>> i would like to thank the american public first of all. the american congress and the american government for their sacrifices, blood, and treasure during the last 13 years. the relationship with the united states is a strategic relationship that is based also on the value of democracy. our people have demonstrated that we like democracy and we like our vote to count. i negotiated -- i was one of the three people involved in negotiations of the bilateral security agreement. i find it both national interest and in the united states interest. i will be signing it within days of taking office. the agreement has been reviewed by a consultant, counsel across the board. afghanistan has recommended that it be signed. i find its signing in our interest and i hope we can demonstrate that president obama's decision to scale down the number of american troops very significantly within 2.5 years can be matched by a major program of reform of our security institution, of our legal system, our system of governance, and our economy so we can demonstrate b

public is somehow inherently. incapable of grasping these ideas or handling the truth the idea is that most of the american public is dependent on the media content of five or six major corporations depending on how you how you identify those entities and what they're fed is very poor so it would be like criticizing me for being a slow runner when you feed me a diet of nothing but junk food you know i don't not getting the nourishment i need in order to be the strong capable person that i am and i think that's the situation with the american public you guys are the definition of grassroots organization bottom up you and compass so many different colleges to get these stories generated every year and of course you're doing things on a daily basis as well where do you see the corporate media structure in ten years and how can people get involved with such an amazing project that you guys are focused on part of what we try to do it project since it is say yes there is a lot more it can be overwhelming to process what is there but here are these validated independent news stories that have been researched and vetted a

is problematic because this is top down manage news the zine to shape public opinion by narrowing the scope of perspective and of course the american public can't stand up to the fact that we're given over three billion dollars a year to israel because if we did. cause some changes there you want to but if the public i mean i think it's something to be very clear and projects inside our stances not that the american public is somehow inherently. incapable of grasping these ideas or handling the truth the idea is that most of the american public is dependent on the media content of five or six major corporations depending on how you how you identify those entities and what they're fed is very poor so it would be criticizing me for being a slow runner when you feed me a diet of nothing but junk food you know i don't i'm not getting the nourishment i need in order to be the strong capable person that i am and i think that's the situation with the american public you guys are the definition of grassroots your ability organization from the bottom up you and compass so many different colleges to get these stories generated every year and

and the director of national intelligence have maintained to the american public and to congress that they couldn't count how many americans were being swept up in this program yet somehow the washington post managed to do a pretty good estimate based on documents from the whistleblower so i think it really demonstrates the need for aggressive investigative journalism and whistleblowers because without them we would still be being fed this line of. you know that well yeah that too but this line of we can't tell you how many americans are being swept up here when in fact it seems that you can at least do an estimate i mean the washington post an estimate based on a representative sample. it's a quantum quantitative number that you can arrive at when it comes to minimisation the n.s.a. and senior officials and surveillance state apologists have really relied on these minimisation procedures to protect the country but you know that's not the way the law is going and it's not the way the supreme court is going in another context just as robert said founders did not fight a revolution to g

there is no question the american public opinion had turned against the war. but in the military, which was abashed by what had happened, a myth grew up that it was the journalists who had sabotaged the american war effort in vietnam, starting with these three. and david halberstam became the special villain in that rogues gallery to the american military. guys who had undermined the war effort by telling bad things about what was going on. another view that arose was the influence of television was very hard on the war effort. if you showed the american people pictures of battle, they would not be able to stomach it. people said, what if we had had movie cameras at the battle of the bulge in world war ii or iwo jima? there, too, the american public would have lost the will to fight. the thing is, when historians have gone back and looked at the actual coverage of vietnam in the newspapers and on the television networks, what they found was, there was very little gory coverage on tv. and even in the newspapers, most reporters covering the game story, the how ar

homeland security held a hearing today on capitol hill to discuss the continuing threats facing the american public after nine eleven this hearing is almost ten years to the day after the nine eleven commission released its report with recommendations for protecting the american public to a former members of that committee testify today former new jersey governor thomas kean and former deputy attorney general jamie gorelick call for major reforms to the department of homeland security there are ninety two committees with jurisdiction over the department of homeland security that is dysfunctional and you merging reporting to ninety different people you get nothing done. gets nothing done it's partly because of this congress is going to reform itself both the congress members and the witnesses pointed to this overabundance of oversight as a major threat to america's ability to identify and thwart potential terrorist threats using a chart to display the dysfunction throughout the hearing however al qaeda and the ongoing war in afghanistan as well as isis threats in iraq were only briefly mentioned ins

the american people. basting in the adulation of the american public. this is not your lifelong guarantee. this could ebb and flow. have managed to criticize the war and not criticize the warrior. i'm curious -- the coverage of the war in iraq and afghanistan. this is the first war since world war ii since we rotated national guard units. this brings back home to hometown america. like the civil war where the regiments came from particular areas. that resonates back. the state of louisiana -- there were hurricane katrina strikes in new orleans. which makes -- that story which had nothing to do with the war in iraq. those who were supposed to come to our assistance were serving the nation. >> one footnote. one wefirst iraq war, went to kuwait, the pentagon was clear about not having any embeds. they had their pools. there were some supporters -- reporters who were called unilateral who went. and the troops allowed them to embed. that made me feel so good that this tradition lives. even though the pentagon did not want it, the american troops allowed it. so there was reporting even when it wa

why do you think 70 years later this date still resonates with the american public? >> well, first of all, i'm glad that it does. i think it's important to remember significant moments in american and even world history and particularly this one where the world changed so dramatically as a result of the sacrifice of those who invaded northern france in 1944. and i think the 70th is particularly moving. it's a lifetime. i mean, if you consider the biblical injunction that a man has three score years and ten,

he is, as you know, among the american public, a controversial figure, and among members of the u.s. government who have dealt with him. there have been consistent allegations of corruption. he would not sign a security agreement. so what is it that you think is hamid karzai's legacy? >> first of all, president karzai's elder brother endorsed abdullah, campaigned for him, and very actively engaged with him. the karzai family endorsed different candidates as individuals. i've not had support from the president. we've maintained cordial relationships, but dr. abdullah, thanks to the legacy of the very large political party... is a major presence in government, ministries, governorships, police posts, et cetera. i have no one in the government. i have not appointed. so i have not had backing from the government. the president-- president karzai took power in a very difficult time and his legacy will be both a person who has managed to maintain an umbrella under which various afghans with very different outlooks and backgrounds and persuasions have managed to cohabit, and also a legacy w

proficiency rescission of the capabilities with unable to develop high level authorities tell the american public that there have been no civilian casualties. this is what we do we kill people and break things. we can see something as simple as people playing soccer games you can see individual players and you can see the ball. i can only see his facial expression you can see his mouth open and crying out. maybe he cursed us or maybe he asked.

homeland security holds a hearing today on capitol hill to discuss the continuing threats facing the american public after nine eleven this hearing is almost ten years to the day after the nine eleven commission released its report with recommendations for protecting the american public to a former members of that committee testified today former new jersey governor thomas kean and former deputy attorney general jamie gorelick called for major reforms to the department of homeland security there are ninety two communities with jurisdiction over the border to homeland security. the national weather service in mount holly new jersey has issued a severe thunderstorm warning for northeastern bucks county in eastern pennsylvania west central bucks county in southeast pennsylvania lehigh county in eastern pennsylvania northwestern montgomery county and southeast pennsylvania south central north hampton county and eastern pennsylvania until six fifteen pm at five sixteen pm national weather service doppler radar indicated a severe thunderstorm the storm was new in huntsville moving east at twenty miles per

the american people. this was back in the 1960's and 1970's. young soldiers basking in the adulation of the american public, and not assume this is your lifelong guarantee. this could ebb and flow. we have managed to criticize the war and not criticize the warrior. >> one of the things that may have affected it -- the coverage of the war in iraq and afghanistan. this is the first war since world war ii in which we activated the national guard and we rotated national guard units. this brings back home to hometown america. not unlike the civil war where the regiments came from particular areas. it resonates back in the hometown newspaper. the state of louisiana -- there were hurricane katrina strikes in new orleans. the louisiana national guard is absent. that story which had nothing to do with the war in iraq. it is somewhat more poignant, because those who were supposed to come to our assistance were serving the nation. -- the nation abroad. >> one footnote. in the first iraq war, one we went to kuwait, the pentagon was very strict about not having any embeds. they had their pools. they managed it. you com

it's our way to show the american public the sort of materials we have here, so you can understand army history, whether you're a soldier and a veteran or someone who has never had family or been in the army themselves. we start the timeline for this exhibit with the spanish-american war because that's when our collections have the very first recorded audio oral histories of soldiers who actually experienced the war itself. of course the spanish american war we have the title, the great adventure, because the army was not ready to go to war at this period of time, when the u.s.s. maine exploded in havana harbor and cubans rebelled against the span ir, everything came to a head and we declared war on spain. spain declared war on us and the war started in earnest in a lot of soldiers enlisted all at once. we didn't have any sort of underlying setup, any sort of logistics ready to go to supply all these soldiers. so between not being able to ply the soldiers to begin with but going to war any way and seeing the consequences of the spanish american war afterwards, kind of foreshadowed the a

these practices put the health of the american public address. it is sloppy and inexcusable. i thank you for testifying today. i question if the corrective measures you have announced will solve the problem, and i look forward to the testimony. taking personal actions will not address problems that appear to be systemic. toneeds tod -- cdc needs ensure that procedures are followed. you said you were distressed by the delay in notification over shipment. i want to know if you have reason to believe workers may be afraid to report incidents. cdc will not solve human errors unless it gets as much information as possible. since 2007, there have been 17 reports indicating a worker was potentially exposed to an agent or toxin. as far as we are aware, no one has become sick from improper handling, but 'sthese nts will continue. sooner or later, someone will get very sick or die. the risks require failsafe mechanisms and redundancy similar to those used in contexts such as handling weapons. the subcommittee will review the oversight of laboratories and explore the possibility of an in

that i have, really, is that we didn't have a better understanding to be able to present to the american public about the problem. i truly believe that that could have and should have been done through the senate judiciaryveh told the truth. there are probably people with whom it will never be settled. and i can understand that, and i can actually live with the fact that people are not certain. but what i don't want to live with is the idea that the issue of sexual harassment has gone away and that that is settled and it's no longer an issue. >> was it worth it? >> it is becoming increasingly worth it, but only because i work at making it worth it. it would not have been worth it if i had gone back and just settled, if you will, for allowing the issue to just hang out there with no information and with no public understanding. it's worth it only if i'm able to keep talking and speaking and talking about women's experiences and now men's experiences as well. it's only worth it if we can

that is what a lot of the american public wants. they have entertainment tonight after the nightly news. >> i think -- i have worked in cable news and msnbc so i have covered those stories. sometimes those stories make it onto nightly news but not as often. i think that part of it is how -- the important stories to tell. but relative to world events, how important are they? there is in this country and appetite for sensational stories hence o.j. simpson story and michael jackson and others like it. i will tell you sort of the same answer i said before which is those of us in television fight every day the battles to get the stories we think are most important. and generally, the stories you just described are at the bottom of the list. at the top of the list are often stories that are not as sexy, do not get as much attention. but in many of us think are more important. that is a battle we fight every day. we want people to watch our broadcast. i think it is what you see on nbc nightly news and it has a great reputation. and i know t

huston didn't make the movie because he wants to pull one over on the american public but it was the only way to convey the realities of ground combat and ground troops advancing which is something that had not been successfully shown in an american documentary before. so even though what you're watching isn't real what huston is going for in the movie is, in fact, a kind of realism. it turned out to be a kind of realism that wasinflue influential on many filmmakers off the war in terms of creating understanding of thousand shoot battle footage that looks real. >> thanks for that explanation. here is that film by director huston, the battle of san pietro. >> in 1943 it was one of our strategic aims to draw as many germans away from the front and contain them on the italian peninsula while liberating as many as italy as possible by the means of our disposal. operations in italy had to be conducted on an extremely limited scale. thus, it came about during the winter months, the number of alley dif iings visions in ital greatly reduced yet they succeeded in withholding a very large numbe

these practices put the health of the american public address. it is sloppy and inexcusable. dr. frieden, i thank you for testifying today. i question if the corrective measures you have announced will solve the problem, and i look forward to the testimony. taking personal actions will not address problems that appear to be systemic. cdc needs to ensure that procedures are followed. you said you were distressed by the delay in notification over shipment. i want to know if you have reason to believe workers may be afraid to report incidents. cdc will not solve human errors unless it gets as much information as possible. since 2007, there have been 17 reports indicating a worker was potentially exposed to an agent or toxin. as far as we are aware, no one at cdc has become sick from improper handling, but 'these near miss events will continue. sooner or later, someone will get very sick or die. the risks require failsafe mechanisms and redundancy similar to those used in contexts such as handling weapons. the subcommittee will review the oversight of laboratories and explore the poss

>> erin, the biggest supporter and the best tool to find people is the american public, the canadianc, the mexican public. you know, we caught guys on the fbi's ten most wanted for 20 years. i caught 17 guys off the fbi's most wanted. the medium of television, the great reach of cnn and the public that are fans of mine, i think we're going to catch this guy and bring him to justice. >> and let me ask you, john, about, you know, one of the cases our viewers are been hearing about, and it's captured people's emotions and heart strings because i believe the numbers are something like 40 children die a year because they are left in their car seats in hot cars, and these are all accidents and now there is this case in georgia where the father is now facing murder charges for leaving his son in a hot car. what do you make of that? >> i've been following that case and this is only my opinion, not cnn's opinion. i can't not look at this guy and say, how could you possibly not know that your son was in the back of that car the many times he came to the car. i just don't buy it. i have a brand

we did not set ourselves upon the american public. where did we set ourselves upon the american public? >> you were calling for more violence. you were riling people up. kathy wilkerson is talking about if there was some decision to get more peaceful, it was not communicated to the troops. you were the leadership. >> no, riling up -- the people who riled up the response that they got over the five years in the early 1970s was the government itself riling us up. >> it wasn't bill ayers? >> no, i absolutely thought we should do more. we should be more effective. >> and that meant more violence. >> it didn't always mean more violence. >> but it did sometimes. >> no. you're using violence in a con flated way. >> you want these 20-year-olds to understand the nuance principles of militancy, i didn't mean -- i want to bomb property but i don't want to kill people and i can trust all these people to follow my edicts. >> throughout the left at that time the catholic left, the -- people were destroying property again and again and again. >> once

you know they got a lot of heat from the american public saying you know why did you just hand this over to the government why are you just kind of a you know swinging wiser doorway wide open to them well now they can kind of say well we can share with you you know every time the government comes for to us we're going to court requests which is a very important thing for them very very well the trust issue. was referring to there. so are there any other additional protections that we have uncovered or you know i mean with the bill is it just kind of do we just received it today so people or you know kind of combing over it you know as much as they can and you know i think it's i think it's important just to know that like you know what is the first step you know this bill is a first it doesn't quite cover everything that we wanted but at least it's a glimpse of much media than the than the house bill that we've seen earlier and so far the main tension surrounding it as a reform have been within the different committees not necessarily. you know aligned along party lines that's not really

we did not set ourselves upon the american public. where did we set ourselves on the american public? >> you were calling for more violence, kathy wilkerson talking about if there is a decision to get more peaceful waits not communicated to the troops you were the leadership. >> no. riling people, people that riled up response they got over the five years was the government itself riling us up through genocidal murder. i thought we should be more effective. >> it did sometimes >> you're using violence in a inflated way. you want these 20-year-olds to under your nuanced principles? i want to bomb property but i don't want to kill people and i trust people to follow my edicts? >> people were destroying property. again and again and again. and we should have destroyed more property. >> you, other people back then, we hold them accountable. today i have you at the table. >> i understand, i'm saying we should have done more to stop that genocidal war, including destroys more property. absolutely. >> your argument in response to my questions

how will this play out with the american public and who will they blame? er king of new york has his finger pointed in one direction, southward, to ted cruz. he told the washington post this morning, before republicans pulled the vote, quote, the obama white house should put ted cruz on the payroll. we have a chance to pass a good bill, not a perfect bill. boehner is working hard to get to 218 votes and yet there is ted cruz telling us to do nothing. if he wants to come over and run for speaker, that's fine, but otherwise he should stay over there in the senate. i love peter king. sometimes. steve mcmahon is a democratic strategist, and john is a republican strategist. this is set up politically for obvious reasons. john, it looks to me like the president has found a message. a harry truman message, which is i'm not running against the right. i'm running against nothing. these guys' whole strategy is freeze the ball, do nothing until the election is over. turn that into they're a lazy bunch of no-good people not out to help the people. you heard congressman

let's actually demonstrate to the american public that we can move forward on things that are literally no-brainers, things that absolutely make sense. and, you know what? those of us who support the keystone pipeline, we'll find out. we'll find out if we can pass it. think about this: we have a bill here that mangeds -- that mandates that we approve that little bit of crossing into the united states of america, which is the only way the federal government really gets involved in it is because it's coming from a foreign country, approves that. maybe we win, maybe we lose. but we know where we're at because the administration has taken six years in a time period that it took us longer to evaluate the keystone pipeline than it took us to fight world war ii. there is something dramatically wrong with that. and so that frustration builds up. we know we need to move the keystone pipeline. we need to have a strong vote here. let's take that vote. let's take the vote on shaheen-portman. it is a critical piece of legislation, well thought out, comes right out of committee where lots of amendmen

kindly, i think the american public is disappointed and somewhat disgusted with the whole proposition. if asked to serve put together a commission to craft a bipartisan response? obviously, the president meeting with governor rick perry of texas tomorrow. >> in a heartbeat. just a humanitarian problem. it has social applications, but the rest of the world takes a look at this, which we have seen for years to be a dynamic democracy. the democracy and system of governance that is based on the principle. even the constitution is a compromise. you set up points of view. at the end of the day, in order to solve a problem, you need to sit down and find common ground. neither side will initially get what they seek. i do believe there is an answer. matter of coming up with an answer. it is about a will. if both sides are going to use it for political leverage rather than addressing the problem in a meaningful way, perhaps even incrementally, we will continue to have the debate for the next 10 years. it is an enormous disappointment, because i think it is not a matter of being able to come up

right now where his poll numbers are, where the congress is, where the american public are don't seem to bode well. i think he needs to make a reassessment and figure out what is the best thing he can do to get things done with other people. because simply doing things by fiat is potentially dangerous. he can have things undone by the supreme court in a matter of -- well, maybe in the matter of the next session. we saw them restrict his power on recess appointments just recently. >> yeah, i want to get to some of your reporting. our viewers always see you in front of the white house doing your work, but all your readers are often in front of bloomberg terminals and at their trading desks. hobby lobby, as you wrote, was a big decision for them because it expands corporate rights. you point out this is not small potatoes and business. they have 600 stores, over $3 billion in revenue. if they can do it, so can potentially others. given your contacts on the street, what are you finding in corporate america in reaction to this decision? >> well, corporate america generally speaking is happ

that's what the american public feels, even though they have all these rules that they force us to -- the procedural gimmicks that we have to work our way through. there's no other way to look at what republicans are doing. this is obstruction for obstruction's sake. the republican leader is desperate to keep this emergency brake on, hoping that by slowing down every senate process imaginable, he can run the remaining six months out and damage almost. the harm that this does to our country i guess is not in their calculation. he's playing a very dangerous political game at the expense of this great country, and of course the american taxpayer. the senate currently has a backlog of 130 -- backlog of 130 nominations that have been languishing on the senate calendar for an average of 281 days. 281 days. and it's particularly outrage arks mr. president, that they're stopping us from confirming noncontroversial career foreign service officers and ambassadors. what does this mean, a career foreign service officer? the presiding officer has been in government a number of years, been governor

vast majority of information about nuclear physics, and fission, and put that out there before the american public. scientists want to do this because they want to pursue unfettered research. veryew dealers are efficient in doing this because they want to get the blessings of american industry and advancement and technology out before not only the american public, but the world. , aprofessor krieger noted group of conservatives and some in the military are more conservative about this and worried about secrets getting out. they are generally putting brakes on the amount of information that can be declassified. this is going to create this tension is really embodied in 1946 act. you can see this. the section of that act that actually deals with what becomes known as restricted data, confidential information. initially, it was entitled dissemination of information. it was later changed to control of information. that becomes the title. you basically see that the people who want to put restrictions on the amount of information that can be made public -- there is language that supports both control an

>> i don't know that the american public is looking at foreign policy. even right now they're thinking about the presidential elections. their number one concern still is the economy, and i think that's the bigger problem for hillary clinton right now is she's going to have to come in the wake of the obama presidency, his approval ratings obviously quite weak, his handling of the economy quite weak and there's no sign that the economy is going to suddenly catch fire by the time we hit 2015. that is going to be a bigger weight on her than what's happening overseas. >> can you imagine the 2016 ad real quick with her pushing the russian reset button? >> but i think elizabeth warren is a real issue here. she was greeted as such a celebrity at this conference this past -- >> grassroots nation getting huge -- >> she was all but a candidate. she can say what she wants about not running, but if there were a slip or if there were any reason where hillary clinton has to take a step back and if the foreign policy becomes an issue, which she has to own part of -- >>

the american public. that event used by the foreign policy team as an excuse for military weakness, lack of grand strategy and indifference too human rights and democratization issues. as hitler's triumphs showed, we are more likely to be forced into war by events spiralling out of control than by exerting influence in far off lands. disengagement and detatchment allows the escalation of atrocities, weapons programs and hostilities. moreover, as cold war policies show, involvement need not mean military intervention and the united states has multiple means to influence events short of war. nazi germany's concentration camps and world war ii taught us that we should never again be strategically unprepared militarily weak or morally detached. the refrain never again was born out of reaction to hitler's concentration camps and nazi germany's brutal subjew gas station of foreign people through war. it stated the importance of focusing on the suffering and repression of others, not just ourselves. it warned of

the families led the way, but they captured the attention of the american public. the politicians, incidentally, that led the city were not initially enthusiastic about us. it was only after the people became enthusiastic about us that the politicians began to change. >> another new dynamic in our democracy. >> one more thing. the staff. i mean, we had a4a short time to hire a lot of good people. but a lot of good people wanted to work for us because of the tragedy. and lee and i had one commonality. we didn't you whether somebody was republican or democrat. we never asked that question, but we did not somebody could been a heavy partisan for either republicans or democrats. and so we went through resumes pretty carefully, and say no partisan, we didn't care. but if you have been very active, very active in campaigns in very active for one party or another, then we didn't want you because we didn't want that kind of partisanship seeking into our collaborations. >> i don't think we ever ask anybody their political affiliation. >> we didn't speak we have actually supe

americans after the 1973 oil embargo . and the film "china syndrome" in spheres. >> can you not promote a technology that produces the most toxic substance on earth and also protect the public. >> polls show that more than half of americans oppose increasing nuclear energy and nearly 75% don't think government should help build new plants. but now a growing and unlikely movement thinks the american public is wrong. michael is a former antinuclear activist whot no longer sounding -- who is no longer sounding the alarm. we caught up with him. >> i associated nuclear plants with nuclear weapons and we just thought it was something sinister. something to be feared. >> reporter: but a more sinister threat, catastrophic climate change caused him to reconsider. >> the thing that really snaps out of it is to figure out how do you power a world of 7 billion people without also dealing with climate change? >> he doesn't believe renewables are up to the task. >> you got to look for ways to produce large quantities of energy in smaller amounts of space. with a smaller footprint. so that's where i kind of came back to nuclear a little bit grudgingly at first a few years ago. >> shellenb

right now we're arguing about a lot of things that are not, in my opinion, core to where the american public'soncerns. the american public concern is middle in come americans, low in come aren't rising, seeing opportunities, that's what we have to focus on. >> one of the things the president's leadership, the question of iran and nuclear weapons, even if there is a deal, kim, there's going to be a tough sell to congress to say we think we've got a deal with iran, we should ease up on sanctions. it doesn't seem like either party is willing to let the president get that deal. >> this has been a good example of bipartisanship in congress, both in the senate and house. democrats and republicans, they don't want to go back for it. they want tougher sanctions. >> did it resonate at home, the idea of the threat from iran and nuclear weapon? >> absolutely. anyone on the globe thinks we don't need more nuclear states in general, and we certainly don't need this state which has shown itself to be responsible. the interview you had earlier today shows how irrational the thinking is. >> do you believe, yo

>> neil, there's been a conjob perpetrated on the american public for the last five, six years and the idea that wall street caused the collapse, greedy profit seeking financiers and unregulated speculators that caused the collapse. obama made a video saying just that. in reality, all elements of the financial system that failed were regulate and the ones that failed the most were regulated the most. community reinvestment act. free markets don't fail. we didn't have a free market and caused businesses to fail and will continue to cause fail nurse the years to come. neil: i've been around long enough that i can distinctly remember congresses and presidents and both parties saying you're not lending enough. we've got a housing boom here potentially why, don't you get with the program and start lending more. loosen standards to get more people in on the fun, this was the emergence of no doc loans, people with $50,000 incomes could buy million-dollar homes. they bear responsibility, the politicians bear responsibility. yet they're the ones handing out the punishments. i'm not saying that