i knew he was one of my own. and my wolf pack, it grew by one. >> cenk: perhaps not the same wolf pack, but his heart is in the right place. "viewpoint" is next [ ♪ theme music ♪ ] >> eliot: good evening, i'm eliot spitzer, and this is "viewpoint." it's a phrase that could define mitt romney for the rest of the campaign. and it was delivered by president obama with relish, at a connecticut fundraiser last night. >> obama: he asks the middle class to pay more in taxes so he could give another 250,000-dollar cut to people making more than $3 million year. [ booing ] it's like robin hood in reverse. it's romney hood.

[laughter] >> eliot: after the president smackdown, the g.o.p. tried to table a comeback on fox news. >> romney: if i could coin a term it would be obamaloney. he's serving a dish a which is a simply in contradiction to the truth. >> eliot: weak comeback, mitt. very weak. much tougher an ad from the american priorities super pac that supports the obama campaign ausing romney of ignoring the human cost at a kansas steel plant closed by his bain capital firm. >> i don't think mitt romney understands what he has done to people's lives by closing the plant. a short time after that my wife became ill. i don't know how long she was sick. and i don't think maybe she didn't say anything because she knew we couldn't afford the insurance. and then one day she became ill and he i took her to the jackson county hospital, and it was

stage four. there was nothing they could do for her. >> eliot: for his part romney's campaign opened a new front. >> in 1996 president clinton and a bipartisan congress helped end welfare as we know it by requiring work for welfare. but on july 12th president obama quietly announced a plan to gut welfare reform by dropping work requirements. you wouldn't have to work for train for a job. they just send you your welfare check. >> eliot: the change in the welfare law is nothing more than an invitation from the department of health and human services seeking permission to waive or change some rules. permission sought by two very red states. nevada is very interested in working with your staff to explore abraham waiver. and utah is especially interested in the development of waiver authority in the temporary assistance for needy families grant. a little additional context. then massachusetts governor mitt romney was one of 19 governors

who asked congress for more expanse in welfare waivers in 2005. and expanding the list of speakers on the list, former secretary of state condoleezza rice mike huckabee, rick santorum and rand paul. not to mention nikki haley and former governor jeb bush which takes romney off theirs list for presidency. and let's not forget bobby gindell and virginia governor robert mcdonnell. who is not on the list, all those speakers, but not for minute for donald trump. what a shame. it would have made it exciting. i'm joined by molly ball and

boris epstein. molly, let me start with you. is this likes two kids in the sandbox calling each other names and will it mean anything 24 hours from now? >> it certainly does seem to be an attempt to liven up the lexicon by giving them completely new and utterly made up ways to make fun of each other. but if you listen to what is behind each of these names, the romney hood idea, obviously comes from the sustained attack that the president is mounting on romney's tax plan and economic plans and the effects that democrats say that those would have. i do wonder if you bring up robin hood if it does not raise the speaker spector of class warfare? does romney want to be associated with stealing from

the rich to give to the poor. i wonder about that. and then the romney campaign, we've seen a lot of this sort of complaining from them that they're the victim of all these things that are not true from the other side. but then as you pointed out some of their claims about what is happening with welfare are themselves disengenius. a lot of this is the regular distortions of a presidential campaigned that is to be expected. >> eliot: it sounds like we've gone from atlantic magazine discourse elevated in thought to mad magazine kicking sand at each other. and on the other hand, boris the problem with for mitt romney the romney hood captures a perception, and it may work as a metaphor for what people dislike about him, his tax plan in particular having been critiqued very aggressively. how do you see these two phrases playing out over the next couple of weeks. >> over the next couple of

months the phrases are going to be a non-event. the event is where are the job reports, that come out between now and then. as far as calling obama obamaloney. and romney hood. the olympics are going on and not a lot of people are paying attention. they're trying to get people tuned in again. they're working very hard to get people on their side with what is probably a very small section of the electorate that has not yet made up their minds. for the romney perspective it's good to focus on not a good jobs report that picked up from 8.2 to 8.3. from the obama perspective all they can do is attack mitt romney and his plans. >> eliot: boris, you're correct. the numbers that matter are the jobs numbers. and when they fit into a pre-existing narrative and capturing is that the public believes in, and the short

snippet of the ad, they're putting a lot of money behind and it talks about the steel mill that was closed, the husband whose wife was sick. that again plays right into into the lack of sympathy concept. that's what i think they're beginning to win between that, the tax returns the bain, there is an unified attack that is cutting into mitt romney's capacity to understand the economy. >> this is sort of a piece of narrative that has been coming together through all wings of the democratic coalition over the last several months. the idea that romney is greedy that he lacks empathy. his economic plans his time at bain capital all of this sort of comes together in an unified

portrait that paints a picture of romney that i think has been much more consistent than what the romney campaign has tried to paint of obama. you had for a long time romney characterizing obama as sort of well intentions but well over his head. now they're moving towards something that is much more accusatory, more that he's a liar, and he's actually being intentionally nefarious and there have been different pieces of their attacks that have gone in different directions. i don't think it has been quite as focused. >> eliot: boris, i think molly has made an interesting point. the attack on on the president is morphing to nefarious. >> when the attacks from the president went live that's an argument you can make. from the romney campaign, they had opponents, starting with newt gringrich. it did not work against mitt

romney. now that obama and the democrats have picked up that mantle, and they're trying to do the same thing. they've gathered themselves around this message. but it's not working. look at the polls overall nationally it's within the margin of error. and in florida, it's almost one point. and ohio and pennsylvania are very tight as well. these messages, while they may be coherent from the democrats they're not working. that's what they should be looking at. why are they not working? the people are are see through this attack on mitt romney and seeing that this president has not deliver good i think you're right. it is tight maybe not as tight in the swing states. peep may be watching swimming more than the candidates at this point other than those who are junkies. does mitt romney need a lightening bolt? does he need someone who is more boring with a zen spring shower? which of the two makes more sense in terms of changing the dynamics of this race. >> i think boris is very right

saying that the polls have been essentially static. we've seen the same tight race. it's not a tie. obama has led in the polls in the swing states but only by a couple of polser pols. polls it's been a very tight race. they have not succeeded in blowing him out of the water to the point that people are absolutely unwilling to consider him yet. if, indeed, at all. and so the idea that romney, i guess you can look at that in two ways. you can look at despite all the fire he has taken romney is staying in this thing and what he needs to do is stay the course, and then people start tuning in and paying attention and it's getting closer to election day they'll go ahead if they don't screw anything up. or if they're staying this close and nothing is moving the

needle, they do need that lightening bolt. i think the fundamentals that we were talking about earlier the probably going to be still disappointing jobs numbers those are going to be what turns the last undecided voters. what they don't need is a sarah palin-type distraction that would turn the conversation to something else entirely and possibly take the emphasis off that referendum on the incumbent that they want to have. >> eliot: on a particular poll in question, which way do you think it will go. >> they should look for the best of both worlds. they don't need to look for a game change. >> eliot: which way do they go, lightening bolt or spring shower. >> they go for something like marco rubio someone in the senate and someone experienced but who will bring in the florida voters. you go out and see who can reach the voters you're not getting

them and then go close to the margin of error. there is a question you don't want to kick a long field goal and try--i'll kick your coverage because you can get there with the way you're going especially when the jobs are not going so good. >> eliot: does rubio give the florida vote to romney and does portman give the ohio vote to romney? do either one necessarily carry the home state. >> they give a whole lot of shot at that state. they're important and popular in that state. rubio a bit more so in florida than portman in ohio. >> eliot: molly, time runs short, rand paul, does he get a primetime speaking opportunity? the guy is a crank from right field. does he really get a primetime speaking opportunity. >> i would say a couple of things about that. they have announced that he is going to speak a role for his father, ron paul. it has not yet been announced. it will be interesting to see

how they'll handle that seeing that ron paul has not conceded yet to mitt romney. he has the ability to make trouble if he so chooses. rand paul is not his father. rand paul is someone who has been actually working very hard to ingratiate himself in the mainstream of the republican party in ways that ron paul never did. i don't think it's quite fair to paint him in the same mold as ron paul. >> eliot: we'll continue this next time. the good news, once the olympics are over, we have the conventions to look forward to. molly ball, and boris epstein great to have you both on our program. which senate races are the ones to watch. keep an eye on the money. that's coming up. >> we talk a lot about the

influence of money in politics. it is the defining issue of this era. the candidate with the most money does win. this is a national crisis.

>> eliot: turns out it doesn't matter whether you believe in climate change or not. it's real, and it's creeping up on us. one way to measure that is our number of the day. 1584. that's how many u.s. counties have been designated as primary natural disaster areas by the department of agriculture. because of the dry spell. that means more than half of the counties in america have been crippled by drought. corn and soybeans are withering in the fields. rivers are shrinking and grazing lands are drying up and blowing away. it's just all part of a trend. for the last few years we've been seeing more and more drought and heatwaves all over the world. and the culprit seems to be

global climate change caused by manmade pollution. the director of nasa's goddard institute says there is no other feasible explanation for this kind of sudden and drastic shift in overall temperatures. dr. james hansen warns about this back in 1988. now he says he was too optimistic. in a new study he reports what he called a stunning increase of the frequency of extremely hot summers. dr. hansen will appear on the show tomorrow night to give us details. but for now let's lay off the denials and start looking at this problem like grown ups. this is not a theory, not a projection not a drill. climate change is now a daily problem for more than half the country: clap >>the rich, you're going to destroy our economy." not true!

if you have an opinion, you better back it up. >>eliot spitzer takes on politics. >>science and republicans do not mix. >>now it's your turn at the only online forum with a direct line to eliot spitzer. >>join the debate now. >> eliot: every four years the eyes of the nation turn to the eyes of the president. while that race captures the majority of the headlines in donations the outcome of the legislative races could have an equally significant impact on the direction of the country. after republicans won control of the house of representatives in 2011, the democratically controlled senate remained the last line of defense from hyper partisan bills passed by house republicans. which is why this year the republicans are making a big push to take four seats in the senate to take control of that chamber as well. leading the push is karl rove who will be spending $4.2 million on ads in five states. missouri montana north doc

missouri and washington and nevada. for more on the push, let's bring back reed wilson, editor and chief of the hotline. welcome back. these five races i just listed, $4.2 million will crossroads gps continue this from now until november. are we just going to have watch week by week? >> it looks like they're vying for the following week, it looks like they put down $3 million for the following week. crossroads and crossroads gps are two organizations that have a lot of money. they can forward to be afford to be on the air for quite awhile. >> eliot: around just to do the simple math, 52, in the context

of the money they're raising they could continue with this pace without making a huge dent compared to the money they're spending. >> of course, as time goes on, television advertising gets more competitive. there is limited advertising and advertising slots. that means everything gets more expensive as they go. it's not going to have the punch that $4 million in late october will have. >> eliot: they may have bought up all the available spots. lucky tv viewers in those states. all they'll see is political advertising. let's zero in on a couple of these races because they will determine the control of the senate. let's start with virginia why youwhereyou have george allen and tim kaine. >> this is clash the titans. two former governors.

there is not a single person in virginia who don't know who they are. at the time moment the race is nearly tied. i don't know why people bother polling this race. every poll has somebody up one or everything all tied up. but when it comes down down to actual election day you'll see tim kaine running a few points ahead of obama. he'll find supporters in the outer washington suburbs and richmond surgeons who remember his tenure as mayor and governor and want his style of leadership rather than george allens. at the end of the day kaine probably pulls this one out. and it will be easier for him if obama were to win the state. >> eliot: there is a difficult stand between kaine and obama. he can't really distance himself from the president but he doesn't want to embrace him that much because it's a part of the state where the president is not very popular. >> yes, that's right.

he has put distance between himself and the bush tax cuts. but that's sort of a minor difference. it's not as if tim kaine can go out and say i never met this guy because of all the photos out there. this is the only way he can operate by putting a little bit the distance. voters respect that more than they would say kaine saying i'm not going to endorse him. >> eliot: an interesting contrast in montana, you have john tester who is in a tv spot, definitely distancing himself from the president. and then denny rayberg who has voted in the republican mainstream. he's are two guys who are trying to be more moderate in their party. >> this is one of those states where both sides have 100 hers name identification. everyone knows jon tester. he has a great grant and buzz cut and he only has two fingers on one of his hands because of a

accident. he makes light of that. on the other hand, denny rehberg who has been elected statewide up to seven times now lieutenant governor and congressman. he has made statewide runs in the u.s. senate before back in 1998. so these are two guys who are incredibly welcome known. they have good brands. this is interesting because it's one of the races where the presidential race won't touch. obama, romney, they're not advertising. that gives a lot more opportunity for the candidates themselves to have control of their message. so often today we're in this parliamentary system where the color of the jersey means more than the name on the back. in montana you have a place where two people are going to be able to establish their independent brands. that's the fascinating part to watch. >> eliot: in montana what is the issue, if there is one. tester voted for the healthcare bill. is that popular or not in a state like montana? >> it's not popular any more

popular than anywhere else. it's a an issue that has not got gotten a lot of traction. rehberg and they try to go after that early. they're going to be talking about the wolf population and the pipeline that would run through montana. thei think we're going to be fighting those fights in montana more than the national healthcare stimulus, that kind of thing. >> eliot: all politics is local. the unemployment rate in montana being incredibly low. we'll want you to come back in weeks ahead. this will control the senate which will matter a whole lot. thank you once again for your insight. >> thank you. >> eliot: nasa makes it to the dale lay show. the viewfinder is coming up next.

[ charles ] when you can make a person smile when they taste the food that you cooked, it does something to your heart. i think what people like most about the grilled food is the taste. the flavor comes from that oak wood. the shrimp, the fresh fish the steaks. it locks in the flavor it seals in the juices so that when you put the fork in it, it just goes through it like butter. it's beautiful. [ laughs ] i'm proud to be a grill master. i love food. my name is charles himple. i'm a red lobster grill master and i sea food differently.

>> eliot: still to come, mixed signals from the fred.

but first colbert celebrates the mars landing and honey boo boo celebrates her roots. i assume that sentence makes sense to someone. it doesn't to me. when it doesn't fit anywhere else, we put it in the viewfinder. >> a nation, it is a proud day for america. our chests are puffed. our flags are flying, and we're singing that verse of the national anthem with all the curse words in it because at 1:30 a.m. america standard time nasa's curiosity rover touched down on the surface of mars! [ cheering ] >> we marsed it. whew! [ cheering ] >> the celebration was cut short so that mission control crew would not be late for their shift at best buy. >> more real conservatives, tea

party activists republicans or constitutionalists want the second amendment right to be put in the hands of weak, pacifists, and we're literally going shooting on today's episode of " "political chick." >> meanwhile, mitt romney is gearing up for his bus show and guess who is running shotgun which vice president pick? >> forget about shark week. here is the first installment of shaq week. [ ♪ music ♪ ] [laughter] [laughter]

>> she likes to get down and dirty. >> we are a redneck. >> we are a redneck. >> tell your new saying. >> you better redneckize. >> i don't know what to say to that? i think that is a perfect place to wrap up. >> eliot: i wish that would wrap it up. doing nothing republicans inspire a do-nothing federal reserve. coming up next. >> this court has proven to be the knowing, delighted accomplice in the billionaires' purchase of our nation. >> and you think it doesn't affect you? think again. fruit just got cooler. fruit on one side, cool on the other.

a fruity, cool way to break the ice. joining us. >> my pleasure. thanks for having me, man.

so, you guys grew up together. yes, since third grade... what are you lookin' at? not looking at i anything... we're not good enough for you. must be supermodels? what do you model gloves? brad, eat a snickers. why? 'cause you get a little angry when you're hungry. better? [ male announcer ] you're not you when you're hungry™. better. [ male announcer ] snickers satisfies. >> eliot: writing "the new york times" a little over a month ago, paul krugman questioned why

it is that in the face of the still struggling economy and high unemployment federal reserve is doing next to nothing to help the situation. he said, quote my guess is that it's intimidated by those congressional republicans that it's afraid to do anything that might be seen as providing political aid to president obama, that is anything that might help the economy. and if you had any doubt that he was right when asked about the possibility of another round of quantitative easing, richard fisher president of the dallas federal reserve told reuters that this week that the fed could be hesitant to make a move because it could been seen as being politically motivated. however, not all fed bank presidents are set on cowering to political factors. of course, the most important decision will be made by federal reserve chair ben bernanke who could make his opinions known

when he speaks at the fed's annual conference at the end of the month. joining me now gilliantett. who is right here. should the fed be doing more and it can change the outcome here? >> i think what the fed can do right now is keep up the pressure on the political positions and make it clear the terrible costs of this fiscal inaction. in terms of the practicality of what they could do, it could go out and do more quantitative easing buying more securities, government bonds. the issue is right now the interest rates are near rock bottom lows, and it's unclear how much of a boost it would have. it certainly can express it's deep frustration with the current political climate and point out some of the very big risks if these positions carry

on sitting on their hands. >> eliot: the fed historically, right, alloyed tried to avoid being a political animal. the fear of action can be seen as being political as well the active acting. failure to act is just as political as acting in the face of politics. >> absolutely. the fed is caught between a rock and a hard place for two reasons. firstly, it's very clear if this gridlock continues it's going to be very damaging, and the it's to make sure that the economy is healthy. one of the big risks right now is politics. they have to talk about it because if it doesn't, it's ignoring one of the key factors acting as a drag on the economy. the second reason why the fed is in a very tough spot in terms of political views is that if it's going out and doing more government bonds, it's

essentially helping to finance the government debt. it's keeping the rates low right now. that's taking off the pressure for radical reform in the fiscal front. it can pretend that it's devoid of politics, but it's a bit of a fiction. the fact that we've seen this descent, no one knows what the impact of this kwan at at quantitative is and is not. and the degree of policy debate that's is going on about what the best course of action is. >> eliot: the chairman of the fed, ben bernanke has as directly as he possibly can said to congress you got to start to doing something. we've fired all the arrows in our quiver. we've used all the policies at our disposal. to push the yield curve down

three years out will only have a tiny marginal impact on businesses and consumers, so there is not a whole lot more that they can do. rhetoric is all they're left with. what more can the fed do at this point? >> right now the fed is in a funny situation simple to the european central bank. they know it's on the politicians to act. they're frustrated with the politicians on both sides of the atlantic and they're strike to keep the pressure on the politicians to do something. but at the same time they don't want the economy to go completely into a downward spiral. it's a very delicate balancing act for the fed right now. yes, it could buy more ones and more mortgage-backed securities. it could go into marketses indirectly and do clever things with the banks by reserve the balances that they keep at the fed. if they try to encourage and go forward and lend rather than

holding the cash they have. but it's not just the fact that interest rates are near zero, if you adjust for inflation, right now you have negative rates. people are going out buying government bonds are guaranteed to lose money if the current predictions are correct. that's an extraordinary thing even that is not getting the economy swimming properly. it's treading water right now and it's very hard to see what's going to get it properly under way. >> eliot: we need inflation and the fear of inflation to get people to take money out of the bank do something with those dollars, invest in investments and it's easy in negative real returns if you buy t-bills or the inflation rate, if there was a higher rate of inflation people would invest and produce theoretically a positive return. maybe th do something to produce more inflation, does that make sense.

>> what the fed is doing at the moment is likely to generate inflation. sitting idling now like damp wood in a bonfire waiting to get dried out. but you can bet your bottom dollar it could start burning. the fed is doing its part to create some element of inflation or to avoid deflation. what it really needs it confidence. not amongst the consumers but businesses too. getting confidence where the economy is going and the future of america is really going to rest on the government providing a clear road map not just on the fiscal side although that's very important, but also in terms of where jobs are going to come from in the future. >> eliot: i like your metaphor, throwing tarp damp wood on a fire. gillina tett. thank you so much for your time. >> thank you.

>> eliot: my view ahead here on "viewpoint." ughhh. trash builds up and can make your dishwasher smell. over time, grease and residue get stuck inside. for an intensive clean use finish dishwasher cleaner. it's taking out the trash for your dishwasher.

[ air howling ] [ air howling ] peppermint that cools as you chew. stimulate your senses. 5 gum. now in micro pack. she's every 5-year-old who ever jumped in a pool and didn't want to get out. ♪ ♪ every coach, every rival who ever pushed her. she's the tip of a spear that goes all the way back to the beginning. it's amazing how far you can go with a little help along the way. td ameritrade. proud sponsor of the 2012 u.s. olympic team.

>>now let's get some real news. (vo) first, news and analysis with a washington perspective >>you couldn't say it any more powerfully than that. >> current tv, on the roll. (vo)followed by humor and politics with a west coast edge. >>ah, thank you. >>it really is incredible. (vo)bill press and stephanie miller, current's morning news block. weekdays six to noon. >> eliot: two mass shootings in two weeks, yet still no serious talk about gun control. i'll offer a solution in my view. but ahead in "the war room" with jennifer granholm, political commentator abby huntsman will discuss who mitt romney will pick as his running mate and why. and political satiristw.kamau bell will chime in. we'll have more next.

>> eliot: again, for the second time in just over two weeks the horror of a crazed, gun wielding maniac wreaking havoc and death on a community. in the case of oak creek wisconsin, because of a right wing racist agenda that seeks to blame others for the severe problems of the sick individual who pulls the trigger. yes, people pull the trigger but guns are the instrument of death. gun control is necessary and delay means merely more death and horror. so what have we heard from the presidential contenders? pablum. romney hides behind the misunderstanding of the second amendment and the white house blames congress. here's the white house press secretary jay carney on monday. >> he does support renewing the assault weapons ban. i think what i've noted in the past and what i've noted here is the reluctance by congress to

pass that renewal. >> if the white house really does want to act not just give us more recognize recollect more rhetoric, it has the tools to do so. using government's power in the marketplace as a largest purchaser of guns to force the companies we buy from to act properly. i first proposed this idea when i was attorney general in new york in 2000. but it was impossible to forge a coalition of executives willing to act. maybe things have finally changed. the government uses it power in the marketplace all this way all the time. just two examples. infamous tarp program conditioned to bail out funds on limits to executive compensation and properly so. and contractors who want to work for many government entities at the municipal level in the particular have to pay a living wage, and ensure diversity in

their workforce. here's how it could work with guns. the defense department and the city of new york are among the largest purchasers of gun. if the president and the mayors truly believe that semi-automatic weapons they should not buy from companies who will not pull semi-itics from their stock or from companies that keep producing magazines with more than ten rounds other than for sale to the government. for example. the president and mayor bloomberg should announce that the semi automatic handguns with high capacity magazines used in oak creek, aurora, colorado, to you san arizona and virginia tech can no longer be sold to private citizens by any company that wants to do business with the federal government. stop blaming the legislature act immediately. that's my view.

>>it's the place where democracy is supposed to be the great equalizer, where your vote is worth just as much as donald trump's. we must save the country. it starts with you.

what's my secret for sunday lunch? my little helpers... and 100% natural french's yellow mustard. it has zero calories for me, and a taste my family loves.

>> eliot: it was once said that there was strength in unions. but labor unions once a bastion of strength for american workers and the muscle behind the middle class have seen their relevance fade dramatically. in states like wisconsin ohio, indiana, missouri, legislative efforts weakening unions have been bolstered by republican governors. so this is no coincidence that

the gap between rich and poor has steadily widening as unions have a taken a dive, plummeting to 11% of all workers in only the last decade. but there is hope yet. in their new book labor historians dan katz and richard greenwald, demonstrate why and how the labor movement can and must be saved. with me now are the co-edtiers of the new book, "labor rising: the past and future of working people in america." thank you for joining me. dan, let me begin with you. the economy mirrored by gdp is back where it was before the cataclysm before '08 and there are fewer workers, wages are stagnant and they've been going down for many years. what can be done and what can unions do in that. >> what can be done the labor

movement can organize and organize in ways that they haven't done in a long time. the reason why we wrote and edit editing "labor rising" is because we thought there were many lessons in history for organizing workers in ways that haven't been done before. that could be done again and perhaps in new ways and contexts. there are a number of unions on the cutting edge, and the of a hasafl/cio has a number of incubator projects that give us thought about in ways unions can organize in the united states, north america and throughout the world. >> eliot: it's a collection of essays by thoughtful historians and economists. there are contingent workers. workers who are not working on an assembly line, a purpose for which forming unions was easy. it's a more difficult environment. how do you overcome the new economy and the problems and

hurdles that poses to increase union memberships. >> i think the way work has been organized really since the late 1970s has been to push all the risk that used to be shouldered by corporations and by government on to individual workers. the outsourcing and freelancing and gig economy that has resulted on that has put a lot of pressure on individual workers. many of them are very isolate. there are moments. we asked scholars to look at moments either in contemporary life or in the past where workers overcame those obstacles and forged some alliances. for instance, in the new york city area, freelancers union is organizing. it is probably one of the most--the largeest worker organizations in new york city although it's not quite recognized as an union. it really is a cooperative at

this point. it's bringing workers together and educating them politically and getting them motivated to vote politically. it's also getting them educated on retirement benefits, you know, health benefits and those kinds of things. >> eliot: but as you point out in the book, the economy is structurally very different. you're right freelancers academic smart maybe you can forge with workers of that sort. but in the world where the it's vertically workers to employer, and organizing it's a a point in time where our manufacturing base looked very different. how do you forge that sense of common purpose where these days it doesn't simply exist? >> well, in fact, the way unions are beginning to reimagine the labor movement is a much more of

a global labor movement. there are connections being made. for example the steelworkers. they're creating formal organizations, not just with canada, but with mexico, great britain, brazil and south africa. right now the president of the mexican mine workers union napoleon gomez is operating as a president re-elected out of an office in vancouver because he had to flee mexico under threat of mine owners and corrupt politicians. there are ways in which unions are beginning to reach out internationally. the afl/cio has an organization that has 25 field offices around the world, operating in 64 countries, making connections between on the local level and international level, unionses around the world. >> eliot: you're making a fascinating point.

in a global economy workers would still be competing against workers in china or wherever it may be. so you need an union as movable as the capital. would workers here in tennessee have something in common with workers in province of china. is that a possible solution? >> the challenge in the united states, if you want to look at the u.s. to get the american people to hear the side of labor, and to understand what's going on. you know, one of the essays talks about the communication strategies of unions and working class folks. they've been shut out. the story of what unions have done how they created the middle class the positives that they had done throughout american history are completely complete

obliviate did from the story. and part of that is telling the story globally getting workers connected. >> eliot: i agree with you and emotionally i'm with you every step of the way. politically in the past two years, the recall effort in wisconsin, which did not turn out the way the union movement wanted and occupy wall street and the union movement, it does not appear to have happened yet. are these opportunities lost or are we missing critical ingredient of workers and a common purpose that goes beyond academics? dan, what's the answer? >> well, first of all i think what happened in wisconsin is still unfolding. it's also a mixed result. the democrats won back the senate and you know, in that same period there is a referendum in ohio that overturned the same kind of legislation that happened in wisconsin.

so i think that's mix: but also occupy wall street, you know, you have to remember that occupy wall street did not fizzle out. it was crushed by police action. it was coordinated activity by mayors around the country. and that did not stop the activity. there is a lot of those young people in occupy wall street that went on to occupy houses, and housing and urban centers that are involved in union activities. a number of tm are beginning to get jobs in unions. the story is really just unfolding. and also again it's about a new internationalism. and just as occupy wall street was being crushed the student movement in québec was heating up. for last semester there is this provin in québec, and it's part of this largeer global movement against neo-liberalism and global capitalism. so to zoom the camera in and to

say that a battle may have been won or lost, it's not the entire story. and the story of labors demise has been told over and over again in history. in 1877, 1886, 1919, all these are moments in which the epitaph of labor has been written and then labor rises again. usually under the radar of mainstream media. >> eliot: you make a fascinating point. like a phoenix labor rises again and again and can it do so in an environment that is structurally different and can we understand the trade and as it pertains to who the inners winners and losers are. co-edtiers dan katz and richard greenwald. thank you for yo