to bring about the enactment of a good civil rights bill. i appeal to all senators we are confronted with a moral issue. today, let us not be found wanting. thank you guys, very much. [applause] [applause] >> so, thank you, able, neil, and julia. and thank all of you here today who are here to celebrate both the institute and this great moment in our countries history to teach, inform and inspire courage, and future generations. thank you, thank you, thank you. [applause] >> we will have more music from our choir in just a little bit, but keith, i'm looking at a note

here. were though student from umass boston? [laughter] i just wanted to make sure. in the video that you saw earlier that kara did such a great job on, it was part of it where you see a button that vicki and ted have for governor deval patrick. they were happy warriors in campaigns for so many people, but i think for those of us who knew senator kennedy well, the pride he took in the nomination of the democratic party of deval patrick and his election was one of the things that he was incredibly proud of. proud of our state, and proud of deval patrick, that he would run in the such an excellent governor of the commonwealth of massachusetts. his excellency, and deval patrick. [applause]

[applause] >> thank you very much, peter. to you and to the board, the vicki and ted and kara and patrick, and all the members of the kennedy family, to all of my partners in government who were here, present and former, to all of you former staff members and supporters of this extraordinary moment and this incredible milestone, i'm honored to be here to thank you. i just want to thank you. because i can tell you, we need this institute right now. decades, decades -- [applause] decades of poisonous rhetoric about how government is bad, taxes are bad, greed is good has begun to jeopardize the can-do spirit of this country. my greatest disappointment with the conservative movement,

so-called, is it is a step in the optimism -- zapping the optimist out of our country. ted kennedy wasn't optimistic he not only understood but embodied the uniquely american blend of optimism and effort, hope and hard work, the understanding that an ideal was essential, and that applying ourselves to making it real for people was the real contribution and highest contribution of public service. this institute will help us not only honor that legacy, but remind ourselves to live it, to live it. and knowing that if we live it, our greatest days are ahead. i'm so pleased and proud to be with you today. god bless you. [applause]

>> how would you like your from a fellow prison optimist and also the mayor of boston, who up until tuesday, people always thought he had great judgment. [laughter] >> when senator kennedy asked me to chair the rose kennedy greenway conservancy, when he called and said are you free for lunch? you know, i didn't look at the counter, of course i was. he said i just called thomas menino, the three of us are going to go to lunch a talk at the greenwood. the threat is talked about with agreement could be and what it should be and all of that. and a dishwasher burgers been such an inspiration for the institute, also in inspiration on the institute, on the greenway board, we're talking about open green excellent and having as much green space as possible, and the entrance to the harbor and tom and ted went

back and forth. the mayor had to leave. tom is leaving the room and ted said, don't you just love this guy? a man who has done an incredible job as the mayor of boston, up until tuesday, i got you can't help but love, the mayor of boston, tom menino. [applause] >> thank you, peter, for the introduction. you're not on the table yet, so don't worry about it. [laughter] we can always resend those, we'll find some investigative reporter who found that you have an overdue library card for years ago. [laughter]

do you know why i left that lunch early? because i was getting stuck with a check. [laughter] i know teddy. [laughter] one day we are doing an event in roxbury with bill clinton at the community center, which youth violence, and teddy says let's go to lunch. and bill clinton oh, yeah, good idea. and clinton says let's go to some fancy restaurant. teddy had the smart enough to say, the mayor will choose the place we go. so we picked out this mike's diner on washington street -- [laughter] and so teddy likes to be. we all understand that. bill clinton does, and, of course, i do. [laughter] the best part of the whole bunch was when the bill came.

bill clinton says i don't have any money. [laughter] teddy says, of course he had no money. [laughter] so get stuck with a? me. so then, you know, but -- but we do something, folks, this guy, ted kennedy, was a very special guy. we will never have a guy like him ever again in the business. [applause] maybe some of the other elected officials remember when he called you on a saturday night around 8:00, said, you know, mayor, you know the thing you asked for six months ago? i forgot all about it. he said i'm going to fix the problem up now. he was just come he was one of those guys who really stayed in

touch with people everyday. and he cared about people. he's what this government was 30, 40 years ago. not what government is today. and so i'm glad, i'm happy to join vicki and all the family, members of senator kennedy's great staff. i tell you can hear the greatest staff of any elected official. they were just really great people. [applause] >> and all of you, to help dedicate this institute, a place of public education and learni learning. a man who taught us all so so much, i tell you, and we're so fortunate to have this and the presidential library right here next to one another. two great institutions named for

two great public servants, both on the harbor. chancellor motley, my only concern is, don't forget to leave some space for some of us alumni. [laughter] [inaudible] >> you wrote it down, okay. [laughter] it was so inspiring to listen to the students read passages of that civil rights debate. senator kennedy always new and always believed that young people are the future. i remember being at the school in charlestown, first school that was wired in this country, hardwired to the internet. he was better and he was so proud he was able to deliver that to the city of boston to he

was also making sure of the world-class education to key always believed this was a civil rights issue of our time. so i know he would be thrilled that the institute for the senate, civic learning, and this institute will be welcoming this nation for many years. the truth is, we need to buy more red tape to extend the freedom trail to dorchester. thousands of children and families will come here every year. they may where the paint then, but not the message. opportunity to speak to all people, no matter what is their background. just think about the kennedy institute, what it means to the city of boston and our people.

boston's children will no longer just read about the great debates of the senate. they will visit your to experience it, too. boston natives come to the kennedy institute to learn about the career of one of their own, that democracy he strengthened. aspiring public servants will, for a career in public service. and folks, they need this more than ever. it's what it is really about. i think we're off track. this government is not about what katie belief in. haiti believe in people and how. that's what the institute has, bring people back on track. it will shape the future, future

young people. you know, folks, we have lost teddy's voice, we have not lost his example. his career was a moral to make sure everyone had a fair, share success in this country and that's what this, with a center called the world's most exclusive club. and share with people. just say i'm so happy that it's right over here in dorchester. dorchester massachusetts. but especially on the university mass campus. where keith motley is the chancellor, does a great job. i just say to all of us, it's a great day, groundbreaking is always a special day. i look forward to months and weeks later we have the folks

coming here and learn about government. learn about the senate means, the effective it has on people's lives but and also i think that some of those young people will find quite a different ted kennedy and semi-people's life. how many people he touched and so may different ways. i'm just honored to be asked to say a few words this morning. thank you, all of you. thank you. [applause] >> there are great days in a commonwealth. i think days when we all can be happy and proud of what we do, and the kind of leadership that this commonwealth provide. today is one of those days. we have talked about the institute and we talked about it being a nonpartisan institute, where we talk about the issues of the time and the issue of the past so we illuminate the future. a tribute to that sense of

nonpartisanship and what we can do as a commonwealth. our next speaker, senator scott brown. [applause] >> well, first of all i want to just say welcome to the kennedy family. obviously, patrick, good to see you as well. and all the elected officials, a lot of friends here. i haven't seen in quite a while, and colleagues. i want to thank the kennedy family for the history of their service and sacrifice, and i've had the privilege action to speak with vicki on many occasions about her vision for this amazing facility or this institute of learning. and i was deeply moved by her passion and enthusiasm to do something very special for her husband and for the family, and for commonwealth and for our

country. and i told you i would come. [laughter] a little surprise to everybody, isn't it? [laughter] but one thing all politics aside, i do want to thank vicki especially, and patrick, especially for their warm welcome in the transition in becoming the new united states senator. and one thing that you would know, i mean, everybody knows he is a legend to me about people, i understand the large issues i have to fill. but one thing i always appreciated was his dedication to service, his sense of humor, and the fact that he was so zealous in the way that he fought for the things that he truly believed in. and i'm not sure if you are aware of this but i do picture on my mantle of senator kennedy. and one of the reasons i have t there is to remind me that he worked with all sorts of people. he worked with democrats, republicans, young, old, black,

white, all nationals, everybody, as long as they had a good time, they came in with an open mind and they were willing to work with him, he was going to work within. that's the type of legacy i hope to leave and use his example in that regard. i just want to close by saying, i'm enormously mindful everyday of the greatest public on in my life as the opportunities are in the united states senate. and also to be here to see all of you. so thank you. i have to go and do the people's business, governor, as you were referencing. there are good people who do want to move things forward, regardless of their political party. and so i'm going to be heading on a plane with the speaker and all of our other colleagues, and i apologize for leaving early, but thank you for including me. thank you. [applause] >> in just a model will hear

from vicki, and folks in the family, but before we do, just an interlude with the boston committee choir who has done such a grand job, not just today, but other times for us. thank you so much. you bring such a wonderful, wonderful tribute to the day and to senator kennedy. thank you. [applause] ♪ ♪ oh, happy day ♪ oh, happy day ♪ all happy day when jesus was

♪ when jesus was ♪ when jesus was ♪ there was a happy day ♪ oh, happy day ♪ when jesus was ♪ when jesus was when he washed ♪ he washed my sins away a note oh, happy day ♪ ♪ he taught me how ♪ he taught me how to watch ♪ and fight and pray they

notified and pray ♪ ♪ and he taught me a note he taught me how to rejoice ♪ ♪ every day ♪ oh, yes a note every day ♪ oh, happy day ♪ oh, happy day ♪ oh, happy day when jesus washed a note oh, when he washed ♪ when jesus washed ♪ he washed my sins away ♪ oh, happy day ♪ oh, happy day ♪ he taught me how ♪ taught me how to watch they notified and pray ♪

♪ oh, yes, they notified and pray b ♪ ♪ and he'll rejoice ♪ every day ♪ oh, yes, they note every day. ♪ oh, happy day ♪ oh, happy day ♪ oh, happy day ♪ oh, happy day ♪ happy day ♪ oh, happy day ♪ oh, happy day. ♪ oh, happy day ♪ oh, happy day

♪ it was a happy day ♪ it was a happy day ♪ it is a happy day ♪ it is a happy day ♪ oh, happy day a note it was a happy day ♪ ♪ oh, happy day ♪ good god, it was a happy day ♪ oh, happy day ♪ oh, happy day ♪ when jesus washed ♪ when jesus washed ♪ he washed my sins away, lowered ♪ ♪ oh, it was a happy day. ♪ yes, it was a happy day ♪ oh, it was a happy day ♪ yes, it was a happy day

♪ ♪ [applause] [applause] thank you. thank you so much. thank you. there are those relationships, some that began in a neighborhood, some in an office, some with a boss or employee where a friendship that is a model for all of us emerges. a man who has done so much for the kennedy library, for the kennedy family, but most especially for our friend, senator edward kennedy. senator paul kirk. [applause]

>> and thank you, peter. you're a great pal, and done so much for the institute that is about to become and so much for our city. we look forward to your continued great career. members of the committee -- kennedy family, distinguished guests, is this choir way cool or what? [applause] thank you for helping to make this a joyous and glorious morning, terrific. congratulations to all of those who, with two years of hard work, have made it possible to have this public inaugural of the edward m. kennedy institute of the united states senate. you've done a great job. this will come as no surprise to

you, but after 40 years of working together on political policy and professional issues, and having enjoyed a fun filled and treasured friendship, the most meaningful public honor in my life was to receive the endorsement of the kennedy family, and the appointment bike governor deval patrick to succeed edward m. kennedy in the senate of the united states. [applause] and so many of our private conversations he would say, america is a promise. america is a promise our founders passed on to succeeding

generations. each with an obligation to leave it better than they inherited it. and to fulfill that promise, like his brothers, john and robert, before him, he chose a career in politics. ted kennedy was a politician, and proud of it. [applause] the institution, he chose for his political service, was a center of united states his place in our democracy, and it was rolled in our history he truly revered. in his memoir, true compass, he wrote the following, to say that

i love the senate does not begin to convey what that institution means to me. let me put it this way. after nearly half a century, i still cannot be in a car headed for the capitol, especially in the evening, and glimpse it in the distance without the hair on my arms standing up. i've told vicki if ever that site does not move me, i will know it is time to step aside. that building symbolizes to me the benevolent power and the majesty of our government. it is awesome to me, not awesome in the reflexive way that young people use the word, but in its real sense, its older sense as

evoking reference. being a senator changes a person, he said. something fundamental and profound happens to you when you arrive there. and it stays with you all the time you are privileged to serve. i have seen the changes in people who have come into the senate. it may take a year, or two years, or three years, but it always happens. it fills you with a heightened sense of purpose. edward m. kennedy, in his own words. what follows are my words, but i am as sure of them as he was of his. and they are worth repeating on this occasion. when history's hand finally

writes of the first 250 years of this republic, it will record that no individual legislator from any state, of any political party, at either house of congress, worked harder or longer with a more heightened sense of purpose for the cause of peace and economic and social justice than edward moore kennedy, democrat of massachusetts, whose name will bear this institute. [applause] [applause]

and despite that extraordinary record, he did not want this institute to be limited to his own career. or to be a personal and nostalgic memorial to himself. nor to be a partisan center of education. he believed in being part of something larger than oneself, and he envisioned a teaching institute larger, broader, and more far-reaching than even his own work or a place where the entire history of the united states senate will come alive and educate and inspire others to serve and to work to fulfill america's promise. while senator kennedy was proud to be a politician, in his own way, too, he was a teacher and an educator.

one afternoon, early in my term, one of his former colleagues approached me in the senate chamber, and reflecting on what the loss meant to that body and how much they relied on him to carry the tough fights, and how we always shared credit, no matter what victories he had achieved, the senator said, wistfully, ted taught us to be better senators, and now we must be. and in this audience, there are over 100 former staff members who can attest that by his constant devotion to making a positive difference in other people's lives, he made us better citizens and, indeed, better human beings. ..

in the city and the commonwealth he loves. next to his brother's library and bcm which itself echoes of patriotic call to service. we can be certain that edward kennedy will live on and all who will be inspired by the educational mission of this great institute, which will proudly bear his name. congratulations and we thank you all very much. [applause]

>> as senator kirk was speaking, speaker deleo leaned over to me and he said, doesn't he sound like a u.s. senator? [laughter] a great appointment governor patrick. thank you. [applause] when i first heard of the institute it was on the cape with vicki and ted, and i think some people do know that this all began as ted had served 40 years in the senate and ted and vicki began to talk to historians about what might the come and institute, we are breaking ground for today, and as those historians met with ted and vicki and others, the whole sense of what this could be, frankly what it must be, has been what vicki has brought to

the table again and again and again with a sense of excellence, with a sense of purpose and a sense of patriotism. the guiding light, the edward kennedy institute for the u.s. senate, vicki kennedy. [applause] [applause] >> thank you. i am going to ask, could i ask that all of our family come up here? do you mind? good all of our nieces and nephews too? could you please? [applause] joe, could you? would you want to? just let everybody see you. teddy would want it this way.

would you let everybody? i will try to talk fast. thank you. thank you. what a happy day indeed and while everybody in our family -- i just wanted you to see everybody. this is so important to us. thank you. [applause] while everybody is filing up here i just want to thank all of those who have been part of this program today and all of teddy's colleagues from washington, who serve now and those who have served before, who at may the effort to be here today. all of his colleagues in government here in the state, all of his friends and all of his people who afcom far and wide to share in this magnificent day with us. thanks everybody. how great is this? how great is this? [applause]

i just want to thank everyone who has done so much to make today happened. when my husband was a young teen, he went to washington d.c. to visit his old there, he wrote brother, his godfather, the newly sworn in congressman, jack kennedy. his brother showed him around the sites of washington d.c., the house office building, the senate office building, the supreme court, the library of congress and the beautiful dome of the capitol building itself. teddy was mesmerized and it showed in his face and his brother could see it. but then his big brother turned to him and said teddy, it's great that you enjoyed looking at these buildings, but take an interest in what happens inside

of them. and those words literally changed teddy's life and that is what we hope to do at the edward m. kennedy institute, encourage an interest in what happens inside our government buildings and in the process, change and enhance individual lives and the life of this great country. we want to show how throughout history, men and women of goodwill in both parties came together and addressed the greatest challenges facing our nation, civil rights, human rights, equal rights, workers rights, war and peace, health care, economic opportunity, education and yes, the budget.

teddy himself was at the center of many of these great states. as we heard earlier, he made his maiden senate speech on the civil rights act of 1964, and he saw that problems could be solved, that senators could come together and deal with important issues for the good of the country. he knew that finding common ground wasn't easy, but that it was necessary. he once said, we are american. this is what we do. we reach the moon, we scale the heights. i know it, i have seen it, have lifted and we can do it again, and that is what we are going to offer visitors at the edward m. kennedy institute for the united states senate. it's the chance to know it and see it and live it, so that people can be inspired to do it

again. [applause] we are going to do this in a dynamic and exciting and cutting-edge way. because edward m. kennedy was dynamic and exciting and always on the cutting-edge. we are developing study modules so that participants can hone their skills of persuasion and negotiation. they can immerse themselves in issues, take on the role of senators to see if they can bring their colleagues along with them. they will learn the art of compromise, so as they are studying the civil rights act of 1964 for example, they will have the opportunity to see if they can break that filibuster, if they can garner the votes to pass that historic legislation. they will have all the possible

research tools they need at their fingertips, but they won't have a script. the work legislating if you will, will be up to them. if they break the filibuster and pass the bill, they can learn about what came next, and if they don't, they will learn about the consequences of the failure to pass the legislation. it will be learning. they will know what it is to be in the trenches. they will learn about all the parts of our daily life that we take for granted if they fail to pass the legislation, like if they don't pass it, they will find out that -- the things we take for granted like no discrimination on the basis of race in restaurants and hotels and movie theaters. no federal funds for discriminatory programs in colleges and universities. no discrimination in employment and the elimination of different

requirements in order to register to vote. we take that for granted because the senators came together and rope that filibuster. they will learn how to different our nation would be if that filibuster hadn't been compromised. those are lessons that ted kennedy learned and took to heart in the way he legislated for his entire nearly 47 year career. my husband didn't want a memorial to himself or to his achievements. he wanted to create a place that would spark an interest and nurture the belief that public service can be a noble endeavor, that it can lift and change the world and our nation. that each of us can make a difference and all you have to do is try. and talk to each other. at this institute, his dream will live on.

thank you very much. [applause] [applause] ú@@@

>> demos co-founder david callahan and the ayn rand's centers yaron brook tech part in a debate. david callahan called government a tool used to aid individuals and encountered wealth disparity and society is good because it's a product of freedom. [inaudible conversations] >> good evening everyone. thank you for coming out to town hall tonight. my name is bob redman, in the program director and i'm excited to introduce our special program tonight. it's part of a national series of debates on first principles presented by demos and the ayn rand institute as part of town hall center for civic life programming. the topic of tonight's debate is

government, what is its proper role and it features david callahan at demos and yaron brook of the ayn rand center and moderated by former u.s. attorney john mckay. before i say more about tonight's program i want to bench in a few events coming up there are center for civic life series here at town hall. first of all naomi prince with a timely novel set in the great depression. she links to making a case for a carbon tax and local activist john mcgrath and -- you ask what is the economy for anyway? also coming up at town hall is physicist frank close, nathan merkel the newly formed watershed opera, seattle radio theaters performance of miracle on 34th street and a very cool literary musical collaboration between the bushwick bookclub and seattle rock orchestra and all of that stuff is happening in the next two weeks, so it's typical for town hall and if you want to stay in touch with everything we have going on you can find out more at town hall

seattle.org. the best ways to become a member and membership starts at just $35 provides a discount on books, tickets and more. best of all, it gives you a feeling that you are a part of everything we do here at, over 350 events a year. we are a member supported organization so on your way home tonight pick up a membership form in the lobby and you can also sign-up on line sign up on line at town hall seattle.org. tonight's debate will be moderated by a seattle nativea l john mckay, who grew up on capitol hill and attended st. joseph's grade school, seattle prep high school in the university of washington.and he served as united states attorney under george w. bush from 2001 to 2007. when he resigned along with eight other u.s. attorneys following that, mckay joined the faculty of seattle university school of law where he continues to teach.of law i want to turn the proceedings over to him nowh. and he is gois

to introduce our debaters andimn tell you exactly how the evening will proceed. thank you again for coming. please givean the warm town hall welcome to friends -- first principle of debate. [applause] >> >> good evening everyone. i'm john mckay.y it's my privilege this eveningto to be here at seattle's town hall here in the great hall and to welcome you to what is now the fifth in a series ofth national i a series of national debates on very debates what is it good overnment -- what is it good for? ehat may ba ovoce for e tonight david callahan.

he is an author. he is a commentator and lecturer. his books, in particular the cheating culture and the moral center are tremendousul commentaries worthy of yourentas consideration. is a graduate of hampshire college and he holds a ph.d. ph. iitics from princeton university. ersity. mleft it is of course a well-known nonprofit organization, advancing the ideas of objectivism. he is himself a tremendous intellect and writer as well,

publisher and commentator soob e have two very engaging debaters tonight and we were talkingweer beforehand that we were hoping that our debate, we are not using as a yardstick the puesidential debate to put you all att ease. what we hope for tonight is engagement, engagement on important ideas, important i issues.de we have to tremendous protagonist here and we are asking all of you to participat. as well which is a tradition here at town hall so we willat have 20 of opportunity and time for questions from all of you fr tremendous debaters. i would like to jump into our discussion tonight. my role will be simply to move this along to various topics, but not to be afraid to linger on important topics, as our debaters and chairman may determine them to be.

if we read from the headlines today, the first issue could only be characterized as failure. i am referring of course to the joint committee looking at the question of the reduction of united states' debt to, and the failure of the joint committee, the analysis failure. that might be a good place to start on what the government is and should be. i'm giving you each an opportunity to open in the context of the question. i want to give each an opportunity to meet. -- to speak. david, we will turn to you first. you make five minutes of an opening statement. >> it is great to be here tonight. this is my fourth appearance at town hall seattle.

as always, i am thankful to the fantastic team that makes these events possible. a town hall is truly one of the best venues for public discussion in the country, and i have been to a lot of them. on one of my previous visits to town hall, i was the only person on the stage. while it is certainly fun to be a monopoly provider like that, i am also looking forward to tonight. the role of government is the central issue of our time and our politics. i am thrilled to be here to make the case for a public sector that is strong, that is effective, and that can advance the common good. let me sketched out the way i see things. for starters, the questions here tonight -- the real question is not what should government be doing, as if government were some autonomous entity with its

own agenda. the real question is what do we, the citizens, want to do through government this is a democracy after all. government is our common tool to get things done. government is us. it is a tool we use when we want to do things that we cannot do as individuals. that we cannot do through the free market. the cannot do through a civil society or charity. the best way to think about government is as a set of public structures that we have built to make society better for everyone. in a great many ways, the story of america's success and prosperity over the past century is a story of how we together have built these public structures and expanded the role of government to improve our

lives. i will talk about a bunch of those good things tonight, but let me flag major and overarching rules for government. first, we use government to protect ourselves. protection is a fundamental role of the state. it goes beyond protecting ourselves from street criminals, or from foreign terrorists. we have also turned to government to protect ourselves from other things, like contaminated food, pollution. americans no longer die in droves from food borne diseases, as they did before the creation of the fda in 1906. we no longer took on the air we breathe in our cities. we also use government to protect ourselves from unscrupulous business practices. the government protect us or should protect us from being ripped off in financial fraud or

exploited by you serious -- usurious lenders, attracted by false and advertising are harmed by dangerous products. government protect us in the workplace. seven years ago, 100,000 workers died every five years on the job, because employers did not care whether they died. that was at a time when there were only 4 million people in the labor force. today, 5000 workers die a year in a labor force which is much larger. fewer americans are dying on our highways since the federal government stepped in to regulate auto safety in 1966. the auto fatality rate has dropped by 400%. seat belts and air bags, regulated and mandated by

government, have saved hundreds of thousands of lives. they want government to play this protective role, but for decades, powerful interests have been working to destroy these protections, often to increase their own bottom line. this helps explain why investors lost trillions of dollars when wall street was allowed to turn into a casino, why so many americans have lost their homes to predatory lending, why so much air pollution persist, causing asthma and heart disease were a government watchdogs are sleeping or have been put to sleep. bad things happen. yet all this bad stuff apparently is not enough. there are politicians trying to strip away even more of these protections, trying to kill the fda, the epa, and osha > a second major role for

government -- again, a role we have chosen together as citizens -- is to help build a stronger economy and ensure prosperity for everyone. capitalism is a great system for creating wealth. but it can also be a phenomenally harsh and brutal system. it allows some people to live like kings and others to start on the street. it can be a very unstable system, prone to booms and busts. this is not the kind of society americans want. we believe in economic freedom. we want to use the market and business to build wealth, to realize our dreams. but we also believe in mutual obligation and taking care of each other. as a society, ideally we try to manage capitalism through government to get the best of

both worlds, to get the prosperity and the freedom, but also the fairness and the security. we have not been doing that very well lately. we have not been getting the best of both worlds in that way, because government has been too weak. the evidence is everywhere around us. to many americans live in poverty. to many americans are unemployed. t 00 many do not have health care and cannot afford college. all of this at a time when the top 1% have more wealth than the bottom 90% of americans put together. that is not ok. it is not the kind of country you want to live in. it is not the country the founders envisioned. we can do better, and government offers us a way to do better together. i am going to come back to the

super committee question. >> may i ask you about the context of your remarks? you have talked about the weakness of government. it seems in the joint select committee, an enormous amount of power seemed to float into that committee, but it has been a failure. when you say the government is weak, would we strengthen something that, when given power, seems to fail? "super committee was a failure because the republican party has been taken over by anti- government ideologue's, who will not raise taxes under any circumstances despite the fact that taxes are at their lowest level in 60 years as a percentage of gdp, and we are facing the retirement of the boomers. that is what the super committee failed. it is not the problems of government structurally. it is about the republican party has lost its line. -- lost its mind. [applause]

>> let me turn to mr. bork in the context of your opening statement, to address the failure. we want to give you an opportunity to open as well. >> i would be happy to. this is my first appearance at the town hall. thank you for inviting me. hopefully, it will not be my last. you will have to let me know afterwards. i feel like david is more at home and i am, but i would like to be an home. >> you are very welcome here. >> i would also like to thank demos, and our moderator for being willing to moderate this discussion. i want to take a step back a little bit. i think we will get into all the different concrete issues that david has brought up. i am eager to comment on all of them, but probably will not get a chance to comment on even half of them. i would like to take a step back to ask the more fundamental

question. why do we need government? what is it for? is there something unique about this country and the experiment that is america? because i believe there is. i believe in the 18th-century, the thinkers of the time, and the founding fathers in particular, faced a crucial turning point in american history. they had to decide who each one of our lives belongs to. is your life the property of a king? is your life the property of a tribe? the property of a group? the collective? in democracy? is your life the property of someone else? because that is the way human beings have been living forever.

before 1776, you as an individual did not count. you did not. you are responsible to some other entity above and beyond you as an individual. but the enlightenment did, and what the founding fathers established, is the first country in human history where there was not true. the country was established with the idea that your life belongs to you, not to the king, not to your neighbor, not to any group. it does not matter. your life is not owned by the tribe. it is yours. it is yours to live as you please. the founding fathers -- this country was established on a moral principle of individualism. on the idea that we are autonomous entities that have a

moral right to our own life, a moral right to our own ideas, a moral right to pursue our own happiness, and infringed by majorities, by codes, by anybody. how do we live a life like that? hundley fulfill that individualism? how do we live in a society where everybody is pursuing their own interest in a harmonious way? the founders, following john locke, had a concept called individual rights. the idea was if you live your life the way you wanted to live it, pursuing your own values, your own happiness, that was ok, as long as you did not use force against neighbor, as long as you did not impede your neighbors' ability to do the

same. we all have this right to pursue our dreams, our happiness, our values. but we need an entity to prevent us from using force against one another. we know throughout human history, unfortunately, we are a pretty bloody race. people use force all the time. that is what this particular government was instituted to do -- to protect us from a neighbor who might decide to steal our stuff, to defraud us, to take stuff away from us. that is the role of government -- to protect our right to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness. that implies a very small government. that requires a government that just does these things -- military, judiciary -- and leaves us alone otherwise,

leaves us alone to live our lives. once a government starts doing all the things david would like them to do, they have to start infringing on my rights. a really goode is cause out there. people need more health care. people are not getting the bill -- the best health care that could otherwise get. there are only two options ultimately to get me to help them. one is to ask. that is the system i like, a voluntary system where my rights are respected, where i get to make the choice of who to help and who not to help, under what conditions to help them, under what conditions not to help them. the only other choice is to force me to do it. and that is a violation of my rights. that is a violation of my right

to life. that is taking property away from me and using it in a way i do not want to use it, or that i have not chosen to use it. and that is fundamentally wrong. it is wrong when we do it to each other. but call it stealing. it is equally wrong when we get a group of people in the room and vote 51% to take my money away. it is still stealing. it is still wrong. it is still a violation of my rights. it is still the government the founding fathers warned us against, a government that tries to tell people how to live, what to do with their money, could to help and who not. my approach to this issue is very simple. government should do one thing only and do it really well. it should be as big as a means to be to do this one thing, and that is to protect individual rights. everything else, all the

wonderful things david might have for society, should be achieved or not by a voluntary association, individuals pursuing their own life and their own happiness. in terms of the super committee -- >> a failure, perhaps. >> in my view, the failure is not the failure of the super committee. it is the failure of 100 years of a mixed economy that has brought us to the brink of bankruptcy, administration after administration spending money on things the government should never have spent money on to begin with. the failure is spending money we do not have. the notion government should be able to borrow all the time, as much as they want, which leads to greece. it leads to chaos. it leads to the violation of each one of our rights to live

our life in the best way that we choose to live our life. the system we have today is the system of autocrats dictating how and what and where we should live. and yes, in some very narrow field, you could aggregate the numbers and say somebody is better off. but what if i am not better off? i do not accept the right of the government to dictate that. the super committee is a technicality. they failed. it is funny to blame it on republicans when the problem really -- >> would you blame both parties? >> republicans are awful. republicans got us to this point, right? the bush administration was one of the great disasters of a 20th-century. >> could we answer democrats into the response as well? the you have the same antipathy

to the democrats? >> i have a great antipathy toward the democrats. >> i did not want to leave them out. >> certainly would not want to do that. >> my view is that the problem in washington is spending and too much regulation. if the only solution is to cut, cut, cut and reduce the size and the scope, it significantly the scope, of government. -- you cannot do that by raising taxes. there is stuff you can do with taxes. we can talk about that. >> we will come back. death and taxes will come to all of us. but i would like to turn to davis -- david. we have heard a very narrow view of government, and a dramatic clash between our speakers, which is exactly what we hoped for. yaron mentioned the philosophy

of government, the philosophy of our founding fathers, "and john locke, who famously said our rights are life, liberty, and property, followed by thomas jefferson, who replaced the word property with, one might argue, "the pursuit of happiness." i am wondering if you have a comment on the basic view toward government in our society. is it a property right? is there a narrow view of government? is that the government came to be as we know it in the united states? >> i think government should be what americans want it to be through our democracy and the social contract. i think americans strongly support, for the most part, the government we have -- strong support for social security and medicare. strong support for a role in environmental protection. strong support for the fda and its role in protecting us against bad food and drugs.

strong support for food stamps, unemployment, and other key elements of the social safety net. strong support for investing in infrastructure. strong support for having government paperwork role in investing in science and ensuring we keep up in global competition. we have the government americans want. this is not some kind of autocrat dictating to us how your money should be used. we, as a democratic society, have made these choices. >> yaron says there is one aim of government. you said there were too. he said the governor should be there to protect us. there might be common ground in your first element and his. i am unclear as to your second point. you said that it was to address the question of capitalism. i took it to mean the government should manage capitalism.

am i wrong? >> absolutely. >> what is the disagreement in terms of the protection element between you and yaron? >> i believe in a more expansive role, as do most americans, for government protecting us from a bunch of things. not just from street criminals. not just from hard terrorists. frankly, whether or not i lose money because my house is burglarized or lose money because my financial investor rips me off because the securities and exchange commission has been downsized does not matter to me. i have still lost the money. whether i die because i am murdered or whether i die in a workplace accident because my employer is cutting corners does not matter. i want protection, as do most americans, from a range of dangers that exist in modern society. >> to americans need to be

protected in that way? >> no. this is the difference. i view force as unique, something very different. it is something people inflict on one another. it is the one enemy of human life. in my view, to be successful in life, to prosper as human beings, what we need is to be free to use our minds, to think, to reason, to solve problems, to engage with reality, choose between a variety of options, make decisions. we need to be free. when you have a gun stuck to the back of your neck, you are not thinking. you are doing what the guy says. the one thing that obstruct our ability to think, and therefore to be successful, is force. in my view, force is unique. it is not like cancer. it is not like a virus.

it is not like voluntarily taking on a risk that maybe somebody else would not. i believe people should be able to take their own risks. force is unique, and i want to banish it. the only thing i want from the government is to ban it. the example david dave is a little fuzzy. we both believe the government has a role to play in catching fraud. if there should be an s.e.c., it has only one job. that is to catch bernie madoff. the reason it cannot do that job is because it is monitoring every transaction i make. i have to file loads of paperwork. i am an honest guy. i am not cheating. i am no court in advance. they are just waiting to catch me. they are so flooded with a million forms that they do not have time to catch the real crux. we both agree the crux of -- i

think. >> what about catching the ceo of world,, who committed fraud. >> that is the job of the police, however you want to call it. catching crooks, catching people who defraud other people, is clearly the role of government. the role of government is not to look over my shoulder to tell me what kind of transaction i can and cannot engage in, how many shares i can or cannot buy, who can sit on a board and who cannot, and who can invest in stuff. when it is force, and i include fraud under force, the government has a legitimate role to play. but there is a fundamental difference between harm that occurs to us -- for example, safety. the notion is that safety came from government. all the statistics show that

safety improves in an industry dramatically. the government puts in regulations. that reduces the rate of improvement. safety makes sense from a proper perspective. i know it is a shock to people who have never been in business. it is not a profitable activity to kill your employees. it is not. [applause] >> before you proceed, the statement has been made by david, and i want to give you the opportunity to expand your comment. you talk about our financial system. he has suggested that capitalism needs to be managed. would you care to comment on that statement? we will give david an opportunity to expand as well. that is a different concept than protection. would you like to address that? >> obviously i am against it. i think government should only

do one thing. it should not be doing this. >> you do not see capitalism as a threat to individuals in any way? >> i see it as a contract. i believe it is a protection that causes the harm, not capitalism. i know a little bit about the financial crisis. i can address that. why did we have a financial crisis? this banking system is the most regulated business in the united states. capitalism and the mortgage business -- where? it was completely subsidized, completely controlled. how many of you own your own home up right? thank you. all of you guys are subsidizing my mortgage. the government is everywhere in these industries. it is no accident that three of the most regulated industries in the united states led to a major collapse. the regulations caused the

collapse. it is the regulations, the attempt to control a voluntary, healthy win-win interaction between participants and the marketplace which causes those transactions to become lose- lose, which causes the risk behavior you saw during the financial crisis. that is what causes the problem. that is not the solution to a problem. we never blame the regulators. we never been in the regulations. the last 100 years, we have always blamed the so-called free market, even when there is no sign of a free market in the banking space. anyone can see it. >> on this concept of managing capitalism, if one turns to the demos website, there is a statement supporting the occupy wall street movement. can you tie that together in

terms of managing capitalism? >> fundamentally, the occupy wall street movement is about taking on the excessive economic inequality that has grown up in this society. and it has grown up because starting a couple of decades ago we decided to take in more hands-off approach to the economy. we did not intervene as structural trends started to siphon more wealth and upward. globalization. technological change. not only did we not intervene to defend the middle class in the face of those trends, but we made situations worse in washington by lowering taxes on the rich, by making it easier for the people on wall street and the ceo's to make these huge fortunes by lifting compensation got out of control. this is, i think, what occupy wall street is fundamentally protesting against. unless we manage capitalism, it

does have a tendency to concentrate wealth at the very top of our society. that i think is fundamentally incompatible with american values. this is an egalitarian society apart. we need to intervene through our collective tool of government to preserve that egalitarian spirit in the face of an economic system that has total disregard for it. >> if one were to look at some of the photographs of the tea party movement, you will occasionally see a sign that would relate to the ayn rand institute. what does objectivism have to do with the tea party movement, if any? would you like to comment on the occupied -- occupy movement? >> i have a lot of sympathy for the tea party movement. i think it is very confused. it is, to some extent, impotent. it does not have a real agenda.

it knows what it does not want, and i am with them. they do not want big government. how they get there, they have no clue or plan. that is unfortunate. it is a huge missed opportunity. the fact that americans stood up and said enough is enough, to me is a wonderful thing. many of those people took inspiration from "atlas shrugged." occupy wall street is a very different movement. it is not about shrinking government. it is about expanding government. it is supposedly against cronyism. they are not against cronyism. that are against cronyism they do not like, wall street cronyism. i did not see signs that objected to the auto bailout. that are not against subsidized solar energy.

they are for their types of subsidies and corporate engagement with government. i would like to see government completely disengaged. i would like to see government stop subsidizing all business. if i had any position of power, the first thing i would do would be eliminate all tax subsidies to business. get the government out of business school. get them out. lower corporate tax rates dramatically and slowly phase out all the regulations. absolutely, government should not be involved in any of that stuff. i sense about occupy wall street is that they are very much -- in

terms of inequality, this issue of wealth inequality. now, i do not have a position on wealth inequality. i do not know what is right -- and i do not think david knows. i do not know what is the right inequality of wealth. i do know that inequality is a good thing. i do not think we should all be equal. tall people would have to have their legs cut off. >> let's give david a chance to comment on that. >> on the question of what is the right amount of inequality, there is no absolute answer to that. i think it would be a good thing if we lived in a society where all boats rose together, which was the case for most of the early post-war decades. the rich got richer, made a lot of money, but the middle class

rose, the working-class rose. starting in the 1970's, we entered a different kind of economy in which only the costs -- gots really went up. the income of the top 100% have grown by almost 300% since 1979 while the incomes of middle- class and working-class have barely moved at all. that is not the kind of society we want to live in and that is the kind of situation we get when we have an unregulated form of capitalism, when we take a hands-off approach. i think we need to do something about that if we're going to retain our egalitarian democracy. remember, inequality of income and wealth always translates into inequality of political power. people with money and wealth can easily translate those resources into a bigger say in our

democracy, and that is not compatible with the values of this country. [applause] >> so, i said i do not know what the right mix is, but i know how to get there. how to get there is freedom, is leaving people alone, is getting the government out of picking winners and losers and getting the government out of leaving some to falter while helping others. let people be rewarded based on what they produce, not based on what some bureaucrat thinks they deserve. >> let me put the question directly to david. is government pose a role to redistribute wealth? >> absolutely -- government's role to redistribute wealth? >> absolutely, yes. we do it through social security and medicare, which enjoys wide public support. we do it through education. redistribution is a fundamental role of government.

the last time we had a situation like yaron describes is 100 years ago before the income tax, before the regulations of government. what did that society look like? it was in effect an oligarchy. that is what we will get again if we try to go back in that direction. >> this is completely rewriting history. >> robber barons? >> from 1800-1850, average incomes in united states doubled. gdp per capita grew from the civil war to 1913 at the highest rates of human history. at the same time, the united states was absorbing millions and millions of the poorest of the poor from all over the world. freedom works. was there disparity of wealth?

absolutely. i am not against that. i think that is wonderful. if some people are making huge amounts of money, that means that we value the services we're providing. how do you make money in a free market? not today, were some people make it by getting subsidies from the government. you make it the way microsoft made money, by selling a product that people value. and you benefit from the service that product provided your life. good for bill gates. he worked to the max. he lived his life to the fullest. and at the same time, at the same time, he made all of our lives better and that has made him a lot of money. [applause] >> let me ask you, -- >> microsoft employees here in

seattle. >> let me ask you, should the government role be to promote disparity in wealth? >> know, the government is neutral. this is the radical position i take. let me just address one thing. he is right. america notes -- america wants what it once. this is not a debate about popularity. nobody likes i'm advocating for, but i am right. and believe in the separation of government from economics. i do not believe the government's should be involved in distributing wealth, managing capitalism. if you want to be a socialist, you can, as long as you can convince other people to go and live with you and a commune. if you want to bail at detroit, get a bunch of people together,

pull your money and go bailout detroit. >> is it important to have significant wealth disparity as a product of society? >> if it is a product of freedom, then yes. i am a strong believer that equality is an evil gold. the regime that came closest to achieving equality was in cambodia. they killed 40% of their population in the killing fields. who among you is equal? i do not believe in equality. i think it is an evil idea, an awful idea. when the founders talked about equality, they talk about equality for the law. in those days, if you were an aristocrat and you were accused of murder, the aristocrat on a much lighter sentence.

what the founding fathers objected to was that kind of inequality. the government should treat everybody the same. the marketplace is going to treat us all different because we bring different things to the marketplace. that is what makes it fun. >> i think we have our clash in terms of what the role of government might be, at least in terms of outcomes relative to wealth. let me turn to a point on which i think i perceive some agreement between our debaters, and that may be the role of the government in regards to national security. if you wish to throw in law enforcement, i would invite you to do that as well. this is it the that the one thing government should do is keep us safe. does that mean that you favor significant, even massive increases in our military budgets? >> i think we would both agree that government has a major role to play a national security.

we may even agree on the size of resources needed for that. >> should we increase it? >> at this point, clearly we need to reduce our military obligations. in fact, that is already going to happen under the budgetary deals reached by congress in august and also through the trigger agreement. we're looking at defense cuts of about $1 trillion over the next decade. i think that makes sense. we've been fighting two wars abroad. we need to turn to domestic challenges and we need to really focus on the economic challenges that we face to compete with the likes of china, brazil, india. it is a jeer-economic game, and we need to be more effective -- geo-economic game, and we need to be more effective at that game. >> i certainly think it can be cut.

i believe the military should serve one purpose and one purpose only. there is the theme here, right? that is to protect the lives and property of america. i do not believe we should be building democracies. i do not believe we should be helping the south koreans defend themselves when they do not want as helping them defend themselves. i believe the role of the u.s. military is to defend america. somebody attacks us, we should go find them, crush them, and come home. i do not think we need to build anything that breaks or rebuild anything that breaks. i believe in the military that is lean and mean in the sense that it does what is necessary, whatever is necessary, to protect the life and property of american citizens. >> we want to .. evaluate

the effectiveness of our government? whatever its size may be? and if i may be permitted an editorial comment, i think it is fair to say that if you ask americans today what is their view of the success, not what it should look like, but the success of government, you have a very poor response. people seesen, they see a lack of commitment, at least even in the words to the pursuit of the common good, but rather the acquisition of r power. it seems to be a great infirmitt in government today, at leasting that is how i think much of theh public use it. t what is the metric from your different points of view on how government can be successful? h you mentioned the gross domestip product of our country, the output of the country.

thinking go to other parts of tu the world and they might choose of determinantchooseif detewhether or not government is successful.er o is government successful when it promotes happiness, and ifhen it that's true how is it defined,, the common good, the financial success, the relative debt of the nation, the degree to which people can engage in wonderfuls? leisure time, maybe the pursuit of the greeks, which was alsople raised on this side of the debate, but what is the metric of government success? >> i think that is a good and tough question. i think for too long we havehino been measuring the success of our society through narrow economic indicators. gdp is the sort of dominant indicator where we always used that to the kidnappings arein going. we need to move beyond that toao create indicators which capture how people's quality of lives are, and that involves a number of different things.and it involves some much time they have formb leisure, it involvesh

you know, the strength ofave community, the well -- thes,lean cleanliness of the environment. there is a project right now called beyond gdp in which we are looking at those kinds ofin alternative indicators.rs. vuitton famously as the gross national happiness. at think thautt is going in thei right direction. one thing government can do isgt be the instigator of some ofgatr whose new indicators and create the kind of data necessary to measure our progress. in terms of how you measure the metrics for measuring the success of government of megovernment and self, you knowf that's very difficult to do. the you're right. that many americans in the abstract are disenchanted with a government, but when you askt them about this particular thint that government does they likege it. alexis security. they think government has been very successful in ensuring retirement security for more ols

people that are ensuring thaturn seniors have access to medical care.eople, they like government's role in insuring a clean environment. so in those particular isrs hav americans are very pleased withs the successes the government has had, and the successes have been substantial. in 1960's 35% of seniors live in poverty. today it's under 10%. eniorss a remarkable success for this war on poverty that is so often derided. >> is there a metric for happiness? t a we have gross domestic product, a new sort of gross nationalomec happiness scale perhaps being proposed by others around the world. i fear that your answer may involve something more like l those the government does the tm happier we are., i want to invite you to make -- to offer a metric formetric government, even in a very limited view, what would be a metric for evaluating governmenn

>> completely different. i mean, this is not about whatto makes most of us happy or some measure of happiness, and i. certainly want to distance myself if i might, that the making of government. i just happen to think thatt could government also has that.e you know, but in my view the mattresses individual freedom. if the job of government from my perspective is that theobf ototection of individual rights, then the measure by which we me basure where the government s succeeding and not is, is it doing, is a protecting rights, or is it, as the case yesterday, that it is the biggest violator of civil-rights as the founding fathers indeed one this it woulu become. government today is a violator of rights. government today infringes on our freedom, research our ability to make choices andto decisions and pursue our own ins happiness. the magic hour which uses to what extend are you free tothe i

plant at your life and make the whoices that you need to make in your life, what extent are you free?ch what extent this government leave you alone to do that and it gets rid of the crux in order ?o let you do that. i think on that matrix we are failing. we have been declining dramatically for the last 100 years. i believe government should not be engaged in, for example, the decision of whether i should be allowed to take viox or not. there is risk involved, but i should be able to decide. it is a decision i should be able to make with my doctor or my pharmacist. every time the government makes a decision like that for us, we have less freedom, less ability to pursue happiness. and yes, i believe individuals

are less happy as a consequence, although i do not think you can measure happiness, certainly not collective happiness. >> do you have a comparative analysis from your viewpoint? is there another government somewhere that you think we should be emulating? are you referring to the united states government or all governments? >> no government has ever been like the government i would like. no government has ever practice the kind of government i think the founding fathers imagined. even they did not practice it. but to the extent that governments have advocated for freedom, people have been successful, gdp has grown, happiness has grown, freedom has ground. i am a huge lover of 19th

century america. i know that david has a different perspective of pre- world war i america. i think that was the golden age of this country in which individuals were actually as free as we have been in america. if you compare china to hong kong. if you compare america to hong kong, we are sinking in economic index like a rock. i think there are better governments and worse governments, and i think the u.s. government, which started out as the best government in the world -- i am an immigrant. i came here because i believe this is the best government in the world. i think it has eroded over the last 100 years and is moving away from that freedom. even by simple indexes of freedom, dropping dramatically. >> the me turn to david to give us a comparative analysis.

dark pictureron's of the last century rather puzzling. the last i checked, the last entry was pretty good. this was the time we created the first mass middle class in the history of the world. the 20th-century was a time when we became the freest, most dynamic society in history of the world. it was a phenomenal century when america became the richest country in the history of the also, and that' period coincided with the rise of a powerful government that was committed to making america number one in a lot of different areas, a government that was committed to building a modern middle-class through the gi bill, the interstate highway system that opened up the suburbs, public universities that made higher education affordable, scientific investments that put us on the

cutting edge of industry and technology. the government played a central role in creating the golden age. the golden age was not the 19th century when children were working in factories, people did not have the right to organize and robber barons ran america. the golden age was the 20th century, absolutely. and in terms of the international comparison, i think one of the best examples in the world right now is denmark, a country known for its economic freedom, a country that is a great place to do business, but also a country with a great social safety net and a lot of investment in human capital through its education system. we are in a major competition right now with other countries that have very strong governments that are trying to chart their role in this 21st century.

>> let me take this opportunity to invite the participants who are here with us in the great hall of seattle's town hall to join us at the microphone here to my left, to your right. we will have someone here to sort of moderate activity for us, but i ask you to begin thinking of your questions and to come forward. while we're doing that, i just want to make a comment about this last bit. maybe i am standing in the middle for a reason. i would say that from my standpoint i continue to believe that i live in the greatest country of the world, whether we look at it from our economic success an opportunity to the role that we play in terms of safeguarding the world's security. not to say that we're perfect. i think americans, better than anybody else, expose the weaknesses for all to see, and

that is a powerful thing. since there seems to be some agreement that this government may not be good for certain things and that our metrics may be skewed, let me just give a few. this is from "newsweek" magazine, who attempted to pull together some of the of the happiness indices from around the world, health, education, politics. in the quality of life index, the united states this 31st. in recent rankings of the world's most livable cities, economists ranks the american entry at 29. the quality of living survey, number 31. perhaps we have another form of agreement here. >> which countries are at the top of those lists? >> i could not say. i believe a number of them are

scandinavian. others believe that china, as the emerging power of the world, will head the list. >> i propose that we take the top of that list, scandinavian countries and others, and open the borders in both directions and see where people move. i'm willing to bet that the movement will be to this country. that is were smart entrepreneurs want to be. we would have to have a very different political environment to engage in experiments like that. >> we do want to involve our guests here at town hall, so we will take some questions now for our speakers. >> a question for yaron brook, i wonder where is the morality of allowing unhindered

accumulation of wealth. in a country where you have people working three jobs and having no health insurance, i wonder where the morality is coming in. also, a country that prides itself and christian values, christianity does not espouse that you have such a wealth disparities. >> let me just make it clear in case i have been understood. i'm a radical. i do not believe in christian morality. i think it is a corrupt morality. i think it is bad. i do not believe you are your brother's keeper. i do not believe you belong to anybody else. i believe in the morality of rational long-term self- interest. i think your own responsibility is to your own happiness, rationally pursue the of the long term. i do not believe and sacrifice. i do not believe your job is to take care of other people. i believe one of our jobs is to

take care of ourselves, make our lives flourish. i want to ask the opposite question. what is the morality that says that i cannot accumulate beyond a certain amount of wealth? what if i am selling products that you guys love so much that you keep buying, and you buy more and more, and i make a profit? why do we live in a country where making wealth, creating value for people, trading what people value for value, is somehow despicable morality? giving it away after you have made it is good. if you want to make bill gates a sane, do you know what he would do? he would give it all away and given to attend. then we would declare him a saint. -- he would give it all away and moved into a tent.

then we would declare him a saint. rex thank you for the question. >> i do not think that wealth is created by individuals acting alone in some heroic fashion. i think well this created by individuals working within a society where there are the foundations for wealth creation, the roads, the schools, the infrastructure, the legal system, and that society decides together how that wealth is used. individuals do not get to decide completely on their own. and actually, this is not a view that i created out of the blue. this is a view that andrew carnegie famously espoused in his essay "gospel of wealth," in which he argued for an estate tax on the grounds that because

society created wealth collectively, created opportunities for people like carnegie, we needed to capture some of that wealth and recycle it so that opportunities were created for others. that is what redistributive tax policy is all about, creating opportunities for all. as to some of the other points, he keeps saying that look, government should not have to solve the problem because people will step forward to solve it through charity. we know historically that that is not the case. 75% of seniors lived in poverty in 1975. in his world view, we get rid of government and we expect charity to solve it, and then we also espouse the philosophy of radical self interest which takes away anybody's sense of

obligation for anybody else. that is a formula for a brutal, brutal society. [applause] >> next question, please. >> i would like to bring the discussion down to two very concrete issues that seem to me some of the greatest threats we're facing today. yaron.estion for he how is your understanding of the role of government deal with what economists callnegative externalities', which is simply pollution, the danger of global climate change in the world? and for david, it is a question about democrats who seem to join so eagerly in waging war for the purpose of gathering resources in the world because we realize

we're running out of everything. and finally, if i could ask mr. mckay, to include you so you will not be left out -- >> you are very kind. >> one of the issues i have understood the courts are doing, related to the role of government, is ruling that if we go to war, that is a political issue, and make no judgment about whether the war is legal or illegal despite the fact that justiceeme court jackson said that initiating a war of suppression is a crime. that should last the three of you for under an hour. [laughter] >> thank you for the questions.

i think our speakers are who people came to see tonight, but i think that the courts have had a very important role in determining accountability for international activities, especially for war crimes. you yourself mention nuremberg, but also the war crimes tribunals for yugoslavia and rwanda, for abuses in what we consider to be the rules and laws of war. >> media did not make myself clear, against a -- maybe i did not make myself clear -- against ourselves. i am speaking of the invasion of iraq. >> on the question of guantanamo bay, the executive branch displayed a wide view of the power of the executive to hold individuals outside the united states in what could be seen as a constitution-free zone. the supreme court stepped in and said not so fast.

individuals there have the right to petition for habeas corpus. it is a pretty dramatic conflict between the role of the executive in war making any application of constitutional rights. the court spoke loudly about what could go one at guantanamo bay and very much restricted the role of the united states there. i think we will continue to see the supreme court taking an active role in the national security -- the executive branch. that is my answer to my question. thank you for involving me. he made me feel more useful here, because i think the better questions are coming from you than from me. let me turn to david first to answer the question he posed to you. >> very quickly, it is crazy to be fighting wars and expending

resources 12,000 miles away. we need a policy for developing renewable energy here at home, and in my mind, this is a great place for government to take the leading role. this is a strategic area, and i think the best thing government can do is to set a price on carbon. push up the price on carbon and the market will solve the rest of the problem. if we do not do that now, quite apart from the challenge of climate change, we're going to continue to be dependent upon oil from some of the most dangerous places on earth. >> they are related, i guess, because they all deal with oil. i do not want to get into the question of our policy on war, because that will take this in a completely different direction. the idea that renewable energy is around the corner is ridiculous. it is vanishing. it does not exist. 95% of all the energy in the

world is from carbon sources. except that. it is going to be like that for a very long time. if there was really an alternative, do you think a venture capitalist in silicon valley would not be investing like crazy in it? all government is doing is throwing money at this problem. it will be one of the biggest boondoggles in american history. the idea that windmills and solar panels are going to solve the problems in seattle in terms of producing enough energy for us to consume the way we are today, forget it. the only way to do this -- david is right. to have a carbon tax and lower the standard of living dramatically. that is what happens when government intervenes. the standard of living goes down. to the issue of externalities', first, i have to point out that people lois talk about negative

externalities', but i want to talk about positive externalities', which are far more dominant. i keep bringing a bill gates. bill gates is a huge positive externality to every one of your lives if you live in this community. the number of jobs, facilities, the wealth created because he chose to locate microsoft here and build his business. and yes, he did not do it alone. he paid people to work with him. he paid his suppliers. he paid for the private infrastructure. there are no free lunches. i completely agree. the whole society is involved, but that is what the price system does. it rewards people for the degree of their involvement. employees who became early and contributed more get more because of that. you cannot dump your garbage in my backyard. we know that. we have established that for a

very long time. let's get innovative. let's create private property everywhere, including on water. including creative ways over the air. let's figure out how to protect our private property, each one of us. just like we protect our backyard from our neighbor polluting it with his garbage. there are creative, private, leo ways in which we can protect ourselves from harm delivered -- legal ways in which we can protect ourselves from harm delivered through the water and the air. we do not need massive government regulatory systems to achieve that, and indeed, i think it is slowing down the process. i think human beings would live in a cleaner environment if we got rid of the epa. it slows down progress. the human environment today is the cleanest environment it has ever been in human history.

it is cleaner and than london in the 19th century when there was menu are everywhere. industry -- a maneuver -- manure everywhere. >> government is the government of people. what is the proper government would depend on what your view of people is. what kind of creatures, what kind of circumstance, how do people live, what are their capabilities, whether they're competencies', how should they live, and i wonder if both speakers could address, fundamentally, how do you view

people? >> i think people are moral animals who believe in and cooperation because it is in their self interest. i believe human beings have a high degree of empathy for other human beings and that there are evolutionary reasons for that. when you cooperate, when you make sacrifices of your own self in order to strengthen your community, you get long-term rewards. i think that the government we have, in which people are making sacrifices, letting some of their wealth be redistributed to help others, is a reflection of that basic empathy and desire to advance the public good. >> a believe that the fundamental here is that people are rational. the need to use their minds. the need to use reason in order to improve their lives in order to achieve happiness.

all of the values around us are products of the human mind. the human mind thrives. it is possible to think, the reason -- to reason and be rational when the mind is free. be rational. be reasonable. create stuff. pursue values. when the government tries to tell us how and what we should do, who we should help, this or that, it is restricting our ability to think about what truly is in our rational self interest. it is restricting our ability to reason. i'm all for corporations. i am again sacrifice. i'm against forced corporations. i'm against slave camps of any kind. free people voluntarily cooperate with one another in a rational way.

>> i have a question for each of you. david, it seems that your view is that it is better to be a slave than to be poor. i want to see how you feel about my statement and hear your argument. then, for yaron, my question for you is, when government fails to do what we want through the democratic process, is there a point when it is proper to have a revolution, to initiate force, and if so, what the society look like at that point? >> david? >> i think that yaron said he

believed in voluntary cooperation among free people. that is what we have in the united states. not as much as we would like because there is too much wealth and power in hands of a tiny elite who are using that to have a large voice in society, but together, we are making decisions that have actually made us a lot richer. we have become a much wealthier society of the last seven years in part because of a proactive role -- 70 years in part because of the pro-active role of government to enable us to build more wealth, invest in human capital and invest in our physical capital. >> must be choose between freedom and slavery? >> i do not think that slavery is on the table here. nobody is talking about slavery. the closest thing we have come to slavery in this country is when we had slavery, and it was slavery that was an institution

run by the free market, unchecked by government. [boos] >> so, we have raised the question of freedom, the question of slavery. now the question of revolution. >> let me talk about slavery. clearly, slavery is wrong and it is the government's job to make sure it does not happen. i agree about the civil war. i think we should have gone to war because rights were being violated. that is the role of government to stop the violation of rights. >> if it is the position that the government has failed in such a massive way, what we do? do we have a revolution? >> the founding fathers revolted

against their government for a lot less than what we have to suffer under our government, a lot of it. i mean, in seattle, the tax your coffee. everything is taxed. it is a different context and a different world. i am not an advocate for armed revolution. for many reasons. among others, we would lose. [applause] [laughter] government needs the sanction of the people in order to govern. that is why we have the government have. the people, the overwhelming majority of people, believe, in one form or another, slightly to the left, slightly to the right, with this. if you believe in something different, what we need to do is convince them that they're wrong. convince them that their ideas

are wrong. this is an intellectual, philosophical, ideological battle. it is the battle of the mines. it is the battle of reason. it is not a battle of arms. and we're not going to win the battle unless we engage in it at this level and try to convince enough people that the way we're heading is the wrong way. >> i think you have covered the ground. let's go to the next question. >> thank you for spending your evening with us. it is my understanding from what you are saying that people inherently tend towards violence and that humans are also inherently selfish. you talk about acting in your own self interest in the basis of morality. i wonder if he could talk about the role of correction in your

ideal government. how do you catch the bernie madoffs if you do not have regulations and checks, and how the use of the rampant corruption -- how do you solve the rampant corruption we see in our government now? >> how big and robust must government be in order to catch all of the bernie madoffs better out there? >> unfortunately, we do not catch them all because we're too busy with other stuff. first of all, let me correct you. i do not think people are inherently selfish. i think to be selfish requires hard work. my conception of selfish is the pursuit of your best interest, rationally, over your lifetime. what is best for me?

how should i live my life so that i should live a flourishing life? aristotle talked about this. that to me is hard work. that is not a common view of selfishness, doing whatever you like or in a momentary sense, lying, cheating, dealing -- stealing. how do we catch bernie madoff? there are lots of ways. in the case of bernie madoff, it was actually pretty easy. some of the people who wanted to invest with bernie madoff looked at his books and said, this is a problem. and i'm going to call the cops. and they did. a hedge fund manager wrote a nice memo to the sec. he sent it twice. it was about six years before they finally caught him, elaborating on this being a fraud. i think it is not hard.

when all you're trying to do is catch crooks, it is not hard to catch them. let me argue something radical. there are a lot less croaks under capitalism than with regulations. regulations create all these loopholes. we lebanon in burma were businessmen are taught do what ever you can get away -- we live in an environment where business men are taught to do whatever they can gget away with. i do not think we need a huge government -- i think, you know, certainly, the justice department could be quite a bit smaller. you need enough to get the bad guys. >> our other speaker tonight is

the author of a book called "the cheating culture and the moral center." you might be able to address this. >> i said in my opening remarks that capitalism is a great system in many ways. it is fantastic at producing wells. it is dynamic. it rewards hard work and creativity, but it also has some down sides. i talked about inequality being one of the down sides, but another of the downside is that capital-letter some, when it is not properly regulated -- down sides is that capitalism, when it is not properly regulated, it tends to become corrupt. it also tends to corrupt the political process. in terms of the corruption of capitalism in business, we have seen that in spades in the last 10 years. everybody talks about the

financial crisis we just went through, a crisis that incur occurred, in part, because the ratings agencies that were supposed to tell us whether subprime mortgages were sound were compromised. they had a major conflict of interest with the companies they were reading. there is huge corruption throughout the real estate and mortgage industry as well, with lax regulation of mortgage brokers, appraisers, lax regulation every step of the way, and that helped to produce the collapse we saw. remember, there was a housing bubble in almost every developed country in the world. it turned into a financial crisis here because of weak walked dogs -- week watchdogs in weak government. capitalism inherently krebs government because wealth

inequality -- inherently corrupt government because wealth inequality affects government. the financial industry spent $3 billion loosening regulations -- lobbying to loosen regulations. how do we deal with that? we have to get money out of politics. we need tougher rules on lobbyists. we need to do a number of things. >> but you're not suggesting that regulations are actually the cause of the problem. our regulations causing the bad conduct? >> that is totally false. during the 1950's, 1960's, 1970's, and into the 1980's, before the systematic attack on the regulation of our financial industry, we did not have the kinds of scandals and crashes

that we have seen in just the past 12 years. we did not have enron, world,, tycho, not to mention goldman sachs, countrywide, and all of the stuff we have just seen. we had some financial instability. we had some scandals in the 1970's. one reason we had the accounting scandals later on is because we did not respond effectively to the accounting scandals in the 1970's. regulatory changes were never made. accountants or writing their own roles in washington, and that is how the system got broken. >> before the justice department went after microsoft, microsoft spent $0 in washington. today, microsoft spends $9 billion annually. >> let me clarify, you are referring to another washington.

>> i am referring to washington, d.c., far away from this one. >> just a quick warning, we have about five minutes left. >> the questions are excellent. please bring them forward. >> i have to be quick. this has me going nuts, i must say. in full disclosure, i am a big government democrat, no question, but i have run into government 1000 times and thought, this is the stupidest thing. but it does not happen more often in government than in the private sector, wells fargo, comcast, sprint. every single private entity idea with has regulations based on the assumption i am cheating and it makes it more expensive to

deal with. my real question is, why do we believe this is about government versus free enterprise? the american system of government -- those founding fathers -- i read a lot of the federalist papers. they were not talking about john locke and economics. they were talking about roman systems, athenian systems, and how human beings are at risk of abusing power. in government, we tried to set up a system to regulate the abuse of power, and we have no such system in free enterprise to regulate the abuse of power. here is my question. in america, we get a credit for free enterprise which is built not so much on free enterprise for the first 20 years as it was on free land. >> is there a question?

>> the question is, -- >> we will ask that question. >> can we take another question as well? >> we will take on the role of free enterprise and another question and give our speakers a chance to answer both. >> why has there been absolutely no, not one mention, that our freedom is about to be taken away with the two stealth provisions put into the defense bill of 2012 that is voted on tomorrow. why are we not talking about this, because it is about ready to happen tomorrow? >> can we take another one? >> we will take one more.

>> i was wondering if both of you could try to define for me the common good and what that means to everyone, not just in this room, but across america. what is the common good? i hear that all of revenues and everywhere, and i have never really heard it defined. it all over the news and everywhere, and i have never really heard it defined. >> that is a tremendous final question along with the other ones. we will give the speaker is an opportunity to sum up with their comments. >> i think that the society we want to build is a society of balance, a society where the america and the value of mutual obligation is respected, upheld an advanced through government. civil society can play a role, but i think government has a dominant role in ensuring that

we take care of one another. it is also about ensuring a strong free enterprise system. these are not mutually antagonistic ideas. government and business have often worked together, historic they come to create more wealth and opportunity -- a historic to create more wealth and opportunity. we struck the right balance in the early postwar time when we had strong free enterprise but also strong government. i believe we can do it again. that would be one definition i would have of the common good, a balanced society where you have both strong government and dynamic free enterprise. they're certainly not antagonistic inherently. >> it is no surprise that you have no definition of the common good because there is no such thing. there is no such thing as the common good.

all there is is individual good. we can create a society in which individuals drive by pursuing their good, or we can criticize -- individuals thrive by pursuing their good, or we can create a society in which some benefit by other disadvantaged. though some may be unions, politicians, whoever. they are all bad. the idea of sacrificing some people for other people is bad. the kind of society -- [applause] i do not want balance. i do not want a little bit of poison. i do not want a little bit of sacrifice. i do not want a little bit of violation of my freedom. i want to be free. i want you to be freed. i want a society in which those freedoms, this individual

freedoms are protected, and that is the job of government. there was a question about the marketplace. it is really important -- we do not have a free market today. when sprinter whoever treats you badly, that is not the free market. all of these businesses are heavily regulated. there is no competition in cable. there is no competition in these services. there's no competition in ratings agencies. the three are the government granted monopoly and guess what? they do not do very well. what we have is a mixture. lots of government controls and regulations and some freedoms. the reason we have been successful over the last 100 years is because that mixture has not gotten too toxic. the amount of freedom left in our society has allowed business to create the wealth, to create

the products to make the goods that have allowed us to thrive and be successful. but that mixture is becoming more and more and more toxic, to the point where, i agree with the steady, incomes in the united states are flat to declining. economic growth is flat to declining. our freedoms are declining. so, i am an advocate of individual freedoms, individual rights, no common good, government stay out of my life except to protect me from bernie madoff. [applause] >> let me just add a couple of quick words of thanks, first to seattle's own town hall for

hosting this event, for all of you for participating in it tonight. thank you very much. i think all of us would agree that one important role of our government is to allow this kind of criticism and debate to flourish. so i think all of you for joining us. i want to thank for being with us -- i want to thank david callahan and yaron brook for being with us. we have had this debate about the role of government for as long as there have been government. it is a healthy debate. i want to thank our two debaters. please join me in thanking them. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national

cable satellite corp. 2011] whether police can put a gps tracking device on your car without your consent. and at 6:00 the first of to q&a programs with the new york times jill abramson. and looking at prime-time programming across that c-span

networks, join us tonight at 10:00 p.m. eastern for more from our series, the contenders. tonight's program features george wallace. here on c-span2 at 8:00, book tv top programs on presidential biographies. and history tv with a look at american artifacts. look at a map of iowa republican presidential candidates are fanned out across the state campaigning in advance of tuesday's first in the nation primaries. earlier today we spoke with the president of the to moines chamber of commerce about the caucuses. >> we are south of downtown tomn mourn at the location of cream cup cake, a bakery, and we are joined by its owner, christina market. not only does disservice the honor of the business, she is also the president of the downtown des moines chamber.f thank you for joining us. c tell us a little bit about what small>> business and how they benefit from the caucuses coming to town. >> the best thing about thebe caucus for us is that january is

normally are slow season. as soon as christmas is over,ana the new year's resolution, it is normally cold. people don't want to go out. the caucuses coming to town. people are still out, spiritst t are up, and people are just out enjoying each other. what that means for business is more people at our door >> so how much more business as york shop seen since the caucuses? >> we have definitely seen an influx, been very fortunate tobu have several of the candidates come, not the kendis themselves now but they're people come to re adoor, always celebrating birthdays or have a rise in the polls to muzzle the want toce celebrate cupcakes. p they come through. also, we are doing a big eventj3 on january 3rd with kugel for gglmedia to have an obligation to stop and pick up a cupcake the and celebrate the caucus. >> you have a few employees here in your shop. a little bit how small business and the mine has fair because of the economy. >> absolutely. sma

small businesses like myself are the ones that are hiring. we of the ones that are creating cre. to ke it will to keep my employees busy throughout the slow season because of the seaso caucus. >> tell us a little bit then, as the president of the chamber, what has it been like for the i other businesses? have you seen people these? have you seen people transitione into new businesses?g to n >> we have seen a lot of people starting businesses, and not pe necessarily because of the wayne out, but because of the timing.. people i just wanted to try something new, wanted to come back to the morning, and this is the perfect time. tim in a recession, you're only going to hopefully go up and nol down. aot .ecede people stepping out, putting faith in what to do what they're good at. >> that is a bit of your story personally. g >> it is. my story personally is that i have a great corporate job, absolutely.atporate the work of my company and love them. had ad a passion for baking. the timing for me is that ior wanted to make a leap of faith

in january when i knew that it will be slow and that i could actually learn and not just kind of jump into the busy season. but i just wanted to do a love to do. it's been the best decision i ever made. >> because the mind becomes a political hot spot every fourhop years. a small business are, how you look at the caucuses from a business person's perspective?oa >> well, for us we have been wve ramping up, talking about the caucuses since august. how we're going to walk people through the mind. out only for my business, but as a chamber, the actions you wantt to send out. how we help people get arounda . and know about downtown. revamp the website for thepeto t chamber. making sure all our businesses are up today.and also, i added staff in october.n the caucuses were coming, also for the holiday season.for thli and we just planned to continuet to grow. hopefully this is a hot spot for the morning.for >> thirty seconds, what is your: best selling cupcake?

>> ravishing red velvet,g est:hern traditional red velvet cake. >> christina moffett is the honor of cream cup cake, the president of the dumb one downtown chamber. thank you very much. >> the key for having me. >> in the last iowa caucuses in 2008 barack obama won the democratic caucuses and then on to win the presidency. mike huckabee won the republican iowa caucuses but dropped out of the race just two months later. see what a caucus looks like with video from previous years online with betsy's been video library. now through tuesday our c-span cameras are following the 2012 republican candidates at events throughout the state. political guests are taking your calls on washington journal. tuesday night, we still live coverage of two of the caucuses from the central and western parts of the state on c-span. ♪ -- c-span. kendis beaches. for more resources use the

campaign 2012 website. see what the canada said on issues important to you and read the latest from kendis, political reporters, and people like you from social media sites . >> the symposium making it the life and legacy of rambo push coalition president. jackson who gave remarks of the end of the conference turns 70 this year. we start with remarks by reverend al sharpton, about two hours in 20 minutes. >> we want to invite to the states now is a panel discussion who will talk about the legacy who will talk about the legacy of his extraordinary contributions of the american political landscape, talk about his push for civil-rights, is addressing an economic injustice , his stress on social

liberty and civil liberty and his ability to engage people across the racial and sexual engender dynamic to speak about as rare for a sharp and so brilliantly and eloquently spoke of it the rainbow coalition. i invite now and introduce the moderator of our panel. a renowned social activist and an author. the author of a forthcoming book don't come angel. the issue of economic justice for women and speaking of the gender divide in american religion. she is also noted because he was the first chief of staff furred the international trade bureau of operation push. so she worked with reverend

jackson in the early days of that movement in chicago and contributed mightily and since has become a renowned author, activist, and social engineers of graceful movements and events that helped bring together various people across many divines. she is a resident presently of washington d.c., and she runs a bunch of stuff. we are grateful to her today for serving as the moderator. i'm sure reverend jackson is saying something smart. i know he did. right. run the emcee. she is a rap group. there is no doubt about it. and so the author of don't call me angel and god sang soprano, discovering the fear of voice of god, the rev. marcel l dyson.

[applause] [applause] >> this is emotional for me, reverend jackson. because as the first chief of staff of the international trade bureau, as a young moment he did not come into operation push as a civil rights baby, coming from up family that was a political and a social and many wasted not monarchal sir, did not teach my history, but having this rebellious child within the home , you allow me to take this activism from the late michigan to look beyond the shores and see myself and situate myself as an international citizen by your appointment as chief of staff. i remember telling you, you won't remember this before you're running for president in 1984, what would be your legacy. will it be just the man,

reverend jackson. will it be your son, yusuf jonathan jaffe jr. or your daughters? will it be operation push? what i'm hoping that you see today is that the legacy to everyone to whom you have poured some of yourself into so that we can go and run on, not carrying your baton, but carrying the four runners vision of what you saw american and the world should be. ..

who tells us always, keep hope alive. and in order to do that i am going to the welcome to the stage people that have known you for decades, some for a few years and some that you have just met but whom you have impacted in just a few months and i will start with this one who is part of the rainbow now, dr. grace kim. as i call your name come to the stage, as is an associate professor of doctoral theology and the director of the program at morant in theological seminary. her research interest lies in theology and culture and comparative laval theology. she is the author of the holy spirit, dry and the other a model of global and intercultural neurology and the grace of sophia. kim is serving her second term on the american academy of religion, the racial ethnic minority committee and assist

steering committee member on aar comparative theology group and women of color scholarships teaching and accidental confrontation. c. sits on they -- she sits on the editorial board and as a referee for both the journal of race ethnicity and the general religion and popular culture. kim is working on the first and second chronicles, ezra and nehemiah for the commentary series belief, theological, commentary on the bible and kim will be ordained in the presbyterian church comdex sunday morning. we welcome you and congratulate you dr. kim. you can have a seat right there. [applause] next, we have a young professor, doctored james braxton peterson. he is the newly appointed director of africana studies in english at lehigh university. he is also the founder of the

hip-hop scholars and association of hip-hop generation of scholars dedicated to researching and developing the cultural and educational potential of hip-hop. explain that to me. okay, urban and new cultures. peterson has appeared in you may have seen him on "fox news," cbs, msnbc, abc news and espn and various local television networks as an expert on race, politics and popular culture. thank you dr. peterson. [applause] next we have gary flowers. gary flowers is executive director and ceo of the black leadership forum and alliance of national african-american civil rights and service organizations in the united states of america that was founded in 1977. vase in washington the black leadership forum makes leaders of national black organizations

together, forming a coordinated leadership model and legislative -- legislation affecting african-americans. flowers served on the frontlines of american civil rights formation and public policy since 1989 and has -- historic law firm in richmond virginia. prior to the black leadership forum, mr. flowers served as vice president and national director for reverend jackson's rainbow/push coalition from 1997 to 2007 in chicago. he was also one of the people who worked with reverend jackson on education, legal rights and civil social activists. thank you for joining us mr. flowers. [applause] we also have with us jeff johnson. jeff johnson is a commentator of political analysis and culture for msnbc.

he is a commentator on the tom and joy a morning show and the director for the naacp youth division. he is a youth activist and like with -- what reverend sharpton said earlier that without the youth movement, which dr. michael eric dyson so addresses in his classes and in the streets, you know he is a hip-hop intellectual but his intellectualism is also goma activism among many students which also engage, whom he also engaged in the political campaign for now seceding president obama. we thank you for your youth activism, jet. join us shortly will be laura murphy who also has a history with reverend jackson. she is known for advocacy on human rights and civil liberties. she is now in her second tenure as the aclu washington legislative office as director,

a position she held from 1993 to 2005, and because of her coming back to the aclu, she is responsible for the passage of the fair sentencing act of 2010 signed into law by president obama on august 3, 2010 that reduces the sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine and it begins to address some of the racial disparities in the criminal justice system. thank you, panelists. [applause] i would like to start off with the newest member of the circle of reverend jackson's fans, doc or kim. you recently matt reverend jackson. people see reverend jackson as being an american icon but we heard reverend sharpton talk about his affluence around the

world. meeting him, and you being a korean, maybe you want to speak of his universality. we tried calling him and as our own but how did you meet him? how did you see him when you met him not on american soil? >> it was fascinating because i grew up in canada. i'm a canadian citizen and i came down in 2004 to teach at the seminary and growing up in canada i wasn't exposed to that many politicians except for reverend jackson. he is known internationally and i experience that while we were in qatar. there were many people all over the world from over 60 countries who represented this conference, conference on interfaith dialogue and the overwhelming response from everyone was that he is such a hero for many people around the world. that he has given hope for many

people who have injustice against racism, against sexism and it was just wonderful to be part of that experience and to meet him there. >> gary flowers will be joined soon by laura murphy. one thing that was missing an often overlooked within the civil rights movement and even in the activity in which reverend jackson himself participated is a visual persona and the inclusion of women. in their absence can you tell us something about reverend jackson's movement and the importance that women played in his life and his social justice outreach? >> absolutely. first of all dr. dies in thank you for inviting us to this gathering to pay tribute to dr. and reverend sharpton said earlier, the man who transformed the last 25 years of american

society, not just politics. economics, the structure of america. reverend jackson is to credit for that so first thank you. but much like egyptian pharaohs, we note -- as a pharaoh but we don't know there was a duality of leadership in the kingdom kingdom if you will at that time between he and his wife. so out of that duality of leadership, reverend jackson has kept a light all of our status. i serve from 97 to 2007. we always had a distribution of leadership between men and women, so it was not the old male-dominated theocracy of the south in the 1950's and the 1960s. it was as though reverend jackson was looking ahead not only with rainbow but particularly in putting women in positions of leadership, not just for window dressing but

because of recognizing competence and out of that those of us who studied under him have kept the of flame alike. for instance with the black leadership forum we give out awards are for gear. there is a male component and a female component to each aboard symbolizing that duality of leadership and we say our appreciation to dr. reverend jackson. >> can you name some of those woman? >> absolutely. yolande carraway is here today, ms. moore. there is regina thomas. there is lee adultery, linda baskerville, there is let's see who else is here? over the years there has been jan -- kim marcus just left

rainbow/push. but if you look at lexus herman, if you look at a composite of the who's who in black politics the women who come to washington d.c. primarily have come from reverend jackson. >> okay, thank you very much for that. dr. peterson, you are newly installed as the director of africana studies at lehigh university. we cannot pretend that today, while the talk about the rainbow and the sunshine that there was a dark cloud over reverend jackson. there is seemingly a misconception, or maybe it's not and you can tell us that he has been ostracized on the political climate of today. can you address that issue or the possibility of how that could have happen? >> sure. i would just say that this is also, i want to thank you for inviting me and thank you for

having me here. this is an extraordinary moment to be here to honor you on this day to be a part of the proceedings here today. you know, reverend sharpton did a great job of sort of explicating a front row, up close view of reverend jackson and the emergence and his impact and because of my age and my generation and because i just didn't have that kind of political access, my vision of reverend jackson is a bit from a far. and so from my perspective, i don't see that austria station in the same way because in my view reverend jackson has had a direct impact on me and my wife, my father, mike or others, and my sisters and i want to break down a few of those things so you can understand how i see it. 84 was a really important time and in fact the slogan of jesse run was a powerful slogan in my household that was around that time, i was about 13 years old,

that my parents planted a seed in my brain that i could be president of the united states and i took this very seriously. the proof of that was reverend jackson's first presidential campaign so what we can talk about this, the inner workings of the movement and i think that's really important but it's also a important to capture the way that impact radiates out of the world so for young teenager in inner-city newark to have in my mind that i could actually be president of the united states was a way that i sort of bought reverend jackson's life and legacy into my own personal life in an immediate sense. sometimes parents pay -- say this and that to their kids, you can be an astronaut, you can be -- but he made it believable for me at a young age. in 1988 i was an over achiever in high school and i went to duke university during that summer of the 1988 democratic national convention that was very strange for me to be in the south, to be at a white institution and trying to figure out my politics and understand

my trajectory of the young young scholar and i remember watching reverend jackson's speech at the dnc and is still gives me chills to think about it but when he articulated the concept of the quilts as a metaphor for not just rainbow but a way for which we the people of the world can come together. in that moment reverend jackson's impact was seared into my consciousness in such a way i could never think of it outside of a political process for me personally or for black people more generally. i can't even explain to me how it felt. mug me to tears. i can explain to how that speech empowered me in a challenging environment is a high school student on the campus of duke university for the first time in the ways in which southern slopes of our black folks in the lead white institution saw black students. ' speech had an extraordinary effect on me and it really challenge me from that moment not to think about the ways in which i could become a leader. so as we fast-forward to 2008,

you know there was a lot of things going on i think in my mind and my heart with respect to the emergence of president obama but i never comment still don't, separate the legacy of reverend jackson from that of barack obama. is impossible for me to do that and if you think about it that way me as a young kid being president i could have that thought without reverend jackson and the other side, president obama releasing that dream in many ways so the ways in which those things coalesced in my life are completely inseparable. i remember when president obama was inaugurated and at the time i was living in lewisburg pennsylvania which is a very homogenous area pennsylvania. they say pennsylvania's philadelphia and pittsburgh and alabama in between. i was living that kentucky or alabama in between and on the evening of the inauguration or the evening of the election, i was sitting in my bed with my wife and my two children, and we were watching this happen and i

remember when as president obama and his family came to the stage, this extraordinary emotional moment and i remember my son you know and my son was at the time about 10 years old and he was aware of reverend jackson and he was aware of reverend sharpton and aware of dr. kidding and when, at the first family came onto the stage my son's first response was fear because they felt like they are -- they were so exposed and he was concerned, what is going to happen? are they going to be shot and it was such a tragic moment that my son's connection to the first black president was are they going to assassinate him? i remember when the camera panned to reverend jackson and the tears were pouring down his eyes. after all the ways in which they try to ostracized him from that process, they try to cherry-pick things and make it seem as if you are anti-the first black president. when they showed that clip of those tears rolling down your

eyes, everyone in my family started to cry. and i think the power of that moment will reproduce on the stage but i can tell you that, excuse me. [applause] i can tell you from that moment my son understood the power of that moment and his fear went away. his fear went away and we just absorbed it and lived in that moment so it was very difficult for me to extract reverend jackson from my sense of american policy in the world and i can tell you i wouldn't be here is director of africana studies at lehigh university as the mentee of dr. eric michael dyson is someone who has lectured in these halls multiple times without the legacy of reverend jesse jackson. [applause]

>> thank you.here peterson. we are joined now by laura murray and i will give you an opportunity to catch her breath, laura, okay? jeff i want to ask you a question about the youth movement and your outreach to get youth involved in the things that pertain to the issues. we heard dr. peterson talk about his son you know and his own life and how emotional he was over the possibility of having reverend jackson -- in my history which is absolutely ludicrous to me. what is the utility of reverend jackson now for youth beyond the fact that we can say that he was the man who we remember was the first black man who ran for president. what is his utility now in the midst of some of the quagmire that happen within the political arena? >> well i think the utility is complicated by what i think dr. peterson went into in a very

à la quint way that i would like to go into any less eloquent way. and i want to say this and i think it's very important for you to hear me out, because the initial statement is going to be problematic. i think that the worst thing, think the most challenging thing that jesse jackson senior ever had to deal with was not being assassinated. and the reality is, is when you look at those that created similar models and their own generation, most of their lives were cut short, and so when you look at king being portrayed on broadway and his weakness is being manipulated through a fictitious opportunity of stage play, or malcolm's quote unquote issues being laid out within an academic text that can be argued, people were able to

watch a jesse jackson senior become human and that is an incredibly difficult thing to do when you have been deified, so here was this man, master of civil rights, celebrity in many cases who had done what no one else had done before, who would mobilize people that others were not able to mobilize, who created inspiration in young and old alike who now became human before a 24 hour news cycle to add little integrity to history and were only concerned about ratings and never had a leader in our community had to do with what reverend jackson had to deal with, transitioning into the 24 hour news cycle, becoming human so whether it was his personal issues, whether it was what he said on an open mic, and the thing that got me was, people are becoming angry at reverend jackson for being reverend jackson. i am confused.

he challenged every president since his birth. he has been critical about what he believed to be right and wrong, even in his own support and so i was somewhat confused about this notion that now we want reverend jackson to be a robot versus him being reverend jackson and so i think those are things that we don't talk about very often. one is the humanity of an individual that actually has to live to be critiqued first as those that critique them during their death. so for young people to challenge -- the challenge now is, how do they see beyond their parents critique of reverend jackson, when so much of the media doesn't want to give you the opportunity to see who reverend jackson is in 2011, so when i'm in cleveland with reverend jackson during a congressional lack caucus panel, that he didn't have to come to, he is fair and is the only one on stage dealing with the substantive voter protection

issues before anybody else because no black caucus can even talk about it so even in the midst of no media coverage of reverend jackson when people are calling him a media hound he continues to be consistent in addressing the folks justice issues that he has been addressing since he had the limelight. that is what i think young people need to be reminded of by those of us who are bridges to another generation, not highlighting any personal mistakes in the name of humanity, by saying here is an individual that continues to be addressing the issues that affect youth so i can point to reverend jackson and say look he's talking about the issues of 194 and senate bill 5 before people in your community who are supposed to be talking about it are talking about a because they are still trying to decide what side of the -- they are going going to be on based on who is giving them a check so this utility in 2011 is not connected to the legacy of all that he has

done. it's connected to the fact that he continues to address substantive and fragmented issues providing solutions even when those that should he listening aren't listening and we need to be bridges to young people to say look, there is a talents diet and a conference of community of activists, young and old alike and reverend jackson is a part of that voice now as he ever was during the 1960s, 70s and 80s. [applause] >> thank you. thank you panelists for showing us he is not prince harming rather than prince charming anbar and doors and she worked work on advocacy for disparities on issues pertaining to our civil rights at the aclu, how important has reverend jackson been in your life in informing and empowering your position as director of the washington aclu?

>> wow, where do i begin? imad reverend jackson when i was a teenager and he came to baltimore during the riots and he was calming throughout american cities where they were on fire after the assassination of dr. came. he campaigned for my brother billy, who ran for mayor unsuccessfully in baltimore, and i remember you know, i am somebody and i am somebody was not a trite phrase. i am somebody was reverend jackson's message to rioters that we don't have to burn up our own cities to declare our selves as equal human beings, and i remember feeling as a young black woman who grew up with very very complex man, my father, my great grandfather founded the african-american newspapers that were in five

cities so we chronicled black men in our family and black women. and i remember being deeply touched by i am somebody so i knew i had a connection to this person because i felt empowered by his words and i saw him embrace my brother, but then when i worked for willie brown when he was speaker of the california assembly, willie brown became chairman of jesse jackson's 88 campaign committee and he dispatch me from los angeles to chicago to work for reverend jackson. and briefly i became his finance director for the 1988 presidential campaign. the thing that touched me so was how his own bliss charisma and energy blinded us together and so the finance committee which i reported two, was made up of earl grey and ed lewis, the

founder of essence magazine and tom who created one of the first black ever tracing firms and people who had gotten auto dealerships or mcdonald's because reverend jackson had taken the case to court -- to fortune 500 companies that they had to do business with black men and black women and here were all these empowered black men and women who would not have come together and understood the importance of raising money for candidates, had jesse jackson not connected the trajectory of running for public office to the outcomes of policy decisions that would affect their business decisions and their lives. so the thing that i love about reverend jackson is the community that he created around him, his legacy cannot be erased ecosphere by the grace of god go

the rest of us because we were given titles and opportunities. we were told to go out and ask people for meetings and we were told to valley people. we were told to register to vote and he was empowering of us, and he had tremendous respect for the black women in his midst. i felt respected and embraced by reverend jackson on an intellectual level, on an emotional level and on a political level and then the second time we worked for reverend jackson was when he had a big operation, rainbow/push based in d.c., and i had to appeal as head of the aclu washington office to black leaders about the disparities of sentencing the twin crack and powder campaign. when we told that mothers of the community, that their kids were the only kids who were going to

jail for crack, that one kid used crack but why kids weren't going to jail. they said held to the know, that's not right in reverend jackson was the first national leader to be a drum major for justice for the right of black people not to be subjected to these inhumane mandatory minimum sentences, and we walked the halls of congress together, and we lobbied senators find who basically -- when we were working on the crime bill in 1994. we lobbied carol moseley who wanted to argue that young african-americans needed to be incarcerated at a greater rate and i have seen his rejection. i have seen his perseverance. i have seen his ability to see and to feel into the future about how we could be, so

clearly if he had not done what he had done i don't think we would have as many black business people. i don't think we would have as many black elected officials and i know for sure we would not have had it lacked resident, because he paved the way. .. >> because i don't know anybody

else who could go to another country and free an american soldier. i don't know anybody else who could go and enlist white farmers and union workers to be on his presidential campaign. i don't know anybody else, and there are lessons here about courage, about daring, about perseverance, about heart, and about getting a punch in taking a punch. you know quacks he's been hit so hard, i remember in 1984 they said was going to happen to jesse next? and this was going to happen now? then the wall street project eckerd. they said what -- you know, they need to get over this. we are complex people capable of rebounding as much as bill clinton or anybody else. and we need a court to teach the element of this development to other people so that he can be inspired.

and there should be a lesson plan, and we contribute to it. i just find him a remarkable, engaging, exciting human being that i, i have been so, so honor to work with throughout my career. [applause] >> laura, you know, there's a scripture, and we often see in the black church is why we are praying, god answered. michael was teaching that class at georgetown university. the reason why we're able to come here today. maybe they can package it and send it from -- >> i did mean any disrespect. >> i want to package and reproduce, and i want chapters in the book that we can analyze the different aspects of his whole life because his whole life is an inspiration. >> i agree. [applause] in other words, he is a page of newspaper. is something we need to read about. but i also said the reverend

jackson -- as the jn, jackson international network. because you mentioned it briefly about him going over to rescue soldiers, you know, during i think right after desert storm. if i'm not mistaken. i know i had a conversation with reverend jackson always trying to pull his coattail when he and michael are not talking come to talk about libya and what's happening in northern africa. i know he calls us at checking our phone bill from switzerland or sweden or south africa or latin america, the caribbean, that he really is j.i.n. because reverend jackson, our international policies is understood by our national predicament. we forget this ship is tied to international community that is undermining all american citizens and possibly the world. we will go back to my international citizen, dr. kim, and ask you this question as a scholar your change of the first and second chronicles and the

book of -- and it talks about redeeming the faithful. it's talking about possibly the profit. given what you've heard today, since you've known doctor reverend jackson families, how do you think your studies to the person called reverend jackson? and it relates to the work that you also as an activist for korean women in your studies and as a pure activist as well? >> that is a big loaded question. when i look at, a lot of asian-american history, asian american theology, and when i studied that, you know, united states is the land of immigrants with immigrants coming in from europe who went through ellis island to grab a asian americans who came into the angel island. the difference, europeans that came through ellis island, they just did humans, wrote their names. they were documented and then were sent into the country. that asian-americans that came

to angel island, goes like a prisoner they were there for days, sometimes months, sometimes years. and when people left asia, they tried to send the most educated, the healthiest and so forth. but when it got to angel island they were done. this was the beginning of i think the racism, the beginning of sexism. the subordination. the women were sent into farm work doing hard labor all day long. and the men were not well off either. so they were used as cheap labor. so when i think about the transfix his roots in the land of the united states of america, it is with a lot of pain that i study this. when i think about the pain, i can't think of any real strong asian-americans are that rose up from our community that can speak to the pain, address the racism, address coordination,

addressed the other that has been happening throughout the asian-american history. in the united states. so when i think about when i can't get any leader can any political leader, a social activist, any religious leader that really spoke an address these issues, it really saddens me. but when i look at the life of reverend jesse jackson, i think with this movement, with the rainbow/push coalition, that he wasn't just addressing the asian-american, just african-american community, but all communities. and i think the person of asian-american racial ethnic background that we can embrace him as our leader, someone who breaks down barriers and works for social justice, not just for the african-american community, for the asian community, for the latino committee but the

hispanic committee and so forth. when i study, it's talking about purely, that when the israelites were exiled and when they were brought back into the land, they were striving for purity. so those, the foreign women that were married, they were sent out. they were exiled and they were taken out of the community. when i think about purely, i wonder how much coming at them as his aside we strive for purity but i don't know if there is any kind of purity. and so when i do my own study, i actually embrace, that together when the are people who can come together of all races, that people can get married together, that people can form friendships together, that even within, we can embrace people who are of other faith. that we work more than hybridity. i think everybody is what we as

americans as i should strive for a not so much purely because there's never been purity. there is no pure asian-american. there is no pure anybody. so i think as americans aside that we need temporary hybridity, that we need to welcome hybridity, and that is a new form to build the society on. >> thank you very much. gary, i want to ask you this. i remember when i worked at operation push and reverend jackson had the kennedy forms are he would have conventions and conferences, that there was a swelling of black leadership which included free to come her mother from high with the very instrumental in campaigning for reverend jackson in iowa and her mother being a part of the civil rights movement that spawned activities of dr. king in the midwest and in the south. but it seems to me that when you

have those meetings today, that everyone is not as cohesive and you know, on the same drumbeat as i saw before. am i. mib nostalgia? and racing something wrong? every man for himself now and, you know, a linear formation of black leadership more than a cohesive bounty or sql -- circle? am i wrong? am i missing something? >> the genius of president jackson is is he's the amalgam of dr. king's articulation and ella baker's organization. so, he trained us as staffers to have a methodology about social justice and direct action differences, we would move in first with research. statistics. then we would educate. then we would negotiate and then demonstrate and if necessary,

reconciliation now, all of those, something you work for reverend jackson here to learn how to rhyme. no. but reverend jackson used to liberation and rhyme was able to take dr. king's methodology which is take a complex issue, reduce it to seven seconds because in the '60s you're going to be on television for about seven seconds. you have to make sense to people in the kitchen, living room, and seven seconds. when reverend jackson does that, he can make a simple the letter ration, the poor pay more, actually have -- i don't think there's any more dissension. or balk as a nation of them before. but the genius of reverend jackson is he has trained us to be able to look at people in what we call coalition politics. and take people in organizations who all have a role to play. one of the things i've done issued from the model of a black

leader tom and everyone following from there, to a circular sense of leadership where we all our leaders on the circle with a radiant toward progressive public policy. and as we do that, if i am, you know, the leader in transportation i am the leader of the group for that issue. and i think in such we can take reverend jackson's lesson and go forward. >> in taking that lesson i remember during the 2008 presidential campaign everyone was talked about how we had this great youth movement that that particular campaign spawned the use become more electrified about the electrifying man at the time, send obama, now president obama. but i know that you can tell us, along with a few of us here in the audience, the degree to which help rock the vote that youth activism came long before, i mean with reverend jackson for

sure but because people have short memory, that even if we go to rock the vote, how can we continue to rock the vote today, given the complacency and complexity that young people are now finds himself when hope hasn't changed, and when faith is spelling that because of the president but because of the government at whole? who can have that charisma to continue to rock the vote among young people following the jesse jackson model? >> i think the charisma as the focus is part of the problem. and so, i think that when reverend sharpton was speaking come he spoke about a james bevel, and look at a reverend jackson model, a reverend jackson model comes out of a tradition of methodology, of training, not just moving. and i think will be transitioned to, we've had this conversation before, when you start looking

at rock the vote and rap the vote and hip-hop, action network, these were not moving for young people were trained. they were movements were young people were moved. and the problem which culminated with president obama is that you agenda people invested in the process of an election but not a process of a movement. and so because they were not trained and insert into institutional infrastructure, that said this is not about getting president barack obama elected, this is about supporting an ideology which part of that is seeing somebody being in office that will support the policy agenda that you have, not the sum total of the been getting this person in office. because what happened is everybody then look for somebody else to be the change instead of them being plugged into an say i have to be the change her clothes or talk about what we need in 2012, and this is a macro and micro conversation.

i think we need to see institutions doing a better job of training progressive young people to be part of local movements where they are. i think it's about supporting local organizations that are already doing good work and adding capacity to what they are doing through data, through research, and through training. but i think we need to see more institution. so reverend jackson, i would, i think there needs to be a reverend jesse jackson senior institute that begins to address some substitute training and develop an of young people to ensure that even when the personality is gone, because i think what kim brings up, she talked about being discouraged that she could identify and it am asian -- asian-american leader. so the question is, where we in many cases looking too much at one individual to be the person that was going to lead us into

the bye and bye as opposed to looking to a communal infrastructure process that said yes, we have individuals that are charismatic that provide the vision that motivate people, but it is a institutions to ensure that there's direction, the people plugged into a process so now i'm a piece on a chessboard, not looking for somebody to do all of the work. that's how you begin to change. and young people are looking for the. young people are not looking for someone to roll in from d.c. or roll in from new york or row international organization to change their committee. they are looking for people to believe in the work they are already doing, to plug them in, to local apparatus to be able to do it and to be able to support him from a national space. it's individuals like reverend jackson and others that has the ability as a result of all the work that they have done through their own institution to be able to provide support, infrastructure support, capacity building, and training to young people at a local level so that 30 years from now when, 50 years

from now, reverend jackson, when reverend jackson senior is not here, there is a methodology in training that more than a curriculum that is being curriculum that is being taught through someone like a doctor dyson but is a hard-core institute that is producing more and more young soldiers that are prepared in their own way at the local bubble to do the very thing that reverend jackson did before anybody knew the name reverend jackson. >> this is not new to reverend jackson. citizenship, education was a part of the '60s but it was training every saturday at operation push in chicago. when you're going through not only the three branches of government but how do you mobilize people above? how do you register them to go? and once they go, how do you keep them engaged? so i grieve with the jacksonian institute. reverend jackson like no one else is uniquely qualified with his 50 years of experience on the ground and trained, and

dr. king, absorbed dr. king's methodology to train public policy students coming out of kennedy school at harvard, to train first year state legislatures, to train seminary graduates. because reverend jackson taught us you can't teach what you don't know. you can't lead where you don't go. so as jeff said many of the kids said, zealousness in 2008, but they were not trained. and so, therefore, they just dissipated after the election. so i think reverend jackson have set the model been ignored they had activism without -- >> we need to return to the jacksonian institute. >> i want to ask james peterson this question. we talked about the political social activism but we also, what they're saying as an intellectual property how would you institute this intellectual property when the newly established position and director of studies at lehigh university, do you see a chance

of something like that, that they're calling for censure at the possibly to take that to reduce? >> absolutely. i mean, i have seen dr. dyson's curriculum. i think it's brilliant. i don't know if i have the wherewithal to actually teach because i think it requires a sort of working knowledge of history that i don't have yet by more than willing to continue to work at it. to do that i think, you know, want to backup a little bit, reverend dyson, and just say that i do think you're not being as i do think that there are some distinct things to consider with young people today versus folks from even 20, 30 years ago. and jeff is right that there are young folk that organizing and doing it, but they're doing them in different ways. and i think your point is well taken that young folk will do things sometimes more literally than they do holistically or cyclically. part of that is because the world in which we live is different and the ways in which we are to organize going forward will be quite different as well.

so we have to understand our history but also meet some of those young folk where they are. in terms of him and me, i would like to have an opportunity to work with whatever the steering committee is going to be to establish the reverend jesse jackson is it to an opera all the resources i have at my disposal at little lehigh university to make those things come to fruition. there are number of different things that have to happen. i think the one we have to understand the activism and organization in the 21st century, it still going to be on the grant and will still be hand-to-hand but it will also involve social media. it will also involve understand the ways in which critical media literacy are sort of gusto to the ways in which young people understand the world, right? so we need for young people to understand the ways in which information is sort of directed at them on various platforms, internet, radio, tv, music, videogames, et cetera said it. the way they communicate as now tax and different forms of communication. so asking our arms around those things i think we should be part of the mission of establishing.

i wouldn't want a jesse jackson institute that was just looking back or. i would want a jesse jackson institute that continues to look forward. i think those things would be key, not a line what he says i'm jesse jackson on the balcony when dr. king got shot, right? people think that is some passing off an allusion to an important historical figure. but listen to what he is saying. going back to just point, not about charisma necessary but think of it more as trying to represent the ethos of a large body of folks who listen to his music. jesse jackson on the balcony when team got shot? now he wants you to make his relationship to biggie small, to pocket and other heroes of this generation and there are the possibly thing shut down from the. he has written a very, very important voice but what does that mean? somebody is lost. those folks don't know the direction to go and don't know -- i've got to be honest with

you, i'm being so tired of the hate amongst young people. right? i talked to dr. dyson but it's all done because you guys are going to see peterson, why did he go after that person that wacom are what happened to peterson? he used to be a nice guy. now he's angry. because i'm frustrated, invisible and by young people thinking literally. young people are much more apt to hate other folk and other leaders and other young leaders are all leaders are other professors look like themselves than they are to either be self-critical or to critique the sort of infrastructure and the systems that are out to challenge their ways of life. so that is to be one of the more disheartening components of even the young activist and young scholar that we see. so for me, a reverend jesse jackson has got to be able to capture all those things, capture the ways in which new media will be a part of would've movements there are going for. capture the ways in which young people do identify with cultural

movements like hip-hop and how do sort of pars hip-hop in such a way that doesn't demean or diminished young folks expense with a but use their sense of empowerment and voice through to actually do some things that to an pragmatic in terms of political move and making progress in a society. we've got to have a complicated sense of we the institutional building works, and i want to say that i'm committed to the cause but i think you already know that. but i am commit to the cause. whatever resources i have at my disposal, i'm down with you on that these. >> did you get that on the record? we will pray about. the michael dyson well-publicized. yolande before you leave, you will get sponsors for it. [laughter] barbara, he will help to legalize this and get the paper together. now laura, hope you kept your point, i didn't as you, get a? >> i just want to make sure that there's a strong role for women in the training, you like maxine waters.

who have also been very enduring. but i do have a concern, one of the things i saw happen in the civil rights movement with reverend jackson, without sharpton, with andy young, with john lewis, is that a lot of us felt that our key to equality and justice would be our ability to a sin to electoral office. and i have a great concern about the stability of black justice institutions, whether it's the naacp, the legal defense fund, the lawyers committee, the foundation funding is shrinking up. i don't want us to not have this institute for jesse jackson but also don't want us to get caught up in the cold personality easy. i want us to talk about how does rainbow/push carry on, how does national action network carry-on, how does the national negro college fund carry on? one of the things i think that kids got so upset about is that

they've worked for barack obama but they didn't get jobs in the obama administration, but they were trained to be, they should have jobs in the black leadership forum's. they should have jobs, but we don't have the interest in giving and sustaining those organizations. so i think we need to focus on our need to build institutions while we talk about our leaders, to. >> is this mic open? is alive, is a hot? i would like to get opportunity with the panelists agreeing to maybe take questions from the audience. can we have that for a few minutes? [inaudible] >> yes, you made any comments or statements? come to the mic back a couple points -- >> he is speaking. in a couple points going backwards. young people thinking in a linear fashion, the genius of senior, he taught us circumferential he. so they have you all looked at

tracks of star trek, he plays chess are three different levels at the same time. so he may give you an assignment or you're looking at him like that doesn't make any sense, it is already permeated 16 was down, and so it's a circle way of thinking. the other way is the young people are disenchanted i think with the obama administration, some, not all, but i had two students at harvard and a give them an assignment of books to read to we could discuss your mr. falcon your stock about reading emma we don't have to read everything. we have opinions, we can block. i'm like, no, to believe in something you don't understand according to stevie wonder is to be superstitious. and so, therefore, if you have not read francis for non-come if you have not read the african origins of civilization, if you're not read sonia sanchez, if you're not read, you can talk

to me about advancing the theory because you don't even have, you always a fog, and so i want to leave that point that even though we can't idolize, make this a cold worship free have to a certain body of training, a certain body of information before you can discuss. >> before you, excuse me, sister -- you will speak loudly? [inaudible] >> make sure you are aware that -- i'm sorry. i forgot her name. spoke about what happened with the disparity between the drug between coke and crack. in 1999, here in washington, d.c., it was close and at that time they shipped

15,000 -- i'm sorry, 11,000 young men between the ages of 15-24 to oklahoma. because in the majority of they were caught carrying crack. if you two ounces of crack he went to jail, mandatory for five years. you could have two pounds of cocaine before you went to jail. who smoked crack and who's not cocaine? when the young man went to prison, for five years, bad things happen to them. these were young men who have not had a full, mature life. and they were introduced to a different lifestyle. things happen to them and they fought -- >> do have a question? >> well, i just want to say that we need to be aware of our history, period, and be able to connect with some of -- there

are a lot of people, a lot of young people who want to do something but they don't know how come and many of us, there's a big. i met jesse jackson while i was at howard, and i was concerned about what i could do. and being a woman, back in the city, and he told me not to worry about being a woman. he told me to be concerned about developing might intellectual property. so i would have something worth sharing. >> all right, thank you very much. thank you so much. young lady, thank you. >> good morning. i'd like to thank dr. dyson for pulling this together. my name is kate pierson and i want to just briefly speak on an area of reverend jackson's legacy, that i haven't heard and may not be that well known. back in 1993 when the resolute

dusk operation was established to potentially read about all of the assets that had been poured into the u.s. treasury as a result of the record number of savings and loans closures, a small group of us approach reverend jackson and asked him to work with us to pass mandatory legislation to require any contracts given by that agency to go to minority contractors. if you at $200,000 or more that you had to give a contract to minority subcontractors. and i just want to say that during that time, reverend jackson worked with us tirelessly for 18 months straight. we went on capitol hill, i don't know if you remember this, reverend, but we went, we testified on capital before the

senate banking committee. we went around the country and organized minority sewer in asset recovery. we held trade conference first of its kind. at the time i headed a trade organization of minority contractors. and this was before anybody had even heard of the fdic, or knew of its, function only. and they had not, they did not have black people above the secretary level in these positions. as result of those efforts, that legislation did pass, and now anybody who, even though the resolution trust corporation was grandmother did out of existence, those rules remain with the fdic, the office of the currency, comptroller of the currency, and a whole lot of agencies that are still unknown. but that was 18 years ago, and

it was, it was an incredible effort. it was a groundbreaking in an area that had never been, that black people were not even visible in. so i think that heart of his legacy should also be recognized. because it wasn't publicized. you know, i mean, the fact that it lives on. >> i think that part of his legacy is encapsulated with his vision, the wall street project. dr. king's last statement was the next phase of the civil rights movement is economic justice. on april 3 in mason temple the night before he was assassinated talked about a redistribution. at the sanitation workers are getting heat and giving pain, he said jesse, ice cream, coca-cola, selective patronage. out of that model of dr. king, once again structure, once again methodology, reverend jackson

creates and launches with janice mathis and, a host of business leaders across the country the wall street project, to talk about in to shift to economic justice. we did a study with the wall street project six years ago. we look at asset manager across the country, public pension funds. of 20 states. all of the state from 19 states were below one half of 1% minority management of asset. the state that had 11%, illinois. why? where is operation push, rainbow/push not locate? in illinois. there is no coincidence that because of the political heat, organizational skills and all that he learned from dr. king, he was able to poured into economic justice. so luke apple and others in chicago are asset managers at 11%. >> okay, and i think there's that economic development that

reverend jackson, the reason when i go to the clinton global initiative, he's one is not the only black leader at those kind of forums as was the world economic forum, because i know he follows the money trills across the water. again, given its international acuity about how the economics of the world, global economic situation really how it impacts us. we are running out of time. i would like, is this a question? will be taken and be brief. we'll ask like his church and testimony. i just want to say i wasn't challenging. this preceded all of that. another area of legacy i think you're all great and qualified. >> this is like a black church figure giving testimony. nothing wrong with your testimony. we thank you for your constitution. thank you. if you can make a quick question, please. >> yes, i can turn it into a question. i just want to give the moment, -- my name is bernice jenkins.

i want to point out another major part of reverend jackson's history, and very important to d.c. residents is he was our first statehood senator. we voted for statehood in 82. after that, very little happen. he came and brought his prominence and his fame and his power and organization in the mid '90s, and showed a light on the fact that d.c. residents are on the last plantation. still the last colony, and i would like to ask reverend jackson, now that this has been revived, now that our mayor has been a risk, now that we're having some civil disobedience, i'm going to trial on the 15th of november, because of protesting. would he like to bring, come back and run for our state at the center? that might be get in trouble with some people, but --

[applause] i would like him to think about that. >> is it a d.c. vote teacher u? >> no, this is council member brown tom rowley outcome action on tuesday, tomorrow, the steps of the wilson building will have a rollout of further stated initiative. so everybody is invited to attend 30 tomorrow. >> that's a very important, i'm glad you brought that up. got it glad you got a chance to speak is he's always been about the concert of representation, taxation without representation. now the i live in d.c. i am hot on that issue, so thank you very much. i'm going to ask for a brief closing statements from our panelists at this moment. i will give you each a minute to summarize or to say last words regarding the legacy and the life of reverend jesse louis jackson, sr. dr. kim, please be? it's a pleasure to be here and it's a pleasure to study, and i'm very grateful to you for

what you have done for all the different communities in the united states, and what you will continue to do. and hope that we will be able to live on this legacy through books and institutes and so forth. so thank you for all your work and your continuous work in a caloric? >> i would just like to tell people to remember that reverend jackson has affected so many people across the economic spectrum. he fought for food stamps, and has become an institution during the johnson administration. i meet young people whose fathers are auto dealers, whose mothers are on board of trustees. and he fought for those people to get access to fortune 500 corporations. he put the rights of gays and lesbians in his 1984 democratic national committee speech, and so i don't want this just to be about black people.

i want this legacy of reverend jackson to be remembered as a legacy as an advocate for humanity and for justice, for international respect, and touching the lives of millions of americans in untold ways. that story needs to be told. >> thank you, laura. >> we could've had one people up there and 100 hours and we still would have been able to capture reverend jackson's legacy. i did want to make that clear. we don't have enough time, hopefully we will continue these conversations. one of the things i think that was left out is there's a lot of private pain that goes along with public mentorship, right? if you think about the relationship between reverend sharpton and reverend jackson or reverend jackson a dr. king, anyone has been made toward housing in tea pickers are some of the challenges. what we need going forward is we need a good leadership succession plan. just in honor of the two great coaches, coach thompson and coach thompson was here today.

we need great coaches to help to pass along some of this information. that's really the way i think i see going forward have to good relationships across generations and transmit some the information of what we talk about about an incident can do that but folks worked and made to mentoring, not getting paid to mentor which is mentoring out of the kindness of their heart. >> thank you, dr. peterson. mr. johnson? >> i would just like to say thank you. first time i met you in a more intimate level was in the back room before you and others were to speak with people for the american way during 2000 in florida. and i introduced myself and you ignored me. and i'm like, damn. [laughter] he won't even speak. and what it said to me was that you and some others clearly come from the school where there's

some work you got to put in before i acknowledge you. you in the room, cool. but before i acknowledge you, there's some work you need to do. and as i have been consistent and come up, you have been willing to give more and more of your insight and your time. as you have said that i in some way have proven that i wasn't there for any other reason than to do the work. so i would like to thank you for that accountability. and i think the fact that you have never been afraid to be unwavering about the fact that i'm not going to analogy just because you showed up. i'm only going to acknowledge if you're willing to do the work. and, unfortunately, we need more of that within this space because they're so we people to get on television twice and believe that they are now a superstar. but have never been in the trenches once. so thank you so much for your accountability, and the forcefulness with which he said look, if you're not coming to work, don't come at all. thank you so much for that applaud that.

>> and gary flowers. >> reverend jackson used to teach us that can't get off tasha he also said that people in today's generation are picking up fruit from trees they did not shake. so thank you for being a tree shaker but also thank you for training us, because it was nothing more complementary after our staff a project for reverend not to say anything. that means you knock it off the box. ray anderson is here, reverend grainger browning who is here. leslie is here. those of us who ask he worked for reverend, thank you for coming up. thank you for investing in us, and we will continue to carry your legacy in changing the structure of things as dr. king trained you. and to the students at large, dr. king trained reverend jackson. reverend jackson trained as. red, yellow, brown, black or white, we are all precious in

god's sight. so don't look at the civil rights movement as dr. dyson said as a black thing, but as a progressive thing. that's how we can go forward. >> i guess -- think you very much, panelists applaud that. >> reverend jackson, i guess what we're saying a. as a moderator, and was, to use your phraseology on this is that your the man for every season to your the man with rhyme and reason. thank you very much for your life and your legacy. [applause] >> dr. dyson? >> thank you. [applause] >> don't leave. please, please do not lead or you're going to miss one of the great treats of your life. i want to thank the panel for all the great work that they did up here today, no doubt about

it. for the extraordinary work that they did and for the insight that they gave us, and as dr. peterson said, we could stand a very long time and try to deconstruct the legacy of reverend jackson and it wouldn't be enough time. but i want to thank reverend marcia dyson for expertly shepherding that panel through some critical areas of reverend jackson's life and legacy. now we have the opportunity and since dr. peterson mentioned them went to mention both of the great coaches who are here. coach thompson at coach thompson. j. t-3 and his father or coach thompson and his son, let's give them some love here, georgetown. [applause]

>> and i know reverend jackson appreciates especially coach thompson presents and critical role, not only as a coach but as a human being and as a man who actually made a tremendous contribution to reverend jackson's campaigns, and his struggles in his crusades, but also in mentoring young men, and women, to become extraordinary members of our society. now, it is my pleasure to introduce to you the reverend doctor frederick haynes iii. is one of the most x-rated preachers. we tossed around the word genius here today, but when you have such talent, in the house, you've got to acknowledge what it is but and you say that dr. haynes is a rhetorical genius is really not to go as far as we can go to speak about

his leadership, his captivating oratory, his activism and his extraordinary pastoring of one of the great churches in america. he pastors what has been termed a mega church of nearly 15,000 people in dallas, texas, the friendship-west baptist church. he took that church from a relatively small group of people to the multiple thousands that are represented there, but they do such extraordinary ministry to the community and to the nation. they fight for racial justice. they fight for social and economic parity. dr. haynes himself has devoted himself to transforming the lives of those whose backs are against the wall and those were disenfranchised. he has been there now for nearly 30 years. he is a well-trained young men,

passionate -- bachelor degree and a doctor of ministry degree from the graduate theological foundation. he is also a radio show host, and come anything an extraordinary fashion, has revived for this generation the fusion of political insight and analysis, spiritual of human and a kind of commitment to a prophetic model of ministry that is sorely needed in a time when the prosperity gospel has absorbed all of the intellectual and theological space. now, when this man is preaching throughout the country, and he preaches a lot outside of his own church, he's like a rock star. i go to hear him, as often as again. almost like a jay-z, condi ticket to get into the church because he is just that hard.

he is that popular. literally thousands of people flocked to hear him in every city. he goes to your about to understand why, but is deep and profound commitment to the principles of humility and the practice of prophetic ministry have made him one of the great geniuses, not only of the african a mean chicken, but of american sacred rhetoric. and one of the great leaders of his generation for the social justice movement that reverend jackson has so brilliantly pioneer. i present to you then, none other than the reverend doctor frederick douglas haynes the third gym where the extraordinary members of our community come and we are blessed to have him here today. dr. haynes. [applause] thank you so much. this is such all expired experience for me, and i want to express my appreciation to doctor michael eric dyson for

not only his friendship, and i want to put in parentheses, i think we are friends, but i want to thank them for the amazing way that he models for me and for so many what it means to unite in holy wedlock both spirit and scholarship. he is indeed one of the amazing voices of our time, and so i appreciate so much his brilliance. he is an intellectual with a capital i, and our world is a better place because he has made it sexy to be an intellectual. he has got it like that. and so i appreciate him so much for the warmth of our relationship and friendship. he is the brother that i have never had, and i appreciate that about him. now, in parenthesis, i said i think we are friends because for me to be up now after you heard the reverend al sharpton, after

the phenomenal panel we have just been exposed to come and then to have to do it in front of reverend michael eric dyson who i think you all know is without question fearless when it comes to outstanding orator. he is in a class by himself but as a metaphor, he teaches the class, but then to have to do it in front of the legend of our time, the reverend jesse louis jackson, this just a fair. so i just ask that you pray for our relationship because maybe i have done something to him that caused him to put me on the spot like this. and if i have, i'm sorry, i will never do it again. but i got mad love for you anyway, even though i am feeling some is wrong with this. because i wouldn't do this to anybody in this i could not stand them. so please, let's get out. and then to have the legendary

coach john thompson and his son and house, james summers is a protége of yours, and he coached in dallas. so i texted him. i said i'm sitting in front of coach thompson, and he blew my phone up so i've got a whole lot to tell you about coach summers. god bless you, and it's good to see. now, i want to come in light of the spot that i'm in, basically recognize that so many of you could do a much better job than me, so i want to go ahead and just come in light of the home training, i would share with what i call a thank you note to reverend jesse jackson. i want to phrase this as a thank you message. my mother taught me the best thing to do when somebody does for your what you don't deserve, and you know you could not have done it yourself, is to have the sense to write a thank you note. so what i have done, reverend

jackson, is basically downloaded on my mental computer all that i've been able to catalyze that you've done for me, and so many, and right now i would like to orator click print a copy of this thank you message from me to you from my generation to you. because we are, because of what you have done. the reverend jesse louis jackson, thank you. i'm writing to say thank you because of the fact that in recent days i've heard you say on more than one occasion, using your amazing ability to sustain clay suggests an idea that all of us can capture as a matter of fact, to put this, utilized a teaspoon of terms to convey a kind of truth. au recently have talked about how it is important for us to recognize that if you have a

size 10-foot and you are wearing a size eight shoe, eventually there will be pain. as a metaphor, a corn will come out of that structure. you have a structural issue going on that must be rectified if you want to have healing in the body. our nation yes, our world has a lot of pain that is going on right now. and reverend jesse jackson, utah to us it's a structural issue. i thank you for that because we know the pain but as a matter of fact, we spend a lot of time talking about the pain in recent days, how our hearts were broken as troy davis lost his life in spite of the fact that seven out of nine by witnesses recanted their testimony because they were pressured by the police to make that testimony. and troy davis is now gone, even though there was doubt about him having done the crime.

well, evidently we talk about the corn, the pain. troy davis lost his life but reverend jackson, thank you for letting us know troy davis is the corn. it's a structural issue whereby we allow eyewitness testimony to weigh so heavily when it comes to individuals who are convicted of crime. it's not just the corn we have to be concerned about. we have to take a look at the structure of the injustice in the justice system. as the medevac i've got to go to richard parsons your not feeling the. richard pryor says he went down to the courthouse for justice, and all he saw was just us. evidently there's something with the structure, the shoe does not fit. i think if i was preaching am a michael dyson, i would call this message if the shoe fits, because there is a structural issue. we focus in on the corn. we focus in on the pain, but we

don't deal with the structure. as a matter of fact, when we look at what j.c., i'm in the presence of michael eric dyson, i might as well quote cheesy. j.c. talks about what happened about the statistics as relates to black guys. he then says it's because the system is working. that's why. what is try to say what he says we have a corn, we've got pain. but the reality is instead of focusing and on the pain, we've got to deal with issue that does not fit. we have a structural issue. thank you, reverend jesse jackson for not focusing in just on the corn, but making sure we take a look at the structure. and with that indicate i want to share basically three things i've learned from reverend jesse jackson that have changed my life for ever, my ministry will never be the same because jesse jackson says we've got to make sure that the shoe is changed.

the shoe must fit if we are to experience healing, and the body politic of this nation, yes, even this world. number one, thank you jesse jackson for showing us that you can overcome odds that are just absolutely horrendous odds. jesse jackson did not, was not born with a spoon in his mouth. he did not come from a a silver platter of the background. no, instead he blessed us with a 1980, if you have not read his amazing book, keep hope alive come in the book not only do you have his speeches from that year as he ran for the presidency, and lifted us all with his brilliant run, but jesse jackson in 1988 concluded that campaign with a phenomenal speech in atlanta, georgia. the setting is enough to bring tears to your eyes when you think of the fact it was in the atl, atlanta, georgia, the

birthplace of the drum major for justice, dr. martin is akin to jupiter was in atlanta, georgia, the home of morehouse, spillman, clark atlanta university and morris brown college, atlanta, georgia, jesse jackson stood in the old cradle of the confederacy, and the very next evening his name was to go in as nomination, democratic nomination for the presidency of the united states. shirley that ought to bring chills to your body as you think of that imagery, the inspiration from that imagery. and jesse jackson on that and i concluded that profound speech by saying a word to those who have no voice, he says to those of you who are struggling, those of you who feel you have no hope, i understand. and can you him now as you are utilizing his oratorical genius over and over again? he would say i understand what

it means to be looked down upon. i understand what it means to be held back because of something over which i have no control. he simply can't sing, i understand, i understand. why? because he came from a broken background, but out of that broken background he has brought in healing to this nation and healing to so many lives. as a matter of fact, since i'm a preacher i might as well quote the bible. the bible says he was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our inequities. and this has, we are healed. jesse jackson comes from background where he has been bruised. we don't know the price he has paid to be who he is, but the brilliance of it is, out of his strides this nation has experienced a heating that we would not have experienced had jesse jackson not become who jesse jackson has become. so man, i just want to say thank

you, because of your background, it did not define you but it did not define you, but it made you who you are. [applause] and lifted all of us in the process. jesse jackson, what a background. as a metaphor, i won't forget that year because after that speech i was in the barbershop. you know how we kick it in a barbershop in the hood and the brothers were talking to, did you hear jesse? did you hear jesse? jesse, jesse, jesse. i wasn't feeling the -- i said do you know reverend jesse jackson? and a brother jump right back at me and said no, i don't know jesse, but i know jesse knows me. i like it. because when you catch it, you understand he was saying i can relate to him because he feels me and he feels my pain. and because he feels me and my pain, i can say though i don't know him myself, i know that brother knows me. and so, reverend jackson, mama

taught me to say thank you, number one. i want to thank you for your background, though it was broken, the beauty of it is out of that broken his you have brought healing to this nation, and healing, yes, to my life. but secondly, i want to say thank you because god had blessed you to articulate and powerful vision of what we ought to be, inspite of the is news that has incarcerated us. i'm going to do that one more time. i like that, a vision of what we ought to be inspite of the isness that has incarcerated this nation for far too long. what a powerful vision. he is there to articulate and how he does it so brilliantly and poetically, nobody can rhyme like jesse jackson. before hip-hop that was reverend jesse jackson. before there was wrapping and rhyming, there was reverend jesse jackson. i checked the brilliance of it. he would use a teaspoon of terms

to convey that kind of truth. listen to him as he injects into the veins of the people have been broken by oppression, but makes is repeat after him, i am somebody. i may be poor, but i am somebody. i may be black, but i am somebody. i may came from the slums, but the slums are not in the. i am somebody, and then watch them as he was slipped into that rhyme before jay-z, down with dope end up with all. the brother always had those poetic steels of articulation. but he would do that, don't miss this to articulate an alternative vision of new possibilities that this nation could finally live up to its -- that's the reverend jesse jackson has dared to do. thank you, man, for the prophetic poetry that you have utilized to help us to be more than what we were.

and see beyond where we are. the brilliance of it is when you think about it, he has done in the context of darkness, but what else is a vision but a preview of coming attractions. a vision, a preview of coming attractions. you will catch the and just a minute. a vision, a preview of coming attractions. we go to the movies a lot with the dyson's, anything that gets us if we happen to get there in time, we get there for the previous, but, you know, what happened, you don't see the previews until the theater goes dark. you missed your shot right there. ..

bring ourselves together because when we come together then this nation will live up to its promise. jeff johnson took what i was going to say earlier, and it's tough to sell it, but as the real deal. a lot of people have missed out on the genius of rev. jeffrey -- jesse jackson because of his boston to hang around so long and do so well for so long. because oftentimes we honor people based on their lives being cut short. it is almost as if they are you -- their youthful vitality is frozen in time. fold it in time that martin king jr. was 39 years old. malcolm x39 years old.

john fitzgerald kennedy, 46 years old. all of them did not live that long. they lived well, but here is a gift to our time here now with the benefit not only of his brilliance but with the wisdom that informs his brilliance, his liberty wisdom in forms as liberating brilliance. as a consequence we should thank god that we have him for as long as we have had in. because of that we are a better place and a better world. i have to testify because jesse jackson high around just long enough to inform so i would not have a right wing homiletic. can i make that real plan for you? jesse jackson brilliantly and prophetically said that there is something wrong with the preacher having a picture of martin luther king jr. in his office study. they're going to preach. i have to go back and grab you

because you did not get that. how can you preach a billy graham's gospel with among luther king portrait? it is because you have the ability gramm hermeneutic that informs your homiletic. now, of course you know what that is. it is the size of interpretation going between the scripture and the street, and if you go between the scripture and the sanctuary of the scripture and the street and that hermeneutic is informed by a right-wing oppression then what you will do is stand up and even though you had a liberation face you will, indeed, have an oppressive spirit and that a person's spirit will continue to feed the impression that our community suffers from. thank you, jesse jackson, for telling us the most of taking the text of scripture out of context and the con people with

their pretext. and doing the best i can. and so understand, my brothers and sisters, jesse jackson said don't take the text out of context. what does that mean? you cannot read the text of the sacred scripture without understanding the oppressive context out of which they came. every single section of scripture except for briefly a time during the reign of king david occurred in the context of oppression. so how dare you stand up and reach an individualized gospel that does not address the social and economic political context that that scripture cannot of. jesse jackson, you taught me that. so every single sunday when i stand up and preach the gospel man going to deal with the socio-economic and political context of the text as well as of our time. i'm just here to say thank you, jesse jackson. i have one more thing to say thank you for. momma taught me the best thing

to do when somebody does something for you is to say thank you. i do have good home training. i have one more thing to thank you for. overcoming your broken this and bring healing to us. number two, for articulating a powerful alternative vision of what we all should be, in spite of the end cursorily business of our situation. but in the final analysis, i have to think the rev. jesse louis jackson for making short that you use what god bless you with to open the door to a brand new era of possibilities that all of us enjoy. it has been said today. you don't have a 08 and obama without 88 and to see jackson. the rules were changed in '88, and the democratic process because of the brilliance of this man standing tall and standing firm. it opened up an era of new possibilities.

wait, it did start with president barack obama and. as a matter of fact you have to think about all of those elected officials, those progressive politicians who were elected on the coattails of reverend jesse jackson. and some might pay as there are a whole lot of people who might not only have jobs and businesses but they have offices because jesse jackson opened up an era to a brand new possibilities and showed us what god looks like whenever god gets involved in history and with humanity. i have to stop there because that is what i've come to say. for all that we've heard today, we heard about him as humanitarian, social activist, but don't you forget, he is a preacher of the gospel. he is a preacher of the gospel, and i like the kind of gospel that jesse jackson preaches. i close with this. going to speak in honolulu hawaii. had to speak over in hawaii.

he had flown from philadelphia over to honolulu. of course, times change. it's a long flight jacket with his body. he gets to honolulu. it's like 3:00 in the morning there. he can't go to sleep. he ends up going to a dive to get some coffee. this the cafe dive to get some coffee. about 3:00 he goes into the dive. about 330 and walks some sisters to work at that time of night, some sisters walk-in who worked at that time of night. it gets that later on. their work that time of night. sisters walk-in. one of them walking in says that i forgot tomorrow is my birthday, to which one of them responded sarcastically, sardonically, what you want to my birthday party? and she said, no, i'm just letting you know, it's my birthday, it just hit me. i had enough, but. the moment said that campeau noticed it, and when they exited

to continue on their work shift he decided to ask the person working the counter, to they come in every at this time? to which the responded, yes, every that at this time they come in from their work hours. he said tomorrow night we're going to throw a party for them. birthday party for the sister his birth date is commence of the people who were in their got excited about the possibilities of throwing a party for the sisters who worked night walking the streets. and so what they did, some said i'll handle the case. another said all had a list thank. there were about to throw a party the next day for these prostitutes, and especially for the prostitute whose birthday it was. 330 and next morning, like clockwork. here they come in. and when they came in, those who were in on the party shouted out, surprise, happy birthday. they threw a birthday party for the sister who had never had a birthday party before. and so the tears began to stream

down her face. the tears came down. you know what happened. someone said, what's wrong card you happy? she said, yes. you don't understand, i come from a broken background. i never knew my mother because she abandoned me. of course, you know i never knew my father. so i've never had a birthday party. i just found out when my actual birth there was a few years ago. i've never had a party. no one has ever done anything this nice for me. and with that, she said to you mind if i take this particular? i have never had a birthday cake in my life. at that moment she ran out, she ran out crying and hollering thank you. there was and uncomfortable deafening silence now because the birth date on every hand run alps so overcome by emotion. she didn't know what to do, and finally well, this is a party.

the least we can do is get our party on. they said, well, what should we do? well, let's eat all this good food, and maybe should come back. they said great. cool and the gang. the fort week we have to save -- said grace. we pray for our honoree. cress six amen. at that moment the person working the counter said hold on. what kind of pitcher are you. he said i'm the kind a preacher who's concerned enough to throw a birthday party for hose a 3:00 in the mornings. i'm trying to say thank you. you have never allowed people for who have been left behind and held back to be forgotten. you have a voice to those whose voices have been strangled. you have not forgotten about the war on poverty that marked mr. king jr. was killed trying to fight. among the to king jr. is looking down today saying run, jesse, run. do it, jessica went to it.

our world as a better place because of what you have done. thank god for reverend jesse jackson. i'm going to, but i'll say it one more time. my mama taught me well. i'm a part of the training, and so all i try to do today is articulate for all of you. a thank-you note for reverend jesse jackson. [applause] [applause] >> you know, reverend haynes, reverend haynes, dr. dyson, reverend jesse jackson, george carey, you write about your mama's teaching you good manners and running that lovely, lovely thing keynote to reverend

jackson. you mention in your own training about remembering those who are in pain. reverend jackson, when i get to 80 people your day. talks about the possibility follow the the world in different times. well, reverend jackson, you're treading me. but a fire in me to go places where i never thought i would go. and to meet people that i never thought i would meet. that fire took me to haiti where people drowned by waters and sickened by earthquakes to meet this great woman who last night many women that our social activists and you train also came. and in her native tongue she wants to sing a song to you about revolution and promise. i give you my sister from 80 running for the mayor of cities a late, the city of lights that is darkened but now i know your

brilliance and will assign more. same for reverend jackson. thank you. [applause] [applause] ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ >> i love that i am singing. you don't year -- i mean, i'm singing trio. it's about love, you know, and you can fall people. you go into the heart of the people. you never go out. it is you, reverend jackson. from haiti. [applause] [applause] >> thank you so much. that great rendition.

and the rev. dr. frederick douglass saints, give him some love. and that was just a preview. imagine when the darkness comes what you're going to see from that. i told you he was a rhetorical genius and the oratorical wizard. he is, as rev. geoffrey jackson has so aptly summarized, a freak. if freak in the sense of freakish precocity and serious intelligence combined with the spiritual rhythm that courses through his very speech. and he spoke for us all to say thank you to rev. jesse jackson. i want to hear his sermon, and don't just take parts of it, take the whole. of the taking 330. don't be trying to -- that's what he was saying. he was talking about the fate that can overcome circumstances

and situations that seem both the presses and the improper. and that kind of genius has delivered to us the meaning of reference jesse jackson. i'm going to bring him to this podium now, the man that we have been celebrating. i have stood with them in the south of this country. i have stood with him in london when mandela was released from prison and we were in a small room with oliver tom bowe and nelson mandela and buddy mandela and mrs. tom bowe and reverend jackson. i have stood by him as he had fought for the labor rights. san antonio texas. i have seen him preach around the country. you will not get up earlier the him. you will not get a plated with him. and when he calls you on the

telephone this is your brother. he ain't got no small talk. he announces to the is, says he loves you, and it's two hours of serious social engagement. when he's done a the niceties and stuff. all right click. i've been with him at parties. in los angeles. a great christmas party. we went when year, and i wanted to get my party on for real. i wanted to dance a little bit. reverend talked to me for four hours in the party. i didn't drink. i didn't eat no food. i couldn't dance. i had an education. i have been inspired by this man . in my mind by melissa king jr. frederick douglass and then jesse louis jackson. that is my order, that is my

list. we have been benefited by his genius. in so many areas we covered a few today, but we can't cover them all to read what he did with sports alone, challenging this country to deal seriously with athletics broadly than that african-american athletes in particular is monumental. but he did with the film industry in hollywood, challenging the images that are perpetuated and the legacies of air quality and bigotry that flow through the small screens. what he has done on wall street economically to make sure that the flow of capital would be redirected toward african-american and core communities. and so i bring him to the states. want to thank eric. i want to thank joseph ferrara. i want to thank sister colleen. all the people who were involved here. and nobody being paid.

we get -- we did this out of the love of our heart. this is a thank-you note. at georgetown there were gracious enough to a hostess and then sponsor a lots of people have with reverend jesse jackson. now bring to you the man whom we love, whom we admire, who for so long has taught us to be better human beings. to keep hope alive and to make us understand that we are somebody. stand on your feet and received the rev. jeff -- justice jackson. [applause] [applause] >> thank you very much. let me express my sincere thanks

my friend and brother across the years extending his class activity to have this celebration, to have this exercise and some of the work of my life. i want to thank you so much. you can sit across the years. i want to bet doesn't know that he is in my debt. he made you tear me. he is doing all this, try to piggyback. i want to thank you and all of you to participate and share today. i want to thank coach john thompson. we appreciate you. you have shown us how in so many ways, and we thank you for your presence and for your son.

keeping a legacy alive. all of you saw what reverend sharpton who i meant when he was 12 years old and watched him grow and develop into the voice. in it does not yet appear with the show becomes all of us. living for the haines who is well, that speaks for itself. he is rare among us. we have great plan for him for the future. we need a higher stage. [applause] [applause] geniuses just a platform where from greatness. it's already that, but it is not recognized. you put a 7-foot giant in a 3-foot whole and he appears to be a magic. he is not short.

dole is just the. he may put a 3-foot made it on a 4-foot platform. he looks like a giant. he really isn't. the platform is just kind. and so what we have among us, these geniuses to stand and hold we must figure out some way to get them the platform. higher and herself. as i'm listening to the panel, let's go to their analysis. excited about what you said, what you might say. and at one time i thought about, wanted to say something so bad when elvis sang little things. i said to some not long ago, i said, you know, the worst thing that could happen to yell, he showed up on sunday. y'all can relax. i speak for myself today.

[laughter] comes walking in church wearing some sandals and appeared not speaking english. he would make it past the usher. so santa want to speak for myself today. but it's a joy. i think that i have sought to be a continuous. those. and though i have sought, i never in some way or another stopped trying to serve. i have sought to have continuity in the service. i have sought to remain current. my biggest ambition has been just said secede which makes you look sometimes very disorganized because there are those who focus a lot on planting seeds

and very systematic rose. they write them down, and they have an organized patch, but i am really has the sort. some are dropped. some hit the air, and some germinate. you have no idea which might germany where, and in the and it does not really matter to me where it blossoms. and i think i have lived long enough to be encouraged by many stopping to write down. i want to do some of that, but my basic writing is in -- you're the tablet. it's already written down. and if you keep telling it, i remember when a few years ago her belafonte convened a meeting of what he called the elvis trying to communicate with on coming generations. some shared experiences, and he was there.

some others, very able people, and growing up, what was happening in katrina. i had just come back from venezuela. katrina was on the water. i had to leave. you can't leave because we are going to have as a meeting. a reading of the to have a meeting, but people on the water. and currency was competing. i had to do the current thing. the meeting was a good idea. but the currency said, was not stay too long talked about yesterday of his people are drowning today. so even as we meet right now, tomorrow has a chance. a black man can be the governor of mississippi like tomorrow morning, like tomorrow,

tomorrow. and at the nation to that campaign. now, the material state. the billboard state. governor of mississippi tomorrow night. and so if you show it well, you accused of ambulance chasing. well, the relatives in it. all the really. not miss this moment that a black man can be the governor of mississippi. mississippi to our night. and we bought our numbers. we can win mississippi

governorship. we can become governor of mississippi by tomorrow night. now, they made it inconvenient, but not difficult. difficulty is to get shot trying to vote. guilt is difficult being locked up trying to vote. now, the on hour, that's not difficult. this just inconvenient. inconvenience should never stand between you and the championship. it is worth the inconvenience. and so the fact is, and ohio governor james the rules. the voting booth closed on this past friday. there will let you go begin until tomorrow morning because of the attempt to rollback the

voting rights act in 38 states. now, they have some further suppression scheme. back to 1877 all over again. but you can say that while voting in ohio, the right to vote this weekend, that is inconvenient. it's not difficult. you can vote on saturday and sunday and monday. you ought to occupy the space, the voter registration office and stay there all day and all nine for three days. so stop complaining about occupy new york, occupy toledo. occupy cleveland. remain current. update your occupation zone. the fact of the matter is every state where they have an ounce in early voting, spend the weekend going to jail.

we have to remain current, and we have to keep faith. my last part is, really want to talk just a little q&a. it takes about a week. why are we so good on the basketball court? i saw l.s.u. in alabama play tonight. and i -- some things, the numerator changes, but the denominator is amazingly consistent. we have gone from come balls to football's. it was illegal to make money picking cotton when you were in slavery. if you got, selling, and you could be whiplashed, punished. if you got selling cotton that you picked and planted, you could be punished on the plan.

so now if you get caught selling their own jersey. [applause] [applause] i mean, they need a little money picking football the night before last the name a chopping sugarcane in picking cotton. somebody got to raise the question about the justice of this. this is not what the n.c.a.a. wants. this is a billion dollar bought and. and the only people ineligible for that money is the cotton pickers. [applause] [applause] something about that doesn't seem reasonable. the cotton picker, those who would pick the cotton, those who made it impossible for i the only ones eligible to sell their own jerseys. come pick a number two. we have gone from picking cotton

balls to picking football and basketball. but what makes it so great, the reason we could choose uniform, and not skin color. mickey's direction and that complexion. the reason why people were all caught up. i retired. half march madness, the best on the earth. it's hard to be in first class plus one basketball. is in the document be a starter on the top team. i may god to become a pro. of all the folks in the room, we are the best at what is real hard to do which requires the best of our cognitive and motor skills. applied geometry and maximum speed. you have been two referees, people booing and cheering, and you heiss the ball in some

fashion. twenty of 30 feet out. that is real genius in motion. what allows us to be the best at what is so hard to do. first of all, you can't inherit no points. [applause] [applause] second, the playing field is even. the rules of public. the goals are clear. the referee is fair. not lobbying for the honor of the team. in the school has trash cans. whenever you play by rules where inheritance to not trump. the plainfield is even, the rules a public common goals are clear, the referee is fair, not on the apparel of the home team and the score is transparent, we

can make it. will we are trying to say today to keep the kind of simple is that beyond the playing field the rules are not public. the goals and i clear, and the score is not transparent. so we are free, but not equal. that becomes my struggle to try in these last days to keep our struggle current and continuous and keep because some might get the seeds. some might take off and germinate. controlling. you determine which season will grow. you just do your best. my last one would be this. today we do have a structural crisis. and that a structural crisis puts us and an awful dilemma of

having to deal with our nation states crisis because when you are speaking truth to power, power fights back. and power kicks back. we, there is an occupy movement going on now. it's good, but it's not new. the occupy mall. occupy the mall was a simple agenda. make a choice between the war in vietnam, killing people, the war on poverty healing people. make a choice. if you keep giving more and more privileges to fewer and fewer and more were unnecessarily it can't take care of the poorest, well, that is unchanged. we are occupy wall street. is just an extension of occupy the mall.

but today when we bailed out the banks with interest-free money and then give students a trillion dollar debt end education becomes obstructed by bank policy where many good minds cannot afford to attend school, they can't afford to apply. others in and can stay and. others graduate with a guaranteed debt without a guaranteed job. so they simply dropped out of school. somebody got to say something. it seems to me. that when the insurance companies have lobbied to not have a public auction. insurance fees are rising while the uninsured is rising, it seems to me that somebody has to say something. five major insurance companies, a trillion dollars since

september 11th this tugging tax subsidies. the bush tax cut extensions, the richest 1 percent of americans. more money than all the state budget deficits combined. so you really can't fight the justice if your politics are creating injustice. somebody has to say something because there is too much concentrated wealth, too many unnecessary wars, too much poverty is and to any job losses for us to be at peace with ourselves. i'm deeply concerned. we militarize africa. we are now were unfinished. libya went from a humanitarian mission to a full-scale war. we launch into libya. once into the other crisis

they're looking at in yemen and the crisis there looking at in syria. what makes that so different? well, one of my concerns is that leaders of our two-thirds arab libyan and one-third african. libya is a member of the arab league and the african union. and african as mercenaries. they said they don't have a place there. so several thousand people in jail, most of them are african women who came out of hardship from sudan and manager and said in egypt and algeria. well, somebody has to say something. those inconvenient truth that honor our tradition. the tradition of change. i want to thank all of you today for the state, and i am anxious for us to continue the idea of the institute because it belongs

to us. pass on a vaccine. i've seen a lot across the years. how could i have ever applied, camping in new hampshire. why? a part of my stop by rhythm. i did go. i did see that the hampshire, you would know that unless you went. how was it to back where should i be in the i/o is a privilege to campaign. i was told. to many white people. i found the pain is what pain is. we spoke. people did respond to us there. but we did learn something on those trails. we do hope that this president does well, but we held him without protest. silence is the trail.

[applause] [applause] i don't care how great you are, you can't balance the basketball without air and it, even if you have free georgia burn in the background. the basketball has to have air in it. you can't dribble a ball. and when their leaves, i don't care what, you can do no crossover. you can't cross over. you can't shoot the ball when the enthusiasm and hope leaves you can't win. but the hope then, have to keep putting aaron. and so it becomes our burden. how do we win? we win by putting their back in the basketball. and those who put the air and in the first place have to keep it in. president barack obama inherited our journey to the wilderness wanted to talk more about this in coming days 40 years, just

passed in the wilderness. we have to spend more time on the wilderness years. i heard a little of that today. but the king was killed. we didn't go to sleep. some people prayed. some people rioted. we came out of the wilderness. campaign. had the big rally in indiana. we can elect people like coleman young. those were big people in those days. we went from three black caucus members to 40. i mean, we got. that was the beginning of the game because we could play, but the rules kept feeding yes. it wasn't just the blacks. blacks could vote, white men couldn't sit on juries. the tennis convoke. students can vote on campuses. the rules were stacked against.

we never stopped fighting came out 40 years of struggle. i remember one day i was looking . they're writing about eight or so campaigns. and they saw crowds that we had never seen before. i remember one night denial of we were packing people in auditoriums in gymnasiums as opposed to sitting in people's living rooms. one was teary eyed and holding her grandson. about four years old. reverend, we heard tonight. we agree with everything you said. we just aren't quite there yet. don't give up on us. we're not quite there yet. well, 20 years later they were ready. because some house seats got planted, and when george and the journalist told the story the white riders attacked them for

not being counted journalism. now, almost a fish by the same black-and-white journalists. they just wrote down what they saw. it takes on many levels, but i tell you about my joy. my interest is much further than my joy. i have served a long time, my best time, but i want to tell you that we must pull some of this together now because much of it is transmittable. as i look -- i talked to the occupiers. we must communicate with the occupiers. the big issue is the biggest victims of economic violation absent from the protest. those who lost the most jobs are the occupiers. those who lost the most homes ought to be occupiers. those who have faced the greatest amount of credit card debt ought to be occupying.

but what they said, well, let's take out. but you know, jesus occupy, and this comes down to values question. do you occupy the living room of the ruler and have a fund-raiser de occupy the center of simon the leper? the space of simon lapper is our moral challenge. and as long as we are caught up and the parties, the ridge and ruler and not the poverty of those we cannot see god. we must see god. i think you very much. [applause] [applause]

>> we want to think reverend jesse jackson for a life of commitment, a life of love, life of service. a want to think marcie a dyson for organizing today's program. thank all of our speakers. let's give some love again to the rev. jesse l. jackson. coach john thompson. thank you so much for coming. think georgetown for this opportunity. get a chance to highlight rejection to look at. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> here is what is ahead. next a recent supreme court oral argument. the case is united states v. jones on whether police can put a gps tracking device under car without your consent. at 6:00 the first of to q&a programs with the new york times joel abramson followed an hour later with a conversation with columnist charles pope. and looking at prime-time programming across the c-span networks, join us tonight at 10:00 p.m. eastern for more from our series, the contenders. tonight's program features george wallace.

here it is book tv with programs on presidential biographies. and history tv with a look at american artifacts. a look here at a map of iowa republican presidential candidates are fanned out across the state campaigning in advance of tuesday's first in the nation primaries. earlier today we spoke with the creator of caucus the musical.s. >> the heart of the city outside the city center of the morn, iowa, specifically outside the studio theater.a. it is the site of what is known as contras the musical.ats kn yeah joined by the creatorusical robert john ford.." why musical about the caucus? >> well, a lot of song and dance and really has a lot of tetra aspects to it. is a a we just felt like it was thebuta perfect space for a musicalat-lk production. >> so what is the main plot? >> the main story focuses a lot on an iowa farm family that is deemed the typical iowa caucus

stores by the national press, and consequenntly all the kendis that are in the state tothe cand campaign a desperate to win. >> so for those who will be able to see, give us a sense of what the process is like on stage, i what are some of the experiences >> well, basically just featured in one article when one nationan newspaper.iona ane campaign season progresses, the candidd it's will do anythil to win their votes. they stop by the home, have dinner. they all end up having dinner ae the same time.havi the culminating scene. candid it's get together in one house. they have an all-out. >> the political and a you bring to it to matter you see it? >> well, what i want to do is just show the world basically what the process was like here,a how the caucus actually works,kn and what we are exposed to everw four years your.

coming in, the be coming in, and in.t how was it, the frenzy and activities surrounding the caucuses every four years. something that needed to be thown on stage because it is in some way cilia times, but very serious. but we always take the process very serious. >> other aspects of this current political season that you brought into this political tha process? >> the difference this time around is, you know, two years ago, four years ago we had botho parties vying for the nomination this year we only had the republicans. we updated so that it reflects the current proper republican candidates in the currentop o hot-button issues. >> tell us how you chose, what>h kind of characteristics for you looking for? >> well, the director was looking for people that brought, you know, some knowledge aboutaf the political process.as someone that helps.e and, you know, we knew pretty much in advance who the candid it's work, so we were looking for actors that not only had the

look, but also the personality types. perso and you know, all our charactere are fictional, which i represen, everyone. >> did you get reactions from democrats and republicans independent for this? what was their response? >> an equal opportunity offender. a recently are not trying tore validate one party over the other. there's absurdities and strikes in both parties. botrtie >> the creator of caucus the o musical. do it again in four years. >> we will seek. we will decide. >> thank you. >> you bet. thank you. >> in the last iowa caucuses in 2008 barack obama won the democratic caucuses and went on to win the presidency. mike huckabee won the republican iowa caucuses but dropped out of the race two months later. see what a caucus looks like with video from previous years on line with the c-span video library. now three tuesday our c-span cameras are following the 2012 republican candid it's evident throughout the state.

every morning live from iowa political guests are taking your calls on washington journal. tuesday night we will show live coverage of two of the caucuses from the central and bust and parts of the state on c-span and c-span2 and later the results of all the nearly 18 and caucuses bus candid is peaches. for more resources used c-span campaign 2012 website to watch videos of the candid it's on the campaign trail. read the latest on candid it's political reporters and people like you from social media sites had c-span.org / campaign 2012. >> the supreme court recently considered a case questioning whether a advances in technology can alter a person's reasonable expectation of privacy. the case united states verses jones asks if the police need a warrant before secretly attaching a gps device to a person's vehicle. the court is expected to deliver a decision before the end of the

term in june. >> we will hear arguments first this morning in case 101259, united states versus jones. >> mr. chief justice, and may it please the court, says this court's decision in casper says united states the court has recognized a basic dichotomy under the fourth amendment. what a person seeks to preserve as private in the enclave of his own home or in a private letter or inside of his vehicle when he was traveling is the subject of a fourth member protection. but what he reveals to the world such as his movement in a car on a public roadway is not. in knox versus united states this court applied the principle to hold that visual and deeper surveillance of a vehicle traveling on the public roadways

infringed no fourth amendment expectation of privacy. >> seems to be much more like traditional surveillance, following the card. helps you follow it from a slightly greater distance. that was 30 years ago. the technology is very different , and you get a lot more information from the gps savannah's that you do from falling a beeper. >> the technology is different. but a crucial factor that shows that this was not simply amplified visual surveillance is that the officers actually fear detection as the car crossed from minnesota to wisconsin. the driver began to do you turns, and the police broke off visual surveillance. they lost track of a car for a full hour. there were only able to discover it by having a deeper receiver in a helicopter that detected the beach to the radio transmitter. >> that is a good example of the change in technology.

that is a lot of work. he did to sit back in the station. they push a button whenever they want to find out where the car is. they looked at data from a month and find out every has been in the past month. that seems to be dramatically different. >> but it does not expose anything, mr. chief justice, that is not already exposed to public view for anyone who wanted to watch. that was the crucial principles that the court -- >> under that rationale could you put a beeper surreptitiously in a man's overcoat ours were cut? >> probably not. and the reason is that this court and carol verses united states specifically distinguished the possibility of following a car on a public roadway from determining the allocation of an object in a place where a person has a reasonable expectation. >> this is a special device, all the trees -- streets and public elevators to. >> in that event there is a serious question about whether

the installation of such a device would need a searcher seizure. public movements do not implicate. >> you might just be aware that i have serious reservations about the way in which this was installed, but you can get to that. >> i would like to get to it now. >> happy to. >> give a little prologue to my question. when wiretapping first came before this court we held that it was not a violation of the fourth amendment because the fourth amendment says that the people shall be secured in their persons, houses, papers, and a facts against unreasonable searches and seizures. wiretapping just picked up conversations. later on we reversed ourselves. as you mentioned, the new

criteria which is, is there an invasion of privacy? are you obtaining information that he had a reasonable expectation to be kept private? at think that was wrong. i don't think that was the original meaning of the fourth amendment, but nonetheless it has been around for so long. however, it is one thing that that privacy concept to the fourth amendment as it originally existed. if it's quite something else to use that concept to narrow the what the babbitt. it seems to me that when that device is installed and is unquestionably a trespassed, thereby ensuring the honor of the car not secure in his effects. the car is one of his affects, against an unreasonable search and seizure.

attached to the car against his will and the serbs because what it attains is the location of that car from their forward. now, why isn't that correct? do you deny that it is a trespass? >> it may be a technical trespass, but it was equally at technical trespass in the united states forces carol when a can of the pair was transferred to somebody that had a ready of -- >> but the owner of the can at the time it was installed consented, and that is not this case. there is no consent by the honor of the property to which this device was fitted. in fact, it was done surreptitiously. >> but there was no consent to the owner of the can once he acquired it to have it contained of foreign item installed by the government. >> that doesn't make it a trespass. >> will discord about. >> it may be as the key thing to do, but every sneaky thing is not just passed. >> this court thought that it was a technical trespass and said that made no difference

because the purpose of the fourth amendment is to protect privacy interests. many fall into appearances, not to cover all technical trespasses. >> the privacy rationale of this not expanded pinero's in some respects. >> the changes it. and i think the case that most clearly illustrates the distinction between trespass and fourth amendment protection is oliver versus united states. the case that we affirm to be the open field doctrine. in that case there was absolutely no doubt that the police committed a trespass under local law. they entered, crossed fences, ignored the no trespassing signs. this court held that the interests that are protected by trespass laws i distinctly interests protected by the -- >> undoubtedly. but the rationale was not unreasonable. >> after no surge. the rationale of that case was that open fields are not among

the things that are protected by the fourth amendment. the corps was raised this is lee focused on the distinction between trespass law before the melo. >> there would also not be a search if you put a gps device on all of our cars to monitor our movements for months. you think you are entitled to do that? >> the justices of this court. >> yes. [laughter] >> under our theory in this court's cases the justices of this court when driving on public roadways have no greater expectation. >> to your answer is yes, you could decide that you put a gps device and every one of our cars , follows from want, no problem under the constitution. >> well, equally, mr. chief justice, at the fbi wanted to make it put a surveillance agents around the clock on any individual and fall of that individual's movements as they went around on the public streets kenwood verify -- >> get