.

>> from our studios in new york, this is "charlie rose."

>> while i will not be on the ballot in november, i will be a champion for conservatives across the nation who were dedicated to preserving liberty and providing opportunity. what divides republicans pales in comparison to what divides us as conservatives from the left and their democratic party. went to begin with political news. house majority leader eric cantor lost the primary public and elections in virginia in the seventh congressional district. it is considered one of the most surprising primary upsets in congressional history. he was defeated by tea party candidate david brett, and economics professor. cantor will resign from his position at the end of next month. he had been viewed as the successor to john boehner. joining me for a look at the ramifications, mark halperin and john heilemann. they are managing editors of bloomberg politics. i am pleased to have them here. let me begin with you. what happened to eric cantor? is it he didn't play attention to his district?

or, is it some profound split within the public and party -- within the republican party? >> yes, and yes. there are a lot of different factors. this is not a case where there is one factor. there is no doubt eric cantor lost touch with his district. he spent a lot of time traveling around the country. spending time in the hamptons. playing the role of a national republican leader and not tending to business at home. there is no doubt about that. he got attacked on populist grounds by the challenger as being a corporatist. it is a very interesting line of attack. and the attack people have focused on is the immigration attack. that is a split in the republican party, immigration. he was attacked on that front. he was attacked as a representative of corporate republican is in -- republicanism. a big-money republican. big business representative. a tool of the chamber of commerce. there was a populist element to this. the national tea party did not

play a role in this race. >> they do not support him in terms of financial backing? >> he spent hardly any money. $200,000, as people pointed out, eric cantor spent $800,000 at a steakhouse. his opponent spent $200,000 entirely. though the tea party was not a big player, the establishment versus insurgent populists split was very much on display in the rhetoric eric cantor's opponent and the winner put out on the table. >> what does this say about what might happen in the upcoming elections? >> it says in a short-term, in the mississippi senate runoff where thad cochran is an establishment incumbent, he may have more trouble now. the tea party will be energized. i think for november, it says very little. the nature of the midterm is such that although democrats are celebrating today because there

is dissension on the other team, it shows republicans are energized. i don't think -- democrats have a chance to come back with a message and change, but all this says there is a special case with eric cantor. show the poll president's numbers are down. obamacare is not popular. the economy is not chugging along fast enough. it is shaping up to be a good republican year in the midterms. they have a problem with immigration, until they find a way to convince hispanic americans and other nonwhite americans they are an inclusive party. they are marching towards extinction. eric cantor is not a moderate. on immigration is not a moderate brady is one of the most conservative members of congress. the fact that he lost to a guy

that outflanked them on the right, because talk radio decided he was not sufficiently conservative. it is time to say we draw lines in the sand now, and we need to take the party back to the center on a range of issues related to the public image to the party. >> what you think john boehner will do? leadershipll be elections. boehner needs to figure out how he can make this come out where things work in a different way. politics is a great find. does this mean there's going to be governance? yes. is that fine with john boehner? i don't think he wants any deals. there is not in his interest. they want to run on health care they don't want to give the president any victories. what does john boehner want to do in 2015 before the presidential kicks in?

nothing. he must play a bigger role at this moment in trying to bring the image of the party back to the center. >> what we know about the candidates who ran in this race? >> we have seen little of him. part of the reason why it is so surprising, not just in the primary, but any election, it was on no one said radar. the polling showed canter with a lead. no one was paying attention. was ill-served by his staff and his pollster and his strategists. >> and by himself. he was in washington d.c. on election day. not back in his district. it tells you how out of touch he was with the jeopardy that he faced. --i've lost your question. him?do we know about

the little we have seen of him is that he is a plainspoken, college professor, not a populist guy who comes across that on tv. not super polished. doesn't look like washington, d.c., but is not a man of the people candidate from the little that we have seen of him. -they have been cramming to figure out who this person is. very few could have picked him out of a lineup before last night. >> as many problems as the republican party has, their biggest problem long-term is to be a part of middle-class opportunity. eric cantor was working on that and had done things to mres hape the image of the party. the guy who beat him, brat,

amongst the things he seems to speak well about his economic populism. into big is too business. he is doing the party a favor by showing that is a winning message. >> if you're a politician in 2014, whitney make a keystone of your campaign opportunity to be part of the middle class? >> you would. the republican party has had problems electing leaders that enunciate that. besides cutting taxes they have come on board with few things. there have been recent efforts with policies strategist. eric cantor, mitch mcconnell, they have not broken through as making people feel they are fighting for the middle class. >> one of the most fundamental problems, take income inequality off the table. talk about stagnant wages over the course of the last 30 years. what is the republican ideal to

fix that problem? >> i don't know. obama's numbers aren't 40%. he is in favor at doing things for the middle class. >> we have had a complicated electorate. resident mom is numbers have rarely been above 45%. -- president obama's numbers have really been about 45%. he still has support, which is better than the republican congressional party has. it is not at 40 right now. >> picking on the question on who may benefit, is there something here beyond a one election and district, does any republican take more from this ? >> in the short term, talk radio people who party, identify with the tea party.

they have a moment here to say we are back to being important. if they want to get elected, have the ability to bet on them as winners. >> who is likely to do that? >> the republican party doesn't have anyone right now. even jeb bush who has been seen as the strongest. radiohard to take on talk and fox news, and the wildfire that burned in virginia last night. is,eally quickly, the party people throw around the word civil war all the time. your publican party is having a civil war. that is what is going on right now. mark is right.

for 2015 in 2016, the civil war is central. example of a good this. the establishment candidate now is jeb bush. yet his poll numbers are terrible. he is not a popular figure in his party. there is never been as great a gap between the establishment who thinks is most electable, might make a good president, but the republican electorate has not rallied around jeb bush at all. >> is it because he's a moderate. >> it goes to this. >> they think he knows who he is. his name is bush. >> that is his establishment. it is not loving an establishment republican. >> lindsey graham won his

primary. >> by attending to these problems. lindsey graham does a lot of ment to try to reestablish himself.tablishmentify >> when you look at the republican party today, what they are going through right now, is it like below ill clinton in 1992? death penalty,he right to work, talk about restrictions on abortion. he had issue positions that were so much more out of step with democratic party, no one could imagine that he could be nominated. >> what did he do? >> he found a way to convince most of the people in the base of the party he was one of them and cared about their values,

but winning elections mattered, and the courage to take people on. the problem with the party today in the republican party, they are afraid to take the party on. bill clinton did it. it is always instructive to look at bill clinton. he knows the way to win. you have to have something like his skills. it is a high wire act to take on your party with the ferocity of the base of the republican party now and their intolerance for dissent is such that you will have to take risk. when jeb bush wants to do it, when chris christie wants to do it, they can do it. >> do they want to do it? then whoever the democratic nominee will win back on nation. they have not exhibited the appetite.

way bill clinton one, taking on the establishment class, [indiscernible] took on a series of the institutional parts of the democratic base in various ways. they had big resonance. the media elevated them. to distance himself. who republicans has done that? heart may wants to do that. chris christie has the ability to do that. they haven't shown appetite for doing that recently that i can recall. the other thing clinton did well, welfare reform. a fundamental challenge to the orthodoxy of your party. there is nobody like that.

pretty good coalition in the center as a candidate. this, the week of attention on hillary clinton and her book, and a good interview by diane sawyer on nbc. where is she? what does this book do? amazing.k, it has been i don't think she is handled things well at all this week. >> issue rusty as a politician? >> very rusty. it was tone deaf. the book was much and the interview was tone deaf. that is probably true. i think those are both accurate. although diane did a nice job, you could have done a better job. she would haveat done if she was asked detailed questions. if you were so broke, why did

you buy a house across the street from the british embassy in westchester county? you could imagine the series of she left it open for other questions. i don't know what she would have done. moment there were a series of follow-ups you could've imagined given that she set herself up that way, she opened the door to it. >> based on what happened this week, does it make you suggest to you she was going to have a harder road to the presidency if she chooses to run. thatere are two things have with the book that she will have a harder road, although she is formidable and there is no one close to being as likely as the next president as she is. >to handle the wealth question the way she did, it did not show a lot of finesse.

the other thing is, i'd understand writing a book of that link without a message. govern,ants to win and that was one of the biggest opportunity she will have between now and the voters to say here is what america is about right now and here is what i fight for. >> and to go to the narrative question, people have been saying for several months, what is her message? she is not a candidate for anything yet. she is a need to have a message. she has fought for things over her career. she will need to have a message. here is a book many pages long. it talks about her time as secretary of state. it was an opportunity to say here is my life adds up to. here is how that history leads to make me the right woman to lead america at this moment, its challenges, what i have learned, how my governing the loss of

applies. philosophy that is the story you need to tell. in 2008 when she became a good candidate, when the race --[indiscernible] when the race was effectively lost, one of her aide said to me it reminded me of ted kennedy in 1980. ted kennedy was a terrible candidate until the race was over. kennedy was shackled. kennedy became a candidate people thought he was going to be. this is what happened with hillary. it was almost as if once the door was closed, and the map was that she could not win, she became free and became an amazingly good candidate in those final months when the math was -- the race with mathematically over. isehow looking at it, that not present in what we see in

this presentation. what we see is back to the excessive caution, the calculation, the timidity. walking on egg shells. for her to win she cannot get the lessons of 2008. >> we all know because we've had the privilege of spending time with her, she is likable. she has a personality in private goreike mitt romney and al have trouble displaying in the context of public persona. she was noting unlikable, but i didn't see moments that would lead people to think new about horse feel this is the person i want back. she is rusty. cautious.what she does it want to make mistake. she does want to send things in the wrong direction. this from ay to say

table in new york city, with the interesting thing about politics is people want straight shooters. they want candor. they want bold leadership. we want to know there is a strong sense that you know who you are and where you want to go, and what to do. >> and you are calculating, and cautious, and holding the finger to the wind. clintons have to have both images. she is never going to be as skilled as her husband. she is going to have to run as herself. she is not, right now, that practice. she is talking about doing campaigning in the midterms. we will see more there about a stump speech, talking about her vision of the country. that is not so far away. isthe other thought i have that the country is waiting for somebody to tie it together. an explanation of where we are.

somebody who looks at all of these things and offers viewers a sense of this is what it is going to take in order to put this country together and maximize its potential. >> i go back to the spring of 2008, what we had discovered about her was that she could be a great candidate when she was freed, that she was not quite her husband. she was less of her husband on economics. bad place to be if she can get the candidate skills were she wants to be. to be to the right of where bill clinton was on foreign policy and more progressive and the left on economics is not a bad place to be in 2016 in america. that is in a likable -- that is place toble be. >> met romney. is there a five percent chance that he may look at --

>> there has to be an establishment character. not only should you look at it, but he will. on paper he is very strong. he would be an open seat. i just get the sense that he does these public interviews, he is concerned about the future of i think mitt romney will run if there is no other candidate. i think gore or kerry will run. romney didn't really want to run. the main thing was that he said i looked at the field and didn't see anyone else who could win. if there is no christie, he may make the same appraisal. i will tell you the secret

people don't know. for a long time the presumption has been that one of the reasons he would not run is that ann was against it. i think that is no longer true. she is now actually in favor of him doing it. >> this is reason to double down again. >> thank you. we'll be right back. ♪

>> tom friedman is here. he is a columnist for the "new york times." you knew that. he is also a correspondent for a new showtime project called "years of living dangerously." it is a documentary series about the human impact of climate change. "the guardian" calls it, "perhaps the most important climate change multimedia communications endeavor in history. here is a look. >> ice melt. rising sea levels. >> we have wildfires all year long. >> what do you think republicans have gotten in this distrusting the sciences? >> methane coming out of pipes all over the country. that is a big deal.

>> when does this become the priority? >> everyone thinks this is about polar bears. it is a big mistake. this is 100% a people story. i have teamed up with jerry weintraub. >> hurricanes are twice as busy. ice is melting where it is not supposed to. >> this is a lake? >> it is all because of global warming. >> jerry and i have put together the ultimate cast. see the stars like you never have before. they are going to be the correspondence. meeting people affected by this. these are the stories of people whose lives have been transformed by climate change. >> we used to have seasons back then. now we don't. >> could we run out of water? >> possibly.

>> they are out of water. >> water took everything away. >> climate disruption is not a social issue. it is a moral issue. >> i don't know what causes it. it doesn't matter. it is happening. >> this is the biggest story of our time. this is the time to tell it. >> nothing could have prepared us. >> i am pleased to have pulitzer prize winning journalist and author tom friedman back at this table. >> good to be here, charlie. >> tell me what this is. it clearly has a lot of production value. a lot a people who are not reporters included. >> they have many hollywood movie stars. matt damon, jessica alba, arnold schwarzenegger. don cheadle. some reporters. one of your colleagues, and myself, chris hayes. we put it together to try to

tell the climate change story from the ground up. through the voices and eyes of real people living around the world. the project is the brainchild of two ex-cbs producers. they really deserve a shout out for doing this. they left their job and raise the money to make it happen. i can tell you it has been one of the most satisfying things i have ever been involved with. it has been fantastic journalism. "the new york times" has allowed me to write with them. i write columns about it. >> why is it exciting for you? >> for me, i did the middle east side of the story. -- i did environmental stresses in the middle east. was so much fun for me as i spent roughly two months on and off in the middle east talking to environmentalists. that is a community i'd not been

exposed to before. and azing dynamic, committed group of people,, completely off the radar screen. we talk to young arabs today in places like egypt. they will say we have tried everything. we have tried nationals and, socialism, liberalism, nothing worked. one thing i was saying, there is one is in you haven't tried. environmentalism. it is the one is in that will save you. they start with the comments. , no sunni. shia and lest they bring the commons that unite them, there is no way forward. >> tell me about the drought in syria. >> we went to northern syria which is ground zero for a four-year drought, the worst

they have experience in modern history. it basically sent a million syrians into the cities. the government did nothing for them. 2006-2010.om in lead up to the war, the revolution. it did not cause the revolution. it was one of the stresses that when the revolution came, with the first call for revolution, these farmers said we are joining this thing. what the drought did was turn conservative people, not your revolutionary types, into vicious opponents of the regime. >> take a look at this. >> when they write the history of this revolution, how

important will the drought be? -- >> some say this was the most ambitious segment of the series. it is not easy to do. syria.ing into northern >> telling the story. >> it was fascinating, it was exciting. a shout out to the production team that made it happen.

getting the right fixer, the toht retired security guide lead us. and the brave syrians to talk to us. the islamic al qaeda version were down the road. the guys came to us saying they are staring down there, it would be a good time to get back. it was very exciting. , there column he wrote was a wiki leaks? quite interesting. i forget which year it was. 2008. the u.s. indices saw this coming. they sell this all coming. they were talking to syrian officials and were saying if we don't get more aid to the farmers this place is going to blow. our in this he reported that. they were on the case. >> when ford was ambassador? >> someone else.

but, they saw it coming. they were talking to syrian officials. it did blow. respect towith particular storms, everyone is looking when they see these storms having an impact, or a drought, or fires, is this because of climate change and global warming? experts are quick to point out we can't say there is any one particular incident that is responsible -- that is a consequence. we can say with the overall impact is. explain that. beene climate has always changing. the climate changes on its own. people do understand, that is a minute we can't add to the changing patterns. that we can't be forcing it. that we aren't loading the dice for certain outcomes. when you add more carbon and you put a tighter blanket around the

earth and create these trends, what you basically get is you make the hot hotter, the wet weather, the snow heavier, the most disruptive storms worse. that is what climate scientists believe. any particular storm you can't say. , ito know he warmer waters allowed sandy to get more energy going north. hurricanes hit delaware and the jersey shore. >> but when it does. >> in the point is, you only know for sure when it is too late. in your is a great line piece where the guy says, the last generation -- >> we're the first in a ration to feel the effects of climate change in the last generation that can do something about it. that is the governor of washington state. >> a powerful statement. >> i think so. my approach, i am not a climate

scientist. i just go with what the experts tell me. the argument i tried to make from the beginning, it gets to the epa rules to president announced on power plants and cleaning them up, let's think about what is happening in the world. we think climate change is happening here in the world is getting hotter. some people don't believe it. you don't believe it, that is between you and your beach house. here is what you better believe. the world is getting flatter. more and more people can see how we live. driving american size cars, eating american sized big macs. , andmiddle-class people just more people. there is going to be 2 billion more people between now and 2020. what happens when flatmates crowded? when there are more and more people?

when flat meets crowded, and more in the middle class, there is only one thing. if we don't have more clean air and clean power, and energy efficiency, we are going to burn up the planet faster than al gore predicts. it tells me the next great global industry has to be clean air, clean water. the only question we have, do we want to lead the energy or not? it is going to be the next great global industry. >> with all of the problems, is china prepared to leave? >> they would love to. that is why with the president did here last week with these new epa rules on power plants, i think may turn out to be the most significant act of his presidency. >> what were the rules? >> on the existing power plants, requiring really significant

reductions in emissions. do, yout is going to can do it anyway you want, become more energy-efficient, become, use more renewable power. what it basically says is invent a way. it basically said you now have a huge incentive to invent a way on efficiency, clean power, renewable energy, nuclear, whatever you want. it is going to stimulate a huge amount of innovation with companies moving rapidly down the cost curve. they are going to have a big market for this. then our companies are going to be in a position to take these technologies around the world. it is hugely important. >> everybody talks about a carbon tax. >> the president also basically said the easiest way to do this would be to put a price on carbon. a tax cap.

i certainly would favor that. i would favor a one penny carbon tax. one penny at a time. if we just did that the signal a ton energy -- industry, of carbon emissions, some executives who you have had around the table, they would get on the phone and say this is coming. get me and energy efficiency person. they would do so much more than they are required. just because the signal is there. anything we do to stimulate innovation around this, what is going to happen is in the short run there will be a price rise. it is going to drive efficiency so much. the unit cost of your electricity may go up. your bill will actually go down. you will be so much more efficient. >> we talked about this for a long time.

we watched silicon valley early on tried to say this is coming, we're going to create companies that speak to it. it seems that it still needs some spark. what is that? what is the straw that breaks the camels back in a positive way? >> with the president just did. the timing, this is coming at a moment when clean energy is getting it efficient and cost-effective. google bought nast. energy of didn't homes. apple announced they are going to be doing the same thing. industry doing this on their own for their own profit reasons then you get the government standard which is going to get utilities incentive to buy these things. these things are going to meet at the same time. it is enormously important. i have always believed, changed america, change the world. global believe these climate conferences. is america.ve in

when we change the world, the world changes. want to do it, no problem. i'm going to eat your lunch in the clean power energy. that is my message to china. take your time. i'm going to eat your lunch. on cars, home heating, energy efficiency. >> let me turn to the president, who you spoke to. he went to west point to make a speech about his foreign-policy. what was your assessment of that? your newspaper editorial had problems with it. , i saw a morbid in my newspaper, -- i thought morbid in my newspaper. i like to watch what people do and not what they say. in fairness, -- when people craft a

speech and they signal that it when they craft a speech, if you listen to the words, especially this president, he means it. it is his struggle to define. someone once said i don't know what i think until i see what i write. writing is a process. with the more sympathy president on this for a simple reason. i have been saying this since before he was the president. this is a terrible time to do foreign-policy. why?> for so many years are foreign-policy was about meeting other people's strengths. another super power. so much of foreign-policy today is about dealing with other people's weakness. that is much harder. a collapse in states where the only solution is nationbuilding,

in communities and states with building blocks of democracy just aren't there. there is something inherently unsatisfying about this moment. you can't succeed without rebuilding these societies. it is such a huge project. it comes after we tried and largely failed in two of them. >> iraq and afghanistan. of peoplere a lot throwing spitballs at the president on this out of a discomfort with the challenge. it is not satisfying. i would like to do big things in the world. >> it is hard to be an integrator when everything around you is disintegrating. >> exactly. i don't know what the answer is. >> he sent signals that he is weak, from putin to the middle east, they want to take advantage of it or worried by it.

so much so that he had to reassure the middle east. >> who said we are weak in the middle east? the saudis. with upset the saudis. -- we upset the saudis. they want us to bomb iran for them. i don't want to bomb iran for them. president did was get a lot of leverage in terms of sanctions on iran, and got them to the table. it is not as satisfying as a bombing run, until after you do the bombing run and discover you miss the target. people have such short memories. down, he took it off the -- he took qadhafi down. with over libya is today. look at where libby is today.

which of the two arab spring's that are doing the best? sia and kurdistan tan. the countries we have nothing to do with in their current form. when people wanted -- they have a balance. when people take ownership and they find what is to be the key of these springs, no victor, no vanquished, inclusive politics, where that exists the countries are going to go forward. that is what happened. after a lot of struggling and say no i'm going to have it all, islam is, secularists, they finally said let's share. you get a little, i get a little. that is what is missing in every one of the others. look at egypt. the army threw them out. then we get it on now. that is going to fail, charlie. sunnis forof the

saddam. he said, great. now i have it all. determined to be pigheaded like that, there is nothing we can do. it is very unsatisfying. >> nothing we can do. >> we can sit on it for 30 years. >> are you saying we should retreat? we tried.e to say if you're going to change, you have to change. >> writes. i think it is obviously a balance. it depends we. not every country is the same. we were not going to go to war for crimea. george w. bush wasn't going to go to war for georgia. what did obama do? gotrganized sanctions that the deputy prime minister of russia to tell the economic forum these are causing is a problem.

did putin decide not to invade ukraine just because he said i guess not? i didn't mean it. left his country because of the sanctions in three months. down wall street can bet they are down there with hedge funds calling around saying, would you let to join us? returnings no one their calls, customers are saying when we can every game em andt out -- wrede get out? the imf predicts they will go into recession. >> what is interesting about syria, netanyahu said that was a great deal. wasimmediate reaction israel and saudi arabia think

this is the worst thing ever that could happen. >> because we didn't bomb them. his poison most of gas out making them less dangerous. stuff.till doing bad i am not against arming rebels if you have people who need, who share our values. notout a victory there is going to be a military solution. sunnis are not going to defeat the shiite à la whites . doctrine?e an obama >> he defines it as don't do anything stupid. he spent a lot of time unraveling it. i don't think there is a particular obama doctrine. i think --

>> there is multilateralism to it. >> where interest are directly threatened, we respond. indirectly, we will do a multilaterally. >> i thought was interesting in the speech was how he categorized what he felt the biggest threats were. especially terrorism. critical, would be where you can be critical, on places like iraq or afghanistan, it is arguable that rather than saying i just want to get out and get out, taking a more proactive you and saying 80 we can build something here, if we stay longer, there is an argument you could make that we stayed in iraq longer. that was on his watch. the iraqi parliament when go for it.

it is messy. we are atworld where a distance education -- we're at a disintegration. the american people, you know, they are tired. we have ground these guys to a nub. we have been in afghanistan for 13 years. in iraq you have to remember, we don't know what we are doing half the time. when you get the iowa national guard and put them in those old -- in mosul, the chances of them getting it right the first time are low. there is this assumption that we only use force, everything else will flow. oes everyone forget what happened? these people have agency. why is the ukraine in problems? at an industrial

level. their country for 20 years, there was a wholesale looting. raise your hand if you want your tax dollars to go for that bailout? they have thrown out these people. the people who have come in our well-intentioned. it is not -- it is not the cold war. >> vietnam. what did you learn that? midsize country living russian bear then next to a chinese tiger. the parallels are fascinating. what you learn there is we ,ought a war with these people 40 years ago roughly, and 40 --thereter our values are extraordinary number of vietnamese on facebook today. there is extraordinary number of

students study in america and applying to study in america. not be happier. there is a message in that bottle. what do we do? we stomped in there, made them allies of a country that had occupied them for 1000 years called china. we didn't understand the internal dynamics. a country they hated. always,t question was what do you think about what is china is doing to us? the american embassy in curtis tan, you see how hungry people are for our values. how hungry they are for america as a model more than a military. to lead.rld want us let me close with this. you been talking about this in your column. this idea of where your kid is going to get a job. a big question you think, and a

paramount question for america today. >> i'm doing a conference on this next week. i think it is the biggest question. when i go around the country, if there is a single foreign-policy question i get, how might going to get a job? regardless of what country. what is striking, we are in the middle of a really big disruption here. use uber. you ask them, do you like this thing? they love it. i drive on my own. when i do want to drive on my own, i go online and make myself for uber, and i get their clientele. service,demand taxi basically.

i was talking to sebastian thurn. he is very smart about this. his argument is, we are not just going to have on-demand taxis. we are going to a world of on-demand labor. in a world where there is on-demand taxi and labor you are going to need on-demand education. you're going to need to be constantly upgrading your skills, all the time. the notion of a job you and i of myp with, the chance girls working at the same organization for 33 years is zero. you will not have a job. you will be income on-demand. you will do a little of this, a little of that. that is the direction things are going. an challenge is to get education system that parallels that. the education system we have now

is for the industrial age. you go and learn everything once. you are set for life. that is not possible anymore. you need to be constantly learning. jobs will be consciously changing. >> thank you. a pleasure to have you here. -- tom isiedman friedman. "years of living dangerously." thank you for joining us. ♪

♪ >> this is "taking stock" for thursday, june 12, 2014. i'm pimm fox. today's theme is slice. a jersey deli has been slicing and dicing and has expanded to over seven locations across the united states. plus, we will give you a slice of the good life in this week's segment. talon air offers flights anywhere. and a gadget to get rid of that annoying slice in your golf