tv After Words with Jonathan Chait CSPAN January 15, 2017 9:00pm-9:57pm EST
why is that? >> guest: when people look back at obama 100 years from now when his presidency is summarized for schoolchildren, the first thing you will learn is that he was america's first african-american president or the first non-white male president. that is not just a footnote or a breakthrough, but something that defined in the public mind something that he had to grapple with and i tried to make the argument in the book it wasn't just something that happened to him but something he helped to shape and create a narrative of race in america that helped to bring america forward. it was hardly incidental and it drove support for him and opposition for him.
race was essential to the perception of obama and everything he did from healthcare onboard. i do try to show it in an empirical way it was driven by racial perceptions but also something that he struggled with at first. i think eventually mastered in a way we should study as an important part of his achievement. >> host: covering the white house during the obama presidency is how much barack obama tried to get away from this issue. he tried to avoid dealing with this issue. he was brought to deal with the issue from time to time whether it was the trayvon marfan shooting and so on. how does that affect the way that the public perceived his presidency and his ability to move legislation here in washington? when he was somebody that didn't want to have this front and center
>> guest: it changed throughout his presidency. the first couple of years he was afraid of the question. he was asked about skip gates and gave an answer about a distinguished professor arrested outside of his own home, a pretty outrageous case. maybe at the worst of the most violent case of police abuse, but an outrageous case. and this professor was his friend and this became a huge controversy he hav had to resoly bringing both parties to the summit. this was a cleanup operation and they tried to stay away from it but in the presidency he learned how to use the issue anyway he could control it and shape the narrative and the chapter ends with his speech on the edmund pettis bridge for the march on
selma. this dramatic speech in which he wove the civil rights movement into the story of america and he needed not just a thing that happened incidentally. when i worked with history as a kid it was all progressive but i think still when i was reading history as a kid, you read the chapter on what happened in the 20s and 30s and then there would be a box and here's what's happening to african-americans at the time. they were inventing jazz or peanut butter or some other little trivial thing that puts them off to the side of what was going on. it made it central to the experience was the heart of the experience to a more perfect union and began selling to america in 2004 it was almost
completed not only for his presidency but by this version of history that he formed as president of the united states, so it was acting as a public intellectual as president using race to tell the american story. >> host: but he still had to deal with animosity that was driven at times. you solvuse office in the tea py rallies and the way that you endure the dealings you talk about that moment when congressman joe wilson said you lie during that speech. he had to deal with ugliness at times that other presidents didn't have to deal with. >> guest: i make this case in my book but first let me give conservatives their view. i think that conservatives are rightly indignant that their ideas are constantly
investigated a. you couldn't always be sure to. joe wilson is a great example who scream that president obama and you could say that he never would have done this to another president tha look at the way tt republicans were with bill clinton. in other days it was just as bad. you have a jesse helms directing violence when bill clinton visited his home state were warning that he would be shot. you had insane conspiracy theories as dignified about clinton as a murderer or drug dealer. there were serious derangement. so conservatives have a point when liberals say you only did this because he was black. this became a waiver for a lot of people to dismiss all conservative objections and politics and all of their
theories. i think that was not fair and they were not right about that. however, this is true and you can show politics became much more racialized. people had racial animosity and drove their politics much more under obama. people that object into the interracial marriage and are suspicious of african-americans. any measure you want to take to racism. the feelings became much more mapped onto the partisan politics than they were afterwards. so they deal with the world in which racism and racial feelings became almost impossible to pull away from other kinds of conservatives. so, again at the beginning of the presidency i think over time he found a way to deal with it
in a way that was with his advantage and america's advantage as well. >> host: do you think that this time will be looked at as a kind of racial healing or was it ripped apart, do you think? >> guest: there were elements of both. i think white america became more aware and you can look at the polls about abuse. that is an issue where white americans were just not aware of the scale of the problem. so it isn't just obama's doing. cell phone videos made americans aware of the mistreatment that goes on a that many of us assume must be a rarity. but i do think that he had a lot
of success in conciliating between different visions and you could always say look, the police have a tough job and legitimate reasons for fear. we can't tie them all in the same brush but a lot of them do bad things it doesn't mean all of them do bad things. and he could also empathize and relates to the fear african-americans feel with police said he had a marvelous ability to see all sides of the issue into the practical way to move this forward. that gives an example of the ways that he dealt with the racial question. >> host: no drama obama. >> guest: he could be an african-american president and also speak to the issue in a way that i think was really able to threlatable tothe majority of a. now, all americans didn't see it that way. there was a significant minority almost entirely white saw him as a black man speaking for black
america coming to white america in a spirit of hostility. this was the minority for america, but a powerful minority of america. it was enough of a minority to give donald trump the nomination and then a series of strange events to sneak into the presidency. nonetheless, obama i think is to figure who can speak to a conciliatory majoritarian vision of racial understanding as indicated by his approval ratings which were very high in a way that no other figure in the united states can. >> host: moving forward in the book i find this eight fascinating subject because it is the aspect that his advisers will tell you he doesn't get enough credit for and that is
preventing a second great depression. you have made the observation in the book that the president wasn't going to get credit for this. you don't get credit for preventing something bad from happening. explain that. >> guest: that is just the nature. you credit them for things that didn't happen. roosevelt got credit for helping the depression of th overtook ag time to do that. because the depression had already gone through years of reaching before roosevelt took office. no one would have credited him with what happened. you can't say that it would have been worse if obama had been there. part of the problem was they didn't know how bad the crisis
was of what had happened to the economy in 2009 understating the extent of the crash so they contracted much more than anyone knew at the time. they didn't have measures long enough to contain all the damage. so there was a lot of pain and it took a long time to heal the pain that resulted. so all people saw as obama in office and then things got worse. they couldn't see here is what would have happened if we didn't institute all these policies. >> host: i remember when he was inaugurated, there were hundreds of thousands of jobs being lost on a monthly basis and he came into office as a firefighter and you talk about a point in the book where timothy geithner, the treasury secretary and economic adviser was basically saying this is really
bad and how you will be remembered as preventing a second great depression. he said i don't want to be remembered for that. i want to be remembered as a transformative president. >> guest: that is exactly right. he had a structural agenda he wanted to tackle in the climate change and health care reform but also education and some other areas. and then he comes into office and it's the greatest emergency and timothy geithner is telling him just like you said, forget all that other stuff, the house is on fire. we are going to put out the fire and that's it. he said no, i want to do both. and i make the case and that he did do both. he put out the fire and stopped the recession from spiraling out of one of the biggest depressions. he could have done more and i can see there are ways he could have done more but the united states came out of this crisis much better than any other advanced economy that has a
financial system and went to a financial crisis. so compared to all of our peers, his response was in first class and while everyone else including his administration if this would supersede all of the other reforms he planned to do he still managed to get those things anyway. >> president obama comes into office and has to pass a stimulus package or at least they feel like they had to pass the stimulus package and what you lay out in the book, you start to see the beginning of the obama white house and republicans in congress at although he did have a democratically controlled congress, in the beginning in both houses of congress, getting republicans to come along and support the stimulus measures that were needed at that time, that was difficult for them. >> guest: at the beginning he only had 58 democratic senators.
so he was driven out of the party and al franken wasn't needed because there was a recount. so, he had a short period where he needed republicans to pass the stimulus and when he came in, he assumed they would pass the stimulus. republicans get past the stimulus the year before at the beginning when they had the first inklings of the crisis that congress passed the stimulus and i think that it was overwhelmingly popular about well over 300 votes. everyone on the republican side just about, was for stimulus. you put money in people's pockets and they spend it. there was a republican in office and that was going to suffered the damage of the crisis. then fast forward almost a year later and now they realize the crisis is dramatically worse
than they ever thought and the arguments for stimulus are much greater than what they thought was a tiny little grease fire they put out. it's now a ten story blaze. they said we don't believe in this theory it is all nonsense. they have no ide had no idea whs talking about. we need to do the opposite and cut the deficit in the middle of the crisis and that is the way we are going to solve it. so they turned on a dime. at the same time, they were meeting and concluding that their political success depended on maintaining partisan opposition to everything that president obama did. if you look at the sequence of events, you can say republicans made a political decision about what was in their party's best interest in how they were going to return to power. and that drove their policy stance and that is the reason why they suddenly decided it no
longer applied. >> host: this doesn't tackle a whole lot in the book but i remembered it being a complaint so i want to get your take. nancy pelosi saying we one. a house chief of staff, how much of that do you think was productive or counterproductive to get republicans on board early in the administration? if you talk to the republicans on capitol hill, they would say that data to some extent plays in the atmosphere to have these hard charging democrats for barack obama at the beginning of the administration. >> guest: nancy pelosi made the comment in response to the republican votes in the
republicans were saying we are against stimulus. we don't believe in this stuff at all. one idea was based on the economics that used to be the theory that both parties had before and now republicans were saying they didn't need it anymore so how do we reconcile these, we should at least have the upper hand in crafting. she wasn't saying we won't accept your input but look, we are at the starting point which is usually how it goes. >> host: moving forward after the stimulus measure and so forth, we got right into the thick of the affordable care act, health care reform and even some in the white house are
saying to the president at the time, going after health care reform right now might not be the best political decision, but barack obama said no, we are doing this. hell did that shape the first-term because for the first term people look at it as being more successful although pursuing healthcare reform did plant the seeds taking control of the house in 2010. so they were pretty fiery stuff and they start putting the president on this path to eventually deal with the government. >> guest: i wouldn't accept the premise that democrats would have held at the house. i think in the atmosphere where they had a total control and the government and you have an economic crisis that would mean they are going to get worse no matter what they did, people
were going to turn against the party in power and i think they would have lost congress no matter what they did. i don't think they had any chance to hold on to congress. so the question is what are they going to do when they have the majority and are they going to try to change. you have it like you said a lot of people even in the democratic party let alone the political establishment urging them not to do this. it was the conventional wisdom in washington that he was making a huge mistake going forward with health care reform. i think that he saw it as a moral imperative and he was right to do it. there were moments when he had to decide whether he was going to go forward. healthcare reform was dying and you had the democrats spending
month after month after month trying to get republicans to agree on a bill saying what can we do, you put your name on it. tell us what you need. one by one, every republican dropped off and they asked what can you agree to when they see nothing. >> host: they were holdin holdin to the former senator from maine. >> guest: they said you've got to get other people here. mitch mcconnell had gone to them and said we need to have unified opposition. mitch mcconnell openly described his theory which was best. people in both parties were signing onto the bills. the public would get the message that people have solved the problems and there were no controversies and they would
support obama and vote for this party. conversely if they opposed everything they would see a lot of conflict in washington and if things were going badly all of the measures were partisan and they would punish the party. and mcconnell was right. >> host: getting to the signing of the affordable care act initially, there was this site called the public option which was attached to a centrally what people call romney care that forces you to buy insurance. and that insurance mandate is something that not only me met probably supportefromthe support other republicans. it was a conservative healthcare reform concept. you talk about that a little in the book although president obama had a healthcare concept at the health care reform
package, he was still struggling to line up support so they give up the public option to get it to the finish line. of all of the legislative pieces of business he had to tackle in his administration, this was perhaps the most fascinating piece of business to watch. >> guest: at the beginning like you say obama favored the public option. so when they explained the bill it as a public option that makes it acceptable because they thought that was always going to be part of the bill. so, then obama said all right we will put that out. they had a handful of democrats that opposed that. you need every single democrat and republicans. then republicans came up with
different reasons. it's notable that the bill even the one paul ryan was supporting was very similar to what obama ended up signing but it was the same thing when bill clinton tackled health-care reform in 1993 to 1994. thethey cannot provide is that y have proposed because these ideas only served the purpose of allowing republicans to say we go for something, just not your bill. >> host: and you described the signing of the affordable care act as one of the most successful reforms in the united states and now that we are on the cusp of the beginning of the trump administration, he's made this job number one to repeal obamacare. they laid out how they are going to replace it, we haven't seen a
replaced bill presented to the american people at this point, but they want to get rid of obamacare. how does that affect because i remember them saying from the north lawn to the white house dismissed the legislative achievement that came out every time they described obamacare. what happens now? >> guest: we will see what happens now. but i think what you described indicates how lasting this is going to be. if they believe that the bill was failing and collapsing, then they would eliminate it right away. and they could do that, but they won't do that. and the reason is they know that it is not failing and there are a lot of people that depend on the bill. so the position now is the same as the position has been since 2009. we oppose your bill. we agree the status quo is
terrible and unacceptable. there are better plans without the parts nobody likes. we are working on this plan and we will come up with next week or next month or next year. it is without harming anybody. it isn't powerful to rate this kind of bill. what they are trying to do is maybe even four years. they don't know how long. >> host: but they are going to put up this repeal for years to give themselves even more time to come up with a plan that does all these wonderful things.
what does this tell us? before obamacare was put into place, you have tens of millions of americans that are uninsured and better outsid that are outse system and could be ignored by the people in washington because they didn't have a program that took care of them. but they were not organized. they didn't have an existing benefit. so they could just be ignored every single day because it wasn't on the agenda. it's very hard to take away a benefit somebody has in washington. it's easy to prevent them. republicans are discovered and it is hard to take away. that's why they are not going to take away. i don't know what is going to happen to obamacare. it's possible at the one and republicans will end up just
extending and extending and they won't end up changing the law at all. they will give some relatively small changes to repeal it and replace it. and they will call it trump care. it's possible they will repeal it and come up with nothing. but then they will have a lot of angry people in a massive backlash which they are already afraid of. >> host: >> guest: whatever happens i think that it's fair to say obama has changed healthcare politics forever. the republican administration can't come in and leave 30 million people uninsured without any cost. they did that underbrush. they didn't touch the issue at all.
>> host: it was the attempt to deal with climate change and the environmental legacy. you talk about and about how they tried to bring about the cap and trade that even had fellow democrats like west virginia senator joe manchin. we are a member of this so well when he put the bill up againstt the tree and shot it and that was the end of cap and trade. so the president had to turn to regulation and do this administratively. not very sexy. there isn't a big bill or sign attached to it but you consider this to be a big part of his legacy. >> guest: i do. newt gingrich was cap and trade.
it was the conservative plan for dealing with climate change and an overall cap and that is how we would leave it to the market to decide how to allocate the cuts so the market t will find e most efficient ways the private sector could find them and firms could come up with the cheapest way to get rid of emissions and that's how the market would work. this had been done with others in the past successfully. ronald reagan had supported it to use others and then the cost has been below because they said the market worked so conservatives who care about the environment say we have this plan and this is how we are going to solve climate change. republicans were against it and
disappeared so cap and trade died and there was a long period they had no recourse and have spent a lot of time writing up and talking about it as if it was a complete failure on what they understandably regarded as the most important issue in the world so it was reversible damage to the fate of the entire planet. but like you said, and like the book shows he found another way around it. but they used a series of regulation and existing law. the government had already been regulated for years so we tightened the regulation and worked to make them more fuel efficient so they were using less and less energy.
the biggest piece of this was the power sector. it was already displaced and it was the dirtiest energy source by far. it was already kicking out coal everywhere. a lot of things i it didn't hapn in the ways people paid attention to. environmental regulation there were no ceremonies to any of these things. look what we are doing with air conditioning standards and building standards it's just piece by piece. the stimulus had $90 billion in green energy invested that hardly anybody paid attention to
it because the economy was falling off the cliff and people didn't care about whether it was going to reduce emissions six or eight or ten years later. they cared about we are all going to die right now. but the stimulus had a huge environmental reform and that actually mattered because wind energy and solar energy became much cheaper over the course of the terms of there was a massive expansion. >> host: this got thrown out because mitt romney at one point i remember i was on that trip they took reporters to highlight going to a company that failed. another part in the book you talk about how mitt romney went after the president saying i'm going to slow the rise of the oceans and so forth and you pointed out at one point he said
in a speech i want to help you get a job or make your life better. so they are making hay out of this and going through the environmental legacy and making it more difficult for the president to achieve the goals. >> guest: looking after the long-term interest of the country. it is a thankless task and that is why politicians want people to be happy right now. so, if there is a trade-off between what we can do for our constituents right now are between now and the next election for 20, 30, 50, 200 years down the line they would usually change and get elected right now. forget about the oceans. i'm going to help you get a job right now. i do want to point out returning
to the topic romney promised they would get rid of the regulations and taxes obama had going and they would get unemployment down to 6% by the end of the term. if i don't get there, you can fire me. but that is how successful my plan is going to be. and of course it is below 5% now and has been with months to go. >> host: you mentioned that she had an unofficial became a big administrator at the epa which is interesting to see. >> guest: one of the argument i try to make in the book is that obama borrowed the ideas from the republican party and they decided that it was against everything he was for. mccarthy was an unofficial.
they can import the model indicated, they have for the clean powerplant. but again this is one of those issues that they had the position that republicans just moved and abandoned it. i think the case you can make is that they drove a huge amount of progress and cost no credit. >> host: you don't get a lot of credit for preventing that. >> guest: if it is happening right away and miami will be submerged in 2015 and abandoned obama would have gotten no credit. all he's doing is delaying the day so you get even less credit for that. this is a leader taking on a
thankless task which is why there was no agreement on the climate change. the actions were in trickle to bringing it about. >> guest: it's part of the obama legacy and it's something donald trump wanted to talk about all the time and to talk about it in the book saying he wanted to bomb the un with our vices. the president likes to remind people a big part of the legacy as killing osama bin laden and getting american forces by and large out of afghanistan withdrawing from iraq although there is the status of forces agreement that is debated so much that red line there is a
huge subject to tackle when it comes to the president's foreign policy legacy. how do you think we are going to see if because it is hard to take out osama bi osama bin ladi call the red line and then i do not enforce it. >> guest: one thing i want people to understand is that it's not an unofficial account of. i traded to account for his mistakes and failures and shortcomings. it's a positive account. he's been a successful president but not perfect. the foreign policy is one you can find more mistakes and i argue in the book she's been a transformative domestic president. i wouldn't argue that he's been a transformative he managed the
foreign-policy and they left him an absolute shambles and managed to reverse a lot of the damage that thbut the red line was a me obama himself was responsible for by blurting out this comment in a live interview about the red line division he didn't intend to take. >> host: than he used chemical weapons and doesn't do anything to. it sent a message to the world. >> guest: they never developed a response to the crisis. the best argument they can make is we didn't have a better option which might be correct. it's hard to know what might have happened because the rest
of the world doesn't have the intelligence they would have and it's not easy to intervene. we've tried a lot of times. they might be right there aren't other options but a lot of that they didn't have a lot of great responses. they put some points on board and made some changes like in the book. i think that the opening with cuba was a master stroke. they succeeded in rebuilding the image in the world although it is about to go back down the other way. >> host: the other part is dealing with russia and vladimir putin that moves from one
president to another. barack obama had to deal with vladimir putin and with mixed results. the obama administration can say he indicated crania so we slept these sanctions on them and it did affect their economy and standing in the world than donalbut thendonald trump comesd everything changes. how do you assess the dealings with vladimir putin and the whole situation in ukraine because as it turns out, it's set up an amazing situation that occurs. >> guest: i think the response was reasonably robust. they realized you couldn't go to war with ukraine and russia.
they would send american troops to defend the territorial sovereignty so when russia is dismantling ukraine we don't have a response but we do have a diplomatic and economic response. we organized opposition in europe and the united nations and isolated russia and imposed sanctions that harmed elite and they were stealing all this money in the fossil fuel sector but as you said, he has his own response which is if you don't like the american government can't try to get a better one and he basically does. we don't know how intertwined he is with donald trump that he got a much more favorable president who will defend his human rights abuses and attacks on neighboring countries and whose
prospect of secretary of state is his favorite american and lobbied against sanctions obama put in place. i think the end of the story is going to be sad for obama that putin got the american government he wanted and will end up with the upper hand. >> host: let's talk about donald trump because you do delve into his candidacy and now we are turning from the obama presidency to the trump administration. donald trump was the king of the buddha movement which we didn't talk about earlier in the program, that wa was an integral part of the first chapter looking at president obama through a racial lens has been g the first african-american president. here you will have a situation on inauguration day you have president obama and soon-to-be president donald trump on the
same stage shaking hands and here you have the man that is going to be taking the reins on the oval office questioning the legitimacy, accused him of not being born in this country and so forth. what do you make of that? >> guest: i wrote most of this before the election. i wrote a lot about donald trump because he and minimized what i described in the first chapter into the last of the republican party is being dominated. that was becoming the driving political force in the grassroots opposition's and how they managed to tap into this backlash for his own candidacy.
it's quite the irony that this proponent of the conspiracy theory is going to succeed the first. it's not an accident. that is how he won the republican nomination by submitting his loyalty and attaching what was the most important trend in conservative grassroots politics which was a racialized backlash in the belief they were giving to other people and that is the sentiment that drove the tea party and made it possible to compromise because he represented the voters mind something evil. i make the argument donald trump is not the future of this country. when we look back 50 years from now or 100 years from now i
think that trump will be a figure that comes along once in a while in politics and exploits right-wing populism, charles kaufman, george wallace, joe mccarthy. they all attracted a mass following. they were not able to become president but they were hugely influential and attached to something important but in the long run, i think that obama is right the country is moving in a different direction and i think like i said 5what i said 50 or m now, obama's ideas will be the ones that people admire and teach them part of our civic pentagon is donald trump will be a step backwards. it will be a story that will move past. >> host:.
they were out on the campaign trail. do you think that he will be tempted to look at the obama legacy and say all these things i said out there on the campaign trail there's stuff that maybe i ought to hold onto. >> guest: it's happening on healthcare than the republicans and congress afraid of creating so they are putting it off until they figure it out and they are not going to figure it out so they don't know how to deal with the problem on the environment. he doesn't need in climate change. the epa administrator let fossil fuel companies write letters and he said i'm with those guys. whatever they say that's my stance. i think that he realizes there will be costs to him if he tries
to destroy the legacy. what will happen is he won't continue the path of progress. they can muddle through and give some favors to the fossil fuel industry and kind of pleases some of the base but doesn't alienate himself from most of the rest of the countries in the world that are committed to that, they are committed to doing something in climate change. >> host: let me get to one of your final moments in the book and that is the notion of the disappointed that left. i do think it is an interesting subject. you make the argument republicans are better rallying
around for mike george w. bush achieved quite a bit and you have these phases now. now. would have been changes in a great extent. what's going on their? >> guest: bernie sanders was tapping into the liberal content with obama that was there in the beginning and i tried to chase this whatever he did it wasn't enough. you could argue he was falling short, and i try to answer this in part. not only do i try to show in the book in most cases he was going far beyond what other members of the party wanted to.
but let's throw in the towel obama says we are going to keep going when everyone else was willing to give up so she was an ambitious president. when i try to go back and say he said this with reason about truman and roosevelt every single time there is a democratic president they are spending most of their time talking about how he is a sellout and hasn't done enough and wants to compromise too much and hasn't rallied the working class. >> host: he's always happy with half a loaf. >> guest: the criticisms are identical. when you have the same complaint about the last democratic presidents in a row you have concluded it's not them, it's you.
sometimes they are right. jimmy carter wasn't much of a liberal, obama was more of a liberal progressive and discontent shows with being in power. >> host: what do you think the answer is for 2022 you think the democratic party should run someone like barack obama who is a pragmatic progressive for the most part? a bernie sanders as a socialist or should they go back to the bill clinton model which is southern democrat, maybe governor for the north carolina, something like that. what do you think? >> guest: obama was a political success.
this is what you should try to do. he follows the model. tim kane would be an example. he's like obama in a lot of ways which is why he almost made him vice president eight years before he became vice president. >> host: do you think the democrats will have trouble with donald trump? >> guest: i think that he's going to be a very bad president and he's not going to do the things he said he would do. he needed a lot of the voters in the midwest and a lot of them thought he could be an enemy of the status quo. they saw what the clintons left in a lot of ways. a lot of these attacks on the big banks and special interest
but he's more closely tied to special interest more than obama and clinton and george bush. he's a very inside a republican president baserepublicanpresidee appointments and policies. so i think that it will be hard to square the circle that he needed the voters. if you can keep the coalition that is still a segment in the country that's the roa roadmap o winning. >> host: hillary clinton won the popular vote. to start wrapping things up how do you think barack obama's presidency is going to be remembered near term, long-term does the trump presidency make
obama's presidency looks better, what do you think? >> guest: any major social reform is going to produce a backlash. abraham lincoln passed the amendment with slavery but it was a terrorist uprising in the south to taksouth to take away s that were given and reduced many conditions that were close so we remembered a great achievement that happened under lincoln but we don't know what happened after that which robbed african americans much of the freedom that they one and it took decades to restore the basic civil rights to fulfill what lincoln was trying to do at the time. republicans have been attacking elements of the new deal and to this day republicans want to privatize the reforms roosevelt put in place so it's a measure
of the ambitions obama carried out and republicans are trying to dismantle. i can't predict the future. i think it ought to be liberals recognizing a the administration going forward the way we do and that is the closest thing we've got ten and it should be defended. >> host: fascinating conversation. enjoyed the book and i think people are anxious to go over the administration and as we find the new one they will offer that book. thanks very much. good talking to you.
how often have you heard a politician the last few years say something like this and i will quote a brief paragraph. many people watching tonight can probably remember a time when finding a good job and finding a factory or business downtown? you didn't need a degree, competition was limited and if you worked hard to come in but have a job for life with a decent paycheck and could benefits and promotion occasionally review but have the pride of seeing your kids work at the same company. that has changed and many painfully. that happens to be presi