That was Edith Roosevelt, speaking in new york city 20 years after she left the white house. She was the matriarch to a rambunctious family and her husband, Theodore Roosevelt, was as outgoing as she was private. She was the groundbreaking manager of the white house, overseeing a major renovation that added a west wing, separating the family quarters from the president s office is for the first time. Good evening and welcome to cspans series, first ladies. Edith roosevelt will usher in season two of the series and the 20th century. We have two historians who know the roosevelts well. Meet Kathleen Dalton. She is the author of Theodore Roosevelt a strenuous life. And Stacey Cordery is the author of a biography of alice roosevelt. Welcome, the both of you. The 1900 election. It does not last very long because an assassin has other things in mind for president mckinley. Tell the story that brings the roosevelts in that very momentous time into the white house. It is traumatic because Theo
Is that entire issue being determined in those proceedings . Not determined because the proceedings have been stayed. But three states have challenged that issue is what is at issue there . Will you finish describing the issue . I really didnt hear it. K 466 says a correction must be made in the same manner, end quote, as decision being corrected. Epas approval went through notice and comment and because of that k6 requires they go through notice and comment and corrections here did not go through notice and comment. Heres no disagreement between commissioners and respondants on that point. The United States tries to get out of that by saying they can use the good cause exception in rule making that sounded the administrator procedure act. That doesnt help epa at all because the requirement comes not from the administrative procedure act. The requirement from notice to use comments is from k6. It doesnt help epa rely on an exception to a statute when the statute does not impose the req
Give us your analysis of that. Theres no question that he is not only mysteries but a president and an autocrat at the same time. Clearly, this is a very, very difficult situation. How do you remove a president who has functionally no term of office and the power of the state behind him, the power of the military behind him . That is a conundrum that we have not yet managed to figure a way out of. I would like to see a system where the International Community could in fact joined together to bring about a change in the regime such as assad. We are not there yet. We dont have a United Nations or any multinational contract in any fashion that has been able to successfully do that. That is really a major hole in the International System today. Is he being propped up by some of the most imperial president s currently in office, namely mr. Putin and the iranians . Certainly the iranians have helped out. We have a new regime in iran that is trying some kind of agreement with the west, or dem
Modernizing conservatism. Here is a brief look. In 2001, before september 11, one of the big issues that the new president faced was whether and how the federal government should fund Embryonic Stem Cell Research that involves the destruction of human embryos. To all of us, this means of the taking of a human life. Whether it was moral to spend money on that public research. The president made a decision that said you could spend money on cells that already existed but not new ones, you would not be using federal dollars to encourage the further destruction of human embryos. He said these kinds of issues are going to stay with us, they are not going away and we need help in thinking about them. He called together the bioethics commission, a group of 18 scholars, almost all of them academics. They would come together several times a year and consider a bioethical question with how it Public Policy applications and provide advice to the administration and the country in the form of repor
With the full dna. You are saying that california can take that dna, hold it in only look atand the john dna, but they have it in their custody, and there is a marylandecause versus king. By law, california can only look at discrete portions of identification dna. That is it, nothing else. Whats wrong with the proposal by ms. Haskell recognizing what king does restrict, to simply say go to the Supreme Court decision, it talks about a valid arrest supported by probable cause. Says we cancouncil draw the line with a judicial determination of probable cause and therefore am a free reign under the california statute. What is wrong with that line in terms of did interpreting how king applies to this case . Nothat interpretation would be consistent with king, which recognizes that the identification information am a whether it is fingerprints, photographs, or dna, informs the charging decision. Scalia role does justice how would this respond to . Udge mcewens for whatever reason, they got it