. >> eliot: a pretty safe bet given the congressional budget office foresees unemployment in just over 6% in four years. romney and his fellow republicans insist those taxes are job killers, that take money out of the hands of the job creators. namely the 1%. an orthodoxy that was challenged in march by venture capitalist nick hanauer. in dress for the ted conference, a web seminar series that boosts of the rivetting talks by remarking people hanauer insists mid class consulars are the real creators, and that our tax system which favors the rich has it exactly backwards. joining me, nick hanauer thanks

for joining us. >> happy to be here. >> eliot: first, let's get this out of the way. what happened with ted. they're known as as a come positive tore of great speeches. why wouldn't they post it, and what's the outcome? >> well, the speech i made and the arguments i made are an attack on the economic orthodoxy that a lot of people have a huge stake in. obviously if everyone believes that rich people like me are job creators, essentially the center of the economic universe, the extraordinary privileges that we enjoy like a tax rate which is, you know, 50% lower than the taxes on ordinary work are reasonable and justified, right? you can't get to a situation where i get to pay 15% on cap

gains, dividends and cared interest, and ordinary americans pay the top rate on work without deidefying capital lists. >> eliot: and it does challenge the orthodoxies accepted by conventional wisdom. when i first heard about this, i said it makes no sense. i greed with the entirety of your speech, but i was surprise when the ted conference would not post it. then i want to move onto the substance of what you were saying. >> i know that chris anderson cares about economic and equality. i think he misjudged how strongly people feel about this issue, and the salients and persuasiveness of the argument i made. as soon as the human cry got loud he released it to youtube, not on the website

but at least people got to see it. >> eliot: a lot of people are watching it, and for good reason. i as well. i look at you, and i'm a venture capitalist, you created companies, and you say the real pressure for job growth and the energy for jobs is the middle class not the top 1%. explain why, what are the economics that under lie your theory? >> yeah, all traditional economics is rooted in some 19th century assumptions about how human social systems work. they assume they're lineared a mechanistic. we know that's not true. we know with scientific certainty that human social systems like economies are ecosystemmic. we know that the economy is not an ecosystem. it is literally is an ecosystem. once you get there, you realize it's characterized by feedback loops that is fed by ecosystems.

in that sense jobs are not created by rich people having money poured into them like an incredible. it's an ecosystemmic feedback group mean customers and businesses. the more our customers buy from us the more people we have to hire and more prosperity is created. a rich business person like me calling themselves a job creator is like a squirrel who claims to created evolution. it's the other way around. >> eliot: i like that metaphor. a squirrel tried to sell that to me the other day, but i didn't buy it. you're like henny ford understood this. >> absolutely. >> eliot: henry ford, we learned in our history books said if i build cars and no one can afford to buy them, there would be no business model. he realized he had to pay his workers enough to meet the demand. it's the opportunity for jobs to be created and the world we're

living in is-- >> it is. it's political and economic decisions we've made. it's essentially creating this death spiral of falling demand. the thing about complex systems eliot, they're characterized by positive feedback loops and they're virtue of cycle or a death spiral. and we are in a death spiral of falling demand as the economy essentially all the money in the economy accumulates in the hands of the tiny minority of people. call it 1,000 times as much the median wage, but i don't buy 1,000 times as much stuff. my family owns three cars, not 3,000. i buy a few pairs of pants just like most american men. i can't make up for the falling demand of the tens of millions of million class americans who are out of work or even greater number who are under employed.

they can't afford any new cars or meals out. that's the problem. >> eliot: and it's interesting because economists of all stripes. i don't think even the most conservative economist disputes what you just said which is the percentage of democratic used for consumption declines as income increases. you're earning $1 million, you still only buy a limited number of shirts. go out to dinner a limited number of times. the rest of the money sits in a bank and that in of itself will not create jobs. we need to pump up demand. how can we do that in this economy. >> how do we do that? >> eliot: yes. >> you start with reasonable tax rates on wealthy and corporations again. tax rates on the super wealthy and on corporations have fallen precipitously over the last 40 years. if there was a shred of truth to the idea that the lower the tax rates on the wealthyier more wealthy got or more profitable

the corporations were the more jobs, we would be drowning in jobs. yet we're at historic levels of corporate profitability and wealth for the wealthy, and unemployment and under employment. that's because, look corporations don't hire more people because they have an an abundance of profit. they hire more people when they have the abundance of more customers. the only way to get this fly wheel moving in the right direction again if we tax the people to be enough to invest in the bottom. things will get better. there are a bunch of other policy choices we made that are wrong. for instance, letting china as being as predatory as they have been with respect to our products and workers, but of to tax the top. >> eliot: let's keep it domestic. we'll have the trade discussion another day. we need to have that, but the

capital gains of 15% versus the 35% that ordinary taxpayers pay is contrary and counter to what you would say is good economics? >> yeah, i do believe that the capital gains rate should be differentially lower than the top tax rate to give people a reason to invest, but it's not just capital gains eliot, it's dividends and car carried interest. people like me pay very little tax at the very tippy top and you have hard working middle class americans who are paying 35% or more. it's backward and crazy and not economically effective. all i do is accumulate money and hedge funds and other things and it's not in the economy. >> eliot: and then you pointed out in your speech this was the data point i had not heard. if income distribution had stayed where it was several decades ago, median family income would be up to $92,000. give us the numbers, and most of

that differential would be spent and consumed. that's the feedback loop that you were talking about. >> since 1980 the share of can income the top 1% of americans has gone from 8% to 24% while the share of income from the bottom, fallen from 18% to 12%. here's the really scary part. if the current trend simply continues, the top 1% will have 37% share in another 30 years and the bottom 50% of americans will share just 6% of national income. you don't have a capitalist democracy any more at that point. you have a feudel society. >> eliot: we were talking the economic impact of disperty of wealth, but the fraying of our social fabric will not be far behind. >> yes, the economics will be--exactly. the economics will be the least of our problems at that point. you know so my argument, in

ever inequality is unfair whereas my nine-year-old loves to say, it's mean. but that's not the best reason to fight against this rising inequality. the bigger problem is that it's terrible for business. the more customers business people like me have the more successful we will be. it is a small price to pay to pay a little bit more tax to ensure that the middle class and the working class thrive and grow. >> eliot: could not gray more. nick hanauer thank you. >> thank you for having me. >> eliot: going wherever the wind goes but in a good way. right after the ad break. at 14 my life changed forever. i was in a horrific automobile crash with other teenagers. the driver was 16, he had lost control. when we hit the telephone pole

the metal bent, the glass shattered, people were screaming and my body was just destroyed on impact. when i woke up, i didn't know who i was. i had to relearn who my family was, who my friends were, how to walk, how to talk, i had to get fed through a tube in my stomach. i had to like like a baby up until about 16 years old. wearing diapers, you guys, at high school. just from 14 years old till now i'll be going on my 23rd surgery. my legs hurt from the second i wake up to the second i fall asleep. my pain is soo deep but yet i am so lucky to be alive. i am a huge advocate for safe teen driving. we need to do something because if we don't an estimated 11ause teens will die every day on our nations roads. support the standup act, save lives. join the movement to help prevent teen driving deaths at facebook.com/save11

[ female announcer ] e-trade technology can help make you a better investor. our new e-trade 360 investing dashboard shows you where your money is, live. e-trade pro is so usable you'll actually use it. and our apps are the ultimate in mobile investing. become a better investor at e-trade. [ male announcer ] you get in the zone long before the race. get your head right. and focus. on race day you don't leave anything

to chance. ♪ ♪ get set every morning with gillette fusion proglide. designed for a comfortable shave even against the grain. its microcomb guides hair for its thinner blades to cut close. ♪ ♪ great starts begin with gillette fusion proglide. ♪ ♪ ♪

>> eliot: you may have noticed i was not here for the last two days. i was off having a wonderful time with my family celebrating my oldest daughter's college graduation. which is why our number of the day is so disturbing. 52. that's the percentage of jobless workers who are over 24 who have either goodated from college or have gone there for some period of time. it's not that the college degree makes someone less employable. it's more that more and more of the workforce has either a degree or some time in college. so those credentials are less influential as distinguishing factors. what is beginning to matter more majoring in something practical. even comedians have figured that out. listen to andy samberg at my daughter's graduation. >> andy: math and science majors you're cool. finally. >> georgia you can't miss with the tech majors. but the highest unemployment is among those who have some college.

they leave without getting a degree. they end up with no job, lots of debt and lots ever anxiety. >> eliot: wind baby wind. it's not as catchy and sarah palin's drill baby drill but it was the message that president obama brought to him yesterday at a wind manufacturing facility. >> this industry thanks in large part to tax credits have taken off. today we have nearly 500 facilities in 43 states employing tens of thousands of americans. >> eliot: despite his praise for wind and other alternatives energy, the president still isn't necessarily against drilling. in fact, just the opposite. even after the exxon valdez and bp disasters possibly two of the

largest environmental disasters in u.s. history, the president is designing support for offshore drilling in the arctic. according to a story in the week's "new york times" quote, in blessing she will's move to the arctic mr. obama continues his efforts to balance businesses and environmentally interests. the president is writing a new chapter in the nation's unfold be energy transformation. in this case the benefit of fossil fuel producers. meanwhile, the families load into their cars for the memorial day weekend, gas prices are slowly but surely coming down. the national average price for a gallon of regular gasoline yet was $3.67 down become $0.30 from where it was easterly april. suddenly the other side doesn't seem to be so adamant that the president controls the price of gas.

joining me now bob cavnar and john hofmeister. all the to come of the gas going up and now it's coming down. was this just a boogeyman's politician roll out. >> it's no different than oranges future, traders have a role to play. they present to the buyer an opportunity, the buyer can say no or yes. i don't say its manipulation. it's the process. >> eliot: i've been a prosecutor for many years, i wonder why politics don't talk about when prices go down. anyway, let's put manipulation aside. i agree with you. i don't think that's why price gas up or down. is the president right to do some of everything? all of the above if he likes to say the renewables wind, solar drilling in the arctic or is

there a lack of focus that leads us wandering aimlessly. >> there is a generation of electricity which we use use. and we're all looked on oil because of december sal engine. there are no substitutes in the mass market, not yet for alternative mass transportation market. the president needs an all in, all of the above strategy. >> eliot: you are supportive of drilling the arctic simultaneously pursue the wind and other alternatives. >> if the u.s. does not drill in the arctic then we're dependent dependenton standards set by others. >> eliot: you've been critical about policies in the gulf. you said we're not prepared then, we're still not prepared.

it's another case of here we go again, hoping that the public has forgotten and there is a disaster in the arctic and then we rue the day that we made this decision? >> the challenge is eliot, is that we use the same equipment that was in the gulf of mexico when the bp well blew out. the challenge is not where we're drilling, whether it's in the deep water or arctic it's well control and safety. the devices that we use today they're essentially the same technology that has been around for a number of years. there are new generations of blow outs being designed and tested but those are not being deployed. in the permit for shell in the offshore architect there is redundancy and backup so that helps. but that's an awfully challenging environment to be drilling in the offshore. >> eliot: so bob, if i hear you properly, as critically as you have been of the way we drill and have drilled until now, if we were to put in place the proper technology you would say let's go for it?

it makes sense as part of a coherent energy policy? >> you know, i think it's beyond that, though eliot. the whole challenge we have here is comprehensive energy policy. we as a nation burn more oil per person than any other industrialized nation in the world. as john pointed out we're very dependent on engines for transportation. without that energy and encouragement of alternative energy, we're forced into these environments. we're fortunate that shell is a great company that is very very safe in drilling of offshore but they're dependent on current technology. i don't support offshore especially in the arctic, but our energy security is very, very important to us, also. it's a trade-off, and that's what the obama administration is focused on. >> eliot: john, let me come back to you.

it sounds reasonable an oil company, any company will use existing technology as long as the profits are there, and there is no necessarily incentive to embrace new technologies. what would it take for the oil industry to move to the next generation to make is safer and perhaps more productive, and flip side, do you think that we could and should have regulations demanding greater mile per gallon output for cars? >> one of the beauties of the oil and gas technology is that it's technology industry. it lives on thrives on technology. it's always coming up on new innovations and new ideas. bob makes an point on old designs, and companies are moving on. what shell would like to do off the coast alaska, they've been doing off the shores of another way. you learn not to take risks.

for the wells, and frankly, this process started when i was still at shell many years ago it took them seven years just to get to this point for just a couple of experimental wells. they'll only drill when the ice is gone. they'll only drill to a point in time when the ice returns so they won't be facing arctic conditions. these are just experimental wells to see what is under the earth. this is not going to be producing wells. there is still years ahead to get the best of technology and innovation as to when they get to the production point. >> eliot: to get back to the harder question, what is the spur? what will create the incentive for shell or exxon or competitors to come up with that technology. is there an affirmative role to be played by a government regulatory system that says you must meet this safety standard or industry safety and then you'll invest the dollars. >> eliot: there is not a government on earth that knows as much about energy technology as what exists in the oil companies. so what the oil companies do is

they consult with the government to look at and debate and quite open forum what are the best technologies. then the regulators get to work laying down those technologies as part of regulations. then the american petroleum plays a big part-- >> eliot: in bp, where was the big failure there as bob pointed out on this show and elsewhere, there was an old technology and failed technology being used at the time. where was the failure in that chain of command or in that decision process that permitted that to happen then? >> there were multiple failure steps along the way just like a plane crash there are generally multiple things that happen at once. one of the issues was they got rid of one blow-out protecter and brought in another one. it was out of warranty redesigned, it had not been tested at adequately or regularly. the equipment should have been pulled, forced by the government to pull that piece of equipment. >> eliot: there should have been a regulation at the government

level to pull--bob you guys are buddies, i don't want to put you against each other, do you believe that shell would have made that same mistake? >> i think shell is the gold standard for off-shore drilling. their technology well design and well control and management is much better than bp, and they've proven it with their performance. but there are still issues. i beg to differ with john in a couple of areas. one is the api, the american petroleum institute has been a standard institute for decades. unfortunately, it's it's moved into a lobbying organization. the api now gets in front of the industry lobbying against safety regulation. we have to remember that there has been no legislation no permanence of new procedures butt in place by the legislature since the bp plowout. build out.

a lot of has been improved as far as internal procedures especially shell, testing and back up and those kinds of things, but the government itself has not stepped up that effort to improve the safety performance that i think we need, especially in environments like the arctic. >> eliot: do you believe the government needs to pass through legislation new standards in terms of safety in the aftermath of bp? >> i think not. i think not because the regulations are tough enough. if people execute. if people don't make the foolish adjustments that were made on that rig in the bp instance i don't think legislation itself-- >> eliot: this is more enforcement than legislative failure? >> that's my view. >> eliot: we'll continue this some other evening if you'll come back and join us again. >> love to. >> bob cavnar and john

hofmeister, thank you for joining us tonight. >> thank you. >> chris matthews asks newt gringrich's what his favorite snake is. and it's not mitt romney. >>scores of the most talented filmmakers in the world gather in new york city every year for the tribeca film festival. the eclectic slate of films draws an estimated 3 million people a year. cat coira's film, "while we were here," is about how travel can change the way we look at our lives and loves. >>you never know someone until you travel with them, because it takes people out of their element. >>(narrator) director morgan spurlock's films have taken him all around the world. his latest, "mansome," is about grooming in the modern man. the project brought him to germany to a professional beard building championship. >>just as there are beauty pageants for women, there are, you know, now these beard growing competitions and mustache competitions for men.

>>i'm wayne rosenfeld at the tribeca film festival. and who doesn't want 50% more cash? ugh, the baby. huh! and then the baby bear said "i want 50% more cash in my bed!" phhht! 50% more cash is good ri... what's that. ♪ ♪ you can spell. [ male announcer ] the capital one cash rewards card. the card for people who want 50% more cash. what's in your wallet? ha ha. ♪ ♪ [ train whistle blows ] [ ball hitting paddle ] [ orbit girl ] don't let food hang around. yeah! [ orbit trumpet ] clean it up with orbit! [ orbit glint ] fabulous! for a good clean feeling. ♪ eat, drink, chew orbit! ♪

ah, claim trouble. [ dennis ] you should just switch to allstate, and get their new claim satisfaction guarantee. hey, he's right man. [ dennis ] only allstate puts their money where their mouth is. yup. [ dennis ] claim service so good, it's guaranteed. [ foreman ] so i can always count on them. unlike randy over there. that's one dumb dude. ♪ ♪ the new claim satisfaction guarantee. dollar for dollar, nobody protects you like allstate. i have the most common type of atrial fibrillation, or afib.

it's not caused by a heart valve problem. i was taking warfarin, but my doctor put me on pradaxa instead to reduce my risk of stroke. in a clinical trial, pradaxa® (dabigatran etexilate mesylate) reduced stroke risk 35% better than warfarin. and unlike warfarin, with pradaxa, there's no need for regular blood tests. that's really important to me. pradaxa can cause serious, sometimes fatal, bleeding. don't take pradaxa if you have abnormal bleeding and seek immediate medical care for unexpected signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. pradaxa may increase your bleeding risk if you're 75 or older, have a bleeding condition like stomach ulcers, or take aspirin, nsaids, or blood thinners, or if you have kidney problems especially if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all medicines you take any planned medical or dental procedures and don't stop taking pradaxa without your doctor's approval as stopping may increase your stroke risk. other side effects include indigestion, stomach pain, upset, or burning. pradaxa is progress. having afib not caused by a heart valve problem increases your risk of stroke.

ask your doctor if you can reduce your risk with pradaxa. >> eliot: obama and romney turn their targets to working class whites. but first randall calls mitt romney a wuss and chris matthews called newt gringrich a snake and meg began mccain calls herself a mutant. when it doesn't fit anywhere else we put it in the viewfinder. ♪ >> many people in the republican party treat me like i'm a freak that there is something wrong with me and a mutant and original design. >> loaning the way i learned chess. it's a thousand miles in great britain. i was afraid of nuclear war the whole time. i've ridden an ostrich. i've done a lot of things. >> focused on lower gas prices,

american energy, lower taxes and creating jobs. >> our campaign is going to stay focused on lower gasses, lower gas prices, lower energy. >> falling prices could be the sign of looming global economic crisis. the good news, it's memorial day weekend, the prices are down for the underlying reason for it is a negative. >> is that a yes or no. >> our campaign is going to focus on lowering gas prices, creating jobs, and lowering prices for the american energy. >> you got 15 minutes to live. the attack like this. >> you have a more ruthless approach to politics than i do. >> our focus is lowering gas prices, creating jobs, and lowering-- >> what is barack obama's qualitycation for being president of united states of

america? i don't know yet. >> is mitt romney a wuss. >> yeah, i think he is. ♪ >> eliot: why china is kicking our ass! >> the reason number 933. >> what is that? is it dance party friday? is it? how did that happen? ♪ >> those are news broadcasters. they're there to tell us what is happening in the world. >> eliot: still true to politics is the best spectator sport in history. our wealthy president and wealthier opponent tries to see who is the most middle class. more few point coming up.

if you have copd like i do you know how hard it can be to breathe and what that feels like. copd includes chronic bronchitis and emphysema. spiriva helps control my copd symptoms by keeping my airways open a full 24 hours. plus, it reduces copd flare-ups. spiriva is the only once-daily inhaled

copd maintenance treatment that does both. and it's steroid-free. spiriva does not replace fast-acting inhalers for sudden symptoms. tell your doctor if you have kidney problems glaucoma, trouble urinating, or an enlarged prostate. these may worsen with spiriva. discuss all medicines you take, even eye drops. stop taking spiriva and seek immediate medical help if your breathing suddenly worsens your throat or tongue swells you get hives, vision changes or eye pain, or problems passing urine. other side effects include dry mouth and constipation. nothing can reverse copd. spiriva helps me breathe better. does breathing with copd weigh you down? ask your doctor if spiriva can help.

>> eliot: have you ensnared those middle class votes. for mitt romney, by pivoting onation reform. and for president obama by bashing his rival's profit-maximizing philosophy. while romney made an overt appeal for minority voters this week, laying out his vision for a voucher-run education program and referring to education reform as the civil rights issue of our era, president obama playing on us-versus them politics in his swing through california, colt, and iowa seizing on the romney's at the arrested ship at bain capital mocking his g.o.p. opponent for saying corporations are people. even though national polls have kept obama at a slight advantage over romney, a new "washington post" "abc news" poll shows 58% of struggling middle class white voters say romney would do more to advance their families economic interests. only 32% chose obama. voters across party lines agree

that romney who would do more to advance the interests of wall street. let's bring in nia-malika henderson, national political reporter for the "washington post." and david schuster current tv correspondent. the numbers flip when go to the other side anybody who isn't white, is this a racial divide or economic divide or both? >> well, i think it's a little bit of both. i don't think the obama administration, the obama campaign would be surprised at this divide, nor would any democrat who for the last 20 years have grappled with how to attract these voters lower middle class white voters, white male voters folks who work with their hands those kind of people. that's why you see the strategy focusing on african-americans latinos, women because they feel like if they can swell the voter world in those demographics, then they have a

pretty good shop. barack obama in 2008 got 43% of the white vote. that's what bill clinton did lower than what jimmy carter was able to do. he got 46% of the white vote. they feel they have enough avenues, and kuwait frankly the demographics of the country are changing in such a way that it probably favors democrats in the long run. >> eliot: look, it's always better when you're in politics to be playing on your opponent's turf. how bus president obama appeal--i'm a huge nascar fan, i have been long before i was in government. how does president obama appeal to what people call the nascar vote, white middle class, lower-month old class folks, as mia-malika said, folks who work with their hands. >> rather than appeal, you hear the obama campaign talk more about trying to suppress that vote. they believe that white middle class voters are the ones

successible, and would stay home on election day so they can raise the voting rates among women and latinos as nia just said, and keep down the voters from going to the polls that's a victory. >> eliot: you said the white house was trying to suppress the vote? is this some sort of-- >> let me be perfectly clear. the negative ads we're going to see a barrage of negative ads that's not designed because we want to energize the energize the obama voters, it's to lower that category of voter from going to the polls and that will help president obama. >> eliot: i never thought that the white house would stoop to that level. nia, you always want to play on the other turf. george romney, going back decades to his four, govern romney gave a fascinating speech

about civil rights, defining it as an education issue. do you think he'll win over african-american votes or is this a larger effort to change the narrative so he's viewed differently by suburban voters who would feel more comfortable to vote for him. >> it's both. they're realistic about their chances in terms of attracting any sizable portion of the african-american vote. george bush did decently 11% across the board. 16% in ohio, which was a pretty good thing for his campaign, and some people credit that with him being re-elected. but in terms of turning towards african-americans, turning towards latinos to a certain extent, the real strategy there is coming across as as a compassionate conservative. you saw george bush doing that and that's what you see mitt romney doing it. he didn't get a very good reception yesterday in philadelphia. he went to a poor plaque neighborhood, a school, a

charter school was not received very warmly there by people, shutting get out romney. obama has got our backs. it's going to be tough for him but they've hired a couple of folks. they have rob page, an education consultant. he has a bit of a checkered past. they brought in a public face of the campaign working with communication strategy and outreach strategy. we'll see what they're able to do. i think, a, it's about appearing compassionate and getting some of the black vote, but this goes out to voter suppression. it's more if they hammer away on barack obama and say, listen this is a guy whose administration has rot 13% in the black community, 17% under bill clinton, is this someone that you really want to reelect? is he going to mean anything healthy, good, and hopeful for

your communities at this point. i think that's also a strategy that they're looking at. voter suppression. >> eliot: it's interesting putting aside the voteer suppression issue, we'll come back to that. but you use the phrase compassionate conservatism, and george bush gave it a bad name in the aftermath of his tenture of presidency. i don't believe that the romney camp can genuinely believe they'll make serious inroads in the african-american community. i think they're hoping in the latino community, on the other hand, to have a significant up take in what he gets. if he doesn't, he won't be able to succeed. david, do you think that the romney campaign knows that it has to use education as the wedge issue to do that? immigration is a dicey issue. he risks using his very conservative base if he does anything that speaks to compromise on immigration but he can on education. >> the visit to philadelphia was not for african-american voters, but it's more to appeal to

suburban women outside of philadelphia. i think the romney campaign is crazy if they think they can win pennsylvania. they don't, and they feel education is one of those issues that can get them away from oh, romney is a venture capitalist. it's a campaign to appeal to women. >> eliot: let's talk about his education policy. he brought out the voucher word, which has not been uttered in the white house, it's a dirty word in the white house. it's a dirty word to the education establishment, the unions in particular. do you believe vouchers have any future regardless mitt romney is elected president? congress is not likely to fund a voucher program, is this more politics or he really believes vouchers will work and have a place in our educational establishment? >> right, i think it's politics. this is the conservative line you hear on education, this idea of vouchizing the system, having kids who go to public schools get vouchers and go to private schools. but of course, teachers unions,

public school are advocate and aren't happy with that and it won't necessarily go anywhere. i think david is exactly right. this idea of talking about education is a soft issue trying to appeal to black folks. it's really an indirect appeal to those suburban women voters who will decide this election, not so much in pennsylvania because i don't think that a republican is going to be able to win that state but you're going to see that in states of virginia, ohio, and to a certain extent, florida. >> eliot: we're still at a stage in the campaign where each of the campaigns are trying to flesh out how the public sees them and the sound byte of bain capital, we should not forget that congress has not been able to move forward on the reform of "no child left behind" which was a piece of president bush's domestic policy. it's an issue we need to talk about at length, but we haven't any made real progress on it.

nia-malika henderson from the "washington post," and david schuster, current tv i appreciate your comments tonight. >> join us ahead on "viewpoint."

[ nervous ] i hope no one recognizes

us... you...you think these disguises will... no. [ male announcer ] salty. sweet. and impossible to resist. >> eliot: facebook may have had the worst week of its life at the same time it had the best week of its life. that's later in the show. but first let's go out to jennifer granholm and "the war room." what do you have for us? >> we're heading into the memorial day weekend. we'll put the focus where it should be, that's on our veterans. we'll exploit what the president has been saying on veteran affairs, and spotlight where it is needed and the key voting blocks, veterans yes but including millennials we'll show some mind-blowing numbers. that's at the top of the hour right here in the war room.

have a good memorial weekend. >> eliot: you, too, and thank you for all the veterans watching. we thank you for your service. more "viewpoint" coming up next. ♪ >> eliot: what a term weak for facebook, right? the ipo that everybody was waiting for and eager to get a piece of was a bust with the stock dropping like a fishing weight. and now it turns out the underwriters may have given material information only to their chosen customers leaving small investors as usual out in the cold. investigators are salivating as they dig into this one. the company must be feeling deeply unfriended. so yeah, at that level not the week that facebook wanted. but let me give you totally different perspective. it starts in cairo. where the election is ongoing for president of egypt. and it may leave egyptians with

two not terribly satisfactory choices. a run enough between the candidate of the muslim brotherhood and mubarak's last prime minister. perhaps not the choice we had hoped to see. but at least it is democracy. messy as always. but has this to do with facebook? ily believe that without the explosion of information technology and social networking the upheavals of arab spring could not have emerged. weather facebook, twitter or even poor old my spay, egyptians and libyans had to create networks outside of the traditional means of communications the media that were already controlled by totalitarian rulers. so maybe the fact of election in egypt has history. so all in all not a bad week.

that's my view. and who doesn't want 50% more cash? ugh, the baby. huh! and then the baby bear said "i want 50% more cash in my bed!" phhht! 50% more cash is good ri... what's that. ♪ ♪ you can spell. [ male announcer ] the capital one cash rewards card. the card for people who want 50% more cash. what's in your wallet? ha ha. ♪ ♪ i look at her, and i just want to give her everything. yeah you -- you know, everything can cost upwards of...[ whistles ] i did not want to think about that. relax, relax, relax. look at me, look at me. three words, dad -- e-trade financial consultants. so i can just go talk to 'em? just walk right in and talk to 'em. dude those guys are pros. they'll hook you up with a solid plan. they'll -- wa-- wa-- wait a minute. bobby? bobby! what are you doing,

man? i'm speed dating! [ male announcer ] get investing advice for your family at e-trade. >>steve jobs was many things but he was not a politician.

>> eliot: every week in politics has its share of winners and losers, and this is cable, we're going to focus on the losers. you knew that we would do just that. you know this guy sitting in the seats, viewpoint guest host, john fugelsang. i hope your week was not nearly as bad as the guys you're about to talk about. >> no, it's great to be your loser correspondent. i had a great week here. >> eliot: thank you for picking up the slack. >> thank you for your office and the computer as well. >> eliot: you're the guy who made that mess. >> if you find stuff on the hard drive, it's not from me. >> eliot: the fbi already has it. where do we start? >> let's begin with mr. zuckerberg. if you're on your honeymoon and you lose $2 billion to

$4 billion you're sued by your investors and you get pretty much defended by nasdaq and investigated by the sec. i say that makes the worst honey moon than anybody has ever had. >> eliot: do you think she'll drop him? he's only worth $18 billion sorry, that's enough. >> he waited to go public before marrying her. >> eliot: you thought he would lose $4 billion a week and say did he sheet-short the stock. >> he's lucky to have her. she hung in there nine years and she has a heart of gold. it happened the same week that facebook went public. >> eliot: do you think he makes all of his private information public so we can see it? >> i sincerely doubt that. but now that we see the old scheme of not paying taxes to the government, the only good news for zuckerberg, he's only the second most loathsome character. >> eliot: cory booker.

>> we love cory booker. he had a rough week. he went on "meet the press" and equivocating reverend wright and discussing what bain does. this caused a cry and there was a week of may i can't mea copus for cory book. >> eliot: a lot of people saying is it good, is it bad? how do you pars it? but not in your own tent. he was dumping on his own president, not a smart political move. >> especially when you're' surrogate. if you toll the twitter feed, he was posting dynamite stuff about why he completely supports the president all week. that may have been damage control but he went to the wall for him. cory booker loves obama but hates attack ads and he's

supported by the g.o.p. who hate obama but love attack ads even more. >> eliot: you're losing me. cory booker, who said, i have a different take on private equity than you. i'll take a different perspective, but to come out on the broadside shows lack of subtle thinking because there are arguments on both sides on that one. >> i think he'll be a great value to the campaign down the road but he won't come out as a surrogate in the next few weeks. >> eliot: there will be a few more scripted lines for him. let's go into the religion word. >> sane catholics who are embarrassed that the american catholics are suing the white house over birth control something that jesus never mentioned once, and something you really can't use the bible say is wrong. we're seeing the catholic church suing the obama whews number is it politics? >> eliot: not to get theological, but you said

something interesting, the bible really doesn't address this. i'm not playing on my own turf but explain what you mean. >> the story of onan, any none pro creative sex is against the well of god. if you really read it, it's creepy and it's more about disobeying the will of god. jesus never said thou shalt not use protection when you're with your date. by taking on this mantle this is definitely a religious argument. i would not say it's not a biblical argument but more about the institution than faith. >> eliot: another conversation for another moment but a lot of progressives within the catholic church are saying more of their conservative social perspectives taken by the church are not biblically derived. >> that's why many think that the catholic church is becoming an atheist factory. if they had confidence in their

bishops in their authority they would say we'll make it available to our employees. we'll tell you in the fluff never use it and see if they obey. >> eliot: we only have a minute left. our doctor friend in pakistan, good week? >> not a good week at all. this doctor was sentenced for 33 years for helping the united states do what the united states has paid pakistan billion to help us do. we've been shoveling money to pakistan for a long time. the president stopped sending money to pakistan last year after we found out oh, you really do have bin laden and kind of know where it is. so we have a year of unmade bribe money in dues, so they took this gentleman who took traced bin laden, and he's the fall guy. they've locked him up despite the fact that we paid them billions to find the guy. did he the job for them. >> eliot: and they're our friends in that part of the world. it makes you wonder what foreign policy is all about. politico median, john fugelsang.

>> sorry about the crystal. i'm sure you can glue it. >> eliot: yeah, that's "viewpoint" tonight. have a great memorial weekend. stay right here for "the war room" and jennifer granholm. thanks for watching.