tv After Words with Bret Stephens CSPAN January 18, 2015 9:00pm-10:01pm EST
miners that were trapped underground for something like 40 days. hector got exclusive access to the minors. he said they wanted him to them to write their story. it's kind of like into thin air except it's down. it's about being trapped down into the bowels of the earth. it is a fabulous nonfiction book. >> if you would like to watch the author talk about deep down dark. how the great gatsby came to be. next on booktv after words with political: mr. bret stephens author of american
1920s and the republican administrations for the 1920s and 30s for much of the roosevelt era in total late 1930s. so would treat them in this way about largely replicating that. and the argument i'm making in doing so is not going to me that this is going to abate, but that it's going to become worse. we are inviting a global disorder, which is a subtitle of the book and i started writing this book a couple of years ago and i think that now it is the beginning of 2015 and some people might say that now at the beginning of 2015 they can say that we have this capability. i'm worried about the pattern of american foreign policy. one of the points that i make is that is a choice, that one administration has made and that
another administration can reverse. >> the book was published in november. some of our viewers have read it and some have yet to read it. and so we were speaking to both of those people. so you made the distinction between retreat and decline in page 22. so what is the difference between repeat endocrine? >> well, declining if something bad happens for reasons that are typically beyond the reach of any one political leader to reverse. science has been in decline for a long time, generation after generation of french political leaders have tried to include that decline and it has not succeeded. japan has been a part of this, and the prime minister has found
it hard to turn that around. russia isn't a tremendous amount of decline. i don't for a second think that the united states is in a decline, there is an entire chapter that makes that a case, that the united states for sure is going to remain the dominant economic social power and probably military power throughout the rest of my life and my children's life as well and possibly well beyond that. but they can still be in retreat because they make these choices and that russia can still be on the march as we are witnessing here today. so that is a distinction that we want to draw and it's because we are not endocrine because we remain number one that our enemies or adversaries aren't though going to be gunning for us one way or another, whether it is the militants of islamic
state or a chinese general seeking to kick us out of east asia or russian politicians seeking to revise the conclusions of the cold war. >> the new isolation in the coming global disorder. why is it coming? >> a prominent person who read and liked this book said that i liked it very much but the problem was if the current disorder, but i think that it is going to be a case of you have not seen anything yet. it's going to be worse. for example, the falling oil prices come all of us are celebrating as consumers not having to pay $4 per gallon for a gallon of gasoline. and we think that it gives us leverage over countries like russia and iran that perhaps we didn't enjoy before.
my sense is that russia and iran will become more dangerous as oil prices decline because we are going to seek other ways to get out of our economic predicament. and also it invaded this. iraq in the late '80s oil prices were falling and the decline is going to be worse. so you asked about the isolation one of the objections to the book that i've heard so far is that isolationism is a dirty word. and it has the most venerable american foreign policy tradition and the first inaugural address with isolation
in many areas it served us pretty well when getting from portsmouth to new york with three weeks or so and it becomes a much less viable policy alternative when we are 30 minutes away from a ballistic missile. but it is a serious approach and i would say to moralizing approach to foreign policy that tells us that on the whole we should not meddle in other people's business and on the whole it will have unintended consequences and those will come back to haunt us. on the whole we should be spending national resources not on a large military or japan or germany, but right here at home rebuilding infrastructure and our schools and so on. so the case for isolationism or what i call it isolationism is a
strong case and the smarties, and it has to be dealt with but they can be dismissed as a bunch of yahoos. i happen to think that they are wrong, but i don't want to dismiss this. >> as a columnist and editor i take it you are a conservative. >> yes i am. >> the heart of a book is a case for foreign policy and that doesn't mean that we have this. much of my book is dedicated to criticizing this in the republican establishment foreign-policy views over the last decade or so and that
struck me as substituting utopianism perform policy. this includes the realm of the possible and i don't think that we will ever find a world free of tyranny because we will never find one free of tierney without malice and evil and ambition and greed in their hearts. so in the middle of the bush administration we became infatuated with this idea that we will plant the seeds of democracy in the heart of the middle east. and i think that struck such as an overly ambitious idealistic misbegotten foreign policy and it takes someone like sarah palin, her view of the crisis in syria to let them sort it out.
and it meant that it was turning a domestic crisis in syria it has created the chaos which has been filled by islamic states and i am a conservative foreign-policy with the most storied conservative editorial. >> any indication that either of them have read the book? >> well, i know that friends of theirs who have read the book have been the nastiest reviews that i have had that have been on the more libertarian leaning
side of the aisle and those are the other individuals that basically said this idea and i think that this is a more pronounced angle because they take the accusation of isolationism is a assault on their character. but since the second world war it did not continue. >> i would like to leave the book and talk a little bit about the author. you are 41 years old. >> 41 years old. >> and you were raised in mexico city. >> yes i was. >> can you describe that them what that was like?
>> first of all, i was born in new york and i'm wondering why they insisted that i have been born in mexico, i have been born to a family my father had been born in mexico, when i was an infant, that is were my childhood was spent. i think that being an american and raised outside of the united states for a significant portion of time is perfect in two senses first of all i speak a foreign language fluently, i'm acquainted and with another culture and it gives us much richer culture in the united states come every few months my parents would pack up our station wagon and we would drive from mexico city in texas and as a kid i i remember it as heaven on earth and it was interesting because all you did was cross a little river and not
a particularly broad one, the geography was the same, but it was a different world where you could put a glass under the sink and drink the water from the attack. it strikes me as kind of miraculous, i don't get bottled water when i'm thirsty i drink a glass of water from the tap so it made me aware that a lot of white here in the u.s. that we assume is mundane and everyday and we take it for granted, it's actually quite extraordinary given what the rest of the world is like. so enough so you have to boil it or you run the risk of becoming seriously ill. so it gave me an appreciation of the specialness that i don't think i would've had if i would have been raised in westchester.
>> you consider yourself a mexican-american? >> i consider myself a mexican-american. i would have rooted for mexico, i am proud of what they have accomplished over the last two decades even despite the headlines. i love the country. it's one of the reasons why i think unlike many conservatives that i have always been sympathetic to a more liberal immigration policy because i think what latin americans have done is contributed to this in that way. and that includes lithuania and russia and other places that have also been a part of that. and i think that also alters and makes me a conservative with a slightly different angle. >> where did you go to high school? >> i went to a school in middlesex massachusetts, it's a terrific place boarding schools get a terrible reputation and they are terrible elitist
schools, i thought it was not only fantastic addition, caring teachers, emphasison many good things. i started an alternative newspaper which gave me my first taste of writing something and having it read. >> why was it alternative? >> it was a mainstream paper and we thought that we could do better and do this on average. and mainly the official campus paper published about four or five times per year, we were dedicated with students coming out every other week. we publish many more additions and we ended up getting ourselves into trouble. but in retrospect at the time it seemed like a lot of fun. >> have you gone back your high
school? >> yes, i have come it's beautiful. >> what is your major enact. >> short answer is that i majored in political philosophy and the long answer is that i majored in a program called fundamental which is a continuation of the great books program. were we would have a senior professor that would spend an entire semester reading just one book and reading thomas more's utopia, the debates of the federalist and anti-federalist. so it was a kind of an effort to really understand these writers and speakers as they understood themselves versus history operatives which is more meta- >> i wrote one or two pieces for this paper but i worked
probably harder at the university of chicago than i have at any other time in my life and i look back on it with mixed feelings because i think that i was supposed to be having fun and partying and instead i was closing the library almost every other night. on the other hand, when i look at what i write as a columnist the way things are referenced it sowed deeply influenced by what i was reading at the university of chicago that over time the echo signal became stronger and not weaker and i felt that much more readable. >> host: then he wins the london school of economics? >> guest: yes, that is a good question. why did i go to graduate school? well, it seemed like a good idea at the time. if i could do it again, i would not have gone.
>> host: weisbach? smack i think that the time was misspent. and when i was a graduate student i wrote on a lark and op-ed and i did this for my own edification really. and then i said, let's see if i can get this published him i sent it to "the wall street journal" and they published it it is a wonderful feeling and to this day the memory of waking up in the morning, the day that i knew this is before the piece was getting published, i ran out to the nearest bookseller i anxiously turned the page and there i saw my byline in "the wall street journal" and it was a marvelous sensation. the topic was nationalism and democracy. and so on the basis i was given
a basis, i applied for an internship and painfully it was a two-week internship in the brussels office of the journal. and i think that i don't know exactly what they were thinking, but on the basis of this very brief internship they hired me and i went to work for them in new york city and shortly after that went to brussels and started writing about the european union a great deal. among a very diverse assemblage and then i started coming to the middle east out of brussels and not long after september 11 sort of out of the blue i got a phone call from the publisher for an individual who asked me if i would be interested in being the editor of the paper and i was 27 years old at the
time and i thought that was very interesting. >> host: what was that like. >> guest: well this was a time of recurring suicide bombings culminating in the terrible bombing [inaudible] almost 30 people died at the dinner, they circled in god to come in the invasion by u.s. forces of iraq coincided with this time. it was like growing up fast for a journalist, being thrust into a position and having some managerial responsibility that was eye-opening and it was also tough and i was there for just
shy of three years but they felt like every year was the equivalent of this. >> how do you think that that affects the way you look at politics? >> guest: i mentioned going up as a touchstone in my political worldview and when i was living in israel and i met my wife there, our first child was born in israel and there were four or five suicide bombings and i would say 845 radius in yards and i remember literally just down the street from where we lived my wife and i were with her newborn baby at 830 in the morning, we heard a blast, we will doubt i was just about the first person on the scene of the bomb, and it was in fact on the
street that was a little bit of an angle and just about a block shy of the prime minister's residence. so to see a suicide bombing and the effects of that, not 20 minutes later but immediately afterward gave you a visceral sense of the horror of terror if in these kinds of attacks. and so it is important. on one hand i wish that i'd i had never seen it, but it has been instrumental to my moral and political education to understand what is really meant by the word carnage. the emphasis on carnality, what it means to blow people up.
and i've never lost sight and this could be true about many that are in manhattan. you understand it in a visceral sense that i think people who haven't quite you will never understand it. >> before i do that why did you decide to write this book and how did that go? >> guest: my mother had been urging me to write a book to end up writing it to get her off her back, and a couple of years ago in 2012 i sensed that we were entering a period of disorder, i think broadly speaking most
americans would have had a window from history of the global situation was relatively benign after there was a responsible exit from iraq, we were making a responsible transition in afghanistan and we had reset relations with russia and i think most americans agree with that, that was i think what was the view that was being promoted by al qaeda and i look at europe at the beginning of the economic troubles and you look at russia where democracy is being effectively abolished
and i don't want to say neo- soviets but neil is our rulers that had ambitions. i looked at china and understanding this with the first world war, it is sort of a crisis at the periphery and at the center. and that includes increasing chaos that was researched. so i had this idea that we were at entering this is a period of global disorder. and i flushed out this article in world magazines and i thought that in fact what really unites this is that all of this is happening as america has turned this way. and we already had this
historical experience of what happens in the world when america turns inward, there is a connection. so it was on this basis that i started to write the book. >> host: the publisher is a conservative of 10 when books. when was the first printed? >> guest: you know i don't know i think that we are somewhere near 30,000 at this point, probably more. >> host: how many have sold? do no? >> guest: the last i saw was about 14,000 or so but again, i'm almost reluctant to say this because i could be wrong. and the lovely thing about
c-span, as people that watch the show, whether they agree with everything i say or not many are sensitive, intelligent, worldly, this is hopefully a contribution to their part of the world. >> host: we have about a half hour left, let's get back to the book "america in retreat: the new isolationism and the coming global disorder." on this page you talk about secretary of state john kerry. the doctrine is over. that is worth applauding that's not a bad thing. >> guest: i think that it serve not only us but latin america as well. and so for many -- it was actually written by john quincy adams and essentially they will
not allow european powers to intervene and metal in the western hemisphere. and right now the chinese are becoming patrons of the regime in venezuela and we have an increasingly liberal regime in ecuador, the radiance had extensive ties and it is once again threatening to boost the traditional were pre-cold war era security ties with cuba, not exactly sure how these are well served by the secretary of state, revising a foreign-policy doctrine that most do not spend all their time thinking about simply to announce that it is
bad, you do not want russia or china or iran intervening in latin america, and i don't think venezuelans are cubans or ecuadorians do either. i'm back to the book part of the criticism of present obama in the book you refer to them -- >> certainly with your sense of history, standing on the shore line and commanding the tide to receive. to prove these powers and so when the president says that this tide has receded, he can only observe that the tide receded and he cannot command it. the war in iraq is over and we
are going to put an end to what used to be called the war on terror. the president in may 2013 gave a speech that we cannot allow this war on terror to define our generation. and so we are going to change our attention to something else and by the way great news and all the other terrorist groups and affiliates an offshoot of al qaeda are what you later call the jvc of global terrorism, so this is an effort to simply say lo and behold in just a few months he operated this research and throughout central arab world's and a year later in 2014, isis or whatever you want
to call it took over the territory that is enormous and has decided to declare that this is as misbegotten as a pronouncement as the notorious mission accomplished moment on that aircraft carrier back in 2003. >> in the book you also write only in the age of obama do wars end by means of attitude and expectation adjustment of learning to move on with left-wing politics. >> i was going say what about vietnam. is there an analogy there enact did they do that. >> the war in vietnam gave rise to that wonderful phrase but let's declare a victory and come home.
but i'm not going to get into this analogy because it's a complex analogy and we could have been easily amount of television time in this way. saying that what we need to do is stop hyperventilating about this terrorism threat. for example 12 journalists have been murdered in paris a number of individuals who have provoked jihad as an islam islamic fanatics and so how big is that? let us turn our attention back to the because they referred to someone who had been badly scarred and the woman's comment was by move on. and that is very admirable for this woman who suffered atrociously but it's very hard
for a nation to do that. he supposedly said you name that you may not be interested in war but war is interested in you, jihad in the middle east is part of this. >> in the book you write about periphery of conflicts and he mentioned this in the 1930s in this decade can you explain that a little bit? >> the civil war in spain became a policy war in its day in the 1930s which my understanding is that liberals in america supported getting involved in it. there was a famous brigade and a distant relative of mine and one individual talked about this and george orwell was involved
but in a sense it brought in and anticipated the kind of conflict that the world would have less than a decade later the germans were very involved in supporting this and i'm sure everyone who was watching the show is familiar with this and people who are on the left came in to support the soviet union as well who on the other side of a part of this and this was burning and burning increasingly horrific ways with descriptions of what happened and it really matched some of the information and images that are coming out at this very moment from homes in the lebeau and other places like that. so these have become proxy with wars that are not of control and sort of help to set the scene for large or complex to follow.
>> it is very difficult. and we had a patient who tear two years ago had stayed one time. the doctors or society had intervened early and went isis show that there was a real chance to overthrow bashar al-assad probably by using excel politicians by the vice president and a dissident syrian general that could have formed a decent coalition that held the country together. can i promise you that this would've had a good outcome?
of course not. but that became something that called the free syrian army that comparatively speaking was a group that we could have worked with swiftly and effectively to overthrow the bashar al-assad regime and all of a sudden she hottest groups started forming as we went from stage one to three to this stage four cancer that we have right now and the islamic state on the other end in a way some of the others have no involvement whatsoever can say that it's one group of bad guys against another group of bad guys and a plague on all of
their houses, but that does not justify the policy inaction that brought us to this terrible past where right now it is not just a crisis in syria but the entire world for the united states. and i think the most important thing that we can do right now is to establish no-fly zones to protect what remains that continues to target it in a much more islamic way, we need to create some kind of safe place if possible, that this is some sort of alternative that emerges in syria, but inaction has consequences that are often worse than the consequences of action. >> we are also critical of other
options interact. >> it kind of reminds me that he was a one of the douglas macarthur took over in japan in 1945 and why we have some of these most interesting individuals and you have ever seen. and so he actually set them on the course in a peaceful sense not just geographic sense with first world liberal democracy all thanks to this and that happened with the genius of this particular administrator.
everything is totally destroyed and broken and we had to disband this entire army, we had to include some of these damages how much it is part of the iraqis themselves, doesn't mean getting our troops out either. and we should have not tried to turn iraq into this. so if you want to ask in a cliché what is my view of the war, we were right to go into iraq and make an example of saddam hussein. we spent 400 lives in that effort, we were wrong to try to make them as an exemplary state. that was another 4000 lives and
the misbegotten effort which is not only failed in terms of the political culture but in terms of american political culture and i don't think americans will stand for these efforts to stand up countries like iraq. >> also the absence of past americana. >> guest: it is somewhat misbegotten which was a true empire in america is not a true empire but that is only true if you count berean detachment and things like that. so in a sense it is america as the backstop and the guarantor were we provide security for our friends and we provide a military presence throughout the
world that keeps countries like russia and china from being tempted into aggression and from time to time punishes certain growth violations of order and setting a chemical violation in syria and then trampling effectively this consequence. >> at the end of the book you call for more spending and for more military employment and for us to become the world policeman. so who is going to support that. >> i think that the problem was the term world policeman has gotten a bad rap and it has to do with the way we conducted ourselves. so to be a policeman you ask about the non-earlier and it was
among the many stakes of vietnam. and in some ways it was wrong. and in some ways it was the work of priests and a preacher. a policeman is simply in the business who is the guy in blue were you want to shop at the nearest bodega, she will look at that and say if you are looking for trouble i'm going to take myself out of this. and they're going to ask them if they did it. and so that is the role that the u.s. largely fulfilled in most of the postwar time.
and he said that we never suffered this as we did in world war ii. we created a free world in places like south korea by defending them and a lot of people right now watching the show are going to pull up your samsung phones that technology is what happens when we defend freedom. as we created a world that bends towards freedom even if it will not move inevitably there western liberal values are awfully aspirational and that is the world that we made by shaping certain patterns. so i hope that there is a candidate during up in 2016 and i may have heard from some of these candidates who are interested or looking for a foreign policy.
and this includes they don't want the porridge that is too cold, which is in the barack obama recipe, so what is the just right temperature for american foreign policy. this book is an effort to offer that porridge. >> host: we have about 12 minutes left let me step back to the question if we spend more money, does that mean that we have less money to spend in other ways? >> there are a couple of points. in some sense it means that and we have as much money to spend in growing economies. and we now spend well under the gdp. and that is historically a very low figure. during the carter years we were
spending close to 6% and during the eisenhower's about 10% of gdp and the average between 1962 in 2007 went from basically the cuban missile crisis and return to the war on terror about 5.5%. but right now we are spending very little in it showing up in the fact that we have moved towards the smallest army that we have had toward the beginning of the second world war, the smallest since we have had with an air force that is undercapitalized and people are flying planes that are as old as their grandfathers are since the early 1960s and we do need to spend money on defense, that is a core responsibility. people say what about that debt and deficit. that comes from our entitlement. that is where the money goes herriot so if you want to
address in a serious way this problem, address the entitlement problem, but they are not going to do it on the back of the pentagon's budget. they went precisely for that reason. >> host: hillary clinton is not mentioned much in the book although there is this prediction of the future. let's talk a little bit about that and what you see for hillary's presidential campaign. >> what i didn't want to do [inaudible] and it was the year -- christmas day 2019, hillary clinton as president, and she is easily beating rand paul so put it this way i pulled out my inner tom
clancy for a chapter in the book and i wanted to offer a scenario where the future that was plausible on current trends, the first thing that i write about in that scenario is the price of oil is going to plummet in value of the dollar is going to rise and this is going to sharply hurt the economy of commodity with countries like russia and so far the prediction looks pretty good. so i do write about hillary in that sense. i am not a writer about political personality but my sense is that billy clinton and foreign policy, it's like her husband falls more into the mainstream of american foreign policymaking in the post-world war ii timeframe than barack obama. barack obama represented a fundamental break from the
post-world war ii bipartisan tradition that the ballot. truman and continued with jack kennedy and richard nixon, ronald reagan, bill clinton, and george w. bush. so my sense is that she would be comparatively a much more realistic ideological foreign policy president. is she my first choice? probably not. >> i don't have a first choice yet because i don't know who will be in it. paul: >> host: who are you most interested in? >> guest: i don't know honestly because the people have not been notable for their foreign-policy credentials. maybe marco rubio has established a little bit on foreign policy than others would be contenders have not. the guy who worries me, and i'm absolutely frank that it
worries me is rand paul. i understand the he is not his father, i think that his father had drank foreign-policy moonshine. and you can even hear the evolution. part of the things that he has sent worries me and is the basic view that i think that rand paul comes with -- or comes much closer to barack obama in terms of foreign-policy outlook than any of the other presidential contenders. barack obama wants less of a foreign policy that is a global footprint to the united states with bigger government and rand paul once it for the sake of smaller government. >> we often meet with politicians. >> typically the best exchanges are off the record exchanges.
it varies. but it is an opportunity to spend an hour or so with an interesting political figure a governor or a senator and a presidential candidate. and they really get to pick their brains and see if they are capable of answering the following questions. most politicians will cut to the obvious questions you are a journalist and you know this every bit as well as i do. they sort of red this cheat sheet but you really start to see these guys at work when they are probing a little further and wondering if this isn't any kind of monetary policy the value of the dollar the nature of american military engagement we got right what we got wrong why that matters. and that is important.
it is important to be able to put these presidential contenders to that kind of test. especially where we have a guy like you that could push each of these candidates to see what we need to do. one cliché or another. and we can't just operate in the realm of sound biting. sought. >> what you going to do to change national security for the remainder of your two years in office? >> i think the we are entering into a uniquely dangerous. lack of time when our adversaries overseas think that there is a weak and indecisive president who is more interested
in this rather than his legacy and that is very problematic and i think that we see it in the kind of combination of incompetence and indifference that helps to explain this for the political rallies in paris and i would start to ask about the nature that he has if that were an off the record conversation. he would never say something publicly, but that is what i would like to know because i think that the next few years are going to be very choppy waters for the united states. but it's not just that our enemies think that we are weak and a resolute and this is an opportunity to do things. our allies are also worried and if you are in israel or saudi arabia, you may ask yourself whether american guarantees are any good and you don't need to start freelancing mess in ways that might involve the united states at a time and manner that
is not in our choosing. >> host: we have two minutes left in the hour. so i want to read to you those last sentences and ask you to explain that a little bit. and you say do not dismiss america is the world's policeman. when these thugs show up in your neighborhood as they sometimes do, you will be grateful to know that they are reassuring in this dangerous world. make the case. i don't think that that is a very popular image. >> new zealand is a lovely country, i've never been there but we are not a country that is is going to be irrelevant to the rest of the 21st century, we are still going to be the preferred target for terror and still going to be the country that china is going to want to replace and we are still going to be involved in the struggle
in the future from little countries to taiwan to israel to poland and so on. we are going to be the world's number one country for the rest of this entry because this is a country with amazing capability of renewal and regeneration. as we are not going to be able to essentially say that we just want to be a pleasant little country leave us alone, the world will not leave us alone whether we like it or not. as we have to decide how we want to behave in that world. for over seven decades we have shouldered the role but we've also benefited from being the world's policeman and from this remarkable technologically advanced integrated network world and we want that world to carry on. no one was watching the show would say that this is the ideal
world. and i don't think that everyone says what i really want to do is be a cop. but nobody in this watching us wants to live in a neighborhood without a cop and we don't want to live in a world without a copy either. i would rather have america be that cop then have vladimir putin or someone else. that is the real choice that we face today. but we have to face it with sobriety and seriousness of what our options are and understand what we are doing is not all tourism, above all in his self-interest properly understood which is the basis of all smart american policies. >> host: take you for writing the book and talking about it. >> guest: thank you for having me. >> that was "after words."
our signature program in which authors of the latest nonfiction books are interviewed by journalists, public policymakers, and others familiar with material. it airs every weekend on booktv at 10:00 p.m. on saturdays, 12:00 p.m. on sundays and 12:00 a.m. on monday. you can also watch us online. go to booktv.org and click on "after words" in the series of topics list on the upper right side of the page. >> here's a look at some books are being published this week. governor mike huckabee shares from his run for president and what he is optimistic for the united states in his book "god guns, grits, and gravy." then we have the book by monhamedou ould slahi "guantanamo diary" detailing the
treatment he has received in the u.s. treatment center. then we have jan jarboe russell, "the train to crystal city" where thousands of japanese and german and italian american families were sent during world war ii. former marine infantry officer david morris, "the evil hours" explores the cultural history of poster mattock stress disorder in his book as well as his personal struggle with the illness. and then we have sarah chayes "thieves of state" talking about the negative effects of political corruption and points to the issues in iraq and ukraine, egypt and nigeria as a result of pervasive corruption. finally we have thanassis cambanis,"once upon a revolution" telling the story of the 2011 political uprising in his book. look for these titles and book stores this coming week and watch for the authors in the near future on booktv and
booktv.org. >> yours look at some book fairs and festivals happening around the country. the tv will have live coverage at the savanna book festival which will take place from the 12 through the 15th of february in georgia. then on march march 14 and 15 booktv will be at the university of arizona with live coverage of this event annual festival of books. then the virginia festival of the book will be held in charlotte will virginia and for march through the 29th, the city of new orleans will host the tennessee williams literary festival. let us know and we will add your festivals to our list. e-mail us at firstname.lastname@example.org. >> congressman steve israel of new york is next on booktv. he talks about his novel about a pharmaceutical salesman gets caught up in a top-secret surveillance program. it is about 45 minutes.
>> good evening. i am the coowner of politics and prose and on behalf of the staff i would like to thank you for coming and thank you for braving the cold and the ice. i have just a few quick administrative note and now would be a good time to turn off your cell phones or anything else that might be during the talk. when we get the q&a session we would appreciate if you would step up to this microphone because we are recording the event tonight. ..