the idea of the quality. not what i call french equality which is the idea that he quality of income which they usually think of but what they call scottish he quality, he quality of human dignity, socially and before the law, those of course were raised in prestige by the success of this formula. in england and holland it all begins in holland in the united states. you see this great success and that increases the prestige of market tested betterments as they call it. i would say to ridley to look at the timing. let's look at the timing. the increase in status of economic behavior and bourgeois activity and innovation happens before substantial economic success, well before. around 1700. 100 years before, around 1600 you have this flowering of dutch commercial society. 100 years or later, dutch central bank, and dutch national debt, i am surprised they didn't adopt the dutch language. became so very dutch by 1700. the real path comes not so much in the classic industrial revolution of the 18th century but th

some the people clave from ideas so i guess it is a reason to about 1980 which is nice. most thinkers or intellectuals were materialists. and even conservative people. and certainly the marxist were an adages part of the life with of the suspicion to say you claim your dominated the you have stockinette general motors corporation but my friend wayne booth calls the attribution and motive is some that you are motivated by a selfish interest. economists are special like journalist and professional cynics and motivated to think of materials prices but then they tend to say the great economist are other grey tea economist and the trouble is what the english professors call because these are professors and journalists to say it is are pointless. interest is all that matters. and you can see there is a lunacy about that. >>. >> there is a third. >> i have a story about that. then around since 1969 to i was in in the coffee room of milton friedman who often played tennis in milton was very short window of the comic scenes of academic life. >> did one haven't advantage over the o

the founders. professor thomas with his national university? >> it is an idea of the number of leading founders of franklin in jefferson and the idea was the new constitutional order of which we take for granted in our day was in the process to be built and they turn to education as the central way to foster the political culture and education is necessary. >> what would that look like? like? >> what is unique at the time is if we go back to centuries what does that look like in the day? that is not what they look like by and large parochial sectarian institutions with the basis of the curriculum to have a mismatch between the educational institutions and prior to the constitutional convention said that they are remnants of a theocratic political order and it was one idea that was floated to alter education. >>. >> host: dell we have several national universities? >> we do. is a large form i started to count the number of times that people said don't we already have a national university? and then they say harvard but there are institutions that our national in

idea. not here but in europe that with the right wing idea. it migrated into the left in america through yes, uganda, postmodernism. these philosophers in france whose followers came to america most in the 1970s, particularly at yale university come and develop a foundations of all the critical theory that today is the defining concept of the left. went to decide is a postmodernism come from court who were the forefathers of for these people? they were schopenhauer, nietzsche and these guys in 19th century europe were radical individualists. they believed in the hero, heroic individual. they believed any kind of pure subjectivity, why there's exercise of the will in human history. but they also are the ones who influenced these postmodern philosophers that i describe. you can look at the intellectual history, it is a very interesting idea. the history of ideas, something migrated from that counter enlightenment into what is today supposed to be the very expression of delight with which is the radical left. it's very interesting to me. why is th

is a book called the founders and the idea of national university. here's the cover pair professor thomas, was a national university? >> guest: will come in the national university was an idea put forward by a number of leading founders. many of the name she think of, george washington, james madison, benjamin franklin, thomas jefferson and the idea really in chart was that the new constitutional order created, which we take for granted in our day was really in the process of being built and they turned to education as one central way of trying to foster in further the kind of political culture, the kind of education they thought was necessary to sustain that constitutional order. >> host: what would it look like? what we teach? >> guest: what's really unique about the idea of a national university at the time is that, i mean, first week it goes back two centuries and think what the dark educationalists institutions look like and today what we think are now institutional education, harvard, yale, princeton, that is not what they looked like at the tim

i'm talking about taking the ideas of the founding, the idea that there was something called individual rights, there was a sense of universal justice, it was understood by natural law before or by religion, and the constitution was formed in order to protect those rights. whether you're liberal or conservative. that's an idea that every american should rally around. that is not what is taught in american universities. not at all. >> thank you, terry miller with the heritage foundation, congratulations on a fantastic book. it seems to me one of the points of vulnerability for the other side or for the ill liberal liberals is might be the place for the radical individualism intersects within the group think. i wonder if you can elaborate a little bit on how that happened. >> i've been asked, i've been doing radio interviews and i get what we do next, and how do we argue this point. a slave to answers. one they're overreaching. they're going to far, these, these excesses are just offensive to most americans. i'm talking about universities, using subpoenas by attorney generals to go after

eric: roosevelt uses the idea of antifascist as an alliance in the war. it carries over into the late 1930's and they use currency loans and antifascist measures during the time when the united states was not yet a belligerent. vigorouslyegan to aid britain and used currency devices to send aid to the brits in 1941. it was done with american aid. the american administration ase and it was-le part of the deal they would sign onto a currency program, which would be an international agent for peacetime. >> roosevelt is concerned about the global economy and the american economy. eric: he is concerned about andnging an economy avoiding fascism. he believes that depression gives rise to fascism and that movements would rise in the united states. of ating recovery prosperous economy around the world would be antifascist, as well as recovering. >> if world war ii had not come along, with the depression have lasted longer? eric: i think it is tablets at the mobilization for war and spending money the u.s. congress would not have approved of in peace time, it is w

and, taking the ideas seriously. so, i just think that it is important to realize what is happening to american liberalism. >> question here in the back. >> thank you. i think we know as students of modern history that revolutions devour their children. i would rather not wait that long. i would like to know, if you can give some prescription, how we fight this battle of ideas? we're merely voters, parents,onw employers. we participate in a social contract that others no longer recognize. how do we fight back? >> simple question. >> no, it is not a simple question. i'm, at my age i'm thinking there as you ask the question do i have 30 more years to do this and it may take that long. the short answer, take ideas seriously. educate yourselves and take the culture seriously and take what is happens in the universe seriously. we conservatives understandably so, have a tendency to think wee can focus on politics and somehow that will be our is vision and that which must do that i'm not suggesting we don't or can't do that.

i believed in the idea. the team believed in the idea. wewe stuck with it and figured out a way to work through the issues that were holding us back and eventually broke through. i think that mindset, some of the stories and lessons will be helpful, and it is not just the engineers and entrepreneurs. everybody needs to think about the future and more optimistic way and think about how they can think about their own job in the world where the definition of work has changed. a very big percentage of people are in the freelance economy and working for companies the same day. the nature of work has changed. there are positives and negatives, but that will continue to develop. how do you position yourself in hockey to say wayne gretzky was great because in focus on where the puck was aware would is going. maybe they can position themselves in theirand their career and prepare their family for the future that will unfold. >> close with your best piece of advice. one of the things that comes across in this book is thinking about entrepreneurs dif

that is the idea of equality. now what i called french equality which was the idea of equality of income which is usually what we think of.eq but when a call for scottish equality, namely equality of human dignity. socially and before the law. those of course were raised in prestige by the success of this formula. you see it in scotland itself for example in england, andng hollands to begin with, it all begins in holland than the united states, australia and so forth. and you see this great success. of of course back then it increases the prestige of market tested, betterments as they call it. it. but i would say to ridley that you have to look at the timing. and the comparisons. but let's look at the timing. the increase in status of economic behavior and bourgeois activity and innovation happens before the financial economic success. well before. well actually they say it starts in holland. so 100 years before around 1600 you have the dutch commercialhee society about a hundred years later the english adopted a

put that together with the idea of independence. peter, rightly, i think, discusses a lot of factors which impinge on the tenets of the fed ut to the extent the fed has meaningful independence combined with its power and the riskyness of its judgments and its actions, the bigger and institutional puzzle it represents and the more necessary is peter's second book, which he's working on. in the famous conclusion of john maynard cain's general theory, it tells us that it is ideas which are dangerous for good or evil. i think this is especially true of the ideas which come to dom nate the minds of central bankers. this is something we can't focus too much on. which ideas are dominating the minds of central bankers and how are those ideas move something of course, the most important minds are those who lead the fed, and this is why, i think peter's examination of the shifting ideas that have led the minds to have federal reserve is absolutely key. he tells us in the beginning to think that the fed would create fiat money was outrageous. w

and the trouble is both of them can see that the economic inequality is a bad idea and the problem is if it is a bad idea, then we are in trouble because economic freedom is immoral. we talked about this free-market that leads to nothing resembling economic inequality. it leads to progress for everybody but different progress. so we have a lot of work to do. we have to challenge their idea into their narrative and present the counter idea and that is what we do in the book. >> host: yes. certainly i very much enjoyed reading it and it's worth everybody picking up and adding it to the state. what seems to concern many americans isn't inequality per se. but we talk about mobility and peoplpeople that start off low y just want to get better off. that seems to be more important than economic inequality. what do you say about that? >> guest: a lot of our concerns when it comes to the concern isn't that gap. it's our people able to ris rise binaries are they able to rise by their own efforts even if they start out without a lot of wealth or all things they were on the scale there's a couple

are we going to rely on the idea of freedom of expression. w do we define what i see in the codes of conduct assort of peace and respect for the environment, thinking about the beginning of this, how do we protect the environment from these spaces and are we engaged sometimes in the idea of public deficit model of public participation. who is the observer and who is the student and who is the teacher, and lastly, i really wanting to back in the idea of interrogating equity and access -- is this the equivalent of trickle down and what values are being mechanized if we bring biohacking to market. so this is our motto, responsible uses of human genetic technologies and thank you so much. [applause] >> next up tito jankoswsky. i'm going take this one off. thank you. tito: thanks, elliot, that was really great. lots of nods from me. hi, everybody. let's see. biocurious, a hacker space for biotech. when we started five years ago, our goal was to get more people doing science stuff. we started labs in our garages and our apartments and then we got a

. >> the idea of an empty inspiresment candidate veterans. -- the idea of an

the idea that he went a little crazy, you have to be crazy to take this on. he was approached earlier about the job when they chose his predecessor but i think that he really the idea to take this on appealed to him as a guy that's got stuff done. >> host: what did you think when you met him? >> guest: the first time i met him, i was immediately struck by what a people person he was if my idea was someone reserve and kind of arrogant and have some level of arrogant account in the opposite he was funny. he wanted his story told obviously in the fact he takes my wife as the first person to tell it, and he wanted it told honestly. he didn't want the story to seem as just someone who was flawless as a human being or executive but who have tremendous desire to tell the american people and correct the record of their perception of the company. so, i immediately liked him. he was the kind of man you ask any question he didn't think about the answer it was just what you saw is what you got. going back to the charming and handsome you can see all of the charisma. it wa

put that together with the idea of independence. peter, rightly, i think, discusses a lot of factors which impinge on the tenets of the fed but to the extent the fed has meaningful independence combined with its power and the riskiness of its judgments and its actions, the bigger and institutional puzzle it represents and the more necessary is peter's second book, which he's working on. in the famous conclusion of john maynard keynes' general theory, it tells us that it is ideas which are dangerous for good or evil. i think this is especially true of the ideas which come to dom -- dominate the minds of central bankers. this is something we can't focus too much on. which ideas are dominating the minds of central bankers and how are those ideas move -- moving? of course the most important minds are those who lead the fed. and this is why, i think, peter's examination of the shifting ideas that have led the minds of the federal reserve is absolutely key. he tells us in the beginning to think that the fed would create fiat money was outr

i'm against the idea that one person's need is an atomic. limited but this question we often think of ourselves as the one doing the helping and we think i want to people. i was dating somebody starting in front of my eyes. so what i. that's not the issue. you can have anybody want, and historically we've seen that people do. the question is this. hoosiers offense issues of initial. let's say you are sick and can't afford. which you think i'm entitled ano some opposing and i don't care if they're struggling to send their kid to school.me i don't care if they're trying to build their business. i need something as i'm going to march over to my neighbor's house and i'm going to demand that debate from operation. i've asked thousands that question i get to meet one person i've yet to meet one person says that the i would add that we would act is to ask it to understand that if they said no, all right, i'll go out somewhere else. i think that same kind of civilized moral attitude should be reflecting government policy. this isn't about helping peo

have investors got used to the idea in the last couple of days?round toors coming the idea that the fed is about to hike quality in the next couple of months? david: i think they probably are. seen a gradual improvement in the market here but a small increase doesn't hurt the global economy. i would argue that it hurts it. if you look at the futures market, it doesn't seem to be pricing in a fed move but i would be distrustful of the futures market. i think equity investors recognize the federal reserve likely to raise rates in june or july. meanwhile, china is trying to manage its currency. holding it fairly steady against the dollar, dropping it against the basket. if the dollar continues to strengthen, what is its policy going to be? fear of a piece of january when it seems to lose control? i want to add into that question -- we had a wall street journal report saying that they tried to measure the yuan against a basket of currency. how probable is that? david: i think china wants stability. they are trying to move toward more openness and what

think of the trope or the idea of white spreading. this is the image that was very popular in this period of how it was the donning of an age of reason when enlightened men and women were able to discern patterns in nature, to make sense of what the creator had intended and that idea that there is an ultimate intention in the future, that all men would be treated equal, that there would be freedom for all the peoples of the world and here is the key point. he sees his enslaved people as a captive nation. a separate people. even while he lives with his slaves intimately. how do we get to a point in which those nations could be separated so that enslaved people could be free people and independent people? here is the key thing and it points to a fundamental problem with what we call democracy and republican government, and that is majority rules. that is the mother principle of republican government. jefferson's enlightenment, the rest of you, we feel enlightened with these glaring lights but you are cast in the darkness. only when we tu

the idea that somehow he wasn't able to communicate it suggests that the american people were stupid.harlie: there is another idea. the business community, there was a great disconnect. if i hadays to you, not got into politics, i would have gone into business. andrew: most people probably would not create that now. like aks probably more venture capitalist. he would like to do a startup, i secretly wonder, when he leaves think it is possible. disconnecty the between him and business? it includes silicon valley and a lot of sectors of the economy. andrew: early on, he made a political choice which is that he felt he needed to be committed -- critical of the business community. he absolutely did publicly. let's separate the business community from wall street. andrew: correct, but they often get conflated. people say, he hurt their feelings. he laughs about it at one point, croft,ed to steve talked about the hedge fund managers and called them fat cats, and one of their sons came home and said, daddy, are you a fat cat? doot of people say, boo hoo, we need to worry about their feelings

the whole idea he needs somebody who the not a sycophant, anybody who is not a sycophant in the is goingbe bruised and bloodied in the process. we're talking about making the politically correct move now. bringing a woman, a latino, a african american. that is precisely what he's campaigned against. >> yeah but i have nothing against sycophants. [ laughter ] i like to be surrounded by them myself. doesn't work. ben stein, what do you think about the idea that he has got to reach out to a crowd that is very leery of him. that you were saying something interesting on fox business when you were saying it is incumbent on him to sort of work getting them back by being con siltry. >> i never heard anyone who got in trouble by being too humble. or anyone who got in trouble by getting in touch who knew how to get things done. government is not a business. the mention about reneging and paying less on government bonds is such a stunningly terrible idea. somebody should have stopped him from even uttering those words. just crazy. and he's done that with his bondholders for his casinos and other en

the idea that they robbed people. hat transformed this country from a country that was, you know, basically a swamp back water, was totally poor into by 1914 the richest country in the world. it was in large part the actions of people like carnegie and people who really created these new industries, modes of organization and far from robbing people, if you look at the price of steel or the price of oil as rockefeller are getting richer, the cost of what their producing is going down, down, down as they supply a nation with later gasoline, and as they apply a nation with steel. and today in our own time we have seen a real smearing of any businessman who is successful, even steve jobs. within weeks of his death you started hearing people, but he didn't give a lot to charity. >> host: that's true. i read that. >> guest: this is a person who had created company and made millions of thousands of peoples lives better and lift the standards of other companies who started thinking about the user experience at a better level a

still the idea they do want to work is still there. number two, when i travel around the country, i met people that i would ask why they would not move for work because you know at that time north dakota had 0% unemployment or something ridiculous. i would meet people in alabama saying what about moving for work which is something we used to do a lot. i did it growing up. and benefits hold you back from that because it is hard to get off the benefits and go move to another state and you have to reapply. so it is very complicated. as far as blaming the victim, i think that is exactly what we have not doing. we have saying we care deeply about these people and they have just as much right to happiness as we do. why do they have more or less right to the same things we have. i have the right to happiness and they do, too. so to ignore them and say you live in a poor neighborhood too bad for you. phil and i are arguing we care about them and want them to be happy and believe their happiness comes from them working. >> the worst thing, it se

the idea that the fed independence can only be justified in terms of price stability. this is a curious assertion and it's curious because of the history of central bank independence and price stabil y stability. it extends to above the financial crisis in the mid 2000s. and it was amended to give the fed a dual mandate of price stability and low interest rates so when we add that to the mix of regulatory functions or bank supervisory functions it's systemic risk regulation and emergency lending authority. the fed is a multifunction entry and most provocatively the idea that central banking is purely the work of technicrats is also false. not to say the technical training is irrelevant. very far from it. the point is the most interesting and hardest questions are also those where the technical apparatus is exhausted. after technical consensus has broken down there's a gap between that break down and the point at which decisions are required now what feels the gap. you can say they're making them because they're corrupt or stupid but the softer reality and the better re

the idea was to focus on innovation, technology, and renewable energy, especially energy. s happening in los angeles on the whole state is amazing. right now argentina gets 1%, more or less, from their energy from wind and solar, and we are nearly 50% in the next four years from wind and solar. we can bring a high delegation of corporate leaders to develop these partnerships and linkages. brad: tell me more who was with you on this trip. mahet: we had a real mex. we had a woman who was the president of a subsidiary. all kinds of industries. iticulture, technology, and was a really broad section. and for the first time ever, the argentine government is attracting the private sector into government. the chairman of shell. who camee many leaders from the private sector. they are embracing the idea that argentina should focus on -- not just business, but technology and disruptive technology. my understanding is that it has been characterized by great turbulence. is that over? mamet: sure. many companies have been doing business there for a while. many have been there for 100 ye

the previous speaker karen mentioned the idea of using mass media and the media was so different then from now. phil donahue who might be on this program later in the week was just an angel in inviting public interest people onto the show and letting them advertise their products, memberships, newsletters and we had posters back then on food attitudes and nutrition and we would be on a show and sell thousands and thousands of posters and newspaper columnists talking about the issue and saying get this pamphlet for $1.50 or whatever and we would sell thousands and thousands. mccarthy, another speaker in the series wrote a column about one of the things we wrote and we had orders for publication sitting outside our front door. we lived on that sort of thing. a giveaway, little newsletter for nutritionists that are somewhat progressive. after a year we decided we couldn't afford to give it away for free anymore so we started charging and gradually build that into a real powerhouse of a newsletter, the largest circulation newsletter in the country. that has been the basis of our existence

ruth: the way luke works, he has fabulous ideas. d the right place. he will just grab it. we will work with him collaboratively to deliver it. that is exactly what happened with "withdrawn." luke: i feel like i have just learned how to be an artist, i suppose. and i am sort of beginning to open my wings, spread my wings, and get a sense of what i am capable of doing. to create artwork, it does not have to be huge. or large-scale. you can do outrageous innovative artwork on a work as big as your hand. so it is not always about scale , or complexity. , it can be about simple ideas that can change the world. ♪ ♪ ashlee: one of the basic truths of the human condition is that people look to float. and there's no better place to float than here at the dead sea in israel, where large mammals -- where, without any effort at all large mammals can achieve , buoyancy. there is a ritual to doing it the right way.

for kirk, the idea that every generation must in some way promote prudence. this he takes from the ancient virtues, prudence being the first of the great virtues, not the highest, but the first. the way kirk went -- meant prudence is not the way it was thrown around now in common discourse. kirk's idea of prudence hearkens back to an older idea of prudence, that we must always be able to judge good from ill, good from evil. we do not loveif what should be loved, we will never hate what should be hated. he believed that hatred of the right things is very good. we should hate things that should be hated. we should hate tyranny. abuse of.hate the all these things must be hated. this is something god gives us through grace. prudence is the ability to discern good from evil. kirk, who is deeply rooted in the western tradition, takes this all the way back, not just to the greeks, but if we jump forward a bit, he takes us to the ancient anglo-saxons as well. in particular, he's thinking about their use of common law, what we regard as central to our own jurisprudence

i don't think that was the determinant thing but what really made the difference to him was the idea of the rule of law. that's what mattered to him. saw himself as a servant of and the idea and links up exactly with what he criticized the court in happenedy. court's mission to make everything come out right but the court's mission to apply law. >> i want to pick up on that because onele bit of the criticisms of originalism as an enterprise is that it's unknowable, how can we put 91 andes back in 17 figure out what they intended, scarecrow version of originalism or what the original 200ic meaning was as we're years later. and since it's so indeterminate, facade forit's a achieving the agenda i want and cases are pretty dispositive proof that for originalism wasn't a tool he wanted where because it often took him to places he didn't want to go. the notion that there were criminals with lighter sentences or convictions overturned altogether is not what you would expect from a conservative the court like scalia yet that's what blakely and that we lead him to, can't use police investigati

the idea that they robbed people. hat transformed this country from a country that was basically a swamp back water into by 1914 the richest country in the world. it was some large part the actions my people by carnegie and rockefeller. it was the people who created these new industries, the new modes of organization and far from robbing people, if you look at the price of steel or the price of oil as rockefeller and carnegie are getting richer, the cost of what they produce is down, down, down as they supply a nation with kerosene and later gasoline and a nati with steel. today in our runtime, we have seen a real hearing of any businessman who is successful. even steve jobs, who i think is also seen as an artist, so there's a more positive response. within weeks of his death, you started hearing people going to give a lot to charity. >> host: that is true. i remember that. >> guest: this is a person who made millions of people live better, that had really also help lift the standards of other companies have started th

power of the ideas and it really comes from two things. number one, is he standing for for a morale ideal, ideal of economic quality and the second is he has in his side a morale narrative that tells us when you abide by my ideal, you flourish and when you abandon the ideal you flounder. government supposedly fought income inequality and we all did better, what happened in the 70's which is equated with blaming reagan, but starting in the 70's what happened is we abandoned that ideal. the 1% took over, started rigging the game, we moved in a radical free market direction and the result is, you know, they got all the gains and we all stagnated. and so the lesson is supposed to be fight inequality, things are great, abandon inequality, things are bad. >> host: his message does have traction, it's been getting a lot of traction. taxes should go up 80-90%. people cheer, college students vote for him. they feel the bern. >> guest: yeah, i think when yo have morality on your side at least when you appear to have a morale ideal on your side, that'

that was the idea and one of the animating reasons for right to work was the jim crowe south. southern states wanted to protect their very rigid worker where unions couldn't come in and building solidarity between white and african-american working class people. >> host: so you talk about the power of the union then. how did those jobs get lost over time? >> guest: well, that's another story that is really starting to be the center of our political debate right now. you know, we had an era of what's called free trade and we made all of the trade agreement that is we are now, i think, in evidence that it has not been a gain and we lost millions of jobs as a result of these contracts and it hasn't really been a gain for mÉxico either whose, you know, farmers, for example, are now competing with our major big businesses and actually the squashing of small farmers in mÉxico is one of the drivers of immigration to our country. the population that immigrated during the 90's and 2000 came from rural areas because they could not longer sustain a living farming, and so they came to ame

for going to remain the most innovative nation we need everybody's idea and everybody to have a shot at the american dream. not just from investing entrepreneurs who went from stanford and palo alto, are engineers coming out of emma mit , although they do great things they deserve some support, it's also people who are former teachers in new orleans were coming up with software are former farmers who understand what needs to change in farming or doctors at the cleveland clinic or the mayo clinic, those who have ideas on figuring out a better path forward on health. so i'm optimistic that it will be more inclusive, it has to be. >> party your thesis is that it is now the internet of everything. so no matter we've seen the first wave was connecting people the second was kinda social and apps and now it's basically taking every day aspects of our lives in things that we did not think were technology in their superficial orientation and empowering them and changing them that would argue that like the agriculture industry which is not by the way headquartered in northern california it's he

the idea that trump is now going to toady up to ryan, that may backfire. rk: they have had some conversations, and made public comments back and forth that have been friendly, some less so. the reality is paul ryan cares , about policy. trump's position on policy and trade make it very difficult for ryan to say he should be the nominee. i guarantee you, ryan is surrounded by people, including one that will be a guest on the show tonight, that have extreme trump skepticism. john: what is trump going to do? there are big policy items. we have friends in the media and other places important , conservatives that listen to trump and say, if he doesn't change his posture on immigration, his posture on the muslim ban, if he doesn't do something like that, it will be hard for me to support him. i say that is a totally , legitimate position to take. what do they expect trump to do? these are positions that trump built his candidacy on. it is one thing to pivot in a general election towards the middle. it is another thing to repudiate the big headline, the policy pro

of the donor class versus the ideas of the base.is what it's really all about? >> that's the operational part, but it's clearly now working into something much bigger because the donor class is handing in its sword of surrender. there was an article by dan henninger pleading with donald trump to please consult can koch. he was handing in the sword to general lee. i think we're going need to cope with the wreck that is coming and the immensity of the wreck and it's not just a presidential wreck. it's going to be a wreck in the senate, and in a lot of other places and it's a moral and cultural wreck. to cope with this, the people who object to what is happening whether they're donors or weather they're base will need a series of strategic decisions about the key dates ahead on the calendar. there is a key date at the convention. what can be done at the convention to tell america that not all republicans are on board with what is happening? >> how do you do that, david? he's the nominee and he'll write the platform and the platform wil

now put that together with the idea of independence. peter rightly i think discusses a lot of factors which impinge on the independence of the fed. the fed has independence combined with it is power and riskiness of its judgments and its actions, bigger and institutional puzzle it represents and the more necessary as peter's second book which is working on. in the famous conclusion of john maynard keynes general theory he tells us idea are dangerous for good or evil. i think this is espll te with the ideas that come to dominate the minds of central bankers. this is something that we really can't focus too much on. which ideas are dominating the minds of dominant central bankers and how are those ideas moving? and of course the most important minds are those who lead the fed. . . carter glass said nothing could be more ridiculous than to say the fed will create currently. of course, today we are used to the idea that the fed is the leader of the worldwide fiat currency system. in discussing martin, peter has this line, the keeper of the c

the constitution does not apply to the national security agency. that was an interesting idea. the constitution did not apply to a whole agency. i think i know what was in the back of his mind. that the work was meant to be mostly -- it was meant to be foreign. they were meant to be doing things overseas. largely. was, ofnder to him course the constitution applies to the nsa when you are doing things that affect americans and affect americans within america. >> with respect to domestic communications, is there a statute that prohibits your interception thereof or is it really a matter of internal executive branch directives? they understanding is that national security council director defines our activities to foreign communications. adopted a definition for foreign to medication for the communications act of 1934. i think that is -- you areelieve consistent with the statutes but there are no sexy separate the major interception domestic medications? the importancem of the secret security agency? how to make sure they don't go beyond their writ, and how to ensure that the right

the idea that people need to find out what the problem is.sgguy is a problematic guy. >> okay. there's so much to talk about here. let me take it to this. this question of the bushes, the two presidents bush not saying they will stay out of it, that seems like an extraordinarily big deal. >> it's a huge deal. >> to be clear, george herbert walker bush has been involved in every presidential election since he was president. endorsed. gone to conventions. >> this is donald trump's problem. he is fractured the party. it's his job to figure out how he will win over these people. >> have you talked to anyone in trump world? have they asked you for your advice? >> i'm not going to comment on that. >> how is paul? >> paul is fine and he always gets what he wants. if he puts together a good ground game, i'm confident trump will win. some thinks trump politics, that would be family. when it comes to the bush's they're famous for their affections for each other. if someone said of your son or brother what donald said about jeb, you'd have the same reac

i think he's got the right idea. his appeal to people about regulations and being overregulated, people feel that. >> reporter: a lot of big promises saying we are overregulated and by taking away the regulations, we as a country will create more jobs or he will be able to do that. but also promising clean air, clean water and working with environmentalists, conservationists. without any regulations, how do you work with conservationists and ensure that you still have clean air, clean water, or is this a bit of a pipe dream? >> i don't think he said we're not going to have any regulations. he said we're going to try to get regulations that will free people, free businesses to do the right thing. his real strength -- he didn't mention it in the speech -- he's a deal makeren he'll go to congress, enough of this partisan politics, let's sit down, cut deals and get the country moving. i believe when he does that, when he gets there, it's going to unleash all of the money. i believe you and your listeners know, viewers kno

so my question is also on the topic of the idea of colleges being a place where the market place of ideas is particularly important. and where we do need to have a lot of discussion. but my question is whether, for all of the panelists, i guess, whether all of you necessarily should be protected, particularly in terms of hate speech, maybe perhaps that is kind of speech that isn't worthy of first amendment protection to begin with. but i would like to hear the thoughts on that. >> should i go ahead? >> sure. >> well, i think that it's very dangerous to start going down that road. because, sure, maybe there are some view points that these days maybe the entire room or most of the room could agree is not a valuable view point. but historically, people felt the same way about, you know, black people not being slaves. there is always going to be different view points -- or historically there have been so many view points that seemed completely unacceptable at the time but now are, you know, the norm. and i think that it is impossible to know what -- how views are going to change over time. bu

you stand at heathrow and it is the most fundamentally unamerican idea and absurd and get mexico to pay for a wall. is there anybody that believes mexico is going to pay for the wall, i'd like them to stand up. it is an absurd idea. >> i want to get angela in. having heard how donald trump sees the world, we look closer at how the world sees donald trump. president obama claims he is rattling world leaders. is that true? we will look at that. >>> later, polling that hillary clinton could lock up the nomination at the same time she loses a primary to bernie sanders. americans... ... 83% try to eat healthy. yet up 90% fall short in getting key nutrients from food alone. let's do more. add one a day women's gummies. complete with key nutrients we may need... ...plus it supports bone health with calcium and vitamin d. one a day vitacraves gummies. i am totally blind. i lost my sight in afghanistan. if you're totally blind, you may also be struggling with non-24. calling 844-844-2424. or visit my24info.com. is it keeps the food out. for me before those little pieces would get in between my d