tv Washington Journal CSPAN June 19, 2016 7:00am-10:01am EDT
general and newspapers in particular have dealt with criticism during the 2016 election cycle. as always, we will take your calls and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. "washington journal" is next. host: good morning. when the senate convenes tomorrow afternoon, lawmakers will be debating four separate issues on gun legislation. the votes will be head by democrat senator dianne feinstein with her legislation, also republican senator john cornyn of texas, all of this following a 15-hour filibuster on the gun issue last week by connecticut senator chris murphy, a democrat. it is sunday morning, june 19, a very happy father's day. we'll begin with the gun debate and, for the first 45 minutes, we only want to hear from gun owners. our question, whether or not there is compromise on this
legislation. our phone lines are divided. those living in the eastern half of the country, 202-748-8000. for those of new the mountain pacific time times, 202-748-80001. send us a tweet @cspanwj, or fine us at facebook.com/cspan. good sunday morning to you. also this week, we're following the debate in great britain over brexit, whether or not great britain should remain or leave the european union. we'll have live coverage of the result courtesy of itv. that gets underway thursday evening at 5:00 eastern time on c-span2. tomorrow night, the debate over gun legislation, and this story from the "orlando sentinel," a memorial service will be taking place later today. 20,000 people expected to attend the services. there will be a vigil in an orlando park, and services taking place at the cathedral church of st. luke. that story this morning from
the "orlando sentinel." this, front page photograph from the "new york times," a make-shift memorial taking place outside the orlando regional medical center for those 49 people who were killed, and more than 50 others injured in the attack that took place one week ago. the second amendment states the following -- it focuses on a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. only part of the debate tomorrow evening on c-span2, as the senate takes up the issue. again, legislation red by senator cornyn and senator feinstein. you'll watch it live on c-span2. the president traveled to orlando this past week. this is what he had to say. president obama: this debate needs to change. it's outgrown the old political stalemates. the notion that the answer to this tragedy would be to make
sure that more people in a nightclub are similarly armed common iller defies sense. those who defend the easy accessibility of assault weapons should meet these families and explain why that makes sense. they should meet with the newtown families, some of whom joe saw yesterday. whose children would now be finishing fifth grade, on why it is that we think our liberties requires these epeated tragedies. that's not the meaning of liberty. i'm pleased to hear the senate will hold votes on presenting individuals with possible terrorist ties from buying
guns, including assault weapons. i truly hope that senators rise to the moment and do the right thing. i hope that senators who voted no on background checks after newtown have a change of heart, and then i hope the house does the right thing. and helps end the playing of violence that these weapons of war inflict on so many young lives. host: the president in orlando, florida. he was joined by vice president joe biden. this is the cover story of "time" magazine, why the did did they die," the 49 who were killed at the purse nightclub, and a photograph of those, many of whom will be buried today or in the weeks ahead. the week ahead, i should say. zach is joining us from youngstown, ohio. good morning. caller: hey, good morning. i do believe there's compromise on this issue. however, i think when you look at what compromise is needed on the current bills, it comes
down to that wait on the no-fly list and the due process required with that list. i mean, the second amendment is pretty clear, shall not be infringed. i mean, when you look at the time, the security of a free state, the same thing like an oath anybody takes in the military, you know, against all enemies, foreign and domestic. again, like anything, it's multifaceted. but the arms in the second amendment are military arms. it's not for hunting or anything else. it's to protect against all enemies, foreign and domestic. god forbid it ever comes to that, but those are the arms you want in the hands of civilians. when it comes to this legislation, certain restrictions are absolutely ok, such as background checks, and if it's required that there be a waiting period for those people who are under investigation, well, then, you know, that's fine.
but give them their due process. it's like if you have a name that's similar and you're on the no-fly list and you want to get off, even that, guns aside, it's near impossible to do from what i understand. that needs to be looked into. and if 72 hours isn't enough time, we really need to hash out what is a reasonable amount of time to keep somebody safe, but not infringe upon their second amendment rights. host: zach, how long have you been a gun owner? caller: i have been a gun owner since i've been 16 years old. i was gifted a hunting shotgun, and my first private, you know, purchase was made, you know, with my own money when i was 21. never had an issue. it's never got up and shot anybody. a gun is a tool like anything else. it's responsibility and education is required. but it is a right. host: zach, thanks for leading off our discussion as a gun owner. we're asking you whether or not there is compromise on legislation with an eye on what's going to happen in the
senate tomorrow. this is a tweet from one of our refers, referring to the president's comments earlier. but mr. president, why does the debate need to change, the issue never changes and you never address the real problem. from pennsylvania, bill, good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: we're fine. how are you today? caller: listen, my problem is with the gun. i've been carrying a gun for 50 years, ok? i just came back from europe. and they're praying they wish they had a gun there in greece right now, ok? it's not the guns that we got problems with. the problem is that the president is playing games with. you don't want to open the issue of the mental problem we have and go after that, number one. the number three, you want to destroy the gun owner like me that i carry a gun 50 years and
other people that protect themselves. we don't go around killing people. and he wants to mess us up. i think it's totally wrong, and he's not going to be successful on that, and i can guarantee you that. and this wasn't taxpayers money, instead of doing the right thing for the right people. and i wish he could change his mind and use his brain instead of his attitude that he has today and the american people. it's uncalled for. i feel sorry for him, really. thank you very much. god bless you. caller: fwrill pennsylvania. let's check out some of the tweets that have been coming in over the last couple of minutes. this is from one viewer, saying do a buyback program like australia. u can send us a tweet, @cspanwj. politicizing a track zee his game. every time there's a shooting, he runs to the cameras to blame the american people and guns. and finally, from fred, who says no, democrats need to focus on criminals.
congress needs to take them from you, and it will be better for everyone. again, send us a tweet, @cspanwj. also, many of you weighing in at facebook.com/cspan. this is from benjamin, who says i'm a gun owner and i enjoy both the pleasure of target shooting and a sense of security that comes from being able to defend oneself in a home invasion. that being said, i would gladly give up any right to gun ownership in order to stop mass shootings. and bob allen says not only is it possible, it is desperately needed. keep weapons of war off the streets. other than that, buy all the guns you want if your head is stable. let's go to robert, joining us from california. good morning. welcome to the conversation. robert, good morning. caller: hello? host: yes, from california, you're next. caller: oh. am i on yet? host: you are. please go ahead. caller: well, in the second amendment, it's interesting
that it's a comma after the security and free state of people keep and bear arms. and you're talking about militia. back in that time, they didn't want to have army, and the militia was the people of the state, like they had to fight the indians off or something. it wasn't till 1814, after the british burned the white house they decided we needed to have a standing army. somewhere along the line, they do pass, by law, they say that litia is a whole body of able-bodied male citizens, as you can subject to call to military service. that's part of your draft, the right of the draft, right there under the second amendment. but to regulate it, it says to regulate it, and that would mean we can regulate and there is no reason.
we're not going to have a civil war with guns in this country to fight, to take over or to fight back against the one percenters. of course, they have been preparing for the way they have with homeland security and various buildup of military, but anyhow, yes, i think we should be regulated. there's no reason to have these assault weapons, and i'm somewhat bothered occasionally by my neighbors that will occasionalingly off with various types of guns. i live kind of away from the city, so there's a lot of -- these people have done a lot of shooting. anyhow, that's my comment, the militia. host: right. well, thank you for the call from california. this is the headline from the hill newspaper, depen, teeing up the debate that will take place tomorrow afternoon and into the evening on c-span2. democrats are targeting
vulnerable senate republicans over the issue of gun control in the light of last week's mass shooting at that orlando gay nightclub, in the effort to regain the majority in the upper chamber. democrat senate candidates are highlighting the measure that would bar suspected terrorists from purchasing firearms, as well as one to expand background checks, their renewed push sets the stage for a major clash with republicans on monday when votes on several gun control measures are expected. that's the point from michael with this tweet, saying political posturing is going to happen in the senate, some see it as an election issue to fire up the base. there's also this tweet from don, who says i've been carrying a gun since the 1980's, and yes, we need better gun laws. and finally, carol says, why do so many in a place like chicago die every week and liberal media ignores it. doesn't black on black murder count? and if not, why not? thanks for your calls and comments. again, if you're listening on
c-span radio, we're asking for gun owners only for the first 45 minutes to get your perspective on the debate over gun legislation. is there room for compromise, yes or no. tell us your thoughts. matthew from kentucky, good morning. caller: good morning, sir. yeah, i just wanted to say that it appears we have all this legislation, i've been a gun owner for half a century. we have all these laws that have been coming out, and they try different things to regulate gun owners, and i believe it's time they move in a new direction. the problem is people with this problem in their minds. they think that having a gun makes them powerful and that they can go out and change society by killing gays or muslims or christians or whatever they think they can do, and that's just wrong. and the problem is in the
people's minds. that's what we have to address. this passing laws against legal gun owners, that's not common sense. commone sense is to address the problem, and the problem is in people's minds. that's all i have to say. host: this is the headline from fox news, speaker of the house paul rye and an top republicans urging caution in the post-orlando gun control measures. here's part of the interview that airs today on nbc's "meet the press" with the house speaker. >> we want to make sure we get this right. the question right now is, if someone is on the terror watch list, are the authorities notified as to whether a person on that list? that is the procedure right now. the question is, can we make sure that procedure works the way it's supposed to work? point number two, you don't want to deny a person a constitutional right without due process.
so we have to be very -- we have to concern ourselves with the constitution and rights. we don't want to deny a person of due process rights. that's point number two. point number three is the f.b.i. is telling us be careful how you do this so you do not undermine or blow terrorism investigations. so we can't just be very columnsy and rush to judgment and do something that actually harms our ability to do terrorist investigations. we got to get it right, and we're going to take a deep breath and make sure that this is done correctly so that the policy of making sthure the authorities know and have time to respond to a person who is on a terrorist watch list is trying to buy a gun, that we want to make sure we get right. host: the comments of house speaker paul ryan who sat down with chuck todd for "meet the press" that airs later today, and nbc releasing that excerpt. this editorial from the "st. louis post-dispatch", senator chris murphy saying gun control is coming to the senate, thanks to the 15-hour filibuster. this tweet from one person who
says please educate the viewers on the history and reasons for our second amendment. seems a lot of people hate learning. bill from ohio, good morning. caller: good morning, sir. thanks for taking the call. i have been a gun owner all my life. i'm a 20-year veteran. anything being androw proceedsed would not have prevented this action in orlando. there are so many ways that the bad guy can obtain a weapon that everyone is assuming that the only way he's going find a weapon is walk into a gun store and buy one. host: well, bill, just one point, because one of the issues that came up last week is he was under an f.b.i. investigation. that investigation was closed. do you think that if you're under an investigation at any point the f.b.i. should at least be alerted or that should restrict your ownership to a gun, even if -- caller: i have no problem with that. in fact, they were alerted by one other gun store where he
was trying to buy a vest and some ammo. what happened with that? host: somehow it fell through the cracks, according to latest stories, but you're absolutely right. caller: exactly. so does it make sense to hinder the law-abiding citizen over actions of a few islamic terrorists or, you know, that's not really going to have anything to do with it, it's not going to make a difference. also, i wish the media would stop calling it an assault weapon, because it is not an assault weapon. it's a semiautomatic weapon that functions exactly the same way as many other hunting rifles that are on the market. it just looks scary to some eople. 99.9% of all the weapons in this country are never used for any criminal purpose whatsoever. and we have over 20,000 laws on the books right now. and the problem partially is that many of these laws go unenforced.
host: ok, bill, thank you very much for the call. we appreciate it. let's go to glen, who's joining us from upstate new york. good morning. welcome to the program. caller: how you doing this morning? host: fine, thank you. caller: i've been a gun owner my entire life. my dad was in the military, retired from the military, and i spent four years in the military. now, the problem we have with this legislation is, personally, i don't own the assault weapons. i have several guns, and a lot of them are black powder, shooting black powder. the problem is, where i live up here in new york, they passed the patriot act, and it says banning assault weapons, and you're supposed to register them all. well, when you look at the definition of an assault weapon in the patriot act, it virtually bans just about every semiautomatic ever made. and that's the problem. every time they want to pass this legislation, it's just a gun grab. they want to grab all the guns
they can. the guy that was ahead of me about assault weapons, there is no assault weapons in the hands of civilian people in the united states, unless you have a special license. these weapons are just look-alikes. it's like having a rifle that looks like the old west rifle. you can buy a .44 colt that looks like an old western gun. it's just a knockoff of what the military guns look like. now, you know, they banned -- well, what they did in connecticut, which is one of the bluest states, one of the most liberal states in the united states, they banned -- you have to register all firearms in the state of connecticut. you have to have a license to buy ammunition now in the state of connecticut. all you people in tv land with the tweets and the twitters and the facebook can look this up, is that nobody registered their firearms. nobody. they had like 10,000 that registered their guns. so it does not work.
and the same thing in new york, you're supposed to register all your assault weapons. nobody did it. so, you know, you can pass all this legislation. there is so much rules on the books now that, you know, just enforce the laws that you already have. it's not going to stop anything. the only thing it's going to do is take guns from people, and it's going to make them a victim. now, i don't care. if you don't to want buy a gun, don't. that's fine with me. if you want to be a victim, that's fine. you can be a victim. i personally don't want to be a victim. host: thanks from the call from upstate new york. this is from dean. just because certain people can be responsible with guns does not mean everyone is. and from steve, who says the national media ignores some shootings because there are too many, it's the news media out to make money, not deliver news. send us a tweet, a lot of you weighing in on our facebook page, facebook.com/cspan.
jennifer carlton have co-written a piece this morning in the outlook section of "the washington post," this is the headline, first gay marriage, next gun control. it is an all too familiar routine for americans, dramatic calls for change in action. it happened when 20 schoolchildren were murdered at sandy hook elementary school, when a dozen people were killed in aurora, colorado, in a movie theater, when almost three dogs were slaughtered at virginia tech. but this time things might be different, they write, not because of the record number of people killed in orlando or because this heinous act was a terrorist attack, a hate crime and a mass shooting. it's because the victims were part of a social movement with infrastructure and political know-how largely unmatched within the gun-control movement. it's because the attack targeted gays, and their community is organized. that's this morning from "the washington post." the n.r.a. initially did not have any response to the shootings that took place last week in orlando, but late last week issued this web video,
available on the n.r.a. website. ere's a portion. >> why should suspected terrorists be able to purchase a firearm? national rifle association does not want potential terrorists to be denied purchasing guns in the united states. >> and the n.r.a. insists that people on terrorist watch lists still be allowed to buy guns. >> if the f.b.i. is watching you for a suspected terrorist link, you shouldn't be able to just go buy a gun with no questions asked. >> those are just a few of the democratic politicians and anti-gun activist whose absolutely absorbed puns the news media pretends represents the whole story. the media's failure to provide americans with a complete understanding of the terror watch list issue is the most superficial, simplistic, disgraceful excuse for journalism in recent memory.
if you believe that a free press protects a free society, you should be absolutely terrified about the future of our country. here's the story the media flat out refuses to report. out of sheer hatred for the n.r.a. and the second amendment freedom it defends. the national rifle association has never opposed putting people the f.b.i. believes are terrorists or could be terrorists on a watch list. all we've said is if you're going to deny those citizens their constitutional rights, get a judge to agree with you. this is how justice works in america. but the media and their friends in the democratic party don't like american-style justice. they dream of soviet-style list making, where bureaucrats working in secret put whoever's name he wants on a list that automatically denies them their constitutional rights with absolutely no possibility of assuring accuracy and fairness.
i've heard about 100 so-called reporters demanding to know why anyone would need an ar-15, but i haven't seen a single journalist ask why anyone would need the unilateral ability to strip citizens of their rights in secret. i haven't seen a single reporter ask why the democrats are so afraid of judicial oversight. not a single reporter has asked hillary clinton or barack obama or chuck schumer why they hate the constitutional system of due process. not one. how fearless. host: that response from the n.r.a. in response to the shooting that is took place one week ago in orlando, florida, the results of the death of 49 individuals and one gunman. a new poll this week showing 57% of those surveyed support a ban on assault weapons. you can read the story online
at washingtonpost.com. we're asking you, gun owners only, whether or not you think there's room for compromise on gun legislation. all of this teeing up the debate that will take place tomorrow late afternoon and into the evening. you can watch it on c-span2. david from virginia, good morning. caller: good morning. thank you very much for taking my call. i think you chose a beautiful subject this morning. i've been a gun owner for the most part of my life. i grew up in the country. i feel sad sad, sad, sad about those poor people in orlando. unfortunately, i have a feeling that this individual perhaps can't say, not a doctor, but may have had some type of a mental problem. it caused him to do what he did. unfortunately, i think we need to enforce the laws that we have on the books right now,
prosecute individuals who try to buy guns and they're not authorized to buy them. the prosecution invite very, very low. nd another thing, guns are not used that often. if you check with the f.b.i., they will give you statistics. or f the most common uses items used are kitchen knives. kitchen knives are used in a great majority of murders. so are we going to regulate kitchen knives? are we going to regulate cameras, tie tools, ought motive vehicles? -- automotive vehicles? and another thing, this watch list. preventing those people from purchasing weapons. i don't even know what the parameters are for being put on
the watch list. it would seem to me that the legal system should be utilized before someone gets put on some kind of a secret government watch list. of reminds me very much germany many years ago during world war ii. a farce was used for hitler to take away all of the civil rights of the citizens of germany,, and that fire was supposedly set off by a communist, but there have been interviews done of various particular bar owners that it was the nazis themselves who set the fire. so i don't know. i don't have an answer to this. however, i think we need to
really enforce the laws we have on the books. if people are selling guns on the streets, they need to be put away, and if we need to do this watch list thing, about preventing those people from buying weapons, we need to put the parameters out in the open, how does someone get put on there, and use a judicial system. host: thank you for the call from fort belvoir, virginia, which is the location of a major army base just outside of washington, d.c. don responding to that story i read earlier from "the washington post" has this, did "the washington post" survey clarify what assault weapons mean? did 57% support banning scary looking rifles, or did they mean semiautomatic? we should point out "the washington post" reporting on a poll that's available online at cbsnews.com. a newspaper locking at three countries, australia, great britain, and finland, pointing out three countries where gun
control has worked. again, the two key figures tomorrow on the senate debate on the democratic side, senator dianne feinstein of california, and on the republican side, senator john cornyn of texas who will be leading two tncht proposals on the senate floor. the centerpiece of the debate, the second amendment, which reads as follows, a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of people to sandeep bear arms, shall not be infringed. is there room for compromise? we're asking for gun owners only. from arizona, tony is on the phone. good morning. welcome to the conversation. caller: hi. how you doing? host: fine, thank you. caller: i think that the target is the free zones. and i think that an armed would that shoots back stop a lot of the carnage that keeps happening over and over again, just keeps happening in
gun-free zones. it needs to end. people need to protect themselves, protect their families, and protect their friends and neighbors. and that's all i have to say. thank you. host: thank you. inside the "time" magazine story, which includes photographs of those 49 people who were killed, 40 years of massacres is the story. you can trade also online at time.com, pointing out, over the past four decades, the u.s.a. has seen an average of 19 mass shootings a year, according to data compiled by a northeastern university criminology professor. a mass shooting is defined in data as an incident with four or more deaths by gunshot, including events with multiple assailants like the 1999 columbine high school shooting in littleton, colorado. since 197 , mass shootings have claimed the lives of 3,712 victims. david, west virginia, good morning.
caller: hello. i have a comment about this second amendment that says a well regulated militia. a lot of these things, people who call themselves militias are not regulated at all. i think that's one of the problems. and i've had guns for about 50 years. i can't see anybody going out hunting with something that can ire 50 rounds of ammunition. first round of ammunition, the deer has already run away. there's no way you're going to get another shot. this is just stupid to claim that these are hunting weapons. i think there needs to be some compromise, and i think there needs to be some kind of control over stuff like that. there's lots of people that have guns who are unstable. they shouldn't have guns. and the comment somebody made earlier about kitchen knives being used, i don't see a
kitchen knife being used to kill four people in a row or 20 people in a row or 50 people in a row. who's going to pull out a kitchen knife to go and kill a bunch of people like that? host: david from west virginia. one of our viewers saying i enjoy being able to enjoy a movie in a gun-free movie because i wouldn't get accidentally shot by an irresponsible gun owner. michael is the author of the "time" magazine story out this week, "why did they die," the massacre in orlando elicits green, anger, a heightened sense of our stark political divide. you can also read more at vox.com. the rise, fall, and rise again of hillary clinton's passion for gun control. our next caller is alan from georgia. good morning. caller: good morning, and thank you for c-span. thank you for this question. i've been a gun owner more or less for about 55 years.
host: what kind of gun or guns do you own? caller: i have two .22-caliber semiaurt market rifles -- semiautomatic rifles. two single-shot shotguns, and two pistols. host: before you go on, where are they stored and how are they stored? caller: well, i'm country. i'm single right now. and no children. and my guns are stored wherever i decide to lay them down. host: ok. go ahead with your comment. thanks for phoning in, by the way. caller: ok, thank you. anyway, i have no problem with anyone owing the type of weapons that i have. my problem is we have these assault weapons. i spent 22 years in the military. i'm a vietnam war veteran. i was there, not just in the service at the time. people want to know what the
difference is between a assault eapon and a regular gun, the m-16, f you look at an they used to have colt ar-15 stamped on them. they were designed for the military to kill people, and that's the only reason that they were designed. .60-caliber machine guns, .50-caliber machine guns, they're all the same way. they were designed to kill people. that's an assault weapon. those should not be sold on the civilian market. i mean, you know, if the people want to stretch their imagination, why not have tanks all over the market? the idea of knives being banned because they could be used to kill, well, knives have a useful purpose, a kitchen knife has a useful purpose. an ar-15, ak-47, any of those
things don't have a useful purpose. st: alan, thanks. we're going to move on, but appreciate your call and thanks for giving us insight on your own gun ownership issues. next, massachusetts, your thoughts, matt. caller: well, i think it's pretty clear politically that the consensus area is mental health. and that's fine, absolutely fine. the problem is, how is a gun store owner going to test for it? i don't think they can, and the ai.q., ng they can have and i absolutely think there should be an i.q. test that has to be passed before you can get a gun. the reason for that is, a lot of mass shootings are a manifestations of people who are sort of unable to use their words, if you will. they just don't have the cognitive ability to express their grudges in words.
i think we have to face the face that idiocy is a mental health problem too. host: ok, thank you for your comment. this is a story this morning from inside "the washington post," after orlando, anxiety fills muslim congregationers. worshipers in the nightclub town already enduring epithets, worrying about what might come next. the story is also on washingtonpost.com. let's go to pennsylvania, larry, good morning. welcome to the program. caller: yeah, good morning, sir. how are you? host: fine, thanks. caller: yes, if they would just enforce the laws that are already on the books, i feel that maybe this gun control, you might be able to get a grip on it. but if you're going to put more government, bigger government involved in it, it's just going go way out of hand, and there are other uses for the a.r. i mean, there are gun competitions where people fire these weapons.
they are not criminals. if the government, if they want to help this, what's to keep them from just taking mass amount of people and putting their names on a list without due process? it's just strange to me. it was supposed to be about a mass killing, and now it's turning out to be a gun issue. guns don't kill people. people kill people. that's all i have to say. thank you. host: thank you, larry, from pennsylvania. some more tweets. this is from one viewer saying the orlando shooter wasn't mentally ill, nor san bernardino, nor fort hood. they were evil enemy terrorists. another comment who says they still have not answered the question on how the guy got into the place with an assault weapon with police at the door. some of the headlines from florida, beginning with the "orlando sentinel", as there is
a symbol of unity. soccer a sanctuary as the community heals. the photograph this morning, front page of today's "orlando sentinel," this courtesy of the museum. from the tampa bay times, omar mateen stormed the pulse nightclub, more than 300 people had only a heartbeat to try to survive. the story of what it was like inside that nightclub, one week ago. and from the pensacola news journal, remembering the victims. the faces of those who were illed. michael from maryland, good morning. elcome to the program. caller: yes, thank you, c-span. i was calling because i've been --y been a gun owner for at least 20 years. i grew up in a household pull of automatic weapons and rifles. my dad had a gun shelf,
cabinet, rather, with every kind of rifle in it. he always had a big chain running through, so as kids we couldn't mess with it. it had all kinds of pistols, gun collector for as long as i can remember. he always taught us the responsibility of a gun. he taught us how to -- if you point a weapon at someone, be ready to use it. the responsibility of owning a gun, and people just need to be caught at a young age, because guns aren't going anywhere. you know, you can't blame the democrats, you can't blame the republicans for things that's not being passed or whatever. the families of the victims crying out for something. that's all it is. they just want something, you know? and i understand that. but at the same time, people just need to be educated on gun use, and like i said before, very early, that's probably one of the things sustained in my
brain, my dad sitting me down and showing me how to hold it, showing me the responsibility of not using it unless i need to, or hunting squirrels. i've hunted everything that i could ever think of in my life. you know, so when i look at things, i look at all the killings in the cities and just people losing their minds, like i said, some people are just mad about certain things. no one is going to have a true, a true fix of this, because we are a gun-carrying nation. i believe education more than anything is the key. thank you, c-span. host: michael, thank you for the call. some other headlines from "the washington post," guns, terrorism, hate, immigration, trumping clinton's speeches after the massacre, and "the washington post" fact checker this morning inside "the washington post." also, want to share with you this headline from "the washington post," the u.s. seeking $15 billion more for
afghan forces. of course, this is not focusing on the gun issue, but an important story that we'll be following. one person says, america's longest war is about to include more cash for afghanistan's army and police force without any new conditions to try to ensure it doesn't get gobbled up before making it to the battlefield. at a summit in warsaw, the u.s. and its allies will try to raise $15 billion to fund afghan security forces through 2020. about $10.5 billion is expected to come from the u.s., a continuation of commitments to pay and clothe afghan security forces while supplying them with fuel, weapons, and ammunition to fight the taliban insurgents. but even though billions of dollars have been wasted or stolen over the past 15 years, nato leaders will probably not link the money to new bench marks or anti-corruption standards. this morning from "the washington post." back to your calls and comments on gun legislation, from gun owners this morning, whether or not you think there's room for
compromise. this is from don who says, ok, we've got to enforce the laws on the books already. susie is joining from us california. caller: good morning. i wanted to put in my comment that the terrorist in orlando was a ticking time bob, and a lot of people knew it and reported it. and i don't know why the f.b.i. couldn't have told the local police, keep an eye on him, we have to close our investigation. or even he was so unstable that so many people reported him, and they could have given him a 5150 this they were separate enough, because he sounded, from what i've heard, very threatening. i think there's things that people would use like what happened with the pressure
cookers in the boston marathon, people will use whatever they can. they will set a fire. they will do anything if they want to do some evil, and i think people should be able to defend themselves against something evil like what happened. thank you. host: thank you. front page of the "new york mes," from troubled child to agrieved killer. details on his troubled past and his run-ins with authorities over the years. thank you very much for the call. let's go next to harold, joining us from florida. good morning. welcome to the program. caller: hi. look, i have a gun for one reason and one reason only, and it's just for self-protection. so somebody comes into my home, i have some sort of defense, and i think those poor people in orlando, god, i wish somebody in there had some sort of gun so they could have had some sort of protection. and when the president says he
wishes nobody would have a gun, that would have made it so much worse, i don't know what he's thinking. i just wish somebody there had a gun to defend him or herself and everybody else. host: harold, how long have you had a gun? caller: i've had a gun about 10 years. host: in that 10 years, have you ever needed to use it? has your home been invadeded or any threats to your own security? caller: no, no, sir, not at all. i will say, my situation is a little complicated. i was a prosecutor for many years, so i've seen defendants, and i've seen things, and i just can't imagine not having some sort of protection. and i'm just so sorry for those people in orlando. just a horrible thing. host: harold, thank you very much for the call from jacksonville beach, florida. ron joining us from lake view, new york. good morning. welcome to the program. caller: good morning.
thank you for taking my call. i am a gun owner, and i own an ar-15. and i think that this new rash of gun laws that are being proposed, whatever, are unnecessary, because we have so many laws on here. this thing with the orlando shooter was the fault of the f.b.i. where multiple warnings were put upon this person, and nothing was done about it. but in regard to the ar-15 self, i mean, being close to three million to five million law-abiding citizens in this country take this rifle to our local ranges and spend a pleasurable afternoon with friends and family, shooting holes through paper and plywood. that is the purpose. it's just for target shooting. anyone who does any type of rifle or pistol shooting enjoys just the point of shooting it. and the ar-15 is no different than any other semiautomatic rifle.
the point that's never proposed by the media, whatever, is, ok, does the ar-15 pose a threat? well, look at the f.b.i. statistics on gun violence. you look at the -- for the last several years, the average for any type of rifle violence is roughly between 250 and 300 a year. you take the number of gun owners of the ar-15, three to five million, and that's just an estimate no. one knows for sure. make a ratio out of that. divide that by the three to five million, you have less than a half a percent of any type of gun violence being done with an ar-15. this is only an issue now because we had another mass shooting. everyone seems to forget, this is a terrorist attack. the first terrorist attack was with aircraft. the second was with a bomb. the third was with a pistol. and now we have a couple using ar-15's. so the demonization of a chunk of metal and plastic is just
the hysteria being pumped up by the media to continue on with the anti-gun witch hunt. thank you. host: ron from new york, thank you. this is another tweet saying low information voters, the bounce her a gun, and 49 people still got killed. and this is from jim, who says the proper answer to my question, have you used it, needed it, is "not yet." well, thank you to all of you who have weighed in, gun owners only for the first 45 minutes of the program. we appreciate your calls and your comments. again, the debate tomorrow, legislation being led by senator feinstein for the democrats and senator cornyn for the republicans. two different bills for the two different political parties on trying to rein in the issue of those who have access to guns. you can watch it all unfold tomorrow, late afternoon, into the evening, on c-span2. coming up in just a moment, we'll turn our attention to politics. shermichael singleton, a former adviser to ben carson's campaign, also formerly with
newt gingrich, discussing donald trump's candidacy and the potential impact it could have on the g.o.p. in the november elections. and later, author and political analyst michael dyson from georgetown university, talk about the 2016 campaign and his push calling for demonstrations in cleveland outside the q, where the republican national convention will be taking place. but first, want to share this headline from "the washington post," dozens of republican delegates launching a new push to halt donald trump. this is the reporting, who points out this is not coming from political pundits, but rather, from delegates. more than a dozen delegates are trying to change the rules to prevent donald trump from obtaining the nomination. over the weekend, the r.n.c. saying there's no concerted effort, and those rules will not be changed, but it's part of the debate leading up to the convention in cleveland. and coming up on "news makers," two members of the anti-trump movement will be joining us. here's part of the conversation, "newsmakers"
follows the "washington journal" at 10:00 eastern time. >> steve, the goal of this movement is to organize all the people around this country. they're very unhappy with what donald trump has been doing since indiana. i wake up every morning looking for reasons to support donald trump as our republican nominee, and i've yet to find one. donald trump has spent more time reaching out to bernie sanders supporters than to conservatives like myself and my colleague, bob, who's on with us on the show today. this is ant effort to deny donald trump, fwout empower the republican delegates to do their job. they have a moral obligation to nominate the candidate who is best suited to defeat hillary clinton and support and advance the conservative republican party platform. right now the republican party is heading towards a cataclysmic defeat in november, and it's time we made donald trump accountable f. we open up the convention to what we're striving to do, to an open debate, open, robust discussion, and donald trump has to prove himself, he may very well show that he is the leader he says he is.
>> first of all, you need to know, i'm not in a hash tag, never trump mode. never have been there, never was there. donald trump and i have been friends for the last five or six years. but as noted earlier in the segment, i have been willing to stand up and hold him accountable. even hold him accountable to the point of saying everything in cleveland should be on the table. the reason i say we need to hold him accountable, a, as steve pointed out, it will make him a better candidate, and if he is the nominee going up against hillary clinton, and if he does win the presidency, i believe it will make him a better leader. and that's what i think we need to do. in regards to what's good and what's not good for the republican party, this has been a very unusual campaign. take a look at the speaker of the house, paul ryan. really kind of weaken his support of donald trump, making statements, you know, that are not helpful to our party nominee, the same way with mitch mcdonnell. this is happening all over the
republican party. stoip the national spokesperson for -- host: the national spokesperson for the courageous conservatives and the president of the family leader our guests. it airs every sunday at 10:00 eastern time, 7:00 a.m. for hose of you on the west coast. shermichael singleton is a republican political consultant, former adviser to ben carson in his own presidential campaign. thank you very much for being with us. guest: thanks for having me, steve. host: sbhob has watched the "washington journal" many times, we're glad to have you. you also write for thehill.com, and you write about donald trump, saying the following, a week ago i wrote an article discussing donald trump and the belief that he was a better option than hillary clinton. your views have changed. why? guest: well, i won't say, steve, so much that my views have changed. i think as a writer and someone who works in politics, i always try to approach every situation methodically and objectively.
and that means that you have to tell a certain level of truth, whatever that truth may be, whether or not you like it or not. and what i stated in my previous articles, any proponent of conservatism would have to say that more than likely you are going to fare better under a trump administration in regards to being able to pass certain policies that may be in the better interest of conservative-leaning individuals that you would under a hillary clinton presidency. i still do believe that that maintains some level of truth. however, my opinion slightly changes with mr. trump, as i had hoped that his opinions and his behavior would become more of a disciplined candidate as he gets closer to garnering the republican nomination. however, with his comments regarding the hispanic judge and his heritage, and his continued comments regarding muslim americans, it sort of bothered me. so i felt compeled to write a new article, not necessarily
critiquing mr. trump, but just saying, you know, these are some things that the party perhaps should speak to him on and say, hey, you got to sort of change these things if you truly expect to win this election. host: let me go back to -- many referred to it as the autopsy. and you mentioned hispanics. this is a portion, this is from the republican national committee, "if hispanic americans perceive that a g.o.p. nominee or candidate does not want them in the united states, i.e., self-deportation, they will not pay attention to our next sentence -- it does not matter what they say about education, jobs, or the economy, if hispanics think we do not want them here, they will close their ears to our policies." guest: i think that's a fair statement. if you recall in 1964, where about 60% of african-americans voted for lyndon b. johnson, versus republican nominee at that time was barry goldwater, the reason for that is because,
not necessarily so much that barry goldwater was a racist or against african-americans, but he felt that this should be a states right issue. for a lot of african-american voters, that was perceived if, if you think of that, then you're essentially against it, which is why you saw the final migration of african-american voters to the democratic party. i think you can potentially, more than likely will see the same migration with hispanic voters and mr. trump, which is something that bothers me greatly, because they are the largest minority group in the country. now asians have surpassed them as far as the fastest growing, but hispanics are still the largest. strategically, for me, as i'm thinking about outreach mobilization for the republican party, the future of the country as a whole as far as becoming more diverse with minorities, i'm beginning to think, how can we compete strategically for that vote? host: let me share with you, this is from abc news and "the washington post," a new survey this week showing some troubles for donald trump, but among nonwhites, he has a 12%
favorable rating. 88% unfavorable. compare that to hillary clinton, again, these are among nonwhite voters, and it has a margin of error of 3.5%. hillary clinton has a favorable rating of 66%, unfavorable among that group of 32%. guest: again, this goes to show you, steve, the troubles that mr. trump's campaign may have. i think up until this point mr. trump has clearly defied all odds. i wrote in my piece, if you look at the textbook definition, he embodied in every way, shape, fashion or form one can imagine. but now, as you get out of the primary process and you begin to pivot for general election, you are indeed going to have to target your message to more diverse audiences. and at this point in time, mr. trump has not done that. for me as a strategist, beginning to say, ok, it's that time. you have to begin to pivot. you have to begin to change
your tone. and we have not seen that yet. but i remain hopeful that we will. host: is donald trump the new barry goldwater? it's available online athad.com. our guest says the following, a party that that has struggled with gaining the african-american vote since goldwater's failed attempt at the presidency now risks repeating history with the hispanic community. and if that occurs, one has to ask, what does that mean for the republican party and its ability to compete for minority votes? guest: again, referencing the 1964 election, goldwater and lyndon johnson. prior to goldwater, i believe it was around 30% to 32% of african-americans that have consistently voted for republicans, and you saw that decrease after f.d.r. and the great society pledge, when you saw the first migration of african-american voters to the democratic party. but again, goldwater's position against civil rights, i compare that to a lot of donald trump's
tone and rhetoric regarding building a wall, regarding the hispanics being rapists and murderers, etc., etc., which is not a factual statement to make, reminds me a lot of a lot of african-americans and their feelings in 1964 and their reasoning for voting for lyndon b. johnson over goldwater. i think we'll see the same thing. host: aren't those high numbers? guest: i think we'll see a similarity as far as voting for clinton cln over mr. trump. host: let me get your reaction to what donald trump said last month in san diego on these issues. mr. trump: they put up latinos for trump, latinos. [applause] mr. trump: we're going to do great with the latinos, because i'm bringing back jobs. the latinos, african-americans were doing great with african-americans. they want jobs. we're losing our jobs to everybody. we're being taken advantage of by the world. we're losing our jobs to
everybody. we are going to bring back jobs like we haven't seen in this country for many, many decades. and people that aren't doing well, they're going to start doing very, very well, believe me. host: shermichael singleton, donald trump taking it to the next step, which is focusing on jobs and the economy, to go back to what the g.o.p.'s so-called autopsy report said, is that hispanics will close their ears and eyes to that if they know that they have the potential of being deported. guest: that's actually one of the stronger suits, at least as far as i believe. however, i'm reminded of something that jack kemp stated in the 1980's, you can have all the best policy in the world, and i'm paraphrasing, but if an individual doesn't believe you care about him first, they won't listen to anything you have to say. i think this is the case of mr. trump. let's say he does propose some policies as far as the economy and job creation and growth and upward mobility, economically, entrepreneurship, etc., and they can be the best policies that we've ever seen.
many of those communities would disregard those policies because of their perceived sentiment that is mr. trump posed for their community. and so i think people immediately close their ears and say i'm not interested in your policies, because to me, i don't think you care for people who look like me, or people within my community. and as long as that perception maintains, i think whatever policy mr. trump may propose will be very difficult to get into the communities. host: we are talking with shermichael singleton. he grew up in texas, born in new orleans, a graduate of morehouse college. we know your smother watching, proud of you. making his very first appearance here on c-span's "washington journal." we welcome you to the program and welcome your calls. let's go to henderson, kentucky , a caller. caller: good morning. good morning, shermichael, sir. i watch you on tv with rowan martin, and ien joy your commentary, even though i'm an
independent. i respect a lot of your positions. and mr. trump, i'll bet he wants to win the presidency. if he really wants to win the presidency, he needs to sit down with real black leaders, mr. farrakhan some other black leaders who have shown proven they don't want guest: i don't know if mr. farrakhan would be the ideal .erceived leader if you well i never liked that term, leader of the black community, as if there are one or two individuals that control the entire culture or group of people. think your question, i do -- to answer your question, i think mr. trump needs to address some issues. it look atation, places like baltimore, chicago, new orleans. parts of atlanta georgia that are having a lot of issues that
i do not think president obama has addressed throughout his presidency that mr. trump could have the opportunity to address and garner interest. host: our guest has worked for mitt romney, newt gingrich and ben carson. john is joining us. caller: good morning. i am 56 years old. i'm starting another business in my life. i get out of bed every morning and about 4:00 in the morning i to work about 6:00 in the morning. i'm tired of working every day and beinguntil dawn called a racist by hillary clinton just because i am white and part of the reason i like and support trump is because i don't think he's a racist. i think he's a man of integrity on creating jobs and opportunities for everyone. i am tired of being called a
racist by anybody just because i am white and i own guns and love the constitution. host: can i ask you a quick question? caller: you bet. host: as you know, the story by ed o'keefe in the washington post, being called the dump trump movement as some delegates try to figure out a way to keep him -- to prevent him from becoming the republican nominee. if that were to happen, your reaction? the rnc says this will not happen. hypothetically, what do you think. ? caller: i would be so angry. i think new image is one of the greatest politicians that ever was born in this country. i would be so outraged, as i am that now, other direction this country is headed because of the republican party in some , we've not just saying
got to come up with a new solution and cowing down to everybody that calls us a racist is totally wrong. i'm angry about that. host: john, thank you for the call. guest: i do not know what is in mr. trump's hard. heart. when you get into that type of rhetoric, which i think it is hyperbolic more than anything, yet be careful about calling someone a racist. as it pertains to the perceptions of mr. trump, hispanics and african-americans and younger millennials, it is the perception that maybe he is not a racist but some of his remarks can be received as bigoted. for me as a strategist i would prefer for mr. trump to tone down some of his rhetoric and to begin to have a more balanced approach of balanced statements
as he talks about policies and tell the difference between himself and secretary clinton. his policies versus her policies . i think that is how you win voters. host: who are you going to vote for? guest: i will vote for whomever the republican nominee is. [laughter] host: you say that with a smile? do you think there is some scenario in which donald trump is not the nominee? guest: whomever the nominee is, that is the personal going to vote for. texas once, houston the republican line. caller: good morning. says hegentleman who has been called a racist just because he is white, i and a black 83-year-old woman and i am called aunt jemima because i think for myself. would you saying -- we keep saying blacks do not go to the
room publican party. at detroit, michigan. ferguson, missouri. philadelphia, pennsylvania. look at all of the cities where blacks are suffering. my city, houston, texas. we are not doing any better. we were going to do fantastic under obama. we are in worse shape today. all of the cities i called out, -- detroit went into bankruptcy, lack votes. they said they had not had a republican mayor in detroit in 50 years. houston, texas, we are suffering. we have not had a republican mayor in over 30 years. we have a black mayor today that's going to straighten up things that democrat mayors did.
how are you going to keep doing the same thing? if you keep on doing what you've always done you will keep on getting what you always got in the democratic party used us for our votes and we have got to stop being stupid. they are using us. they don't give a damn about black folks. it says the polls -- 98% of us voted for obama. look at us today. our children are walking the streets today in houston, texas because they do not have a job when they used to have a job but hour, who the hell is going to pay you $15 an hour and you don't have since enough to pull your pants up on you? we have got to stop letting the democrat party use us. i'm 83 years old. i left the democrat party in my
40's because i saw they were using us and we were not getting anything from it. we are still doing worse shape today than we were 60, 70 years ago and we have been voting democrat 80 or 90 years. heras stated that someone they would use us for 200 years for our vote and that is what's going on. host: i'm going to jump in but thank you for your passion and putting your issues on the table. you're voting for donald trump in november? years: use this for 200 -- guest: that was a lot of passion and she covered a lot of things. i don't like to think that the african-american community is a monolithic group because there is a divergent of views come opinions and our perceptions of things, values and beliefs are
disparate as within anybody people. she did talk about some things i find to be interesting. unemployment, crime, education. if you look at the national unemployment average, though it has decreased nationally, for many african-americans it is still very high and for african-american youth it is around 49% of underemployment. i do think there is some truth to what she saying. tediously i have always advocated traffic and americans in particular. logically it does not make a lot of sense to vote for one party consistently overwhelmingly without giving any type of a vote or attention to the other party because that party -- the party vote for is not always going to be in power. need to address that mayerns or issues not be prevalent to the community.
strategically thinking i think african-americans should searcy considered voting for a republican parties just because when the republican party is in control of light -- we are partn of your voting electorate now you have to address some of our concerns versus ignoring them. she also talked about minimum wage. $15 per hour. some think i've written about. a lot of those minimum-wage jobs are entry level positions. they were never intended to pay individuals $15 or $20 per hour. what you are beginning to see now, even in liberal places like seattle, washington, i think it turningr king that is to automation. when you walk into some of their stores you are no longer greeted by an individual. he walked claiming shane, place your order, putting cash or swipe your card and someone prepares your food but they are decreasing the number of employees. when you look at all of these things that have been huge rally
cries by democrats, we have to increase minimum wage, we have to do more for individuals as far as eight, welfare, etc., these are not things that mobilize people. as a conservative i think we're more concerned with upward mobility versus what democrats are concerned about. host: what is the relationship between ben carson and donald trump? guest: i knew this was a question that was coming. dr. carson likes mr. trump. i think it is a good relationship. host: who do you think donald trump will select as his running mate? [laughter] gingrich, boss, newt has been mentioned often. guest: i don't want to comment on something the campaign is still in the process of vetting various candidates and that is something i have seen when i worked for romney and i understand what that process is like so a lot of respect for that i don't want to comment on any possible selections.
host: part of the process includes the drafting of the platform. the republican party platform will be drafted in cleveland. the democratic party that form friday in phoenix, arizona. you can watch it online at c-span.org. we posted the entire two days' worth of sessions. caller: good morning. to 83.i could make it i will be 50 later this fall. host: you need to have the same passion as joyce had. caller: yes. i am black. i voted republican. i voted for ronald reagan, my commander in chief when i was in the military back in the mid-80's. i voted for ross perot and i did not vote for george bush either time.
i did not vote for obama. i will be voting for donald trump. some of the things that he says do hold true. are all mexicans that come from mexico into the event date rapists and murderers? no. some of them are. here in the phoenix area, we have a problem with coyotes. not the animal, but the term that we use for mexicans that will smuggle people and drugs. they will smuggle scores of people at a time, hold them hostage in houses that they rent and hold them ransom and wire back their people in mexico and say we are not going to let your uncle, your father, your sister, your brother, go unless you send us more money. i also believe jobs, that's another major problem. the unemployment rate is four
point something percent. still 95 million working age adults out of work in this country. if you crunch the numbers, the ratio of the unemployed to than it is higher today was back in 1929 during the great depression. the 83-year-old caller was correct about, and you mentioned it also, about hedging your bets . blacks unfortunately will vote monolithically democrat. host: we will get a response. guest: i think jonathan brought up some good points. dr. carson would also bring up -- would often bring up the $1 trillion in cash that corporations keep overseas. mr. trump talked about this also. finding a way to get those funds back into the country. economic empowerment zones or whatever the case may be where those companies will get some
type of a tax break. bring the funds back and say you going to the most destitute communities in our country and you work on job growth etc. in regards to african-americans , you monolithic, i think think about a person's perception of an individual and what the individual says. i do not know if mr. trump believe some of the things he says. i know how a lot of minorities perceive those things. as a reference jack kemp, mr. trump could propose the best economic policies for many minorities but if the perception is that he does not care about those minorities they will not listen to any of those policy , as illogical as that may be to some of our listeners. host: our guess is a republican political consultant or if he also writes as a contributor for the hill newspaper. this is a tweet saying, ask you
about the term african-american. should we not stop the color ethnic division? guest: i don't think there's anything wrong with referring to someone as african-american or hispanic american. ment of one'sbrace background. i am proud to be african-american but it does not dictate my being. there are going to be some differences because of the way i was raised, cultural differences, etc. i found we share more similarities than differences. and in those unique differences i think it gives us an opportunity to truly learn from the -- truly learn from one another. host: this is from harriet who says what a great young man. you would make a great vp. guest: i have at least 10 more years ahead of me. you never know. [laughter]
host: james on the line from virginia. republican line. caller: nice to see you, mr. singleton. guest: i still hear from you. caller: the lady from texas, praise the lord for that lady. i've asked the question, what has the obama administration did for the african-american and the answer is still nothing. , a are 25 years old millennial. you are automatically going to passedmocrat and clinton nafta the end of 1994. put 4500 people out of work. democrat. obama, what has he done? past of the health care law. insurance companies going out of business. insurance company's had to merge.
month on one365 a person? only $800 a month social security. how do you respond? guest: james, in response to obama and what he is done for the african-american community, you look at various groups where there -- whether it is the energy bt q community, the hispanics for, let's say you look at the african-american community. i would say if you had to rank them, i think it would be fair to say to james' point that the african american community has not seen the types of pro-policies that a lot of the -- the two other communities have seen as far as lgbtq and the hispanic community. unemployment is extremely high for the african-american
community. life is such as he tried, baltimore, these places have horrible high crime rates. 100 individuals are being killed each week. you go back to the fundamental things, education and job creation, job growth. those things are nearly nonexistent within those communities. james, i don't have an answer to why the community continues to democratic policies overwhelmingly and continues to support democrats overwhelmingly . the only thing i continued to go back to is the perception in the perception is that democrats care more about issues and concerns of the african american community and minorities in general and the republican party and this goes to rhetoric. i think mr. trump has an amazing opportunity potentially to outreach targets and possibly even mobilize many minorities if he focuses on job growth and job creation.
you talk about secretary clinton and nafta, diabolical for many african-americans who were upward mobilized as far as middle-class in many upward mobilized whites that were middle class. that something a lot of voters have not forgotten about. secretary clinton passed support of her 1994 crime bill which was written by now vice president who was then senator joe biden. a lot of people have not forgotten about those things. mr. trump come if he can change his rhetoric i think he can have an opportunity with many minorities. host: this tweet from stan who says if someone treats people in either a negative or a positive way because of their race, isn't that the definition of racism? guest: i think you should treat all people fairly. i don't think any group of people should be given special religious over another group of people. sure, our country has a past with racism and discrimination,
etc.. at some point i think we finally as a country need to address those issues, come together and say we know the ills of our country, we have to forgive them in order to move forward. host: we have just tweeted out , this site at c-span.org survey from the washington post and the headline from the hill newspaper, trump has 94% unfavorably braiding among blacks. but go to harvey who is joining us from petersburg, virginia. harvey, could you turn the volume down? we will hear and i go and there will be a delay. caller: ok. host: good morning. caller: good morning. guest: good morning, harvey.
host: i'm going to jump in. could you turn down the volume and go ahead with your question or comment? caller: yes. my comment, for mr. singleton, i agree with him that trump has the opportunity to garner a lot of the black votes. host: did you want to respond? guest: again, i think a lot of minorities are concerned about economic mobility. they are concerned about education. a lotk when you look at of the crime rates you see within a lot of these communities and the have not been addressed. african-americans overwhelmingly continue to vote democratic and you have to ask yourself, what are the results of those votes? if you're going to vote for someone you should expect to receive something in return. if
not you make your vote competitive. by competitive i mean you give a percentage of your vote to the other party. that way both parties have to compete for your vote. host: another tweet from tw with reference to the earlier caller taking aim at bill clinton and nafta. stop blaming nafta. those cu companies move for greed, not just to be competitive. lisa.orning, caller: will you please give me the time that joy scott -- that joyce got? thank god, a new orleans person. i'm from shreveport, god bless you. i want to tell you, my son is so upset because of the 94 crime bill from bill clinton. orleans, people in new
he's trying to get them to turn republicans. edwards.ot john bell that is good because we are going to get medicaid and i need it. my dad just died. i have no husband. nafta, and i don't understand what you can do about educating the black people. some of them don't have internet. i tried to talk to my friends here to encourage them to go look. i cannot stand donald trump but what are we going to do? please help us. thank you. host: thank you, lisa. the same amount of time. we appreciate it. guest: i was quite the task. i'm not sure. i clearly don't have the answers to these things. i wish i did.
i think as a republican, for me, i've always believed that the burden is on me to go into communities that don't typically vote for my party, to share my party's platform, my party's policy positions. there's also some level of burden on the individual to be receptive. i found when i have traveled across the country working for various candidates, going into minority communities talking about education and economics, a lot of people were surprised. and when i asked why, they said i never bothered to listen to what you guys had to say because you think all republicans are racist that you are young and black and cool so that is not the case. we have to do a better job of going into those communities. you referenced in the beginning of the segment, the opportunity project. $20 milliont around into the growth and opportunity project. if you look today, i have to ask
myself, where is the growth and opportunity project? have we seen the results of the millions of dollars that have been spent? at some point i think my party is not only going to have to just throw money at the issue but aggressively go into these communities. if you look at the demographics across the board, we are going to be at a point, at a place where we cannot compete the way we were able to compete 20 to 25 years ago. host: we talking with michael singleton. , and washington, d.c.. thanks for joining the conversation. guest: good morning. caller: good morning. for me, i'm 54 years old. i cannot sit there and blame the democratic party or the
republican party, whatever. is, the united states is set up the way it is. to give you some schooling on the what happened to parties is, the republican party switched over to the democratic party is what happened. during the civil rights bill. t asking nobody for anything. you want black folks to come vote for the republican party. come and talk to us. don't just assume. democratic party, for you to say -- that theylks are taking us for granted, we're smarter than you think. host: we will get a response. guest: i think to eric's point,
the party should indeed talk to african-americans, hispanics. referencing my piece, is trump the new barry goldwater, the point of my piece was to talk about, not so much the policy positions of both candidates, but was to make a comparison between both candidates that with goldwater his opposition of the 1960 civil rights act and trump's rhetoric regarding latinos and even muslims, are things that can isolate these communities and that is something that strategically the republican party cannot afford. , iit pertains to democrats do understand the perception of many republicans by many people of color. i think we have to become more competitive. it is almost like you are investing in the stock market. you would not put all your money into one company, you diversify your portfolio. i think many minorities should
do the same with their vote. host: byron is joining us. caller: good morning. . have a question why is the republican party not talking about these progressives, socialists? progressives are socialists in my book. i can't understand why the republican party is not talking about what's happening in our country. , they need to come out and talk about what socialism really is. host: what do you think it really is? caller: i think the progressives are socialists and communists. usa webpage, the column says progressives. they target the black community, latinos, women's groups.
nobody ever talks about this. pretty big problem in my book. i'll think we need to be a socialist nation. we are a capitalist country. host: we will get a response. guest: that's an ideological question you're talking about. i guess -- i don't think secretary clinton is a socialist. is clearly as democratic socialist and we can go into it that truly needs and the differences between he and secretary clinton. i believe it was several months ago i found twitty 6% of regular -- a registered -- 26% of registered republicans said they could vote for -- they could see themselves voting for someone democratifies as a socialist.
they find that to be appealing because a lot of people feel left behind. in a lot of ways, mr. trump talks about the same thing. he is saying let's figure out a way to get funds back into the country that businesses have in offshore accounts that empower our people. mr. sanders is saying take it and spreading among the people. those are differences. it is something the party should talk about as far as making that distinction. host: the biggest challenge for the republican party is what? guest: minority outreach, engagement, and mobilization. host: michael singleton, and his work available at thehill.com. first-time appearance on c-span. thank you for being with us. we are going to turn our attention to more politics. joining us at the table is michael eric dyson of georgetown
university. he will be here to talk about what he wants an organized march in cleveland. joiningavern will be us, president and c.e.o. of the newspaper association of america, to discuss the media and industry in general during this 2016 campaign, where things stand for the newspaper industry. this weekend, we take you to nashville, tennessee. heritage of at the president andrew jackson in a new exhibit on his life called "born for a storm." here is a preview. >> the title of the exhibit comes from a jackson quote. the full quote is "i was born for a storm and calm does not suit me." which could not better encapsulate the life of andrew jackson. over here, the large panel lays out jackson's early life.
jackson was our first president who was the son of immigrants. his parents came to north america from northern ireland in 1765. jackson born here in 1767. his father died just a couple of weeks before jackson was born, so he never knew his father but was raised with his mother and two brothers internet and --le's home and in some ways many ways treated like a servant. that contributed to his nature. he was born on the frontier, the first president not from one of the virginia, aristocratic families or from massachusetts. was largely self-taught in his ability to communicate and express ideas grew over the course of his life. he was a very forceful writer, very direct, not unlike his speaking voice, as we are told. still not necessarily eloquent,
writerery forceful and a with greater clarity as his life went on. host: make sure you tune into booktv on c-span2 and american history tv on cspan3. ur is availableer i anytime online. michael eric dyson, welcome back, professor at georgetown university, contributor to msnbc and the "new republic." your calling for a march on cleveland next month at the site of the republican collection. site a big basketball games the last couple of days. guest: the warriors and cavaliers, what an epic matchup. host: what are you calling for? guest: i think all citizens of good conscience has to mobilize against what we see manifest in the campaign of donald trump.
not so much directed at the ability of mr. trump to receive his party's nomination as president. that is fine, that is what they are going to do. my point is for the extra political excess, if you will, of what i see as bigotry, racism, xenophobia, resistance whouslims and mexicans constitute such an important slice of this country's history and its population. and to really talk about the amplification of all of the ills i think donald trump represents. i'm calling for people of all good conscience to march on cleveland to say this is not who we are at our best, and these are the values and principles we erishd embrace and ch and there are others we should discard. host: donald trump says he is not a racist. guest: when you stand up and want to ban all muslims, i don't know what else you call that. when black people are at your rallies and you offer to pay for the defense of the person who
either sucker punches them or harasses the person and physically assaults them or intimidates them, i think that is problematic and certainly would qualify at the very least as a racist impulse. when you lead a birther the president long after it has been proved he is a legitimate american citizen, i don't know what to say. we can stretch back into his own history. i am suggesting the things he are at the least racially insensitive and the worst racially charged. host: your latest book. are african americans better off eight years after barack obama? guest: that is a complicated question. on one hand, we all as americans have benefited from the huge intelligence and very eloquent tongue of this remarkable human being who has come up on the
american scene. he bailed out the banks. he straightened the economy out. he offered universal health care. he bailed out the automobile all in the first two years big he has been the victim of opposition from the republican and far right wing. the vicious intimidation unleashed under the presidency of the first black president is lamentable and remarkable. on the other hand, i think the president has been slow to send the bully pulpit to speak about race. i would not blame barack obama for the rise of donald trump. it happens to be a sad and tragic coincidence that his failure to necessarily man the pulpit to speak articulately about race in the way he is capable of doing coincided with the rise of i think racial demagoguery on the far right apotheosis is
donald trump and his campaign. i think eight years later, our african american people better? the embassies would suggest -- the indices would suggest that is not so. african american unemployment is still double what white unemployment is. the housing situation, the education system, and the victimization by crime in their neighborhoods and communities but also the precipitous rise of police brutality. all that suggests no one president can wave a magic wand to make it better. but if we would have an articulate expression of the problems that specifically confront this community, i think we would be better off. host: we will talk about hillary clinton in a moment. the piece by greg howard is in the "your times." -- new york times."
interesting photograph dating back 48 years ago as richard nixon, candidate for president, getting a football signed by college players. yes, that is o.j. simpson in the photograph. that howard says this country was built on the backs of black labor whose lives and were stolen by white masters protect created a caste system in which both groups could occupy the same space and have different experiences. a white american black america. in 1619, 1865, 1947 when simpson was born. it holds true today. guest: absolutely right. it is a remarkable consistency in america, the fact that race has been the major predicate for the distribution of goods or withholding of them. toni morrison brilliantly said upon the backs of black people this country has been built, so mr. howard amplifies that resonant metaphor.
but also when you think about the argument that the plundering of black america has been the basis for the distribution to others of the goods and resources made possible by the labor for free of these black people well into the 20th century. thomas blackman argues well into the 20th century, the systematic exclusion of black people from opportunity and expertise in of them has been the basis for the capitalism enjoys. this is a powerful argument. the point is not to transcend race. the point is to transcend the narrow viewpoints people have about race. i don't want people to transcend my blackness or force me to do so. i have been majoring in blackness for 48 years and it is
too late to get a new major. many black brothers and sisters manythey are doing -- brothers and sisters think they are doing a service when they don't notice someone is black. i don't need to focus on that exclusively. i want you to transcend blackn ess and what you think about that. together, a community built on all the wonderful colors, the point is how we can celebrate the wonderful and blissful gathering of differences that constitute this nation at its best. for me, i think that is a timely reminder of the illusion we can get beyond the boundaries of especially onple, the far right to believe, anybody who talks about affirmative action or speaking
about racial or ethnic conditions of people vulnerable are reinventing the will of racism. that is the confusion when we believe in the illusion of transcending race. host: the resume of michael eric dyson includes the following, earned his phd from princeton university. the author of a number of books, the book about martin luther king's death and how it changed america. katrina., hurricane 's latest book on the black presidency looking at barack obama and the politics of race in america. he is also the host of in npr's "michael eric dyson show." how did they come up with a name for that? he also writes for the "new republic." we want to hear from you. the phone lines are open. send us a tweet.
join us on facebook. to him in virginia, good morning only democrats line. caller: this has been a crazy year in politics. i don't think it matters who we put in until we take the lobbyists out of the congress and senate. i don't think, politics will be fair again. we need to put military on our borders. to put military on the borders to stop a lot of this. guards onr military other borders in other countries. like can't we guard our own border with our own military? guest: there is no question lobbyists have made colorful excesses and committed for the realoblems value of the ordinary american getting his or her voice heard. when you have big business money,the money -- big politicians listen to that.
that has been the value of having a person like bernie sanders in the democratic race to push hillary clinton further to the left so that progressive values resonate, not only in the streets of america but in the halls of congress were they need to be heard. i think that is a valuable cautionary tale about the excesses of lobbyists. in terms of military on the boundary, you must excuse my skepticism about that because i think the occupation of people, the military like occupation of many communities in america by police state directed toward full noble people of colored, has proven to be a disaster. what we need instead is appreciation for the recognition our borders should be protected but not by a menacing militarism. but rather by the appeal of our country to other nations to say we are a nation that is remarkable because we provide opportunity. not because we close people out.
early generations of immigrants came to this country and made this country what it is today. that because the majority of people coming to this country happened to be from central or south america or now people think the scourge of syrians or other people from the middle east, we muster member many of the worst acts of terror in this nation have been done by people who are citizens of the united states of america. host: this is from jody. i was proud when america voted president of black america. he wrote "yes, she can" and say the following. guest: i think hillary clinton
has those skills, insights, and the opportunity to exercise them in a way she is uniquely capable of. even president obama said she is perhaps the was qualified person ever to run for the presidency of the united states of america. of extraordinary depth, insight, critical intelligence, the ability to bring together various constituencies. if she does not possess what some say is the rampant charisma of her husband or the inbuilt opportunity and advantages barack obama possesses via the african american people because of his race, she does possess the potential to enact profound elements of public policy that speak directly to african american, latino, and poor white people. to be able to address them in a way that there is not a great commercial celebrating the charismatic authority of this woman because of her unique ability to play the saxophone as
her husband did or give a speech the way barack obama does, but she has the nuts and bolts, the mechanics down of what it takes ship of race. given her interactions and learning from black lives matter. the famous engagement with them where they were telling her about animus towards african american people. and she acknowledge is not simply about the heart, of it is about public policy and what we can do. i think that interaction shows black lives matter is externally necessary to push all politicians to deal with the issues of race but at the same time for hillary clinton to acknowledge it is not simply about intellectual reorganization of the logic of american race. it is also about putting public policy to work to help the people victimized. host: 12 feet from where we sit is the green room where the guests wait before they come on the program. i love this tweet. i love this tweet. i'm going to read it to you.
he said i would love to be in the green room when michael eric dyson met shermichael singleton. an articulate young man with articulation of we cannot be in one party versus the other. i love when he says that. i like the fact he is the face of hopefully a growing dimension and demographic within the republican party that is open-minded, intelligent, articulate young people capable of expressing themselves without demonizing their ancestors or others. without casting aspersions against those across the aisle, but suggest realistically black people must not be always pegged in a certain position and therefore predictable and not taken seriously. my problem is in my challenge to him would be the republican party has to ante up a lot more so black people can get involved in that card game. what are the payoffs, the
attractions, and appeals they would offer? if the future of the republican party looks like that, i think we have a much better chance of engaging in a two-party system that would be viable among african american people. host: david, thanks for the tweet. been go to carl outside of michigan on the independent line. caller: thanks for taking my call. i am 79 years old. i have lived in the city my whole life. from 2seen it pushed million people down to half a million people, total destruction. i have watched this happens is 1963. more as a white person would i want to have black people in my neighborhood when i have watched the mystery the entire city of detroit? i have watched rights with a burned holdings -- where they burned buildings and looted stores and there's nothing but apologies for it?
president's background is appalling's. of them and tired saying because i'm black you owe me this. when are they going to get together, like the 83-year-old woman on your program said? she knows what the problem is. it is people like mr. dyson causing this. i have watched the description -- destruction of my country for 50 years. guest: how have i individually caused thatguest:? caller: because of your attitude and feeling. gimme, gimme. guest: when did you hear me say that? caller: five minutes ago. you are saying, what can you do for us? guest: you are distorting it. you are making it up. caller: you want the government to do things for you. guest: what have i said? caller: i was just watching it a
second ago. guest: on the replay, you will never hear "give me anything." that is not what i said. it is not grammatically correct or instinctively right. i am a native of detroit, michigan. let me tell you what ruined detroit. it was the predicate of white supremacy that passed on the authority to rule and govern way before 1953 when detroit practiced politics of exclusion, when detroit was part and parcel of a system of rewards. you say get over it. you have 150 books on abraham lincoln. you have more on the great presidents. you don't say to get over that. when it comes to acknowledging the systematic exclusion of african american and latino people, all of a sudden get over it. you don't want to hear. i don't want you to give me anything but the opportunity to breathe the same way you do.
so that when police look at me, they see a human being. i am part of james brown's ideology. i don't want nobody to give me nothing. open the door and i will get it myself. nobody gave me a degree from princeton. i earned that. i don't want to cast aspersions on what you earned. i was born in 1958. i was a victim of the caste system there. read the book that says when affirmative action was white and white brothers and sisters like you may not be inclined to acknowledge that when you have the game to yourself, when babe ruth was playing against other white players, not black players, in the white corporate structure gave jobs to white people, when public schools excluded us. all i am arguing for is inclusiveness. i'm not saying give me anything. people has earned what they
deserve in this country. in detroit, lights fled to the suburbs -- white flight to the suburbs depleted it. we now have a white mayor in detroit. if you are dissatisfied now, part of that has to be laid at the feet of the white mayor. detroit has been victimized by the exportation of jobs and inability of people of color and white people to gain access to resources from the particular industries central to american society. caller: 12% and 80% of the crime. guest: 84% of people white were killed or killed by white people. is that white on white crime? host: we will go to steve, in dover, florida. good morning, steve. caller: good morning. 50 years ago.ur
i am a conservative republican. not talking about the reality here. they made the free trades with mexico first good thing another country, india, whatever. i have to tell you the trickle-down economy does not work. he informedhere, beforenths, i thought -- and a half months, i've bought myself a cadillac convertible. the trickle-down economy does not work. the trickle-down economy works for the rich. host: thank you, steve. voodoo economics george bush talked about in regards to his contest with ronald reagan and the kind of trickle-down economy ostensibly intended to benefit those at the bottom does
it has been i agree an economy predicated on distribution of goods upwards towards those whose pockets are already golden and lined. amen, brother. host: let me read this tweet. here is another comment. and then there is this. they say mr. dyson's rhetoric borders on racism. aret: i'm sure some people nervous about an articulate black man fighting back, not excepting the premises of those engaged in a conversation. i took the caller seriously so i engage him. this is what i do in my classroom. you have to defend your position.
you are free to say which you want but you have to have the facts to back it up. i take the caller seriously from michigan. i respect him. but alive television i cannot permit him to engage in intellectual misapplication of the facts and distortion as well. i am sorry you thought i was racist for saying so, but i think we have to have the prevalence in this country of a spirit that says white brothers and sisters are not used to being talked up and having ideas they don't like expressed to them. african american and other poor people have to hear it no matter what. when we are brushing our teeth in the morning, we are hearing stuff on the news that is a big distortion of us but we don't have the leisure to not participate. i think the spoiled character of many people who don't recognize their privilege has led them to have flabby intellectual muscles. i'm here to be a trainer of those muscles and help you get
in shape. host: we will go to bennie in alabama, republican line, with michael eric dyson, professor at georgetown university and the author of 18 books, find that we highlighted -- five that we highlighted. betty, good morning. thanks for waiting. caller: good morning. as a black southerner, i know what i am talking about. blackness as aat religion. guest: who is your people? caller: that is what i mean. guest: what do you mean by "you people"? who are you referring to? caller: i am black. that is what i am saying. guest: what people are you referring to? caller: black people such as
yourself. guest: you are black, too? caller: yes, i am. i am not like you. i face reality. i am older. i came up through the 1960's. i know what is going on. i worked in mission fields and in the black community working with these black jokers. sin,are bad as homemade these black children. back before the civil rights black% of thought -- people were born out of wedlock. now it is 75%. are you going to blame white people? you need to face reality. guest: i never said he caused pregnancy unless he was in the room. caller: i am black like you and
know what is going on. i am older than you. guest: being older is a value in itself. when you've got 75% of black children born out of fortification -- guest: fortification. caller: and no man in the house to help and guide them. i have two sons and i thank god for my son's. he is able to put his children inexpensive, private schools because he worked hard. he was taught to work hard. my grandchildren don't have to worry about their education because they have academic scholarships. blaming white folks for the problems black folks have. guest: i have not blamed white people for anything. , aler: i went to high school segregated high school. we had an outhouse. i have a sister with three or
four phd degrees. guest: four phd degrees. phd degrees, extraordinary. caller: that is right. me and my sister picked cotton. hot picturesters, in the south, we did not blame the white man. guest: neither did my mother who picked cotton in alabama, ma'am. caller: she was over the [indiscernible] department in new york. i had my own counseling service and worked in the mission field. stop blaming the white man. host: thank you for the call, betty. guest: betty is vigorous. i love that. three or four phd's, amazing. it was hard enough for me to get one. meis repeats a similar the of distorted ideas. i'm not suggesting blaming the white man. people should --
take responsibility for their actions. she talked about fortification, homemade sin. as an ordained baptist minister for 35 years, i understand that kind of theological perspective. that also means those responsible for doing ill should take responsibility for it. she does not want white brothers and sisters to assume responsibility institutionally and structurally. pullant white people to themselves up, to be rewarded for hard work, which i agree with by the way. but on the other hand, you don't want white brothers and sisters who benefited from a system they did not institute would have derived advantage. they were not there when the constitution and bill of rights were written. we were not there but we take advantage of it. all of us take advantage of the past. all of us rely on stuff we did not create that are advantaged by.
when white brothers and sisters men i did not do that, a and thank god for that. but we are talking about an institutional framework that does not demand individual access or consent. i am not asking white folks for nothing except the white people who pay me at georgetown. i am asking me for my paycheck, but i earned that. i write, i teach students, i think critically about the nature of society and offer the fruits of those insights to the american public. those who like it except it. those who don't will not. i am not asking the white man for anything. but i ask you to think critically about the fact we have to deal with out of wedlock births. that has increased precipitously in white communities as well. there is no demonization of white brothers and sisters in the same way. there was no report written in 1965 warning us about the coming
matriarchy that would undermine the consistent fabric of black people's and their families in america. until we have a moynihan report that looks at miley cyrus or kim kardashian or the way white byrica has been blinkered ization and popc culture, spare me that. let's all work together to work together to help the most vulnerable and uplift the values that keep us together as a nation. host: james in fort worth, texas, democrats line. caller: you are a light in the dark. i am sorry so many people cannot tell the difference of the behavior of poverty and desperation and culture. that is not exclusive to any particular culture.
i want to get back to the 2016 campaign. it began in 2007 with the rise of the tea party. that is a backlash movement to the rise of president obama. the republican party saw that was the largest single dependable voting bloc in the country and pandered to it which resulted in the tea party gaining two midterm elections, several governorships, state legislatures, and the house of representatives which effectively stopped the government for doing anything -- from doing anything for the entire term of barack obama in office. donald trump, i don't care if he is a racist. he is pandering to those people and that is why he has got the tea party that has brought him as the presumptive nominee. want minorities to go home
in their neighborhood and not be seen after work, be satisfied with what you have. that is outright racist. you remove those people and donald trump would have been defeated by jeb bush. i am a sociologist. that is a scientific analysis. . that is my opinion but i spent 70 years doing it. articulate,y intelligent, compassionate, and humane. this is how you use information. i don't think you should jews bombarding rhetoric -- use bombarding rhetoric. -ish and give a compelling narrative that stitches them together. i think our sociologist friend has made a compelling argument int the tea party is response to the rise of barack obama. he is saying a great degree of the response to barack obama, a reaction predicated on race, some ofnd collectively
the animus directed toward this man is for no other reason than he is a black man occupying the office. how do we know that? so many jokes told by republican elected officials removed from office or chastised because of their expression of them. police departments that have talked about barack obama in negative fashion. dylann roof who murdered nine folks a year ago in the church in south carolina remonstrated against the people there because you are taking over. the greatest person to take over has been barack obama,'s and nobody strikes more fear in the hearts of some white brothers and sisters then the ultimate symbol of blackness that has darkened the highest quarter of american power -- corridor of american power. white brothers and sisters in
the tea party do not understand some of the descriptions of obama resonate powerfully with racist ones. legitimate concern about displacement should not cast aspersions against obama. obama has been the best friend of folk who are white, poor, and working class. not the republican party that would explain the differences between white and black workers to the advantage of corporate america and the bastions of american capital who continue to do bad things to those poor white people. martin luther king junior said this. poor white people understand something. you have more in common with black people in the same boat as you are than white people exploiting us both. gavenk the sociologist empirical verification to martin luther king's hunch. ont: is that we must march cleveland, a more obligation to protest in cleveland. here is what he said about some demonstrations.
the president said this. guest: i am calling for the same kind of thing. the violence that may be in the offing is not from the protesters but from the tried and true tradition of those who respond to protesters, especially those who are progressive. police forces directed against them, donald trump supporters who have been violent. there has been inexcusable behavior on the other side. that is not what i am here to support. i'm here to say we must raise our voices and articulate disagreement with what is going on in intelligent fashion and in our bodies being on the front line. i'm glad the president spoke up. i wish he might have used his
bully pulpit to speak exclusively against the police forces arrayed against african american people that have shot them in the back, murdered them. yes, he finally began to speak about that. but after being cajoled and forced to do so. the greater forces of oppression in this nation don't happen to be those people who are even violent in their protests against donald trump. it happens to be the american tradition of looking at black people as less than human and as a result treating them so from the state, police department, down to the communities in which they live. i agree with the president in absolute terms. the new york times" reporting on a new treasure trove of letters by barack obama's father on this father's day. and a photograph of a very young barack obama with his dad. he did not have much relationship with him. guest: no, he did not.
that has shaped his understanding of what he thinks should be a black man should be. some of it has been harsh and some understanding. of the president, like many other african american men. two days ago was the birthday of shakurticular -- tupak talked about father absence. "with that disdain in my so the president would do well to look to other figures in african american s, authors,pper intellectual, ballplayers who have been bereft of their father's influence tragically so. and that hurts all of us that have been subjected to that. i think the president manages that -- registers that.
let's look at why some fathers have been pushed out economically. let's look at why some fathers have been marginalized from communities. let's look at the front the prison industrial complex has increased on the backs of black and brown people. many of those are fathers. they had disappeared because they have had nonviolent joint offenses that have put them in prison for 25 years. i applaud the president for commuting the sentences of those unjustly imprisoned but also putting forth public policies that would regulate federal prisons in regard to those laws and perhaps, ironically enough, the president can help release from jail the father of a young person who is a young barack obama meeting his father -- needing his father or paternal influence and maybe save others from the fate to which he was subjected. host: of you are saying we have -- a viewer saying we have to
work together. here, here. caller: dr. dyson, you are a breath of fresh air. i am a 75-year-old black man. the reality is we are hearing people discussing and observing the way in which blacks behave. i'm saying you need to look at the reasons for the ways they behave that way. a lot of people talk about racism. racism is an accommodation mechanism used by another race to expand its power. blacks in this country are not in a position to enforce their power demands to impose them on white people. got his number one -- that is number one. history documents there is white
racism. the facts show that. the next thing is we understand in the antebellum south and in the north, 80% of this nation's economy was based on slavery. what i would like is for us to that dr. grimmct has done extensive research and people, some black people in this country suffer from posttraumatic slave syndrome. it is a fact, just like a veteran from vietnam or afghanistan has post-traumatic stress syndrome, blacks in this country suffer. the problem is people are not willing to accept it because it means they are going to have to alter their behavior and understanding of what is happening and why it is happening to black people. host: thank you for the call. do youby that theory --
buy that theory? guest: when people say black people are racist, he is saying unless you control resources and able to distribute punishment or reward and impose your will upon them to make them behave in a certain way and have consequences that have legal support, he is saying you're not a racist to that point. that people can be racist and black people can be racist and bigoted. he is saying racism is being in charge of resources that will dominate, reward, or punish other people. i think that is a fair estimation. he talked about white racism is real. those of us who are honest will acknowledge the history and trajectory of white racism is real and continues to manifest and is something we have to grapple with.
he talked about the economy of america, 80% in the antebellum south being predicated on slavery. i don't think we have to keep relitigating that case. people who think they are pulling themselves up by the bootstraps are pulling them up by boots slaves. made. we see posttraumatic stress syndrome on the front lines and cast down by people victimized by forces of oppression that continue to live today. there are ways people get a message today. if you are darker skinned, you are seen as less intelligent as a lighter skinned black person. if you are a person of cholera, your qualifications are seen to be less than others. is a way in which people who live constantly with that stress, now they call it micro aggressions. but every day when you are
taught your life does not mean as much as somebody else's and likelittle things occur people overlook you in a line or restaurant or you go into stores and a track you around think you cannot afford to pay and the like. the small infractions accumulate to starve the soul and injure the spirit that think people not subjected to them don't understand. host: quick question, brief response. james, florida, what is on your mind, republican line? caller: thank god for you, sir. god bless you, reverend. can beu say, we president but we can't be a racist. but we know donald trump is a racist. guest: he certainly amplifies the worst instincts in this country.
his assault on president obama was extremely troubling and the degree to which he is willing to say he will be the platform for many people whose beliefs he claims not to believe is remarkable and troubling. host: j, south carolina, republican line. caller: yes, eric dyson, i have what you many times. you are a knowledgeable man and i thank you for your energy. this is what i want to say. it is deeper than we realize. our african culture has been hidden. we go back during the egyptian builtecause black people pyramids. we were the founding fathers and mothers of the earth realm. our history has truly been hidden way back during ancient times. for a movie called "hidden callers." guest: there is no question
there is a tremendous history of black people before enslavement. if you go to the african american studies departments at princeton, amherst, temple university, and ucla, you will see a extraordinary collection of scholars can critically and intematically about the ways which forces of oppression operate in this country but also what happened with african identity prior to the rise of slavery in america. host: tonya, you get the last word. quick question. caller: ok. itself,cratic party in like he said, he white democrats, my show and discuss what policies you are going to implement for the black people. if you don't come on my show, i'm going to publish your phone number. guest: roland is a friend of
mine. i have been on his show in this building. is a good man -- he is a good man. republicans, democrats, independents go on his show because you don't want your phone number published. this is a vigorous conversation about race. in america this is why we need presidential leadership on this issue. i want more of what obama thinks. i want more of what hillary clinton as the first female president will think, from my 's ears. god if donald trump is elected, we need even more conversation. what we need is the ability to agree or disagree with love and compassion because the ultimate goal is to transform america to make it the best country it can be. dyson ofhael eric
georgetown university, the author of a number of books, seen on msnbc, and your articles for "new republic." thank you. david chavern will be joining us from the newspaper association, he is the president and c.e.o. as we talk about the state of print media and the challenges of covering the 2016 campaign. you are watching and listening to c-span's "washington journal" on this sunday morning, father's day. we are back in a moment. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] i often say 50 is not the new
30 and 60 is not the new 40. 50 is the new 50 and it looks good and it is ok. people are to own their age and we ought not be talking about being over 50 as decline. >> tonight, the aarp c.e.o. talks about the health and financial challenges older americans face and what aarp is doing to assist them. books also the author of a called "disrupt agent." fastest growing segment is people over 100. inn these programs were put place, life expectancy was 67 or 68. not only are there more people in the system, but they are living longer, so we have to be able to look at these programs and make meaningful adjustments that is going to allow people to live with dignity for a much
longer time. >> tonight at 8:00 eastern. on to use the, the federal court of appeals for the district of columbia upheld the sec for treating the internet like a utility requiring providers to treat all internet traffic equally. fred campbell and the policy director at free press are on either side of the decision and talked about their views. they're joined by the "washington post" technology reporter. itnow that the fcc has said applies to isps, that opens the door for additional regulation that was never part of the net neutrality debate. >> we think of that as returning to the right law for broadband,
treating it like a transmission system and making a distinction between the carriage and content on the internet. >> watch "the communicators" monday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span2. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we want to welcome david chavern, president and c.e.o. of the newspaper association of america. the title is clear. but what is your association do? guest: we represent 2000 newspapers. that is mostly digital property now, digital and print organizations around the country. everything from the largest down to your local newspaper. host: i want to talk about the state of the industry. this past week, donald trump banning the "washington post" or , duringld trump events buzzfeed and politico denied. your reaction to that?
guest: i have been critical of mr. trump in this regard. i think it is highly misguided of him. i think fundamentally what it comes from is he comes from a in dealinglebrity with the press in the context of being a celebrity. that is fine and that is the world he came from. t we are into now is the role of the free press and interviewing someone running for the most important office in the world. it is a public mission. is a serious public mission. it is not always fun or pleasant. the founding fathers did not always let the 18th-century press, but they wrote them into the first amendment because they knew about the critical role and mission of the free press in our democracy. i think what he is doing is dangerous but more misguided. host: the state of the newspaper
industry today is what? guest: transition. people want the product. they consume more news than ever. 150 million adults over we can consume the product from my members. people consume more news than ever. the idea that people or millennials do not consume news is wrong. that access to much more and consume much more. the challenge is a technological and economic challenge. he will get through that because people want the product. there will be another site for the industry. and: conducting a survey indicating trust in the media remains at historic lows. why? guest: media relates to a lot of things including cable tv, newspapers, magazines. if you look at that, the thing people trust most is local newspapers. trust in the media is a
long-term low. but trust in all institutions is led. -- low. i think the intense negativity attached's to this season political campaign drives down people's trust in anything related to politics. there is a lot of divisiveness in the world and that is reflected in the fact people don't like anybody in the space. host: what are the biggest challenges facing your industry beyond digital? guest: first and foremost, it is an economic model challenge. when it was only print, there was a clear advertising-supported model for newspapers across the country. now we are moving into a digital space. digital advertising is a very different animal and not well formed right now. digital advertising is not that great. it is still derivative of rent and tv advertising -- print and
tv advertising. anybody in the content business who creates things to be consumed online is challenged with online advertising. we have to figure out a good business model for the future. but people still want the product. that is not a problem. host: our phone lines are open for republicans, democrats. our guest is the president and c.e.o. of the newspaper association of america. story, the 229 people, places, and things donald trump has insulted on twitter, a complete list. other online organizations are doing with their online product? guest: particularly national newspapers are being incredibly innovative with their online news offerings.
the huge percentage of news is now consumed through facebook. the idea that millennials don't consume news is wrong. they may consume it differently. they may watch a cat video and then a story on isis, but they consume a lot of hard news. you are seeing a lot of innovation in the industry. local papers are innovating because they are tied to communities. it was a hard problem. it was a successful industry for a long time. it is going through transition. it is not unique in that. we will find our way to the other side of it. is a graduate of university of pittsburg. he was valedictorian at georgetown university where he earned his mba. how do you make money? guest: you do great journalism and i think we are doing that. subscription and
advertising models and innovate. digital only side, there are some organizations that have been very innovative on the advertising side. i think we need to find better models for digital advertising networks for consumers and more subscription-based. at the end of the day, people want what we make and are for the most part willing to pay for it. host: one of the essays written by our guest, why donald trump's war on the media is a danger to our democracy. it is online if you want to read it. democrats line, good morning. caller: good morning. is that it is evident the republican party is out of touch with the american people and that they should
and allow mr.k trump to go ahead. gotten inike he has ofch with the people america. host: we will get a response. whether therms of republican party is out of touch or not, we will find out in november. i think the republican party has some challenges in terms of who mr. trump is trying to appeal to, versus some traditional supporters of the party. but we will see. we are still a long way from the election. if you come from the news business, this is great. there will be a lot to report on an a lot of people will be interested in it.
what is going on within the company? gannett is pursuing a consolidation strategy on the newspaper side. that makes a lot of sense. if you can create some official -- some efficiencies, that could be a good long-term economic model. one thing i hope, you see the radio business has had huge consolidation. i think they have lost some of the local voices and radio. i think -- -- some efficiencies, that could be a good long-term economic model. that makes a lot of sense. host: a lot of smaller town
newspapers are going by the wayside. a lot of them are selling and consolidating. i start speaking to the ,ouisiana press association hundreds of local newspapers and towns. i was just talking texas. local newspapers are doing pretty well. the most part they have a monopoly on the information. host: without our joining us from boston on the republican line. i obviously read a local newspaper and i'm not keeping track of the national new york times and boston globe. be the they are supposed fourth branch of government,
they should be telling us something we don't already know. there really is no motivation to read the new york times or the boston globe, because i already where their stories are going to go. i posed to you the question, they will be crucifying former president george bush. where their stories are going to go. in theajor change national media in the early 1990's after 12 years of republican control in the white house. you could tell there is an influence.
you can see them going along with it. guest: people complain about bias in the media broadly. if everybody is complaining about your bias then you must be doing something right. sometimes that is reflected and sometimes that is not. host: how do you know everything? guest: those stories came from reporting newspapers. aboutof people complained it media bias in favor of mr. trump. all the things that people don't like also came through newspaper
reporting. you can say you don't read news newspapers, but if you follow it back almost all the news you consume comes back. host: for miami florida, howard is next. caller: the media is pathetic. i think they used that word because the media was so primarily let me just article i alsoan check that article on the internet. you can see the slant of the herald.
when clinton was in front of the benghazi committee, the headline was clinton skewered by benghazi commune -- benghazi committee. online it was a more ambivalent headline. that slant in the way it is presented. when obama bailed out the auto industry, the headline of the article was "obama defends bailout. but if you read the article it -- about just this past week there were three mentions of rick scott record -- rick scott writing a letter to obama. obama requested 1.9 billion based on the recommendation of
the cdc, and the world health organization says there will be 4 million cases of sica in the western hemisphere. cap -- 400,000 cases, 33 33,000 cases per month. the consequences for people are going to be horrible, financially, emotionally, and physically. guest: you start up by saying the media is pathetic, then you talk about the great information you have consumed from the media. the fact of the matter is when i was theger, the news local paper that landed on the driveway and what was on the 6:00 news. the fact you have access online and numerous other ways to get incredible amounts of , and obviously the
caller consumes a whole bunch of media and relies on it for good information. he can complain about the miami herald, but it is not like he is limited to that point of. thank you for being a great consumer of news media. host: our next caller is from new orleans. democrats line. i wonder if you were theered by the fact that entire media is owned by a few people. and i wonder if you feel there is any influence that the fact a lot of reporters cannot report like net neutrality, the poisoning of land by and different things that your advertisers support in
the media and don't want reported. guest: i don't think the media is controlled by a few people. there are big organizations. i think there are something like 500 independently owned news organizations in louisiana. there is wide diversity of ownership. i don't see constraints in terms of reporting. where have you gone to get , goneation about fracking down the list of things you mentioned. it comes down to news reporting. it maynot be one paper, be in another paper in another location, but you obviously have access to it. to bek you have self-aware to say there is a lot of reporting, a lot of information, and i consume more
of it than i ever have. i haven't heard complaints about have been shut down on the editorial site because of views of ownership. host: a comment and a question on our twitter page. this is from michael who says -- a nether viewer who says it is time for all media enterprises to go digital. caller: they also do print editions for people. interesting thing about the print business, prince or is going to continue to go down. i don't think anybody is disputing that. money and there are still people that really like the print edition. he will about content being multi channel.
my folks will put the news on your phone, put it on your ipad, and they will put it in your driveway. is any think there industry that is more multi channel than the news business. they have significant digital properties. the peak of its circulation was roughly 800,000 daily circulation. 80 million unique visitors per month. they have 100e consumers as they did in the golden era. host: jerry from frederick, maryland, good morning. caller: i think it is sad to say the newspaper industry is part
of the bigger media industry. they are no longer the eyes and years of we the people. that is a very true belief. longere media is no accountable and being the eyes and years of the people, it means the politicians no longer fear the population. the media has a lot to answer for, including the newspapers. you don't even follow issues like the constitution, freedom, liberty, things that made this country great. have been hijacked by people like jeff bezos of amazon. i think it is troubling when big companies can manipulate the masses.
whoever owns the media owns the masses. just go see not to germany for that. host: how is the media biased, -- guest: how is the media biased, liberally or conservatively? ask themedia doesn't same questions we the people would ask if we were out there. when journalists want to run a story, and they run very hard-hitting informative studies tell hers her editor we are not going to run the story. is that not biased? journalists have left the industry because when they try to run stories the editors in the backroom say that is not
good enough, that is too conservative. we are not going to want to get .id of terrorist's so the editors who are old troll liberal, who are controlling the journalists who walk away and , you keepne with this squashing my stories, a lot of good journalists within the industry. host: she works for sinclair broadcast, she was on cbs, but cbs television. guest: a lot there. is extremely hard-hitting news journalism that isut of newspapers very tough on politicians.
all the things you know about politicians, almost all that came out of newspaper reporting. have you seen the pieces they run on donald trump's history with trump university or atlantic city? in theu seen the pieces new york times about secretary clinton's e-mails? there is a lot of reporting .bout politicians the newspaper business is the source for that kind of information. yes there are always challenges at individual news organizations, but i see nothing indicating that there is some goodrial desire to squash journalism, good reporting. that is what people want, that is what they will pay for.
>> our guest, the president and ceo of the newspaper association of america. this is from -- caller: one thing people like , is a great thing on a sunday morning. also it ends. .ou can read the print you can't consume a whole website. it's a ritual, they consume it. that is fine. they can go online or go on their phone. it will deliver the news to you anyway you can consume. >> good morning. i want to talk about the heroin epidemic.
if he's the president, i wonder if the media poses the question [indiscernible] there were two whistleblowers that lou the whistle on hillary clinton. and nobody took it up. nobody questioned her server. whyou have any concern this wasn't a follow-up? is a job you are supposed to do as a news organization. host: first on the heroin epidemic. caller: obviously a huge issue for the country. if you look at what has in form to your view, that there is a huge heroin epidemic, i think it
is going to come back to a reporter from a newspaper somewhere. seen the newif you york times reporting. the challengesof are so big, no matter how much you report on it it is never enough. you have to think about where the information you are basing your view on came from. on the secretary clinton whistleblowers, i'm afraid i don't know what you are referring to. the news business is not perfect at all. ands made up of individuals individuals can be biased and miss things. it is about effort and focus. if you go back to where you are learning what you are learning, they say it is from
other places. we employed reporters and something like the heroine epidemic took years of good solid reporting. it is one of these complex areas . host: johnny says what new source do you recommend to keep up with the war in afghanistan and iraq during conflicts? nato is going to be asking for $15 to help with the rebuilding effort in afghanistan. i think foreign reporting expensive, andd this is probably an area where there has been less reporting them there has been in the past.
i certainly think the national newspapers and new york times, washington post's and others still do a really good job of that. go online and get access to the world of international reporting. to what haslimited landed in your driveway in the morning. i do take the point that there is a cutback in foreign reporting and we have lost something in that. i hope the news industry can rebuild. host: we will have live coverage of the results. the time difference will begin at 5:00 eastern time. you can also listen to it on , which is a key
vote for britain. democrats line, good morning. why is no media at all of the about the effects cdc's new guidelines for pain medicine, and they are not talking about people like me who are living in constant pain. i've had a headache every day from 9.5 months. community has shut their doors on those of us that have chronic pain. walked a line between trying not to kill myself every day. if i was the family pet i would be put to sleep. i have no quality of life. to, no no one i can talk one who would talk to me about
this issue, why aren't we not -- why are we not being heard? guest: i'm sorry to hear but your suffering. i understand from my own family experiences about people who go through challenges like that. i think this does get back to inorting on the opioid abuse the united states. problems, ifomplex there hasn't been enough for putting on cdc guidance. where thesean area organizations have to do a better job. ofon't think it is for want desire to cover these things. i think you will see as we go along the information people do have almost always originates with our reports.
and i you all the best remember the look -- and whether it is gaining the coverage it deserves. and there is a photograph during the new hampshire primary . know he was very critical of donald trump. has the media failed? newspapers, cable tv. have they failed, i don't believe so. -- on thehe argument other side of the coin almost all of the negative things people know about him or argue about him are a trump university or atlantic city or treatment of
women or other things out of newspaper reporting. so he is a polarizing figure that generates a lot of and there is going to be good and bad attached to that. trump,riticisms of mr. my guess is the information originally came from a newspaper host -- newspaper reporter. host: from pennsylvania, good morning, independent online. wondered -- a couple of questions i have. i was reading a book about oswald, and it's a very good book.
and i had just gotten back from poland. where censorship was really bad. mentioned, he stopped his narrative about oswald. and he said -- why do authors write books? he kind of surmised possibilities. some conglomerates are the same way. in order for conglomerates to make money, which is their primary -- they need to own as much as they possibly can, because that way they can get in
as much advertising as they possibly can. guest: we did a study on what readers value most. there is an assumption people want short, they want a couple of sentences. that is wrong. they told people about -- they polled people about what they value. people value enterprise journalism, investigatory pieces. explaining big competent of topics. i think clearly from our industry perspective it was unique and creative. is what they value.
in order to make money somebody has to be really big. i don't think that is how the newspaper business works. i think what you see as we understand that if we are going to have a future we have to create powerful journalism. ultimately that is what they pay for. we think that is what people want. it has been wrong. that is not what people want, that is not what they produce. host: you can get more information. from washington dc, good morning. caller: i have to disagree with the consolidation of the media. government lifted the restrictions from consolidation.
what we have now is four major corporate entities. now we are up 70% of the news.al they own the big corporations and the big stories. a lot of times they just regurgitate what is going on. you arelt of what seeing is hard-hitting stories against corporations. of why are weg trying to back russia into another war? no company wants to talk about that, even though the german chancellor, one of the representatives of nato said we are trying to start a war, what are we doing here? go outside those boundaries you are not allowed to argue about them. guest: let me focus on consolidation from a newspaper -- from a newsmaker perspective.
there are some big chains out there and some of them consolidating. the newspaper business is dying that they also say they are monopolists. there are huge sources of information around you. i don't know i agree that the stories haven't been covered. been covered consistent with your point of view. i think consolidation is going to be a healthy thing that helps the industry survive. so -- davidyou for chavern, thank you for stopping by. we will continue the .onversation he is leading the effort to censure the irs
commissioner. thompson.n where is that money and what is going on with all of that? with you thise headline from national geographic, president spending his we can with the first family, including a stop at the yosemite national park. this short excerpt from an interview. >> walking this very trails, through these redwood trees. these granite mountains, they live -- president obama: teddy roosevelt , certainly the president i and the most because back then he would go to yellowstone or , he would spend the
month just wandering around in the middle of his presidency. it's harder for me to move. it's been said and it's it may be true that america's best idea, the idea that sacred, they are for everyone and not just a few. for us to be able to celebrate 100 years of the national park service and all of us who had the foresight, it is a great time. president, celebrating the 100th anniversary of the putonal park service ge