can see why you were taken with his book. our second discussant is michael barone. he can tell you exactly how many votes and from which precinct mayor daley rounded up for kennedy. in addition to being a long-time columnist we are pleased he is now a fellow here at aei. he is the author himself of the ourative political history country

i was fortunate enough to read richard hofstadter's the pier and i'd style of american politics just a few weeks ago and it's great hearing you talk about this. i was thinking that these two men are so brilliant that they couldn't make themselves demonize what the other person was saying. they had to really think about where the other person was coming from and where the other side was coming from so they couldn't go to that level of vituperation that we kind of do now like sean hannity. >> that's exactly right in every single one of their letters not every but every time that the long letter they say let's get to you there sometime and after dinner we can retire just the two of us and i can cure you of all the problems in your thought and you can cure me of all the problems in my thought. they have this impact for each other's intellect. they had this respect for people people -- for each other as people. they did think the other person might be able to teach them something and that was the spirit of engagement that they had. it wasn't about scoring points. it was about figuring out