Work with you here in the congress. Eager to chat about your book, the case against socialism but maybe first reflect a little bit on the role that you have within the congress and within our party as an independent voice and as someone whos willing to strike out on issues that may be other republicans arent whirling to strike out on. Guest sometimes i think im a lonely voice but you know how it is in a house if you believed in balancedbudget or you believe we should spend less or have a limited Constitutional Government really controversial things like that, limited Constitutional Government but unfortunately we never get any of the other side but then we lose a lot on our side that could be better at it and i guess thats one of my frustrations but i tried very hard to have the same opinion whether republican president or democrat president that the constitution was specific. Spending power was ours but things like that that we should keep our hands on from a power to declare war is ours. I think we too easily give that up. I think one of the interesting things that i found coming up here is that democrats are better on these issues when its a republican president they want republicans are better on this one of the democrat president but when the parties are the same they tend to acquiesce a little bit on the idea of separation of powers. Host in this book you write to the case against socialism, it operates to me, very much as a debate guide against those who would try to grow the left Political Movement by advancing socialist ideas, embracing socialist dictators, maybe talk about the need for the buck through the lens of which Political Movement is expanding or contracting . Guest most people hear the title, the case against socialism, and say thats a great idea but i wish it wasnt necessary but you would not think it would be necessary and it isnt true. I was born in the 1960s and we still were sort of expanding in the early 1960s khrushchev was just admitting to stalins terror of the programs killing millions of people who died in the famine. The great famine in china had to happen in the 50s and so many of these things were just becoming known but throughout most my lifetime people were horrified at what they learned and what happened with socialism. Now we turn the page and we have polls showing over half of young people are enthusiastic. Almost half of them hate capitalism and almost half think socialism is something we ought to try and its perplexing to some of us who have read the history of socialism but i think it is necessary. We have a couple of socialists over on your side and a socialist on the senate side and when i was a kid i think there were socialist but they were embarrassed of the label and did not want to be called socialists so they were liberals and then they do not want to be called liberals but they knew it would not be popular and now there in your face saying i am a socialist and we want to bring socialism and they have a party the democrat socialists of america and they are proud of it. It alarms me the young people arent going all my goodness, what would socialism mean for our country. Host its been in a short period of time that we seen democrat socialists embrace the socialist brand as a growth agenda. You said something earlier in your political career which ive never forgot about our prospects for growth and leveraging liberty for growth and you said specifically wants that our party needs more people who have tattoos and more people who dont have tattoos and so the question is do we need to go find people with tattoos to join the party or do we need to tattoo more people in the party . Guest good question. With ponytails, without ponytails, with earrings, without earrings. We need to be a hip or cool party that young people want to join so thats the part of the problem is somehow social and has become hip or cool but they dont know what it is. The same studies that say they are for it, 10 of the people who are poor socialism kinds of finance has the government owning the means of production. They think its about fairness. Part of this i blame on the government schools, government schools teach everybody can have selfesteem and if your son cant spell we will give him the prize anyway because he needs to feel good about himself and we will passout selfesteem and pass out fairness and they get this idea that somehow the government will make things fa fair. One of the things we point out in here is there is still a top 1 and socialism. The difference is under our system its at least mostly or to large extent based on merit who becomes wealthy. If im sam walton and sell something you want and im good at selling industry beating it i can become a billionaire but no one forced you to buy myself. Sam walton became a billionaire because people voluntarily bought his stuff. Its the same weight with most billionaires in our society. When you look at socialism there is still a top 1 but think maduro does not have a top 1 . They are his generals. They are all well fed. We point out the maduro, the leader in venezuela, average person lost 20 pounds on there but he makes ted kennedy looks limpid hes wearing the size of 68 jacket or 74 chest jacket and hes getting fatter and fatter. Host i never read a book that [inaudible] [inaudible conversations] [laughter] you went down this project as an interesting endeavor in marriage as well. He wrote the book with your wife and im not married but ive always said that wallpaper together can be difficult but talk to us about the process of writing this book with your life and you write a beautiful poem at the beginning of the book to your wife that i think speaks to a lot of people who have been born some sense of sacrifice and that sacrifice is linked to another human being that you love. Yet, kellyanne i work well together and its like in the days when they give you advice in marriage is that when your wife says something you divide up, you have things and ultimately you let her make the final decision. Thats not entirely true but it kind of is and that im laid back. I wrote a lot of stuff and then she came through and read it and said you know what, and be interesting to add this in. Host give us a kelly paul, unique sweetener. Guest i would say the discussion of the Covington Catholic boy was largely hers. It really got her going and got her upset and not all of us upset who watch this at what the media did to this. The link into social loan is that weve gone to a point we have propaganda billing our airways and under socialism its directed from the government paid business coming from private entities but that point was an innocent 15 year old boy in our kids went to Catholic School but he is standing there waiting for the bus and never says a word and yet all these adults on cnn were saying he has a printable phase but i met with some of these people a week later when the truth came out and they were still sane it looks like you ought to punch him. Do you not understand what you are saying . Everything about that story was wrong and i hope that in the end the courts will say you cant lie about somebody because there really is a court case here. There have been kids not getting into harvard because they do inappropriate things on their social media or whatever but he didnt do that but hes being lumped in with people who are racist or say bad things and he might be excluded from schools and ultimately from careers because people think, youre a terrible person and in reality he never said a word or did anything and the other side where all these terrible adults that were fomenting and getting in his face, yelling horrible epithets at both him and the others there in the media got everything completely wrong because they had an agenda with kelly was key and getting that in there and did a great job of describing that and drawing it into this whole idea of what happens under propaganda and socialism. Host the democrats and socialists we serve red and Congress Tell us that socialism is really the path to fairness. Who are the Fairness Police . How do you write about them . Guest thats a good point. In the abstract they say we will have fairness but the thing is you have a conception of fairness, i have a conception of fairness and representative omar might have a conception of fairness but for her to invoke hers on us if we disagree with her, shes not going to sell us her ideas of fairness but she has to send the police basically. This is where it breaks down. This is, i think, why maybe its become popular and the idea of fairness is they conflate fairness with things like charity and being your brothers keeper. I believe we should be our brothers keeper. I believe in christianity and the christian idea that we have community and take care of our people but that has nothing to do with government. They believe it and then they conflated and say that charity is if i come to her house and take your money and give it to some one else but no, charity is if you give of your own money and its not charity when the government comes but it also isnt very charitable in the way the government does it because ultimately the more you want socialism this is one of the points we make, if you want a little bit of socialism violence from government may be tolerable but if you want more you will have more state violence but if you really want to take the property and when mao came to take the farms or when stalin collected the farms, truly there is a point at which people rebel and the only way you can get it is really through violence pretty you have to kill the people. That is what happened under stalin, not just a few people but millions. From that we try to develop the question is and i taught a course of George Washington on the dystopian novel and keep kids kept asking is violence and accident of socialism or is violence inherent . Is it inevitable . I think the more socialism you get, yes, absolutely it is inherent and the more in the closer you get to taking peoples property people will resist and then you cant just find them but you will put them in jail or shoot them. Host i interact with a lot of folks that come up to me as a young conservative and say how can i motivate my child or my grandchild to embrace the principles that have made our country great . I would say the book really doesnt detail out all the arguments that socialists make and then it goes into, i think, a good historical context, good global context but the question is when do we believe move past that Tipping Point . You cite a harvard study that half of people under 29 have a favorable view of socialism. How we crossed the rubicon . Do we have to go win back this argument with people who have embraced that incremental socialism . Guest i think we are in danger of it. It differs in every side every generation has to renew the water at the tree of liberty and thats true is socialism and bad ideas but every generation has to realize the problems with socialism and what comes from it but the big lie that is out there right now in the big sort of superficial, platitude they throw at you is that they say the intellectuals in america used to like stalin but then we learned he was bad and thats not the we wanted we used to like castro and bernie was a big fan of castro but then we learned it wasnt so great so we arent supporting castro but we used to like chavez but not so much but what we really like is sweden. We love scandinavian socialism. Its the kinder, gentler socialism until a big point of the book is disproving that. One that sweden and scandinavia is socialist because theyre not. They rank pretty high on the Freedom Index is portrayed and a lot of other things. One of the main policy things that bernie wants is to raise the Corporate Income tax. The lower them from 35 at the highest in the world to 21 but interestingly scandinavia has been in the low 20s for 30, 40 years now and its part of their success is that theyve had low business taxes. Bernie says we want to be sweden and scandinavia but he doesnt want to the low Corporate Income tax, he wants to raise them but also interestingly scandinavia doesnt have a minimum wage. The other interesting thing and this is the real big one and this is probably the biggest lie of the left and the biggest lie of all the socialists is that you can have all the free stuff and have something for nothing. Free college, paid leave, everything you want, we give you free money and we will only tax the rich people. The big lie is thats not what they do and scandinavia. They do have a big welfare state. There is a lot of free stuff there. Free stuff they give you but they tax the heck out of everybody. Bernie and his clan and his merry troupe of socialists wont tell you that because they want to just to get to the rich, not the middleclass. In scandinavia everybody pays 25 sales tax so from the poorest to the rich is 25 sales tax and everybody also pays a very significant income tax so the income tax over there is 60 starting at 60000. 60000 is the middleclass. This is not the respite that is how they get so much money. They tax the heck out of the middle class but you wont see bernie or aoc going on tv saying yes, we will do 10 trillion for Climate Change and 60 trillion per medicare for all but the middleclass will have to have 60 income tax. No, they are lying to you. They say the middleclass wont have income tax increase but its a lie. Host in is capitalism zerosum then . The rich get richer at someone elses expense and you say examples to go through circumstances where its capitalism that is the rising tide lifts all people. Guest income inequality has been bandied about by the left and that is terrible thing and we look at it and the interesting thing is that they say one of them points out that pakistan and ethiopia have less income inequality than us and i was like move there then. If you think its great, but its not about how close you are to each other but its about what your level is. Income inequality, one of the authors be quote says its like a jealousy trope. Its about me carrying how much money you make and in reality thats a really bad, thats almost its coveting someones property where i dont just care how much i am but its another big lie that comes from the socialist but they say economic pie is fixed and that if i get some then you are getting less. The truth of the matter is and the statistics are overwhelming on this the economic pie is being bigger and bigger and theres less poverty. As a group we quote from called human progress. Org and they are associated with cato. The statistics six are amazing. Poverty and about 1820, 90 of people lived on less than two dollars a day and that is how the world bank defines a bid they do constant dollars but when i was born and went from 90 in 1822 about a third of the world living in poverty in the early 1960s but today its less than 10 . That is incontrovertible. We are just getting 137,000 people escape extreme poverty every day for the last 25 years. Their facts are wrong. They are completely wrong for the world is so much better than it used to be. Host do you think that global you take that global lens unexpected book to focus on a lot of this domestic policy reforms that youve chanted to enhance liberty and reduce the scope of government and lives but readers can expect a very global view of how quality of life has been impacted as folks have moved towards Big Government or towards liberty. Guest right. I think the facts are there that the World Economy is growing and like the u. S. Economy may have doubled eight times in the last 200 years. Poverty is less, everyone is richer and we are all doing better in fact i start out speeches by saying theres never ever, ever been a better time to be alive. I want that to sink in. This is not host maybe not in venezuela. [laughter] you make people eat their words on venezuela and you seem to take joy in pointing out that not only bernie but folks on cnn and even oliver stone champion venezuela as his great utopia and you have a different critique. Guest yeah, venezuela is such a disaster. People literally eating their pet spread we tell the story of a young lady, teenage girl, she has a gang but her gang is to defend the turf of trash so the certain garbage receptacles and she keeps people out because they are her garbage receptacles to look for food. People killing rats in the street to eat them, pigeons and it really is a sad thing but going back to the World Economy thing we have to understand why the World Economy got better and we have to understand why venezuela is deteriorating into chaos did i think that is part of the book is doing. Its also the debate we are should be having up here and we seem to have it. Congress were not talking about which Economic System is better and nobody in the media seems to care the what aoc is supporting her but bernie is supporting is stalin and mao and pol pot and all these terrible ideas and they get away with it because they are challenged. Host you also trace the roots of socialism back even to the arab world, which i think, would be enlightening to many who would cast these golf monarchies and arab endeavors as rightwing governments, not leftwing governments but you cite the nasser socialism is a brand of social that is been particularly violent and harmf harmful. Guest i think that is part of the problem weve had since the 1930s. [inaudible] and others said when he met hitler, bored by the late 1930s they were talking about rightwing dictators. I dont think this was accidental. I think these were political scientists who decided to develop a spectrum of right and left. They put not theism over here socialism and communism over here. In reality they are different variance. In fact, hitler was very proud of his socialism and he said that most inventors of something he wanted to make sure it was distinct. His was nationalistic, not international and his was racist, obviously genocidal but he was proud of those things but said this is a unique he came up with a unique form of socialism. When you look at his original planks they are from the communist manifesto. They are all the collection but they did it because after the war and people became so horrified with what he did with the holocaust the socialist say we can to socialism if they think hitler is a socialist select call him a capitalist or a rightwing authoritarian. The saint is in the arab world. Postcode you attack the notion that socialism is attainable by saying in the book does every economy in the world to distribute resources on equally, but there is no opportunity for the four equal distribution of resources and so in the world where the unequal distribution, you prefer merit. Do we fall at some risk in the congress of sort of leaning into those elements of the crony capitalism and does that take us on the march to these bad boys . Guest how things are distributed and the equality being a global if things are distributed the problem is that you would lack incentive because they want to increase your share of the price of getting rid of the incentives was always a problem. We fall to the trap here sometimes, yes because in order to get the things we want by producing taxes on the economy weve taken people off the no taxes so we have a tax system that is a lot different than the scandinavians. But we really are much more tipped towards the very progressive tax code. The vast majority of the top 20 of earners pay like 90 . You are critical of the way the socialist system can view all of the markets and how that can undermine peoples purchasing power and opportunity to live the normalized Economic System. What are the striking examples of the imposition of socialism directly fueling that nefarious black market economy . Guest there is a price point at which people start selling things and its price controls in general if you set the price too low, all the goods are gone and if you set it too high, they are on the shelf in the black market develops and its one of these things even conservatives screw up sometimes. What is a just price. It is supply and demand and you have to leave it open to supply and demand, and then the invisible hand of the marketplace and those wanting to strive for more profit of more inefficiency and once the government sets the prices we get into the world of hurt because they dont know the correct price of anything so it is too low to hig low or too his the perfect price of the market to determine the leads to her thick things in the market and several examples we talk about how under socialism it cant be tolerated. If you tolerate a little bit it undermines the whole system so you have to have informants and families in forming on families and neighbors informing on neighbors. And then after a while the jury trials are too slow. Everybody in the community is buying bread on the black market because that is how we feed our family when we put people on the jury the government isnt going to get a conviction so you get rid of the trials and things become more authoritarian because the policies are unpopular. One of the examples someone selling stuff on the street and its a lot more than the price and the governments kind of apologize, but we actually have stuff and we are giving it to people so we have food and medicine and people get it. We are sorry we are charging more than the price but there is no food or medicine and distort and thats what happens. It just doesnt work. Some of it could be well intentioned. When they do it well intentioned that we keep it cheap, then there is no bread. And it happens everywhere. Host but you cited in the book when people are waiting for bread that is the sign of a healthy socialism. Guest we suggest they go down and see what the lines are like in venezuela and really it is giving a great wealth to the country. The country is so wealthy right now we do not have a food problem. The biggest problem we have an health right now, not the biggest but one of the biggest is food and the poorest people in the society are better off in ththan the middle class in most societies around the world. Workforce participation, people who dont participate its like 38 and in some it is 58 of people not working so there still needs to be this thing and i think it is coupled with the drug problem, people are not working. They are divorced from that whole process and make it more likely to get into the drug problem but we still have that problem here and its a problem of plenty and every day you probably hear the people in thee businesses are saying i cant find enough workers. We still have a bunch of them that are not participating. Host you draw from the resources and the movement and i sensed in reading the book that at times you are frustrated by the willful ignorance on how their own policies impact their communities in utah story about my colleague in her coffee shop and going back to the coffeeshop just the willful ignorance on how the policies impact the quality of life. Guest she goes back and is blaming it all on capitalism having to go out of business and they interview the owner and he basically says we went out of business because the minimum wage is too high into the rent is too high. This is probably the biggest problem on the left if you want to grant them and they want to do things to help poor people, i think many of them do. They are not thinking through the second order or the third order over the unintended consequences. You can see havin having bread 0 cents would be so good for the poor people but then six months later you find there is no bread and there is a black market for it and people are selling it at a different price. It has been pointed out repeatedly that the 1 tax that she has on those making over 10 million brings in acting 50 billion in the projects that she wants to spend are like 60, 70, 80 trillion. You would think they have to know that and it may be facing selling santa claus is easier than it is, its easier to sell santa claus than it is freedom and liberty and responsibility and opportunity. We say they have been easier sale but certainly after enough people, money just doesnt grow on trees. Host damascus become challenging but we have to. One thing he gets a lot of credit for certainly message discipline throughout his campaign they repeatedly talked about the middle class and pitched thpitched the socialists and was enduring to the benefit of the middle class. You walk through a number of circumstances where socialism wipes out the middle class. Talk about specifically those folks trying to follow the rul rules. The bottom line is once you get more and more socialism you get less and less Economic Growth and contraction. There is no wealth. The best example is venezuela where they have more reserves than anybody. If they dont have food. So how does that happen, how can they become so desperate and the marketplace never allows that to happen and the marketplace is growing and there is more of this Economic Growth within the socialism that is contracting and sort of shriveling up. But its not just one. You see it time after time after time. Going back to the question on whether or not violence is an inherent to socialism. He had a good way of putting it he said that if the ultimate decider of socialism is to own the property and you have to take it from people and people will resist the more you take it from them, maybe socialism selects for most worthless person because when they finally come to your house it is like im not going to resist attacks or should the Tax Collector or the regulator. But if they come to my house, who can do that, you cant have somebody that is an easy going socialist it has to be stolen or maybe it is inevitable that more socialism you want, the more ruthless so that is why you always end up with worthless leaders if you want to take peoples property, you have to be to get it. Host and that shows the lifecycle of socialism. One question i have is why do these dictators dressup as liberators initially, and you sort of go fo through this momet of liberation and then the strong authoritarian violence. How do you break that cycle once you begin the incremental socialism . Guest when people talk about the birth of the country and how extraordinary it was, remember the french resolution didnt quite end the way that arrested. Ours was amazing in the same that we kept much of our religious faith and traditions and virtues but also a written document that said the government cant get bigger than this. The government is bound within these chains of the constitution, and i think that we also sometimes dont realize how much of that is the lineage of the tradition. Our revolution if we think of it as this abrupt thing. I think it is a continuation of the glorious revolution in england, the magna carta and the bill of rights weve been trying to limit and theyve done a great deal of it. We want more limitation and so through all this lineage we got this constitution and George Washington not becoming a king. Morality is an argument of the left makes a service and socialism. Your answer is interesting. It forces you to look inward whereas capitalism requires you to be morally in tune with the needs of others. Talk about that. Guest if im going to be a successful capitalist im not caring about my desires. Guest everything is focused outwards to try to get you to accept and buy my services or products but if im a socialist, im really not carrying too much about popular opinion and pleasing a consumer. But you have to use rationing they dont seem to care that you have to wait in line for six months or a year. Its directed more towards the ideological concerns. Host how does that drive selfishness their professed to be everything is for someone else but in the end it is true of the selfishness. They consider them and accumulate power and money in homes and Everything Else all based on the cronyism of their system. Taking apart this argument is a big part of the book and its also a big part of the debate that we have about the kind of gentler form of socialism, but you actually point out the trendlines moving away from the socialism and only from the reliance on taxes. Where do you think we will see scandinavia 25 years from now and what trends do you see that answer back the lesser argument . The peak of socialism in the 70s and since the 70s theyve been moving more to the right. Four out of five are in the centerright government and the trendline on taxes went down and thereve also been trading nations involved in worldwide trade and they have these economic indexes i think heritage does one and other associations duties. They all rank pretty high and its important you have to know whether they are socialist or not. The Great Success we have to know if they ar are socialist sarnoff and frankly, they are not. This private ownership, but it doesnt. Host welfarism, walk us through welfare and socialism and where does our country fall back guest i think it is a continuum. Capitalism is here and socialism is here. We are here but more o with more capitalist side. We are offcenter towards capitalism, knocked me over. We have a great deal of governmental control and involvement. Host you eventually write a reform to Social Security into the book. Guest and a spectrum of things that is where we are. If scandinavia there is a quote we have a where jesus talking to one of his students if you want a quick definition of what is one thing it requires to be a capitalist nation he says having a private stock market and although scandinavia has private property, they really are capitalism with welfarism. Welfarism basically is paid for through high taxes and you still have private ownership but it isnt something im advocating to buy a car in scandinavia is 100 tax youve got to pay another 30,000 or 200 it may even be 60,000. Host you dont think Bernie Sanders could get elected at that point . Guest but the minister responded no, no, we are not a socialist. Maybe to do business with the world and who wants to do business in the socialist countries of denmark says we are open for business and i love the socialism in denmark. It is kind of funny they all want to be scandinavia and they say that wait a minute, we are not socialist. Host as scandinavia awakens to this and the impact to this class as they try to have a more capitalist system and shifting more of th the othy do you ever invasion a circumstance where the two would cross . Guest everything interesting about scandinavia they had a lot of success like in the longevity and there are several authors to look at the statistics and try to understand why, there are some amazing statistics. So they always say scandinavians live longer than we did have higher incomes than we did. Look at scandinavian americans. Ones that live here. There are some that have migrated here for 100 years or more. Their average income is still higher than ours and the argument is there something about culture and the work ethic and i think it is. Its harder to teach people it comes from families, Family Structures and communities in the church and things like that but this is where we have to get away from this craziness they say he deserves to have each row they even though he cant spell. The problem is when we dont teach the work ethic and as we get away from that, we get a whole segment of the population 38 of them who dont work now who have never really felt a sort of esteem you get from work. And i absolutely believe that the work is not a punishment. It is a reward, and its how you get your selfesteem. There isnt one that is better than another. You can be a janitor, nurse, doctor, lawyer, physicist, you get it through trying to produce something with your mind, hands, body and if you dont do that, it is a huge hole in your life that is a big problem for all of us. Host you have a revision for the party that is different than the racially diverse electorate. Instead of those that disproportionately affect should be subject to repeal and get the same people that advocate for socialism or the self aggrandized Racial Justice warriors in the congress and you write about the ability for racism to animate elements of socialism and socialism may create a susceptibility that you wouldnt see in capitalism. What is the basis of that view point . Guest i think under socialism when you view people collectively you view them as groups and under capitalism everybody is an individual regardless of your skin color, religion or merit but we see they are group rights and really its so emotional to the individual rights to be blind to who you are the law should be absolutely the same for everybody. The problem is when you begin to recognize the group rights it has to be different for these people they have to have an elevation above and that is what happens is under socialism if it is to be distributed equally the wall has to be unequal because the society ends up when things are distributed as more stuff and so to make it equal the ball has to treat people not the same and it is a sort of this irony it doesnt have equal protection under socialism in order to make us all equal and to keep readjusting us its based on the groupings and whether they are in the party, poor, rich we have a lack of justice. Host you are critical of china and talk about the leap forward. What do they tell us about the future and the relationship Going Forward as they embrace these values . That might take a whole another book but its a difficult situation. People have a lot of hope. In the 70s and the opening up of having more of a marketplace people were very hopeful and many people predicted with economic liberty which they were not getting much more economic liberty is maybe longer than we are seeing now that economic liberty makes people more interested in political liberty. There are hundreds if not thousands of people that were interested in it in hong kong you see people that are very interested not being extradited to china and by the hundreds of thousands we can be disappointed that we still have a Chinese Government that is authoritarian but we can be encouraged but theres still resistance. How we get there i dont know. So many people its sort of separate some of the more liberty minded people from the conservatives and weve all seen the same problems. I saw the same in venezuela and china they think we will conquer china and everything will be great and that is unfortunate it doesnt seem to work out that way. Host you talk about what flowed from socialism. I know there are conservatives concerned about the fact they lost the debate on the radical left in n they know longer wanto debate the merits of economic principles and they instead want the platform to defame and bestride those that hold these values that youve expressed. Why does socialism access the viewpoint and five . Guest once you monopolize the planning you have to monopolize criticism until you cant handle it anymore and its a consistent theme. Every one of these regimes ends up with a secret police and i think he gets bac it gets back. Is it an accident unfortunately it went that direction, or is it inherent that they cannot handle the debate because ultimately it will lead to dissent and unraveling. Host it wouldnt be a rand paul because there wasnt the war and the congress that represents more troops than everybody else. I thank you on behalf of the military families for what you do. You write and criticize a particular journalist and say ive respected eisenhowers warning that a small wars could lead to big. I never understood how one could be called blogging. This is a fact check that somehow eisenhower belonged to the more power and then you go on to quote eisenhower saying only as a soldier that lived it can only as one that has seen its brutality and stupidity and so as we try to in our government here away from the forever war a word of advice would you give those tha a try o have the realistic view of the policy . Guest you say you have a lot of veterans in the district. We have databases in my state and the interesting thing is some of the most thoughtful people are the people that have served particularly in combat. If we had a roundtable with five or six guys or women whove been involved in the combat, they are not kneejerk in the afghan war should go on and on. Most of them are like we were okay after 9 11 to go get the enemy but when you told us to plant the flag and the words and nationbuilding, mentioned the word nationbuilding and the soldiers will recoil. And they dont see themselves as policemen. They dont want to be over there policing the streets and building roads and giving all this stuff. Ultimately it is a little bit i make the analogy like welfare you give People Welfare and they never will step up and really take the world in their hands and become selfsufficient. The same way with afghanistan. 50 billion a year they are never going to step up. Not if we fight the taliban for them so ultimately we have to. I think if there is a chance the military and those that cant speak out if shows 60 of dems say we should end the war over 60 now say the iraq war may not have been in our best interest, so we should listen to them and also the constitution that wanted to make the war difficult. Some people say that is so antiquated. We cant let them do that. They could never declare the war. My response to that is weve been attacked in the last seven years. The attack they go to die and one or two people that voted no the same with 9 11. It was a month or so later that it was virtually unanimous for the war. So i think that congress can come together and people have looked at it and said we tend to do better and have Better Outcomes when we declare the war and when we are all in altogether on it and we tend to do not so well in thos and thost drag on and on and dont have a clear mission. I have three of th in the mility father was career military. I cant send a Family Member or your Family Member or anybody else down there without being very thoughtful about it and deciding what is in our National Interest to be there and we cant have one vote 19 years ago saying that it binds the generation i think that would be the definition of perpetual war. Thank you for enlisting your brilliant wife to write this book with you and for ensuring that anyone that reads the book will never lose an argument when the socialist ever again. Guest thank you. Appreciate it. Next comic and Affairs Editor in chief Nathan Robinson looks at socialism in the 21st century. His book is titled by you should be a socialist. This was hosted by solidstate books in washington, d. C. [applause] good evening everyone,