www.archive-org-2013.com » ORG » Q » Q-AND-A

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".

    Archived pages: 628 . Archive date: 2013-09.

  • Title: Q & A
    Descriptive info: March 17, 2013.. Fred Barnes.. Executive Editor, The Weekly Standard.. Program Details.. Info.. : Our guest is Fred Barnes, television commentator and executive editor of the Weekly Standard.. He discusses the relative importance of the Weekly Standard to those in the political community, including the role it played in discovering Sarah Palin in 2007.. He reflects on his conservative upbringing in Arlington, Virginia and notes the changes he experienced in his life when he became a born again Christian.. He recalls his early days on television, including his participation as a panelist in the first 1984 Presidential debate and how it led him to a position on The McLaughlin Group.. He talks about his time with the New Republic magazine and why he felt the need to provide a conservative alternative.. He praises syndicated columnist Robert Novak and describes his memoir, The Prince of Darkness: 50 Years Reporting in Washington the best book ever written about politics.. Barnes talks about the change in ownership of the Weekly Standard from Rupert Murdoch to businessman Philip Anschutz.. He defends his overt support of the Bush administration, as well as his claim that the media pulled out all the stops to reelect President Obama.. Uncorrected transcript provided by Morningside Partners.. C-SPAN uses its best efforts to provide accurate transcripts of its programs, but it can not be held liable for mistakes such as omitted words, punctuation, spelling, mistakes that change meaning, etc.. BRIAN LAMB: Fred Barnes can you remember when you first got interested in being a writer?.. FRED BARNES: Well I got interested in being a reporter before I got interested in being a writer.. My dad was a great consumer of newspapers and magazines particularly conservative magazines like National Review as a charter subscriber.. He d bring them home and he d bring home the Wall Street Journal everyday when I was still in high school.. And, you know, when you -- if you like politics and you like journalism, well then, that s what you do when you get out of college, and that s what I did.. LAMB: Where d you grow up?.. BARNES: I grew up in Arlington, Virginia, right across the Potomac River.. Arlington is a -- in those days, now it -- now it has a lot of yuppies and young people in high rises and so on.. It was all single family homes back in the days when I was growing up in the 1950 s.. It was a nice place to grow up.. My dad was in the military so we worked at the Pentagon and several other military installations around town and we moved away, lived on a couple of Air Force bases, but in the ninth grade, I came back and we moved back to Arlington and I haven t left except to move my residence to Alexandria where my wife s from, right next door.. LAMB: What -- what in -- more than anything in -- informed your views over the years? I mean what -- where did you begin to think the way you do?.. BARNES: I maybe through my parents, particularly my dad.. He was very conservative, very interested in politics, very interested in world affairs, particularly he was strongly anti-Communist, a huge fan of Whittaker Chambers for one, and -- and certainly thought Witness was perhaps the greatest book ever written other than the Bible.. And it really all came from him, this interest in politics and -- and conservative politics in particular and it s amazing, you know I didn t realize it at the time but when my dad changed what he was interested in, you know, a few months later I would change.. You know, I was originally going to go to West Point where my dad went and my uncle went, my grandfather went and when my dad became more interested in politics than the military, so did I.. LAMB: Why didn t you go to West Point?.. BARNES: Well, I d been in the Army for a year and I got an Army Reserve appointment back in the early 60 s and I didn t want to be in the Army and as I said, I was more interested in politics.. That s what my dad was interested in, that s what we talked about at home all the time and, you know, I just couldn t see a West Point education, it s opened up a lot, it s much more of a liberal arts education now, but then it was a, you know, engineering and -- and military tactics.. I -- I had no interest in that at all and -- and I didn t want a military career.. LAMB: When did you first read Witness?.. BARNES: So many years ago, I can t remember exactly when, probably when I was in college and after that Cold Friday and I ve read Witness I think three times now.. One of the disappointments in my life is that I have not been able to transfer to my wife and my grown children a desire to read that book.. They haven t read it.. I ve talked it up for years and now with Communism having waned, it may be harder to get them to do it but I just haven t succeeded.. LAMB: So what s the big deal about Witness and -- and who was Whittaker Chambers?.. BARNES: Whittaker Chambers was a great writer, a beautiful writer, but he was a Soviet spy who ultimately rejected Communism, embraced Christianity, thought the -- the -- the struggle in the world was not just between the Soviet Union and the United States, it was between Communism and Christianity and he decided ultimately on behalf of Christianity, but of course, he famously said, he thought he was joining the losing side, not the winning side.. And then of course, his famous clash with Alger Hiss, a State Department official who -- who -- who he identified as a Communist spy and, of course, all the liberal intelligencey, said ah, that couldn t be with Alger Hiss who ultimately now we know from evidence that has come down in -- in the last 30, 40 years that Whittaker Chambers was absolutely right.. LAMB: You talk about your Christianity in some of your columns.. Why do you write about it and when did you become a Christian?.. BARNES:: I became a Christian -- I grew up nominally a Christian and then when I went in the Army when I -- when I got out of high school, I -- I just forgot about it.. I didn t really reject it, it just had no meaning for me.. I didn t -- I didn t go church, didn t -- I didn t think about it, didn t give it another thought.. Well, then I got married and -- and I had a couple kids and my parents, again, my mother and father had had a real reawakening of their Christian faith when they retired and moved to Florida.. Actually, it started before then but it really blossomed when they moved to Vero Beach, Florida and -- and -- and they were different.. I mean I could see what had happened in their lives and in the lives of my sister and her husband and their kids and other people I would meet and it was really that that it just was so appealing to me, I guess Christians that I kept running into, probably not accidentally.. But in any case, I can -- I can remember the exact date, it was right after Thanksgiving in 1980 that I -- I kneeled in my living room floor and my wife and I did and asked Jesus into our lives and it s been very different since then.. LAMB: Explain how it s been different.. BARNES: It s been different, I just think about the world differently.. I think about my job differently.. I -- I -- you know, I used to be -- I used to be kind of mean.. I used to be a -- I -- I cared not at all what I wrote about people that it might hurt them.. I -- I try not to do that, you still have to be tough and honest.. But -- and it s particularly changed all my -- affairs in life.. You know, one of the great things about being in Washington for me is having grown up here and -- and being a part of a church, and you know so many people, who could care less about politics.. They re just not involved in it, you know, they don t read the -- the magazine I write for, The Weekly Standard before that The New Republic.. They don t watch the television shows that I ve been on over the years.. And its just great to know people like that and -- and -- and be friends with them.. I don t -- on a completely different level, it is -- it s just so appealing to me.. I m not -- it keeps you from being just sucked into the Washington political and journalism world.. LAMB: I used to be mean?.. BARNES: I was very mean.. LAMB: Explain that.. BARNES: Well I drank a lot and even smoked a little and I just -- I had a very pessimistic view of the world and a pretty pessimistic view of -- of other people.. LAMB: So what was the year.. BARNES: It was who I was.. LAMB:.. what was the year that you became -- I assume you call it born again?.. BARNES: Yeah.. LAMB: What year -- what year was that?.. BARNES: 1980, my wife and I both.. You know, we had decided -- my parents were really -- had prayed for us a lot and talked about their renewed faith and people they met and they d introduce them -- us to them and at first it had no impact at all, but -- but after a while it did and I -- once -- and my wife and I decided we would have our two daughters -- we have four children now, but we had two little girls then and we would have them baptized in my parent s church in Florida.. We thought we were doing my parents a favor.. We were doing this for them.. And we were on the phones in our house, my wife who came from a completely unchurch background, we were on different phones and my mother asked my wife if she d like to be baptized and to my complete shock, she said yes.. So there we -- we -- we go to Florida, this is after Thanksgiving in 1980 after the election where, of course, where Reagan got elected president.. And -- and we went to their church and my two daughters and my wife were all baptized.. We got back to Washington, we joined a church and that s been our life every since.. LAMB: Back to your early career as a writer/reporter, what was your first reporting job? How long did you just report not give an opinion?.. BARNES: For a long time.. I mean I was a -- I was a reporter for 20 years before moving to the New Republic magazine and then starting the Weekly Standard.. My first job out of college, when I got out of the University of Virginia -- of course, I didn t have a job and -- and -- and I wrote a bunch of newspapers in the south.. I -- I -- I just -- I didn t want to go to the north, I kind of liked that south.. And you know, I d read All the Kings Men.. It was such an appealing book to me and the south was of great interest to me.. Anyway, I wrote a bunch of newspapers and one of them, the Charleston, South Carolina News and Courier offered me train fare to come down and back and be interviewed.. I leaped at it and they offered me a job for something like $80 a week.. So, this was in 1965, I -- I moved Charleston, South Carolina -- not a great news town as it turned out.. And of course, South Carolina back in those days was entirely a Democratic state.. Republicans had gotten a little bit of a foothold when I -- I believe it was 1964 when Strom Thurman became a Republican, but there weren t many others.. Anyway, it wasn t -- Charleston was not a big news town, it wasn t the state capital for one thing.. And so after a year, I moved back to Washington to go to graduate school at George Washington University.. I hated it -- I hated it.. I just -- I m a grad school dropout.. I dropped out pretty quickly and got a job with the The Evening Star, the evening newspaper in Washington which was a very good newspaper folded in 1981 you ll recall.. But I got -- I started there as a dictationist.. You know, people now a days in general probably don t even know what a dictationist is.. Well, when you work for an afternoon newspaper, reporters would be out and they d have to -- would -- you didn t have computers or laptops, you could type a story in and send it on.. They d call and they would dictate off the top of their head their story and if you were a dictationist, you d be -- you d type it for them.. And that s what I started out doing and then became a local reporter and -- and had a great time being a local reporter.. I mean that -- that -- I -- I still remember all the murders, for instance, that I covered.. And then I covered transportation when they were building the metro system and the bus -- then the private bus companies were failing and -- and people don t remember this, but there were huge fights over highways being built in urban areas, in particular or suburban areas, there were huge fights in the Washington area about building a new bridge over the Potomac, the Three Sisters bridge up by Georgetown, never built.. And so and these were great.. I -- I -- and this when I really got into -- really got to like journalism and.. LAMB: Did you have strong views then, you know away from reporting?.. BARNES: About -- not -- yeah, not particularly in those days, no.. My dad ran for the House of Delegates actually in Virginia as a Republican in 1963 and -- and lost and I guess after that, they were not quite as involved in politics and I got married, and you know, I was married, I had children and I was -- I -- like I said, other interests that were not particularly political.. LAMB: When did you start as a member of the John McLaughlin Saturday Group?.. BARNES: Well, that started in 1984.. I was -- I d been chosen as one of the three panelists in the first Reagan-Mondale debate.. If you remember back then, they had tried to -- debates were different then.. In those days the campaigns could veto anybody they didn t like and they had vetoed all kinds of people.. LAMB: Hold on, before you tell that story, we ve got some video of you at that 1984 debate, the Reagan and Mondale debate, let s just watch that so then you can tell the rest of it.. BARNES: Okay.. (BEGIN VIDEO).. Barbara Walters: In the past, there was no problem in selecting panelists.. Tonight, however, there were to have been four panelists participating in this debate.. The candidates were given a list of almost 100 qualified journalists from all the media and could agree and only these three fine journalists.. As moderator, and on behalf of my fellow journalists, I very much regret, as does the League of Women Voters that this situation has occurred.. And now, let us being the debate.. BARNES: Mr.. Mondale, the -- you complained just now about Jerry Falwell and you complained other times about other time about other fundamentalists in politics.. Correct me if I m wrong but I don t recall your ever complaining about ministers who are involved in the civil rights movement or in the anti-Vietnam War demonstrations, or about black preachers who ve been so involved in American politics.. Is it only conservative ministers that you object to?.. Mondale: No.. what I object to -- what I object to -- what I object to is someone seeking to use his faith to question the faith of another or to use that faith and seek to use the power of government to impose it on others.. (END VIDEO).. LAMB: At that table, Diane Sawyer was there, you were there.. It s interesting that those two men, especially Mr.. Mondale agreed that you and Diane Sawyer could be on the panel.. BARNES: Yeah and Jim Wieghart was the other one.. LAMB: Yeah.. BARNES:.. from the New York Daily News.. LAMB: I was certainly surprised.. BARNES: Yeah, I was a reporter for the Baltimore Sun covered national politics.. I also was -- by then, I had gotten more interested in politics and -- and I writing a press column for The American Spectator magazine.. LAMB: Conservative.. BARNES: Conservative.. And I guess the -- the Mondale people didn t recognize that.. And I think my questions were very -- were very fair.. You know, one of the things I ve -- I ve -- I ve noticed and particularly the -- among conservative journalism -- journalists, if they re in -- if they re writing for a newspaper or something, they know how to be fair.. I mean Brit Hume did this for years when he was an ABC correspondent, particularly covering the White House and I was -- I was scrupulously fair in covering the Mondale campaign that year.. I liked Mondale; Mondale was a wonderful guy.. I didn t agree with him but that didn t make any difference for what I -- to what I was writing.. But any case, I had asked -- before I asked Mondale that question, I d asked Reagan why he didn t go to church and you know, sitting in the audience behind me were -- we were sort of in front of the Reagan section.. They hissed.. I think that s the only time I ve ever been hissed and then of course, they cheered when I -- I -- I think that was the same people -- Reagan people.. LAMB: But you know, the whole atmosphere there was different than what we see today in these debates.. LAMB: It was the League of Women Voters, you had Barbara Walters, what role did she play?.. BARNES: She was the moderator.. She would, you know, they d answer her question and then she d say, well Diane, we -- she moved to the next one and -- and once she said well that I -- she said well, you know, did you have -- you don t have a follow up and I said, yes I do have a follow up and so.. Look, she complained about it being -- she didn t like the way it was done and they -- a lot of reporters were rejected and so on.. Well, you know, maybe so, it was a great opportunity for me, however, no question about that.. LAMB: What did it do for you?.. BARNES: Well it was on -- I got invited to be on the McLaughlin Group, that s how you originally asked about this.. The next week, Pat Buchanan was away and I was on the McLaughlin Group.. The truth is, well I knew Mort Kondracke very well and Bob Novak is a good friend of mine, I had never watched a show.. So I had never met -- well I had met McLaughlin actually when he tried to stay on in the Gerry Ford White House after Nixon resigned.. But in any case, there I was on that show and in 1984 and -- and after that, it led to, you know, being asked to be on television else -- on other shows and -- and ultimately becoming a regular in 1988 on -- on the McLaughlin Group.. LAMB: What impact did the McLaughlin Group program have on this city, from the beginning?.. BARNES: Well, you know, now McLaughlin was a genius for television.. He --he could have --he could be a very difficult guy to get along with personally, although I got along with him pretty well.. but it was so much faster and it was -- it -- what it -- what I tried to get and succeeded a lot were the more candid outspoken views of -- of people in journalism in Washington and not just what they write, you know, it was -- it was and very fast moving, extremely opinionated and, you know, Washington just hadn t seen anything quite like that.. Now we see a lot of that now, particularly with cable news and so on.. But McLaughlin Group was a breakthrough and there are so many people, Brian, over the years that have -- have written or said or asked me about it that somehow they believe -- and I don t -- but they believe that the -- the whole dialogue in Washington politically was changed by the McLaughlin Group, that it became more polarized and more argumentative and -- and -- and so on.. I don t  ...   say I ve been wrong a few times.. I, you know, there were a lot of polls, I have always placed great stock in Gallup and then Gallup got this election wrong as did some other pollsters, you know the battleground poll that showed Romney winning and.. LAMB: Why do -- why do people in this business stick their neck out on predictions? I mean.. so many are wrong.. BARNES: I don t know anymore.. I know, why did I do that? I didn t have to do that.. LAMB: That was on right -- right at election day.. BARNES: Yeah, I know -- I know.. You can be -- in other words, I was -- I was wrong.. I was proven wrong the next day I think.. Wasn t November 6 the election? The -- I don t know, I look back and I think gee, you know, why didn t you -- you know I certain qualms but I thought Romney was going to win.. Romney thought he was going to win.. Romney s pollsters thought he was going to win.. So look, there was evidence out there, it was a minority for sure, I mean so many of the other polls, the big newspaper polls and -- and -- and others had Obama winning reelection, but you know, why not, I thought -- I thought Romney was going to win, why not say so?.. LAMB: October 8, you said this in your Twitter message, the media pull out all the stops to reelect the president.. Did you really believe that?.. BARNES: Let me be -- really didn t pull out all the stops but certainly pulled out some of them.. Look at the way they covered the campaign.. Normally, you would think a presidential campaign in which the president s running for reelection, that his record would be a big issue.. They completely ignored it.. His -- his record, it was all about what he was doing in the campaign.. Romney of course, wanted to make Obama s record a part of the campaign and he was highly critical of it, the press just didn t pay any attention to that.. Romney s record, they paid a lot of attention to going back to his time at Bain Capital in particular, which is what the Obama campaign was trying to make the issue and they succeeded basically.. The Obama campaign did, I mean this was -- Brian, this was not a normal election -- a normal reelection of a president election in 2012.. Because with the complicity of the press, the issue of Romney and being a corporate predator and all that had become as -- as big or bigger an issue than Obama s actual record in his first four years.. LAMB: So in -- in reading you, you get the impression you feel like you re surrounded by journalists that are all liberal.. BARNES: Yeah, well look it s.. LAMB: Do they -- do they tell you what they think, personal?.. BARNES: No, they used to when I was younger and I was out covering campaigns all the time, but I certainly -- I certainly read them and -- and -- and it hasn t changed.. LAMB: But you know what the liberals would say, they re sitting talking, the conservatives are whining when they have Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and Mark Levin and all these people, there are a lot of other talk show hosts.. They have Weekly Standard and the Washington Examiner and Fox News.. Well there is an alternative conservative media that didn t used to exist.. LAMB: How has that changed the world? How has that changed this town?.. BARNES:: I don t think -- I don t know that it -- Washington is still a liberal town.. It really hasn t changed Washington that much.. They re more -- there may be more jobs for conservatives in journalism than there were, but it hasn t changed that much.. Look, who decides what the story is? It s not Fox News, it s not Rush Limbaugh, it s the mainstream media which is liberal.. They decide what the story is and, you know, some conservatives thought because talk radio in particular had a huge impact in the midterm election in 1994 and it -- but it -- but the -- the conservative media could rival the mainstream media.. Boy, that hasn t happened at all.. You know, Brian, I wrote a piece for the New Republic back -- I m trying to think when it was, maybe -- it was soon after I got there, 85, 86, 87 -- a conservative era in American politics, Ronald Reagan was president, Republicans until 86 80 to 86 controlled the Senate but not the House, but Reagan had been successful in getting things through the House.. And I mustered a whole bunch of evidence to say that there had been -- I called it media realignment, that the media was getting more conservative and -- or -- or at least less liberal.. And I wrote a whole piece, it was on the cover of the New Republic it was completely wrong as it turned out.. It I had all this evidence that, and I thought added up to something and it really didn t.. LAMB: Does it matter, though?.. BARNES: Of course it matters.. LAMB: Why?.. BARNES: Well look at the -- I mean look at the 2012 campaign.. Brain Lamb: He said that you hemmed and you hawed when he asked you what the Iliad and the Odyssey was all about.. BARNES: I read them in college.. Brain Lamb: You know, you say that in the column.. I mean -- I mean that s ridiculous.. Brain Lamb: Well, the --the third paragraph, the only problem is none of this is true, it never happened, Moore is a liar.. Strong.. BARNES: Yeah, well he -- he -- certainly about what he said I said or hemmed and hawed and so on was not true.. And I thought about it later and he actually may have called me.. Brain Lamb: But you don t think you hemmed and hawed about the Iliad and the Odyssey?.. BARNES: No, of course not.. That s ridiculous.. Brain Lamb: How often in your opinion do people lie in politics? And we -- if you don t -- people don t use the word lie, they use every other word but lie.. BARNES: Yeah, sure.. Yeah, there are all kinds of words really and -- and they don t flatly lie that much.. They exaggerate, they sort of make up things and they forget things and they embellish things and -- and -- and sometimes they flatly lie but -- but not -- we re not really that much.. Brain Lamb: You wrote a book about George Bush and you got kicked around by some of the media.. Did you -- did you read any of that?.. BARNES: As little as possible but I know it got kicked around.. I -- I read, you know, I said when I wrote the book that I was not going to read any of the reviews.. Well, I read a couple and then I realized that my first instinct was correct.. Maybe you shouldn t read these.. Brain Lamb: Did you read Isaac Chotiner s review in the Washington Monthly?.. BARNES: I did.. I ran into him after that actually on a train and.. Brain Lamb: He says, let me just read a little bit.. BARNES: Actually I had not read his review but somebody told me about his review.. Brain Lamb: It says, where Bill Kristol may show more fealty to his conservatism than his president, or where Ann Coulter is too vitriolic for the good of her own side, you can always find BARNES: calmly toeing the administration s line.. And then later on he said, he is the perfect Bush hack.. BARNES: I guess he didn t like the book.. LAMB: But -- but you know that you got criticized for that.. Male: Oh sure, of course.. Brain Lamb:.. but you never.. BARNES: I was generally in agreement with the Bush Administration, particularly on -- on foreign policy which was the most critical area.. Brain Lamb: Why? Why were you -- can you remember what it was because you, on the Fox News when you were on there at night and the -- on the -- on the six o clock show, you were almost always on the administration s side.. BARNES: I was because I.. Brain Lamb: I mean people sit out and say oh my goodness, there he goes again.. but they say that about other people, too.. But I m.. BARNES: Of course they do, sure.. Brain Lamb: Did you -- did that worry you?.. BARNES: No, not at all.. Brain Lamb: Why did you like the Bush Administration?.. BARNES: Because I thought their policies were right on domestic policy, not so much the spending but on the -- on domestic policy, the tax cuts and so on and particularly on foreign policy, the war in Iraq and so on.. Those were the big issues and I agreed with them and what I said on Fox and what I wrote as well reflected that.. Brain Lamb: You talked about Whittaker Chambers and the book Witness as one of the best books your father had ever read.. Did you think the same thing -- same thing about it?.. BARNES: Oh yeah.. Brain Lamb: But you also said.. BARNES: It s just incredibly well written.. Brain Lamb: Okay, but you also said that one of the best books ever written was the book that Robert Novak wrote near the end of his life, here s a clip from you and a little bit of a roast one night at the Press Club.. BARNES: Well I m flattered to be here following Jack Germond and talking about Bob Novak that probably two people in journalism who I ve learned the most from and admired the most over the years.. You know, I ve spent the last few days doing the exhausting job of reading Bob Novak columns going back many, many years.. It -- it s very time consuming, not very exhilarating and I have discovered that Bob -- that after reading your columns, so many of them I ve come to the conclusion that your words will be remembered long after Shakespeare s are forgotten, but not until then.. LAMB: Why did you think his 650 page plus book was one of the best books ever written on Washington?.. BARNES: It may be the best book, but -- but I can think of one better, I ll get to that in a moment.. But because -- and I -- and I -- when we get young people, interns and -- and young reporters at the Weekly Standard I tell them, read Bob Novak s book because it will tell you more about American politics in Washington over the last 50 years than anything else you can read.. Bob covered everything, Bob wrote about everything, and it s a very readable and great -- and a great book.. If you want to know about what s happened over the last 50 years politically, read Bob Novak s book.. LAMB: One of the things he did that I ve never seen before is he told you how much money he was paid.. LAMB: What did you think of that and what do you think of this town? I know you re a member, you speak for a living and all that.. BARNES: Sure.. LAMB: It s become a huge business.. BARNES: It has, yeah.. But it comes and it goes and it s all based on being on television.. I ve never had anybody call me and say, boy that was a great article you wrote in the Standard and we want you to come speak to our group and we ll pay you such and such.. That s never happened.. It s all -- it s all about TV -- being on TV.. LAMB: Is that good or bad?.. BARNES: I think it s fine I mean I don t -- I don t say anything to groups that I wouldn t -- haven t written or -- or said on the air.. LAMB: Is the Weekly Standard more popular during and Obama Administration or a Bush Administration?.. BARNES: You know, it s about the same I think.. LAMB: You didn t a rash of new subscriptions?.. BARNES: A little bit but not really that much.. LAMB: And what about your experience now with Fox News, are you still doing the commentary?.. BARNES: I do some, but a lot less.. BARNES: Well, that s partly the decision of Fox News with, you know, going with other people.. I did a special report the show 6:00 to 7:00 Eastern Time when Brit Hume was the host for 11 years, was there almost every night.. Bret Baier comes in and he wants to have his own people.. I understand that.. And I m on occasionally but not regularly.. LAMB: How far do you and Brit Hume go back?.. BARNES: High school.. LAMB: What was he like in high school?.. BARNES: Brit -- Brit we -- we -- I guess he s changed a lot.. But he.. LAMB: In what way?.. but he was -- but he was always pretty -- Brit was always very self-confident, spoke very well, was not a particularly great student, nor was I when we were together at the University of Virginia and but we both -- both went into the same line of work and he was much more interested in the beginning, much more interested in the newspaper business than I was.. I was -- I had after a couple of years, I was thinking well maybe I ought to go to law school or maybe I ought to do something else and I m glad I didn t but the -- so in any case, Brit, once he got this show and I -- I was on it all the time, I mean, I ve -- I think I ve done enough TV for a lifetime.. LAMB: When he was here right after he retired, he talked about his relationship with Jesus Christ, the same thing.. LAMB: Is that new that people talk about this in public and -- and journalists talk about it?.. BARNES: Well you must have asked him about it, you asked me.. LAMB: Oh no, I did.. I -- I would say -- but there was a time when people said, I m not talking about my religious beliefs.. I mean we.. BARNES: Yeah, that s not true of I think these days among evangelical or born again Christians, they re, you know and I m certainly willing to talk about it.. I have.. I ve given talks to various groups and prayer breakfasts at one place or another.. Not a lot, but I ve been asked occasionally and I ve certainly been willing to do that.. LAMB: I have a column from 2012 where you talk about Chuck Colson who died in 2012 back in probably in April or something like that.. You -- you say that Colson wanted me to give a talk somewhere about my life as a Christian while working in secular national media.. I said yes, not that I had a great story to tell, I accepted Christ a few years ago and he goes on, you talk about the McLaughlin Group.. You say that you believe Chuck Colson s prison ministry and there are people that looked out and said, he s just the same guy he was in the Nixon Administration.. BARNES: I know but look, it.. LAMB: How did -- why did you trust him?.. BARNES: It went on -- because it went on for so long, that s why.. I never knew him when he worked in the Nixon White House and of course he had this reputation of being the ultimate hatchet man.. But look, one of the things I try not to judge anybody s state of faith, but I mean his just struck me over talking to him many, many time and what he did over many, many years, you know decades, as being entirely sincere, honest, legitimate and this was the real -- the real Chuck Colson.. I mean he didn t get a lot of hosannas from the media but he --when he started prison fellowship and became a leader of evangelical Christians.. He did it because he believed it.. I, it just seems so obvious to me.. LAMB: When people come into this town now, they always as what s the difference today than it was, you know, 40 years ago? You ve been here forever.. BARNES: Yep.. what s your overall analysis of the country, of the town, even of the religious beliefs of the country?.. BARNES: Well Washington really was a sleepy southern town back in the 50 s.. You know, when -- if you lived in Arlington just across the river, that s about as far as the suburbs went.. You know we had friends who lived in McLean and they had farm animals in those days, it was really quite different.. And what you didn t have in Washington that you do have now is this great permanent community that -- that produces buzz all the time in town and it s made up of not just the bureaucracy but the lobbyists and the elected officials and the consultants and all the people that are involved in politics one way or another.. And the press is a big part of this.. I mean for one thing, there s a lot more of the -- the media here than there was 50 years ago.. And so it sort of changed the way Washington operates.. You have this political hum and buzz that s going on all the time and you didn t used to have that.. And the other thing is, Brian, nobody leaves Washington.. You know -- you know, 40, 50 years ago, people had became a Congressman would retire and he d move back to Arkansas or Alabama wherever he came from and the people that worked with him would go back too and you were worked in a -- in an executive administration, you d leave, but nobody leaves any more.. LAMB: More honest, less honest?.. BARNES: Gee, I don t know whether you could -- there s more reporting about what goes on.. It s more -- it s more -- it s certainly more transparent, not all that transparent but a lot more.. Remember, the House Ways and Means Committee used to have no public meetings back when -- back in the old days.. That s where reporters like Bob Novak really developed their skills and -- and source development and so on.. But Washington -- and why is it that nobody leaves? There s only one reason, money.. They stay here -- if you re -- if you re somebody who works on Capitol Hill, for a few years and works in the House Ways and Means Committee and you re a lawyer, and you work there five years, you can get a job making hundreds of thousands of dollars right away as a lobbyist, as a -- and --and not necessarily as a lobbyist just.. LAMB: As a reporter.. Better reporting back when you started or now?.. BARNES: No, it s certainly different.. There s more of it.. It s much more opinionated than it used to be.. So I would say probably not better, but you can -- look when you have the Internet, you have so much on television and there s just more information that you can get and you don t have to try that hard but if you try hard, you can get an awful lot.. LAMB: Is Fred Barnes going to write a memoir?.. BARNES: No.. LAMB: Are you going to write any more books at all?.. LAMB: On what?.. BARNES: Well there s subjects that I m -- I m interested in that I d like to write about.. You know, there -- I think there s some people who ve been important in America over the last 400 years that haven t been written about enough.. I mean certainly it s not Lincoln -- Lincoln you know, he s probably written about more than anybody else or George Washington or Thomas Jefferson, but you know, people like Alexander Hamilton, Henry Clay.. LAMB: There s one person I haven t asked you about, your wife, how long have you been married, where did you meet her?.. BARNES: We -- I met my wife in Washington.. We were set up on a blind date by her roommate in college who -- who s -- who knew friends of mine and this must have been 1966 and -- and we dated every night for a year and then got married in 1967.. LAMB: And what did she do?.. BARNES: Well she went to G.. W.. -- George Washington University, graduated -- well when we got married, she still was going to school, fortunately her father continued to pay for it.. and she graduated in 1968, went to work for one year as a teacher in the Washington, D.. C.. school system, taught the sixth grade at a school in southwest Washington and then she got pregnant.. LAMB: And her name?.. BARNES: Her name is Barbara.. Brain Lamb: And that s it, we re out of time.. Thank you Fred Barnes.. BARNES: You re welcome.. END..

    Original link path: /Transcript/?ProgramID=1435
    Open archive

  • Title: Q & A
    Descriptive info: March 10, 2013.. Jody Williams.. 1997 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate and Author, "My Name is Jody Williams".. : Our guest is author and 1997 Nobel Peace Prize recipient Jody Williams.. She discusses her newly released autobiography titled My Name Is Jody Williams: A Vermont Girl s Winding Path to the Nobel Peace Prize.. Williams shares details of her prize winning work on the campaign to ban the use of landmines and her career as an advocate for world peace.. She reveals the struggles she faced in adjusting to her new life as a Nobel Peace Prize laureate.. She describes her political ideology as left of liberal.. She speaks candidly about her departure from the Catholic Church and her relationships with fellow laureates Desmond Tutu and the Dalai Lama.. She opens up about meeting her husband, and fellow human rights activist, Stephen Goose, and the struggles they faced together.. She describes her motivation for advocacy as righteous indignation and says that she is full of anger at injustice.. She talks about the eleven years she spent working on various projects related to the wars in Nicaragua and El Salvador.. BRIAN LAMB: Jody Williams, what role did a pamphlet play in your life?.. JODY WILLIAMS: I was living here in Washington, DC.. It was February of 1981.. And I was rushing to the metro stop trying to get on the train early and get home to Virginia, and some scruffy looking individual shoved a pamphlet at me.. You know, kind of like this so you had no choice but to take it.. And you and I are old enough to remember mimeograph, you know.. The ink came off of my hands I was getting a tad irritated.. But I looked at it, and it said, &rdquoEl Salvador another Vietnam.. &rdquo My first protest had been in 1970 against the war in Vietnam.. So when I saw juxtaposition of Vietnam and Salvador, I was curious.. And instead of throwing the thing away, I read it.. And the next thing I knew a week later I went to a meeting.. I was stunned to hear about US intervention there, and I ended up volunteering shoving those same mimeographed brochures in people&rsquos hand here in DC, trying to educate the American public about US intervention in Central America.. LAMB: Who had handed that pamphlet to you, and who paid for it?.. WILLIAMS: It was an organization called CSPES, the Committee on Solidarity with the People of El Salvador.. I volunteered for them for about eight months and then decided that our philosophies toward dealing with the region were slightly different.. I thought since the Reagan administration was taking a regional approach to Central America, the response should be regional.. And they didn&rsquot share that point of view, so I moved on.. LAMB: Who was paying for that at the time? I mean.. WILLIAMS: I didn&rsquot get paid.. I was a volunteer.. LAMB: I don&rsquot mean you.. I mean.. WILLIAMS: Oh.. all the organizations you&rsquove been involved in.. I want to know where.. WILLIAMS: M-hmm.. if you can tell us where the money comes from for all this.. WILLIAMS: I think it was all donations.. I really don&rsquot know, since I was a volunteer and I wasn&rsquot involved in the administration of it.. LAMB: Who cared about El Salvador back then?.. WILLIAMS: Well, on the Reagan side as you remember, he was drawing the line against communism pretty much anywhere he could.. And in the view of his administration, Nicaragua was a Communist state after the rise of the Sandinistas.. Of course, Cuba is a never ending thorn in the side of American politics.. And Salvador the revolutionary movement had arisen after several elections in a row were overthrown.. And on the Reagan side, they wanted to draw the line against communism, and it was in Central America.. I think you know, I was a hippie out of the &rsquo60s and &rsquo70s.. As I said, my first protest was Vietnam.. And when I learned again that the US was intervening in the internal politics of countries that should not matter to the United States in those terms, it just brought up all my frustrations about the Vietnam War and, you know, the Civil Rights movement, the re-emergence of the women&rsquos movement and made me realize that I really believed I had to do something to try to shift US policy.. LAMB: I want to ask you a question.. WILLIAMS: Sure.. then get to a lot of other stuff, that you&rsquove never been asked before.. LAMB: What impact did the Nobel Peace Prize have on you?.. WILLIAMS: Well, it was certainly a fabulous tool for our work.. You know.. LAMB: You have not been asked that before.. Have you?.. WILLIAMS: Never.. Never, never.. You know, I received it individually.. But also the International Campaign to Ban Landmines, which I was the founding coordinator of, also received it.. And I believe that the work of that campaign as the engine you know, to push governments to do what they should have done anyway, which is ban landmines deserved the recognition.. LAMB: What year?.. WILLIAMS: It was in 1997.. LAMB: OK.. Go back to 1997.. LAMB: When was the first time after you received this award that you said, &rdquoOh, my goodness.. This matters to people?&rdquo.. WILLIAMS: The Nobel Prize?.. LAMB: Yes.. LAMB: And how did you see it?.. WILLIAMS: You know, I had never really thought about it much except a woman I knew from Central America had received it.. Rigoberta Menchú in the early &rsquo90s a Mayan Indian who had been involved in the struggle.. Many of her family members were killed, as a matter of fact, the Ríos Montt government, as a matter of fact.. He now is facing trial for genocide and crimes against humanity, which is pretty outstanding that inside Guatemala they&rsquore going to try this man.. I didn&rsquot think about it much, though.. I mean, I think that actually the innovation of Internet and all that has made an understanding of the Peace Prize more accessible than it was.. I never really thought about it.. And then all of a sudden, you know, this thing happens.. All of a sudden, people who would talk to anyone in the campaign before only wanted to talk to me.. And I found it intrusive.. I found it very disturbing.. I thought it was demeaning to my colleagues in the campaign.. We were all working together.. And why, all of a sudden, was my voice the only one they wanted to hear? So I had a very hard time, actually, adjusting to the prize took me five, six years.. LAMB: What did you do to adjust?.. WILLIAMS: Oh, I spent quite a few years very confused, to be quite honest.. When I would go home after speaking sometimes, I would just cry in frustration and confusion.. I knew about landmines.. I knew about building a campaign.. I knew about building a global coalition to bring about change.. But that doesn&rsquot mean that suddenly you&rsquore Mother Teresa, that you&rsquore saintly, that you can answer anything in the world by virtue of this wisdom that falls upon you with the Peace Prize.. Well, that&rsquos absurd.. LAMB: Who picks it?.. WILLIAMS: There&rsquos a committee of five in Norway.. I think their term in office, or whatever, is about five years.. And they can serve on the committee two terms in a row.. And it is those five people plus Geir Lundestad, who is the secretary of the Nobel Committee there.. And there are nominations made every year, the beginning of the year.. They have to be in by February 1.. And then the committee meets I think five times in the year.. I learned these things after I met the committee, of course.. And I liked the ones that I met.. Then they meet about five times a year, and the first meeting is to just discard all the ridiculous nominations.. Because some truly are absurd.. And then they start to narrow it down to nominations that they think have some merit.. And they hand them out to researchers.. LAMB: Who nominated you?.. WILLIAMS: Lots of people.. We found out after the fact.. One person I do know who nominated me and the campaign was Congressman Jim McGovern from Massachusetts, who had been he and Joe Moakley, as a matter of fact the late Joe Moakley have been really strong supporters of our work in El Salvador.. So I knew him personally in a sense you know, personally as a Congressperson.. And whenever we were having trouble, they were always there.. You know? And I have great affection for him.. LAMB: Go back to &rsquo97, when the announcement came out.. Were you anticipating it?.. WILLIAMS: We knew that we were front runners.. That&rsquos the truth.. LAMB: How did you know?.. WILLIAMS: Well, because we knew that first of all, we knew we&rsquod been nominated.. McGovern wasn&rsquot the only one.. There was a woman from Sweden who I think at the time was the head of their foreign relations committee.. She had nominated us.. And then I heard later that others had as well.. And when we were in Norway negotiating the treaty, which was in September &rsquo97, was the last phase of the negotiation of the mine ban treaty, journalists started coming up to us and saying, &rdquoHow do you feel about being a front runner?&rdquo And our response was, &rdquoWe&rsquore not here to discuss the Peace Prize.. We are.. &rdquo.. LAMB: There&rsquos a picture we got.. WILLIAMS: OK.. You can see there.. We&rsquoll put on the screen.. And where is that picture? It&rsquos you can see it back there.. WILLIAMS: That&rsquos at my house in Putney, Vermont.. That&rsquos the morning that we received the call.. At about 4 in the morning.. My now husband and I were in bed.. We had just celebrated the night before my 47th birthday with my family, and all of a sudden the phone rings and this guy says in a lilting Norwegian accent that he was from Norwegian television, and he wanted to know where I&rsquod be in 40 minutes.. And I wanted to swear at him, actually.. You know, what the hell? And I said, &rdquoWell, I&rsquom in bed.. I&rsquoll be here.. &rdquo And he called back.. And then he said, &rdquoI&rsquove been authorized to tell you that Jody Williams and the International Campaign to Ban Landmines are receiving the Nobel Peace Prize for 1997.. &rdquo And it was it was stunning, to be blunt.. You know, I jumped up and pulled on the same clothes that I&rsquod had on the day before.. I had this hideous vision of some photojournalist out in a tree in my yard with a telephoto lens.. You know, I wanted clothes on.. I didn&rsquot want photos that people would be screaming, &rdquoPut your clothes on.. &rdquo So just pulled on what I had by the bed and went downstairs, and there were already about five journalists sitting on the stoop.. WILLIAMS: And it was 5 a.. m.. And I invited them in, gave them coffee.. We started talking, and they were the last ones I let in the house that day.. LAMB: I want to show some video of you.. from a documentary.. N.. Me.. You were interviewed by Ami Horowitz.. And this is about a minute and 15 seconds.. M-hmm.. And it shows a different side of Jody Williams.. Sure.. (BEGIN VIDEO) MALE: And the report cannot be considered comprehensive, objective, authentic and accurate.. SECOND MALE:.. and suffers from the lack of credibility.. WILLIAMS: My last point is on credibility, and it&rsquos not about ours.. It&rsquos about yours.. The world hung its head in shame, and said, &rdquoNever again.. &rdquo Well too many of us have lost hope that never again seems to have no applicability whatsoever in Darfur.. When will the world hang its head in shame again? And our job is to attempt to try to alleviate the suffering of the people of Darfur who are being raped, pillaged and burned while political wrangling goes on here in the hallowed halls of the United Nations.. Thank you.. HOROWITZ: There were 20 or 30 recommendations, and one was implemented.. LAMB: Not a great batting average.. WILLIAMS: Correct.. The reason they accepted one is not because they particularly care about the report or Darfur.. They did it because they have to show that the council does something, or it won&rsquot continue to exist.. LAMB: Ami Horowitz&rsquos take on the U.. was not very positive.. What about yours?.. WILLIAMS: Well as you can see from that tape and it&rsquos the first time I&rsquove seen it.. I don&rsquot generally watch myself.. It&rsquos too easy to second guess what you might have said, could have said, should have said.. I have great dismay about the Human Rights Commission, which is what I was reporting on Darfur.. There are other parts of the U.. I have trouble with.. But there are some wonderful human beings in the United Nations that are trying really hard to make a difference.. You know, if the body didn&rsquot exist, some body should exist like it.. I think it is in desperate need of reform.. I think that the Security Council as it stands now is a ridiculous throwback to the Cold War.. I don&rsquot think it reflects, you know, the powerful emerging economies and militaries, if you will, in today&rsquos world, and particularly the Human Rights Commission.. I have no respect whatsoever.. Put this in context from your perspective.. Recently, when a State of the Union address was delivered by the President of the United States and then the answer on the other side or another point of view from Marco Rubio was given, they ended or at some point in the speech, they said, &rdquoThe United States is the greatest country in the history of the world.. &rdquo.. WILLIAMS: Some people believe that.. LAMB: What about you?.. WILLIAMS: I believe that the United States has many fantastic qualities.. I do believe that maybe many people have the possibility of pulling themselves up by the bootstraps.. I think every year that is less and less and less probable.. But the United States especially in its foreign policy, which is what I&rsquove worked on for years and years, is not the great nation.. It&rsquos an interventionist state.. It&rsquos extremely aggressive militarily.. We mess with other people&rsquos politics in ways that I can&rsquot imagine Americans tolerating.. Imagine if some country invaded us to bring their system of government the way we did in Iraq, for example.. Can you imagine Americans sitting there, and thinking that&rsquos OK? And yet, somehow we still in this country have a myth that people are thrilled when we invade them.. That&rsquos insane.. I believe 99 percent of the time we create new enemies.. And I think especially now with the drone warfare going on under Mr.. Obama, which is much worse than under Bush, which I never expected, I think we&rsquore creating new enemies for the future.. LAMB: What did you think of President Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize?.. WILLIAMS: Well, I said this before in public, so I&rsquom not going to have a problem saying it again.. I don&rsquot think it was his problem, so to speak.. I think the committee made a gross error of judgment.. He had not done anything to deserve it at that point in time.. And the terms of Nobel&rsquos will are quite clear that it should go to a person who, in any given year, has done great service to disengage armies, or has held a global peace conference to bring about change.. Mr.. Obama at that time had done nothing of that sort.. In fact, he was engaged in two wars which, I thought no matter what he had done, if you&rsquore sitting head of state engaged in war how can you get the Nobel Peace Prize? When he came out of the White House and said that he didn&rsquot think he deserved it, I was ready to clap.. I thought that was really outstanding.. I would have clapped if he had then said, &rdquoTherefore, I cannot accept it at this time.. &rdquo I think that&rsquos what he should have done.. LAMB: What do you think of Al Gore getting the Nobel Peace Prize?.. WILLIAMS: I think that the environment is a critical part of security and peace.. I think people understand it that way better than they used to.. You know, what the elements of sustainable peace are.. It&rsquos not just the absence of armed conflict.. It&rsquos many, many different elements.. And I think we definitely are seeing global warming and climate change.. And it&rsquos displacing populations.. It&rsquos causing new migrations and new conflict.. So I think that it&rsquos worthy recognition.. There are many who are agitated that the committee keeps sort of expanding the vision of what peace is.. There are some who are very adamant that it should be strictly limited to those who really deal with armies and war.. Not, you know, peace more broadly defined.. I&rsquom somewhere in the middle.. LAMB: I have a book on my lap.. Your picture&rsquos on the cover.. And the title of it is &rdquoMy Name Is Jody Williams: A Vermont Girl&rsquos Winding Path to the Nobel Peace Prize.. &rdquo Why did you want us to know all this about your personal life?.. WILLIAMS: I have a problem with the idealizing of human beings.. Of the glorification, deification in some ways, of making the individual bigger than life.. I normally use the example of Martin Luther King, because we all know him here in the United States and admire his work.. But Martin Luther King was a human being like any other human being.. He had his strengths, his weaknesses, his flaws.. Martin Luther King was certainly an amazing leader.. But there were thousands of millions of people also in that struggle.. And this kind of goes back to what I was saying in the beginning of our discussion that in the land mine campaign, we were thousands and millions.. And everybody saw us as the same.. Suddenly, I get the Peace Prize, and they only want to talk to me.. When Martin Luther King became Martin Luther King and is now a monument on the mall which I think he deserves; that&rsquos not the issue but suddenly, that individual or Mandela or the Dalai Lama who is really in a category of his own, since he is sort of God, what normal human being, what ordinary person can ever believe that they could accomplish leadership like that? And I think that does a huge disservice to both the possibility of change and to ordinary people recognizing that we each have power and we can we can with all our flaws, we can contribute to change.. I&rsquom flawed.. LAMB: Early in the book, you tell us about your brother, Steve.. LAMB: Where is Steve today?.. WILLIAMS: My brother has always lived with my parents, except for two times that he was institutionalized.. One, I write about in the book.. Because he was so violent that we were concerned he would kill a family member and/or himself.. But he&rsquos living with my mom in Vermont.. Still.. LAMB: Did you ask him before you wrote this about him?.. WILLIAMS: No.. LAMB: Why not?.. WILLIAMS: I didn&rsquot ask anybody&rsquos permission.. This is my perception of my life.. I didn&rsquot ask my mom.. She was very nervous, as mothers would be.. And I promised I wouldn&rsquot say anything that would make her friends make fun of  ...   and Russia, which have not signed, have stopped producing landmines for export, recognizing the humanitarian concern.. LAMB: How many are still out there?.. WILLIAMS: Nobody knows.. You know, in the early days, the U.. kind of pulled the figure out of the air and said there were 100 million in the ground.. Nobody knows how many there really were.. Nobody is quite sure how many there are at this point.. However, stockpiles have been destroyed that will never be in the ground.. I think we&rsquore up to like 60 million landmines have been destroyed from stockpiles that will never be in the ground.. Twenty countries have now declared themselves mine-free.. Meaning that their national demining programs have gotten all the mines that they could find.. That doesn&rsquot mean that there won&rsquot randomly be a mine.. That&rsquos inevitable.. And as I said, there&rsquos been no major exporting of mines.. I think my husband, who is the chair of the landmine campaign and the Cluster Munition Coalition, said that only about a dozen countries retain the right to produce mines.. But something like three might be producing.. So it really has been a seismic shift.. LAMB: How many people die a day?.. WILLIAMS: There used to be 20,000 people affected every year.. We&rsquore now down to 4,000.. That&rsquos still too many.. LAMB: And where are they dying of landmines?.. Afghanistan, Cambodia, Angola, Croatia, Colombia, the FARC still lays mines.. Burma.. LAMB: The FARC is where?.. WILLIAMS: The FARC is the revolutionary forces in Colombia that have been battling the government for 50 years.. LAMB: Go back to the funding question.. In the beginning when you got involved in this, who paid the bills?.. WILLIAMS: I was asked to create this campaign by the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation under Bobby Muller, the president.. And they paid my salary.. I helped raise money for my salary.. So that was.. LAMB: Who funded them?.. WILLIAMS: The US government funded some of their work in Cambodia.. Foundations.. Individual donors like, you know, most non-governmental organizations.. LAMB: Toughest part of your effort to ban landmines.. WILLIAMS: I always say that it was so easy compared to Central America that I can&rsquot find it difficult.. But that&rsquos too glossy a picture, I guess.. I think when the CCW the Convention on Conventional Weapons, which came about after the Vietnam War and tried to control things like Napalm, landmines, but did not ban them.. So we used that treaty as a tool in the first couple of years of the landmine campaign an organizing tool.. You know, getting NG non-governmental organizations in different countries involved pressing their governments to amend that treaty to ban landmines.. And they wouldn&rsquot.. OK? So for 2 ½ years, we were there pushing and screaming and shoving at all the meetings they had.. And they did not change that treaty.. And if the Canadian government had not come out of that experience dedicated to the belief that within one year we could negotiate a mine ban treaty, which they challenged the world to do in Ottawa in October of 1996, we wouldn&rsquot have a treaty.. So that was one of those moments that if they hadn&rsquot, I&rsquom not sure what would have happened.. At the same time, we didn&rsquot know they were going to do it until they did it.. The day they did it.. So I don&rsquot know.. LAMB: If somebody wanted to get an example of a genuine, card carrying liberal.. WILLIAMS: Mmmm.. LAMB: Are you it?.. WILLIAMS: I think I&rsquom to the left of liberal.. LAMB: And what can you give us some markers there? Of what makes somebody a liberal? You know, we have this debate all the time.. on this network.. WILLIAMS: I can&rsquot I&rsquom not sure I can say what makes a liberal.. I can say what motivates me.. LAMB: Fine.. WILLIAMS: I am burning with righteous indignation at injustice.. What I was in a women&rsquos peace conference in Santa Fe years ago.. And I tend to get highly impassioned when I speak.. And during the question and answer period, a woman in the back raised her hand and said, &rdquoJody Williams, how can you be working for peace when you&rsquore so angry?&rdquo You know, can you be an angry person and really be working for peace? My response was, &rdquoI&rsquom not angry.. Angry is like if somebody bugs me and I scream at them.. Or I stub my toe, because I&rsquom the clumsiest human on the planet, and I get mad at the table.. I am full of righteous indignation.. I&rsquom angry at injustice.. I.. LAMB: Well, let me interrupt just a second.. LAMB: What&rsquos the difference between your righteous indignation than, say, George Herbert Walker Bush and George W.. Bush, who were both involved in the Iraqi situation? Weren&rsquot they righteously indignant about the injustice of what was going on?.. WILLIAMS: What injustice?.. LAMB: Saddam Hussein going into Kuwait?.. WILLIAMS: That might be a justifiable intervention.. Bush II&rsquos intervention, I believe along with many people in the world including many nations, that that was an illegal invasion.. I believe that wholeheartedly we disrupted the lives of how many people? How many did we kill there? Both on purpose and collateral damage.. And look at the state of that country now.. LAMB: But wouldn&rsquot you violate the law if you were righteously indignant about what this country was doing? Wouldn&rsquot you.. WILLIAMS: I haven&rsquot.. lay down in the middle of the street to stop traffic like they did here during the Vietnam War.. I would be involved in nonviolent protest, yes.. My first arrest, actually, was outside the South African Embassy during the apartheid period.. When the organizations were coordinating mass arrests on a daily basis.. You know? I got arrested then.. My sister, Nobel Peace Laureate Mairead Maguire from Northern Ireland, myself and 60 other people including bishops and other well known protestors were arrested in front of the White House on Lafayette Park when Mr.. Bush decided to invade Iraq.. I believe in nonviolent protest.. I believe that is my right under the constitution.. I would not pick up a gun and use that to indicate my righteous indignation at injustice.. LAMB: Anybody in your family own guns?.. WILLIAMS: My brother has been a hunter since he was 12.. LAMB: Steve, or the other.. Good God, no.. Sorry.. No.. My schizophrenic brother my brother&rsquos guns were locked away so he couldn&rsquot get near them.. LAMB: Do you ever talk to your brother about the guns?.. LAMB: What happens between the two of you? Is he what&rsquos his politics? What&rsquos his politics?.. WILLIAMS: Well, you know, in the early days, I used to just go rabid about it.. When I was younger, I was very I was a little more lacking in sympathy, for lack of a better way of putting it.. We used to fight about it.. But he has helped me understand that for hunters like himself he hunts whenever he can, but he cleans his own animals.. He eats all the meat that he hunts.. He&rsquos not a how does he call them? He&rsquos not a trophy hunter.. He&rsquos not a &rdquodirty hunter&rdquo is what he calls them, the ones that&rsquoll go out in the night and shine lights in the eyes of an animal so they can stun it and kill it.. We I think he&rsquos mellowed.. Because I have said I don&rsquot have a problem necessarily with guns.. But I have a problem with unregulated use of the ability of anyone and their brother to acquire as many guns as they want.. Certainly, my brother would never hunt an animal with a semiautomatic weapon that would blast it to pieces.. You know? So I think we have more sane conversations these days.. LAMB: In your book, you tell us the exact moment when you I don&rsquot know how to when you decided that you were attracted physically to your now husband.. WILLIAMS: Goose.. His name is Steve Goose.. OK? He&rsquos.. LAMB: And he&rsquos affectionately called Goose throughout your book.. WILLIAMS: Goose is the director of the arms division at Human Rights Watch, which is arms as in weapons.. We met banning landmines.. LAMB: And he was married with how many children?.. WILLIAMS: Three see this is one of the things that I talk about not being a saint.. I&rsquom a normal human being.. We were friends in college.. Then we fell in love.. And it was very painful.. The separation from his family was very painful.. With the kids, it was very painful.. He tried to go home several times.. And every time, I said, &rdquoGo.. Go.. LAMB: And tell us about the moment, though.. The exact moment.. WILLIAMS: The moment was when I was mentioning the Convention on Conventional Weapons that treaty that we were unsuccessful in getting amended to ban landmines.. So 2 ½ years the campaign had been there pushing, as I said, you know, yelling and screaming.. Doing antics.. Building fake landmine fields for the diplomats to walk across.. And they would step on a sensor, and it would blow up.. I mean, trying to bring the mines to them.. We didn&rsquot succeed.. And in fact, the treaty was made weaker.. So we&rsquore done.. Two and a half years in Geneva.. In and out not all the time.. But we&rsquore packing up the office, and all of the campaigners are going down to this pub Pickwick Pub in Geneva which they had gone to all the time.. I didn&rsquot go.. I hated that stuff.. I didn&rsquot like the smoke and the people that much.. Not the people themselves, but I&rsquom a loner.. So I tend to go to my room and just lay down and read.. That night I decided to go.. And we were at the pub.. And I usually sneak out, because I hate goodbyes.. So I was sneaking out to go back to the hotel.. I had a very early plane the next day back to Vermont.. And all of a sudden, Steve Goose is beside me.. And we were walking back to the hotel, campaigners tended to stay in the same hotel.. And we get to the front door, and we hear a voice above us, and it&rsquos our friend, Susan Walker, who had been working on the campaign for years with Handicap International out of France.. And she&rsquos holding a bottle of wine and being ridiculous, we went upstairs and had some more wine.. And Susan Sorry, Susan Susan fell over on the actually, laid down gently on the bed.. And the next thing we knew, she was snoring.. And all of a sudden, Goose and I kissed.. It wasn&rsquot premeditated.. It we kissed.. And it was like, Oh my God.. Oh my God.. And it was too late.. I rushed to get on my airplane.. And it was one of those things where you just think, you know, we&rsquod had too much to drink.. It was a stupid thing.. Let&rsquos just forget about that.. And then two days later, he called me on a Sunday, from his house.. And we never talked outside of work time.. And it was the most awkward conversation.. I can&rsquot even remember what we said.. It lasted about 45 seconds.. But that was when I knew that something was happening that I wasn&rsquot sure what to do with.. LAMB: How&rsquod his wife find out?.. WILLIAMS: He told her.. LAMB: What was her reaction?.. WILLIAMS: Well, you can imagine.. Fury.. She locked him out of the house.. LAMB: But he went back.. WILLIAMS: He tried.. Many times.. I moved back to Vermont.. LAMB: Didn&rsquot you two have an agreement that you wouldn&rsquot talk?.. WILLIAMS: Who?.. LAMB: You and Goose?.. WILLIAMS: Oh OK.. Several times he tried to go home while we were living together.. We talked about it.. It was very upsetting for all of us.. And then it got really to be too much.. It was like two years later.. It&rsquos &rsquo99.. And I said, &rdquoGo.. Go back home.. I will move.. &rdquo We were renting a house in Alexandria at that point.. LAMB: Right over here in Virginia.. And I said, &rdquoI&rsquoll go back to Vermont.. &rdquo So I packed up my U-Haul.. Rented one, packed it up.. Left the house intact for him, though.. I thought, well, if he&rsquos in really bad shape, I&rsquom not going to denude the house and leave him like sleeping on a mattress on the floor.. And my dog and I and my sister drove to Vermont.. And I spent I think the first 10 days on the floor weeping in my pajamas.. I&rsquom being melodramatic, but it was pretty sad.. We were not communicating.. I said that you can&rsquot really be trying with your wife, if we&rsquore communicating.. That&rsquos obviously doesn&rsquot work.. And I decided a couple of weeks later to go out to California to see friends.. And I got an e-mail.. And I was angry.. You know, why are you e-mailing me? What are you trying to do? Like make sure that I&rsquom in pain? Yes, I&rsquom in pain.. And then he called me.. And I told him that I was thinking about moving out to LA.. I was going to stay with my friend.. She had lost her husband to lung cancer.. And she was a mess, and I was a mess.. We figured we&rsquod be great roommates.. And that kind of freaked Goose out.. And we worked it out, and I came back and.. LAMB: Married.. WILLIAMS: We got married.. LAMB: How&rsquos it working out?.. WILLIAMS: He&rsquos awesome.. He&rsquos totally awesome.. And we moved even all the difficulty.. We moved to Fredericksburg on February 1, 2001.. We still live there.. Five minutes from his kids so that he could be with his kids and they could be with him.. Because it wasn&rsquot about the kids.. It was you know it sounds dumb.. But people grow apart in relationships.. And if they don&rsquot really work at them, all of a sudden you wake up and how&rsquod you get here?.. LAMB: Let me go back to a question I asked you early.. LAMB: Why do you think anybody wants to know this about a Nobel Peace Prize winner?.. WILLIAMS: Know which? That or everything that I&rsquove put in the book?.. LAMB: Everything that you&rsquove put in the book.. And there&rsquos a lot of personal stuff.. I mean, I could have written some glossy ridiculousness.. Pretended that I was close to perfect.. LAMB: Who wanted you to write this book?.. WILLIAMS: I wanted to.. Partly just to sort out my own stuff.. But I want people to understand that there&rsquos nothing magic about helping to make the world a better place.. You just get up off your butt and participate.. LAMB: By the way, did Goose read this before you.. Before I even wrote the painful part about our relationship, we talked about it.. LAMB: Was he concerned at all about the kids reading this?.. WILLIAMS: Well, yes.. They&rsquore now in they&rsquore mid-20s.. You know, and.. LAMB: What did they think of you?.. WILLIAMS: Oh, my God.. They hated my guts.. Of course.. LAMB: Still?.. No, when they started coming around the house, I said I never wanted kids, first of all.. I knew at 13 I did not want children.. So I ended up with a guy who, by the way, is hard of hearing and had three kids.. And so when they first came to the house, you know, I said to them, &rdquoYou don&rsquot have to like me.. I do not have to like you.. However, we will be polite to each other in this house.. And when you&rsquore obnoxious and I can&rsquot take it anymore, I will leave you with your dad.. I will go up to my bedroom, shut the door and read, which I&rsquod probably rather be doing, anyway.. &rdquo And they were and I didn&rsquot do it for shock value.. I really meant it.. And whenever they&rsquod drive me nuts, I&rsquod just go up to my room, shut the door and read.. And I think I didn&rsquot do it to confuse them or anything.. I didn&rsquot want to be near them.. And I think over time, they couldn&rsquot believe that I didn&rsquot want to somehow pretend I was their mother.. I&rsquom not their mother.. We&rsquore very close.. LAMB: Here&rsquos some video.. The last video.. Only 30 seconds.. WILLIAMS: That&rsquos fine.. LAMB: Back on something you said in 2007.. WILLIAMS: So you end the Soviet Union, you end the threat of communism.. How are you going to justify the military expenditure of the United States of America, unless you have a global enemy of similar scope? You have to have something big enough, scary enough, evil enough to justify continuing the game.. And I&rsquom sorry, part of it is a game.. Part of it&rsquos real.. I&rsquom no utopian.. Just because you win the Nobel Peace Prize does not mean that you suddenly become Mother Teresa and that you don&rsquot believe that sometimes the use of force is necessary.. LAMB: When is the use of force necessary?.. WILLIAMS: For self-defense only.. And I do not buy Mr.. Obama&rsquos argument that extra-judicial execution by drone which under international law is murder is self-defense.. LAMB: Can I ask you the liberals in this country I don&rsquot know, I don&rsquot want to over-characterize, got very at George W.. Bush.. throughout the whole war.. Why are they not angry with Barack Obama?.. WILLIAMS: Many of us are.. LAMB: But not very many.. WILLIAMS: I think that I think there&rsquos not much coverage of it.. You know, in the same way there was against Mr.. LAMB: Why is that?.. WILLIAMS: The liberal media.. I&rsquom joking.. I don&rsquot if I knew, you know, maybe I could change the world more quickly.. But I don&rsquot think the coverage is there.. I think for many people because Obama was so different from Bush in many ways, there&rsquos a lack of desire to analyze and critique his policies the same way one would Mr.. I, on the other hand, believe I don&rsquot care who the president is.. I don&rsquot care what his party is.. I care what his policies are.. And if they are worse than those of Mr.. Bush, they are certainly worthy of criticism.. You know, Obama I think it was within the first two months in office in his first term used drones more than Bush had in the eight years of his administration.. And nobody said a word.. We have created a borderless battlefield.. We are killing people in countries with which we are not at war.. How can we justify this? I was with an international lawyer in Geneva recently.. And he said, &rdquoSome time somebody is going to kill a US soldier in Nevada.. One of the soldiers who goes in every day and does the drone strike.. &rdquo And he says, &rdquoI am going to have to call that an act of war.. &rdquo Legal under the laws of war.. He&rsquos attacking a military target.. I&rsquom not advocating.. I&rsquom just saying how can we kill people wherever we want and believe that it&rsquos not going to come back? It scares me that we&rsquore so complacent.. That we&rsquore not willing to ask those questions.. And it scares me that some people in this country actually think we have the right to murder.. LAMB: The name of the book is &rdquoMy Name is Jody Williams: A Vermont Girl&rsquos Winding Path to the Nobel Peace Prize&rdquo, won it in 1997.. We thank you.. WILLIAMS: Thank you.. END -..

    Original link path: /Transcript/?ProgramID=1434
    Open archive

  • Title: Q & A
    Descriptive info: March 3, 2013.. Bill Steigerwald.. Author, "Dogging Steinbeck: Discovering America and Exposing The Truth About 'Travels With Charley'".. : Our guest is journalist and author Bill Steigerwald.. He discusses his recent book titled, Dogging Steinbeck: Discovering America and Exposing the Truth About Travels With Charley.. He challenges the authenticity of Nobel Prize recipient and author John Steinbeck s 1962 book called Travels With Charley.. Steigerwald retraced Steinbeck s cross country journey exactly 50 years later.. He wrote about it at the time in a blog for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, and kept a video log of many of the highlights of the trip.. He contends that Steinbeck took so many liberties with the truth in the original book that it should not be classified as non-fiction.. He says that many of the encounters Steinbeck describes were simply made up by the author.. In addition, he challenges the perception that Steinbeck was roughing it during his journey.. Instead, he suggests that of the 75 days he was away from his New York home, Steinbeck was accompanied by his wife for 43 days and stayed in some of the country s top hotels, motels and resorts while the dog, Charley, was placed in a kennel.. Steigerwald discusses his motivations for writing the book, and describes many of the hurdles he overcame on the journey to self publication of the book.. BRIAN LAMB: Bill Steigerwald, author of Dogging Steinbeck , when did you first read Travels with Charley and what is it?.. BILL STEIGERWALD: Travels with Charley is John Steinbeck s last major work.. It was supposedly a nonfiction account of his trip around the country with his dog Charley.. I read it, I remember reading it in, when I was 15, so probably would have been about 1963, 64, a couple of years after it came out.. It came out in 62 and I just remember being kind of disappointed that on his great trek, he didn t come through Pittsburgh.. The closest he came was Erie, about 110 miles north of us.. I have a vague recollection of reading it and, but it made no impression on me and Steinbeck himself, I had to read Of Mice and Men , Grapes of Wrath.. I didn t have to read his other sort of major work and that would be Cannery Row in high school, but they always say that Bruce Springsteen s life was changed when he read Grapes of Wrath.. It turned him into, it gave him a great social conscience and wanted to do work for the common working man.. It had no effect on me.. I was a Goldwater boy I guess.. Hillary Clinton was a Goldwater girl in Chicago.. She s almost the same age as I am and I was a Goldwater boy and that set me off in a whole different direction than Bruce Springsteen has gone.. LAMB: The book ends, the book Travels with Charley , when did the trip happen for him?.. STEIGERWALD: On September 23, 1960, after a great deal of preparation, he left his summer home in Sag Harbor, new York, on Long Island, at the European end of Long Island and he and Charley set off in his camper van.. It was a combination pickup truck with a camper almost like a, it was almost like a sailboat cabin or a boat cabin on top of, set into the bed of the pickup.. LAMB: Yes, we ll show it in a minute.. STEIGERWALD: He took off on September 23rd and headed north into Massachusetts and visited his kid at Eaglebrook School near Deerfield, Mass.. Then made his way, then Steinbeck and Charley made his way up to the top of Maine.. For some strange reason, he thought if he was going to go west, which he was ultimately going to do, he had to touch the top of Maine first and boy was he sorry because he found out how big Maine is real fast.. So he worked his way, he went to Bangor and then up the coast and up to Fort Kent, top of Maine and dropped down and then actually went west.. LAMB: How many days was he on the road?.. STEIGERWALD: I figure 75, maybe 77 at the most.. No one knows for sure.. He kept no notes.. There were no records.. There are no expense reports, at least that I could find or that anybody had.. So I know when he started, September 23, 1960 and I know that he was, he mailed something from, is it Pelahatchie, Mississippi, I think December 3, 1960 and he was pushing hard to get home then.. He was sick of the road.. He was sick of everything and he was just trying to get home.. LAMB: What kind of dog?.. STEIGERWALD: It was a French poodle born in France, 10 years old, it was his wife s, his wife Elaine, his third wife and widow, it was her dog and at the last minute apparently, he said hey, how about if I take the dog for company.. LAMB: Quick background on you, where did you work most of your life?.. STEIGERWALD: I grew up in Pittsburgh.. I decided to get into journalism, went to Penn State, started to get a Master s, didn t work out, moved to Cincinnati for four years in say 73, I say Derby Day of 73 and then I left Derby Day of 77 and went to L.. A.. , got in a side door at the L.. Times as a copy editor, did a lot of freelancing, very lucky, had 12 great years in L.. I went out there with I guess, I think there s a theme in my life here, a car with everything I owned on top including an old typewriter and I went out to see what would happen to me in Los Angeles.. I was divorced at the time and had two kids and I ended up getting married again and having three Hollywood born children, that s my great gift to them, born in Hollywood, worked at the L.. Times for 10 years from 79 to 89 and then quit and moved back to Pittsburgh, as I say to raise my children and die in peace.. LAMB: But you did work at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.. STEIGERWALD: Then I worked at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette for the 90 s basically and then the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review which is Richard Scaife s conservative / libertarian alternative to the Post-Gazette in the 00 s.. LAMB: On the cover of your book, it says discovering America and exposing the truth about Travels with Charley , why is there a truth to be exposed?.. STEIGERWALD: Well, I set out to do this, a lot of people think I set out to bring Steinbeck down, which is totally silly.. I did a lot of feature stories in my life as a journalist, a Sunday feature story where you spend a week or two with somebody and it s a long piece and there might be analysis and you sort of, a perspective that I would bring to it, it wasn t a straight up and down reportorial piece, but more of a first person piece although I didn t write it in first person.. I was very much in those stories.. I thought that having quit my daily newspaper job in March of 2009, I thought I m going to write books until I die.. So how about this book? I ll find out where Steinbeck went on his trip and I ll follow that route faithfully 50 years later, exactly 50 years later.. It s almost like a Sunday feature to the 10th power, a Sunday newspaper feature to the 10th power.. No newspaper today would let me go away for seven weeks or spend that kind of money.. So I did it on my own dime and on my own time.. My agent in New York did not think it was a good idea.. Road books don t sell anymore unless you re somebody famous.. I just started researching Steinbeck and the first thing I did was I bought the Travels with Charley , read it.. LAMB: This is what it looks like now, this is the 1997 version.. STEIGERWALD: OK.. LAMB: I read it first, 1962.. STEIGERWALD: Yes, sure, and as did probably close to a million people.. It sold 250,000 copies right off, immediately.. So in any case, I went on the, I just started researching Travels with Charley.. I went through the book, I wrote down every place he went, every place he mentioned and I thought it would be fairly easy to find his route and determine what it was.. I had a 1962 road atlas and I sort of plotted my trip.. I did an awful lot of research.. It was a good thing I didn t have a real job.. So I just kept building this sort of database of time and place line for Travels with Charley.. I went to the Steinbeck Fest that summer of 2010.. I went in the fall of 2010 which was exactly 50 years after he went.. He went right in the midst of the JFK / Nixon race and I went 50 years later, the Tea Party fall of 2010.. So by the time I left, I had read also the original manuscript of Travels with Charley which is sort of like a holy relic.. The west coast holy relic is Rocinante, the truck he went in.. We ve interviewed a Steinbeck scholar in that, in 2001 or 2002 I think and the east coast relic is the manuscript, the original handwritten manuscript of Travels with Charley.. When I went to read it at the Morgan Library, which is, I don t know if you ve ever seen it, it s unbelievably beautiful, it s like getting in and out of the Pentagon and the Vatican at the same time, they have appointments and very, very strict.. LAMB: In New York City, I ve been there many times, but it s on.. STEIGERWALD: Madison Avenue I think.. LAMB: Madison Avenue at about 37th or something like that?.. STEIGERWALD: Somewhere there, I got off at Penn Station and walked around the corner.. LAMB: Named after J.. P.. Morgan, it s his old home.. STEIGERWALD: Yes, and they brought out the manuscript that had been donated by Steinbeck in 1962, handwritten.. He wrote in long hand, in pencil mostly, margin to margin, top to bottom on legal pads.. Its, I can read most of his words now but many of them are indecipherable.. I compared the manuscript with the published book.. LAMB: Had anybody ever done that?.. STEIGERWALD: The guy who runs the Morgan told me that I was the first person to do it I think since 2006 and that only maybe six or seven people had done it since the year 2000.. LAMB: Had anybody ever published anything like you did?.. STEIGERWALD: No, no and when you read, I call it the smoking gun, the smoking artillery piece because when you read that and I did that last in my research, it was kind of strange how it worked out, it worked out very well and so there I am reading this manuscript and I had my little smartphone with the Kindle version of Travels with Charley and I paged through that and I d look at the manuscript, compare, compare, and you realize that the untruth part about Travels with Charley is very, is betrayed by the manuscript and the edits made on the manuscript.. You see what he really did, for instance, that his wife joined him in Seattle and spent the next 28 days with him on the west coast.. That s not in the book.. He had written that originally in the manuscript.. He had all these scenes about them traveling together down the coast, going to resorts and staying at the St.. Francis Hotel in San Francisco which is where Fatty Arbuckle and Queen Victoria stayed, a very palatial place.. I just realized then that there was quite a large gap between what Steinbeck wrote and what he actually did on this trip, who he met, where he went and who he traveled with.. LAMB: You actually called it a fraud.. STEIGERWALD: I did and that was sort of a slow process.. In my notebook, the day I read the manuscript, I wrote, scribbled the thing that this is a fraud, but I didn t use that word until much later.. It was really introduced by a friend of mine at the Post-Gazette who put it in the subhead.. He called it something of a fraud and I kind of liked the way that rang.. In a sense, it is a literary fraud.. It was marketed, sold, reviewed and taught for 50 years as a true story, as the true account of John Steinbeck s trip, who he met and what he really thought about America.. LAMB: How old was he when he made the trip?.. STEIGERWALD: He was 58 and not in great health.. He had had a couple of strokes and he was fine, but he was not a young man.. LAMB: Let s take a look at that, we were out there in Salinas at the Steinbeck Center, back in 2002.. We did a series on writers.. Here is Tom Steinbeck and Rocinante, which by the way, what was that named after?.. STEIGERWALD: Don Quixote s horse, I hope.. I m a nonfiction guy.. LAMB: Let s watch.. Tom Steinbeck: So what I remember about this most was basically the setup of the vehicle and.. LAMB: What is it?.. Tom Steinbeck: It s just a Ford pickup truck but it had one of the first camper bodies that I d ever seen.. This was not a major sport in those days.. There were very few large campers that contained toilets and all the rest of that and he sort of thought it made him look rather invisible on the roads.. There weren t really that many of them in those days.. But he called it the turtle.. LAMB: Rocinante, why did he name?.. Tom Steinbeck: Rocinante because my father was a great fan of Don Quixote and Rocinante was Sancho Panza s mount and it s just really amazing that he occupied this space.. I wonder if I can still get in here.. LAMB: Did he sleep in here?.. Tom Steinbeck: Yes, this table goes down and there was another piece of mattress that went on top of it so you could sleep this way.. LAMB: Did you talk or meet with tom Steinbeck?.. STEIGERWALD: No, I tried several times.. He was one of the first guys I wanted to talk to really because I figured who would know more about the real trip and what went on, on the west coast, than Tom.. It was kind of awkward, his wife was kind of tough to get through, but then I sort of gained her I think confidence and she warmed up to me a little, but I never, I never, he was in Santa Barbara, I was never really going to be in Santa Barbara.. I offered to go down there.. I never did meet him.. I never talked to him.. I could have talked to him on the phone, I didn t need to actually meet him.. LAMB: Why should anybody care?.. STEIGERWALD: That s a good question.. LAMB: Not about your meeting with Tom Steinbeck, but about this.. STEIGERWALD: About the whole thing, in a way, if I were only doing the book about the fictionalizing and some of the sort of deceit that went into the writing and marketing and publishing of Travels with Charley, I don t think that s enough to write a book about.. I think, and that was part of my problem selling the idea into the traditional publishers in New York.. I had an agent.. We tried everywhere.. Road books don t sell.. Steinbeck is not important enough or interesting enough to anybody, so I didn t have a real, neither one of those made a book, but I think everything made a book and my adventures, my sort of innocent, naïve attempt to follow this trail and then applying basic 30 years worth of journalism experience to the process as opposed to being a dog fan or a travel fan or a Steinbeck fan.. I was a journalist.. I followed the trail.. There is no great reason to say this was a, is a big deal, I don t think.. But, there s fiction and there s nonfiction and there is quite a divide between the two these days, creative nonfiction and narrative nonfiction, all these different applications of fictional techniques to nonfiction that either are OK or not OK depending on how far you go in making things up or fudging the facts or changing things around.. As they say, all good nonfiction contains fictional techniques, narrative and all, nonfiction contains fiction and fiction contains.. LAMB: He won a Nobel Prize for literature.. What did he get it for, his whole body of work?.. STEIGERWALD: Pretty much so, I think he had, he won it in 1962, a couple of months after Travels with Charley came out and I guess it just came out recently that he was sort of a, sort of like an OK, we don t have anybody else worthy of it this year, we ll give it to him because they had a bunch of people and they all sort of, I can t think of the woman who wrote Out of Africa was one of the finalists.. They just, they gave it to Steinbeck and they just released the notes from the Nobel committee.. He was sort of, not a second choice, but like OK, we ll give it to Steinbeck for his body of work but he, Travels with Charley had just come out and was a big success at the time, big commercial success.. They did mention that in the release about the award and he had written The Winter of Our Discontent two years earlier.. LAMB: Let s look at John Steinbeck back in 1962 as he accepts the award.. John Steinbeck: It is customary for a recipient of this award to offer personal or scholarly comment on the nature and the direction of literature.. At this particular time however, I think it would be well to consider the high duties and the responsibilities of the makers of literature.. Such is the prestige of the Nobel award and of this place where I stand, that I am compelled, not to squeak like a grateful and apologetic mouse, but to roar like a lion out of pride in my profession and in the great and good men who have practiced it through the ages.. LAMB: What do you think he was like? What do you know from what your research has shown?.. STEIGERWALD: He s likable in a lot of ways and I guess he s, he became rich and famous.. He started out as a struggling writer.. He worked hard to become rich and famous.. He was a big guy.. You can tell there, he had a big, sort of heavy voice and I think he was a funny guy, a playful guy.. He loved to travel.. He traveled an awful lot with his family.. At one point, they all took off for Europe, the two boys, a tutor and everything for  ...   General Eisenhower?.. STEIGERWALD: He made fun of him.. He made fun of his syntax as which they always used to do.. LAMB: In print?.. STEIGERWALD: I don t know.. In letters, he sure did to Stevenson and others.. I can t remember if there s anything about Eisenhower in Travels with Charley but a lot of what was taken out of Travels with Charley was Steinbeck s partisan sort of sniping at Nixon mainly and a little bit at Ike, I think.. LAMB: What d he think of Nixon?.. STEIGERWALD: Oh he hated Nixon, he really did not like Nixon.. LAMB: On what point, what was the reason?.. STEIGERWALD: You know, I think, Steinbeck was openly and again, this was taken out of the book, he was a partisan Democrat and he said that in the original manuscript twice and I think both times it was taken out.. He just did not like Republicans and though he had sort of grown up the son of a Republican, his sisters were all Republicans, Monterey County in California went for Nixon in 1960, but he hated him.. LAMB: Where did you find the letter that he wrote to his editor at Viking?.. STEIGERWALD: That is fairly easy to find.. It s in, I think it may be, parts of it may be in one of the major biographies.. It s floating around a lot.. Bill Barich wrote a book where he sort of, where he went from across the waist of America from say New York to san Francisco, he uses that paragraph as a way to, as sort of a jumping off point to do his book and it s there, it s commonly found, I can t remember where I found it, I think it s in the biographies.. LAMB: Well you, I m going to read some of what John Steinbeck wrote to his editor at Viking.. When was it, after the travels?.. STEIGERWALD: This would have been after the travels, and probably in the summer of 61 when he was struggling to write, still struggling almost nine months after his trip ended to write Travels with Charley.. LAMB: Thinking and thinking for a word to describe decay, not disruption, not explosion, but simple rotting.. It seemed to carry on with a weary inertia.. No one was for anything and nearly everyone was against many things.. Negro hating white, white hating Negro, Republicans hating Democrats although there is little difference.. In all my travels, I saw very little real poverty, I mean the grinding, terrifying poorness of the 30 s, that at least was real and tangible.. No, it was a sickness, a kind of wasting disease.. There were wishes but no wants and underneath it all, the building energy like gases in a corpse.. When that explodes, I tremble to think what will be the result.. Over and over, I thought we lacked the pressures that make men strong and the anguish that makes men great.. The pressures are debts.. The desires are for more material toys and the anguish is boredom.. Through time, the nation has become a discontented land.. What s the difference between what he s saying then and what we are thinking now?.. STEIGERWALD: I think that was a horribly pessimistic and inaccurate account of America.. I think, I don t know where he gets it really.. I have a grudge against people who are rich and famous and live in New York and then who go out into, fly over the country and say that the people out there are too materialistic.. These are people who have everything they already need and then they go out and they complain about regular Americans wanting trucks and toys and things like that.. LAMB: How was America different for you once you got back off this trip?.. STEIGERWALD: Not much, I knew, my trip did not surprise me.. I had been around the country enough doing small, real journalism type stories and the people I met on my trip were no different from the people I had been meeting for 20, 30 years.. LAMB: Name some of the characters.. STEIGERWALD: The guy who, a German American who had a restaurant in Wisconsin named Rolf, I can t think of his last name, I d go into his restaurant at, in the dark of a night and he comes out of the kitchen, he s all covered with grease and he s a big man and he was back there cooking, he owns the place, he tells me his life story.. He tells me how he had seen Hitler when he was 8.. He was born in Frankfurt and just amazing little stories which I retell in there at length because I, where do you meet a guy like that except in the woods of Wisconsin?.. LAMB: What about the guy, I tried to find this on YouTube and couldn t, the guy that you said has made his own YouTube videos?.. STEIGERWALD: I couldn t find it either.. I think he may have taken them down.. A guy named Bob and he was a wild man.. LAMB: It was Oehner, I know I tried to find it.. STEIGERWALD: Yes, something like that.. There was one strange day in Wisconsin, I met four amazing characters in one long day.. Bob was the second one.. The first one was this guy in camo, he was riding on a camo ATV, ATV?.. LAMB: Yes, all-terrain vehicle.. STEIGERWALD: That s right, and he was sitting on the corner in the middle of nowhere and he s the guy who just, he was like an MSNBC Democrat just ranting and he was tremendous.. He spoke so slowly, I could just write every word he said and he was scary.. Then I met Bob who was even scarier because he had done all these YouTube videos and he was challenging Tea Party people and Republicans to fights through his YouTube thing and he was a total character, a nice guy, but a certifiably and proudly kind of crazy.. LAMB: But he would say that Tea Party folks are scary.. STEIGERWALD: Yes, oh yes, and being a libertarian, I can sort of, I can adapt to both, all ends of the spectrum.. I can, I said to Bob, I m not a Republican, he hated Republicans.. He hated CEOs, called them Hell s angels in suits.. Then I met Rolf, the restaurateur and he was a tremendous guy.. LAMB: We ve got some more video that I want to show.. There s one of when you visit the Spalding Inn where Steinbeck allegedly stayed instead of his camper.. Why do we say allegedly?.. STEIGERWALD: Because there s no real, real, real proof.. Two people told me he did, both of whom worked at the inn in 1960, but that allegedly maybe just left over, the left over caption from when I first put it up there.. STEIGERWALD: Because I later pretty much proved that he stayed there.. LAMB: Here s the video that we re talking about.. STEIGERWALD: The Spalding Inn, where Steinbeck really stayed on one of his passes through Lancaster, New Hampshire.. It s a lovely place.. I hadn t seen it yet and here s how you get to it.. This is where Steinbeck stayed according to a good local reporter named Jeff Woodburn.. Steinbeck was seen here by six or seven people in there dressed to the nines.. It s not really a camper is it?.. LAMB: Did you find yourself getting irritated as you went through the trip?.. STEIGERWALD: Not in a real sense, I think early on, I realized that what was in the book and what he really did were often very far apart and I didn t feel like, I think some people have accused me of being on a jihad of some kind.. I was just doing basically, this is what happens in journalism.. You set out to do something, I had to follow the trip and I had to complete the trip or I was, was no use doing it.. LAMB: Were you by yourself the whole time?.. LAMB: Did you have a dog with you?.. STEIGERWALD: I thought of a dog for about five minutes and then I thought how am I going to go crazy, go around the country this fast and worry about a dog too? I didn t have a dog at the time.. No, you ve got to do a trip like this alone.. It s interesting, Steinbeck, when he set out to do this trip, he had great plans and it was going to be what amounts to, what would have amounted to a great journalism project by a great writer.. He was going to go alone.. He was going to take pictures.. He was going to send dispatches from the road to various, to a newspaper chain if he could get one going.. He did none of that and he didn t travel alone.. He knew he had to go alone but he didn t, he wasn t alone very much of the trip.. LAMB: But you tried all along the way, and you write about it in your book, to get people to follow you.. STEIGERWALD: Yes, I did a daily blog back to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette called Travels without Charlie and so two or three times a day, I would send back much of what s turned out to be the core of that book, the people I met, what I did, what I was doing, where I was, photos, no video at the time.. When I got back, I started putting up the videos on YouTube.. So I documented my trip pretty much as I went and that got to be a lot of work, but I had fun.. I had no, this was not torture.. I had a great time.. I met people I ll never forget and they re in the book, thank God and thank God I had written so much about it as I went, because to put it together after the fact, I think would have been very tough.. LAMB: You had a reference to this network in your book when you talk about the call in show and that Steinbeck wrote about the voices that he heard sounding more and more the same across the country, but you say tune in this network and listen to the calls come in and you hear a lot of different voices.. What was your experience out there? Did you hear a lot of accents?.. STEIGERWALD: I heard plenty of accents.. I taped one, a guy in Maine who gave me directions to the house that Steinbeck stopped at on his trip and it was, he was so amazing.. I could hardly understand what he said although I turned on my smartphone and taped the directions he was giving me because his accent was so heavy.. He had a great accent.. Someone waited on me in Texas, a waitress, I could barely understand what she was talking, her accent was so heavy.. There are plenty of people with accents still in America.. I live in Pittsburgh where there are still plenty of people with a Pittsburgh accent running around.. You d think that TV and radio and everything else would have killed them, killed it off but it hasn t.. LAMB: On the front of this cover I have here of the Steinbeck Travels with Charley book, is a picture of John Steinbeck sitting in front of a tree with the dog in front of him, the poodle.. You talk about this picture in your book.. STEIGERWALD: That picture was also used as part of the ad campaign and I think that s what I m referring to.. They did full page ads in the New York Times and elsewhere I guess, that s the picture they used with Steinbeck and Charley together.. LAMB: Charley is a big dog.. STEIGERWALD: Yes, apparently he was.. He was a standard poodle which I guess means he s, he wasn t a baby poodle, that s for sure.. LAMB: How many do you, did you find anybody that could tell you how many books of the Travels with Charley had been sold since he published it in 62?.. STEIGERWALD: The Penguin Group now owns the rights to Steinbeck s books.. When Steinbeck wrote them, it was the Viking Press.. The Penguin Group people said, I said can you give me an estimate of how many Travels with Charley books have been sold throughout history and they gave me the number 1.. 5 million.. When it first came out, somewhere I saw the figure of 250,000 copies were sold within the first month or two or three.. LAMB: So if somebody wanted your book, they can get it on Amazon as an e-book or as a paperback.. STEIGERWALD: Both.. LAMB: What s the paperback cost?.. STEIGERWALD: Its $12.. 99 I think.. I can change, that s the beauty, I can change, I can make it $10.. 99 or $19.. 99 five minutes after I leave here.. LAMB: Is it in any bookstore?.. STEIGERWALD: No, it is not on any bookstore, only on Amazon.. LAMB: Can they find your video on the YouTube channel?.. STEIGERWALD: Yes, if you, I have a Web site called The Truth About Travels with Charley and it s truthaboutcharley.. com.. If they go there, they can eventually find my YouTube videos.. LAMB: Here s some video at Fremont Peak.. Where is that?.. STEIGERWALD: It s a beautiful place, it overlooks, it s the highest point in Monterey County in Steinbeck country.. It is in, it s about 20 miles from Salinas and it looks over that whole Salinas valley and it s a little peak and you might, it s maybe about three times the size of your studio and you have to sort of be a mountain goat to get there.. It s a great place.. LAMB: How long did it take you to get to the top?.. STEIGERWALD: It s a 15 minute walk from the parking lot, but what it is, to me I loved it because there are no rangers, there are no guards, there are no railings or, it s a state park yet it, you re pretty much on your own.. LAMB: Let s look at what you videotaped.. STEIGERWALD: This is kind of high up here.. In fact, it s ridiculously high and a little scary up here.. I m on Fremont Peak overlooking Steinbeck country, that glare behind me is the sun bouncing off Monterey Bay.. I hope I don t kill myself trying to show this.. I ve already dropped the camera and miraculously, it seems to be still working.. I am putting, I m swinging around, I am now looking into the sun as you can see.. LAMB: What did this Fremont Point mean to John Steinbeck?.. STEIGERWALD: There s a lot of good writing in Travels with Charley and I think one of my favorite sections is when he is leaving Monterey County and heading back east after, on his trip and he says that he goes up to the top of Fremont Peak which he could always see from his childhood home.. You can see Fremont Peak, the little point, from everywhere in Salinas valley.. He went up there and he used it as I guess as a metaphor to go up there and look back in space and time on his life and it s some really good writing.. I never knew anything about it.. I went there because he went there and it s hard to get to.. You have to go around the back of the mountains and you have to go up 11 miles through this narrow road along these ridges and then you have to walk to the top where I was there in that picture, in that video.. It s worth it.. You can sit there, usually by yourself, there s nobody there, and watch the sun sink into Monterey Bay 25 miles away.. LAMB: So what about this whole process and project for you? Did you want to make money off this?.. LAMB: Do you need to make money off this?.. STEIGERWALD: Yes, I mean not, I basically, I was living on my, what was left of my 401(k).. I did it on spec, I had no advance.. Ideally, I wanted to get an advance from some publishing company and they d give me, even if it was $20,000 or $50,000 and then you go out and you write the book and do the traveling and everything while you re spending the publisher s money.. Nobody gave me a dime so it came down to the, but when I tried to sell the book before I went, everybody said, the publishers and the agents and everybody said you ve got to make the trip first.. You just can t say you re going to take this trip.. Nobody is going to give you a dime.. So I did the trip and I came back and it was very easy to get an agent after I had made the trip.. That s true, but it was impossible to get any of the legacy or the traditional publishers in New York to fork over any money.. LAMB: What do you think? Are you going to make enough money on this to make it worthwhile?.. STEIGERWALD: It s already worthwhile.. I had, to me it, this being here with you is reward enough.. It s selling about four or five copies a day and if you do the math, and I make $3 or $4 a copy, if this will bring me in $400 a month for as long as I live, it s like a second little Pittsburgh Post-Gazette pension.. LAMB: What outlet gave you the most attention on this and has done the most good for you in American media?.. STEIGERWALD: Reason Magazine, my friends, my libertarian friends at Reason, I wrote everything I wrote for the Post-Gazette within four weeks after I came back from my trip.. I made my statement that the book was a literary fraud all that stuff.. Five months later, Reason Magazine published a larger expanded version of that Post-Gazette article.. I was able to get someone I knew at the New York Times to wave it in front of the New York Times.. No national media had paid any attention to me other than, actually on the media, the NPR station, they were smart.. They were on it, they were good, but that was back in December.. But no print media, Reason did the article.. New York Times saw it and once they did see it; I had a call from Charles McGrath of the New York Times.. He did an article about me and my claims and the power of the New York Times is awesome.. I suddenly given credibility.. I was reading my name in Hungarian, literally all over the world.. The story of Steinbeck s book Travels with Charley being outed as a piece of heavily fictionalized piece of work went all over the world.. LAMB: Our guest, Bill Steigerwald, lives in Pittsburgh, spent 10 years at the Los Angeles Times, a number of years with the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, and the Tribune-Review in Pittsburgh and has a book we ve been talking about called Dogging Steinbeck: Discovering America and Exposing the Truth About Travels with Charley.. Thank you very much.. STEIGERWALD: Thank you.. END..

    Original link path: /Transcript/?ProgramID=1433
    Open archive

  • Title: Q & A
    Descriptive info: February 24, 2013.. Keith Richburg.. Author and Journalist.. : Our guest is author and former Washington Post reporter Keith Richburg.. He discusses China and other countries he has lived in as a reporter for the past thirty-five years.. He recounts details of the exclusive story he reported about blind Chinese activist Chen Guangchen, and his attempts to leave the country.. Chen s release was ultimately granted after negotiations involving then U.. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.. He explains the co-dependency of the U.. -China relationship  ...   Communist Party Chief Bo Xilai which he states exposed a lot of corruption and shenanigans at high levels of the Chinese Communist Party.. He talks about his time in Africa, where he gathered information for his first book, Out Of America: A Black Man Confronts Africa, published in 1997.. He explains the difficulty of entering North Korea as a journalist and provides insight through video he was able to take, into a society which few journalists are allowed to enter.. Click here for the full transcript..

    Original link path: /Transcript/?ProgramID=1432
    Open archive

  • Title: Q & A
    Descriptive info: February 17, 2013.. Timothy Naftali - Part 2.. Former Director, Nixon Presidential Library and Museum (2007-11).. : Part 1 of this interview aired on January 6, 2013 and is available by clicking on the "Past Programs" tab above.. Our guest is historian and author Timothy Naftali.. He discusses the oral history project he conducted during his tenure as Director of the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum in Yorba Linda, California.. Between himself and his assistant, Paul Musgrave, there were over 140 interviews performed in various locations throughout the country.. He states the goal of the project was to obtain oral histories from members of Richard Nixon s administration as well as other prominent figures from the Nixon era.. Most of the histories are available on the library s website nixonlibrary.. gov as well as c-span.. org.. Naftali discusses interviews with White House Special Counsel Charles Colson, Treasury Secretary George Shultz and Acting Attorney General Robert Bork, to name a few.. Naftali details the challenges he faced as the first federal director of the museum which was privately run for seventeen years prior to becoming a federal facility administered by the National Archives and Records Administration in 2007.. LAMB: Tim Naftali, when you did 149 interviews with a lot of the people that served in the Nixon Administration and others that were around the administration, how did you raise the money to do it?.. NAFTALI: Well, the first 20 or so were paid by the Nixon Foundation.. Then, they got buyer s remorse.. And a group of alumni of the Nixon Administration who had worked in the domestic side rallied and raised a lot of money for this program.. I received contributions from Donald Rumsfeld.. I believe Dick Cheney.. I don t remember for a fact.. I know Donald Rumsfeld did.. I think Paul O Neil provided some funding, a number of people, because they felt the domestic side of the administration hasn t received the same attention that Henry Kissinger and Richard Nixon s foreign policy received.. And they were keen, and what I did was I used that pot of money only for interviews that had to with domestic policy.. I couldn t use that money for example to interview a Watergate figure.. For the Watergate interviews, I used the trust fund.. I was very conservative in how I used the money.. As the head of the library, the library received one half of every of all the ticket money that came into the library.. The other half.. LAMB: One-half.. NAFTALI: One-half.. The rest of the money goes to the private foundation.. And I saved that money.. That money was our trust fund.. I used that money for public programming so we could have independent public programming because the Nixon Foundation shut down all funding.. Normally, these libraries people don t know this but the libraries, the utilities are paid by the federal government.. The staff is federal and their salaries are paid by the federal government.. But exhibits, public programming, there is no money for that.. Congress doesn t appropriate funds for that.. I know that s very strange, isn t it? Because we are mandated to do non-partisan work and yet we don t have non-partisan money.. I understood this problem when they hired me.. I participated in the negotiations with the Nixon Foundation.. And one of the things that the National Archives wanted to do was to get five dollars in perpetuity from every ticket.. I realized that 25 years from now five dollars might be a quarter of it.. So, I said, no, no.. Please make it 50 percent.. So, we negotiated 50 percent.. With that 50 percent, I was able to fund our public programming, this oral history program, and I contributed from that trust fund 50 percent of the money that went into the Watergate exhibit.. There is no way we would have been able to put that Watergate exhibit in without I mean, I raised half a million by the third or fourth year I was there, we had half a million dollars in that trust fund.. LAMB: Where is the library located?.. NAFTALI: Yorba Linda, California.. Yorba Linda, California is in Orange County.. I know this for a fact because I used to drive every day.. It s an hour south of L.. it s almost equidistant between L.. and San Diego.. It is a little closer to L.. than it is to San Diego.. It s northern Orange County.. It s a very it s a changing environment but it s a wealthy somewhat conservative community.. One of the challenges I had was to make the library a national institution while still respectful of local customs.. And that was not easy.. LAMB: So the foundation the chairman of the foundation is still Ron Walker.. NAFTALI: Yes.. LAMB: How would you describe, I mean, you were very controversial.. I mean, were you about as controversial as any director of any of these presidential libraries?.. NAFTALI: Well, let others well, it became in the interest I mean, this is what s so if you look at what I said publicly from the beginning, from 2006 when the National Archives hired me to do this, I was very straightforward about what I was going to do.. So there was no bait and switch here, the National Archives came to me.. But it was a very interesting confluence of different events because the head of the Nixon Foundation at that point was John Taylor, Reverend John Taylor.. And John Taylor is an intellectual.. And he s very complicated.. And he s a bit torn about Nixon.. And he admired Nixon s mind and he wanted Nixon s library to be credible.. Now, I don t believe that every member of the Nixon Foundation shared John s intellectual goals.. He really wanted a Cold War historian and I ll leave it to others whether I m one of standing but he knew who I was because I ve worked at this tapes project at UVA.. And I m even-handed about the tapes.. I just let the materials speak for themselves.. I write books but on different subjects.. John Taylor wanted me too so you had Allen Weinstein who was then archivist of the United States he then he.. LAMB: During the Bush.. NAFTALI: During the Bush administration.. He s hired by President George W.. Allen knew me from a Russian project we ve worked on together my first book, One Hell of a Gamble.. It s about the Cuban missile crisis from the Russian side primarily.. Both of them wanted me.. They came to me.. I didn t apply for the job.. And so from the very beginning, I said, Look, you know, I mean I m a historian we ve got to have a place where historians feel comfortable and I m not a member of the Republican Party.. I m not partisan.. I m not going to become of the Republican Party.. I also mentioned the fact that I was gay.. I said, You know, I m not going to go into the closet for this job, please.. Is this because I told them, if you want this, this is what you re going to get.. So, I was very straightforward.. And when I talked to the daughters both Julie Nixon Eisenhower and Tricia Nixon Cox, I said to both of them, I m going to create a space where there s going to be debate about your father but I promise it ll be respectful and it ll be intellectual and your father was an intellectual.. And that s what I promised.. So, the fact that the foundation later would make a big deal out of this was politics because they knew what they were getting from the beginning.. And it becomes politics I ll tell you what happens.. The foundation paid lip service not John.. John Taylor is a complicated figure but most of the members of the foundation paid lip service to me.. They let me say all these things but they thought that Washington would rein me in.. They were convinced that the way the National Archive System worked was that all of the directors had to toe a certain line.. And so they assumed I would regardless of my big talking or whatever I believed that ultimately they would rein me in, but they didn t realize that Allen Weinstein was very nervous about having a library, a Nixon library that was viewed as continuing the cover-up.. LAMB: Who was the initial person that wanted you in there as the executive director?.. NAFTALI: Well, I was the director both men apparently.. John Taylor says that he wanted just as much as Allen Weinstein so both of them.. Both of them were suitors and they came to me out of the blue in 2006 and said, Would you do this?.. LAMB: Where were you then?.. NAFTALI: I was at the University of Virginia.. I was running the presidential recordings program and I was an associate professor out there and I was doing some teaching in history.. I had worked on the Nixon tapes a little bit mainly on the Kennedy and Johnson tapes.. And I knew what Nixon said on the tapes not everything he said on the tapes but a lot.. And I recognized the problem for the federal government.. How does the federal government paper over someone who makes racist and anti-Semitic comments on tape that can be played over and over again? But the answer is you don t paper it over.. But that means that the library can t be a legacy factory.. LAMB: But we have been able to hear those tapes or at least read about it, read the transcript.. NAFTALI: You ve been able to hear them for years.. The big the big and this is an achievement on the part of the Nixon project.. Before there was a library, there was a group of very dedicated archivists working at the National Archives and the first big opening actually thanks in part to Stanley Cutler, the professor legal professor who pushed hard for this but the first openings are at the end of the 1990s, I mean, way before I start.. So, there s a lot of very bad material that is available, bad in terms of being just dismaying.. LAMB: Had all of that been transcribed, though?.. NAFTALI: No.. That takes forever, very little has been transcribed.. Stanley Cutler did a little bit in his book called Abuse of Power.. But even that is about only 15 percent of the so-called abuse of power tapes that have come out.. But long story short, here s the problem for the federal government we have a habit in this country if I may say this now of glossing over presidents.. We decided some people that they are bald eagles and that they all have to be treated as if they re symbols of the country.. What that means though is you have a you have a smoothing over of their rough edges.. And there is a feeling among modern presidents that they have a right to a certain veneration and that veneration will be located in their presidential library.. And even if they re gone, their children in some cases and their former allies, their lieutenants who live longer than presidents because they re younger, they continue this.. In fact, in many ways, they are even more ferociously committed to the legacy not only because it involves them but because the old man is gone and they want to show their loyalty.. The problem is what does the government do, because it s responsible for these libraries, when you have a flawed president?.. LAMB: You got involved in a controversy over the Watergate exhibit.. LAMB: But let me just take it out of the Nixon library for a moment.. Have you been to the Clinton library?.. NAFTALI: No, I haven t yet.. LAMB: I was going to ask you how they dealt with all the problems he had in impeachment and whether or not they ve been fair there.. NAFTALI: I was told that he was that he was really impressed with the Watergate exhibit he hasn t seen it at Nixon.. And I was told that that was going to inspire him to do some make some changes to his museum.. One of the things that Allen Weinstein was hoping was that the Nixon library could be a new start because some of the libraries are much too much like shrines.. And, you know, this is public money, you know.. You don t get to tick off on your tax return whether your money goes to a Republican or a Democratic library or if you re an independent, goes to no library.. It goes to every library.. LAMB: Let me ask you this, George W.. Bush s library and museum is about to open in the early part of 2013.. How much of the building that we ll see was paid for by the federal government?.. NAFTALI: None of the building, that s the deal.. The building is paid for by the private foundation.. LAMB: And is the foundation headquarter inside the building?.. NAFTALI: Often, usually, they do.. But the deal is that they build the building and they have to meet National Archives specifications, federal government specifications.. LAMB: Only allowed so much square feet.. NAFTALI: Well, that s because Congress wants to say you see, I would like there to be a debate.. I mean, I think Americans have to decide what they want but I don t think they know that they have a choice.. Right now, Congress is reducing the amount of money that s going to these libraries and the result is that these libraries are going to be more and more like shrines because if you ask a private ally of a president to cough up a lot of money what do they want in return? Of course, they expect a certain slant.. And what Congress is doing is saying to these private foundations not only are you going to build the building but you ve got to create an endowment to pay for that building in perpetuity.. So these buildings are more and more they re paid for in private with private funds.. So what happens is the federal you build the building and the federal government gets the keys.. The hand over is the day that they open the building.. And so the federal government is there but the federal government is a pauper.. It s an amazing thing.. You have directors with no money.. The money they have is to pay for salaries and the light bill.. LAMB: But the Nixon library started differently.. NAFTALI: The Nixon library is the only one that started this way.. It was started s a private facility and then decided.. LAMB: Why was that why was that?.. NAFTALI: That s well; I know why it started as a private facility.. It started because of Watergate.. Gerald Ford signs a law in 1974 it s called the Presidential Recordings and Materials Preservation Act, PRMPA.. I was the only director who was whose work was governed by a single law.. There are different laws that govern the libraries but PRMPA governs only the Nixon materials and, therefore, the library.. By law, Richard Nixon s materials could not leave the District of 20 miles around the District of Columbia because it was felt that Richard Nixon was not a trustworthy conservator of his materials so he couldn t have a library.. By law, he couldn t have a library.. And that was because Richard Nixon had cut a deal which Congress found out about.. He had cut a deal with one of his appointees who was the head of something called the GAO, the Government what does the GAO stand I m sorry the Government.. LAMB: GSA?.. NAFTALI: GSA.. GSA.. The Government Services.. LAMB: Administration.. NAFTALI: Administration which in those days ran the National Archives.. And what was the deal? The deal was that Richard Nixon would have his tapes within five years and could destroy whatever he wanted, whatever wasn t required for trials, he could destroy and he would have his papers and he could destroy them.. Richard Nixon cut this deal before he left the White House.. Congress found out about it, went crazy and seized his material.. That meant that the Nixon materials were like a crime scene.. I m telling you, running the Nixon library was one of the most phenomenal experiences one could have because what happened was Nixon overplayed his hand and the government responded very, very in a very tough way.. And so everything was scooped up, absolutely everything including people s Super 8s.. Super 8s were films in those days.. LAMB: Bob Haldeman used to shoot his own home pictures.. NAFTALI: Well, those are those Super 8s actually were on government time.. But people used to take their Super 8 cameras home and they d videotape their birthday parties, their kids birthday parties.. And then they would use the White House s lab to develop them.. And so they had these birthday party reels in their offices.. And they were all seized; everything was seized lest somebody destroys something.. Now, the federal government is not that heavy handed.. Those were given back.. You know, those things were given back as the government has no reason to have them.. My point simply is that Nixon s materials were handled differently.. So he couldn t have a library.. Now, his family and his friends felt he deserved a place of reflection and ultimately the place where he and first lady Pat Nixon are buried.. And so they built the library for him with no papers.. It was an ersatz library.. I described it to folks as the Roger Maris library.. LAMB: Were his vice presidential papers there?.. NAFTALI: His vice presidential papers weren t there either because he had deeded them to the U.. government.. They were in a nearby facility in Laguna Nigel.. All he had there were his pre his pre-presidential papers not including the vice presidential papers and his post presidential papers.. I believe the family but you have to ask them because I wasn t around at that time.. But the family decided this isn t right.. Our father wants a library like every other president and they lobbied Congress in the first Bush term to change that law so that the materials could be sent to California, but the condition was they would have to be sent to a National Archives facility.. And I was the first director, I oversaw the move.. LAMB: And John Taylor, you mentioned earlier, who is now an Episcopal priest.. NAFTALI: Episcopal priest, a fascinating fellow.. LAMB: was running the Nixon Library before the federal government took over.. NAFTALI: That s right.. And he very much wanted this transfer to happen.. My sense is that not everybody in the foundation wanted it to happen and certainly not all of the Nixon allies.. I had a very interesting debate but not in person because he didn t like well, we didn t do it in person, we did in an epistolary way via a letter.. But Bruce Herschensohn, who ran I guess he ran for Senate in California, was a Nixon speechwriter.. I think he also was a speechwriter for Ronald Reagan.. He was also in the USIA, in the United States Information Agency and he wrote, I think the screenplay for the memorial film about JFK.. Now, here s a man who has thought a lot about American history.. He disagreed with my approach from the get go even well before the sort of controversies of bringing  ...   way, Robert Caro s books were not welcomed at the Johnson library for years.. NAFTALI: But then they turned around.. LAMB: Why did they do that, though?.. NAFTALI: Because well, because.. LAMB: Did the family I mean.. NAFTALI: I don t know the internal story of why, but I can tell you that that was a great achievement for the system.. And I participated in the discussion at the Kennedy library on the Bay of Pigs.. They d never had a public discussion of the Bay of Pigs until just a few years ago.. LAMB: Let s go back to your oral history.. LAMB: your oral video history, 149 interviews.. LAMB: When you think back on those interviews, 300 hours, what are the highlights for you? Where did you sit there and go, Aha, I didn t know this ?.. NAFTALI: Well, the Dwight Chapin interview where he talks about President Nixon being in the room when Haldeman asked him to start a dirty tricks campaign; Robert Bork s recollections of the tension in the White House and in the Justice department, he s a good storyteller.. Listening to Len Garment, a fantastic man.. Now, Len Garment was a partner in Nixon s law firm, Mudge, Rose with John Mitchell from the 60s.. So this is Len Garment who is still with us.. I interviewed him twice for the library.. He knew Nixon during the wilderness period between his loss in 60 and his victory in 68.. He d been around Nixon.. He knew John Mitchell.. John Mitchell would become attorney general of the United States, would be the would leave that post to run Nixon s reelection campaign and would go to jail for his role in Watergate.. Len Garment is a great storyteller and a good jazz musician.. To listen to him talk about Richard Nixon, the late night calls Nixon was an insomniac, I guess.. And so he would call people like Garment late at night just to talk just so he could wind down.. And then Nixon would fall asleep and he dropped the phone.. And so the person at the other end of the phone would hear it thud against the ground to hear that on tape.. Dwight Chapin s description of Nixon talking to Coretta Scott King after Martin Luther King s assassination when president when then former Vice-president Nixon who was running for election in 68 decides he should talk to King s widow because he makes the mistake in 1960 during the campaign with John F.. Kennedy when he does not call Coretta Scott King when her husband is in jail in Birmingham.. To listen to well, there s Fred Malek talking about why he followed the order to make a list of Jews and.. LAMB: Who didn t talk? Who didn t give you good answers or not good, that s not fair.. Who didn t give you what you thought were honest answers?.. NAFTALI: First of all, I want to make it clear.. Even though, you know, I m free to say whatever I want and I am free to say whatever I want, I would have said this.. I would say that when I was working for the government, it s very hard for me to know for sure who s telling the truth or not.. So it s a feeling, OK? It s just after having done enough of these interviews.. My sense was that Chuck Colson was not being straightforward with me.. I just the evidence was too the overwhelming evidence that linked him to certain things.. But nobody could have even the Watergate special prosecutors couldn t make sense of it.. LAMB: Let me just show a little bit of Chuck Colson for those of you who don t remember him.. What was his job?.. NAFTALI: He is was special counsel to the president.. He was basically the president s boy for political activities and special things.. LAMB: This is about late night calls.. (Video Begins).. CHARLES COLSON: Well, if I sensed that it was one of those middle of the night deals where he was just ranting, I d let him rant and listen and you d agree with him, and he wanted me to fire all of the people at the Bureau Labor of Statistics, one night he called me.. And I called George Shultz.. I said, George, he wants to fire the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics and all of those people over there.. He said they re all against him.. Shultz said, Don t do anything until I come back.. Shultz got a plane.. He was up in Pittsfield, flew back and dealt with the directly with the president.. But I there were many times when I did not do what he said and got the person involved, who should stop him.. There were many times when I didn t and wished I had.. But there were an awful lot of things he would ask you to do that he just knew that he you couldn t do, couldn t do, shouldn t do.. (Video Ends).. NAFTALI: George Shultz, the interview with George Shultz was very powerful.. It s only only an hour, he only had time for an interview with of an hour.. He was actually going to work out.. He s still reasonably fit and he is I believe in a few days he will be 92.. That was a moving interview.. The interview with Robert Moustakas, the student at the time, who met Nixon on the steps of Lincoln Memorial, was priceless.. I mean, who expected to meet the President of United States at three in the morning.. The talking to the special prosecutors, Jill Wine-Banks, her stories were remarkable.. And then, at the end, I was just about to leave.. It was the summer of 2011.. And my closest friends knew I was about to announce, the Watergate exhibit opened in March of 2011, the very first academic conference was in July of 2011.. It was time for me to go.. And so, I m wrapping things up in my mind.. And some veterans of the Watergate at the House Judiciary Committee called me and said, We d like you to interview us.. And so I said but I wasn t hadn t publicly said I was leaving.. I said, Really?.. LAMB: This is John Doar s outfit.. NAFTALI: This is John Doar s outfit.. And John Doar had given permission, when John Doar was still alive, but has wouldn t be interviewed for the project.. He doesn t do interviews, apparently.. He said it would all right to do this.. And they really wanted they saw because he had already started to show these on C-SPAN.. They say them.. They wanted this done.. And they felt that their story should be preserved too, because I had the Senate Watergate folks and the prosecutorial staff, and the FBI, interviewed the FBI, the head of the FBI investigation.. And they wanted it so I said, All right.. Well, I did 18.. I think it was 18 of those interviews before I left.. I was in the last few weeks of working for the government, but I realized this was once in a lifetime opportunity.. I have done so many of these interviews.. And there was a cumulative effect.. I was a much better interview where I believe at the end of this process than at the beginning because I could make connections in my own mind since I d sat through so many of these, anyhow.. For people who are interested in how this in this country dealt with impeachment in for the first time in the modern era, of course, Andrew Johnson is in the 19th century.. These interviews are rather interesting and, of course, these people would later be involved in the Clinton impeachment issue, although on the different side.. And they talk about that.. So you have an opportunity in listening to people like Evan Davis and Bernie Nussbaum.. You can hear them talk about two impeachments at different stages in their lives.. I felt so grateful that they had called and that I was around to do that.. I even get.. LAMB: Those have been released.. NAFTALI: Those have been released.. I get shivers, because you can sit there and be transported not simply to 1974 but to 1998 and 99.. And you learn something about our country because people who do public service do it for a long time.. And they cover many administrations.. And they carry both institutional memory and baggage from one era to another.. And as these folks talk about impeachment, you can see both institutional memory and baggage played out before your eyes.. I felt privileged to be an eye witness to that.. LAMB: Here s another Robert Bork tape, where he talks about before we go to it, but what s the smoking gun?.. NAFTALI: Oh, this is important.. OK.. Robert OK.. President Nixon, I believe understood that the tapes would be his undoing.. I d say unraveling, but that s a bad pun.. And so he fought very hard tooth and nail, to prevent the tapes from being released.. That was, in fact, the reason why he fired Archibald Cox in 1973.. This goes to the Supreme Court, case is U.. v.. Nixon, it s decided in August of 1974.. Court determines that the president has to turn over the tapes that are necessary for criminal trial.. It s all a question about evidence in a criminal trial.. President s powers, the executive privilege do not cover that a criminal trial.. And as a result, the president gives the gives the special prosecutor a set of tapes that they that Leon Jaworski, then special prosecutor had been asking for.. Before giving them, President Nixon orders that transcripts be made of a few, and he knows which ones are problematic.. And what he does is he gets that transcript and shows it to some people.. There s an interview we did with Trent Lott, then a member of Congress from Mississippi, later a famous Senator.. I think Senate Majority Leader, actually.. He is one of those who gets a bootleg copy, if you will.. But the tape is not released, only a transcript.. In the transcript, you can read the president ordering the CIA to disrupt an FBI investigation and to lie to the FBI that the FBI should not look into the sources of funding that was later used by the Watergate burglars for national security reasons.. Don t look into it because it would open a CIA operation it s not true, but this but the President wanted to use the CIA to protect a political shenanigan a political crime and use the national security exemption as a cover up.. LAMB: This was done your interview was done at 08, Robert Bork is still alive.. He s 85-years-old.. Here he was talking about the smoking gun tape.. NAFTALI: What was your reaction when you heard the smoking gun tape?.. ROBERT BORK: Dismay but not surprise.. NAFTALI: Could you develop that a little?.. BORK: Well, it was obviously the last nail hammered into the coffin, you know, for the administration which looked so hopeful so recently.. But I was not so terribly surprised there was a smoking gun.. Jaworski called me before he went to court, and said that he said that We re going to the court in about five minutes, I think, I d tell you that there s an eighteen and a half minute gap in the tapes.. Well, that surprised me and dismayed me.. NAFTALI: Well, that was that was back in 73.. BORK : Yes, that was about that time.. But you can t sit around with an eighteen and a half minute gap showing up and not begin to suspect something.. LAMB: Did you ask him about his role in Watergate and how it affected the possibility of him being on the Supreme Court?.. NAFTALI: You know, I don t remember.. I don t, Brian, I honestly I m quite sure, I mean, I haven t looked at that whole interview for its I guess, it s been four years since I did it.. I know I we talked about the consequences of it.. I suspect that it s there, but I don t want to swear to it because I m not sure.. I know what I did in these interviews, there was sort of a standard approach.. I took I started well before the Nixon period, as I wanted to situate them in time and space.. And a number of them were World War II veterans and I wanted I was thinking of students watching this and I thought it would be wonderful to have some vets recollections of the war or they are Korean War veterans, brought them through the Nixon period and I always went afterwards.. And so I wouldn t be surprised that we talked about it afterwards.. I know he felt that he was he suffered for what he did, the treatment of him later on was a product of the decisions he made in 1970.. LAMB: When your time at the library was up and when your time of doing all these interviews was up, how had you changed your mind?.. NAFTALI: Oh, well.. LAMB: About Richard Nixon?.. NAFTALI: My mind changed rather to say in a strong way, I didn t like Richard Nixon when I started, but I don t believe you have to like a president to respect them.. I m not among those who feels that a president has to be a nice person.. I m interested in a president who leads and whose administration does what I would consider good things for the country including, you know, defending American liberty.. But I don t like him.. I couldn t possibly like him because I heard him on the tapes at the Miller Center.. I mean, and by the way, the people who were hiring me knew my background.. I mean, anybody whose job it was to get to familiarize themselves with presidential tapes would know very well Richard Nixon s comments, because a lot of those things have come out, you know, when I was over the time I was there, we released another I don t know, 630 hours of tapes because there were still tapes to be released and there are still some more to be released.. So I couldn t I m sorry, I couldn t like a man who said things like that about other people.. And it s not just once, it s repeated, and it s clear that it was a mindset.. But that s not that s irrelevant whether you like somebody.. It s whether you respect them.. I have to tell you that my respect for Richard Nixon plummeted as I got to know more about him, as I oversaw the archives, as I the in the 1990s, the National Archives under a lot of pressure from the Nixon Foundation withheld some materials which I had a need to know about because I was working on the Watergate exhibit.. I went into the vaults.. These are not classified materials, these are were closed for other reasons.. I went through these materials.. I said, Why are these closed? I got them opened, about 35,000 pages of material.. We put them on the website, the key ones, about Watergate.. They shouldn t have been withheld.. And it was not the fault of the archivists working in the Nixon project.. They were under enormous political pressure.. It was a very sad story.. And there are some very big heroes in the history of the National Archives from the 1990s, let me tell you, late 80s and 90s.. Anyway, that material, coupled with what I learned from the oral histories, and the tapes that we released left me further dismayed.. A lot of what people a lot of the good that the Nixon administration did in domestic policy is the achievement of a lot of good government Republicans who worked for him.. There are some real heroes whom I didn t know about, whom I greatly admire.. Many of them went on to work in the George Herbert Walker Bush administration.. Those are the people who deserve credit.. On the tape, Richard Nixon, often wants to dismantle these things.. He s embarrassed that he is involved.. And then I would say if he had had a second term, some of the things that he is now credited with, some of the environmental policies he would have dismantled.. In terms of his approach to government, I believe that you should never use government to hurt people.. And he sought to use government to actually hurt people.. And the fact that he didn t do more of it is because of real heroes within the administration who stopped him, and these aren t self-serving people who said this on tape for their own legacy, this is the what the documents and the and the White House tapes show.. So I must say my opinion of Richard Nixon dropped dramatically.. And I think the country was very fortunate that things didn t turn out worse because they could have turned out much worse.. LAMB: Are there and we only have a minute are there people who think Richard Nixon got a raw deal?.. NAFTALI: Lots.. Oh, most of the volunteer staff who work for the library feels that way.. One of the challenges I had as a teacher and I love teaching, I knew I wouldn t persuade them.. I would I wasn t planning to change their minds.. I wanted to open their minds to the possibility that the critics of Richard Nixon might not just be partisan hacks.. And I hope that the video oral histories with people like Trent Lott, and George Shultz, and others explaining that there is a there s a line that you have to draw and the president shouldn t cross it, and that occasionly Richard Nixon crossed it.. I was hoping that that might lead them to have more open minds.. I know I m naïve, but you cannot be a teacher if you re not an idealist in some way.. It didn t work.. There and there are people in and around the library who believed that he got a raw deal.. I remember somebody coming up to me, when we had one of our tapes openings, who was a volunteer at the library say to me, We understand Tim, that you can create these tapes in Washington, and that you are actually are able to manipulate them to make Richard Nixon sound worse, is that true? They thought I could somehow create Richard Nixon s anti-Semitic comments.. They did not want to believe that that was the historical record.. Oh no, it s a remarkable I would say I learned so much about the about how hard it is to persuade people to have an open mind, and how partisan some people can be.. This is a great, you know, this Nixon s story is a great story.. If you re looking for a great Republican story, this is a great story.. It s not Richard Nixon.. It s Ruckelshaus, and Shultz, and Paul O Neill.. You don t have to be partisan about this.. But if your goal is to defend Richard Nixon, then this information is troubling, and I found people whose solitary objective was to disprove any critic of Richard Nixon because they needed him to be the saint who was wronged.. LAMB: Tim Naftali, former director of the Nixon Library and Museum, thank you very much for your time.. NAFTALI: Thank you, Brian.. It s was a pleasure..

    Original link path: /Transcript/?ProgramID=1431
    Open archive

  • Title: Q & A
    Descriptive info: February 10, 2013.. Amity Shlaes.. Author, ""Coolidge".. : Our guest is Bloomberg syndicated columnist and author Amity Shlaes.. She discusses her soon to be released biography of the 30th President of the United States, titled Coolidge.. She traces the life of Calvin Coolidge from his early days in Plymouth Notch, Vermont through his presidency and ultimate return to New England where he died at the age of 60.. She states that Coolidge should be remembered for the fact that when he left office in 1929, the federal budget was lower than when he took office in 1923.. She tells the story of Coolidge s rise through local and state politics in Vermont and Massachusetts.. Shlaes describes Coolidge s involvement as governor of Massachusetts with the Boston Police strike in 1919.. She suggests that his actions gave him a national reputation as a decisive leader.. She reviews the years of Coolidge s presidency which were marked by the introduction of electricity in the country, the widespread use of automobiles, and the reversal of the federal budget deficit into a surplus.. She describes Calvin Coolidge as a loving and caring father and talks about the death of his oldest son while he was in the White House.. BRIAN LAMB: Amity Shlaes, author of Coolidge, when did you first get interested in this president?.. AMITY SHLAES: I was writing my recent book, Forgotten Man, and everything was broken.. Forgotten Man is a book about the 30 s and how the economy was broken and I thought, what happened before.. And, there was a period when it was fixed, and that was the 20s, and that was Calvin Coolidge so I thought, this is the prequel.. I ve got to go back and figure out what went right in the 20 s.. LAMB: Before you do that, talk about him.. I mean, if you read about him today, I guess the first question I d ask, could he be elected president today?.. SHLAES: I think so.. That s really the challenge of the book, whether we can choose someone who s as principled as he is as president.. He did not believe Coolidge, who was president from 23 to 29, that perception is reality.. He thought principle was reality.. Reality is reality.. So, the challenge for us often is, do we just have to have someone who s good-looking and speaks well, good salesman, or can we have someone who s got principles.. And, I do think we can.. We kind of deceive ourselves, generally, that we need looks alone, perception alone.. LAMB: Who did he put around himself?.. SHLAES: Very important question.. Coolidge came into office from being vice president.. Unfortunately, the president, Warren Harding, died, so there s a cabinet there and some of them are compromised.. We remember Harding was a period of scandal, so do you keep them? And, the modern position might be our political advisors would say, Clean sweep, right? Broom out; get them out, so you will have the appearance of integrity.. But, Coolidge also prized respect for Harding.. Those people weren t condemned yet, innocent until proven guilty and continuity for the sake of the people and market.. So, he kept the cabinet for awhile.. Eventually, some people left.. Daugherty, you see the secretary of the interior left, the figures who were compromised in the Harding administration eventually left, and Coolidge did have an investigation.. He named a bi-partisan team, that s very modern, to look into corruption in the Harding administration.. But, he thought first of continuity when he became president at that moment in August 1923.. LAMB: Who was his secretary of the treasury?.. SHLAES: Well, that was the same guy.. That would be Andrew Mellon who was his and Harding s before him and Hoover s after.. Mellon was a great figure like Alan Greenspan today or Ben Bernanke, though, he was treasury secretary.. It was said of Mellon that three presidents served under him.. LAMB: How does that relate to the Mellon name that we know now, the Mellon Bank?.. SHLAES: Who was Mellon? Mellon was a very wealthy man.. He made much of his money.. He created an empire in Pittsburgh of steel, aluminum, was Mellon s Mellon was also, what we might call, a venture capitalist.. He would give a man money if a man had a good idea, see what happened, maybe in the end sell his share when the man succeeded, but sometimes he butted in, sometimes he didn t to the process.. But, he loved new ideas.. He created a whole institute to generate patents, very production-oriented, not just what we say, a rent seeker, not just someone who bought what other people had and held on to it like a monopoly.. A creator of wealth.. So, Mellon came to this job, the job of treasury secretary, with a wealth of experience from the private sector and a few convictions, and his best partner among the presidents, I believe, David Cannadine, the Mellon biographer would say this too, it was Coolidge who understood Mellon.. One thing we have to admire about Coolidge is he knew how to work with other men.. It wasn t all about Calvin.. LAMB: He died at age 60, right after he got of the presidency.. What happened, what was his health like?.. SHLAES: Well, a lot of them did.. I think we re blessed with the angiogram.. We re blessed with statins, with Crestor.. Men now know exactly how well their heart is doing.. And, it s pretty clear he had something cardio going on.. You see men dying all the time in politics and especially in the presidency.. Then Harding died, essentially, from Coolidge said Harding was tired out, wore himself out.. His predecessor, Wilson, had that terrible stroke and never really recovered.. So, the two preceding presidents had been killed.. Coolidge was proud that he made it.. I don t think he was aware of the extent to which his heart was bad until the end, that something was really wrong.. LAMB: We ve got some video that was spoken by Calvin Coolidge at the White House.. It may have been the first video of the president speaking.. Let s watch so people can see what he sounded like and looked like.. CALVIN COOLIDGE: I want the people of America to be able to work less for the government and more for themselves.. I want them to have the rewards of their own industry.. This is the chief meaning of freedom.. Until we can re-establish a condition under which the earnings of the people can be kept by the people, we are bound to suffer a very severe and distinct curtailment of our liberty.. LAMB: Again, forget the principles that he had but no teleprompter, reading off a piece of paper, somewhat halting, high voice, all that could do you think he could make it in the television age?.. SHLAES: I do.. I do.. He actually, they wondered that about him then, of course, the new technology then was radio, and it turned out radio was a blessing for him because he had a little bit of wire in his voice, they said, and it cut through apparently a very good radio voice.. He thought he was on radio there, and he read as though on the radio, but his personality comes through.. I don t think we should condemn people if they don t appear to us telegenic.. LAMB: The chapter that I thought was most illuminating about him as a person was, and I m not sure that you pronounce it this way, The Ouden What is that chapter?.. SHLAES: This is when you get to college, the outsider, that s Greek.. He happened to go to Amherst college, very interesting college.. It had a motto, Let them illuminate the earth.. Basically, a college for ministers or future ministers, generally Congregationalists; although, there were other denominations there in Massachusetts, and Coolidge went down there and, at the time he went down there, it was a Greek school.. By Greek, I mean, it had a lot of fraternities.. Fraternities were all over and most kids were in them.. And, what s interesting about Calvin, and this is all the way through his life true, Brian.. He didn t seem like he was going to make it.. He got there.. He kind of thought he should be in a fraternity.. He wrote his father, we have a letter, saying something about that before he got there, and then he wasn t chosen.. So, imagine being in a very Greek school with boys richer than you and being kind of shy, he wasn t chosen and, I think this is partly we think of this when see our families, he wasn t sure he wanted to be chosen.. He wasn t sure he wanted to give up that much of himself to a group.. But, it s always nice to be asked, and he was quite disappointed, I think, when he wasn t asked, and there s an interesting story there.. There was another boy at Amherst, at that time, called Dwight, who was actually poorer than Calvin, maybe shorter and had a little physical disability, but Dwight was a happy boy and much-loved and went into a fraternity and Coolidge knew him.. They ate lunch together once in awhile and, apparently, Dwight black-balled Coolidge at one point for a fraternity when Coolidge was going to come in.. We have a letter that says that Dwight said, Not him, I ll take the other one.. Well, Dwight was one of those friends you have who thinks it over and changes his mind, and has great regret.. And, Dwight decided he had under-rated Calvin, and that Dwight was Dwight Morrow, who then went to law school, became a big partner at JP Morgan, in fact, when JP Morgan was kind of down.. Dwight liked underdogs and, eventually, Calvin as president, sent Dwight to patch it up with Mexico in a terrible time.. Dwight was our representative, our ambassador there, and that he had a daughter called Anne Morrow, and Coolidge sent down Charles Lindbergh to cheer up the Mexicans, to bring some comedy to the place, and that is how Anne Morrow Lindbergh became Anne Morrow Lindbergh.. So, a lot of history came out of that very sort of understated, a little bit sad beginning of undergraduate life at Amherst for Calvin Coolidge.. LAMB: But, when you read about him and his personality, it defies logic that this man could end up being president of the United States because of his, would you call it an oddball, called quirky.. SHLAES: Oddball.. LAMB: Silent Cal.. How silent was he?.. SHLAES: He was very silent.. We have many stories.. You know, there s a famous story of Calvin where a lady said, I bet I could get you to say more than two words at this dinner Mr.. Sir, maybe he was vice president.. Grace Coolidge told the story, his wife, and he said, You lose.. LAMB: Was that Dorothy Parker?.. SHLAES: I don t think so, but it was told, Dorothy Parker said when he died, Who could tell, a very mean comment, and I want to say, if you go back and look at Coolidge, he was a conservative hero and then his tax rate was a gold standard tax rate that we saw on the video, 25 percent was what he got the top rate down to, and he fought like crazy.. It started, remember, with Wilson in the 70s, so that was an epic battle.. And, when you go look at what all the socialites said about Coolidge in Washington, how cold he was, he wouldn t with them, you want to remember that they were probably also from families that endorsed different policies, especially Alice Roosevelt Longworth whose father had a different model of president.. TR was a Let s get em, go active, bully pulpit presidency, and here was Coolidge, prissy and cold and not giving out favors.. So, she said he looked as though he d been weaned on a pickle.. Coolidge s silence was culture.. He was from New England.. Farmers don t talk a lot or wave their arms about because a cow might kick them, you know, if and he was of temperament.. He was a shy person, but it also had a political purpose.. He knew that if he didn t talk a lot, people would stop talking and, of course, a presidential or political leader is constantly bombarded with requests.. And, his silence was his way of not giving in to special interests, and he articulated that quite explicitly, Brian.. LAMB: Go back, again, to the college experience, though, you say he liked to he learned to like to speak.. How did that come in and did he ever get into a fraternity?.. SHLAES: He got in a fraternity at the end, at the very end of his senior year, and it was a new one on campus.. So, and he was proud, he wrote his father, the letters to his father are beautiful, the Calvin Coolidge memorial foundation published them, and they re hard to find.. I hope we can publish them again.. They re fabulous.. He wrote his father, You know I have to have a pin.. All through his life, you see him writing his father who wasn t at all rich but wasn t totally poor and was an important person in his little town.. I need this, I need the pin, I need the cane, I need the overcoat, I need the so I need this.. But it was very late, last term basically, senior year, that Coolidge got in.. I think his classmates, Amherst is a small college now and it was then, recognized something in him when he began to speak.. He was thoughtful and, we want to say, also, this is interesting about their education, there was a great emphasis on rhetoric in education, so the kids had to speak a lot, and they began to hear him.. And he had a teacher he loved very much, Charles Garman, a lot of us liked Garman and saw and Dwight liked Garman, Dwight Morrow.. He began to have friends and feel he was in a club, the club of this particular lecturer called Garman, lecture and seminar, and he spoke in class, and the other boy said, Wait a minute, it s a new man.. We don t recognize him.. Wait a minute.. How come we didn t know you freshman year or sophomore year.. We messed up, in that wonderful way you can re-evaluate someone in a classroom.. LAMB: I got a picture that I want to show you.. It s not in your book.. This is a picture from the courthouse yard area in North Hampton, New Hampshire where he lived.. It s on the screen there, and this has every job he s ever had on that statue.. Have you ever seen that?.. SHLAES: I don t think so.. LAMB: I want to read you, though, so we can go back and talk about this because I still want to know why you think he got all this.. He was born in Plymouth, Vermont, in 1872, on this statue is what it says, graduated from Amherst 1895, admitted to Massachusetts bar in 97.. In 98, 1898, city counselor, North Hampton; 1901, city solicitor, North Hampton; 1906, state representative, Massachusetts; 1909, mayor of the city of North Hampton; 1911, state senator, Massachusetts; 1913, president of Massachusetts senate; 1915 to 17, lieutenant governor; then governor of the state of Massachusetts in 18; and went on to be vice president in 1921; and, president in 23.. How is it I ve never seen anything quite like that, where somebody s had that many jobs leading up to president.. SHLAES: And he almost never lost.. LAMB: How did he do it?.. SHLAES: He told someone, You have a hobby.. My hobby is politics.. Running for office is my hobby.. One thing was the Republican party and the Democratic party were different, and there was a path if you helped the others they helped you.. He was in the party.. It was a club.. It wasn t to be entirely looked down upon, the way we learned in school, even then the progressives said he climbed the greasy pole of Massachusetts politics.. It wasn t just that.. There was some good in the party.. The party trains you.. It helps you work efficiently, but it s also his incredible personal perseverance, and that s what I try to get at in his the chapter about his time in North Hampton, Massachusetts.. That was the county seat.. So, after college, he looked around.. He couldn t really afford law school.. He kind of bugged his father about it.. They couldn t really afford it, so he went to read the law, and the way they did then, you could clerk and pass the bar that way with a firm of two men who liked Amherst and who had been there and were important lawyers in the town, running for office themselves, and he looked around and learned about his county seat.. Why don t I just try this, whereas Dwight Morrow, his friend, went to law school at Columbia and then went to an important, sort of Wall Street bank, a law firm and then a bank, so this was the old way, the Thomas Jefferson kind of way of serving in the country, don t be a city doll.. That s one of the things they read in college.. And, he was good to the party.. The party was good to him.. He learned pragmatism.. He practiced law on-and-off the whole time.. He was very careful not to be corrupt.. One of the issues of his youth and, remember, his youth is the progressive Republican party, so he s looking at it, and you can see a progressive record in Coolidge, whether he s a state lawmaker, Let s do this about milk, or he worked on busting trusts in theaters, if you can imagine.. They saw trusts everywhere in the progressive era, and the hero of that era was Theodore Roosevelt, so he s thinking, Is this a good policy or not, what progressives do, hate the big, fight the big, reform government and clean it up.. Well, he kind of liked that part, and he certainly had to work in it because he was often assigned to clean up government, to prune, to shut down offices.. But he s evaluating this the whole time.. I want to mention that he had a mentor who was also silent.. I didn t know this until I began to research in Massachusetts at the Forbes Library where much of his material is.. That was called W.. Murray Crane, as a senator, Senator Crane who helped TR with coal strikes.. Crane was of the Crane paper company, so he was a business man, and the Crane paper company, there s a thing we used to call the government plant, printed the dollar.. So, in a very interesting way, Crane knew about the US economy, through the dollar, through how much he printed, and Crane, too, was silent, rarely spoke.. He was the western Massachusetts leader versus the Boston leader in Massachusetts politics.. And that was Coolidge s mentor.. LAMB: How much of the crash of 29, 1929, could be blamed on Coolidge? He left in what, March.. SHLAES: He left in March of 29.. So, you imagine the stock market, we look at this at NYU Stern where I teach, the stock market was 100 for a long time.. Then, it went up to 200, very high, Coolidge had seen a lot of recessions.. It doubled, that s sort of like our 90 s, for example, or also after wars with Napoleon if you look in past, you see incredible doublings.. Then it went to 381 that would be September 29.. Coolidge didn t approve of that, he d seen a lot of recessions.. He d spent a lot of his life with the stock market at 100 or below.. He knew, every sinew in him, knew that was wrong.. He just didn t believe it was the job of the chief executive to intervene.. It was the state of New York, where the New York Stock Exchange was, where the Dow would be, the Dow Jones Industrial.. He knew the owner of the Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones Clarence Barron, but he didn t think the president or the treasury secretary was really in charge of that.. Remember, the Fed was also young, so he looked into it, there s a record of him looking into it.. Another Amherst man was Charles Merrill, who founded what we would call Merrill Lynch, and Merrill  ...   money from dairy, it s always a struggle.. They had a cheese factory because before refrigeration, cheese was the way you transmitted protein.. John started that again as a symbol of what it had meant to be a struggling farmer.. And it was important to Coolidge because he always vetoed agricultural subsidy, farmers never have made much money, he said, but that didn t mean he didn t understand how hard it was to be a farmer.. LAMB: So, how do you now, working for George W.. Bush in the.. SHLAES: For his foundation.. LAMB: For his foundation.. How do you line up the fact that he had a $5 trillion addition to the debt?.. SHLAES: These are questions we have to ask a lot of presidents, and I am historically an economically oriented person, and I see that wars cost a lot of money, so let s just say that first of all.. But, one of the splendid things about George W.. Bush is his great big spirit.. So, if I came up to the president and I don t report to him, it s a real foundation doing work in many areas including, for example, curing cervical cancer in Africa and said, President Bush, you were wrong about Medicare part D.. He would say, Well, maybe I was, or maybe he would say, I wasn t wrong, but he has no trouble creating an intellectual home for people with different ideas who might say something that might not be totally where he was or flatter him.. In that, he is very much like Coolidge.. He is not a narcissist.. He is not a vain man, President Bush.. He wants to serve, and there s a connection there with both Bush s and Coolidge.. It s their sense of service, their spiritual side, I would say their piety.. They know that it s an office that we re serving in, and I see that in President Bush, too, very little vanity about the foundation.. That s like Coolidge after Coolidge was out of office, it wasn t about him.. And that s incredibly hard to do once you ve been the important person in the world, you ve got to stay, we all know that person, right.. Once you ve been on television all your life, very few people are not vain afterwards excepting you, Brian.. So, how do you overcome that and suppress vanity and serve? This preoccupies President Bush.. Well, let me make another connection here.. Vice President Bush became president in many people s eyes because he was the vice president with Ronald Reagan.. And then, his son, George W.. Bush, became president because of the fame of the name Bush, and you say in your book that the two things that made Calvin Coolidge president was the Boston police strike and the fact that he was picked as vice president.. So, let s start with the vice president thing.. How did he and it wasn t a foregone conclusion.. SHLAES: How did he.. LAMB: How was he chosen?.. SHLAES: How was Coolidge chosen?.. SHLAES: Yes.. Well, this is very important.. Imagine now we have this problem of public sector unions.. We might like the people in them, but they re asking a lot or Reagan had the air traffic controllers.. They were in a union, PATCO, they were good guys, they were asking a lot.. In the case of Reagan and PATCO, they were jeopardizing public safety because planes are important.. They can crash.. So, Coolidge had an analogous situation as governor of Massachusetts and, because of certain anomalies in their law, the governor had a say in the police story in Boston.. The policemen in Boston went on strike after World War I.. They were nice guys.. They were underpaid.. There was a terrible inflation nobody was acknowledging.. They re station houses had rats, people chewed you know, little rodents chewed on their helmets, 18 ways they deserved a raise.. They deserved better treatment.. They were over-worked.. Nonetheless, they walked off, and this is a very rough time in American history, much rougher.. There was chaos and violence and rioting and looting in Boston.. So, Coolidge was on the team, the leader of it that fired these policemen.. They went in a union with Sam Gompers, not even a very radical union, the union that was the favorite of President Wilson, but Coolidge said, No right to strike against the public safety by anybody, anywhere at any time.. But, those were the three phrases.. No right to strike against the public s safety.. I m drawing a line, and what s incredibly scary about this from a political point of view, is he had an election a few months away.. He liked Irishmen, he was famous for the getting the Irish vote, the policemen were Irish.. He s firing them, they re nice, they re horses love them, what a bold controversial move.. Why was it all good? Nobody knew at first.. The reason that it was good is there s a limit to what a public sector union should do and jeopardizes the city s safety is too far.. And after that move, the unions in the cities didn t do that anymore, and the cities felt safer and commerce was easier after that rough period.. He received national recognition including from Wilson who waffled on the same issue for his bravery.. He did win election again, even though he had turned his back on these Irishmen, even though he felt terrible about it, and that gave him national stature, and it s why he was chosen.. He thought he would chosen for president so.. LAMB: Well, you paint a picture about Woodrow Wilson going across the country promoting the League of Nations and, at the same time that Coolidge is governor of Massachusetts dealing with this strike, and how did they stay in touch in those days, and what did Wilson contribute to that whole debate?.. SHLAES: Well, that s interesting.. They didn t really stay in touch.. Coolidge might call the Navy or somebody, defend war department for help, and you do see some traffic from Franklin Roosevelt who was Navy in this whole issue of the strike and the port city, need to police it, need to feed it, you know, would there be a general strike.. But, Wilson communicated through Sam Gompers, who d gone to Versailles, who was the union statesman, his friend who had kept labor quiet during the war.. LAMB: Let me just back up a little bit before, Samual Gompers was what did he run?.. SHLAES: American Federation of Labor.. LAMB: AFL.. SHLAES: So, he was the good labor guy.. LAMB: And why would he have gone to Versailles? What was going on in Versailles?.. SHLAES: Well, because the future of European workers and American workers is important.. We knew that there was going to be a revolution in Europe.. There was already revolution in Europe.. You think of, imagine, the Soviet Union is being formed now, maybe Germany is going Communist too.. LAMB: What year was the Versailles meeting?.. SHLAES: Well, this would be 1918, 1919, 1920.. We had unemployment in the US.. We had our budget had gone up, it was $1 billion and went to $18 billion, 18 times.. We wondered whether we were bankrupt from World War I.. All this is going on so you need to keep the peace, right.. And that s Sam Gompers was, and the police of Boston affiliated with Gompers thinking they d be safe doing whatever they did because they were on President Wilson s side.. LAMB: But, all those policemen were actually, a whole bunch of them were fired?.. SHLAES: They were all fired except the ones who.. LAMB: Were any of them hired back?.. SHLAES: No, except the ones who stayed, the ones we would call scabs, or whatever, the ones who stayed, not all, they hired new ones and that was to make a point.. That s rough deterrent justice of a very old-fashioned variety that we find incredible today.. So, but, Wilson waffled, and if you read in that chapter, you ll see him on one day, he s kind of on the side of the public sector unions.. He had his own strike to deal with coming in Washington.. He was in charge of Washington, D.. He was completely preoccupied statesman; I have to keep labor quiet so I can sell the League of Nations, right? Imagine, you know, the way a president would have, so many issues, choosing among them, very tired, about to have a stroke, and there s these Boston policemen, and they didn t know how to deal with that, and he just kind of puts it off.. And, the governor of Massachusetts deals with it, instead, that was Coolidge.. And then Wilson says, pretty good, OK, I accept that because the unions can t go too far.. Even Gompers was ambivalent.. LAMB: How was Calvin Coolidge picked to be vice president?.. SHLAES: Well, he thought he would win, but that was a little.. LAMB: You mean for president?.. SHLAES: Yes, he did.. Because he had this national stature of showing how tough he was, just the way we would have a governor now doing that.. But he had a problem, Henry Cabot Lodge, the senior senator from Massachusetts, a great snob, an institution in the senate, the nominal, not nominal, but really the leader of the senate, Lodge wasn t sure he liked Coolidge.. Lodge was vain, and it was all about Lodge, and the Coolidge s, and there are Coolidge s all over Massachusetts, it s a big Massachusetts name.. Coolidge was some kind of swamp backwoods Coolidge, the governor, not the kind of Coolidge that Lodge knew from Harvard, right They considered Amherst backwoods.. And he didn t really take Calvin Coolidge seriously, and he also toyed with him.. At times, he told him he thought he might be a good candidate.. Other times, not.. So, if your own state is not for you at the convention in Chicago, surely you re not going to be nominated to be the president, and Coolidge didn t even actually go to that convention in Chicago.. We ve heard about the Blackstone Hotel and the smoke-filled rooms, and how Harding was chosen as senator to be president.. But, there was a bit of a rebellion that the senate was running the whole thing at Chicago, the Republican convention.. And, out of that rebellion, someone said, I m going to nominate a governor.. They thought Lenroot a mild, in between, progressive Republican from the Midwest.. They thought he would be and, instead, they said, Let s get a governor.. So it was a Westerner who stood up and said, Coolidge for the vice president.. He s a governor, let s have him.. And there was a lot of applause all of a sudden at the convention, and that s how Coolidge got it, unexpectedly.. And I would estimate to Lodge s displeasure.. LAMB: You say then, after Calvin Coolidge was elected in 1924 as the president, fully elected after the death of Harding and all that, that his vice president was Charles Dawes and that they didn t like each other or he didn t like Dawes.. What was that all about?.. SHLAES: Some of that was his own sanctimony and some of that was that Dawes was impossible.. He was the rogue deputy from hell.. LAMB: How did he get picked?.. SHLAES: Well, Dawes was a wonderful man.. He was in charge of basically procurement and distribution in World War I getting stuff for the generals to the front line.. So, he gave a famous speech called the The Hell and Maria speech, where someone was picking at how he spent money to get stuff to the front line to win the war, and he said, Hell and Maria, we would do anything to win that war.. And then he went the other way, a flamboyant figure, very good speaker, and was in charge of cutting the budget after the war, a crucial job, we should look at now when we re writing a new budget law because they had this budget law where they created a budget office, sort of the forerunner to the OMB, but with more power.. So, he was a man with Nixon went to China on the budget, Dawes did this, he cut the budget.. He did the Dawes plan helping Germany.. We lend them money, the Germans paid everyone else back.. What a statesman.. Banking family, Chicago land family, but he was a maverick.. He d go his own way and what infuriated Coolidge was that Coolidge had some close confirmation hearings planned.. And, Dawes used his inauguration, we re in an inauguration time, to get up and berate the senators for their poor behavior and abuse of the filibuster essentially.. And he antagonized the senate rather than following his orders from Calvin, his president to appease, make friends with, grease the wheels for the nominations to come.. LAMB: You tell a story in here, though, about Calvin Coolidge having breakfast at the White House, and a lot of members of the senate and all calling in sick, not wanting to come.. Well, he wasn t a get-along guy.. Harding was a get-along guy, right.. So, Coolidge comes in and he s a governor.. He had presided over the senate.. I don t think presiding over the senate was fun to him when he had formally presided over the senate of his state of Massachusetts where you can vote, not just in a tie, but you have more power as the head of the senate of the state of Massachusetts in that body than you do as vice president, president of our Senate here.. So, he hadn t really liked the senators.. Lodge made his life hell there when he was vice president, and he but I want to say I think it was his virtue that made them not want to come.. This story is, Coolidge would host Vermont breakfasts and usher Ike Hoover, not the president, the usher would round up the people.. Ike Hoover didn t really like Coolidge.. Coolidge was not a good tipper.. And Ike kept a diary, lo and behold; everyone loves face-time with the president.. We all go, Democrat or Republican, when a president summons, right? The senators didn t go, so there s a roster of excuses.. Sick, Senator Heflin.. Sick, Senator Reed.. Wife s sick or friend s sick and you re like, wow, and Ike Hoover maliciously kept a record of the negative RSVPs, but what I see when I look at why these senators turned down these Vermont breakfasts with the maple syrup from Coolidge s properties, they knew he wasn t going to give them anything.. Imagine the incredible pressure, prosperity has been there for years, the budget should grow, why not? Why shouldn t it grow? Oh, the farms need something.. Oh, let s nationalize power, muscle shoals was an abiding issue.. Let s give the vets more, one mendicant after the other, and Coolidge was so unsatisfying at these breakfasts, he always said no, and after awhile, they turned their back on him.. LAMB: I found these quotes.. I don t know if they re in the book, but I found it and I wanted to ask you about it, that he was offered presidency of Amherst, and he says that s it s easier to control our congress than a college faculty?.. SHLAES: Well, that makes sense.. There s a sub-story there.. There was a wonderful, also rogue, president of Amherst, who his friend, Dwight Morrow had helped put in, Alexander Michael John, and some viewers will know, Michael John s name from Wisconsin where he went later and created this interesting experimental college.. It s a great legacy there.. Michael John was progressive in a way that the Amherst men weren t used to, and he basically wasn t friendly to World War I, and that was as divisive as the Iraq war has been lately.. It was a scissors through society.. You were on one side or the other.. So, the Amherst alums were on one side, and Michael John was on the other.. He wasn t pious enough for the Amherst old guys, and eventually, they forced him out.. He didn t go easily, and Coolidge was clearly on the side that forced him out, and he wasn t happy with that because he could see Michael, I mean, they could all see Michael John was talented.. It was a hard call, and they were all, you know, all of a sudden these nice men had negative articles about them in the New Republic when they d fancied themselves fine fellows.. And, they had thought what they were doing was for Amherst, and Michael John spent quite a bit of money, that one of the issues was he borrowed and overspent on his personal life in the job as Amherst president.. So, this was a burr in their sides.. They were unpopular for ejecting this university president, and he didn t want to get involved with those politics rationally enough.. There was also a new head named just before he left office.. LAMB: In his early age of 60, he died, and I read that he gave $700,000 to his wife, Grace, as you know, what he had willed her.. I don t know whether this is accurate or not, but I got on the calculator and it shows that it would be worth $12 million today.. SHLAES: He wasn t poor at the end.. LAMB: Where did he make it?.. SHLAES: Well, one way he made it was he had another career as a successful journalist.. Calvin Coolidge columnist, and I like that about him too, and I hope to build some things around that, Coolidge wrote a column every day.. Can you imagine?.. LAMB: How long?.. SHLAES: Five hundred words.. LAMB: Did you read a lot of them?.. SHLAES: I did.. I have a book, there s a wonderful book that was put together of only a year.. He stopped after a year just like he decided not to run again in 28.. He stopped, he said that s enough, I ve done them, but he a lot of papers took the column.. He made $75,000 as US president.. He made more as a columnist.. It was an embarrassing amount of money because, remember how many papers we had then, imagine every Web site paid you a little.. So, I believe he made $200,000 alone from the column and, in hard times, that was a lot, but it was honest work.. He wrote the column.. He was exceedingly popular.. Is there time for one story about that?.. LAMB: We have very little time, but go ahead.. SHLAES: Well, someone paid him to write ten columns for $2,000 each, and OK, he sends them in, he gets the money, and they publish only six.. He summons the editor an issue and says just what the editor expects him to say, I wrote ten and you published only six, and what does the editor say in response? But, we paid you, which is the standard answer, and Coolidge said, Well, maybe those columns weren t good enough, here s a check for the columns you didn t print, $8,000 back.. And then we ask, why would he give back the money if the contract said $20,000? He was entitled to keep it.. Yes, he was, and that was Coolidge s business lesson, his philosophy lesson, because he wanted to do business with the other party again.. He wanted to be a good citizen.. Very rare behavior now and I admire that.. With our remaining 30 seconds, which one of your children will end up being the Amity Shlaes of the 2025 calendar year? The writers.. SHLAES: The writer.. I am going to say Helen Lipsky.. LAMB: Which one will be the teacher?.. SHLAES: Oh, so very difficult questions.. I m going to say, I can t they re all going to be very good.. This is dedicated to them for their own perseverance, the Coolidge theme.. They all persevere and I m very proud of them.. LAMB: We really are out of time, but is there anything new about Calvin Coolidge that you found that s in this book?.. SHLAES: That he struggled with debt and found a solution, as we do today and look for our own.. LAMB: The picture on the cover is from where?.. SHLAES: I don t know actually, but it looks to me the beginning of the presidency, 1924, something like that, maybe 19 anyway, it looks like before his son died, very happy.. LAMB: Thank you, Amity Shlaes, author of Coolidge..

    Original link path: /Transcript/?ProgramID=1430
    Open archive

  • Title: Q & A
    Descriptive info: February 3, 2013.. Mark Shields.. Syndicated Columnist and PBS "NewsHour" Political Analyst.. : Our guest is Mark Shields, a syndicated columnist and political analyst on the PBS Newshour.. He discusses his early days in politics and shares stories of his role as a legislative assistant to Senator William Proxmire (D-WI) and his work on the presidential campaigns of Senator Robert Kennedy (D-NY) in 1968 and Senator Edmund Muskie (D-ME) in 1972.. He talks about the profound impact the assassination of Robert Kennedy had on his life and his eventual transition into journalism as a columnist for the Washington Post.. He salutes Thomas P.. Tip O Neill and Gerald Ford as examples of politicians who were strangers to self importance.. He shares stories from being a political analyst on the PBS NewsHour program and speaks about David Gergen, Paul Gigot and David Brooks with whom he partnered on the program at different times during his twenty-seven years.. He reflects on the use of humor in his journalism, and suggests that 2012 was the worst presidential campaign he covered because candidates Obama and Romney both appeared to not like politics very much.. He says that John McCain s 2000 presidential primary campaign was his favorite for the candidate s openness and willingness to speak to voters.. BRIAN LAMB: Mark Shields can you remember the first time you knew that humor works in front of an audience?.. MARK SHIELDS: No, I really can t, I recall humor, the importance of it growing up in telling a story but I can t remember that epiphany when I said wow, what a difference it makes.. LAMB: So what role does humor plays in your life?.. SHIELDS: Well, that s a good question.. I mean, humor -- I think it s great for putting life and it s trials and tribulations into perspective and it s a great antidote to self importance and great antidote to pomposity, so in that sense I welcome humor, I appreciate humor and occasionally I m lucky enough to use it.. LAMB: Can you remember when you first knew that an audience will listen to you at all.. SHIELDS: I do, I was -- as a matter of fact working for Senator William Proxmire at the time, the Democratic Senator from Wisconsin and he had -- as was his custom, he was a man of incredible discipline and he had committed to the United States ratifying the genocide convention and towards that end he gave a daily speech on the senate floor in support of it and I was tasked -- that s a word that you don t hear very often, at least for me, used as a noun or a verb, my responsibility was to write a daily speech which sometimes I did under great deadline pressure much to the consternation of the Senator and word got out that I did this and was asked to give a speech, to speak on genocide convention, at the Willard Hotel and at a luncheon and I did and the crowd seemed to respond and liked it and I said wow, that was fun.. So after that I accepted opportunities where there was to speak, within reason, you know, I didn t speak to the Arms of Krupp or other groups that I found particularly offensive.. LAMB: What have you learned about audiences over the years and what they -- when they start to respond to you? Because I know you do -- how many times do you speak in a year?.. SHIELDS: It depends on the year quite honestly because the presidential year for example you get asked a lot more than you can give because you are covering the campaign and when there is a change of administration there s always more invitations to speak because people feel somehow you must know something.. Nothing worse for a speaker on politics than a re-elected president.. Whether it was George W.. Bush, no reflection on Barack Obama or Bill Clinton, because that means continuity rather than change but the -- as far as the speaking itself is concerned, I enjoy it and I enjoy the challenge, you re walking into a room full of strangers, most cases you ve never met them, they ve never laid eyes on you, they may have seen you on television in passing or whatever and they are going to walk out of there in an hour with some sense of you and in that sense it is a challenge and when you ve got 45 minutes to make them think, make them laugh, that s the highest praise you can get coming out is someone coming up and it occasionally happens, you made me think and you made me laugh and that s high praise indeed for me as a speaker.. LAMB: Let s lay down the basics for Mark Shields, born where?.. SHIELDS: Weymouth, Massachusetts, May 25, 1937.. LAMB: Parents did what?.. SHIELDS: My dad was a salesman, a paper salesman and a civic -- involved in the town and governance and politics.. My mother had been a school teacher but at that time when school teachers married they could no longer -- they were now sullied they were stained women something of that sort because they no longer could teach in the public schools of Massachusetts as a married woman.. So she was a mother and homemaker.. LAMB: How many brothers and sisters?.. SHIELDS: Had one brother who died and one older brother and one older sister.. LAMB: Still alive?.. SHIELDS: Still alive.. My brother and sister are both alive.. My brother sadly has done very well and become a Republican because we were born Democrats and baptized Catholics.. I think it s the way that it was put to us and he is very well -- he is terrific when I talked to him yesterday, we occasionally argue about politics but not -- with great affection and admiration.. LAMB: Who had the most influence on you as you were growing up? Just anybody, not just your parents.. SHIELDS: Certainly my parents did, my parents had enormous we got five newspapers a day and it was -- Weymouth, Massachusetts was a middle class to lower middle class town, it had been -- it was a blue collar town.. I think today it has the highest per capital union membership of any town or city in the State which is partly a reflection of changing residential patterns.. But we were an aberration in that sense, I mean my folks were intimately involved and engaged and cared about it.. My dad was on the school committee and cared deeply about the public school as we all went to public school, as I said my mother taught in it, but we got the New York Times on Sunday which people in our neighborhood didn t.. We were considered sort of oddballs, I mean, by the age of -- I don t know, I mean, 10 or 11, I knew all of then 96 United States Senators and I can -- the first time I ever saw my mother cry was the night that Adlai Stevenson lost in 1952.. So I mean it was that kind of a -- so I have to say my family had the most -- my parents in particular had the most immediate and profound influence upon me.. LAMB: Which is -- which president was the first one you ever saw in person?.. SHIELDS: First president, Harry Truman, they roused me out of bed like 5 o clock in the morning, he was driving through Weymouth in -- his 1948 campaign, he was on his way to Brockton and what I remembered about it -- learned about it afterwards, Brian, was he was such an underdog, the only Massachusetts politician who would appeared with him was Lieutenant governor Jeff Sullivan, had been mayor of Worcester someone of no particular distinction but the others all had important things to do and it s one of the fundamental truths of politics.. Everything is a poll of politics, I ve been involved before I became a journalist, I was involved in politics and political campaigns and you can always tell who shows up and you treasure the people who do.. I remember, working in 1972 with Sargent Shriver when he was the vice presidential nominee with George McGovern and then I remember Fritz Hollings showing up in South Carolina why we were in South Carolina Pat Caddell will explain that someday, the boy genius pollster of the McGovern campaign, why we were in South Carolina.. But you know, showing up on the State House steps and I say wow , I mean you know that you are going to get your head handed to you, not simply in South Carolina but especially in South Carolina and when he shows up, Jack Gilligan, the governor of Ohio showed up, Pat Lucey, the governor of Wisconsin, you treasure those, people come up with very creative excuses why they can t be with you when you re losing.. Like my nephew is graduating from driving school and I d love to be with you but we had a family appointment at the taxidermist, we re getting our cat stuffed, I mean it s just all kinds of creative excuses because people don t want to be seen, the only American sin, the original American sin is losing, you can do anything except lose and people avoid losers.. But there I saw Harry Turman at the age of 11, as he was going on his great comeback upset victory of 1948.. LAMB: Which president have you personally known the most? Up close and personal, as they say.. SHIELDS: I don t know if I ve known any of them really that well.. I ve met them, I ve talked to them at different times but I can t say that one was -- I mean I admired many in different ways, most of the people I was close to didn t become president, I hoped not because I was working with them or for them at the time.. But I admired Gerald Ford and -- whom I did not know well but spent some time with and I always thought he was the most emotionally healthy of all the people I ve ever known who was president, not that the others were basket cases but he became president -- most people become president -- and Bill Clinton was not the exception, sometime around the 4th grade, they get that bug and as the late and very great Mo Udall who sought that office once put it, the only known cure for the presidential virus is embalming fluid and they re driven to that office.. Gerald Ford wanted to be Speaker of the House, when he was the Republican leader of the House the Republicans were in the minority, along the way he became president, and he knew who he was, he was comfortable with who he was, and I always wish I d known Harry Truman because I felt that he liked being Harry Truman, he never thought of being anybody else but Harry Truman and I felt that way about Gerald Ford.. LAMB: Thirty years ago -- this is your life Mark Shields.. Thirty years ago here you are appearing on this network on a call-in show of all things.. Let s watch.. SHIELDS: It s baloney on both sides, there is no thinking, Ronald Reagan is a phony on defense, a phony.. Ronald Regan never says that in the defense of this country we are going to take one 18 year old kid out of Bethesda, Maryland, or out of Palos Verdes Estates California and ask him to serve, no, no, no.. We are going to staff this army, we are going to fill it up with kids from working class American families, poor kids, black kids, white kids, brown kids, who can t get jobs, that s what our army is.. Now this is where I say Fritz Hollings is interesting, right and bright.. He says what we need in this country is a demonstration of will power not fire power.. We re talking about MX s we are talking about nerve gas and baloney and all that stuff, you know, where the hell is the commitment, there is no -- I don t know if you could get a draft call passed the Congress of United States right now, all these tough Republicans, all these tough, let s spend more, spend more, borrow more.. LAMB: Spend more, borrow more, Republicans.. SHIELDS: Listen, it s bipartisan at this point.. I agree with it and I may have mellowed a little bit my delivery but I will say this that Fritz Hollings who I mentioned in that Senator from South Carolina, somebody I admire enormously, he run for president in 1984 and New Hampshire primary, went up to Dartmouth college.. And there he stood before these privileged and many cases pampered ivy league students and said I want to draft everybody in this room because I want our military, it has to be a cross section of the country, defense of this country is everybody s responsibility and silence in the room and he spoke candidly, he said things that you wish candidates for presidents will do instead of pandering to audiences and constituencies, Robert Kennedy did the same thing when he ran in 1968, I worked for him.. Went to college campuses, he said I want to draft you, I want you -- it isn t right that you are against this war, but it s being fought by kids who are not lucky enough to go to this school, it was Creighton university in Nebraska -- I was working in the Nebraska primary he did that.. So I do believe that, I do believe, I think we have a lot more thoughtful and responsible foreign policy, we d have a lot less swagger and one of the things about Gerald Ford that I -- again 10 battle stars, silver star, four bronze stars a Naval officer in World War II, and Jim Webb was a perfect example of that, the senator from Virginia, he said all these think tank commandos in this town, let s go in and get tough.. And he said you don t send force, you send young men and women who have lives and families and hopes and dreams and you better think twice, three times before you send them in.. And I just -- I do feel -- I feel that you know the obligatory line for every politician, Democrats and Republican is how much we admire the people in the military and what a great job they do and isn t it wonderful and I just ask, when was the last time a person in the United States went to a funeral for anybody who came back in a pine box and I can t find it, maybe Mark Knoller of CBS could find it for me, I can t find one.. And one of the reasons is they don t know anybody who is in the military, they don t know them, they aren t the sons of their cabinet officers or the CEOs or the network correspondence or columnists and it just -- when we were debating going to war in Iraq and my assistant Diana Drudge and I called all 535 officers on Capitol Hill and I asked just one question, does the senator or member of congress have a child in the enlisted ranks in the United States military.. Ask me so why the enlisted ranks, because three out of four of the casualties come from E5 or below in the listed ranks I mean with all due respect to officers like yourself, and admirals and generals they just generally aren t there, exception obviously to second lieutenants but -- and of the 535, one, Senator Tim Johnson, of South Dakota, had a child Brooks, who was a sergeant in 101st Airborne and that s -- we ve totally divorced from peril those in power and I grew up in Massachusetts where we had two Republican Unites States senators Senator Leverett Saltonstall and Henry Cabot Lodge, Leverett Saltonstall whose 19 year old son Peter left Yale to join the Marines to go to the pacific in World War II and he died in combat.. Henry Cabot Lodge resigned from the United States senate to become a tank commander fighting Hitler s armies in North Africa.. I mean it was the President s four son all served in World War II, I mean there is something -- there is just something wrong with this and that kind of wild-eyed guy, forty years ago, I think he was onto something.. LAMB: You served in Marine Corps for how long?.. SHIELDS: Two years.. SHIELDS: I was going to be drafted, I mean I was facing a draft and to be in the Marines rather than in the army.. SHIELDS: 1960 to 1962.. LAMB: What impact did serving in the Marines have on you?.. SHIELDS: The Marine did a lot more for me than I did for the Marine Corps.. I think Marine Corps values are admirable and they are incredibly egalitarian, even though I d been to college and -- but I came from -- I guess you could say not a cloistered background but I mean one that was not as wide ranging and it s probably ethnic and racial exposure the first time I ever slept in the same quarters with African Americans, or took orders as a regular course from African Americans, was at Parris Island, South Carolina Marine Corps boot camp and the only reason I did that was because of a president of the United States named Harry Truman who said in the final analysis it was unacceptable and literally un-Americans to ask people to fight and die for their country and then be segregated by race, I mean we had four, five, six college graduates in our platoon, we had kids who were high school dropout, we had kids who were given the option by a judge, you can go there or you can go to juvenal detention.. I mean it was a remarkable experience and everybody was the same you came out of it with the sense of mutual responsibility that I depended upon other people and they depended on me.. LAMB: What was your highest rank?.. SHIELDS: Lance Corporal.. LAMB: So you never wanted to be an officer?.. SHIELDS: I didn t, no.. They offered -- they did approach me at one point about whether I was interested in it but I was interested quite honestly in serving and fulfilling my responsibility and returning to civilian life.. LAMB: We are going to go back to another point in your appearances here, it was on the same show in July 22, 1983.. You are talking about the Washington Post and I want to get into a little bit of your experience there and what s going on today.. Here is Mark Shields.. SHIELDS: The Post is a very, very influential voice in the nation s politics.. When you have the most important, certainly political city in the country, Washington DC and the Post has been the dominant voice in that city for a long time.. Members of congress, Federal policy makers, whether they want it or not, that s their principal link with the print journalism.. I mean sure you get the Times, you get the Wall Street Journal and other news papers, the hometown papers and the L.. A Times but the Washington Post is delivered at their doorstep at 6 o clock in the morning, the people they meet and talk with that morning by 10 o clock, there is a general assumption or a prevailing working assumption that everybody has read the Post.. LAMB: Everybody has read the Post, can they still say that?.. SHIELDS: I don t know, I mean I -- probably not.. I mean they may have very well of -- glanced at the website looking at an aggregator and if there is a post story that -- directed them that way.. LAMB: How long did you work for the Post?.. SHIELDS: I worked for The Post from 1979 to 1981.. LAMB: Why did you leave?.. SHIELDS: I left because -- how I  ...   so forth put Eddy back on the phone and he said Eddy, is there anything else I can do and Eddy said No Tip, we are just proud of you we see you on C-SPAN and he said I ve got to tell you Tip you look like W.. C Fields up there.. Now anybody who can tell a story like that about himself, and he just always I mean, he gave the benefit of the doubt to the people who didn t have high powered representation here in Washington, who didn t have chauffeur driven cars, who didn t have three or four staff people carrying their briefcases for them and then there was just something that he knew who he was, not unlike Gerry Ford.. LAMB: That s three.. SHIELDS: That s three, who else would I include? Certainly I mentioned Gerald Ford, Mo Udall to me was an exceptional man.. Bill Proxmire was a remarkable man and a man whom I had for whom I had great admiration and affection Sarg Shriver as well.. (Ed Muskie lot of Kevin White the mayor of Boston, but Mo Udall was -- he was a gentle giant.. LAMB: Who was he, first of all?.. SHIELDS: He was a congressman from Arizona and -- who ran for president in 1976, he finished second to Jimmy Carter for the nomination and the reason he didn t win, I m convinced, he had a marvelous sense of humor as did Tip, which I guess is the common denominator in people I like is that he was a gentle giant as they say with laughter in his soul and steel in his spine, I mean he took on established leadership of his own party but he could never convince himself, Brian, that the Western world would collapse if he didn t win and I think there has to be something of that in a successful presidential candidate, the indispensability factor and he didn t have it.. Mo just had too wide of a perspective of who he was and what he was about, but he is just a -- he was a marvelous, marvelous man.. LAMB: Let me ask you this, we watched him in the press only die with Parkinson s disease out at the soldiers here and I remember stories of people going out to visit him including John McCain and did you ever go visit him?.. SHIELDS: I did.. And I will say this about John McCain, John McCain s 2000 campaign when he ran for president is the most memorable campaign that -- of any that I ve ever covered I ve been around.. I mean it was just -- we will never see it again here he was facing George W.. Bush who had all the face cards of the Republican Party backing him and the three Republican governors and New Hampshire and all the money.. And John McCain went out and held 114 town meetings and he stayed there until every question was answered and you d see people, you see the light bulb going on in people s heads, they d say, when are we going to get the patients bill of rights? and John McCain would say, we are not going to get a patients bill of rights as long as my party is owned by the insurance companies and the democrats are owned by the trial lawyers, next question.. I mean it was just this refreshing candor and you d see it in people s responses and he was totally opened to the press, I mean there was a candor and an openness and sort of a welcomeness I mean that no one had seen before and no one certainly has seen since.. LAMB: For the moment though go back to Mo Udall and if you saw him at the end, I mean the picture I have, I remember him giving speeches and being tremendously funny, I mean we covered him a lot and all that but his death was -- how long was he in that hospital and he wasn t -- he wasn t able to talk was he?.. SHIELDS: No, no.. It was just I mean, that s what McCain used to do was go out and read to him and it was a terrible, terrible death, I mean a long illness, debilitating and it was so sad I mean, because he had that , as you put it, that marvelous wit and he seemed aware.. LAMB: And you worked for him?.. SHIELDS: I worked for him when he ran for president in 1976 and I -- I was managing because -- I d stayed out of that campaign because my wife Ann was taking the bar exams that year after being married to me long enough she realized that I had this uneven work and income pattern.. LAMB: Where did you meet her by the way?.. SHIELDS: I met her in Washington, she was, my roommate was dating her roommate, that s when men had male roommates and women had women roommates, and that s when I met her.. LAMB: While we re on roommates, I remember John Sears famous political name being your roommates at Notre Dame.. SHIELDS: He wasn t my roommate but he is a good friend of mine.. LAMB: He wasn t your roommate, OK.. SHIELDS: No, John s younger than I am, he was a.. LAMB: Who was he?.. SHIELDS: John Sears was -- is -- I once did this, I was writing a piece and I have one call to make in a political campaign, I d call John Sears and my editor says no, no , if I had two calls to make one of them would be to John Sears because you want everybody else to think that they are the other call and that s how highly I thought of John Sears and I think of John Sears.. John Sears was the genius, he was 29 years old and he and Pat Buchanan were the two people on the payroll working for Richard Nixon who was coming back from having lost in 1960 to Jack Kennedy, having lost to Pat Brown in 1962 in California and his comeback campaign was basically1966 to 1968.. He campaigned for the Republican candidates, they did very well, it was a good Republican year and Nixon had been the one guy who had been out there for all them -- and Sears and Pat Buchanan was writing the words and Sears was doing his politics and then John went into the White House as the White House counsel and Mitchell and -- I m trying to think who else, somebody else, really didn t like him, he was too friendly to the press.. So he got bounced out of the White House and his comeback was with Ronald Reagan, he is the Ronald Reagan architect of the 1976 campaign.. LAMB: What s he doing today?.. SHIELDS: John is in Miami and he is basically retired, I mean John is now 70 but he still has his hand in his practice, he s had a very successful law practice.. LAMB: Here is at the top of my list.. One of the clips I have of you was back in 1992 and you were at the National Press Club saying some strong things.. SHIELDS: What happened to the Republicans was that they reinforced that perception and that prejudice against the Republicans as the party of the wealthy by nominating George Bush, in spite of Pork rinds, and WMCQ, and country and western music and all the other little trappings we ve heard, this is a guy who will have a dash of coffee and his biggest social offence was once ordering the house chablis.. Now that works pretty well in good times, it kills you in bad times, it absolutely kills you.. LAMB: Did they pay you to speak to the Notre Dame club of DC.. SHIELDS: No, no, the Notre Dame club I d do anything for Notre Dame.. LAMB: You were that tie today on top of it.. SHIELDS: This is Irish, this isn t Notre Dame is blue and gold.. You know that, of all people, for goodness sake s, I mean having been vanquished by them so many times, but that s a theory I had, the two parties with the perception of the Democrats is that they re kind of down scale sort of not well educated, that s been their constituency.. So the Democrats love to nominate people with ivy league pedigrees who speak in complete paragraphs, Stevenson, Kennedy, Roosevelt, even Bill Clinton, Barack Obama.. The Republicans are seen as the party of the landed gentry and the well off, like to nominate candidates who come from humble origins whether it s Richard Nixon or Ronald Reagan, Hubert Hoover, Dwight Eisenhower, Gerry Ford and that s why George H.. Bush another man whom I like and admire enormously at a personal level an incredibly thoughtful man, he reinforced the perception of the Republicans as the party of the landed gentry and it became a problem in 1992 in a time of economic downturn.. LAMB: Which campaign did you dislike the most?.. SHIELDS: The 2012 campaign was a pretty bad campaign because I don t think either Barack Obama or Mitt Romney really likes politics that much and you ve got to have people who like politics.. LAMB: How can you not like politics and run for president?.. SHIELDS: I mean you ll have to ask them, I mean or their doctors, I mean I just -- but I don t think either one of them got much joy out of it, I mean.. LAMB: Do you still get joy out of it?.. SHIELDS: I do, not as much, I mean there was a time you d stay up late at night and everybody will have a funny story and I think there is less of that now, I think there s less letting down of hair, I mean there is a lot more control in the campaigns and a lot less accessibility.. LAMB: I remember it seems like 30 to 40 years ago that journalists like you would know these folks, having had drinks with them and all that, and today it seem like it doesn t happen.. SHIELDS: Yes, I think that -- I don t know if it s true for everybody but certainly is true, I think -- in Obama s case I mean he came here and was elected in 2004 and landed immediately Dick Durbin who was his colleague said this is your chance to run which is sort of selfless for a senior colleague to say something like this is your chance to run, and to a considerable degree he was exploring it from that point forward but yeah there isn t that Jack Germond being a perfect example of that -- obviously a great political reporter but I mean who made a point of getting to know these guys in the off season and having the feel for them and it is a great way of knowing people when they are not running.. LAMB: In your lifetime, 17 years with Capital Gang, CNN, 17 years, why did they give it up?.. SHIELDS: You know, Robert Novak was my great colleague and wonderful friend, his idea of the show, he was leaving the McLaughlin Group where he was unhappy and this was his rump group and off we went.. I d say he -- we -- but he as the executive producer made two mistakes.. I mean, one, as far as Capital Gang was concerned he agreed to go to an hour CNN had this very popular show at 7:00 on a Saturday night and it was a great half hour show.. LAMB: Capital Gang?.. SHIELDS: Capital Gang, it was a half hour show, that s what it was.. We did the week and he had a brilliant idea which was to bring on a newsmaker, we were accused of being too cozy or whatever, but to bring on a Senator or a Governor or a cabinet member and they d be part of the discussion, you wouldn t interview them, you d say what do you think about this, Frank or this or that, and we would do it on a first name basis.. And boy it you d really get a sense of these people, I mean some could take it, others wouldn t, I mean others were used to being deferred to but it wasn t an hour show and I just -- I think that when you do an hour show you have to go to hamburger helper you know what I mean, sort of expand how this one -- let s do a longer piece on Bureau of Engraving and it was a high energy show for half hour.. And I think that was a mistake, even CNN was going through all kinds of changes to it but you know 17 years is a pretty damn good run, I mean nothing to compare to C-SPAN and you.. LAMB: But by the way we are 50 minutes into this and we haven t gone to the hamburger helper yet but I do want to take advantage of the seven minutes we ve got left.. You also did Gergen and Shields, Gigot and Shields, Brooks and Shields.. SHIELDS: I like to say Shields and Brooks, Shields and Gigot, Gergen and Shields.. LAMB: I did that only because you lasted longer than all of them.. Which one did you like the best?.. SHIELDS: That s a good question, good question for you to ask and bad one for me to answer.. The -- everyone of them, I did David Gergen was six years, from 1987 to basically 1993 I think, and he left of course to go to -- sort of sort of tarnished his Republican credentials by going to work for Bill Clinton.. LAMB: You can hear Republican saying though that that s the kind of Republican that they -- I mean you can probably say that s the kind of Republican they have on PBS.. SHIELDS: I mean you can t say that about Paul Gigot, the editor of the editorial page of the Washington -- Wall Street Journal but he s gone though.. But he did it -- Paul did it from 1993 to 2001 and the only reason he left was he went to New York, it s a Washington based.. LAMB: To run the page?.. SHIELDS: To run the page, yes.. I mean he got the promotion.. LAMB: So which one of the three did you like the best?.. SHIELDS: And then since then I ve been doing it with David Brooks.. All three of them have been terrific, I ve been very, very fortunate I mean in all three.. LAMB: What s the difference? In those three Republicans, or three conservatives, three whatever they are?.. SHIELDS: What s the difference, I mean I don t know, I mean, I ve done it with David Brooks longer, I mean this year we are coming up on 12 years so I ve kind of watched David grow from this young fire brand to the Walter Lippmann of his generation, it s been kind of a fun thing.. LAMB: So the greatest journalist in your life time that you ve ever read or you ve ever known beside yourself? Somebody that you admire.. SHIELDS: Well, Mary McGory, I just -- the way she wrote, I mean the fact that Mary McGory was a columnist for the Washington Post before that for the Washington Star and just a couple of things about Mary, she was a shoe leather reporter, she went to the event, she didn t just do the thumb sucking, I had lunch with the Secretary of State and this is what he said blah, blah, blah.. I mean she continued to do that and she said -- asked about are you subjective and she said, only about 85 percent of the time.. She said I hated the Vietnam War and I hate the way we treat kids and she did, and she was somebody who lived it and on her spare time she devoted her effort and energy and recruited her friend -- not even recruited them, she absolutely demanded and commanded that we work and help out at St.. Anne s orphanage which was her passion.. LAMB: Here you are on Inside Washington, a program that you now appear on periodically.. SHIELDS: Yes, yes, let s get that straight.. KRAUTHAMMER: I think all he needs is a name change and I have a suggestion, Jeb Ochocinco that way he covers Hispanics and wide receivers at the same time.. I think it would be a tremendous asset to him.. SHIELDS: It is interesting, the other thing he does need too is a speech coach he gave one of the two or three dullest speeches at the Republican convention and that -- believe me, that was a competitive thing, as for Chris Christie I mean, I m the last person in the world to tell him to join a gym but watching him get out of a SUV was like watching the Russians get out of Afghanistan, it took that long.. LAMB: You got them on that one, they liked it, they all laughed.. SHIELDS: They did, they did like that.. Best natural politician in the country, Chris Christie.. SHIELDS: I mean, he s just -- he is uncontrived in public, he is instinctive and he s -- at a time when the brand of politics and politicians is in the cellar he is I think the only major national figure who has positive ratings from both Republicans and Democrats.. LAMB: Would this country go for another Bush?.. SHIELDS: Jeb Bush, I think Jeb Bush is so different, the question is will the Republicans understand Jeb Bush, Jeb Bush understands this point, in 2040, Texas will be 20 percent Anglo.. When George H.. Bush was elected president, he carried New Jersey, he carried Illinois, he carried Ohio, he carried Michigan, he carried California, those states are no longer -- he carried Maine and Vermont.. Those States aren t even competitive for the Republicans now and if the Republican party is ever going to be competitive again, they ve got to understand what Jeb Bush has been telling them, especially on reaching out to Hispanics, I mean the fastest growing constituency in the country, that naitivism or whatever you want to call it that has sort of dominated the Republican nominating process which really if you think about it came back and bit Mitt Romney.. Mitt Romney ran against Rick Perry whom he was worried about and Newt Gingrich whom he was worried about, OK on the right side of immigration accusing Rick Perry of being soft because Texas had passed the dream act with four Republicans in the entire legislature voting against it and because Newt Gingrich said a family that have been part of the community for 25 years in a church and had been participating and paying taxes shouldn t be summarily dismissed.. So this is -- I mean Jeb Bush is a possibility but he d better get a speech coach, go back and look at his speech on C-SPAN and it was I mean, forget Ambien, he ll put you to sleep.. LAMB: When was, this is the last question.. When was Mark Shields the happiest in politics?.. SHIELDS: You know, I said at the time in retrospect, working for Jack Gilligan in Ohio when he was elected governor, I managed his campaign and Kevin White when he was re-elected mayor of Boston in 1975 and I was involved in the leadership of his campaign, Robert Kennedy.. When you are doing -- the Robert Kennedy thing in retrospect because when you are doing what you enjoy doing, what you like doing, what you do well and you think you are going to make a difference that s going to be better for the country and especially for widows and orphans and people who don t even know your name and never will know your name, boy that s probably as good as it gets.. LAMB: Mark Shields, columnist, raconteur, television commentator, thank you very much for your time.. SHIELDS: Thank you very much Brian..

    Original link path: /Transcript/?ProgramID=1429
    Open archive

  • Title: Q & A
    Descriptive info: January 27, 2013.. Cathy Lanier.. Washington, DC Metropolitan Police Department Chief.. : Our guest is Cathy Lanier, the Chief of the Washington, DC Metropolitan Police Department.. She discusses the department s growth in the last twenty-three years she has been a police officer.. She talks about the homicide rate in the District of Columbia being the lowest number for the past fifty-one years.. She describes the reasons for this number, and looks to the future growth of the area as an opportunity to add officers to the force.. Lanier recounts stories of growing up in the Washington, DC area and the problems she encountered after dropping out of school at age 15.. She was married, had a child, and was divorced.. She joined the police force as a single mother with a ninth grade education.. She completed her education by obtaining two Master s degrees and went on to become the youngest Chief in the history of the department.. Chief Lanier discusses some of the criticisms of her administration over the years as well as what she considers the qualities needed to be a successful police officer.. BRIAN LAMB: Cathy Lanier, what s the tough part of being the Chief of Police of the Washington metropolitan Police Department.. CATHY LANIER: It s really not a tough job.. It is, the toughest part I guess in the first couple of years was the toughest part was getting use to the press, was a challenge.. Other than that you know maybe sometimes a little bit of the politics but being a police officer is what I ve done my whole adult life.. So being a police chief is not that much different.. The tough part was getting use to dealing with the press.. LAMB: How many officers do you have?.. LANIER: We re about 4,000 sworn and then I have about 500 civilian.. LAMB: So why is the press tough or difficult?.. LANIER: Well, it s Washington D.. so the press is different here.. Everything is national news almost and some of the simplest little things seem to just go viral in the press.. It s sometimes puzzling why the things that the press focuses on are of such interest and for so long.. But just learning how to, you know, kind of manage that constant beast it seems that are always, everybody needs a story all the time.. And public safety is such a big part of reporting in Washington D.. So it s every day we deal with lots and lots of press.. LAMB: So what are your own personal rules about dealing with an interview situation?.. LANIER: Well, one thing that I ve learned is that all too often in law enforcement and we get asked questions, especially questions about crime and things like that.. We always say no comment.. We can t talk about that.. So I always, my rule of thumb is I always try and tell you what I can tell you.. There is always something I can tell you.. So if I can t comment on for example there was a case where there was an allegation that an officer had made a threat regarding the First Lady.. And so clearly there is an investigation that s going on.. There are personnel matters.. You can t discuss any of that but what I can do is I can talk about here is the process.. The process is we ll do our investigation.. Secret Service will do a thread analysis, investigation.. Then it will be passed on for disposition.. So I always try and find what it is I can tell the press because they ve got a job to do.. And if I say nothing, they re going to report something anyway, so that s kind of my rule of thumb.. LAMB: I have a piece of paper here.. It s says District Crime Data at a Glance and I go back to 1993, were you on the force?.. LANIER: I was.. I came on in 1990.. LAMB: There were 454 murders in the District of Columbia.. LANIER: Four hundred and seventy nine, my first year.. LAMB: That was what year?.. LANIER: 1990.. LAMB: And this last year 2012, there were 88.. LANIER: Yes.. LAMB: What happened?.. LANIER: A lot of things have happened.. A lot of things have happened.. I think the initial decline from the up to 500 down to the 200 range that drop or decline over about a ten year period was the kind of burning out of the crack cocaine epidemic.. That was a 20-year run of sheer hell for most of the cities.. The violence associated with crack cocaine markets, we had 200 open-air markets in the city when shootings would happen, they would be drive-bys and six or seven people would be shot or killed in a single incident.. So as the crack cocaine epidemic started to waning, we dropped down from the high 400s to the 200 range, 250 and we kind of stayed there for some time.. LAMB: Why did it wane?.. LANIER: Because that s kind of the way, I mean if you look at drug patterns, drugs tend to spike in popularity.. They remain there about 15 to 16 years and then they run like 20 year cycles and then they go down.. So the crack cocaine epidemic is no more.. There are still people who use cocaine and there are still people who use crack cocaine but it is nowhere near where it used to be.. So with the absence of that driving the violence, I think that drop is down to, you know, in the 200 range.. But we got stuck there for a long time.. In fact even when I took over in 2007, we were 108, 170, 169 in 2006, 181 in 2007, and 186 in 2008.. We were persistent with gang violence.. And gang violence had kind of was born and accelerated during the crack cocaine years.. So even when the crack cocaine went away the gangs didn t.. So really after that, coming down from that 186 down to where we are now, in four years about a 54 percent drop in murders.. It has been constant focus on our gangs, the high-end gun offenders, illegal gun offenders and just really staying focused on those two things and bringing the community into to work with us.. That s been absolutely key in dropping it that last 54 percent.. LAMB: The Mayor of this town in 1989 was Marion Barry.. I want to run a short video clip of him speaking at the Press Club.. LANIER: OK.. MARION BARRY: Let me just say that nearly half of the 372 homicides, the targeted killings occurred east of the Anacostia River.. Communities plagued by high unemployment, high rate of school dropouts, poor housing, single family female heads of household, other social ills that have had a negative effect on the poorest among us.. To look at a map of what is currently occuring you ll see that there are about 60 percent of the open air drug markets in two police districts, The Fourth District and the Seventh District.. The Seventh District, East Anacostia River, the Fourth District in northwest Washington.. These murders are targeted killings.. LAMB: What did you hear there and what were you doing in 1989?.. LANIER: I hadn t come on yet.. I started in 1990 but the Fourth District that he referred to is where I started.. In fact when I started there right after coming out of the Academy we had a week s worth of riots in Mount Pleasant where the entire area was just completely out of control, looting, burning.. I think they torched about six or seven of our police cars in those riots.. But that s a very accurate description of what I remember when I came on.. LAMB: What was it like for you when you started on the street?.. LANIER: Well, the city was as a very different place.. Financially, the city was in shambles.. I mean we had, my first car, I walked the foot beat for a few years because we just didn t have any cars.. Then the cars we had were in such poor shape.. The first car I was assigned to had 127,000 miles on it.. So you know financially the city was just broken.. So it made policing that much more challenging with the, you know, the equipment and resources.. But you know I enjoyed walking the foot beat.. I think that was my favorite assignment in my entire career.. I learned more about policing by being just embedded in that community, knowing everybody, being so sensitive to things in my beat that I d notice if a car that was normally parked in a certain place at a certain time, it would catch my attention if it wasn t there.. So I think that s one of the most effective forms of policing.. I learned the most doing that.. But murders every single day, every single day one, two, sometimes three murders in a shift.. LAMB: When I first met you today my first thought was oh, I didn t know she was that tall.. LANIER: Everybody says that.. LAMB: Because in a picture you just don t look that tall.. LANIER: No.. LAMB: How tall are you?.. LANIER: Five, eleven.. LAMB: What part has that played?.. LANIER: And if we can get in, I m much skinnier than I look on TV too.. LAMB: Everybody is.. What part did that play in your life as a policeman being tall?.. LANIER: You know I don t think so much.. I think really, there is a misperception by the public sometimes that policing is all about brute force and brawn and policing is so much more about communication, being a good communicator and talking with people and building rapports with people, good and bad.. So I can t ever think of a time that my height has even played more of a role and people are always saying gosh, I didn t know you were that tall.. LAMB: You know a couple of years ago when Mayor Adrian Fenty was elected I remember that you, Michelle Reed, and Mayor Fenty were all under 40.. LAMB: You re the only one of those, that threesome left.. And how old are you now?.. LANIER: I m 45.. I remember the headline; talk about the press.. See there is those things again.. I remember there was an article in the Washington Post and it was interesting because somebody had you know done little bubbles over Adrian Fenty and I, our heads and it says you know you ve got a 36-year-old mayor and a 39-year-old police chief, this is Generation X.. But the byline was you know we re giving it all over to Generation X, don t blow it.. I thought well that s pressure.. LAMB: How do you think you got the job?.. LANIER: Well, you know I had been on 17 years at the time.. I was the district commander, I was one of the youngest district commanders in the city.. I was district commander in charge of the Fourth District.. Adrian Fenty, right after I took over the Fourth District, Adrian Fenty took over as the Ward Four council member.. He was just like he was as a mayor, he was a very high speed, very you know big on accountability.. So we had a lot of the same personality traits in terms of you know really focusing on accountability and customer service and responsiveness.. So we worked very well together.. But then I didn t see him after I left the Fourth District and went to Special Operations Division.. I didn t see him for a couple of years.. And when he was running for Mayor he stopped in to visit a couple of times and I hadn t seen him for a couple of years.. But I think it was just the sheer fact that Adrian Fenty knew how I policed.. He knew how I managed and he knew that my priorities were similar to his.. And I remember telling him when he asked me if I wanted the job, you know you re going to take a huge hit you know if you, if you appoint me, you know, a commander.. So they would be jumping a rank.. I m 39 years old.. I m a white female.. And he says I don t care about any of that.. He goes I know you can do the job.. LAMB: I understand from doing a little research that people behind your back call you Blondie?.. LANIER: Actually it s a name I got on the street when I use to walk a foot beat.. I, still when I go into the neighborhood where I use to work in Northwest and 4D, I will run into people all the time that I encountered who yell Blondie out as I go down the street, so.. LAMB: Does it bother you?.. Everybody in Washington D.. has a nickname.. LAMB: But if an officer of yours came up and said hey, Blondie.. LANIER: Some of them do the ones I use to work with do.. You got to remember I ve been on 23 years and I am the average member of the Metropolitan Police Department.. They are my age.. They re my group.. We came on in 89 and 90.. You know the vast majority of us.. So I ve worked along side, worked with supervised or managed the vast majority of the people in the Police Department.. I know them all by first name.. I know their habits.. I know who is a good cop and whose, is not as energetic as other cops.. So I know them all.. So that s been a huge advantage for me.. LAMB: So who is your boss?.. LANIER: My boss? I have a couple of bosses.. I ve got the Mayor of course, the City Administrator and the Deputy Mayor, Paul Quander.. LAMB: But if you look on the list of how many police departments there are in this area and it s 25.. LANIER: Actually I think it s 34.. I mean that s all I, I could only find 25.. LANIER: But a lot of them are confined to buildings.. I mean to be fair.. LANIER: You know the Supreme Court has a police department.. They police the Supreme Court.. The Capitol Police has a police department that s almost as large as mine, about half the size of mine that polices the Capitol.. So other than the Metropolitan Police and the U.. Park Police and to a certain extent the Metro Transit Police that patrol the transit system, everybody else is really very narrowly confined.. And Park Police really polices the green spaces, the Park Service areas.. We are the only police department in the city that, I put it to people this way all the time.. If you dial 911, it s my phone that s going to ring not any of theirs.. LAMB: So what happens if there is something in the city that happens to a public official and they must go to the hospital? We ve had many cases of that over the years.. Who is in charge then?.. LANIER: It all depends on who that person is.. If it is a protectee of the Secret Service, they would be lead, we support.. If it is a State Department protectee, they would be lead, we support.. But regardless of who it is, any homicide in the District of Columbia statutorily the Metropolitan Police Department is the only agency that can investigate.. LAMB: What s the best training for a policeman?.. LANIER: Well, I ve said it before, I ll say it again, the best training you can get to become a really good police officer and understand what it is all about is walking the foot beat.. I will say that to the day I die.. You learn how to develop sources.. You learn how to use intelligence information.. You learn how to leverage relationships in the community and that is the key.. People in the community trust you.. They ll tell you when the things are happening that are not yet crime so that you can intervene.. And they ll tell you all about how to go about doing it.. I ve really learned the most in my career from those relationships.. LAMB: Why did you a couple of years ago give a commencement address at the DeMatha High School in 2010?.. LANIER: My son, who I m so proud of, graduated from DeMatha and they asked me if I would come and give a commencement speech.. I have to tell you that was the most stress I had ever been under in my life giving that speech.. DeMatha High School, my son graduated from there.. As a DeMatha mom it was very stressful to give that speech.. LAMB: Let s look at a little bit of that speech.. LANIER: All right.. LANIER: Going to junior high school back in the 80s kids from my neighborhood were bussed into another neighborhood for school and that s when my life began to change.. I was bussed to a neighborhood in Fairmont Heights and each day from the first day, when the kids on my bus got off that bus we were promptly jumped by the neighborhood kids who clearly didn t think we belonged there.. This went on for about two years.. I began to skip school, miss class, get into trouble.. I went from a straight A student in a talented and gifted program to failing the eighth grade because of attendance, which is why I was so impressed with the 750 some days without a day off.. But honestly, no child can learn in an environment where fear generates all day long in school.. LAMB: Jumped by, why?.. LANIER: Well, that s you know that s I don t think unique to Washington D.. but one thing that is still pervasive and it was what drove a lot of the gang issues we ve had up until today is neighborhoods.. Neighborhoods in Washington D.. seem to be just territory that are owned by the people in those neighborhoods.. It s neighborhood against neighborhood.. And you know we were bussed into a neighborhood that wasn t our neighborhood and every day when we got off the bus, there was bus loads of kids that came from two different areas outside of the neighborhood.. And both the buses we, I mean eventually we figured out that we could combat this by joining forces and jumping them when we got off the bus, before you know after we got a little better at it.. But it was just a horrible experience for kids to try and go to school and learn in that environment.. That s why I put so much emphasis now as the Chief on making sure kids can go to school and be safe.. LAMB: How many kids do you have?.. LANIER: How many kids do I have? I have one.. LAMB: And you know when you started this job, your personal story everybody wanted to talk about and you said I don t want to be one of those that s on the freaky talk shows.. But I ve got to ask you because people out there that have never heard this story.. What is it? What happened when you were in junior high school?.. That was the hard part about the press too.. My personal story was more important my first year as a police chief in Washington D.. than you could imagine.. Well, I guess the, the interest is, is that I was, I ran away from home, dropped out of school, 14-15 years old, got married, had my son when I was 15.. So I was a single mom with a ninth grade education when I started.. When I came here to MPD I started with a GED, but basically a ninth grade education.. But over the last 20 years, so because I made that great decision to drop out of school, I spent 20 years trying to catch up and go back to school and now I have two masters degrees.. So I, I try to make up for it but it sure was the hard way.. LAMB: Why did you run away from home?.. LANIER: Oh, because I was a teenager thought I knew everything.. I was failing in school because I had been skipping school.. I thought I was in love wanted to get married and then I got pregnant, so.. LAMB: Where did you live during that time when you got married?.. LANIER: In a small apartment just outside of Washington D.. LAMB: What happened to your relationship with your parents?.. LANIER: Well with my mom, you know I was raised by a single mom.. So my mother is the sole reason that I am where I am today.. She was obviously devastated.. She was a wonderful mother.. She did everything right, everything she could.. I was just.. LAMB: Is she alive?.. LANIER: Oh yes, yes.. In fact she lives with me now I take care of her.. So the shoe is on the other foot.. She was wonderful.. She stood by me when, when I got divorced and I moved back home.. My mother had very, very little money.. She was, we were poor growing up.. She took me and my son back in and what little she had she shared with us.. She helped me raise my son.. She helped me get my son into private school.. Helped me pay some of the bills with what little money she had.. She made it possible for me to be where I am today.. So, my mother has been great.. LAMB: What were those early jobs you had in order to make money?.. LANIER: I was a secretary, I actually, my mother taught me how to type at home.. I worked as a waitress.. I took, I worked, started working when I was 15 and I worked two jobs the first three  ...   to know the police.. They start to get to know you by name.. They start to provide information.. There is one particular community over there where we, that drove homicides year after year.. And after two years with foot patrols, dropped it down to one murder in an entire year.. And that murder was closed because we got information from the community.. So zero tolerance to me in my communities alienates the people we need.. LAMB: How can somebody tell, especially another police officer that works for you when you re mad?.. LANIER: Oh, it all depends.. Let s see the ones that, well I would say the most opportunity for people to see me mad is in my crime briefing.. If I have somebody who in our crime briefing we discover they have information that they didn t share with other people who needed it and an additional crime could have occurred or another crime did occur.. I think my body language makes it really obvious.. And I don t have any problem you know telling people especially if they re people I have appointed to positions to make sure these things are getting done.. You know I think it s pretty obvious that that person is not going to be there very long.. I ll move a person in a heartbeat if they re not doing the job I put them in there to do.. LAMB: As a person in command, what would be your recommendation to others that are getting command for the first time in the way you treat people and how tough do you have to be, do you tough in the beginning and loosen up later? What, what advice would you have?.. LANIER: Well for me, you know all the people that I, in fact my entire executive staff, all the assistant chiefs, we all came up through the ranks together.. We competed in promotional tests together.. I have a lot of respect for them and I think that the thing that is most important is everybody that works for me knows that you could be my best friend.. And I ve had scenarios where I have people that I ve personally been friends with for a long, long time.. If you re in a leadership position and you re responsible for a particular area, and you re not making it, I ve got to move you.. I mean I ve got to move you.. I might have to demote you, take you down a couple ranks.. I don t have any choice it s not personal it s not about you.. I have to get the job done.. People have entrusted me to get the job done and I have to get it done.. And I have to get it done through others.. And so it s not, it s not an easy thing but it is what s required if you re going to be a leader and that s accountability.. LAMB: So, I saw a lot of stories about your salary.. Does that tick you off?.. LANIER: Only in a sense.. LAMB: I mean you make 250 some thousand.. LANIER: Only in a sense that, first of all a lot of those stories they talked about the top three salaries in D.. There is myself, the school s chancellor who makes actually more than I do, and then the city administrator.. In that article they refer to me by name and Kaya Henderson by name, the female school s chancellor.. They never mentioned the city administrator who s male and makes more than both of us.. So I thought it was very sexually biased and if you compare my salary to other major city chiefs, and particularly with the, you know the comparisons across city, my salary doesn t stand out at all.. It s not such a big deal at all.. And I wonder if I was male if it would matter?.. LAMB: Who gets the most money as a police commissioner?.. LANIER: I don t know who it is now.. I know Chuck Ramsey is up there.. LAMB: In Philadelphia?.. LANIER: Yes, in Philadelphia, Chicago is up there.. And then if you look at size of force, if you compare the size of force there are police chiefs out there that have police departments there s police chiefs in the region here that have police departments ¼ of the size of what I have that are making very close to what I make.. So you have to weigh a lot of that stuff too, but.. LAMB: Several years ago I don t know 20, 30, 40 years ago, the population breakdown in this city was 70 percent African American.. It s now 50 percent African American and 38 percent Caucasian and others.. What, what happened? Where did the African Americans go and what difference does that make today at all?.. LANIER: You know the population is shifted, I d say that, that shift has occurred at least initially it was fairly gradual started about 10 years ago and then there s been an acceleration in the last five years.. I think the, the city is a, under the last or Tony William s administration he put together he was a visionary.. LAMB: The mayor?.. LANIER: Yes, the mayor, put together this vision for the city to start revitalizing economic development in the city.. He did Gateways projects and things like that to try and turn the city back in a really good direction which he did.. In the course of doing that, one of the things that I think was a good decision is to move away from public housing concentrated poverty to a Section 8 you know model that is in place now.. And so a lot of those public housing complexes that really clustered a lot of very poor folks and very poor living conditions to get rid of those.. So as Tony Williams moved through his vision, a lot of those public housing complexes were destroyed and they re single family homes in those areas now.. So I think some of the folks are disbursed around the city now in Section 8 properties some of them took Section 8 properties outside of the borders of the district.. But the more the district develops and the more development that goes on and there s a lot going on here, there s 52 or 53 cranes out there in this city right now doing, doing jobs.. And so it, and it becomes more expensive to live here.. I think you re going to see a lot more of not just African American but the lower income folks being inched out.. LAMB: And the population is going up for the first time in a lot of years.. LANIER: The population is skyrocketing here.. I just did a 18 month analysis of the economic development in the city because it impacts my policing and I put together a five year strategy for policing and really over the next five years policing is going to look very different because of the development in the city.. It s amazing, so.. LAMB: The president said that there, he wants more police out on the beat.. Does that make sense?.. LANIER: That s where they have to be.. LAMB: Do you need more?.. LANIER: Of course I do.. I, I mean that, that was the whole purpose of my study.. In five years as a chief I ve never gone out and said I need more cops.. But I am watching as a part of our crime projections we monitor a lot of things that are not traditionally monitored by police.. This economic development and the types of development that s going on here is going to impact workload for us.. With the population skyrocketing the way it is with the entertainment venues skyrocketing the way they are here, and the crowds that we re drawing, our nighttime population is now as big as our daytime population.. I m going to need more officers.. I think it is not a fixed number of officers.. I think we re going to need to be flexible, surge officers when you need them, we can attrite officers down very quickly when we don t.. But I think, I think we re going to need to continue to grow the force a little bit right now.. LAMB: What do you, what does cop mean?.. LANIER: Constable on patrol.. LAMB: And do you like being called a cop?.. LANIER: You know some of the names that we get I actually think are kind of fun.. You know in D.. people, I mean in the neighborhoods where we, you know we really police and we fight crime, they don t call us cops.. They call us the po-po.. And it, I think that s an affectionate term so to speak between the criminal element and the police.. For years we were, we were called the 5-0 so we d ride into a neighborhood that was a drug market back in the crack cocaine days, they d yell 5-0.. And so there s a lot of affectionate terms like that going on.. Cop doesn t bother me.. LAMB: 121 officers in the district over the years, if the numbers are still right, have lost their lives as policemen.. I think 60 some of those were killed, 61 or so were killed by a gun being shot.. How much do you worry about that and how, how often has that happened on your watch?.. LANIER: I worry about it every day.. And in the past couple of years we ve done some very, very risky operations to go after the most violent people in the city.. The guys in the units that have worked these operations know that every single morning when we would talk, get updates on how the, these operations are going, it was a decision for me each day it s time to shut this down.. It s time to shut it down because you re taking such huge risks.. And we ve got great police officers.. They, they know the risks they re very good at what they do, but I worry about it every day.. We ve had lots of officers shot since I ve been the chief.. I had you know officers that have been killed in traffic related incidents.. Thank God we ve not lost an officer to gunfire in, in any recent, at any time recently.. LAMB: How much control do you have over, and you know this is a big issue in the district, the cameras? I think, didn t the district raise about $92 million last year on, on traffic control?.. LANIER: Oh, the traffic control?.. LAMB: On traffic control is that yours?.. LANIER: Yes it is mine.. We actually, I was actually the commander of the vehicular homicide unit back in 97 I want to say.. We had 76 traffic fatalities in this city.. And that s when the population was much smaller and we didn t have all the bicycles and all the pedestrians.. We had 19 last year.. I am a huge believer in photo enforcement.. Bottom line is if you re traveling in a car at 30 miles an hour and you strike a pedestrian or bicycle, they ve got an 80 percent chance of living.. If you strike them at 40 miles an hour, they got a 80 percent chance at dying.. That s just a fact.. You slow people down fatalities will go down.. It is a fact.. And I can tell you people slow down in this city because that $100 ticket doesn t feel very good.. LAMB: So you re going to keep it up?.. LANIER: I am, I am.. LAMB: What about the idea, people think that there is a quota on traffic control people, I mean the you know parking and that you send those people out on their little segue to put those tickets on cars and that they have a quota.. Is there such a thing as a quota?.. LANIER: See now that s not me.. See I m, I m very happy to say the parking enforcement is done by another agency in this city.. But I do want to go back to what you said just a moment ago about the, the cameras and keeping up with the cameras.. The other thing that cameras do that people don t realize is the majority of police officers that get killed in the line of duty are killed in traffic incidents.. We ve had officers killed in traffic incidents here doing traffic enforcement.. And it also frees my officers up to go out and do the proactive policing that we need to do.. So, for me the cameras are a win all the way around.. The money doesn t come back into my budget.. You know it s not coming back to me.. I m seeing the number of people losing their life drop dramatically.. I m seeing, I m taking a huge risk off of my officers from my officers being killed in dangerous areas.. And those high speed areas where we run those cameras, some of those places I won t put a police officer.. The Third Street tunnel for example because we had an officer killed trying to enforce traffic in there.. So there are a lot of advantages to those cameras.. And people I think really that look at public safety as a whole appreciate them.. LAMB: I m want to show some video back in 2008.. It s an associated press report on guns and then get your reaction to what s going on today.. UNINDENTIFIED PARTICIPANT: In the nation s capital a victory for supporters of gun rights with the U.. Supreme Court striking down a ban on handguns in the District of Columbia.. The District s government wanted the court to uphold the 32-year-old ban.. The strictest in the country saying it curbs violent crime, crime that would only get worse with guns in homes.. At issue how to interpret the second amendment.. Does it protect an individual s right to own guns or does it only apply to the collective rights of states to maintain militias?.. The constitutional amendment was ratified in 1791 but the court has never before given a definitive interpretation.. Opponents of the ban say the law violates the second amendment guaranteeing one s right to self-defense.. And they say outlawing guns has had little effect stopping the city s violence.. LAMB: What impact did that decision by the Supreme Court have on your job?.. LANIER: Very little.. Honestly.. And people know so little about it and there s such a perception that you know you ve never been able to register a firearm in D.. and I ve had people say oh, the homicide rate is down now since they ve overturned this gun ban in D.. But the only thing the Heller decision did was, you ve always been able to register a firearm in your home.. It just had to be long gun.. Handguns were not permissible.. We ve had about 1,600 semiautomatic handguns registered since Heller.. But it s only permissible to have them in your home.. You can t take them out on the street.. We ve not had one case where a homeowner used a registered firearm to defend their life or defend a burglary, not one since Heller.. So it s had zero impact on crime.. I can t even think of a case where a legally registered handgun has been stolen yet from a home.. My only fear was that, because we have officer s homes who were targeted to steal firearms.. So maybe people would start looking to steal firearms, but nothing.. So other than we ve had some suicides you know involving registered firearms but other than that, Heller has had really no decision, no impact on policing.. LAMB: So if the President called you in the Oval Office and said Chief, what should I do? What would you recommend to him based on your knowledge of the gun business?.. LANIER: In this most recent debate we have?.. Just, what would you do if you.. LANIER: I mean I think every major city chief in the country would agree with me.. There, the goal is you can t prevent every incident.. You have to try and reduce the harm when bad things happen.. Large capacity magazines, there is really no reason for large capacity magazine other than you know devastation.. I think the gun show loophole is huge.. I mean everybody agrees.. I mean you should not be selling firearms to felons and criminals and things like that.. So I think that s a biggie.. And then the assault weapons.. You know I feel for the gun collectors.. You know I have, my father and my brothers were all hunters and you know down in southern Virginia where everybody has a gun and it s safe because they have to have gun safety courses.. But I think those three things would significantly reduce the number of causalities that we see.. We re not going to stop everybody from getting them whether they re legal or not.. But I think it s important for the government to institute policies that at least are aimed at trying to reduce the harm associated with bad events.. LAMB: What would you do about the schools? And do you do anything now about having the schools.. LANIER: We police the schools here.. We ve policed the schools here for a long time.. I have about 100 officers that are assigned to, they don t stand in schools.. We have security that does you know security for the schools but I have about 100 officers that rove through all of the, the high schools primarily but they also do the feeder schools and elementary schools.. And I will continue to keep an officer, a police officer presence in our schools.. I don t believe that police officers should be stationed at the doors and in the schools.. But I do think police officers play, play a role.. LAMB: I notice when you arrived today, you re armed.. LANIER: Always.. LAMB: What do you carry?.. LANIER : A Glock, 9 millimeter.. LANIER: It s what the department issued when I came on.. I mean it is a very efficient firearm.. It s something that we ve had in the Metropolitan Police Department now for 24 years.. LAMB: Have you ever fired it other than in practice?.. LANIER: I have.. LAMB: For what reason?.. LANIER: And people who know me will be shocked.. It was actually at a, I had an attacking pit bull.. Two pit bulls attacked my partner and I, gosh I want to say 95.. So I discharged at the pit bulls and struck and killed one of the pit bulls.. LAMB: What was, I mean was there any other choice?.. LAMB: How often does an officer working for your department misuse a firearm?.. LANIER: You know we have, it, over the years, you know we had a bad patch of years in the early 90s.. I m sure you know found in the literature but we have very, very few accidental discharges.. We have very, very few unjustified discharges.. Three years ago, we went an entire year without one single police related shooting death.. And you know in a city like this with 658,000 calls for service.. Our numbers of use of force with a firearm is so low.. I think each year since I ve been the chief there may be six or seven incidents a year where an officer has to discharge a firearm and almost every single case against an armed, an armed assailant.. So it s a very low number here.. LAMB: How many people dial 911 a year?.. LANIER: I believe about 658,000 calls for service is about the average.. We got 650,000 calls for services a year.. LAMB: How many of those are significant?.. LANIER: Oh, that s a tough question.. LAMB: How many of them are frivolous?.. LANIER: Let me put it this way.. I d say about 35 percent of them are the top priorities.. Those are real, I need the police now.. LAMB: You know if you live here and I ve lived here for a long time, you can rate the importance of an individual by the number of D.. police that are leading his or her path through the streets.. The President when he moves has, how many vehicles and how many policemen do you have around him?.. LANIER: I wouldn t comment on that.. We never give numbers on security but he is the President of the United States.. Lots.. LAMB: But is it better off from what you, I mean, if we didn t know he was in a vehicle, we wouldn t get you know terribly excited and when you come through, I ve counted eight or ten police either motorcycles or police cars coming along with it.. I m sure you ve thought this out.. LAMB: And.. LANIER : I use to run the unit that ran the motorcade escort.. LAMB: Is that hard to do? That, get ready to move a President around this town?.. LANIER : Yes.. It is.. It is very, very difficult and to keep the city moving.. You know the Vice President, the President, the Vice President, First Lady, moving around the city every single day.. And this is a busy city.. But I mean I think one, dignitaries do move around without those big escorts off the record that you don t know about.. But I mean it s the President of the United States.. His schedule is public.. He is and if it weren t public, the press would be accusing him of hiding something.. So when the, when somebody that important who has a public schedule for them not to have that type of security is just dangerous.. LAMB: Cathy Lanier, Chief of Police of the Washington Metropolitan Police Department, we re out of time and we thank you for yours.. LANIER: Thank you..

    Original link path: /Transcript/?ProgramID=1428
    Open archive

  • Title: Q & A
    Descriptive info: January 20, 2013.. Sheila Bair.. Author, "Bull By The Horns: Fighting to Save Main Street From Wall Street and Wall Street From Itself.. ".. : Our guest is former Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Chairman Sheila Bair.. She discusses her new book titled Bull By The Horns: Fighting to Save Main Street From Wall Street and Wall Street From Itself.. She talks about her nomination by President Bush and approval by the Senate in 2006.. In 2009 she was asked to remain in office for the remainder of her  ...   crisis since the depression, and describes efforts to repair the economy.. She speaks about her relationships with Treasury Secretary Hank Paulsen and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke.. She speaks of the basic philosophical differences she had with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.. She reports that she frequently found herself at odds with him.. She describes the behind the scenes role the government played in bailing out several banks and financial institutions.. Bair is highly critical of the bailouts as well as the lax regulation that led to the economic crash..

    Original link path: /Transcript/?ProgramID=1427
    Open archive

  • Title: Q & A
    Descriptive info: January 13, 2013.. Jason Brennan.. Author, "Libertarianism: What Everyone Need to Know".. : Our guest is educator and author Jason Brennan to discuss his latest book titled Libertarianism: What Everyone Needs to Know.. He suggests that his goal in the book was to make libertarianism seem reasonable to people who aren t inclined to know much about it.. He describes the book as a primer in the political philosophy described as libertarianism.. Brennan reviews well known libertarians such as Ayn Rand and Milton Friedman, as well as Adam Smith and John Locke.. He broadly defines three categories of libertarian thinkers as classical liberals, hard libertarians and neo-classical liberals.. He names examples of each category and talks about their views on many different economic and social issues.. Brennan explains that the book is the latest in a series of What Everyone Needs to Know books published by Oxford University Press.. In addition, he credits his high school economics teacher, Michael Lee in Hudson, New Hampshire with getting him interested in the study of libertarianism.. BRIAN LAMB: Jason Brennan, when did you first learn about libertarianism?.. JASON BRENNAN: For me, it was back in a high school class, I was with Mr.. Lee, my high school economics teacher, teaching us microeconomics and I was doing very well in the subject and he just recommended that I read this book by Henry Hazlitt called Economics in One Lesson and that was sort of my first introduction to libertarianism, it was from an economic point of view and the idea was to kind of not just look at the intended consequences of any political policy but always look at the unseen consequences on the side and that was kind of a transformative moment for me.. So it really came down to one high school teacher showing me one book.. LAMB: What did you do about it from them on?.. BRENNAN: It always was an interest of mine, I have been kind of strange in high school and that I have been interested in political philosophy starting in ninth grade just on the spur of the moment, I started reading Locke and Marx because I had this idea that ideas can really shape history in the long run and these were two people whose ideas really had made a huge difference.. But I hadn t really encountered I didn t realize that Locke was a kind of libertarian and I didn t really have a term to associate with him there.. But then, you know, going through college, I have been interested in economics, was taking less of economics classes, I took a lot of philosophy classes and so I just continued to sort of study these issues, and also see about many of the challenges to them as well.. LAMB: How many questions did you ask in this book?.. BRENNAN: It ended up being 105.. LAMB: And where did you get the idea for the book?.. BRENNAN: Well, Oxford University Press has a series called What Everyone Needs to Know and so this wasn t a book that I had been intending to write on my own, it was an editor at Oxford contacted me and said, you know, I say with the Tea Party movement, some of which is libertarian, some of which is conservative, I see with just issues that are going on in contemporary American politics it seems like libertarian ideas are becoming more influential and talked about than they had been and it is time for someone to write a book like this.. And then he asked me to do it.. And you know, I had to kind of jump on the opportunity and in part because I have a sort of story I would like to tell with this book and maybe you know, my main goals in the book is to kind of make libertarianism seem reasonable to people who aren t inclined to agree with it and other books that are like this, they are primers in libertarianism.. They often seem to me to be preaching to the choir, like the most kind of extreme members of the group and the sort of start with premises that most people won t accept.. LAMB: So how did you put it together?.. BRENNAN: Well, I just tried to think about if I weren t a libertarian, what I would want to know about? What will be the questions that I ask and in particular, I was thinking about many of the misconceptions that people might have about libertarianism, I mean, Salon Magazine and the Boston Review and others have been running articles on libertarianism, and have been written by critics of libertarianism and they weren t they just weren t very charitable.. It wasn t that they were uncharitable because they were criticizing libertarianism, but they were uncharitable because they were criticizing a cartoon or a strawman version of it.. So I was thinking in my head like what would that kind of person need to hear in order to get a better grasp of what the view is and even frankly, I was thinking about my mother-in-law a lot.. She is a very committed Democrat and she has a certain view of what the people in this movement think and so I had her in mind quite a bit when I was writing this.. I was like what would be her objections, what does she think is going on with libertarianism and I was trying to kind of write it for that audience.. LAMB: How much of this reflects your own personal philosophy?.. BRENNAN: I agree with a large amount of what is in there but not everything.. I mean, I m not a conventional hardcore libertarian, I mean I m one of those people where people have a hard time pegging me with the label and so some libertarians think I m a hard core leftist socialist which is a really strange thing because I m not.. But others others see me as you know, kind of a regular libertarian kind of thinker and I mean, I use the term neo-classical liberal, and maybe we will get into what that means, and but yes, not every question in there is sort of a report of my own view.. I m trying to say what libertarians in general tend to think and there is a lot of diversity within libertarianism and I mean, as I say early on in the book, I really divide the libertarians into three camps.. There is what I call the classical liberals, the hard libertarians and the neo-classical liberals.. And they have a different sort of sets of premises to begin with, they have different views about what government can and cannot do and they will have different reasons for their positions.. LAMB: Who would you say is the most well-known libertarian?.. BRENNAN: I guess it would have to be there are a couple of candidates but you know, maybe it s Ayn Rand, I think most people know who she is and I don t as I said in the book, I don t think she is representative of mainline libertarian thinking but she is certainly a notorious figure and then with people like Paul Ryan invoking her recently, she is someone that is talked about, her books of all libertarian books on Amazon, her books sell the best typically like she always has her books are in the top 400 on Amazon so she might be the most well known.. More historically, you know, people know who Adam Smith was and they know who they know who John Locke were and they are a classical liberal thinkers and they were broadly within a libertarian camp.. And so I think they are very well known as well.. LAMB: Define those three categories of libertarianism.. BRENNAN: OK.. So they are kind of they are separated in part by their where they occur historically in this kind of line of thinking and in part by the sort of premises that they have.. So classical liberals are people like David Hume, Adam Smith, John Locke and a few others like Frederick Douglas and for them, their view is that liberty like all libertarians, they think that liberty is through the paramount value that has to be protected and respected through politics.. However, they tend to be much more concerned about consequences and weighing the cost of benefits of different policies and they are more comfortable with having some government intervention to the economy or having some degree of a welfare state, they are often they are often using a lot a large range of different kinds of reasoning in order to get to their conclusions.. Many of them were economists and thought like economists and for them, analyzing politics was all about kind of doing cost benefit of different policies.. And so that was kind of the main line of liberal thinking and for a long time, the word liberal just meant classical liberal.. It want until really in the 20th century or the late 19th century where it started to mean at least in the United States, someone who was kind of on the left but not so left that they were a Marxist or a socialist.. So starting around like the 1950s or maybe a little bit earlier, you get what I call hard libertarians or what sometimes people just mean by the word libertarian and these are people who think that we have a very strong and extensive set of the rights over ourselves and over our bodies and that we can acquire rights to property and these rights are not absolute but very, very strong, very difficult to be overcome by other considerations and those libertarians tend to be what we call in philosophy deontological thinkers, they are much more concerned not about the consequences of different actions and different policies but about making sure we respect people as themselves and avoid violating their rights even if we think that the consequences of violating the rights would be good.. So those are people like Ayn Rand or Murray Rothbard or Ludwig Von Mises or the Harvard philosopher Robert Nozick and for a while, that was sort of was the crux of the libertarian movement.. And in many respects, many people who self identify as libertarians now are probably people who I would call hard libertarians in this book.. And then recently, kind of in the past 30 or so years, at least in the academy, the action hasn t been what I call hard libertarianism and it s been in this new thing, neo-classical liberalism, and so neo-classical liberals, as I define them, are people who think that we have an extensive set of rights to liberty and including an extensive set of economic rights, rights to acquire property, rights to run businesses and so on.. But at the same time, they make explicit foundational concern for social justice which is often thought of as an idea on the left.. And by social justice, I mean something like the thought that the basic institutions of society have to be institutions that benefit everybody that give everybody a stake and in particular, don t leave the poor behind.. LAMB: And so how did you change your thinking about liberalism from Mr.. Lee s class in high school all the way to where you are now and what are you doing right now.. BRENNAN: And sometimes, I wonder if it has changed all that much.. And I mean, I have never been kind of the hard libertarian type.. I mean I think we have rights but I don t think that the our rights to property are ones that just they just from deduction from first philosophical premises, we can prove that libertarianism is the best point of view.. For me, it s always been consequences matter when you are looking at institutions, you have to compare how they do for how they perform to other kinds of institutions and any set of regime that led a large number of people fall behind or any regime that failed to perform very well just wouldn t be a regime worth advocating and so I have always been you can almost see within libertarianism, there is really two kinds of ways of thinking.. There is people who kind of follow this F.. Hayek, a Nobel Laureate economist who think a lot of the reasons for having restricted government have to do with the lack of competence of political figures or the fact that you know, society is just very hard to regulate versus others who think it s just about making sure you respect people s rights and I have always tended to be kind of in this camp.. And maybe it s because I came to it from an economic perspective rather than a philosophical perspective and even though professionally, I m a philosopher.. LAMB: My last question to you was what are you doing now?.. BRENNAN: Right now, I m writing two books.. I do a lot on what is called democratic theory which is philosophy, studying the effects of democracy or even political science studying the effects of democracy.. And so I m writing a book right now where I am debating the issue of compulsory voting with a political scientist in Australia, she is in favor of it and I am not and so we are looking at the various arguments for and against it and the possible consequences it might have.. And you know, my view is the arguments for compulsory voting aren t very good, and usually they rest upon like known to be incorrect empirical premises.. But even worse, I tend to think that compulsory voting is kind of like waving a magic wand where you wave a magic wand and it makes the quality of the electorate just slightly worse.. You make people slightly less informed and as a result of that, you get slightly worse government.. LAMB: You teach where?.. BRENNAN: At Georgetown University here in D.. LAMB: What age group?.. BRENNAN: I teach everyone from 18 year olds fresh into college and last semester, I was teaching only first year students in a first year seminar in entrepreneurship and ethics and up in to graduate students in philosophy and executive masters business students in the business school.. LAMB: How often do you find young people coming in to your class that are already think they are libertarians?.. BRENNAN: You know, it s hard to say.. One thing about my class is I if you ever were to look at one of my syllabi, you see, I have a preamble to every single syllabus that says, in this class, we practice academic freedom, and what I mean by that is I have the right to challenge any opinion you have regardless of whether you think it s sacred.. You have that right against me, I will not penalize you for holding these contrary to mine or reward you for trying to mimic my views and we are going to have this open atmosphere where everything can be questioned and we are not going to bully one another for having the wrong view or for having unpopular views.. And I really I don t just say that but I really practice it and the result of that is I had a number of classes where at the end, I mean a liberty student at one time said, I don t really know what anyone thinks in this class and I mean, we have been debating and discussing all of these issues for an entire semester but I don t actually know where anyone stands.. And so I try to cultivate an atmosphere where people can test that idea and argue and experiment with thinking without having to label themselves and so I m not I think because of that, I don t really know where students stand.. I m not out there looking for people to become mirror images of myself and I m not looking to kind of recruit people into a movement and so I think because of that, I just don t really know where they are coming from.. LAMB: Question number 29 in your book is libertarianism atheistic? And you cite Liberty Magazine which did a survey in 2008 that indicated that only 36.. 5 percent of it s readers believed in God.. BRENNAN: Yes.. LAMB: You teach at a Catholic college.. BRENNAN: Yes, right.. LAMB: How does that fit in with them if you are teaching libertarianism.. BRENNAN: Yes, well, it turns out that libertarians are just proportionally atheistic and I speculate a little bit about why that is and I think it s because libertarians tend to be more philosophical and it just turns out that being philosophical makes you atheistic.. I mean as I say in the book, 17 out of 20 professional philosophers are atheist, that is a really high number, and it s kind of surprisingly high.. But there is nothing inherent in libertarianism that is atheistic, the libertarianism is a theory or set of theories about the limits of government about what rights we have and about how we ought to treat each other and it doesn t say anything about whether god exists or not.. You know, and they are very prominent religious libertarians and my sometime, co-author, John Tomasi, and who he and I dubbed that term neo-classical liberal that I am thinking about, he is you know, he is Catholic.. There are other religious libertarians as well.. LAMB: How about yourself, do you talk about your own your religious beliefs?.. BRENNAN: You mean in the book that I talk about then?.. LAMB: Are you know, people that teach philosophy are atheists, why do you think that is?.. BRENNAN: Yes, it s hard to.. LAMB: And which starts first? Your interest in philosophy that leads you to atheism or your atheism that leads you to philosophy.. BRENNAN: Yes, I really wondered about that.. I wonder if you know, is it a treatment or selection effect and in that survey, they survey graduate students as well as current Ph.. D as well as people who have completed their Ph.. D and professors and so on and you do find that graduate students as a whole right now are more religious than people who have faculty jobs.. Not very much but as a whole, it s statistically significant.. I don t know if that that doesn t necessarily indicate that they become more atheistic over time, because it could just mean that we had a large group of atheistic philosophers in the past and now, people are more religious than they had been.. You know, I tend to think that in philosophy, there is an antireligious attitude.. I think most people don t respect religion very much and it s not simply that they are not religious but they think religion is kind of a bad thing.. And so because of that, there might be a tendency to push religion away and I mean, that said, some of the basic questions in philosophy are questions about the existence of God and you know, we looked, if you take a philosophy class, you are going to end up looking at some point, at the various purported proofs of the existence of God and many of these arguments are just not very good arguments.. And so it could just be that philosophers get into this rationalistic mindset and they go, well, this is you know, belief in God is something that has to be shown just like we are not going to be believe in unicorns unless we have evidence for unicorns, we are not going to believe in god unless we have evidence for it and they examined some of the arguments and I guess the arguments aren t that good and they become atheistic.. Perhaps.. It is hard to say.. LAMB: So give us an extreme position two extreme positions that would surprise people about libertarians and you know, that would be I you are a conservative, you would believe this way, if you are a liberal, you would believe this way.. LAMB: But you still end up being a libertarian.. BRENNAN: So two.. LAMB: Well, how many conservative views fit in libertarianism and how many liberal views fit in the extreme is what I m looking for.. BRENNAN: Yes, OK, good.. Some libertarians like to claim that libertarianism is a mix of left liberalism and conservatism.. It s economically conservative and socially liberal because it s for free markets but it s also for you know, tolerance and equality and you know, treating women as equal and treating homosexuals and equal and allowing people to use drugs and allowing alternative lifestyles that conservatism often find repugnant or repulsive.. So I guess what are some positions that I think people find surprising? One thing might be that libertarians tend to be strongly in favor of open immigration.. They think that this is a really important thing and that it s just something that it s not very often talked about.. I spend quite a bit of time in that book talking about that very issue.. I mean, at one point, I even say you know, from the libertarian standpoint, if you are not for free immigration, then any pretense that you care about social justice is really just pretense.. LAMB: Cam you define that, dead weight loss?.. BRENNAN: That means that well, it s a sort of a technical thing if you draw a supply and demand curve and you restrict well, a  ...   want to lower their taxes and it s like is that really what s going on?.. Like they are losing money.. If that is what they are doing, they are losing money, they are spending a large amount of money to do something that has a very small probability of actually paying out and even if it did pay out, it would still they wouldn t lower their taxes enough or lower their regulations enough.. It s really it s a motive to make the world fit better with their vision of how the world should be and I mean that is why the most when it comes to politics, I mean this is a very big misconception most people have about politics is that they think that the typical person, as a voter, in terms of what ideology they espoused and so on is a selfish person.. They picked their ideology based upon what is best for them.. It turns out and there is a huge body of empirical literature on this that is not true.. Very few people pick their ideology based upon self interest and very few people vote based on their self interest.. Most people are doing what they think is best.. LAMB: For?.. BRENNAN: For actually that is good question.. So most people are what we call nationalist (sociotropes) meaning they do what they think is best for the nation, and libertarians are unusual in the fact because they are cosmopolitan, they are not nationalist, and they don t really care so much.. Libertarians aren t so concerned with Americans, they care about the world.. They tend not to identify very strongly with a particular nation and so your typical voter, when he or she votes, votes for what he or she perceives to be in the national interest.. Your typical libertarian probably doesn t vote but when if he did vote, he would vote for what he perceives to be in the world s interest.. LAMB: You cited something called a Watson Institute for International Affairs, do you know anything about it?.. BRENNAN: Yes, that is an institute at Brown University where I was a professor before I came to Georgetown.. So the Watson Institute studies a wide variety of political issues including the Iraq war and that I think in the book, I was talking about they have a Web site called cost of war dot org and they are trying to estimate what are the total expenses that are coming about because of the Iraqi war and the Afghanistan war in terms of how many civilians have been killed and how many Americans have been killed, and how many American contractors have been killed, how much money will be spent.. They are estimating it will be about it will end up costing us about $4 trillion and that somewhere between 100 and 200,000 civilians in Afghanistan, Pakistan and you know, Iraq, have been killed.. LAMB: In your book, you cite a lot of these institutions.. LAMB: How do you trust them? I mean what the what makes you think that the Watson Institute knows that the wars will cost $4 trillion and did they go into detail how they figured this out?.. BRENNAN: Yes, I mean they are getting, their data is stuff that you can get from the CBO, it s nothing hidden.. I if you look it up, you will see that, I might say the Cato Institute says x but if I actually like try to peg something down and let us say, this is the evidence, I will go with what is in peer reviewed in academic journals.. And you know, so if I say something like most voters are not selfish, I m not saying that because the Cato Institute thinks I have no idea what they think about that.. I m saying that because there is a lot of peer reviewed research on this issue.. And the Watson Institute is made up of a number of professors and they are writing articles, the articles go through the subject and the process of peer review and so they are for that reason, trust like maybe more trustworthy than others.. At the end of the day, I m what I often try to do is look for people who are saying something that goes against their ideology as well.. So if I know you are if I know that you are inclined to be left leaning but you are but you do a bunch of research that points to a non-left leaning position.. So for example, you have a bunch of sociologist doing work on family structure and their work tends to show like prove the kinds of the very kinds of things conservatives say, you go well, they are not doing this for ideological reasons.. When they are saying that having married parents is good for children, like they are not people who are inclined to say that for ideological reasons, they are saying that because the evidence suggests it.. So you know, for me, it s David Hume wrote an essay a couple of hundred years ago about when to trust other people s testimonies and he gives kind of some criteria, and for me, I follow that stuff very closely.. LAMB: Why should people who consider themselves conservatives trust anything that comes out of the left liberal academic society that you defined earlier?.. BRENNAN: Yes, well, you know, it s a good question because a lot of them a lot of times, I will bring up some study and say I don t trust those people because they are all biased and look, if you see that there are a number of people who have a certain ideology and they keep doing work that just makes it look like their ideology is correct.. Yes, you have to be you have to have some reason for distrust there.. On the other hand, if you see them doing work that doesn t correspond with their particular ideology, well then, you have more reason to trust it.. If you find that people of varying ideologies tend to all agree with this.. You are given more reason to trust it.. So for example, take the issue of free trade versus protectionism, and you know, your typical economist is a moderate democrat.. However, pretty much regardless of where they stand ideologically, an economist is in favor of free trade, it is rare to find economists who are in favor of protectionisms and even the ones who are in favor of protectionism, it s only under certain limited unusual cases and you know, so when you see that you go look, this is just something that an economist think, it s not something that is based upon one person having particular ideology or another.. LAMB: How much is this book that you have written cost under the Oxford folks? $16.. 95, it says right here.. BRENNAN: But you can really get it for like $11 in Amazon.. LAMB: And they do you have any idea how many of those kind of books that Oxford Press has published?.. BRENNAN: The What everyone needs to know books?.. BRENNAN: I think they have like almost 100 at this point.. This is the first one on ideology though.. The others are on things like nuclear power, and Cuba, China, the very first book in the series was on religion Islam: What Everyone Needs to Know.. It was written shortly after 9/11 because people obviously now, Islam is going to be a big deal in like what we do about the Middle East and our relation with them and but then people have no idea really what Islam was all about.. You know, and so the books in this series they are meant to sort of correct misconceptions and the thought is people have they think they know what they think they know a lot about some issue but they probably don t.. And this is to kind of correct that and get them to see that there is more to the story than they realize.. LAMB: Put Mr.. Dr.. Friedman, who is now deceased into context.. BRENNAN: I call him a classical liberal in the book and I see him as I quote one of his colleagues, Gary Becker, and I see them as having a particular way of thinking and it is not.. LAMB: Becker is still alive.. BRENNAN: Yes, that is right still doing lots of good work.. And so they are not the kinds of libertarians who say you know, we have these natural rights this very sense of right so we can t have government because that just violates our rights.. Instead, for them, they go look, if you want to be responsible about forming an ideology, what you need to do is measure is balance market success against government success and market failure against government failure.. You know, markets can fail in various ways and be inefficient but so can governments.. And Becker and Friedman both say look there are going to be cases where we need government to do certain things for us but the balance of evidence should be very strong in favor of saying that we needed to do it.. And also, the balance of benefits versus cost should be very high before we actually are going to trust government to do these things.. And so Friedman, what he does is look at particular policies and ask well, is this really working? I mean are we getting our money s worth? He was instrumental in getting rid of the draft in the United States like if you like if you haven t been drafted in the U.. , you can thank him.. Because literally, he is like the guy who is responsible for that.. And it was coming down to him making a careful economic argument to the people who needed to hear about why the draft wasn t necessary, why the draft wasn t necessary and why it was better to have a volunteer army and so on.. And that s just his way of thinking.. You know, a friend of mine once asked like is there a particular vice among libertarians like a thing that they make a mistake on?.. And I think and I don t think this is true of Friedman, but it might be true of others who might be inclined to agree with some of the stuff that he said there.. And that is the quality of government varies considerably from one country to another.. So there are places like Denmark that have an extensive welfare state and it works really well.. I mean you can t go into Denmark and go wow this place is a pit from libertarian what a horrible country, we should not be like this and what they are doing, they do well.. You know, what Switzerland does, it does well.. When we try to do it, for whatever reason, we don t do it well.. And maybe we are just too big of a country, maybe we suffer from a dis-economy of scale and institutions that I have worked with four million relatively homogenous people don t work that well with 310 million heterogeneous people.. I don t know.. But sometimes, policies work really well in one place and not another.. But you know what? It s not just the libertarian vice, it s actually a left liberal vice as well.. Because I have colleagues who will go, hey, Denmark has the following policy, it works great for them.. We should copy it and it s like well, it s not obvious that we can t just take on that institution and have it function the same way here.. LAMB: How about yourself? Where was Mr.. Lee teaching you in high school when this all started?.. BRENNAN: What was he teaching me you ask?.. LAMB: No, where.. BRENNAN: Where? This is in Hudson, New Hampshire.. A small suburban town about 30 minutes or 35 minutes north of Boston.. LAMB: Have you ever told Mr.. Lee how much he impacted you?.. BRENNAN: You know, after the book came out, when I got my first publication copies, because I wrote the in an introduction to the book, I say, well, this is my introduction to libertarianism was from Mr.. Lee.. And so I sent him a copy of the book and I didn t I sent him a copy of the book I sent him a copy of the book with like a little thank you note, I sent it through Amazon and then I got an e-mail from first from a couple of students saying oh he got this book and it was really touching, and then finally an e-mail from him too because I did have his contact information beyond just you know, I didn t have his e-mail address or phone number, I just knew that he was still working at.. LAMB: Still teaching?.. BRENNAN: Alvirne High School, and he said something yes, and actually he said something like he was so touched by the fact that I thanked him for this that he was considering retiring but now he thinks he might stay on for a couple more years.. LAMB: What is his full name?.. BRENNAN: Michael Lee.. LAMB: And what is the high school?.. BRENNAN: Alvirne High School in Hudson, New Hampshire.. LAMB: And what was your family like?.. What is it like now? Are your parents still alive?.. BRENNAN: Yes, my parents, they live in Arizona, Sarita Arizona, and I went to graduate school at the University of Arizona in Tucson and they came out to visit me, they liked it so much that they moved out, they sold their house in New Hampshire and moved out there.. LAMB: Why were you on food stamps?.. BRENNAN: Just my you know, my well my mother had me out of wedlock at a young age that is why.. And so you know I guess the reasons we are sharing that is because I think there is a perception among my colleagues among the people on the left that libertarianism is an ideology of the rich and sure, people like the Kochs are rich but you know, George Soros is rich, Bill Gates is Rich.. Bono is Rich.. There are lots of rich people who have all sorts of different points of view and for what it s worth, and this is anecdotal, but on the other hand, 8i have a lot of data points because I know so many people in the academy.. The people I know who are libertarian in the academy have tended to be they tended to come from poor backgrounds and you know, my advisor and one time co-author, David Schmidtz, he and I wrote a book together called The Brief History of Liberty he grew up in rural Saskatchewan and he was dirt poor growing up, he didn t have a flush toilet until he was five.. And you know, that poor.. Right?.. Other libertarians I knew, they grew up poor.. Robert Nozick who is a famous libertarian philosopher at Harvard, he was poor, and his colleague John Rawis who he argued with quite a bit, that he grew up rich.. BRENNAN: I originally went to Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, and I wanted to go to the University of Chicago, I got in but I couldn t afford to go.. I didn t have the money to do it.. And so I ended up going to Case Western and they gave me a pretty good scholarship and however, after three years, I couldn t afford to finish there and I was paying my own way and so I took a semester off and actually worked at Analog Devices making semiconductors and saved up more money and it was at that time that I realized I wanted to be a professor.. I learned like literally, it was you know, May 2nd of the year 2000, I m packing up my stuff to go home and to go work in a factory and I m not sure if I m going to go to college like be able to complete college, I m a first generation college student, I wasn t sure I was going to be able to complete it.. I know people would be really disappointed if I didn t and just on a whim, as I was packing up my stuff, I see that I have all this philosophy books and I m not a philosophy major, I m an economics and chemistry major, right? So and I m thinking, what can you how do you actually get to do this? And I go and look online and find out that to become a Ph.. D and become a professor, you don t have to pay your own way, that they subsidize you, you get a grant and you don t pay tuition and they give you a stipend to live on.. And I realize, this is something I could actually do so you know, I started a couple of days later, I m working on Analog Devices but I had this plan of I m going to go to graduate school and I m going to be a philosopher and so what I ended up having to do was transfer to the University of New Hampshire and I ended up completing a philosophy major there in two semesters and I had an overload, I took 20 credit hours in my first semester and 24 credit hours in my second semester just so I could have the proper depth and breadth and then that was it.. And from there, I went to grad school and then it s history.. LAMB: And then you started at Brown when?.. BRENNAN: I started in Brown in 2006 and I came in as a predoctoral fellow and I was completing my Ph.. D at Arizona and I came in as a research fellow in political science there and I stayed on for a few years in the philosophy department and until I came just a year and a half ago to Georgetown University.. LAMB: So if you could only have one book, on philosophy.. BRENNAN: You mean any book out there at all?.. LAMB: Any book that you have read over the years, what one book would you keep on your shelf?.. BRENNAN: One book that is a hard question.. LAMB: Or what one philosopher would you follow?.. BRENNAN: I would say David Hume.. David Hume s Treatise of Human Nature.. That if I had to pick one book, that is the book.. LAMB: And why David Hume?.. BRENNAN: Because he is such a reasonable guy and I mean he challenges a lot of the stuff that we do.. But he is skeptical about a lot of things but for him, it s if the book, the Treatise of Human Nature , is supposed to be abut introducing experimental attitude into philosophy and what he means by experiment isn t like what we mean by experience like a scientific experiments and testing things but rather empirical observation based.. And so Hume thinks we need to look at the evidence and weigh it very carefully and he is very big on noticing that we are as human beings, we are not perfectly rational.. We are subject to a wide range of biases that cloud our thinking and he challenges those.. And when you challenge them, you make yourself into a better thinker.. He is one of the I mean I m interested in political psychology, he is one of the first people that really talked about that.. Well, why do people tend to think one thing versus another when it comes to morality? What are the explanations for that that aren t necessarily all that you know, when you dig in to it, you might be kind of ashamed for the reasons that you think these things.. Buy you know, what? When you realize where the sources of your beliefs come from, you become a better thinker.. And he is also just a great writer, I mean so many philosophers, they write in obscure fashion, and they torture the English language or whatever language that they are writing in and some of them do it on purpose and a certain German philosophers in particular, they write in an obscure fashion on purpose.. Hume, Hume wants you to have fun thinking and he writes in a way that has this kind of conviviality to it.. LAMB: We are out of time but I need to ask you, can we find you anywhere in the Washington area in a band?.. BRENNAN: No, no, unfortunately I have two little kids, you are asking because I you know, I play guitar and that kind of thing.. I have thousands of dollars of musical equipment that sits in my basement that I play quietly by myself.. I have two little kids and you know, I m also traveling a lot for work giving talks to universities and so on and so I would like to think that, you know, maybe ten years from now, I will be in a kind of 80s hair rock cover band playing Van Halen but for the meantime, not so much.. LAMB: Our guest has been Professor Jason Brennan and the book is Libertarianism, What Everyone Needs to Know Published by Oxford for $16.. 95 if you buy it off the shelf but you can get it cheaper on Amazon and other places.. Thank you very much for joining us.. BRENNAN: Thank you.. I appreciate it..

    Original link path: /Transcript/?ProgramID=1426
    Open archive

  • Title: Q & A
    Descriptive info: January 6, 2013.. Timothy Naftali - Part 1.. : Part 2 of this program will air at a future date.. BRIAN LAMB: Tim Naftali, how would you describe your effort to put Nixon folks on the record on tape or recording it?.. TIMOTHY NAFTALI: Well, I had this challenge, which is that the federal government was taking over a private museum and library.. I was asked to be the first federal director.. This was a library that had been in place for 17 years.. Roughly 100,000 people visit it a year; in addition, about 10,000 schoolchildren.. And it had a certain message.. When you run a private institution, you have the right to any message you want.. When it becomes a national institution, it has to meet a different standard.. I knew that one of my jobs was to change the museum.. In particular, I was told I was to change the Watergate Gallery.. How do you do that after a local community is accustomed to one particular description? You know, a museum might be a national museum, but it's also a partner and it's also a local neighbor.. LAMB: This is in California?.. NAFTALI: This is in California.. Yorba Linda, California.. I thought the best way was -- not for me as a historian I'm a trained historian though I wasn't a Nixon specialist was for the players, key people living up close from that area to tell the story themselves.. So I thought the best way to do this was to start a video oral history program that involved the Nixon players, but also players in the Watergate drama from the left and the right, to have them tell the story and then to use portions of that story in the museum to let visitors understand the complexity of this constitutional drama.. So the video oral history program was designed initially to help renovate the museum.. What happened is that it just developed and acquired a momentum all of its own.. I never anticipated ultimately overseeing 149 of them.. I had a very good assistant, Paul Musgrave, who worked with me for three years on this.. He did a few of the interviews himself.. And it just became clear that there were a lot of folks that wanted to talk about that period.. Since the Nixon Library had been private, it hadn't gotten the treatment that a regular federal presidential library would have had.. For example, neither the private Nixon Library nor the Nixon project in Washington had actually run a full scale oral history program.. So it was ripe for the doing.. And, as it became clear that a lot of folks wanted to participate, this grew to be a much bigger initiative than I had imagined.. LAMB: What was the timeframe?.. NAFTALI: I started just as soon as I started in the job.. I became I joined the National Archives in October of 2006.. Even though I didn't formally become the head of the library, I ran the Federal Nixon Project until the library transferred to the federal government in the summer of 2007.. But I started this oral history with an interview of Alexander Haig right at the end of 2006.. And I did oral histories until the just before I left in November of 2011.. LAMB: This hour has no rhyme or reason to it.. The clips were chosen by Mike Holden who produces this program.. And the objective is just to show the audience because we run a lot of these already a little bit and then get you to explain it.. But before we start that, I want to show some video tape from 1973, Alexander Butterfield testifying before the Watergate Committee.. It's very short.. And we'll come back to you.. (Video Begins) ALEXANDER BUTTERFIELD: I was aware of listening devices.. Yes, sir.. FRED THOMPSON: When were those devices placed in the Oval Office?.. BUTTERFIELD: Approximately the summer of 1970.. I cannot begin to recall the precise date.. My guess, Mr.. Thompson, is that the installation was made between and this is a very rough guess April or May of 1970 and, perhaps, the end of the summer or early fall of 1970.. THOMPSON: Are you aware of any devices that were installed in the Executive Office Building Office of the President?.. BUTTERFIELD: Yes, sir, at that time.. LAMB: Fred Thompson was a senator and an actor and was the counsel for the Republicans back then.. Where did you find Alexander Butterfield?.. NAFTALI: Oh, some of them we found through Google or through people who knew people.. I mean, we put out the word that we were doing these.. And, initially, the Nixon Foundation, the Private Nixon Foundation, provided the funding for the first ones that we did.. I was very upfront about what we were doing.. I promised the Nixon Foundation and the federal government that we would do a nonpartisan oral history program.. LAMB: We don't see you in these interviews.. NAFTALI: That's by choice.. I remember going to an (L.. Festival of the Book) and I listened to David Halberstam.. And Halberstam it was like 2005, 2000 just before I got this job that job.. I'm not in it anymore.. And he was talking about the best interviews.. And he said, "The best interview, the interviewer disappears.. " And I thought what I would do would be to disappear, that my job would be to help the interviewee recall invents, to encourage them and create a zone of comfort, but to disappear.. And, also, because the goal was for this to be a video that could be used for documentaries in the future, as well as for use in the museum, you don't want to see me.. LAMB: It's a minute and 32 seconds.. Alexander Butterfield.. You interviewed him back in '08 2008.. Today, he's 86 years old.. Let's watch.. BUTTERFIELD: He didn't go back to The Residence very often.. When he left the office, he went to the EOB and he had dinner over there four nights out of five.. He only went to The Residence if the young people were coming over, the children with their spouses or boyfriend or girlfriend or whatever, if someone is going to be there, a friend.. Otherwise, when he left the office around 7:00, the Oval Office, we went to the EOB Office across the street with Manolo.. Manolo would fix him a drink usually a drink of scotch.. He might not.. He might just with a red wine.. Those are the only things he drank.. And he didn't drink a lot.. Either he had one cocktail and then red wine with dinner.. Manolo fixed him his dinner.. And he sat there just the way you're sitting there, with his coat on.. He never took his coat off.. He never, never, never took his jacket off even on the hottest Washington, D.. night, in a chair and wrote with his wrote his on a yellow pad ideas, things that would be relayed to Haldeman in the following morning, all the stuff to Haldeman.. Then he'd eat his dinner at a little and have his wine.. And then he might go down and bowl a line.. There was a single lane or a double lane bowling alley in the EOB.. I don't know if it's still there.. And he'd go home around 10:30 or 10:45.. I was always there.. I never went home till he went to The Residence.. LAMB: What were you thinking as you watched the former military man, Mr.. Butterfield?.. NAFTALI: You know, one of the things we don't those of us outside of Water of the White House is we don't really know how it works.. And to have the people who were with Richard Nixon describe the day is priceless.. I mean, we have the tapes, of course, but we don't know what's going on around the taped areas.. And it wasn't just Butterfield, but, you know, you've got Colson.. You've got you've got Leonard Garment, who was in and out of the White House.. You've got folks talking about what it was like.. That's priceless.. That's the part of history that gives it context and meaning, but that disappears because it's not often not written down.. One of the byproducts of these interviews because I let the tape run, you know, I didn't interrupt them.. I let people even if it was somewhat rambled, I let people think and recall and speak.. What you get out of it is color and it's preserved forever.. One of the things that I that was very important to me, because I've had the experience in doing oral history, I was at the Miller Center of Public Affairs at the University of Virginia, and James Sterling Young was running an oral history program there.. And I was one of the interviewers.. I was not running the program, but I was one of the interviewers.. And the way it was run by the Miller Center it wasn't their fault; it was just in fact the deal that they had struck is that the private foundations had control over the interviews and people could edit them.. And I know this for a fact because I participated in interviews that were then edited.. I didn't edit them.. Well, once you edit an interview, the tape, whether it's an audio tape or a video tape, it becomes useless.. You can't serve it to the public anymore.. So, when I went to the National Archives, I worked with the lawyers and I said, "I don't want that.. I want the participant to sign a deed which does not give them the right to edit it.. " Of course, the participant knew this in advance.. We sent them the deed in advance, so it wasn't this wasn't a surprise.. But the fact of the matter is, if we didn't do that, you couldn't use these interviews.. And I wanted there to be a sense of comfort, a sense of respect and professionalism, but would allow people to continue to tell stories and that those stories should be preserved forever.. LAMB: I want to run another Alexander Butterfield clip from when he was talking about the taping system that he had set up inside the White House.. And, ultimately, what would you say the result of the taping system did?.. NAFTALI: Richard Nixon's resignation is a result of the taping system.. And great history for the rest of us.. LAMB: By the way, what's that background we're looking at? Where did Alexander Butterfield when you interviewed him.. NAFTALI: We actually, that was Paul Musgrave that did it.. I'm responsible for the logo, but we decided that we would use for the first interviews a standard collapsible backdrop because we we interviewed people where they wanted to be interviewed.. We didn't have a studio although I did one interview in the studio with Sir David Frost.. But, by and large, we didn't have a studio.. And so we would set up we hired professional videographers, and we needed a backdrop.. Initially, we thought it would be cool if there was always the same backdrop.. We later discovered that varying the backdrop is a good thing.. And, today, I mean, those watching this will notice a lot of different backdrops.. LAMB: All right, here's that clip.. (Video).. BUTTERFIELD: And he said, "Make sure nobody knows this.. Nobody.. " So and that was said a couple of times later when he and the president and I talked about it.. And there was never any doubt in my mind, although no one told me these so many in so many words was that there was no sinister purpose to the tapes.. None.. And I sensed that it was for the memoir.. That would be valuable if you could have all of that.. And I went to Haldeman a couple of times later, much later when these things were accumulating so fast, the Secret Service are coming to me and saying, "Hey, we're having to look for a new place to put the tapes.. " And I said, "Bob, we ought to have a couple of secretaries get up on the fourth floor of that EOB and just type all day long because this is a career here.. You know, this is all day every day.. ".. And he said, "Yes, good idea.. " But we never did do that.. So it had to a mammoth job.. LAMB: Indeed.. Did you ever get a sense of what happened to the 18 and a half minute gap?.. NAFTALI: Well I have a theory, I mean, I had to look into that because there is a section in the Watergate gallery.. I wrote about it.. I was astonished to hear that the tape, the gap is in the tape from the summer of 1972 and June of '72.. And the tape, Rosemary Woods took the tape to Camp David but she also took the tape to Key Biscayne.. And there are, you know, there are a number of people who could have erased it.. The U.. government hired a group of audio specialists to listen to the tape, to the erased portion and they concluded that it couldn't have been an accidental erasure.. There were too many starts and stops.. It actually sounds to the educated ear as if this had been erased eight times.. So somebody either in Camp David or in Key Biscayne erased it.. I've often wondered if it was Bebe Rebozo.. LAMB: Who was?.. NAFTALI: Richard Nixon's dear friend and totally deniable.. LAMB: By the way to our audience if they are frustrated by these little clips the whole interviews are available on our website, our video library and a lot of them on the Nixon.. NAFTALI: On the Nixon, yes, you can get them at www.. nixonlibrary.. gov.. LAMB: William Ruckelshaus, you interviewed, did you do that interview, where did you do it, you remember?.. NAFTALI: I do, sure, I remember it was actually at the library.. William Ruckelshaus is a hero.. One of the things that if you watched these, there is a story of course of the role that Woodward and Bernstein played, very important in Watergate, and that role that the House played and the Senate played, and the prosecutors and Cox and his army of prosecutors.. Don't forget the role played by Republicans within the Nixon administration who said no and Ruckelshaus is one of them, he is not alone.. We'll hear from a few more I think today.. LAMB: Here is William Ruckelshaus who was at that time the number two?.. NAFTALI: He is the deputy attorney general of the United States.. LAMB: Recorded this in '07.. WILLIAM RUCKELSHAUS : And it clear Elliot wasn't going to carry out that order assuming he had maintained it after Cox's press conference.. And I remember him turning to me and saying what are you going to do?.. And I told him, I said, I don't think it's close.. I think that and what he is asking you and apparently subsequently made you do is fundamentally wrong and that you don't have any choice but to refuse to do it.. And that would mean they will find somebody else to do it eventually.. I mean there was only one last person in the line of official command in the Justice Department.. If Bork hadn't done it he couldn t have asked anyone in the department to do it.. To me if it came to that your responsibility was very clear and I don't think he resigned lightly, I mean, I think you do have an obligation to the president.. He is the one who appointed you.. And you do have a duty of loyalty but then there's certain lines over which you can't step.. And you have to tell yourself that it seems to me before you take one of those jobs.. There are some things that I won't do.. NAFTALI: This is really important.. I did my best to interview as many surviving players in the Saturday Night Massacre and many in the audience may not know what he is talking about but in October of 1973 President Nixon wanted to fire the Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox.. And he asked the attorney, ordered the Attorney General of the United States, Elliot Richardson, to do it and he wouldn't.. The next person in line was Ruckelshaus and he wouldn't do it.. Elliot Richardson had died by the time I was in the job but Ruckelshaus was alive and Judge Bork was also involved in the story.. It's a remarkable story because for many of those who participated or witnessed this event this was the closest that the country had come to a major constitutional crisis because here the president of the United States was firing the official who was looking into his misdeeds.. LAMB: Archibald Cox.. NAFTALI: Archibald Cox.. And the question was in a democracy, in a republic where you have a responsible government can the president fire somebody who is about to prosecute him for wrongdoing?.. LAMB: Here is a tape or a recording of Jill Wine-Banks, who is she? Bye the way William Ruckelshaus lives in Seattle.. He is 80 years old.. And Jill Wine-Banks is today 67.. NAFTALI: Well, I don't know how old she is, she is magnificent and it s a great interview.. This is an example of where the backdrop changes and it really helps.. She is part of Archibald Cox's team.. She is a prosecutor.. She is one of the few female prosecutors.. This is an era when women, there is a glass ceiling, unfortunately.. She would ultimately be the one who deposes Rosemary Woods on the whole 18 and a half minute gap issue.. She is the one who asks her questions in court.. Here she is talking, I believe, here she is talking about the Saturday Night Massacre and when she learns that Archibald Cox has been fired and her reaction is startling and it shows the kind of tension that this people went through in that period.. LAMB: Jill Wine-Banks.. JILL WINE-BANKS: The big discussion that I remember was what is Richard Nixon going to do? And it was particularly relevant because we were working basically seven days a week.. I had a family wedding in New York that night, the night of the press conference and said, well, I can't go.. I have to stay here.. And, you know, after much discussion we said, what could he do? In order to fire Archie he'd have to fire the attorney general and he'll never do that so go, it's going to be OK.. He's going to cave in.. So I went to New York right after the press conference.. When I came back from the wedding to the hotel literally the desk clerk was waiting for me and sort of leaped over the counter and said there's a message for you, there is a message for you, the FBI has seized your office.. I called George Frampton and he was the one I could reach, and got on a 6:00 AM flight the next morning to come back to participate in discussions of what the office should do because what had happened was he fired Archie, he did not fire us.. So there was a lot of discussion of do we quit in protest or do we say, OK, Archie is gone but we are still here.. We need to do our job and we are going to stay.. He is going to have to make a second big public relations error by firing us.. LAMB: What did he do?.. NAFTALI: Well, what happened is that actually they closed the office for a nanosecond and then they reopened it and Robert Bork who was then solicitor general and acting attorney general at that point because everybody above him had either been fired or had resigned, he became the head of this special prosecutor's office.. And I interviewed him for the library and he said, look, he said, I he said, I, Robert Bork was nervous because I could be charged with obstruction of justice if I closed this thing down.. So he kept it alive and then they hired Leon Jaworski, a Texas Democrat.. Nixon hired him to replace Archibald Cox and in the end Jaworski would be even tougher on Richard Nixon than Archibald Cox had been.. LAMB: Did Jill Wine-Banks work for him?.. She stayed.. She stayed right through as did the rest of the team.. LAMB: How long were your interviews usually?.. NAFTALI: Most of them were about two hours.. It depended sometimes, they went longer, sometimes they were shorter.. The shortest one was with a very busy Senator Kerry.. I asked him about Vietnam and his work in the American veterans, the Vietnam Veterans Against  ...   the time?.. NAFTALI: Head of the FBI at the time who was going to take a personal interest in whether there was a homosexual ring, a gay ring, at the center of the Nixon Administration.. LAMB: And Dwight Chapin was the Deputy Assistant?.. NAFTALI: Dwight Chapin was the Deputy Assistant, a good-looking California.. LAMB: To the president?.. NAFTALI: To the president good-looking California guy, and well, let's.. LAMB: And alive today, 72 years old.. Here s Dwight Chapin.. DWIGHT CHAPIN: You know, here we all are.. I mean, you know what I mean? I can remember going home and you're scared to death.. I mean this is like a time bomb.. This thing gets out and gets in the press and then Anderson gets it going, there's, you know it s a disaster for all of us, you know.. And it s not true.. So the next day, each of us individually separately, I should say we go into the cabinet room.. We sit across, right across from us, we take and put up our hand and we were sworn in.. And then each of us are questioned by J.. He asks all of the questions.. And the transcript of this was provided to Jack Anderson and that s how it was stopped.. NAFTALI: And Hoover was planning to give this to Anderson?.. CHAPIN: No.. Anderson was going to go with the story.. Jack Anderson, the columnist? You're familiar with him.. CHAPIN: He was the one that was going to put the photographer down there and had Richard.. I've always thought if I ever see Brit Hume, I'm going to ask him because he was working for Anderson at that time I believe.. So Anderson was getting ready to go with the story.. Anderson calls Kline; Kline calls and tells Mitchell.. Mitchell goes and sees Nixon; meanwhile tells Haldeman, "I want to meet with all of you guys as a group.. " He's going to meet with the president says, "I want you get to the bottom of this, John.. " John comes John comes up with this idea of how to get to the bottom.. He brings J.. Edgar Hoover over and has us deposed in the cabinet room with J.. Edgar Hoover doing the asking of the questions.. NAFTALI: J.. CHAPIN: J.. Edgar Hoover asked.. Edgar Hoover asked you if you were a homosexual.. CHAPIN: Yes.. NAFTALI: If you were gay?.. And what these relationships were.. NAFTALI: I should have mentioned this before.. What happens is Jack Anderson is about to go with the story that Haldeman is, and his top aides, are having sex with each other in Key Biscayne.. LAMB: And Bob Haldeman is the Chief.. NAFTALI: The Chief Of Staff and that, you know, have these young California guys, and it s a homosexual ring and they all have huts, little cabins near each other in Key Biscayne.. And that s the story.. I'd never heard this.. And the fact that J.. Edgar Hoover decided the way to determine whether it was true, J.. Edgar Hoover with his own complicated sexual history was for him to interview each of these young California guys, these blond-haired California guys to ask them about their sexual preference.. Well, I nearly fell over my chair.. And of course, you don t all you can hear is me stammer.. Well, I'm stammering because I'm trying not to express my surprise at this story which , frankly, I'd never heard before and I haven t seen anywhere else.. So there it is.. LAMB: Dwight Chapin was in his 20s then and was the Assistant to the President and went to prison.. NAFTALI: Oh, yes.. Well.. LAMB: What's he like today?.. NAFTALI: That s a very what a story.. Well, Mr.. Chapin, whom I didn t know before, was unlike Charles Colston.. Chuck Colson.. Disarming and I think candid.. He came to the interview which we did in New York, ready to talk and to preserve his story.. Now some will say that he was just going to defend himself at the expense of the president, but he'd remained close to the president.. The president, any time President Nixon interacted with him after President Nixon left the White House.. Chapin felt that he needed help some stories to set the record straight.. It was an amazing interview.. It got Chapin, I believe, into trouble among his colleagues and led to a controversy for the Oral History Program because Chapin said something on tape that he did not say to the Senate, he didn t say in the trial, and something that the Nixon group had always denied.. LAMB: That was?.. NAFTALI: And that was it was Richard Nixon who was there when the Dirty Tricks campaign was ordered, that Nixon Nixon was too smart to order it but he was sitting in the room with Haldeman.. It was done on Haldeman's office which was why it wasn t taped.. LAMB: That was Donald Segretti?.. NAFTALI: Donald Segretti.. That Segretti the Dirty Tricks campaign in the 1972 campaign the 1972 election the president President Nixon wanted it, knew about it, and wanted Dwight Chapin whom by the way, Dwight Chapin had worked for Richard Nixon for a long time.. He was very close to Nixon.. He was Nixon had a small staff in the '68 campaign, sort of a personal staff.. Dwight Chapin was his advance man.. Chapin later was the head advance man before he went into the White House.. This man was extremely close to Richard Nixon.. LAMB: And Donald Segretti used to be ?.. NAFTALI: Donald Segretti was they went to school they went to school.. NAFTALI: at USC.. LAMB: Let s let Dwight Chapin talk about Donald Segretti.. CHAPIN: Dick Tuck was a prankster who had done tricks on Republican candidates over the years.. Trick being crazy little things nothing harmful.. One day, the buzzer goes off and I go into the president's office and he's sitting there with Haldeman.. And they say, "Do you know " By "they," Bob says it, the president s sitting there.. "Do you know anyone that can do Dick Tuck type of stuff? We should have somebody like that.. " And I said, "Well, let me think about it.. So I'm went out and I thought about it, and I thought of Donald Segretti.. Don had been a roommate at USC.. He was just leaving the Judge Advocate's position in the military, in the Army and I thought Don, OK.. Don is very anonymous, would fit in, and could do this kind of thing.. LAMB: What happened to Segretti?.. NAFTALI: Well, he went to jail, too.. I actually met Segretti.. He was that close to doing an interview.. I talked to him twice.. He was almost ready to do an interview and he didn t do one for the project, but.. NAFTALI: I don t know why.. He didn t tell me why.. LAMB: Lives in California now?.. NAFTALI: I really shouldn t say.. I mean, I found out where he lived as a result of my job but.. LAMB: By the way, for the record, a couple of things.. People that want to see these entire interviews can either go to the NixonLibrary.. gov?.. NAFTALI: Dot.. gov, yes.. LAMB: Or they can come to us in our video library and find a lot of these interviews.. Also for the record, you are now an American citizen?.. I was when I took the job.. I became a U.. citizen in 2005.. LAMB: You were educated at Yale and Harvard.. What.. NAFTALI: And Johns Hopkins.. LAMB: And Johns Hopkins.. What were the.. NAFTALI: I was overeducated.. I have a BA from Yale.. I have an MA from Johns Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies.. And I have an MA and PhD from Harvard in History.. LAMB: George Shultz was the Secretary of the Treasury.. He was also the Secretary of State.. But in the next administration, he was the Secretary of Treasury when this event was talked about.. He's 92 years old, alive, lives in California.. Here is talking about John Dean.. GEORGE SHULTZ: Johnny Walters came to me and said, "John Dean, the President's Counsel, has just brought me a list of I think 50 names of people and wants a full field investigation of them.. That s a very unpleasant thing to have happened to you.. What should I do?" And I said, "Don t do it.. " And he said, "Well, what shall I tell John Dean when he asks me how it s going?" I said, "Tell him that you report to me.. If he has a problem, he's got a problem with me.. " So they never brought it up with me.. Although in the tape, there's discussion between the president and John Dean about who do I think I am, holding this up? But it was an improper use of the IRS and I wouldn t do it.. NAFTALI: Did you actually speak with the president about this?.. SHULTZ: He never brought it up.. The Private Library had made the argument, and this was an argument that school kids absorbed, that all presidents break the law and the difference was that President Nixon got caught.. And I felt that this was a terrible lesson to be teaching students, that their presidents actually are crooks.. I just thought it was well, not crooks.. Let's say that the presidents break the rules.. And I thought it was a bad lesson for two reasons.. One, because that s not what you should teach kids actually, three reasons.. One is not what you should teach kids.. Secondly, it s not true.. And third, it gives presidents the possibility of redemption if they commit real crimes, because, frankly, sometimes presidents are bad and we shouldn t think that they shouldn t all be venerated.. And I knew that as a that I didn t want to be a carpetbagger.. I didn t I didn t want to be this East Coast progressive who came to Orange County and decided that, you know, he was so smart and he knew it all, and that was that.. What I always dreamed of was an interview like this where you had someone of the gravitas of George Shultz, explaining to people that sometimes presidents ask you to do the wrong thing and you say no.. I can't tell you how proud I am of that because it shows why our system works.. Our system couldn t possibly work if presidents always got their way.. LAMB: It s a long story about how controversial you were within the library system and the foundation and the Nixon loyalists.. LAMB: But here's the quick question on it before I'm going to show some more tapes.. Did any of them try to interfere with your request to these people to.. ?.. LAMB: be interviewed?.. Well, what happened was that not only, this project almost led to my being fired.. LAMB: But you worked for the federal government.. You didn t work for the Nixon.. But when you get a Senator of the United States who takes a personal interest in your work, you can be fired.. LAMB: Which Senator?.. NAFTALI: Senator Lamar Alexander.. LAMB: And what was his point?.. NAFTALI: His point was that he felt that I was that I didn t like Richard Nixon.. And he held up President Obama's nomination for the new Archivistof the United States.. He put a hold which you can do in the Senate because of me.. Which he admitted because the Archivist of the United States, the nominee met with Senator Lamar Alexander.. And Lamar Alexander complained about me to him, David Ferriero was his name.. He is the current archivist.. But Lamar Alexander did not ask David Ferriero to fire me but he wanted to raise his concern.. And to David Ferriero's credit, he didn't ask me to change what I was doing nor did they curtail the oral history program.. LAMB: And Lamar Alexander had worked for Richard Nixon's campaign.. He'd worked in the White House.. NAFTALI: What happened was that I interviewed William Timmons who had been the head of the congressional office and he didn't like the interview.. LAMB: Lamar Alexander didn't or Timmons did not?.. NAFTALI: Timmons.. I interviewed Lamar Alexander.. And there was no trouble.. I think I interviewed Lamar Alexander in 2007.. He enjoyed the interview.. I interviewed Timmons in 2009 thereabouts and he didn't like it.. He thought there were too many questions about Watergate.. He didn't like it.. And he was in the sense he was the rabbi, if you will, Alexander's rabbi in Washington or godfather.. I mean, Timmons was older.. Alexander worked for Timmons back in the Nixon era.. And I think Timmons asked him to do this.. But it was because of the interview I did with Timmons.. LAMB: Egil "Bud" Krogh went to prison.. Usually the story that he tells us is about the photograph of Elvis in the Oval Office.. But here's another one that people my age will remember, the Lincoln Memorial Story in the middle of the Vietnam War.. KROGH: And followed him up to the Lincoln Memorial.. I couldn't have gotten there more than two or three minutes after he got there, went up the stairs to see what was going on and found him in discussion with at the start 10 to 15 young people, students that would come in from all over the East Coast.. And Dr.. Tkash was there and Manolo Sanchez was there.. I believe that was it.. Plus I think only four Secret Service Agents.. It was woefully understaffed and it was a scary time because we got up there while it was still dark.. And he spent about 45 minutes maybe longer talking to these students.. I heard a lot of it, listened to it, wrote down some of it after it was over.. But basically it was a time when I was really, really afraid for his safety.. And I know that he wrote later on that he had never seen the Secret Service quite so frightened and he certainly got that right.. We did not have a sufficient detail to protect him, if somebody decided to try to attack or assault him.. But it was totally unplanned, unscripted.. His own notes at that meeting are extraordinary about what he covered in that period of time.. It was not a drop-by.. This was a major effort to communicate with these young people.. And the crowd grew; it got bigger as it begun to realize this is not Rich Little.. This is Richard Nixon.. This is the real guy.. LAMB: What time of night was that?.. This was after midnight.. This is one of the greatest presidential stories I have ever encountered.. The President of the United States is overwrought.. This is just after we've got to situate this this is just after the Kent State Massacre.. It's May of 1970.. And he can't sleep.. And he goes to his valet.. And he says you know the most beautiful and I believe Manolo Sanchez had just become U.. citizen the most beautiful site in this country is the Lincoln Memorial lit at night.. Let's go look at it.. And he leaves the White House without his staff.. They don't know about it.. They're asleep.. Now, there was a fear that there was a march on Washington.. There was a real fear that the White House might be besieged.. And so, there were all of this buses that had been lined around the White House to protect the President.. And the President decides on his own to leave the sanctuary, to go among the demonstrators.. This is unscripted.. This is raw history.. I heard about it.. I'd read about it.. Richard Nixon mentions it in his memoirs.. I am very happy to say besides Bud (Krough) we also had one of the students.. NBC had located the one student who took photographs.. There are only four or five photographs of President Nixon's visit.. His name is Bob Moustakis.. And one of the last things I did before I left the library was I interviewed him about his experience that strange night meeting the President of the United States on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.. LAMB: We're really running out of time.. Any of what you found in your interviews has been kept from the public?.. NAFTALI: Well, certainly not intentionally on my part.. There are about 15 percent.. But 85 percent is completely open, 15 percent, some of the interviewees crossed international security matters and the relevant agencies have to review the interview.. I did not intentionally engage in discussions of national security.. But where it was appropriate, with people who had done it, I asked them questions.. To my surprise, they apparently mentioned things that agencies wanted to review.. LAMB: Last video of David Gergen, he is the youngest of the people we have shown today.. He s 70 years old.. Let's just see him on CNN.. Here's a quick story.. DAVID GERGEN: And we watched the speech and it was shortly after the farewell speech.. Al Haig, the Chief of Staff called me.. I can't remember exactly what he said.. But it was in effect, David, we forgot one thing.. And I said, what's that? And he said, we forgot a resignation letter.. And I said, well, that's very interesting.. I'll be glad to read it.. I am going to be interested in reading.. And he said, no, you don't get it.. You need it write it.. I said, look don t you think the President ought to write his own resignation letter.. He said, look, he's in no place to do that.. We need you to write the resignation letter.. I said, I don't know what to say.. But, first of all, to whom does the President resign? (Video Ends).. LAMB: And how long was that letter?.. NAFTALI: Oh, it's very short.. The President, they didn't spend much time writing it.. There is only copy of that letter.. It was sent to Henry Kissinger, The Secretary of State.. There are many, many, many Xeroxes of this letter.. Richard Nixon later in life signed them.. People would sort of hand it to him and he would sign it.. So, you will see on eBay lots of copies of this letter for sale.. There is really only one and it belongs actually it's in Washington.. It's not in the Nixon library, we borrowed it.. LAMB: So, after all 149 interviews, total of what? 300 hours?.. NAFTALI: 300, 350 hours.. That's all public domain.. It belongs to everybody.. LAMB: Why aren't you writing a book about this?.. NAFTALI: I wasn't doing it for that reason.. LAMB: But you could?.. NAFTALI: Well, I.. LAMB: Listen, I mean, anybody couldn't get these tapes unless they're writing a book?.. NAFTALI: Of course, they can.. And that was the point.. See, I thought it was really important to create this archive.. I wanted to show that you could use the power of government to create in this multimedia age free video.. And there is no hidden agenda, other than the fact that I wanted to create it.. And I wasn't alone.. And I had real support in Washington.. That was my goal.. It wasn t to write a book.. And the beauty of this is that I touched on all kinds of subjects.. Now, I will tell you there were a couple of things that I focused obviously Watergate but also domestic affairs because it was poorly understood, Richard Nixon's domestic affairs.. I raised money.. At a certain point, the Nixon Foundation didn't want to pay for these anymore.. And a group of alumni of the Nixon Administration who worked in domestic policy, they helped me raise money.. So, I used money that I raised with a group of Nixon alums to pay for a lot of these.. And I used some of our trust fund money.. It's very expensive to do this project.. But my goal was to show that the federal government could do this because most of the time these oral history projects are done by the private presidential foundations and they have a vested interest I would say in a certain legacy.. I am not saying all of them push for that legacy.. I'd say the LBJ Foundation is evenhanded about history.. But that's not true of all these presidential foundations.. This was the first time the National Archives did anything like this on this scale.. And I wanted it to have been done for the library and not just to write a book.. LAMB: Tim Naftali, we are overtime.. NAFTALI: I am sorry.. LAMB: Former director of the Nixon Library, left in 2011.. NAFTALI: Brian, my pleasure for having me today..

    Original link path: /Transcript/?ProgramID=1425
    Open archive





  • Archived pages: 628