until then, thanks very much for joining us, i'm wolf blitzer, in the "situation room," up next, "lou dobbs tonight." lou. good evening, everybody, judge sotomayor deflecting senators' questions for a third day of confirmation hearing. republicans saying she's faying to provide clear answers, democrats saying she's doing great. we'll exam her performance in the face-off tonight and president obama making a new effort to sell controversial health care plan to rising number of skeptics. some say the plan leads to crippling tacks inned midst of recession and rising and continuing expansion of the government under obama administration. three of the country's best economic thinkers join us to assess the economic impact. we begin with republican senators who bombarded judge sotomayor with tough new questions today. many express frustration and disappointment in her unwillingness to give specific answers on issues such as

aborgs. ranking republican on the senate judiciary committee. senator sessions said judge sotomayor's testimony has been muttled. confusing and backtracking. saying she can't give direct answers without knowing a specifics about a particular case. candy crowley reports now specifically from washington. >> this round of questioning -- >> reporter: the senate judiciary committee finally got around to the questions of its most junior member. clearly he's a quick study. >> judicial activism is becoming a code word for judges that you don't agree with. judge, what is your definition of judicial activism. >> it's not a term i use. >> reporter: fine questions but senator al franken was no better than seasoned nars getting direct answers on simmering issues, whether abortion law can be limited in certain circumstances. >> i can't answer your hypothetical. because i can't look at it as an

abstract without knowing what state laws exist on this issue or not. and even if i knew that, i probably couldn't apply them, because i'm sure that situation might well arise before the court. >> reporter: on gay marriage -- >> the aba rules would not permit me to comment on the merits of the case that's pending or impending before the supreme court. >> reporter: even on whether the legal system would be better served at the supreme court took on more cases. >> well, perhaps i need to explain to you that i don't like making statements about what i think the court can do until i've experienced the process. >> the nonanswers were frustrating to them and repetitive questions seemed frustrating to her. >> what he did say. >> i heard what he said, sir, but i don't know what he intended in that description. >> reporter: they knew she wouldn't answer. she knew they'd ask. just about everything figures

she'll be confirmed and sure sounds like she'll get republican ayes. >> elections do matter. that's the point. that the president has earned the right to pick somebody different than i would have picked, and the balance of power, the court's not going to change dramatically if she gets on the court. >> reporter: sotomayor was also asked about her famous wise latina remark. she responded pretty much as she did yesterday. saying it was bad, and certainly people took it not in the way she intended. lou. >> so this was a matter of a foregone conclusion, carried out over what will be four days. is that correct? >> now you're going to -- next you'll ask me if i wasted my time. >> i want want to press u for specifics. but i do appreciate the report. >> yes, thanks. >> thanks, candy crawly. second amendment right to bear

arms is a big issue, but she side steppeded questions whether that right applies to state and/or federal government. as a result the national rifle association said they oppose confirmation as supreme court justice. >> reporter: after 22 years the right to keep and bear arms may be an acquired right not fundamental right even though it's explicitly stated in the second amendment. it's a school of thought bothered one senator in particular. >> what does the law say today about the statement. where do we stand about my statement that i have -- i claim to have a fundamental, guaranteed, spelled out right, under the constitution that is individual, and applies to me, the right to own and bear arms. am i right or am i wrong?

>> the precedent says, as the second circuit interpreted the supreme court precedent, that it's not incorporated. >> reporter: sotomayor was one of three judges on the second court panel. in layman's terms she's saying that the supreme court never ruled that the second amendment is a fundamental right. meaning the constitutional guarantee does not apply to the states. >> a small distinction with profound implications. >> what if we had a right to free speech but it only bound the federal government and the state could silence you. what if you had a right to assemble but that would only mean assembling in federal areas, not state areas. what if you had a right to choose but states could still ban abortion. that's the difference between an individual right and fundamental right. >> sotomayor did not state her position as to whether or not the second amendment is a fundamental right. noting the supreme court will likely take up just that question in the coming months. many gun owners believe their rights were assured with the

decision last year, in u.s.s have heller. where the supreme court ruled that the residents of washington, d.c. do have a right to gun ownership. but legal scholars say they're wrong. because washington, d.c. is not a state, it's a federal district. now, the second amendment is not the only unincorporated amendment. neither are the third which deals with troops and homes. parts of the fifth made lead to the right of a grand jury and seventh, promising a jury trial to any case over $20, lou. >> why would those not be fundamental right thes. we all think of them as fundamental. why would second, and parts of the fifth not be fundamental? >> because they're all proceed ufrl and states have covered those for the most part. >> in other words that's the way it is. >> right. >> we'll see what the supreme court decides in the upcoming months. thank you very much. >> humorous moment

on the issue of gun rights and it came when republican senator tom coburn when the second amendment does give persons a right to self-defense. here's somehow judge sotomayor responded. . if the threat was in this room. i'm going to come get you. you go home -- i'm not going to suggest i am, by the way. please -- i don't want anybody to misunderstand what i'm trying to say. if i go home, get a gun, come back and shoot you, that may not be legal under new york law, because you would have alternative ways -- >> you have lots of explaining to do. >> i'd be in a lot of trouble then. but i couldn't do that under a definition of self-defense. >> okay. >> senator coburn's comment about explaining is about the

situation "i love lucy." which said lucy, you got splainin'to do. >> also. rising outrage about the explosive growth of federal government. out of control spending and higher taxes on the way. president obama giving a pep talk on health care legislation. >> we need to buck up, people, a little bit. american people are on board. it's now up to us. >> we'll tell you why the president's assertion may not be entirely correct. this is humiliating. stand still so we can get an accurate reading. okay...um...eighteen pounds and a smidge. a smidge? y'know, there's really no need to weigh packages

under 70 pounds. with priority mail flat rate boxes from the postal service, if it fits, it ships anywhere in the country for a low flat rate. cool. you know this scale is off by a good 7, 8 pounds. maybe five. priority mail flat rate boxes only from the postal service. a simpler way to ship. as we get older, our bodies become... less able to absorb calcium. he recommended citracal. it's a different kind of calcium. calcium citrate. with vitamin d... for unsurpassed absorption, to nourish your bones. .

good news to report tonight on the economy. the stock market is soaring today. all three major stock indexes up at least 3% on the day. dow jones industrial gaining almost 260 points. s&p 500 rose 27 points. almost. and the nasdaq composite index rose 63. credit for the rally going to the federal reserve forecast at the end of this recession, may be in fact on the horizon, as well as better than expected profits for intell. on capitol hill, today, the senate health committee, voted along party lines, to approve a $600 billion health care bill. the top republican on that committee called the legislation a prescription for disaster.

at the white house, the president was celebrating and he continued his campaign for health care legislation. dan lothian has our report. >> it's health care overhaul were a baseball game, president obama would now have two runners on base. but it's a long way to the ninth inning. >> it's time for us to buck up. congress, this administration, the entire federal government, to be clear, that we've got to get this done. >> house democrats have unveiled a plan that with tax wealthy families, making more than $350,000 a year. a popular target that garners little sympathy, but some say the rich could cry foul. >> they're going to work over the following years to undermine public support for this program. it doesn't crave a firm found gags for long-term success and health care. >> in the senate, a key committee voting along party lines passed a $600 billion

measure but senators haven't worked out how to pay for it. at a rose garden event prescribed as a senior aid to get health care reform done the president chided so called naysayers that praised congress. >> this progress should make us hopeful but can't make us complacent. should instead provide urgency for both the house and senate to finish critical work on health reform before the august recess. >> that means convincing skeptical democrats and republicans like those from these eight states where the democratic national committee is ruling out a 30-second add of testimonials. >> it's time for health care reform. >> earlier this week the president applied pressure himself meeting privately at the white house with democratic leadership. those lawmakers say he was firm stressing a theme that was not an option. >> the president met quietly at the white house with four republican senators, a chance to discuss health care reform.

white house spokensman robert gibbs characterized a meeting for the president to lobby the senators and listen their ideas and concerns. lou. >> all right, dan. thank you very much. dan lothian from the white house. president obama today is saying this about his health care plan. the american people are on board. but a recent cnn research poll finds that a bare majority, 51%, are actually supporting it. and that is less support than president clinton's plan back in 1993. only one in five americans say their families would be better off with the obama plan and actually the president's own doctor in chicago, opposes the plan and recent gallup poll on the issue say majority of americans trust their physicians over politicians. president obama's health care plan is already drawing fire from critics who dispute the claim it will save tax payer money. and they say it's another example towards troubling shift

for government involvement in the economy. casey wian with our report. >> president obama promises health care reform plan will save consumers money but a recent study on the government's track record on health care costs raises serious questions about that claim. >> one word is unprecedented. one question, i think they could accurately reflect what we're asking is who is going to pay for all of this. >> the specific research institute. a free market advocacy group said per patient spending on the government's existing medicare and medicaid programs since 1970 have grown 35% faster than spending for private health insurance. although other experts have pointed out that medicare and medicaid lowered overhead costs and private insurance. the division reflected in the senate. >> here we are with the highest deficit of the history in this country in peacetime. with a bill, that is going to

top over a trillion dollars with no way of paying for it. the bill has an employer mandate that will tax small businesses who can't afford to pay more and will lead to job losses. >> people ask why do we need health care reform. and why should we make sure we get this done. and we have focused -- there's been a lot of talk of the unsured who definitely need coverage, but what hasn't been talked about is if we leave things alone. how even people who are covered, are going to pay and pay and pay. >> opponents view the health care plan as one example of the expanding role of government in u.s. economy. others include government majority ownership and companies such as general motors and aig, government job creation through economic stimulus spending and the fact that federal, state and local government jobs grew faster than private sector jobs before the recession and have

declined more slowly since. >> state and local governments through all their crying and mr. obama's expectations weren't laying people off. >> even in california which faces a $26 billion budget deficit. the state lost 5,600 government jobs since december. >> during the same period, california has lost about 560,000 private sector jobs. in other words for every government job lost here, 100 private sector employees found themselves looking for work, lou. >> nationwide, about 7 million jobs have been lost and nearly all of them in the private sector. thank you very much, appreciate it. casey wian. i have a few thoughts about all of this. and i hope you'll join me on the radio. monday through friday for the lou dobbs show. 2:00 to 4:00 p.m. at wor. go to loudobbs.com to get local

listings and follow me on twitter.com, lou dobbs news. please join me and space shuttle "endeavour" is in orbit after a smooth launch a little while ago from cape canaveral. lifting off after 6:00 p.m. eastern, carrying a crew of seven astronauts. >> four, three, two, one. booster ignition, and lift-off of "endeavour." completing kibo and fulfilling japan's hope for out-of-space laboratory. >> the launch delayed five times for technical problems and weather. this mission includes delivering a final piece of japan's space laboratory to the international space station. thunderstorms delayed that mission three times. hydrogen links causing two delays before today's outstanding successful launch. judge sotomayor's supreme court

confirmation hearings just about over. tonight the divide over her nomination, as wide as ever. >> i think her answers gave me great comfort today that she will follow the intent of congress. >> i don't think the nominee's answers are any clearer today than they have been. >> and we'll see how the nominee handled questions today on abortion and discrimination. also new information tonight in the murder of that florida couple who were the parents of 17 children. it is a humdinger.

well gunfire erupted today on capitol hill. there was a shooting near the capitol building. police shot a man and they killed him as he drew a weapon. police, however, say the incident began during a routine traffic stop. the suspect then tried to drive away and escape. striking and injuring one police officer. the suspect refused to drop a gun that he had drawn. police officers opened fire. they shot and killed him. in pensacola, florida, police still searching for another person in connection with the murder of those parents of 17 children. seven people have been arrested.

and they will be charged, we're told, with murder. today, federal drug agents joined that case. investigators say they believe the suspect spent 30 days training for this crime. ed lavandera has our report from pensacola. ed. >> reporter: well, lou, investigators appear to be winding down this investigation. they say they have the seven suspects they believe were on the property the night the billings' couple was murdered. this investigation continues to grow and move in various different directions. we've been hearing about federal law enforcement involvement with dea coming out today and confirming that we are involved. that seems to suggest a new aspect of this investigation at this point. also authorities say they were looking for two people of interest. one of them, they identified this afternoon, a woman, they believe had been in contact with the alleged ring leader of this group. she was found in orange beach.

alabama, about 40 miles west of where we are here in pensacola. we under that authorities have been speaking with her. now we've been told that authorities are planning yet another press conference for later on this evening. whether or not it has to do with this woman, we don't know at this point. they also opened up a new wrinkle and twist and peek into one of the theories. they believe there might have been an eighth person involved, whose job would have been to turn off the elaborate security system that eventually helped authorities unravel this crime. they believe there was one person responsible for turning off those video cameras in the surveillance system but did not do so. why that person chose to do that is something investigators are still trying to nail down. lou. >> the sheriff said this would be a humdinger of a case, obviously extensive detective work going into this case. do we have yet an understanding, a clear understanding, have we been told the motives for these

two murders? >> well, there is a lot of speculation floating around as to exactly what is going on, to say the least. but one is things that investigators still say they believe that at the heart of this, this was a robbery, and -- but they also suggested there might have been other motives involved. so we still haven't been able to kind of put it -- that final nail into that part of the story, but authorities say they believe the main gist of what happened here is a home invasion/robery. >> yet the drug enforcement administration is joining the investigati investigation? >> exactly. you know p-we've heard from one federal law enforcement source, some of our colleagues had spoken with and said this isn't a movia-related or drug-involved killing that this had something to do with money. that's something that dea inv t investigators will continue to

follow up on. it's another twist in this story that continues to add to the intrigue as to what is going on with this family and this murder investigation. >> all right. ed, we thank you for keeping us up to date as these developments break. it's been a remarkable investigation at this point as it unfolds. we'll learn obviously a great deal more. ed lavandera, thank you very much. tonight we have astonishing new video you likely have never seen of michael jackson. this video taken on the night he was severely burned filming a pepsi commercial in 1984. never before was seen today. take a look at this videotape. it was posted on "us weekly close" website. it starts with michael jackson with his back to the camera. the pyre row tech nicks go off on stage but the timing is all wrong. they explode near jackson. his hair on fire. you see the flames rising from michael jackson. he was apparently so focused, he

didn't realize his hair was on fire until stage hands rushed toward him to help him to use fire extinguishers to smother those flames. it was literally chaos as jackson was surrounded those who apparently took him to get help. the accident is purportedly lead to his adekz to painkillers. and the newsest giving judge sotomayor a quiz on the constitution. >> are the words "birth control" in the constitution? are the words "privacy" in the constitution? we'll hell you how the judge did. next and in our face-off debate. should judge sotomayor be confirmed? we'll be right back. (announcer) introducing new tums dual action. this tums goes to work in seconds and lasts for hours. all day or night.

new tums dual action. bring it on. a day on the days that you have arthritis pain, you could end up taking 4 times the number... of pills compared to aleve. choose aleve and you could start taking fewer pills. just 2 aleve have the strength... to relieve arthritis pain all day.

judge sonia sotomayor facing questioning on this third day of her confirmation. one of the top issues today, abortion, but the supreme court nominee, of course, didn't answer the questions, frustrating republicans who should be used to that. dana bash has our report from capitol hill. >> reporter: sonia sotomayor returned to face a slew of questions on one of the devicive issues, abortion. tom coburn, an obstetrician gave several examples for his search for answers. >> let's say i'm 38 weeks president and we discover a small spina bifida sac on the

lower sacrum. would it be legal to terminate that child's life? >> i can't answer that question in abstract. i would have to look at the state's law is on that question. >> reporter: she attempted to deflect a number attempts to elicit her position an abortion. and it wasn't the diplomats that tried much the democrats asked the most specific questions. >> do you think the right to privacy includes a right to have an abortion. >> the court has said in many cases, and as i think has been repeated in the court's jurisprudence, that there is a right to privacy that women have with respect to the determination of their pregnancies in certain situations. >> reporter: again, republicans asked over and over about her wise latina comment pushing her on what they caulcricks. her promises now to strictly follow the law but half a dozen

speeches suggesting her gender and race could lead to better decisions. >> my rhetorical device failed. it was a bad choice of words by me. because it left an impression that has offended people and has left an impression that i didn't intend. >> as another long day grinded on. she sparred with a frustrated veteran. she also showed her lighter side. especially when al franken quizzed her about the 1960s tv show perry mason. >> i know i should remember the name of it. i haven't looked at the episode. >> didn't the white house prepare you for that? >> you're right, but i was spending a lot of time on reviewing cases. >> reporter: reviewing casing from same-sex marriage. senators tried but almost

entirely failed to get some hint of judge sotomayor how she would rule on decisions on issues certainly likely to come up on the stroke, lou. if she were to become a justice there and on that note, even after this grilling she got today, and she got yesterday. even after we expect will be another tomorrow. both parties say they will not see anything that will alter her path to almost certain confirmation. >> to be clear, we've only seen, matter of fact, one nominee. actually a confirmation over the past quarter century. we shouldn't be surprised. i notice a number of republicans are suggesting they are very frustrated at her refusal to answer questions. wouldn't they be more shocked if she did answer them given the past quarter century? >> i definitely think they would. i had a conversation with senator grassley who asked her about same-sex marriage.

i said did you really expect her to answer? he sort of smiled and said no, i didn't expect her to answer. i think that's true for all of these senators. >> reporter: on capitol hill. dana, thank you very much. dana bash. judge sotomayor facing questions about her views on racial discrimination, affirmative action and specifically the new haven firefighter with the report. >> the case judge sotomayor ruled against. >> don't you think these firefighters deserve a more detailed explanation for why you ultimately deny their claim? >> the supreme court, in its decision, set the -- a new standard by which an employer, and lower court should review

what the employer is doing by the substantial evidence test. that test was not discussed with the panel. >> reporter: the firefighters claimed discrimination after the city threw out test results because no black candidates would have been promoted. according to the equal opportunity commission, race discrimination cases filed by white workers are on the increa increase, raising to 3,559 last year. that's 10% of all race claims. overwhelming majority filed by african-americans and in a state court in detroit, michigan four white medics with 60 years of collective experience recently claimed they, too, are denied promotions because they are not african-american. >> make the level playing field for everybody. if i come up for everybody, he's a better candidate for me, i'm all for him having that position. if the best candidate gets that position, all of the games are taken away. that's what is important. >> reporter: the paramedics say they took promotional exams and

believe they scored higher than their colleagues. for years they've requested their test scores. the city resisted those efforts. detroit does not release exam scores for ems workers though it does for other positions. lou dobbs reached out for the city of detroit and its fire department numerous times. they told cnn they do not comment on pending litigation. >> reporter: and across the board of all of the race case discrimination claims filed to the eeoc. 66% no merit. last year that amounted to $80 million in lowages. and compensatory damages, lou. >> the idea we're talking about racial preferences that, frankly, are straightforward the policy of courts over time as well as congress. is there a sense that's about to end? >> there's a sense that these kind of cases are going to

continue. >> this kind being the reverse discrimination or discrimination? >> both, actually. but what this tells me, tells me that municipals will not be challenged on the test they administer. >> i'm sorry it means what? >> municipal won't bel challenged on the test they administer. what the supreme court was saying there was not sufficient evidence that the municipal would have been sued. >> all right. ines. thank you very much. ines ferre. >> the new questions are raised about the president's eligibility to be president. latest from u.s. army major who refused orders to afghanistan. cook said the orders were illegal. because president obama was not born in the united states which makes him ineligible to be president and commander in chief.

of the major's orders were rescinded. the major volunteered to go to afghanistan and could rescind his request at any time up to list tee employment. the army said based on the fact he no longer to serve on active duty and request of central command his orders were revoked. now she joins a lawsuit by former presidential candidate alan keys who wants documentary proof the president was born in the united states. president obama was born in hawaii according to state officials and copies of certification of birth, fact check.org. investigating those circumstances prior to the election and they have a copy of what they say is the original birth certificate posed on their website. it is in fact the so-called short form, not the original document. it is really a document saying that the state of hawaii has the real document, in its possession.

white house press secretary robert gibbs in may said. hawaii provided a copy of the birth certificate with the state seal that's posed on the internet. documentary proof needed to run by office varies from state to state. federal election commission you may be surprised to learn does not require any kind of certification or proof of citizenship in running for president. they leave that to the state. and in the state of illinois, for example, where president obama first ran for office, proof of citizenship is not required prior to the state legislature or to run for congress or for the united states senate. up next, attacks on wealthy americans, won't be enough to pay for the president's tral dollar health care plan, and some say it may doom it to fail our. should judge sotomayor be confirmed? that's the topic of our face-off debate here tonight, next. has gingko for memory and concentration... plus support for bone and breast health. just what i need.

one a day women's.

should judge sotomayor be confirmed as the next justice of the supreme court? that's the subject of the face-off debate. rejoining us, wendy long, council with the judicial confirmation network. who opposes the confirmation and constitutional attorney floyd abrams who said sotomayor should indeed be confirmed. thank you both for being with us. wendy we start with you. we began with the first day of hearings, how is she doing so far? >> she's still reading from the john roberts confirmation

transcript sounds to me. everything she's saying is at odds with the record in the last 30 years or an avoidance of answering the question. the senators should judge her on the record not what she's saying in the hearing. >> you don't expect they'll do that, do you? >> i sure hope they well. we get them to do everything they can to focus on the record. some will, yes. >> floyd, how is she doing? >> she's doing great. i think they should focus on her record. record as a judge. 17-year record as a judge. she's a well respected, serious person who has done all sorts of things one should do before going to the supreme court and has done them all well. one of the persons that weighed in, a judge who wrote for the

federalist society. he said he was disgusted with the judge's testimony. said, quote. if she is not purgering herself. she's intellect yally unqualified to be. if she was perjuring herself, she's morally unqualified. he's a liberal. so taken by recanting previous positions and business of applying law rather than making law, which he finds disingenuous at best. your reaction? >> look, applying law rather than making law is what everybody says, everyone. every candidate, liberal, conservative, it's become a clich cliche. >> a lie? >> that's not a lie? >> no. is it the truth? is it the truth? >> no, it's -- it's a definitional problem. the problem is this. judges, to an extent, make law. they read a piece of paper written 200 years ago. and they try to apply it.

>> it's a simple question. they try to apply a document written 200 years ago that uses the words due process of law. there's no question or no answer to that. but good judges do a lot of work, do a lot of studying, study the facts of a particular case, and come out with a verdict. there's nothing wrong with that. >> i didn't say there was anything wrong. >> it's not duplicitous. >> it's not? >> it's not duplicitous at all for a judge on one hand to say, in effect. look, i try. i try to -- >> may i, may i, seriously? >> yes. >> we are watching hearings that have taken three days. >> yes. >> the duplicity that's being suggested by professor seldman is this. first, she is distorting what she has said over a period of type. secondly, that that is either a misconstruction on her part, we won't call it lying. i'm not suggesting she's lying,

i'm suggesting, along with the professor, that the whole process is a political theater, without any -- >> process is a ka beubuki danc >> it does not reflect reality? >> i agree with that. the process as a whole does not. >> impartiality but it's still true? we'll work on that. >> floyd is right it's a definitional problem. what professor seldman and other liberals are upset by. judge sotomayor has not held up and defended the liberal progressive view of the law and constitution which is what justice william brennan advanced. what are the sources of law. she has not done that. she has not held that up. >> the professor is as unhappy with the hearings and responses of the chief justice, john robbers as well as justice alito

during their confirmation hearings. he is absolutelile baed in his -- his revoltion of this process. >> he doesn't like what's said but likes it even less when it comes from the mouth of someone who he knows and disagrees with it. >> i think what he's saying, and i share a sense on this, is that the process itself doesn't work. people ask questions in good part, because they're on television and seen, and the candidates, all of them are told, answer as narrowly as possible. say as little as you have to. try to stay out of trouble. that doesn't mean the person won't be a good or even a great supreme court justice. it does mean the process we have now doesn't work. >> i'm sorry, go ahead. >> i think it means judge somebody on their record not what they say in the hearing. >> i agree.

>> probably that's the last thing anyone wants to do give, if you will, the shortcuts available. >> and, floyd, we appreciate you being with us. thank you so much and we look forward to talking to you again, soon. >> thanks. >> up next, a new talk of a new economic stimulus package would be our sec. the results of the first are in question. no time for it to have impact, but why should that slow anyone down? and federal deficit, well, it's not slowing down. topping a trillion dollars for the first time in the country's history. there's a much bigger number no one is talking about. one that will lead generations of americans with tremendous debts and make certain that this is a debtor nation in pe perpetuity. yeah, i'll take credit for peter jacobsen. introducing the all-new nutrisystem for men, flexible new programs personalized to meet your goals. get on the program, eat properly,

you're going to lose weight. it's actually easier than you think it might be. that was really good. thanks. i had awesome results and i've kept it off for three years. for a limited time, get an extra three weeks of meals free. that's right, you can get an extra 21 breakfasts, lunches, dinners, desserts, and snacks. that's 105 meals free. that's what guys like. "tell me, 'do this,' i do it, i lose weight." with prices as low as $12 a day, you'll save hundreds over other weight-loss programs. order now and get an extra three weeks of fantastic meals. that's right, 105 meals absolutely free. call or click now.

i'm sorry. i can't hear you very well. announcer: does someone you know have trouble hearing on the phone? dad. dad, let me help you with that, okay? announcer: now, a free phone service shows captions of everything a caller says. i'd like to make an appointment to see the doctor. announcer: to learn more about captioned telephone, call 1-800-552-7724 or go to our website. i'll see you at 3:00! announcer: captioned telephone - enjoy the phone again!

today the federal reserve reported the latest forecast for the economy. predicting that it will continue to shrink this year, but not as fast as expected earlier. the fed said unemployment, however, could rise past 9%. joining us now, that's a daring prediction given it's 9.5% now. three of the country's best thinkers jeffery myron. michael holland of the holland balance fund. thank you all for being here. professor myron, let's start with the fed outlook which seemed to bolster investors on wall street. what's your reaction? >> they seem to think things are going to improve. i think that's where the consensus of the forecasters out there. but there's also a lot of worry that the growth is going to be rel tvly slow, even when it

starts to turn up, and that the unemployment picture is going to still get a bit worse before it gets better. that seemed sort of reasonable to me. so although the market was incredibly cheered. i don't know why they were cheered at least not by the fed's forecast. >> michael holland knows these markets intimately and can tell us why the market does what it does. why were they cheered? >> the reason for the -- the reason du jour in addition to the fed was more specifically intel came out with an earnings report that said the top line growth was particularly surprisingly good. and that is something -- we've had a few numbers come out where the companies have been able to manage their expenses and get better earnings but the top line is -- they had more -- this follows on a couple asian companies who said similar things in these semi conductor areas. >> and the fed, as we look at this forecast, 10% unemployment when it's 9 1/2, that's

hardly -- i mean, what would they expect. >> you know it understates the jobs from -- it's going to be the biggest political problem we've had in decades. when you had in people who want to work more and can't find jobs. you're talking about 12, 13, 14%. we're going to see numbers, if we corrected them, that were since the 1930s. going to be a huge problem, and washington is going to do more stimulus whether we need it or not. >> let's assume we do need it just for the sake of argument here. why would we assume we need a second round when the first round hasn't even been spent? >> it's way too early to think about giving up on this round of stimulus, because it really shouldn't be doing much of anything now. it's -- the tax cuts take time for people to respond to. and the outlays, only a very small amount that shows up directly.

so it's way too early to give up on it. >> at what point does it become unconscionable for a government with a trillion dollar deficit already on the books, facing, you know, with an economy of 14 trillion dollars, with about 13 trillion dollars in national debt, mounting trade debt of excess of 7 trillion dollars. is there a point which it's unconscionable for a government to continue to spend money? professor myron? >> i think we reached that point. we reached it a while ago. things we're spending money on per good for the economy in the long haul. thr he things that are going to make it less efficient. we're spending all this money in a way that's going to guarantee slower growth. i agree that's totally unconscionable. >> could i ask you a quick question about the comparison with china and their stimulus program? some people are saying that's how it should have been done here? does that make any sense to you?

>> no. i think that basically, they're in a luckier position, they haven't seen negative effects. they're also starting from a much, much lower level of infrastructure and things like that. much more plausible in china, additional roads, hospitals, schools make sense much it's far less plausible here where it's basically throwing bad money after good with all of the additional spending in the stimulus package. >> the republicans, in the tenure of george w. bush spent recklessly, foolishly and disastrously, as it turned out. the administration of barack h. obama, spending at an even higher rate. what is the conclusion of this? why do we not hear independent-minded economists, from academia, from the private sector saying, wait a minute. these are policies that have to be debated, considered and thought out. we are hearing nothing in the way of public hearings, we are

hearing nothing in a way of public discussion or debate. i mean, we are being grave enough on this show to be dull and actually talk about things of substance here. but we're not -- the public at large is not being well served by this. we're -- >> why are you smiling? we're here. it's -- you're asking -- jeffery said it's unconscionable. it's going to take down our dollar bigtime, hurt interest rates and standard of living will suffer immensely. it's because the majority of party of power -- >> who is the party -- >> the thing that the bush administration did right, was tax cuts, across the board tax cuts. >> this administration is going to correct that. >> that was a plus. that was a plus. >> all right. >> but the -- part of the reason nobody is standing up and

fighting back against all of this. because the previous party in power, bush administration did a dismal job of defending markets, and thins like that. so they have now zero moral or intellectual standing to stand up to what the democrats are proposing. at the same time the democrats are saying two words, great depression and trying to terrify everyone, if we don't go along with everything as proposed we'll get the great depression again. i don't think that's all accurate but that's their tac c tactic. >> thank you very much. professor. got to run. michael holland. allen, jeffery meyer, thank you for daring to be dull with us. up at the top of the hour campbell brown. campbell. >> hey, lou, there are late vepts in the killing of parents of 17 children. this afternoon, authorities located a woman they as a pen of interest in this case, and they are briefing reporters at the top of the hour. we're going to take that news conference live and update you as it happens, that and the mash

up with all of the headlines at the top of the hour. see you then. >> campbell thank you, we'll be right back.

announcer: what are you waiting for? all around the world, men with erectile dysfunction have asked their doctors about cialis. ask your doctor if a cialis option is right for you because in addition to 36-hour cialis, there's another dosing option: cialis for daily use, a low-dose tablet you take every day so you can be ready anytime the moment is right. man: tell your doctor about your medical condition and all medications and ask if you're healthy enough for sexual activity. don't take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. don't drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed back ache or muscle ache. to avoid long term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than 4 hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision... stop taking cialis and call your doctor right away. announcer: 36-hour cialis or... cialis for daily use. so when the moment is right, you can be ready.

we got time for a quick e-mail. bob in virginia said one way to solve unemployment is for the president to appoint a few million more czars. send your thoughts to lou dob