18 Burst results for "Harvard University Press"

"harvard university press" Discussed on podcast – Lawyers, Guns & Money

podcast – Lawyers, Guns & Money

05:39 min | 1 year ago

"harvard university press" Discussed on podcast – Lawyers, Guns & Money

"And today we're here with keira dixon view. Ick who is the benjamin w schmidt professor of war conflict and society in twentieth century america at texas christian university curious first book officer nurse woman. The army nurse corps of the vietnam war was published by johns hopkins university. Press in two thousand ten. She's the editor of the history of gender war and the us military post by the press in twenty game. And we're here to talk about her new book or newish book anyway. The girl next door bring the phone front to the front lines and it was published by harvard university. press in two thousand nineteen karen. Thanks for joining us. Thanks for having merit care..

keira dixon twentieth century today benjamin w schmidt johns hopkins university harvard university america first book vietnam war twenty game christian university two newish texas thousand karen thousand nineteen ten
"harvard university press" Discussed on WBSM 1420

WBSM 1420

03:42 min | 1 year ago

"harvard university press" Discussed on WBSM 1420

"Less than a year and a half later it was this man told by the citizens trapped behind that wall with handles with drizzles and pick axes again. I I employ you to help me. I watched that Chilly November night with Joy is the Berlin Wall was dismantled by those it had entrapped, and then I thought we'd won. Paul, did we win or did we lose? Well, we wanted on the battlefield or at least in the international arena, but we lost it in the classroom in the United States and and pretty much ever since, or by the time they went to graduate school in the early 19 nineties, I started teaching a Grove City college in 1997 and Past 24 25 years I've been going around the country invited by desperate students. Yaffe chapters Izzy chapters on different college campuses from students asking me to give a talk with titles like Why is Communism Bad? Because Because they're not learning these things. They're not learning these things on college campuses, and oftentimes I remember late nineties early two thousands early two thousands with like the Harvard University Press book, the Black Book of Communists. Go through the different death tolls and all the different numbers and I remember one professor One time very progressive liberal Professor, and she she stared at me said, Like, looked at me as if the as if the ghost of Joe McCarthy had left inside of my body and possess me, right, like okay, Professor Take it easy on the commie bashing on the red crusading and all I'm trying to do is teach young people crucial history. The last generation or two that they didn't know about the deadliest ideology and history. And what often happens with the left, is they don't they don't attack or even criticized the pro Communists. They criticize and attack the anti Communists. Right, the anti communist or the bad guys, So they look at people like me and you is, if we're weird, right were the extremists for even talking about this stuff, but it's because of the liberal run universities that this stuff hasn't been taught and hasn't been talked about that you now. I'll have in some polls a quarter to a third of young people, saying that they would support the abolition of private property. Not only that, that the victims of Communism Memorial Foundation with its annual poll with you got finding out that two thirds of American millennials would prefer to live in a socialist or conservative, all Communist America, despite the fact that that book you mentioned, which is a life changing book, the Black Book of Communism, which simply calculated the death cost. To the world of Marxism was written by Socialists by left wing historian Stephen Courtois was a left wing and when he started that project, and when he found out that the death toll was over one 100 million souls killed. Forget the rest of us enslaved to kicked out of their jobs sent to labor camps tortured. No 100. Million killed alone. That's the black Book of Communism. Another one to add to your library, along with Paul Kengo's especially his most recent one, which is the devil and Karl Marx. The Devil and Karl Marx. I'm Sebastian. Gorka, This is America. First come to you from the relief factor dot com Studios if you want to do yourself For favor. If you want to support talk radio support. Those that make this show is possible, especially the great Mike Lindell. Mike, The inventor of my pillow is a great patriot, A truth teller, and now they're trying to cancel him with 25 corporations Boycotting his products Get up to 66% off when.

Mike Lindell Stephen Courtois 1997 United States Communism Memorial Foundation Paul Kengo Karl Marx Joe McCarthy Mike Paul Gorka Harvard University Press 25 corporations Black Book of Communists Sebastian 25 years Black Book of Communism First two two thirds
"harvard university press" Discussed on America First with Sebastian Gorka Podcast

America First with Sebastian Gorka Podcast

03:52 min | 1 year ago

"harvard university press" Discussed on America First with Sebastian Gorka Podcast

"Mr gorbachev tear down this wall less than a year and a half later was dismantled by these citizens trapped behind that wall with hand tools. Chisels pickaxes again. I employ you to help me. I watched that chilly november night with joys. The berlin wall was dismantled by those. It had entrapped. And i thought we'd one poll did we. Did we lose. Well we wanted on the battlefield or at least in the international arena but we lost it in the classroom in the united states and and pretty much ever since or by the time. They went to graduate school in the early nineteen nineties. I started teaching grove city college in nineteen ninety seven the past twenty four twenty five years. I've been going around. The country invited by esperance's students yaffa chapters. Isi chapters on college campuses from students. Asking me to give a talk with titles like why is communism bad because because they're not learning these things they're not learning these things on college campuses and oftentimes. I remember late nineties early. Two thousands early two thousands with harvard. University press book. The black book of communists go through the different death tolls and all the different numbers. And i remember one professor one time. Very progressive liberal professor. And she she stared at me so like looked at me. As if the the as if the ghost of joe mccarthy had leapt inside of my body and possess me right like okay. Professor take it easy on the comedy bashing on the red crusading all. I'm trying to do is teach young. People crucial history of the last generation or two that they didn't know about the deadliest ideology in history at what often happens with the left is they. Don't they don't attack or even criticized the pro-communists they criticizing attack the anticommunist. Right the anticommunist or the bad guys so they look people like me and you as were weird right. We're the extremists. Friedman talking about this stuff. But it's because of the liberal run universities that this stuff hasn't been taught hasn't been talked about that you now have in some polls a quarter to thirty deng people saying that they would support the abolition of private property not only got that the victims of communism memorial foundation with its annual poll with you finding out. The two thirds of american millennials would prefer to live in a socialist or conserve. Oh communist america. Despite the fact that that book you mentioned which is alive changing book the black book of communism which simply calculated the death cost to the world of marxism was written by socialist by left wing historian. Stephen courtois was a left wing when he started that project and when he found out that the death toll was over. One hundred million souls killed forget the rest through a enslave to a kick out of their job center labor camps torture. No one hundred million killed alone. That's the black book of communism. Another one to add to your library. Along with paul cangos especially his most recent one. Which is the devil. And karl marx. The devil and karl marx. I'm sebastian gorka. This is america first to you from the relief factor dot com studios. If you wanna do yourself a favor if you want to support talkradio support those that make the shows possible. Especially the great mike. Lindell mike the inventor of my pillow is a great patriot. A truth teller and now they're trying to cancel him with twenty five corporations boycotting his products. Get up this sixty six percent off when you use my name. Go straight to his website.

Stephen courtois paul cangos karl marx sebastian gorka Friedman harvard united states late nineties grove city college gorbachev one hundred million two One hundred million souls two thirds one time Lindell november night one professor sixty six percent less than a year and a half la
"harvard university press" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

860AM The Answer

03:32 min | 1 year ago

"harvard university press" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

"A year and a half later, it was dismantled by these citizens trapped behind that wall with handles with chisels and pickaxes again. I am employed you to help me. I watched that chilly November night with Joy is the Berlin Wall was dismantled by those it had entrapped. And I thought we'd won. Paul, did we win or did we lose? Well, we wanted on the battlefield or at least in the international arena, but we lost it in the classroom in the United States and and pretty much ever since, or by the time I went to graduate school in the early 19 nineties, I started teaching a Grove City college in 1997 and The past 24 25 years I've been going around the country invited by desperate students. Yaffe chapters Izzy chapters on different college campuses from students asking me to give a talk with titles like Why Is Communism Bad? Because because they're not learning these things. They're not learning these things on college campuses, and oftentimes I remember late nineties early two thousands early two thousands would like the Harvard University Press book, The Black Book of Communists go through the different death tolls and all the different numbers and I remember one professor, one time very progressive liberal professor, and she she stared at me said, Like, looked at me as if the as if the ghost of Joe McCarthy had left inside of my body and possess me, right? Like Okay, Professor. Take it easy on the kami bashing and the red crusading and all I'm trying to do is teach young people crucial history. Of the last generation or two that they didn't know about the deadliest ideology and history And what often happens with the left. Is they don't they don't attack or even criticized the pro Communists. They criticize and attack the anti Communists. Right. The anti Communist ER the bad guys, So they look at people like me and you is that they were weird, right? Were the extremist free been talking about this stuff? But it's because of the liberal run universities that this stuff hasn't been taught and hasn't been talked about. That you now have in some polls a quarter to a third of young people, saying that they would support the abolition of private property. Not only that, that the victims of Communism Memorial Foundation with its annual poll with you got finding out that two thirds of American Millennials would prefer to live in a socialist or conservative or Communist America. Despite the fact that that book you mentioned, which is a life changing book, the Black Book of Communism, which simply calculated the death cost to the world of Marxism was written by Socialists by left wing historian Stephen Courtois was a left winger when he started that project and when he found out that the death toll was over one 100 million souls killed. Forget the rest of it enslaved to a kicked out of their jobs sent to labor camps tortured. No 100 million killed alone. That's the black Book of Communism. Another one to add to your library, along with Paul Kengo's especially his most recent one, which is The devil and Karl Marx, the devil and Karl Marx. I'm Sebastian. Gorka, This is America. First coming to you from the relief act dot com Studios. If you want to do yourself a favor, if you want to support talk radio support, those that make the show is possible. Especially the great Michael Lindell..

Michael Lindell Stephen Courtois 1997 United States Joe McCarthy Paul Kengo Communism Memorial Foundation Paul Harvard University Press Sebastian Gorka Karl Marx A year and a half later 100 million late nineties The Black Book of Communists one professor over one 100 million souls two two thirds
"harvard university press" Discussed on The BreakPoint Podcast

The BreakPoint Podcast

04:33 min | 1 year ago

"harvard university press" Discussed on The BreakPoint Podcast

"The confirmation hearings for Judge Amy, , CONYBEARE IT Senator Maisy. . Hirano of Hawaii expressed outrage and shock that the nominee would use the term sexual preference instead of sexual orientation sexual preference announced senator. . TORONTO. . Is An offensive and outdated term used by anti lgbtq activists to suggest that sexual orientation is a choice. . It is not after the Exchange Merriam Webster which apparently like most Americans had not gotten that Nemo with these new linguistic absolutes quickly changed the definition of sexual preference in its online dictionary. . To, , indicate that this wording is now offensive who knew we'll beyond the orwellianism of the literally changing the dictionary to support a political climb. . It seems that Senator Hirano is the one who's actually behind the Times on this whole sexual orientation versus Sexual Preference Issue According to Dr Glenn Stanton, , and then outstanding new article at public discourse. . Judge Barrett's terminology is actually more in line with the latest thinking of leading gender scholars for example, , Professor Sorry Van Anders at candidates Queens University has stated that. . Quote sexual orientation as a term is increasingly seen as regressive because it belongs to the bio centralist project translating to English. . What she saying is that the word orientation suggests that sexuality is hard wired and according to Professor Anders that's just not the consensus anymore among her peers though the whole born this way claim was once a very useful slogan to advance gay rights it no longer serves the goals of the LGBTQ. . Movement years ago for instance, two , scholars at Ucla question the concept of. . Sexual. . Orientation especially for women to instead that women's sexuality and Orientation Fluid Changeable over time and variable across social context other social scientists that Glenn Stanton quotes in his public discourse Article Call For a paradigm shift in how female sexuality is studied and described, , and there've been plenty of surveys indicate that most self identified lesbians will have relationships with men. . At some point. . There's also a more obvious problem with the idea of a fixed orientation that's found in the very initials of the acronym especially the. . Be The queue of lgbtq as political commentator Douglas Murray who identifies as gay by the way rights bisexuals continued to be viewed as some kind of betrayal from within the gay community gay men tend to believe that men who claim to be by are in fact, , gays in some form of denial yet according to a pew research report from last summer bisexuals account for almost half of all LGBTQ adult in the US in fact, the , authors of a new book published by Harvard University Press. . Think. . That male bisexuals are those who call themselves mostly straight vastly outnumber exclusively gay men. . Thus they conclude the old system of gay straight or BI has as stanton puts, , it outgrown its usefulness and even bigger challenge in the B. to the born. . This way dogma is the T- gay rights and gay marriage were sold to us. . The premise that homosexuality is hard wired maybe even genetic like race but anyone claiming transgender as an identity does. . So in spite of physical and genetic realities not because. Of . them and the CUE which usually stands for questioning well, that , continues to evolve in both meaning and practice to include more and more sexual preferences as an identity. . Well, , one wonders whether Senator Horon would feel compelled to lecture the various social scientists that Glenn Stanton sites. . In this article my suspicion is she wouldn't in fact, , my suspicion is that Senate Arana was fed this talking point by an aide who's checking twitter and saw it as an opportunity to tar and feather judge Barrett as. . A big what's ultimately revealed by her political posturing awoke language policing however is crucially important for all of us to now that phrases such a sexual orientation or sexual preference or whatever. The . latest nomenclature are terms made up not to describe reality but to advance the idea that has revolutionized. . So much of our culture on politics that sexual attraction and urge define and determine who we are. . That's the idea we can never embrace even if we're facing outrage from a senator

Dr Glenn Stanton senator Senator Hirano John Stonestreet Judge Barrett Senator Horon Professor Anders Senator Maisy Judge Amy Glenn Stanton Exchange Merriam Webster stanton TORONTO Ucla Hawaii US Queens University Harvard University Press Douglas Murray
Born This Way Is Old Science

The BreakPoint Podcast

04:33 min | 1 year ago

Born This Way Is Old Science

"The confirmation hearings for Judge Amy, CONYBEARE IT Senator Maisy. Hirano of Hawaii expressed outrage and shock that the nominee would use the term sexual preference instead of sexual orientation sexual preference announced senator. TORONTO. Is An offensive and outdated term used by anti lgbtq activists to suggest that sexual orientation is a choice. It is not after the Exchange Merriam Webster which apparently like most Americans had not gotten that Nemo with these new linguistic absolutes quickly changed the definition of sexual preference in its online dictionary. To, indicate that this wording is now offensive who knew we'll beyond the orwellianism of the literally changing the dictionary to support a political climb. It seems that Senator Hirano is the one who's actually behind the Times on this whole sexual orientation versus Sexual Preference Issue According to Dr Glenn Stanton, and then outstanding new article at public discourse. Judge Barrett's terminology is actually more in line with the latest thinking of leading gender scholars for example, Professor Sorry Van Anders at candidates Queens University has stated that. Quote sexual orientation as a term is increasingly seen as regressive because it belongs to the bio centralist project translating to English. What she saying is that the word orientation suggests that sexuality is hard wired and according to Professor Anders that's just not the consensus anymore among her peers though the whole born this way claim was once a very useful slogan to advance gay rights it no longer serves the goals of the LGBTQ. Movement years ago for instance, two scholars at Ucla question the concept of. Sexual. Orientation especially for women to instead that women's sexuality and Orientation Fluid Changeable over time and variable across social context other social scientists that Glenn Stanton quotes in his public discourse Article Call For a paradigm shift in how female sexuality is studied and described, and there've been plenty of surveys indicate that most self identified lesbians will have relationships with men. At some point. There's also a more obvious problem with the idea of a fixed orientation that's found in the very initials of the acronym especially the. Be The queue of lgbtq as political commentator Douglas Murray who identifies as gay by the way rights bisexuals continued to be viewed as some kind of betrayal from within the gay community gay men tend to believe that men who claim to be by are in fact, gays in some form of denial yet according to a pew research report from last summer bisexuals account for almost half of all LGBTQ adult in the US in fact, the authors of a new book published by Harvard University Press. Think. That male bisexuals are those who call themselves mostly straight vastly outnumber exclusively gay men. Thus they conclude the old system of gay straight or BI has as stanton puts, it outgrown its usefulness and even bigger challenge in the B. to the born. This way dogma is the T- gay rights and gay marriage were sold to us. The premise that homosexuality is hard wired maybe even genetic like race but anyone claiming transgender as an identity does. So in spite of physical and genetic realities not because. Of them and the CUE which usually stands for questioning well, that continues to evolve in both meaning and practice to include more and more sexual preferences as an identity. Well, one wonders whether Senator Horon would feel compelled to lecture the various social scientists that Glenn Stanton sites. In this article my suspicion is she wouldn't in fact, my suspicion is that Senate Arana was fed this talking point by an aide who's checking twitter and saw it as an opportunity to tar and feather judge Barrett as. A big what's ultimately revealed by her political posturing awoke language policing however is crucially important for all of us to now that phrases such a sexual orientation or sexual preference or whatever. The latest nomenclature are terms made up not to describe reality but to advance the idea that has revolutionized. So much of our culture on politics that sexual attraction and urge define and determine who we are. That's the idea we can never embrace even if we're facing outrage from a senator

Dr Glenn Stanton Senator Senator Hirano Judge Barrett Senator Horon Professor Anders Senator Maisy Judge Amy Glenn Stanton Toronto Exchange Merriam Webster Stanton Hawaii Ucla United States Queens University Harvard University Press Douglas Murray Twitter
"harvard university press" Discussed on KQED Radio

KQED Radio

04:00 min | 1 year ago

"harvard university press" Discussed on KQED Radio

"Your podcast IRA lab called the Teaching Systems Lab in our thesis is that all around the world? People want to see more ambitious teaching and learning and classrooms. They want to see less recitation. More active, Engage students entered learning, and the only way that'll happen is We can dramatically increase the quantity and quality of teacher learning. So how will that happen? We think online learning will play an incredibly important role in the future of teacher learning, because teacher lied incredibly busy, complex lives even when they're not in the midst of a pandemic on DA Online learning can reach people where they're at So for us Teach lab is not just a service effort to share the kinds of things that we're learning with teachers. But it's part of a broader research agenda to say like what is the role All of public media of podcasts of massive open online courses of freely available digital clinical simulations to improve teaching and learning What we actually talked about and teach lab kind of depends on whatever it is that we're working on this Last spring. The beginning of the year. We were doing a bunch of research into equity teaching practices and anti racist teaching practices. And so the whole first season of teach lab was about that topic, particularly with an eye towards one of the things we found is that there was a lot of discussion about how to avoid issues of bias and inequality in policy in curriculum in lesson planning. But less discussion about how to do anti racist teaching work in the improvisational data day, minute to minute interactions with teachers so with between teachers and students, so we found an area in which we thought the research was lacking, and we brought in a bunch of smart people to help us talk through and think through that issue while sharing it widely. With the world and then in March, the pandemic struck and we just spent all of our time talking about Cove in teaching and how we're going to figure out this very difficult pivot that teachers have been working on since then. Spontaneous outpourings are always great radio, you know, and I discovered that 2015 You wrote a Children's book Baby's first book of zombies. That's right. It's an instant classic. And I'm so pleased now that when you goto my Amazon page, there's a failure to disrupt dot com This sort of very serious scholarly text next to the baby's first book of Zombies. Yeah, Erotic is a friend had a baby and the this couple just like loved horror and sci fi and stuff like that, And I thought the I thought the the offerings in the Children's book section we're a little bit wimpy, and then I went to this. This couple's baby shower. And the first person I met was a comic book illustrator who is also having kids at the same time, And it was just sort of Tio perfectly coincidental to do anything other than producer book and and self publish it through Kickstarter. So So, if you were say, if you're watching zombie movies in afraid your kids it might rub off on your kids. This makes him feel good. Yes, that was exactly was designed for whether or not it works is hard to say, but that I was a lot of kids thought it was fun science, that Theo guy and so I've got it. I've got to tell you the limits of my own knowledge and understanding that za consistent policy even with Children. Books about zombies. Justin Thank you so much for joining me. I hope you come back and see us again. It's been a pleasure, Maura. Thanks for having me. My guest today is m I T professor Justin Reich. His weekly podcast can be found at teach lab podcast dot com. His book is failure to disrupt why technology alone can't transform education. It's published by Harvard University Press. I'm lawyer again. You're listening to tech nation. Technician. Health chief correspondent Dr Daniel Craft has just thrown.

Justin Reich Maura Harvard University Press chief correspondent Cove Technician Dr Daniel Craft Theo producer professor
"harvard university press" Discussed on C-SPAN Radio

C-SPAN Radio

04:14 min | 2 years ago

"harvard university press" Discussed on C-SPAN Radio

"History suggests that that social movements you know can really make a difference and if that social movement is around the idea of secondhand smoke or if that social movement is around the idea that you'll shouldn't market to kids that that can be it impetus for action and what my story also shows that action doesn't have to be at the federal level to be meaningful and so you know activists can try to implement laws at the local level or at the state level and does had tremendous success in the history of the cigarette I changing attitudes toward the presence of tobacco smoke in society at large have the cover come about the cover is the property of Harvard University press talk about a few moments here to laugh the tobacco as a model for taking on big hard challenging societal issues climate change I do see lessons in this that you know maybe I'm just an optimist but you know not that many people read about tobacco and feel optimistic so what I think that a key takeaway of this book is that the federal government for a lot of the twentieth century has been organized around the interests of industry and producers and you can see that with climate change into that with tobacco you might be able to see that with guns as well but laws aren't just made by the federal government and so one lesson of anti tobacco activists is the power of local laws to change the way people experience their day to day lives so by achieving scores of victories at the local level in the eighties and nineties you know anti tobacco activists made more non smokers and a bigger constituency for the kind of future they wanted to see and I think that there is a lesson in in not for climate change activist that might say be frustrated at federal in action guns there to get a one one trademark of the anti tobacco movement where these was kind of a visual vernacular thank you for not smoking I've noticed in more places that I've been to you know signs that say no guns on these promises and I wonder if that visual vernacular just raising awareness of the presence or absence of guns in a place can make people more aware of their stance on an issue I want to thank someone doctors Cynthia Gwyn yarris who says so see that enter the journal of American history helping the our for today's interview I have one last question you love doing history absolutely I mean I have my dream job I love researching and most days I also love writing and you did very very well hello thank you graduations a major major scholarly achievement thank you so much wonderful conversation thank you for being here thank you sure my love history professor university of Virginia the cigarette a political history interview by former FDA commissioner David Kessler and after working other she's been programs are available for download is podcasts just go to our website T. hyphen span dot org forward slash podcast war download the free C. span radio app or access this program whatever you get your podcasts C-SPAN radio WCS PFM Washington on September nineteenth a panel of authors who are also veterans of the wars in Iraq Afghanistan and Vietnam talked about America's wars an event hosted by the Nixon library Chapman university and the Orange County navy late this is about an hour and fifteen minutes everyone.

fifteen minutes
"harvard university press" Discussed on WBZ NewsRadio 1030

WBZ NewsRadio 1030

01:42 min | 2 years ago

"harvard university press" Discussed on WBZ NewsRadio 1030

"Keyed and his partner were trying to question a man with a foot pursuit and a struggle on the ground in sued with officer mall king yelling he's reaching forward he's reaching for it three shots were fired killing office from all keen NYPD commissioner James o'neal describes what happened next five offices at the location fight this service weapons striking the man. a suspect was pronounced deceased on the scene and its fire on a thirty two caliber revolver was recovered by police officer Brian Moore king was stationed in the Bronx and have been on the force for nearly seven years he served to the anti crime unit in the forty seven precinct the police commissioner tweeted there's no worse moment in our profession than this please keep Brian's family and colleagues in your thoughts Harvard University press delivery back our saying he regrets the controversial comments he made invoking the thirteenth amendment in referring to the university's relationship with wealthy donors the globe reports back how spoke on Tuesday the Harvard alumni relations and fundraising staff when he referred to that amendment which freed slaves here in the U. west is a Harvard individual schools can no longer own specific wealthy graduates a vigil is held for deputy Sandeep Dhaliwal they seek sheriff's deputy who was fatally shot during a traffic stop on Friday in Houston here's K. H. O. U. TV reporter Adam data. as the sun set over Debbie Sandeep deli walls memorial his family was surrounded by support. I am very sorry that you deal with the Sikh community and his fellow shares that. his name my not friend or colleague he's been my it it really younger.

Brian Moore Harvard University Sandeep Dhaliwal Debbie Sandeep officer James o'neal commissioner NYPD Bronx partner reporter Adam data. Houston U. west K. H. O. U. seven years
"harvard university press" Discussed on KLIF 570 AM

KLIF 570 AM

07:13 min | 3 years ago

"harvard university press" Discussed on KLIF 570 AM

"Radio's America published by Harvard University press you co editor in chief of made by history of daily Washington post history section at a historical consultant for the slate podcast whistle stop and before that last break we heard Brian make mention of liberal talk radio which has never really taken off some of argued that by the time that liberal talk radio was ready to take off that all the good frequencies were taken and to an extent that's true but I'm not aware of very many places there have been a few but not very many court liberal talk radio has really ever succeeded that well even including some people who were were pretty entertaining and a lot of my they were accused of being a pretty much a doctrinaire ideologues about entertaining but the but for example there were there were those I think you were pretty entertaining al Franken I think was was pretty entertaining among others well I think the problem with al Franken E. eight was he is an in ground floor very funny people but if you actually listen to the shows they did they weren't as funny and I think part of the problem is a lot of the folks who come in to try to do liberal talk have come from outside of the radio business they were first first they tried folks like Mario Cuomo and Gary Hart politician well not surprisingly they you want to give speeches they want to talk about your new ones policy things and it didn't make for very good radio and then in the early two thousands they try people like al Franken and Janeane Garofalo but if you listen to them and what they were saying about what their purpose was they were talking about giving people political voice and and rectifying the imbalance in talk radio or I DO dealing with the disaster that what the bush administration well that's not the goal of most could hope for if there is a pattern that you see left right and center the most successful holes are usually folks who got into radio at a young age a lot of them I was shocked by this how may the folks like Limbaugh Sir DJ when they were teenagers I was a I was a DJ when I was a teenager well there you go it was folks all across the ideological spectrum they understand radio they understand the uniqueness of the medium and what it takes to be entertaining a radio and I don't think that Franken Ingrao flow really understood that to the same extent another factor here and we we talked about this being a business and there are other products that I wanna be careful here because it's something people get wrong all the time there is a liberal media bias out there which is kind of culture which is the most of your journal if most of your NPR host they are they they live in a world where the surrounded by usually either liberal professionals they have a certain cultural world view about what's important what values they have issues matter and it affects the into the questions they ask the stories they report the gas they book and so you get a fair amount with if they try to be balanced NPR attempts balance a lot of the time but there is that cultural pushed and so it's not conservative talk radio is not the equivalent of these things because of its advocacy media and you don't get you don't really have that liberal advocacy media take off until the trump here in terms of podcasting things an MSNBC starts to do it in the last decade and I think I defer the Obama years and they pick back up but those products like NPR and here you can also include Howard Stern and and what is known as guy talk or and also Latino and African American urban talk radio format they're not the equivalent of conservative talk but what they do is they appeal to liberal constituency the kind of three stools of that the liberal base you know suburban professionals might listen to NPR you get a lot of minority communities have their own talk products out there and then you get your young voters who are listening often times too Howard Stern or to sort of non political mmhm morning talk shows and things and then roads the market for a little talk to him thirty you know the the the people programming things they want they want to make money well nobody that they're demanding this or they have a lot of options it's a lot harder to build a format where it's for conservatives for a long time and this is not the case today that for a long time it was the real deal local hosts they had one conservative station and that was really their their main bread and butter all right now welcome to Donald Trump and as you note Donald Trump was not the automatic immediate favorite of talk radio hosts in fact a number of them were were highly your quest to the out of him in fact you'd you'd mentioned mark live them for example who Alderley said that I'm voting for Donald Trump but to keep her out and you have wrote Rush Limbaugh it knowledge in that Donald Trump there was not a conservative or at the very least as I have noted on more than one occasion he has shown a great versatility of conviction over the years so you have a Donald Trump who his his his view points are well shall we say floated in many cases he's brash to be sure so we certainly fits into that aspect of all of this but he I'm not sure that he was was tailor made for you may have a tailor made for talk radio but I'm not sure you would call a tailor made for conservative talk radio as it existed with the trump candidacy began what he does is he taps into the style of talk radio and the frustration almost had spent decades bashing Republicans saying they're not fighting for you hard enough they won't ever go to war for these principles that we stay that you and I share they are not they're cutting deals with the Democrats they never deliver all the promises that you're making that they make tea you know the campaign also then and they never ever gets intact so there's this prostration mechanically the run down the mainstream media over and over and over again for decades until you get to things that really benefit Donald Trump which is first that he comes on to the scene and the talk radio audience the bass says Eureka it's it's almost the same reaction is when Limbaugh goes national people start calling him and say rush thank god you're on the air we find him a voice well with trump they find they say my god finally there's a politician or sticking up for us is fighting for us and he captures that style he sounds very listed Klay like a lot of the host folks these principles are worth fighting for let's go to war over them and when somebody punches him or or says you you can't say this Mr trump he punches right back and the people lost that style and simultaneously because they've run down the mainstream media for so many decades when the media reports that the most unsavory aspects of his business operations was character people say I have a quote in the book from one moment to rally saying you know these people they're just trying to run him down it's just that the mainstream media there they go again to borrow from Ronald Reagan they they they're just out there cheerleading for Democrats they wanna elect her they want to drive him down into the discounted to miss out they tune out all of his worst traits they finally got a fighter any sounds like their favorite house than trump has been on talk radio for four five six years at this point you know doing interviews with people like lore Ingram Sir road testing is message and Limbaugh says that they want as trump come down the escalator liberal says you know we we've been sitting here laughing his producer we're we're laughing.

Radio America consultant Brian Harvard University editor in chief Washington post four five six years
"harvard university press" Discussed on C-SPAN Radio

C-SPAN Radio

15:12 min | 3 years ago

"harvard university press" Discussed on C-SPAN Radio

"Like was in neon was god and man at Yale by bill Buckley and hi I thoroughly enjoyed the book and I became a lifelong fan of bill Buckley and you know better than I hello what an intelligent witty person he was in a great human being and I hi who is hi I'm a life long subscriber to his magazine and that's what my question is about he had a columnist John chamberlain and Joseph circle ski and if those early days and if I'm not mistaken they were both former I mean is scored beveled with it and it seems in reading the early issues of all are you at that time William Buckley when out of his way to have these great anti communist writers who in many cases St may work work Hedman communists or dabble in it or came from communist countries so will that always interested me hello and I'm I'm still I'm still subscriber I have the subscriber of National Review lifelong and your answer that's Joseph what do you do in west haven Connecticut I'm sorry Sir incident I'm retired teacher incidently my first year teaching I taught John chamberlain step son and this is kind of a comical little story I took both of English freshman English and American history and when we when we got to the age of industrialism I use the phrase robber barons and soon after that John chamberlain step son brought me in a book about the great industrialists of America the John Carnegie's in Vanderbilt's Rockefellers and he may have written a book I'm not sure but I hi yeah I got I got his point as I said I'd use the word rapper Berenson describing as men and that he may have heard of from the steps on all right tells us in west haven Connecticut before we let you answer he said he was a a lifelong subscriber to National Review right the editor of National Review now rich Lowry has a new book coming out in August August thirteenth I believe it comes out and it's called nationalism so due to put that on your radar screen sure well we say to a great book by the third full some called the myth of the robber barons really quite excellent yeah National Review is very important to me too and in fact I was it was nineteen eighty nine I think why and I'll never all never forget this I was the way I started writing my writing career happen I I wrote a letter to the editor of the student newspaper the pet news on homelessness and I I these people on campus that I was talking to without any gays in a kind of a discussion were blaming the homeless problem on Ronald Reagan and and and I and I looked at this and I try to understand how this was Ronald Reagan's fault I went night investigated it and did I did a science major would do I look at the pros and cons it wasn't a conservative or liberal I even called the local homeless shelter and I said to the lady I I I said I took notes in a civil houses the fault of Ronald Reagan she said I don't know what they're teaching you this university but this is a Ronald Reagan's fault these people are mentally ill that's what you told me and the liberals that I knew made fun of the homeless people that I walked by and I would try to talk to the homeless people so I wrote this letter to the editor the end up publishing it as a column and then I got attacked I got called a racist all these different names OR and then I responded by writing a column on the contras spend another week or two taking away from my genetics course focusing on the contras in contra aid I wrote a piece in support of arming the contras and for that I got called a **** it and and my dad picked me up on a Friday afternoon and and he said to me he's I can still picture to this day is driving over here on the site is that still a newspaper column you're doing for the student newspaper it's a pretty good dad but I'm getting called all kinds of names I got called I got called a **** this week is that I'm not see I said see you said what what are you writing about writing about it I said I I wrote about the contras like a called a **** and fascist and before that they had a guy called a recess just writing something about homelessness he said why and I said I don't know did I believe there's these people on campus they're called liberals and they call you the most vicious names when you disagree with it's unbelievable they call you every name in the book so this have the exact opposite affected convinced me to keep writing but I asked my dad this is the National Review part of it I said that what is a conservative it's a liberal I'm just writing this stuff is a science major and I said I I can tell liberal probably read like The New York Times this kind of thing was a conservative and my dad said hi Buckley's magazine I said Buckley's magazine what does that mean they said National Review said okay National Review where do I get one of them so when we get home and my hometown was Butler Pennsylvania you go over the bookstore get a copy so I went and I got it off the shelf I asked the lady were National Review I read it cover to cover and I don't disagree with anything I write I thought this is really amazing stop really so I went into this totally a clean slate and I started subscribing I subscribe to National Review in the American spectator yeah the new Republic I love the new Republic especially those years under Morton Kondracke he interests all of then Fred Barnes that whole group those are really the three that I kept the Atlantic to I kept that subscription then I got to graduate school I'm so broke I think I kept only the American spectator at that point because help to keep my sanity because it was so entertaining and amusing but but yeah National Review very very significant and the earlier caller who accuse me of being a random supporter of Ayn Rand you water Hey caller look up Whittaker chambers review of online rand National Review and look at how chambers salvaged I and my heart and Buckley was no friend of mine rand either so unit you need to learn a little bit more about conservatism libertarian those on all these different views you gotta you gotta read more in this stuff you've also written for the American thinker magazine yeah I'm not I'm going right now I'm quite a while it's been quite awhile well this is for may thirteenth twenty sixteen the constant claims of trump being another Reagan must be addressed and must be stopped if merely in service of truth but also in service of what Ronald Reagan really represented and what we need to remember the indisputable reality is that there is no meaningful legitimate sort of similarities between Donald Trump and Ronald Reagan I think that was the last time I wrote for American thinker at the the readers savage me for that I was shocked I was really shocked I remember one of the a woman in the reader comments section wrote something like who is this guy came or was a communist and I thought well no I've probably written for American thinker about a hundred times up to that point and I was just trying to plead with people there it's almost like a psychological thing where supporters of trump wanted to affirm themselves by saying well they did this to Reagan to and look how Reagan turned out to be right and wow Reagan was attacked and called an idiot just like trom so they have like two or three things and say well this is just like Reagan what other than the fact that they were both attack for their intelligence and and underestimated in that kind of thing you can't have two people who are more different than Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump I mean what come up with a bunch of other similarities to our growing the economy and other stuff and and even the fact that Donald Trump in many ways has often as a president and a conservative way including religious liberty court picks his cortex probably will turn out being better than Reagan's Supreme Court picks that's all true but in so many ways especially personality you can find people that are that are more different I I Reagan was everyone who met Reagan liked him at liberals like to break in as a person Reagan was the kindest most decent person that is so many people tell me they said he was the nicest person that I ever met Reagan in his diaries it's the word down he will Reagan when even swear all right I have yeah he's the complete opposite of trump on that so I was pleading with people there look of trump's your guy that's cool make your point go for it but don't try to make him like Reagan because he a Reagan are completely different cleft San Angelo Texas you are on book TV yes hello thank you so much professor king gord so refreshing if you get a conservative such as yourself on national TV for a change I'm a big conservative as you can probably guess my background for that probably is that I played pro tennis when the first World point titles won the Davis Cup with Arthur Ashe was at the White House I agree Richard Nixon's rain in sixty nine but that is bigger out who you are going to ask my producer look I left well I won't even give you my last name necessarily I'm not calling to do brag on myself but you ask the other person what he did and I'm a published author on Amazon I'm a mental health advocate but you know are you still curious you must have got up professor you must have debated at lit liberal professors that make up the majority that can say they don't but they do and to me it would be a chip shot to beat them because of what you've said as to why conservatism has been a proven winner through Melanie out so I know you'll be honest when you answer what has been your experience and what is your what do you think your personal record is would you have debated the liberal professors on the subjects in issues you're talking about that and one last thing we have been absolutely massacred over the last thirty or forty years as conservatives with the press and we'll see activist we talk you down call you names accuse you of being you know I just want to state my opinion without being assassinated character wise and my opinion is this Donald Trump one because of Twitter we've been waiting for somebody to fight back and answer these people and to me they're a bunch of idiots and I think you will again and I think it's so refreshing but I think it's because of Twitter thank you guys so much cliff is this cliff Richie yes thank you Clifford you very quickly god bless the internet right former professional tennis player American junior national champion nineteen sixty two and sixty three won the boys singles title at the French Open in sixty four etcetera etcetera wow well it's very good very well cliff the I I usually don't debate liberal professors they don't they don't ask me the debate I don't get invited to those things it's very interesting I'd be giving a talk for young America's foundation for I'll be twenty years now and and it's it's called why communism is bad that I get I get invitations from college Republican groups yeah off chapters a different campuses with these kids who are desperate saying my professor quite literally has a boss of Karl Marx in his office right I I hear nothing negative about communism I hear out it's good it's about sharing it's badly mis understood the problem with communism is hasn't been tried right and so forth could you please come to campus and give a talk on why communism is bad and I go there and I'll bring a stack of books with me because I'm I'm gonna go straight from the tax communist manifesto Lannan on the state and revolution the Harvard University press book on the black the black book of communism and the students in that room are riveted they they are locked in because this is stuff that they haven't heard before and very rarely is a professor in the room they they hardly ever com the last time I gave the talk there was one professor in the room and he was it turned out he was a Polish emigre he was in the engineering department and he told me that he was the only Republican the new out of the faculty of about a hundred thirty at at the college I had one case where there is a professor in the room a female professor and as I was going through the body bag count the butcher's bill the number of people killed under Soviet communism over twenty million according to the Harvard University press book sex sells and it's in an Alexander Yakovlev in his Yale University Press book a century of crimes in Soviet Russia Yaakov lab who was garbage as chief reformer and given the job of trying to help the skulls and find out just how many people were killed and the Soviet killing fields rock of love says in that book quote Stalin alone annihilated sixty to seventy million people now ma'ale according to the harbor the black book of communism was at least sixty to sixty five million and the latest research on that is probably over seventy million so if if the number is a hundred hundred forty million under communist governments that's more than twice the combined death tolls of World War one World War two so I just lay all of this out very factually and in one case this female professor left at me and you just shaking her head disgusted looking at me like the ghost of Joe McCarthy had flown inside my body and possessed me.

Yale bill Buckley John chamberlain twenty years forty years
"harvard university press" Discussed on 790 KABC

790 KABC

11:20 min | 3 years ago

"harvard university press" Discussed on 790 KABC

"Temple is longer city. than you would see for second degree rape in Alabama. So some doctors may not even wanna come close to violating this law. So I think that's kind of fear life that if the law went into effect that even women, not just women who wanted regular abortions, but women who wanted other forms of healthcare might not be able to get it either. So what is the strategy here? If this drags out it forces, the pro choice, folks to sue, they must sue the states so that happens. But on the other hand, we have said you're talking the results of this position would be that you have women who were libertarian have been in, in western states. The eastern seaboard the upper midwest who are never going to with this. I mean you have such big resistance there. And as you said, there's a moat so many. Folks were motivated right now, who also forced laws force issues in the states to protect these laws. So all this is doing is ramping up the rhetoric and is divided as we are is that going to enter into this in a different way. The fact that also got a lot of judges that they are pointing. Yeah. I think the other thing that this does that I'm sure is very annoying to some of the more establishment pro-lifer anti-abortion groups is that these laws had sort of detracted from an argument that anti-abortion forces have been making in recent years, which is that abortion, hurts women. They argue that you don't the, there's a book by Dr John Wilkie, who is a recently deceased anti-abortion activists called. Why can't we love them both and the argument was anti-abortion opponents will never win in the supreme court or in politics, unless they can convince women that they're not anti woman in that you can be anti-abortion in program. It's really strikingly clear in the Alabama law that, that argument is just not being made. It's all about fetal rights. And so, I think it does deepen divisions. But it also kind of undermines a case that abortion, foes have been making in recent years, that they're trying to protect women if you will less often the argument that's being made. And I think Alabama and Georgia legislators, just simply weren't interested in making that argument. So I think that could. Be a setback anti-abortion organizations as well. What about the way that abortions are portrayed? I mean, the president and others have portrayed. The fact that they're women charters ripped of up to the moment birth, and then, even even as far as saying, the children actually put the death after the birth you keep them comfortable. And then the doctor quietly decides with the mother of what to do with child. This is complete this doesn't happen. Correct. It just doesn't happen. Yeah. I mean there are cases I think that closest thing to that actually happening is scenario where you have children. Born with, you know, either life threatening, or potentially just conditions that are incompatible with life and parents are given a choice about what to do about that. That's almost never after an abortion, though. Because for the most part that techniques that people use to perform abortions, even close to a period in which child could be boring alive. Preclude the happening of a live birth. So we're talking about some. I mean, there are ethical dilemmas in which parents are asked to decide what to do with critically ill or new ones that are not going to make it. But there aren't that isn't usually post-abortion in part because of worship providers and I can get into sales, if you like abortion providers don't use techniques that lead to live birth almost no, you're talking now. Non viable. A baby is born non-viable will not be able to live on their own breathe on their own or whatever. And the parents have to make a decision, whether they want to keep it alive on a breathing machine and suffer for any period of time, but the child would just will not live. It could not function. Correct. Right. Yeah. And I mean the thing that's I think the most misleading about what President Trump is saying, is that those are almost unrelated issues, most of the time you're talking about premature births or even sometimes non premature birth where you have infants with really serious problems, and parents, being asked to decide what to do versus something happening after an abortion abortions are usually performed in ways that would make it impossible for live birth to occur and that's especially true leader in pregnancy. So you're not. That's probably the single most misleading thing. We're not really realistically talking here about something exactly of boring alive aboard in baby. That's not something you're going to see almost ever talking to Mary's professor at Florida State University in written two books after the history of the Boertien debate and also beyond abortion, Rovers wait in the fight for privacy. Now, am I correct in saying that the abortion rate in the US has fallen since the eighties by over fifty over fifty percent, and I'm guessing because contraceptives regulations, and, and just so the society's changing people getting married later cetera et cetera et cetera. Yeah. I think we don't really know part, and we've never had the most amazingly clear abortion statistics in part, because abortion clinics don't have to report to the CDC. So assuming that the data we have are somewhat accurate. And there's recent of leave that they would be. There has been this dropping. We're not sure if it's due to better availability of contraception or the spread of abortion restrictions or both or like you mentioned just demographic changes people having children later in life altogether. I think it's probably a combination of those things, what about the technological aspect of this, that you're able today, because of technology determine a heartbeat earlier? But then at the same point thing that six week when you can determine heartbeat many women don't even know they're pregnant. Yeah. I mean, I think that there's always been a belief on the part of some pro-life anti-abortion groups that technology will sort of solve this for them and convinced people that are right to life should be protected. And I think there's some. Truth, and not in the sense that women shown ultrasound, for example, off of a harder time, any pregnancy than women who don't see an ultrasound, doesn't ultimately changed many women's mind, I think, on the other hand that belief. Right. That science will sort of settle the abortion debate and win it for the pro-life side has been around since the seventies, if you read the briefs that were submitted in Roe v. Wade, people were clearly thinking that, that would be true then and the reality of courses that were here over many decades later still fighting about the science as much as about the constitutional law, so you don't want to think that the technology has changed, our attitudes too much the other thing, Mary, when it comes up, you hear that an unborn child. If they're now be given the title of a actual rights, holing person. You get into a whole other aspect of the law that has expanded whether voting right? What are the rights does this person now have because you've just been determined to be fully full, full citizen with all the rights viewed by the constitution. So all along enough to be rewritten at that point, based on, on a fetus, correct. Well, we wouldn't really know. Right. But you would at least have to have the courts answer, all of those questions, I think the way to think about it is, it's kinda Pandora's box. And the reason I would be really surprised at the supreme court decided to go down that road is it conservatives have long been saying. You know, we want to get out of the abortion business. Right. When the court decided row, it kind of created this morass where every few years, the court has to wait into the abortion conflict and try to sort it out. And I imagine that the conservative justices on the court, if they're going to overturn Roe would like to stop talking about abortion, altogether, and stop probably talking about fetal rights all the other rather than entering into this new thicket of sort of talking about fetal rights, and what does it mean this is this is a person. What does that mean for tax purposes? I mean, it would just be basically endless litigation, and I don't think the court will want to deal with that. It also incompatible with the judicial philosophy most conservative jurists embrace. You did you did mention. I thought it an article where you said you thought it would be some. Point overturned, but agreed with me about Roberts and I think that he's an 'institutionalised so concerned about the courts reputation and it's a big responsibility. Sitting there saying, wow, this could come down to me and my, my decision. Absolutely. I mean, I still think that probably would like to overturn Roe, but I think laws like the one in Alabama and make that a lot harder to do without damaging the courts, reputation late. I mean, I think if roberts's going to overturn Roe, it's probably going to happen in a way that's a little bit more under the radar a little bit more gradual, a little bit certainly more something that you could see coming in the sense that the would have painted it what it was going to do before. But I think the backlash produced by something like this, Ella Bama law might give him pause. And after all, this isn't the first time we've been in a moment like this in nineteen Ninety-two, everyone expected the court to overturn Roe and Anthony Kennedy was the presumed, you know, John Roberts. And he when the moment came he didn't pull the trigger and we don't know Roberts may do the same thing but his enough to fire up. The base house is going to play out to the twenty twenty election as we know it's gonna take longer to make its way through the courts. How's it can be presented politically from now till election day? Well, you can see already how President Trump is trying to portray the issue, which is to focus on later abortions. And like you said, you know whatever his claims about infanticide. That's kind of the direction he wants to take it. He's for President Trump strangely silent about things like the Alabama Georgia, and part because he probably knows that they're not politically, the smartest idea. You you'll expect I think, to see the GOP at the national level, emphasizing some of the pro choice, laws, you see in states like New York, or Vermont that protect later abortions and trying to make political head of that. And you'll see I think pro-choice politicians talking about laws like the Alabama law, and what those laws say about GOP attitudes toward. Women kind of revival run women arguments, and I think, in terms of what who benefits the most, I think, it'll energize both sides, the pro-life side because it seems like they could actually get what they want in the near future and the pro choice side because there is an existential threat through. But generally history would tell us that it's easier to be complacent. When you think you're winning. So I would expect it would be a little more energizing for the pro choice side, because they do have I think more to lose in the near term than pro life forces to marry. Thank you for coming on last minute. Mary's professor, flew of Florida State University college of law. The Twitter's at Mary underscore Ziegler FSU, the Elliara FSU in the books after row, the loss history of the debate, which was published by Harvard University press in one, congratulations. Twenty fourteen hundred university press Thomas Wilson memorial prize for the best. I manage script, and then the second book beyond abortion, Roe v. Wade in the fight for privacy. So I thank you for giving us some context on this tonight. And we're going to watch play out, and I'm sure we'll have you on, again as we get closer to election day. Thanks so much. Thanks for having absolutely AM. Seven ninety KABC. ABC dependable.

Alabama Roe president Mary John Roberts President Trump GOP Wade professor rape US Temple Georgia CDC Dr John Wilkie Florida State University colle Twitter Thomas Wilson memorial Harvard University
"harvard university press" Discussed on Skeptiko - Science at the Tipping Point

Skeptiko - Science at the Tipping Point

04:46 min | 3 years ago

"harvard university press" Discussed on Skeptiko - Science at the Tipping Point

"Spirituality of dystopia. Yeah. Yeah. I think that's true. I do see that. And and that's I think that's disheartening to you know. And I don't think it's I don't think it leads to you know, hope right? I don't think it leads to optimism or hope. But yeah, I mean, I I appreciate what you're saying about the book in the sense that it does try to weave story through. Science and pop culture about the possibilities of new type of science. And I think that, you know, in some ways that that new type of science has arrived in some ways, I think that they're scientists themselves, especially when you see them get on television. Right. A popular a popular science book, you know, they traffic and all of these kind of fantastic scientific ideas now. Right. And they had a sense of kind of excitement and in a sense of wonder, and I mentioned Brian Greene earlier. But you know, there's also Michio Kaku. There's many scientists who have a real sense of kind of on wonder about nature and its many mysteries. Right. Whether that's entanglement or non locality or dark matter dark energy or the multi-diverse or or higher dimensions. You know, or the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics? There have been in the last fifty years, these kind of fen tastic pieces of science that kind of come back in the back door, even even even while scientists themselves try to try to keep them out. So. So I think they kind of have come back, and I think science some scientists, especially scientists who right popular science. They in many ways, they can help themselves. They have to bring these things in because, you know, people doing popular science need and want by it. Now, they want to sell books, and you know, the way to do that is to is to sort of have this kind of excitement, right? Have this kind of more open ended science have these kind of more fantastic scientific notions or more mysterious scientific notions on which may be in an earlier era. Scientists are more quickly to kind of sleep under the rug. So I think it's possible that in the coming decades, you will see more of this. You will see more kind of open reflections about physics and consciousness studies, right or different kinds of combinations. That that many scientists before in in some ways because they were professionalizing and building their sciences, we're kind of against, but now maybe this who knows maybe there's going to be a new open. Innis to this. I hope so great. What's great work? Our guest again has been Dr Christopher white the book that you're gonna want to check out other worlds spirituality in the search for invisible. Dimensions. Now, you can find the book in the normal way. Is right. Chris amazon. Yeah, you can get from Amazon you can if you like it leave a review on Amazon, you can get it through Harvard University presses website. They sell the book on as well. It's published by Harvard University press, and if any wants to reach out to me, they can find me at Vassar. They can also follow me on Twitter. I'm at Chris underscore Jesus. And George underscore white on some happy to happy to communicate with people. If they want to reach out great. I'm sure there'll be a bunch of people reaching out on the forum after this show. So you have a minute. I'll set you up. So you can pop over there and see what people are saying because. That'd be great. That'd be great for us. It's it's right up. Our alley, and you've you've just mass some amazing work in this area. So it's been great having on a thank you again so much for coming on skeptical. Thanks so much, Alex. Great great talking to you for for an hour. Okay. Let's do it again. All right. Let's do again. Again. Thanks again, deductor Chris white for joining me today in skeptical. I guess I'd have one question to tee up from this interview. And that is what do you make of the premise of Chris's book? Is there a subtler deeper interplay between science, and spirituality, and is it being revealed to a certain extent in technology, advancement? I think that's a really interesting topic to explore and I'm really interested to see what you have to say about it because there's so many different directions, we could take and I'm not even sure where I stand on it. So that's why these shows by the way is I need y'all to straight me out, which you do so often end clarify my thinking on these things. I can't tell you enough. How often that occurs? I learned from you. That's what show is all about. That's the payoff for me. So join me over in the skeptical form or other places and tell me your thoughts. Have a couple of really cool shows coming up, please stay with me for all of that. And until next time. Bye for now.

Chris amazon Chris Michio Kaku Harvard University Brian Greene Chris white Innis Twitter Dr Christopher George Alex Vassar fifty years
"harvard university press" Discussed on WCBM 680 AM

WCBM 680 AM

12:44 min | 3 years ago

"harvard university press" Discussed on WCBM 680 AM

"Wants to secure the border. You know, a couple of months ago. The media and the Democrats won in the same. Had a mantra they always have a new mantra. They had a mantra about. The separation of children from parents. People coming across the border illegally. And they said that Trump had created. What are effectively internment camps? Interment camps. Of course, he created no such thing. I don't need to go through with you again. But it was actually Franklin Roosevelt who created internment camps. And he signed a military order directing that one hundred and twenty thousand Japanese Americans in Americans of Japanese descent where to be removed from their homes. And moved into these camps. Some are placed in Arizona summer placed. Elsewhere they were to be moved off the west coast. I want you to know some history. It's all very important because FDR is one of the favourite presidents of the left and the tenured historians who are professors. Usually Washington Lincoln Lincoln, Washington. And of course, FDR sometimes they put FDR first because he was the great progress. One day. It'll be Obama. FDR was a racist. I'm not saying that to be provocative. It's an excellent book written on this subject put out by Harvard gentleman by the name of Robinson by order of the president. Spend a lot of time reading history. And. He issued the order. In the New York Times said it was really kinda cool. Here's the headline from the New York Times. March twenty four thousand nine hundred forty two Japanese begin evacuation trek I caravan. They liked the word caravan a three hundred and fifty cars with one thousand leaves Los Angeles for Owens river valley. Listen to this sub headline good humor prevails. Governor announced plans for colonization of twenty thousand in Arizona Indian reserve. This democrat party is amazing, isn't it? Now, that's not that long ago. Nineteen forty two. So I've been reading this book been reading scores of books of the last several weeks is I. I do my research. And they point this out does Robinson. This book is not a new book. He comes from the Harvard University press. It must be good. Right. It's first copyright. Let's see here. I believe is a nineteen sixty six. Let me read you this. Too closely interrelated related elements stand out strongly determinative in the president's decision and his subsequent actions. One of these was undoubtedly Roosevelt's own negative beliefs about Japanese Americans. While the other was a failure political Amara leadership, they resulted from weakness in his presidential style. Administrative organization. FDR's hostile attitude toward Japanese Americans had deep roots in his past as early as nineteen thirteen when legal discrimination against Japanese aliens in California, brought Japan and the United States close to the war. The young FDR at the outset of his career in public service began to regard, both the the ICU emigrants and their American born that is the original immigrants from Japan and their americ- American-born Nicey children. That's what they called them as a menace, a foreign and racially and Rachel population. They couldn't be assimilated whose presence was a source of both chronic irritation to their white American neighbors. I'm quoting. And conflict with Japan. And during the nineteen twenties, even as FDR praised the Japanese government he called for closer relations between the two countries he publicly opposed any further immigration of the Japanese into the United States, he justified discriminatory legislation against Japanese aliens on the west coast. So means of preserving white, racial purity. This has been the history of the democrat party slavery. Segregation, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt. Yes. I know. I'm I'm I'm telling you the truth. You don't hear these things? Although FDR did not consider people of Japanese ancestry, racially inferior and is a few. They were a biologically distinct. People who are in innately incapable of adapting to American society are becoming true Americans. This is your democrat party. This is your great FDR. He argued that they needed to be kept apart, and he considered anti-japanese nativist sentiment reasonable and just. The president's inability. This goes to immigration, his inability to conceive of people of Japanese ancestry as true Americans contributed to his failure to intervene to protect their liberty and property rights in the face of public hysteria. They're talking about after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Though, he realized the Nicey where United States citizens Roosevelt was unwilling to recognize that they had the same inalienable rights to due process and equal protection of the laws as other citizens. And the media. Our free press freedom of the press, the vanguard of one hundred and twelve thousand Japanese aliens with American born an American born must've accurate the west coast combat zone rolled up the Owens valley by motor convoy this evening temporary. New homes. I five hundred to arrive weary, but gripped with the spirit of adventure. Over a new pioneering chapter in American history. Drove the two hundred thirty miles from the outskirts of Los Angeles in their own cars pace by highway patrolman and army jeeps. He's similar number came by train to the loan pike or buses and trucks met them to carry the evacuees and the possessions the last ten miles to a new reception centre rising as if by magic at the foot of snowcapped peaks wasn't that sound good. Mr. Mr. producer. My Lawrence Davies of the New York Times. March twenty three nineteen forty two actually March twenty three thousand nine hundred forty two goes on. What I'm trying to get at here is what the president is proposing in the border is very mild medicine, ladies and gentlemen. You not discriminating against a single human being. Let alone a race of people. He wants to secure the border, he talks about legal immigration. He talks about giving members of the DACA group amnesty that the Democrats won't agree. You got to watch the Democrats in their motives, very, very carefully. You have to normally the spin in their static. You have to nor the media propaganda on their behalf. He got to think about what is motivating. And it's been revealed. What's motivating them power? Power. If seventy five percent of the Latino population voted Republican, they'd be building walls and moats they'd be putting a fifty caliber machine guns on the border. They would do whatever they add to do to keep people out because that's what they do. And when seventy five percent of Latinos, vote democrat, no wall. No fence open borders. And entice people with sanctuary city, sanctuary states free healthcare in New York City, free out carrier, and there no matter whether bankruptcy city or a state destroys your tax base destroys property rights. And all it doesn't matter. What's the primary importance is the democrat party, and and the power of those elites, and you may be shaking your head that can't be all over the world. Why Venezuela the way it is to help the people now. Keep in power, the people who are in charge China Russia. America. In many ways is the is one of the few exceptions, ladies and gentlemen. So it is a battle between liberty and tyranny is a battle between constitutionalism and progressivism. But the bottom line is they are statists. And we are constitutionalists. The media basically supported what Franklin Roosevelt was doing. It is abuse of Japanese Americans. In his internment camps. The United States Supreme court upheld it. In an infamous decision. The decision it upheld. It. This president wants to secure the border. He's being blocked by part of the house of representatives. He's being blamed for a government shutdown the media, calm a liar. Call him worse than that. He's got limited options. He's the president. He's responsible for the border. Ultimately, he's responsible for the executive branch, which is the administrative state. Here's a lot arguments. He could make about needing to trigger the national emergency Zach happy because he's a dictator because he's Hitler. Every president before him nineteen Seventy-six Ford has used that act for one reason or another. And he can trigger it and he contributed by using the immigration and naturalization act. And there's a section of that act. That's that talks about what an emergency is. And it very clearly defines what he's talking about. And that's why you hear the Democrats saying this is manufactured manufacturing manufacturing because the trying to stay two steps ahead of him. If he doesn't fact trigger the national emergencies at then they can say he manufactured this. So whatever they can do to tear him down, and quite frankly to tear the country down is fine by them. The only crisis. They ever see is one that involves redistributing wealth. Redistributing wealth, the New York Times almost the rest of the American media thought, the internment of Japanese Americans was a swell thing. Was a swell thing. And they lecture us. Where are the fact checkers coming from the New York Times? All the news that's fit the rap fishing as I've said many many times. So for the New York Times, the internment of Japanese Americans and Americans of Japanese descent forcibly removing them from their homes taking the private property away wasn't adventure. A pioneering adventure. And the the article is accompanied by and I'm looking at it right now a photo showing smiling. Japanese. Boarding the train. Because the New York Times. Was a mouthpiece. For Franklin Roosevelt. And much of the rest of the media were to. And this is what happens. When you have an ideologically driven one party media. Tyranny. Tyranny. And that's pretty much what we have today. I'll be right back..

Franklin Roosevelt president New York Times FDR democrat party United States Robinson Arizona Japan Japanese government New York City Trump Obama Harvard University Arizona Indian reserve Washington Pearl Harbor Los Angeles United States Supreme court DACA
"harvard university press" Discussed on 760 KFMB Radio

760 KFMB Radio

07:06 min | 3 years ago

"harvard university press" Discussed on 760 KFMB Radio

"Nothing is frozen. Everything is delivered fresh to every restaurant beef buns and produce because fresh is what it's all about partly cloudy with lows in the fifty ties. In the sixties AM, seven sixty talk and breaking news. Now broadcasting from the underground command post bowels of a hidden bunker somewhere under the brick and steel of a nondescript building, we've once again made contact with our leader. Hello, everybody. Mark Levin here. Our number eight seven seven three eight one three one one eight seven seven three eight one three eight one one. President wants to secure the border. You know, a couple of months ago. The media and the Democrats one in the same. Had a mantra they always have a new mantra. They had a mantra about. The separation of children from parents. People coming across the border illegally. And they said that Trump had created. What are effectively interment camps? Interment camps. Of course, he created no such thing. I don't need to go through a list with you again. But it was actually Franklin Roosevelt who created interment camps. And he signed a military order directing that one hundred twenty thousand Japanese Americans and Americans of Japanese descent where to be removed from their homes. And moved into these camps. Some are placed in Arizona summer place house where they were to be moved off the west coast. I want you to know some history. It's all very important because FDR is one of the favourite presidents of the left and the tenured historians who are professors. Usually Washington Lincoln Lincoln, Washington. And of course, FDR sometimes they put FDR first because he was the great progress. One day. It'll be Obama. FDR was a racist. I'm not saying that to be provocative. It's an excellent book written on this subject. Put up by Harvard gentleman by the name of Robinson by order of the president. Spend a lot of time reading history. And. He issued the order. The New York Times said it was really kinda cool. Here's the headline from the New York Times. March twenty four thousand nine hundred forty two Japanese begin evacuation trek I caravan. They like the word caravan of three hundred and fifty cars with one thousand leaves Los Angeles for Owens river valley. Listen to this sub headline good humor prevails. Government announced plans for colonization of twenty thousand in Arizona Indian reserve. This democrat party is amazing. Isn't it? That's not that long ago. Nineteen forty two. So I've been reading this book been reading scores of books over the last several weeks. Say. To my research. And they point this out does Robinson. This book is not a new book. He comes from the Harvard University press. It must be good. Right. It's first copyright. Let's see here. I believe is a nineteen sixty six. Can we read you this? Too closely interrelated elements stand out strongly as determinative in the president's decision and his subsequent actions. One of these was undoubtedly Roosevelt's own negative beliefs about Japanese Americans. While the other was a failure political moral leadership that resulted from weakness in his presidential style. Administrative organization. FDR's hostile attitude toward Japanese Americans had deep roots in his past as early as nineteen thirteen when legal discrimination against Japanese aliens in California, brought Japan and the United States close to war the young FDR at the outset of his career in public service began to regard, both the the ICM migrants and their American born that is the original immigrants from Japan and their America American-born Nicey children. That's what they call them as a menace. A foreign and racially and Rachel population. They couldn't be assimilated whose presence was a source of both chronic irritation to their white American neighbors, I'm quoting and conflict with Japan. During the nineteen twenties. Even as FDR praised the Japanese government and called for closer relations between the two countries he publicly opposed any further immigration of the Japanese into the United States, he justified discriminatory legislation against Japanese aliens on the west coast. So means of preserving white, racial purity. This has been the history of the democrat party slavery. Segregation, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt. Yes. I know. I'm I'm I'm telling you the truth. You don't hear these things although FDR did not consider people of Japanese ancestry racially inferior in a few. They were a biologically distinct people when innately incapable of adapting to American society are becoming true Americans. This is your democrat party. This is your great FDR. He argued that they needed to be kept apart, and he considered anti-japanese nativist sentiment reasonable and just. The president's inability. This goes to immigration, his inability to conceive of people of Japanese ancestry as true Americans contributed to his failure to intervene to protect their liberty and property rights in the face of public hysteria. They're talking about after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Though, he realized the Nicey where United States citizens Roosevelt was unwilling to recognize that they had the same inalienable rights to due process and equal protection of the laws as other Sens. And. The media. Our free press freedom of the press, the vanguard of one hundred and twelve thousand Japanese aliens with American born an American born a must've vacuum the west coast combat zone rolled up the Owens valley Bhai motor.

FDR Franklin Roosevelt President democrat party United States Japan Robinson Japanese government Mark Levin Owens valley Bhai motor Arizona Obama Pearl Harbor Trump Harvard University The New York Times Arizona Indian reserve Owens river valley Lincoln Lincoln Woodrow Wilson
"harvard university press" Discussed on WJR 760

WJR 760

03:35 min | 3 years ago

"harvard university press" Discussed on WJR 760

"Democrat party is amazing, isn't it? Now, that's not that long ago. Nineteen forty two. So I've been reading this book been reading scores of books over the last several weeks. I do my research. And they point this out. Does robinson. This book is not a new book. He comes from the Harvard University press. It must be good. Right. It's first copyright. Let's see here. I believe is a nineteen sixty six. Let me read you this. Too closely interrelated elements stand out strongly determinative in the president's decision and his subsequent actions. One of these was undoubtedly Roosevelt's own negative beliefs about Japanese Americans. While the other was a failure political moral leadership that resulted from weakness in his presidential style. Administrative organization. FDR's hostile attitude toward Japanese Americans had deep roots in his past as early as nineteen thirteen when legal discrimination against Japanese aliens in California, brought Japan and the United States close to the war, the young FDR and at the outset of his career in public service began to regard, both the the ICM grants, and they're American born that is the original immigrants from Japan and they're American born Nicey children. That's what they call them as a menace a foreign and racially. And racial population. They couldn't be assimilated whose presence was a source of both chronic irritation to their white American neighbors on quoting and conflict with Japan. During the nineteen twenties. Even as FDR praised the Japanese government and called for closer relations between the two countries he publicly opposed any further immigration of the Japanese into the United States, he justified discriminatory legislation against Japanese aliens on the west coast. So means of preserving white, racial purity. This has been the history of the democrat party slavery. Segregation, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt. Yes. I know. I'm I'm I'm telling you the truth. You don't hear these things? Low FDR did not consider people of Japanese ancestry racially inferior in his few. They were a biologically distinct people when innately incapable of adapting to American society are becoming true Americans. This is your democrat party. This is your great FDR. He argued that they needed to be kept apart, and he considered anti-japanese nativist sentiment reasonable and just. The president's inability. This goes to immigration, his inability to conceive of people of Japanese ancestry as true Americans contributed to his failure to intervene to protect their liberty and property rights in the face of public hysteria. They're talking about after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Though, he realized the Nicey where United States citizens Roosevelt was unwilling to recognize that they had the same inalienable rights to due process and equal protection of the laws as other citizens. And the media. Our free press freedom of the press, the vanguard of one hundred and twelve thousand Japanese aliens with American born an American born must've accurate the west coast combat zone.

FDR Democrat party Franklin Roosevelt Japan United States robinson president Japanese government Pearl Harbor Harvard University Woodrow Wilson California ICM
"harvard university press" Discussed on WMAL 630AM

WMAL 630AM

12:54 min | 3 years ago

"harvard university press" Discussed on WMAL 630AM

"Eight seven seven three eight one three one one eight seven seven three eight one three eight one one. President wants to secure the border. You know, a couple of months ago. The media and the Democrats won in the same. Had a mantra they always have a new mantra. They had a mantra about. You know, the separation of children from parents. People coming across the border legally. And they said that Trump had created what are effectively interment camps. Interment camps. Of course, he created no such thing. I don't need to go through a list with you again. But it was actually Franklin Roosevelt who created internment camps. And he signed a military order directing that one hundred twenty thousand. Japanese Americans and Americans of Japanese descent where to be removed from their homes. And moved into these camps. Placed in Arizona, summer placed. Elsewhere they were to be moved off the west coast. I want you to know some history. It's all very important because FDR is one of the favourite presidents of the left and the tenured historians who are professors. Usually is Washington Lincoln Lincoln, Washington. And of course, FDR sometimes they put after your first because he was the great progress. One day. It will be Obama. FDR was a racist. I'm not saying that to be provocative. An excellent book written on this subject put out by Harvard gentleman by the name of Robinson by order of the president. Spend a lot of time reading history. And. He issued the order. The near time soda was really kind of cool. Here's the headline from the New York Times. March twenty four thousand nine hundred forty two Japanese begin evacuation trek I caravan. They liked the word caravan of three hundred and fifty cars with one thousand leaves Los Angeles for Owens river valley. Listen to this sub headline good humor prevails. Government announced plans for colonization of twenty thousand in Arizona Indian reserve. This democrat party is amazing, isn't it? Now, that's not that long ago. Nineteen forty two. So I've been reading this book been reading scores of books over the last several weeks. As I do my research. And they point this out does Robinson. This book is not a new book. He comes from the Harvard University press of must be good, right? It's first copyright. Let's see here. I believe is a nineteen sixty six. Let me read you this. Too closely interrelated elements stand out strongly is determinative in the president's decision and his subsequent actions. One of these was undoubtedly Roosevelt's own negative beliefs about Japanese Americans. While the other was a failure political Amara leadership that resulted from weakness in his presidential style and administrative organization. FDR's hostile attitude towards Japanese Americans had deep roots in his past has early nineteen thirteen when legal discrimination against Japanese aliens in California, brought Japan and the United States close to war the young FDR at the outset of his career in public service began to regard, both the the ICM migrants and American born that is the original immigrants from Japan and they're American born Nicey children. That's what they call them as a menace. A foreign and racially and racial population. They couldn't be assimilated whose presence was a source of both chronic irritation to their white American neighbors, I'm quoting and conflict with Japan. During the nineteen twenties. Even as FDR praised the Japanese government and called for closer relations between the two countries he publicly opposed any further immigration of the Japanese into the United States, he justified discriminatory legislation against Japanese aliens on the west coast. So means of preserving white, racial purity. This has been the history of the democrat party slavery. Segregation, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt. Yes. I know. I'm I'm I'm telling you the truth. You don't hear these things? A low FDR did not consider people of Japanese ancestry racially inferior in his few. They were a biologically distinct. People who are in innately incapable of adapting to American society are becoming true Americans. This is your democrat party. This is your great FDR. He argued that they needed to be kept apart. He considered anti-japanese natives sentiment reasonable and just. The president's inability. This goes to immigration, his inability to conceive of people of Japanese ancestry as true Americans contributed to intervene to protect their liberty and property rights in the face of public hysteria. They're talking about after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Though, he realized the Nicey where United States citizens Roosevelt was unwilling to recognize that they had the same inalienable rights to do process and equal protection of the laws as other citizens. And. The media. Our free press freedom of the press, the vanguard of one hundred and twelve thousand Japanese aliens with American born an American born a must've vacuous the west coast combat zone rolled up the Owens valley Bhai motor convoy this evening to temporary new homes. I five hundred to arrive weary, but gripped with the spirit of adventure. Over a new pioneering chapter in American history. Drove the two hundred thirty miles from the outskirts of Los Angeles in their own cars pace by highway patrolman and army jeeps. A similar number came by train to the loan pike where buses and trucks met them to carry the evacuees and their possessions, the last ten miles to a new reception centre rising as if by magic at the foot of snowcapped peaks wasn't that sound good. Mr. Mr. producer. By Lawrence Davies of the New York Times. March twenty three nineteen forty two actually March twenty three thousand nine hundred forty two goes on. What I'm trying to get at here is what the president is proposing. The border is very mild medicine, ladies and gentlemen. He's not discriminating against a single human being. Let alone a race of people. He wants to secure the border, he talks about legal immigration. He talks about giving members of the DACA group amnesty. But the Democrats won't agree. You gotta watch the Democrats and their motives, very, very carefully. You have to ignore the the spin and their static you have to the media propaganda on their behalf. You've got to think about what is motivating. And it's been revealed. What's motivating them power? Power. If seventy five percent of the Latino population voted Republican, they'd be building walls and moats they'd be putting a fifty caliber machine guns on the border. They would do whatever they add to do to keep people out because that's what they do. And when seventy five percent of Latinos, vote democrat, no wall. No fence open borders. And entice people with sanctuary city, sanctuary states free healthcare in New York City free healthcare urine. And there no matter whether bankruptcy city or a state destroys your tax base destroys property rights. And all it doesn't matter. The primary importance is the democrat party, and and the power of those elites, and you may be shaking your head. That can't be look all over the world. Why is Venezuela? The way it is to help the people know. Keep in power, the people who are in charge China Russia. America. In many ways is is is one of the few exceptions, ladies and gentlemen. So it is a battle between liberty and tyranny is a battle between constitutionalism and progressivism. But the bottom line is they are statists and we are constitutionalists. The media basically supported what Franklin Roosevelt was doing. It is abuse of Japanese Americans. In his internment camps. The United States Supreme court upheld it. An infamous decision. The core Matsu decision it upheld. It. This president wants to secure the border. He's being blocked by part of the house of representatives. He's being blamed for a government shutdown the media, call them a liar. Call him worse than that. He's got limited options. He's the president. He's responsible for the border alternately. He's responsible for the executive branch, which is the administrative state. He's a lot arguments. He could make about needing to trigger the national emergencies act how because he's a dictator not because he's Hitler. Every president before him hundred seventy six Ford has used that act for one reason or another. And he can trigger it and he triggered by using the immigration and naturalization act. And there's a section of that act. That's that talks about what an emergency is. And it very clearly defines what he's talking about. And that's why you hear the Democrats saying this is manufactured manufactured manufacturing because the trying to stay two steps ahead of him. If he doesn't fact triggered the national emergencies at that, they say he manufactured this. So whatever they can do to tear him down, and quite frankly to tear the country down is fine by them. The only crisis. They ever see is one that involves redistributing wealth. Redistributing wealth, the New York Times, and then almost the rest of the American media thought, the internment of Japanese Americans was a swell thing. Was a swell thing. And they lecture us. Where are the fact checkers coming from the New York Times? All the news that's fit the rap fishing as I've said many many times. So for the New York Times, the internment of Japanese Americans and Americans are Japanese descent forcibly removing them from their homes taking their private property away wasn't adventure. A pioneering adventure. And the the article is accompanied by I'm looking at right now a photo showing smiling. Japanese. Boarding the train. Because the New York Times. Was a mouthpiece. For Franklin Roosevelt. And much of the rest of the media were to. And this is what happens. When you have an ideologically driven one party media. Tyranny. Tyranny. And that's pretty much what we have today. I'll be right.

President Franklin Roosevelt New York Times FDR democrat party United States Robinson Japanese government Japan New York City Trump Arizona Obama Harvard University Pearl Harbor Los Angeles United States Supreme court Washington Lincoln Lincoln DACA Lawrence Davies
"harvard university press" Discussed on KDWN 720AM

KDWN 720AM

05:05 min | 3 years ago

"harvard university press" Discussed on KDWN 720AM

"Course, he created no such thing. I don't need to go through a list with you again. But it was actually Franklin Roosevelt who created interment camps. And he saw a military order directing that one hundred twenty thousand Japanese Americans and Americans of Japanese descent were to be removed from their homes. Moved into these camps. Some are placed in Arizona some replaced where they were to be moved off the west coast. I want you to know some history. It's all very important because FDR is one of the favourite presidents of the left and the tenured historians who are professors. It usually is Washington Lincoln Lincoln, Washington. And of course, FDR sometimes they put after your first because he was the great progressive. One day. It'll be Obama. FDR was a racist. I'm not saying that to be provocative. So an excellent book written on this subject put out by Harvard gentleman by the name of Robinson by order of the president. Spend a lot of time reading history. And. He issued the order. The New York Times. So it was really kind of cool. Here's the headline from the New York Times. March twenty four thousand nine hundred forty two Japanese begin evacuation trek I caravan. They liked the word caravan of three hundred and fifty cars with one thousand leaves Los Angeles for Owens river valley. Listen to this sub headline good humor prevails. Government announced plans for colonization of twenty thousand in Arizona Indian reserve. This democrat party is amazing, isn't it? Now, that's not that long ago. Nineteen forty two. So I've been reading this book been reading scores of books over the last several weeks is I. Do my research. And they point this out does Robinson. This book is not a new book. It comes from the Harvard University press must be good, right? It's first copyright. Let's see here. I believe is a nineteen sixty six. Let me read you this. Too closely interrelated elements stand out strongly as determinative in the president's decision and his subsequent actions. One of these was undoubtedly Roosevelt's own negative beliefs about Japanese Americans. While the other was a failure, political and moral leadership that resulted from weakness in his presidential style administrative organization. FDR's hostile attitude toward Japanese Americans had deep roots in his past as early as nineteen thirteen when legal discrimination against Japanese aliens in California, brought Japan and the United States close to the war. The young FDR at the outset of his career in public service began to regard both the the icy immigrants and their American born that is the original immigrants from Japan and their America American-born Nicey children. That's what they call them as a menace a foreign and racially. And racial population. They couldn't be assimilated whose presence was a source of both chronic irritation to their white American neighbors, I'm quoting and conflict with Japan. During the nineteen twenties. Even as FDR praised the Japanese government and called for closer relations between the two countries he publicly opposed any further immigration of the Japanese into the United States, he justified discriminatory legislation against Japanese aliens on the west coast. So means of preserving white, racial purity. This has been the history of the democrat party slavery. Segregation, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt. Yes. I know. I'm I'm I'm telling you the truth. You don't hear these things? A low FDR did not consider people of Japanese ancestry racially inferior in is a few. They were a biologically distinct people when innately incapable of adapting to American society are becoming true Americans. This is your democrat party. This is your great FDR. He argued that they needed to be kept apart, and he considered anti-japanese nativist sentiment reasonable and just. The president's inability. This goes to immigration, his inability to conceive of people of Japanese ancestry as true Americans contributed to his failure to intervene to protect their liberty and property rights in the face of public hysteria. They're talking about after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Though,.

FDR Franklin Roosevelt democrat party president Robinson Japan Japanese government Arizona Washington Lincoln Lincoln The New York Times Obama Harvard University United States Pearl Harbor Arizona Indian reserve Los Angeles Woodrow Wilson Owens river valley Washington California