Republicans control the house and the senate. In the era of the obama gridlock is over. We are going to make a point. The American People have spoken. They expect the people they elect to get the job down. Because you have divided government doesnt mean you havent accomplished everything. I look forward to working toot. Cheryl atkinson says her computers hacked and her reporting stone walled. The height of her investigation, several scandals involving the obama. We have a 300 mile conversation about war, what it does to you and why you miss it. Two pastors and a 90yearold man face possible gaol time. Their crime feeding the homeless we begin with president obamas response to the historic republican blow out victory in the Midterm Elections. The American People sent a message, one sent for several elections now. They expect the people they elect to work as hard as they do. They want us to get the job done. It doesnt make me mopey, it energiesizes me. It means that democracy is working. Even so the president is defiant that tuesdays results is more been it dysfunction in washington than about policies and leadership. He said shed find new ways to reach across the aisle. If the way that we approach the republicans in congress is not working, well try different things. Whether its having a drink, letting john boehner beat me at golf. He promised to go forward with unilateral action before the end of the year. Senate minority leader Mitch Mcconnell, likely to be majority leader warns of trouble if the president does that. The president was mostly conciliatory. The American People have spoken, and given us divided government. The question for the president and the speaker and myself and members is what are you going to do with it . Joining us now is congressman tom latham serving the states third congressional district. He represented him since 1995. He announced he would not seek reflection. Good to have you with us. The president said its obviously republicans had a good night. He said he wants to work with congress to find Common Ground and called on congress to move on things that republicans and democrats agree on. He was defiant showing that americans wanted to get things done. Do you think theres a chance well see the congress and the white house work together. I think there is first of all, talking about funding for ebola, when he talked about fighting the war in terror with i. S. I. S. Things like that i think the debate will be had on the minimum wage if that was to be paid for. For Small Businesses to afford it. I think hell poison the well if he does action like immigration that would totally change the dynamic and relationship. We have an opportunity Going Forward here. If he does that hell poison the well. Mitch mcconnell made an interesting comment about the president moving unilaterally with action saying some days waving a red flag in front of a bull. What do you expect republicans to do if he comes out and takes aggressive action by himself . Well i think you are going to see bills passed that with the version of Immigration Reform that we like to see as far as securing the border addressing them later on the status of people in this country that are here illegally. But, you know that i think, would destroy any opportunity for tax reform, comprehensive tax reform for getting spending bills done. Really, as far as efforts throughout congress to get things accomplished the president has an opportunity here but Something Like unilaterally doing something on immigration, destroying any effort Going Forward. Lets look at Something Else likely to be the majority leader of the senate. Something that he wants to say. Earlier today i had a call from the president , also from senator reed and the speaker. And ted cruz too. All of whom have the view that we ought to see areas of agreement there are. The reference to cruz is because cruz didnt come out and immediately support Mitch Mcconnell for leader. Cruz has been the personification of how republicans are seen as the party of no and hes made tough comments about how the reelection should be interpreted. There are republicans like crews who dont want to find or seem to want to find agreement with the president. Are the deep decisions within the g. O. P. Going to be a paralyzing issue. I dont think its general in the g. O. P. But there are individuals who dont want to govern who are had their own agenda out there. Whether they be running for president. Thats a biggest problem. Theres two, three, four senators who think they are the next president of the United States and who have their own agenda and move actions forward, you know. This election i think, was unifying for republicans, in that the president s agenda was on the ballot. The president said so himself. The policies he put in place were what people were voting on. I think there are individuals, certainly that have their own agendas out there. That will make it tough for Mitch Mcconnell. Could it be more unifying for republicans because few of the more extreme Tea Party Candidates blamed in part for the poor showing of the party in 2012 were a factor this time around . Well and i think the type of candidates we this generally speaking across the country were candidates who want to rein in spending get the federal government under control, do it in a constructive way, through a process, and that can be done. Im an apropriator. I look at the appropriation process as a way to rein in the government. People have different avenues. Ted cruz was the push behind the government shutdown. That didnt work out well. I think the group of people generally elected are people who want to go to washington are part of constructive process to get things done. What do you think this means for 2016 . It depends upon how the agenda is put forward. Whether the house and the senate can get together to put together good legislation. Key stone pipeline. Raining in spending in the government. Controlling bureaucracy, and we see what the president does. The big problem again is youve got three or four u. S. Senators that like to be in the oval office, and what the dynamic has as far as affecting legislation is the big question. I think we are in good shape going into 2016. Congressman tom laith am good of you to join us. Thank you very much. Great to be with you. Turning to the nations capital. A day after both parties vow to seek areas of Common Ground bickering heated up. House Speaker John Boehner took a combative tone on issues from immigration to obama care. Obama care is hurting our economy, middle class families and the ability for employers to create more jobs. It should be repealed replaced with con sense reforms. The speaker warned the president not to use executive authority on immigration and put the onus on obama, to find ways to work with newly emboldened republicans in the house and senate. For more on the tuesday electionless im joined by kirsten. Good to have you with us a big win on tuesday, with that is big responsibility. In a wall street journal article on thursday an op ed piece, Mitch Mcconnell and john boehner vowed to get congress going. Most of what they talked about looked like a g. O. P. Wishlist. Tax reform tort reform. Things that george bush made progress on. Is there a risk in promising action and not delivering . Not at all. I think that it was very good of both of the the speaker and leader soon to be leader to map out what americans can expect in the coming months. I think another story that came ute today was in the Washington Post, and it detailed a little bit of the relationship between the white house, and harry reid and the senators. The position that harry reid put the wows in and vice versa, and a little in sight into why the senate was not productive at all. We saw an obstruction in road block there. Its good of senator mcconnell and Speaker John Boehner to say that it is not happening with the new arrangements in january. I want to get to that in a minute. And lets listen to Mitch Mcconnell and how he sounded conciliatory on wednesday. If i had the ability, obviously i would get rid of it. Obviously its true hes still there. So well discuss how to go forward on this issue when we get back. It sounded like he wouldnt make repealing obama care a priority but they come out with the oped piece, and its straight out calls for a repeal and john boehner at his News Conference on thursday said the same thing, that obama care is hurting the economy middle class families and he wants it repealed. Democrats will say here they go again, the party of no trying to repeal a law insuring a lot of people and they are not offering an alternative. I dont think that is near the truth. We got down with the Midterm Election and obama care was the central issue other than the general economy, and the fact that the democrats had nothing to help the economy. After that obama care and i think that the voters spoke. And whether or not reveal is going to happen in the next couple of months. Theres a large percentage that wants to see that. And if we can figure out how to make fixes, medical device tax is something that a lot of democrats are saying that we can get down off the bat when it comes to obama care. I think the democrats are going to go and fear monger. We have seen it for a very long time. I think its very new, and we should take our time and let the new leadership work and see what we can do. One thing they are not taking their time on on both sides is arguing about immigration. The president said if he went it alone, it would be like waving a red flag in front of the bull. This is what john boehner said. You heard me say, starting two years ago yesterday that the immigration system is broken and needs to be fixed. I made clear to the president that if he acts unilaterally on his own, outside of his authority, hell poison the well and therell be no chance. He went on to say when you play with matches you take the risk of burning yourself. Arent both sides poisoning the well with this rhetoric after the election. You know what i denned to agree with this too. Immigration was a larger discussion of midterms. A lot of people a lot of americans say we dont want to president to act unilaterally. Its not his place. It does not take into consideration their points of view on the issue. We need a conversation we had to have a conversation. That is not what the democrats did. This provides a chapter of sit down and figure it out. When it comes to acting unilaterally theres not enough trust. I think that its right for us to caution him on making that move. We had a republican congressman on the show wednesday night. He was concerned about Senate Republicans angling to be president , paul cruz rubio, and how they may be obstacles for the republicans to govern successfully. The 2016 president ial field will be interesting. I think we are excited about it. I think voters are ready. Candidates are talking about these issues. The tea party is an important part of who we are. Its a good perspective of everyone to keep in mind. There are americans out there. They are part of the conversation not the whom conversation. I think well see progress. Americans will be happy about it. They ended up dominating the conversation at times even though they were a minority. Like the liberal democrats dominated too. If you read the story in the post. Liberal democrats ran the show. The white house didnt have control over it. I think a lot of times the tea party, and the Republican Party get a bad rap, the media likes to talk about it. Theres always another side to the conversation, another perspective. We need to keep it in mind. Its good to get your perspective. Appreciate you joining us. Thank you. Thank you. Consider this will be back. Humanity only on Al Jazeera America thank you. Is the act of feeding the homeless in a public setting the act of charity or a public offense. In a growing trend across the country 20 cities passed laws limiting where and when organizations can feed homeless people. Fort lauderdale is the latest to enact such an ordinance. It is the basis for a debate. Pitting the city against those helping the needy. A 90yearold man and two pastors were issued citation for violating rules about feeding the homeless in public. They could face 50 days in gaol or a fine. I served three people. As i served the fourth they said put down the plate right away, as though it was a weapon. It was a shock. The mayor of Fort Lauderdale said its a Public Safety issue. If you feed them you are aiding the cycle of homelessness, you dont give them the aid they need. Joining us is father mark sims. One of the pastors receiving the citation joining us from miami, and james brook from the National League of city a non profit helping city leaders to improve their city and advocates for a multifaceted approach to end homelessness in america. Its good to have both of you on the show. Since you are accused of violating the ordinance i know you plan to fight the charges. Your argument is that law criminalizes homelessness. It does. Definitely i feel that it does. Ive been given a criminal citation for handling out food to someone who is hungry. A compassionate act of feeding an individual. Why is there a need for the laws we know that your area is second for homelessness. What do you say to the father . Why do you punish people trying to help the needy . I have to argue in terms of analysis of a trend. You talked about 21 cities enacting ordnance. Theres 21,000 municipalities that is less than 1 of cities that have rules on the books. Thats in the city. Let me give you the position which, yes, there are some cities that have imposed various statues that regulate behaviour, such as aggressive pan handling or sleeping in public places. These are things that cities have done. What id really like to look at is what Ford Lauderdale has done to solve a housing and homeless problem. If you look at the hued statistics released last week Fort Lauderdale is exemplary in that it saw a 30 reduction in homelessness and 40 decrease. Im not arguing that point. Fort lauderdale is one of cities done. One of the best jobs at helping the homeless we are not saying that Fort Lauderdale is a bad guys but theres the question. They are trying to help people who have little. Yes, they are trying to help people who have very little. This is my point. The difference of opinion that i have with father sims is there are arguments over how you help the homeless. They are reasonable arguments. Arguments that city leaders put forward in that you need a comprehensive approach na ties housing to nutrition, health care education, job training. And a whole host of wraparound services. The evidence points to the fact that we know this works. You only need to look at the veterans housing population. So see they are eliminating that process. What james is arguing, is that others argue, that its better for the homeless to be fed indoors, taken into programs with other elements so they can deal with Mental Health and drug rehab. Does he not have a point that it would be better for the homeless to go to those facilities instead of getting their food outside . It would be better if every individual in the country had a home and a place to live. They dont. The simple fact is some people are living on the streets because they cannot get jobs. When you have got high an Unemployment Rate as we do in south florida, youll have People Living on the streets. I believe that one of the reasons that this issue struck a nerve is because through the last recession, many people who never would have experienced homeless innocence experienced a brush with homelessness and they will not sit and watch people be fed. Its inhumane. Not everyone is ready. A natural coalition for the homeless, but homelessness is not a choice. People are getting the food out there. Its not encouraging people to be homeless. These are people with no alternative. I wouldnt argue with the choice. It wouldnt be the case. Lets go to examples. We approach the situation in the same way Fort Lauderdale approach it. They were held by the courts to be in violation of rules, or had to allow the process to go along as it was. My question to father sims is is it the intention to continue to have a programme that feeds the homeless where you meet them as many as the housing advocates offer, because if you do that you never solve the homeless problem, and we know how to solve it. We are doing it in cities across the country. It is not oneoff programs of feeding people in public parks. I disagree. You are not going to completely end homelessness in the country. Its not going to happen. Therell be people who are poor living on the streets for one reason or another. All we are trying to do is compassionately provide them with a meal. An important issue. We have hundreds of thousands of homeless people. Father sims james brooks a pleasure to have you both with us. When atrocities and war crimes happen throughout the world, the human right watch is one of the first on the scene. A team of investigators known as the eteam the urge sis team heads into the danger. Members smuggle themselves across borders into war zones to document violations of human rights and international law. The goal not just to tell the story of what happened but bring down the scales of justice, and give a voice to what otherwise would not be heard. Joining us are the codirectors of netflix documenty e team, following the human right watch team in sierra leone and bolivia. And eteam investigator at Human Rights Watch joins us. Fred one review referred to the documentary of rollercoaster of nonfiction film making. You face danger to do your job. Why are you willing to take these risks. Why is it apparent. Human rights works goes to a country, conducts the investigation, and returns to write a report. We felt like there needed to be urge sis, in crisis and wars. We wanted to be on the scene at the moment in real time so we could protect civilians. We had information that was accurate the scene was fast moving, and we wanted to feed that into policy makers. Thats the goal. How do we change something. How do we protect civilians in times of war. You have become the human rights first responders. In the film one of your investigators in syria is interviewing a mother whose children died. The investigators tells the woman we are not journalists, we are trying to report not just to report things but to make some change. This job gives you the opportunity to scream. Is there not enough screaming about the abuse that is are happening around the world . Well i think our objective is to strategically scream. Its not the goal is just to pound our fist on the table and Say Something terrible is happening. No the goal is to do that and try to move policy and improve the situation. There are things that you can do. There are changes that can improve the situation for civilians in war. We are not going to stop the wars often, but well help humanitarian aid reach those that need it. Thats the key goal here is that when people are abusive in their conduct, militaries armed groups can we hold them accountable. Push for justice. In some cases it works. The number of Award Winning documentaries why did you follow these investigators and do the film . When my directing partner katy and i decided to do the film we wondered what happened behind the walls of Human Rights Watch. Katy and i went to meet the Emergency Team members, fred anya peter, ula. And we knew they were incredible characters. Diverse, different and passionate. We knew we had to make a film about the people. Really they are remarkable people. The film doesnt just show them at war, it shows them at home and gives a glimpse of them at home, and one you see anya and ole, her husband, both investigators, they are out there with their 12yearold son and are talking about the bombings in syria, about children hurt in the streets. And another, peter, is with his young son who asks about Muammar Gaddafi stealing childrens toys in libya. That was where peter was headed. What is it like to be safe at home one day, and next to be in a war torn country investigating heinous crimes . Well it is a bit of a schizophrenic life. That is true. I think, you know there are when im in the field you are focused on the works, a lot like a journalist is. You have to separate yourself detach from the hor ig things you are hearing. Youll horrible things you are hearing. When you come home and you see your family i have children now, it becomes more difficult to transition back into that life. I cant imagine a much bigger contrast between a work life and a home life. Why did you decide to highlight that aspect of this. Theres a lot of highlight in the field. Why show the contrast . Katy and i were clear from the getgo that wanted to go home with these people. We wanted to see what the lives were like and experience the push and pull between the home. We also wanted to be able to relate to the characters. Its one thing to see the people working in the field and doing the work they are doing, but the way they relate to people seeing them in normal every day circumstances. Enjoying the time with them at home, and seeing how they related to the rest of their family. It was important for us. The dangers are tremendous. No more obvious than what happened to james foley, the journalist beheaded by i. S. I. L. Not when he worked for you, he worked for you. He shot the footage in the film. Are you concerned because of what we are seeing with the terrorist groups going after journalists, aid workers, that these horrible stories will not get somed. Its a huge concern. The stories must be told. They are incredibly brave people in the face of these horrible atrocities. Jim was one of those people. He worked very hard to show the horrible things going on in the world. He was passionate and a positive person with a cinematographer, she was dedicated to the work. Its horrible when these things happen. As anya said you see the worst in people in these situations and the best. Thats what keeps not only myself and katey and the Emergency Team going, but everyone that goes into the areas and does these things. Important film. You have improved policy and testified against wore criminals. Its important work and an honour to have you with us. The eteam is available on netflix. Thank you. Well be back with more of consider this. The Obama Administration has been called the most hostel too journalists in a generation by Pulitzer Prize winning journalist. The white house has been criticized for trying to control the media narrative. The governments attempts according to a book goes behind freezing access to reporters, and reaches into the newsroom. The correspondent ending up on the bad side found hers under surveillance. We are joined in new york by Cheryl Atkinson the author of a new book. Stone wall my fight for truth against obstruction, intimidation and harassment in obamas washington. Good to have you on the show. The first chapter is reading like a spy novel. Computers turning on and off in the night, phone tapped. It seems like something out of a hollywood movie, and this happened when you dug into the attack on the benghazi mission. So you think the government was actually looking at what you were doing. I can tell you the Computer Forensics examination proves that the longterm surveillance on my laptop and Apple Computer when i walked on fast and furious, and clean energy problems. It had a source using software propriety to government agencies. Those are two stories that the Obama Administration were not happy that you were focused on. Three different investigations into what was going on into computers found the same thing. Three separate examinations all conclouding that there had been longterm remote intrusions into the computers, with a highly sophisticated attempt to cover up what had been down and ri move material. Fortunately that act of removal leads a trail. Two examiners that went the furthest found government related indications indications of governmentrelated connections to it. As you saw in the book had a key stroke monitor. They had my password to occupy my skype audio and listen to what i was saying. They were in the c. B. S. Corporate system. C. B. S. An investigation was by c. B. S. Folks. A c. B. S. Forensics company confirmed this. Why cant you find out what happened because you think if the government was doing this on purpose, they needed a warrant on it. If it was a legal action by the government its my understanding that theyd have to have a warrant. One of those was the Inspector General for justice. There was no legal order to do anything like this. Up at first didnt think it would be happening. This was before the Edward Snowden revelations. Of course not. It never occurred to me that the government was sur veiling me. I had sources that suggested it. As farfetched, these are people to trust. Once other r. E. M. Ations were made. It made a lot of sense. Cracking down. The fox news. The Associated Press phone calls. We mentioned james rice from the New York Times who faced prison for not revealing a source. And he said the Obama Administration is the most hostile. Do you think that . I think it is. Theres a consensus expressed by letters verbally and in writing by the New York Times, the Washington Post, a. B. C. Today. C. B. S. Everybody, washington correspondents Photographers Association we commented that this has been difficult for transparency and freedom of the press that we worked with. Thats a consensus new. And the flipside was although you were complimentary in the book of c. B. S. You felt in recent times there was a change a lack of desire to offend the government in any way. I describe in detail the complex set of factors at play its not just a simple liberal ideological bias there were conservative corporate biasies, not wanting to hurt interests or advertisers or sponsors. Thats what i gleaned. Theres a general sense that all of the networks and the National Press and local to not go after powers that be. We may be talking about corporations not government. They are uncomfortable or increasingly uncomfortable with taking on important powers. Why. We have seen an abandonment of investigative journalists at the broadcast networks. There are a few theories where do we get our money . By making corporations and businesses happy, or wanting them to advertise with the company, and the advertisers if they get mad, its something being reported, or you allow them to have sway. Also there is some ideological on the part of some people journalists. The desire to please the administration for some reason. I never understood that. Its not a new phenomenon. The idea theyd rather be patted on the back. And have the white house call and say you did a great job. Access journalism. Right. Versus the not wanting the call complaining about the reporting. What do you say to liberal critics that say you have a bias. Thats a propaganda campaign. Anyone that brought us to do Google Search will see a strong record of Holding Accountable republican powers Award Winning reporting that has taken on Bush Administration issues republicans too, but a lot of people instead of doing their own research are kind of succumbing to the propaganda effort. These are a captive audience. The people that do the blogs, instead of doing research regurgitate it without doing fact checking. I understand that. Pleasure to have you, especially here in new york. Thank you for having me. The book is stonewalled, and on sale at bookstores and online. Consider this will be back. Doris payne america celebrates the bravery of troops on tuesday. Many of those soldiers struggled to leave war behind. They missed the excitement and suffer withdrawal when they come home. Sebastian younger covered war for two decades and struggled with an addiction to war. And i spoke to him about the last patrol, he takes a war photographer and two soldiers he filled in afghanistan on a unique journey. The idea was to take a series of trips throughout the course of a year. Walking in every season just heading north. Wed bring my dog daisy for company and protection and a cameraman to record our experiences. While we were moving through america, we would have a 300 mile conversation about war. About what it does to you, about how it changes you, and about why you miss it. Why its so hard to come back from war and reenter society. Sebastian is the oscar nominated director and producer of the last patrol, and choins us from washington. Is air said november 10th on h. B. O. Great to have you on the show. Thank you. You took a war photographer and two soldiers you were embedded with in afghanistan and who were among the subjects of powerful documentaries. You took a trek along the rail lines, you described the documentary as a 400 mile conversation about war, and why its hard to come home. Yes, after my friend tim was filmed in combat in libya, i decided to stop law reporting, and i wanted to do something that i discussed with him, getting to know america by walking through the middle of it. They go through up to s, ghettos, farms. Its a tran sect of american society. And it also because its no mans land on either side of the lines, theres a lot of places to sleep. We didnt have tents. This is all legal. We were sleeping under bridges, in the woods. The line was perfect. You show the video of you and tim. A friend who died. The two of you talking about doing this going along the train lines. How powerful was that for you to see america in that way . I group up in a suburb outside of bostion. I have a particular boston. I have a particular experience of america. What is interesting for me as an american is to walk a few hundred miles, and see the incredible variety of this world, lands, country. I mean we walked through ghettos, farms, racially it was subdivided. Socioeconomically it was divided. We had a sampling of what america is. We walked through healthy towns. And we would ask people about the country. One of the questions i had is what do you think the best thing about america is . When we went through really really poor neighbourhoods ghettos in baltimore, invariably people said the best thing about america is freedom, its a free country, freedom of speech. Wealthier community said a land of opportunity. You mentioned what you were doing was illegal, walking near the tracks. Something i didnt know. I didnt know there were Amtrak Police out there. That you had to hide from them. That helped recreate the hardship and the brotherhood of a mission at war. Without getting fired upon and thats why you called this the last patrol. Yes, its technically not legal to walk along the railway lines. In rural areas, people do it. Particularly on the high speed line between d. C. And new york its frowned upon. We had a game of the police. One thing we look for is a helicopter. We stay clear of them. They dont want people getting killed is the problem. We were careful and we were switched on. We were pretty together guys. I was confident wed be okay. A point you make is in one way or another, you were addicted to battle. That excitement rush hard to find anywhere else. You talk about how George Washington after his first firefight, talked about bullets whistling by and how he found that to be a charming sound. And so this is the problem for many military members. When they return home you said many feel alone and alienated and that is scarier than bullets. Yes. I think a bunch of things were going on. First of all war is an adrena lied experience. That was true in George Washingtons time and the siege of troy. Its what combat is its hard to give up. People get deeply traumatised by violence, theres a healing process that takes time. The reason that a lot of soldiers i knew actively missed the war, and wished they were back in it actually had to do with brotherhood. You are in a platoon, in combat with 3040 men, doing everything collectively. And effectively its reproducing our ancestral past. You come back to this society. Its alienated. It has the highest rates of suicide, depression insomnia ever in human history. I think my personal opinion is because its an Industrial Society. Its a lonely place to live even within a family. Kind are the canary in the cole mind. People lose the bonds and comraderie. Between 2009 and 2011, 22 veterans a day committed suicide. You want to call attention to how veterans need more help with the transition. Well you know Industrial Society in general has an incredibly high suicide rate. And veterans of course bear the brunt of it. But what i heard about the rate is tragically a lot of that figure is composed of vietnam votes. A lot of them are older. Many are younger coming from afghanistan and iraq. Its a powerful story. The last patrol premieres on monday. Great of you to join us good of you to see us again. Well we back with more of consider this. Theyre being taken advantage of in the rental markets. The crisis continues. Fault lines Al Jazeera Americas hardhitting. Today they will be arrested. Ground breaking. Theyre firing canisters of gas at us. Emmy Award Winning investigative series. New episode wall street landlords. Only on Al Jazeera America. Why dont americans feel they can trust politicians . They were ranged next to lost on a ranked next to last on a big group of professions. George orwell said its designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable. Lets bring in chuck, and matt coauthorities of dog whistles, walk backs. You start the back with the orwell quote. Candidates love to say they are Straight Talkers, their words tell a different story. As i mentioned the american electorate is not buying it. Why spend time working on how to say nothing. I think basically because the candidates get into office and feel like they have turf to protect. We have the 24 7 news cycle where they are afraid of making mistakes. Ironically they are scripted a lot of the tiles that when they do make a mistake, its amplified and they pay for it instead of cueing to the Straight Talk. Thats an interesting point. You had a positive review in the wall street journal, and it said even though the book is funny, it is driven by a certain amount of resentment. A quiet resentment. How big of an issue do you see this double speak being. So many people hate political that political nonsense no substance speech so much. Why do they use it so much . In a sense we get the elected officials, and the political rhetoric we deserve. Officials use the speech because they feel it can be effective. They can gloss over the issues that voters ought to Pay Attention to. As much as chuck said in the aid of instan tainous, they are scared about going off transcript and saying something dumb. While people say they love straight shooters it can be a doubleedged sword. Lets listen to an example of new jersey governor when he took on a critic about the Hurricane Sandy response. Turn around get your 15 minutes of fame and maybe take your jackets off, roll up your sleeves and do something for the people of the state. You want to have the conversation later, im happy to have it buddy, but until that time sit down and shut up. Some people liked that. Others called him a bully, Vice President joe biden speaks off the cuff a lot and takes a lot of heat for it and is criticized for being a loose canon. Chuck, if we criticise politicians for speaking frankly, are we not partially to blame for all of it. Theres a line that the politicians have to walk being of the people and above the people. When they cross the line in either direction, they get into trouble. And in christys case people want Straight Talk but they want politeness in politicians as well. They see a lot of politics is becoming descending and becoming ugly. In the case of bidens gaffs, its become an engrained part of his personality, that people are used to it and have come to look for it. It hasnt stopped him from trying to speak the truth and speak straight to people. True. Dave you have broken it down into all sorts of double speak categories, and one of the ones that you have is the polite knife in the back. Right. This is one you hear in the halls of congress in the floor of the senate where youll hear one elected official member of the congress refer to the other as my good friend, or some version. Its wrong. They are not friends and in many cases they dont know each others name. Its a thing where they are trying to look polite but its a way of staking the knife in to an opponent. Another great example of the next category is where you what you call avoiding the, l word liar. Kont never Mitch Mcconnell never calls his opponent froomes a liar Alison Lundergan grimes a liar he does it politely. An outrageous issue that my wife and i profited by a coal activist given four pinocchios by the Washington Post is the ultimate deception. Thats hard to get. The only one i can thing of other than Alison Lundergan grimes is the president. A lot of ways of calling her a liar without calling her a liar. Go ahead, chuck. Its bad form to call someone a liar to their face as opposed to onhin or in print. Politicians use coded phrases like disingenuous or theyll preface something with all due report as a way of saying what they want to say. You talk about other words theyll use, boldness and extremists. Both extremists. Both parties using the term bold making themselves sound daring. They talk about adverbs that people can use over and over. Frankly and federally. As you read through the book and you talk about cliches. It brings everything we listen to to life and it makes you angry or me angry. Youll notice members of both parties use many of the same words repeatedly. You have the term bold. They describe a policy proposal on taxes, health care whatever else it may be. Bold captures it all with a one syllable, 4ward term. After a while it doesnt mean anything and a lot of terms are poll tested. Consultants tell them to use the phrases. It is not by accident that they use the same ones over and over. As you go through what you have in the book it brings to life how many of these words and expressions we have to listen to over and over again. Well continue hearing them i am sure. The book was dog whistles walk backs and hand shakes. Decoding the jargon slang and speech. Pleasure to have you with us. Thanks. Thank you. The conversation continues on our website aljazeera. Com consider this facebook and twitter. Well see you next time. Its been six years since the financial crash that sent the Global Economy into a tailspin. Devastating the us housing market. Predatory lending and a poorly regulated Financial System were at the root of the crisis. But now, housing sales in some parts of the country have picked up. It really started in 2010 2011 in the wake of the housing bust and the foreclosure crisis that ensued. There were markets that were totally devastated. You had an unbelievable number of foreclosed homes. At foreclosure auctions like this one in georgia,