Skip to main content

About your Search

2013 5
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)
Sep 1, 2013 12:00am EDT
. before george washington became president while he was away fighting the revolutionary war,martha washington ran their plantation and their home, mount vernon. >> it is clear that martha arrived at mount vernon in 1859 and there was a lot of management that she had to do. when she married george washington, she brings with her to mount vernon 12 housemates. that is really almost unimaginable luxury. these are slaves that are for the most part, not field labor, not producing crops, which is where your income is coming from. they are doing things like cooking, serving at table, clean the house, doing the laundry, doing selling, this is not productive labor in the sense that it is not productive income. she brings them with her and she brings financial resources to the marriage as well as her managerial skills. it makes mount vernon a successful operation and it makes it possible for washington to be away for eight years fighting a war. the fact that he has this support system that enables him to volunteer his time and talents to run the revolution is clearly critical. first, a farm
Aug 18, 2013 6:00am EDT
, hoped he was. the president, george h.w. bush did, then he turned out not to be and the mantra was not more suitors. they're making sure that they know the pedigree much more deeply before they nominate somebody so that they're not going to change. clarence thomas said i ain't evolving. so far he hasn't really. [laughter] >> speaking of not evolving is a concern i have. we're very interested in media law and where the court may go on media law, including these technologies we're talking about. court might not be as comfortable with it. i know i have a worry that down the road there may be bad law made by justices who aren't as comfortable with the technologies, they're comfortable with say television or radio but maybe snot internet. do any of you share these concerns or see issues arising on this? >> i think they have those oncerns. i did a column last week where the justices said that they don't really understand very well these technology issues and that they know they have to deal with cell phone capabilities and easier ways to track people without having a cop follow them arou
Aug 18, 2013 12:00am EDT
attack. >> from george washington university, i will direct the question to matt. eight days after benghazi, you said benghazi was an act of terror. we have had a significant political and bureaucratic debate about talking points and what happened prior to that point, but what goes into the formal determination that something is an act of terror? depending on the political agenda, it could be active thuggery or an act of war or an act of terror. for those who have been inside the system, eight days is not necessarily bad. >> important point after benghazi is -- i was in a hearing that was prescheduled. in the intelligence community, i think i can speak for all of the analysts that were working on this. we proceed of presumption it was a terrorist attack. you had a mortar attack that killed americans and a government facility in benghazi. they were clearly targeting our presence there. it was violence and result in death. there are number of legal definitions, the practical common sense of you that we all proceeded on from the outset was this was a terrorist attack. what it does not
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)