truism was evil. selfishness is the one moral good. this is w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w for. it's deplorable. "viewpoint" isnext. >> good evening. i am eliot spitzer. this is "viewpoint." the big topic on the campaign trail today, energy and paul ryan's fiscal hypocracy made headlines in mitt romney's hometown newspaper. all four candidates worked the crowds in swing states that could prove crucial in november. president obama was in iowa for a second day in a row. vice president biden was in virginia, not north carolina despite what he said at one point. paul ryan, mitt romney's new running mate was in colorado and nevada and romney in ohio where the former massachusetts governor told coal miners that his energy policy included coal

gas and oil while the president's did not. if you don't believe in coal oramerica. if you believe the whole answer for our energy needs is wind and solar, say that. >> in fact mr. obama has said something a lot closer to a what paul ryan said to a g.o.p. crowd near denver. >> we have our own oil and gas. we have nuclear. we are all of the above, wind solar, coal. let's use it. >> mr. obama focused on wind which he says provides 20% of the states power fly supply. he tweaked his rfl. >> governor romney explained his energy policy this way: . i am quoting here you can't drive a car with a windmill on it. now, i don't know if he has tried that. i know he has had other things on his car. >> the legend of shamus the

family drogba he drove to canada in a roof carrier. as did biden's unfetterred way calling to roll back wall street regulations by romney. >> he said he will let the big banks white write their own rules, unchain wall street. >> boo. >> going to put y'all back in chains. >> romney campaign spokes won and degree i can't demanded an apology saying in part, and i quote: the comments made by the vice president of the united states are not acceptable in our political discourse. president obama should tell the american people whether he agrees with joe biden's comments. >> obama deputy campaign manager stephanie cutter said campaign had quote no problem with those comments, adding that the romney campaign missed the point. >> i appreciate the full outrage from the romney campaign. what the vice president was talking about, if you look at those remarks is that there is a consequence to repealing wall

street reform. we are going to go back to the days where they write their own rules. >> the romney-ryan campaign launched a new attack on a new front, medicare. >> you pay into medicare for years. every paycheck. need it, obama has cut $716,000,000,000 from medicare. why? to pay for obamacare. >> no mention of the 700 billion ryan cuts for medicare in his own budget plan. if the hypocracy seems typically, the 7 term greingszman made his name as a fiscal conservative opposed to big government and a massive spending program. but a story in the bostonchrome club says in 2008 ryan condemned the obama stimulus program as a quote wasteful spending spree and that he asked the department of energy for millions in stimulus dollars and after two wisconsin groups were awarded millions in grants ryan thanked energy secretary chu saying the project would, quote create new jobs.

the year before, ryan also had his hand out for earmarks from a stay more than $3 million for a bugs serve 1.38 million for the ice age seenic trail and $735,000 for the transit system in jane ville. perhaps more significant, he supported two big grams condemned by the gop including the tarp wall street ball out and the auto industry bail out. his kong congressional defended the earmarks and grants he fought for in 2010 saying ryan didn't believe a flawed policy should interfere with his doing his job for constituent which goes to show while congressman ryan may be a partisan on the stump, when it comes to tax dollars, he is a bi-partisan spender. for more on the campaign trail let's go to molly ball political correspondent for the atlantic. molly, help me out here. i see the candidates, all over the country in the swing states and i keep asking myself: will paul ryan help mitt romney win any of those swing states? i don't think so.

tell me i am wrong. explain what will mitt romney is up to in picking paul ryan? >> i don't think we know yet is the answer. i think this is something that's going to play out as the american people get to know paul ryan. all of the evidence is they very well so far. it's a congressman. he doesn't have very large constituency. a senator from a big state is not going to be well known outside his state. people will get to know him. >> that's why it's so important, the mentions that's going on right now and the sort of audition that he is having on the national stage, and we are not seeing him making mistakes have a sort of sarah palin rollout where all of the things they would rather not be talking about, they didn't anticipate about him are over 145d owingshad owing the presentation. i think ryan helps him in those midwestern states like

wisconsin. at a time wasn't on the map before. ohio and places like iowa and it may be pennsylvania where you have large consenttrations of white working-class voters. in ohio where you mentioned romney was talking about energy. part of that coal country. they are up seatbelt with the president about what's happened to the coal industry. the problem is, though that these midwestern -- these rest belt states are aging rapidly and those white working class volters are senior voters and so, if the democrats succeed in the messaging that they are doing on medicare, that could be a double-edged swart, i think, for the romney campaign. >> that's the issue which i think will come back to haunt them. you are right. paul ryan is smart. he is thoughtful nimble and quick on his feet. having said that the issue in 2010 that republicans actually ended up fearing was the medicare proposal in paul ryan tests budget. now, mitt romney has embraced it. so i wonder as that medicare debate begins to become the

debate, t.v. ads about it and a back and forth, will not paul ryan's medicare proposals be a dead weight around mitt romney's neck? >> again, i think that remains to be seen. the ideas in paul ryan's budget particularly around are unpopular when you poll the ideas. but paul ryan is a very good salesman a very good messenger for these identifies. i think democrats under estimate him at their peril. you have seen campaign making an aggressive move to try to get ahead of the medicare issue by pointing to the cuts to medicare that are in obama care. this is a playbook that the democrats tried in a special election in nevada last year. and it's a two-pronged playbook. number 1, go on offense, and attack your opponent on medicare before they can attack you. and, number 2, bring out your mom. and you see ryan doing that as well every time this comes up saying, well my mom is a senior on medicare in florida and she

thinks my plan is justify fine. so it's worked for the republicans before. entitlesments have not been a good issue for them in the past. but i think it's all going to depend on who wins that messaging battle. >> you are correct. this will be the battleground. interestingly, even though mitt romney has debay from his tax returns and from bain capital, the deb now in is about medicare, not jobs. i would have expected him to want the new twist to be that we should be debating who is going to get the economy going. instead, we are discussing fiscal consequences medicare and the federal budget, which is not his natural base. >> yeah, i think that's true. i mean let's remember though, that we weren't exclusively discussing jobs before paul ryan came along. we were, like iyou say, talking about things like romney's taxes returns and over trivalties. today, the campay sees to return. they have the knee generally reflex. they can't help themselves. they have to mount these fake outrage campaigns on every little thing that comes along.

they will all clutch pearls and faint to how the other side is de debasing the discourseeint to how the other side is debasing the discourse. how the complex works. but i think one thing that the romney team realized over the past several months of the campaign, they thought all they needed to do was sort of sit tight, tight, sit on their hands and this would be a referendum campaign. what they didn't realize is that, we in the media and people paying attention to the campaign get board, need things to talk about, are not going to allow them to just say the same thing over and over again every day. we are going to be distracted by shiny objects. they might as well have one of their own. >> i am not sure paul ryan. >> he is shiny. >> i am not passing judgment. it has shifted from a referendum campaign to a choice pam pain. i am not sure the choice they are giving the electorate is the one they want. great to have you on the program. >> thanks, elliott. >> for a closer look at congressman ryan let's go to john nickals washington correspondent and author of

"uprising "uprising" from madison to wealth. john, thank you for joining us. >> it's a pleasure to be with you. >> let me ask you this about paul ryan. is his incarnation over the past year two years, as this fiscal conservative who is going to tame the budget is that the real paul ryan, or is that a big spender as soon as he can get anything for his constitwens see or any interest favored by the chamber of commerceuenc see or any interest favored by the chamber of commerce paul ryan is not a conservative. he is certainly not a fiscal conservative by any measure that would be understood frankly by the people who are cheering him right now. he has been at odds with the tea party agenda on some fundamental issues. for instance, he voted for the bank bail-outs. he also voted for the auto bail-out. and here is an interesting thing. when the bank ball out came down, every way watched paul ryan. he was considered to be the critical player because if paul

ryan had gone against the bank bail-out, there was a sense that amount of the younger conservatives would say that's a bridge too far. the initial house vote went against the bail-out. there was a verevolt. ryan became the critical player. he went to the floor and becked -- incredible tape of this. he begged his federal conservatives to vote to bail out the big banks. if this is a tea party fiscal conservative, i would say, you know, boy, he has an interesting way of showing it. >> david stockman had a fascinating and i thought powerfulop-ed. he was the true fiscal conservative in the reagan era. he is looking at the entire shared right now saying you guys are jokers not libertarians, not fiscal conservatives. there is this fundamental tension within the republican party, corporatists who bow down todd to the needs of wall street

and big banks and corporate entities versus those who actually have a core conservative ideology and david stockman called out paul ryan and mitt romney saying you guys are jokers. >> well in fact i think paul ryan is actually more of a corporatist than mitt romney. mitt romney came out of the obviously the vulture capitalist world and that's a big part of who he is. but the truth of the matter is that if you look at ryan ryan is willing to, you know, really shape any principle, to go the way that corporate lobbyists ask. in fact, the interesting thing is that he is referred to as this bold courageous thinker as regards budget issues but there is always an asterisk, and that asterisk is that he is bold courageous, breaks with the status quo except when the u.s. chamber of commerce says don't do it. >> uh-huh. >> when the u.s. chamber of commerce says, vote for a bail out. vote for a free trade deal.

vote for medicare part d because it's great for the pharmaceutical companies and a massive expansion of spending in a very irresponsible way he does it. >> after you read -- i actually read more than i want to of ryan's budget. i think it's a complete sham a fraud, a sham. >> yeah. >> a complete joke the principles he pretends to read in. you read his budget. he goes on at length about individual responsibility, we need to go back to the notion people have to earn their keep and make it on their own and yet he doesn't touch the hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies to the oil companies in every tax loop hole that is there for big corporate america and the we can'ty arrive with hypocracy. why are more people within his party not calling him out on this? he influence under the radar a long time. he comes from a congressional district that has no major media market in it. he never had a local paper or t.v. station going after him on a regular basis. it was really where he was able

to write his own myth in washington, loyal republican and a very nice guy one on one. so i think people forgave a lot. but the one thing to remember and the one thing that anybody serious about our economy should not forgive is this: his proposed referrals, his most desired reforms, as regards social security, medicare and medicaid all default to taking money out of the federal treasury and moving it to speculators on wall street or to insurance companies via vouchers. so again and again and again, he is not for downsizing government government. he ises for using the government to collect money and then redistributing that money to the wall street speculators and the insurance companies that top the list of his campaign contributors. >> all right, john nichols, you finally, called out paul ryan and called him what he is, a corporatist who is not loyal to the principles he pretends to abide by. john nichols, washington correspondent for "the nation,"

author of "uprising" from madison to wall street. thank you for your time thank you. get irresistibly clean and fresh carpets in your home with resolve deep clean powder. the moist powder removes three times more dirt than vacuuming alone while neutralizing odors for a clean you can see, smell and really enjoy. don't just vacuum clean. resolve clean. rich, chewy caramel rolled up in smooth milk chocolate. don't forget about that payroll meeting. rolo.get your smooth on. now in minis. [ dennis' voice ] i bet he's got an allstate agent. they can save you up to 30% more by bundling your policies. well his dog's stupid. [ dennis' voice ] poodles are one of the world's smartest breeds.

are you in good hands? ttv

e reinforces he wants campaign to be about jobs and the budget not the area where the president has the most unilateral control, foreign policy. because romney doesn't want to talk about it doesn't mean the uncertain issue of foreign policy will not rear its ugly head. after defecting last way, senate riad jabab says they control 304% of the country and says the regime is on the verge of collapse. the death toll in the syrian civil war has surpassed 20 78. elsewhere in egypt, president miami morrisey forced the two highest ranking military officials out of their posts. in the war in one wants to talk about, 46 people were skilled by suicide bombers in afghanistan.

here to explain where the fortunately policies difference from that of the president and what romly will do is michael 0 hanlon co author of bending history barack obama's foreign policy. thank you for joining us. >> nice to be with you. >> first, let me ask: does it matter? much is being made of the fact govern romney doesn't have a foreign policy pedigree neither did barack obama. does that matter when you look back at presidents and how they handle foreign policy issues? >> i think it helps a lot if you have a clear sense of your over all-american priorities. if you have a practicinggmatic approach and if you know how to separate out good advice from pour advice. by those standards, even though i probably favor intamingsz's foreign policy at stud and philosophy over all, i would give romney passing grades and i think he is, you know also a guy who has been running for president on and off for half a dozen years so he has had to think throughphon foreign policy to the ex at the time a candidate has to. i would consider him relatively new to this business but not

scary to me. i think, you know, he is competent and generally practicing mat ig and has the right kind of way of approaching problems. i would tend to be fairly off the mystic as a matter of his personal style and background and intel he can't. >> it doesn't sound as though the skill set that you defined differed very significantly from the skill set that any executive who wanted to bring to any set of issues, foreign policy domestic economic budget issues. you are saying know how to make decisions, have your priorities and distinguish good from bad advice. not to diminish it but that means you have got to be a good executive and the particular wisdom that stacks to knowledge about one region of the world is less important? >> i think that's right but i would add one more thing with foreign policy which is avoid illusion of control. we americans are used to having so much influence in the world, we have had a lot of now and yet, especially with the kinds of conflicts that you just mentioned you know in your introduction the ideas of the united states calling all of the

shots is an illusion and we have to avoid that kind of arrogance. i think romney has been tracking foreign policy issues long enough that even though he hasn't been seasoned by his own personal choices, decisions and setbacks he still is probably aware of just how hard it is to get amount of these, you know, crises or conflicts or other challenges sorted out. and so i think you need a certain humility and a certain experience in, in thinking through the problem, whether or not you have been implementing solutions, yourselves. >> that's a fascinating observation because as all domestic politics is local, the particular crises we just range through in the introduction as you say are local conflicts, which have ideology super imposed on them but many presidents coming in with the i will lucien to impose order and they learn that they can't. president obama experienced that in variance regions where after great species, nothing happened. >> yeah. i think that's fair. bam has done very well at separating out his idealistic visions from, you know, sort of

managing the inbox. >> that's one of the themes in our box, bending history he has not do all that great vis-a-vis the grandhome philosophies of remaking the world he articulated the world in '07 '08. but he has done well in handle, the immediate challenges before him. he is an unusual guy. he is a gifted guy. he has made that pivot pretty well going from big think and big dreams to pragmatism. >> that's a challenge for any new president. it was especially a police department challenge for -- challenge for obama giving the visions he wouldn't to promulgate and get elected with. romney might not have as big ambitions so he might not have as hard of a time celling back down to earth. on a on a couple of issues, like russia, he has overstated where he can realistically go or what would be prudent. he will have to go through a period of reeducation, himself, if he wins. >> you wrote a fascinating piece in politico in which you ticked off a number of areas where there will be differences and

began with an economic area which was the budget as it relates to specifically defense department. explain what that difference might be and what that reflects in terms of foreign policy? >> this gets to the whole decline debate. has america seen better days? where is our economy headed? people don't make enough to link. you cannot be a foreign policy president if you don't have a strong economy to base your military and your foreign aid on which to base just your role in managing global economic crises. i think here, of course barack obama has had a tough four years. i don't primarily blame him for it but it's been a tough four years. i agree with romney the main focus of this campaign should be about how to strengthen our economy, even from a foreign policy point of view. i am not sure i agree with the governor about whether his plan is going to help because he wants to increase defense spending and cut taxes. this will exacerbate a big did he have silt, our number 1 concern. i agree with romney insofar as he has correctly identified the

problem. i am not sure he has a better solution than the incumbent. >> china, certainly for the next 20 or 30 years would imagine one of the most complicated and important relationships we will cultivate and nurture theres a die virgentions how you see how they would i am complement that relationships. >> at least a couple of things. of course they are both trying to get tough on china comically. governor romney talked about designating it a currency manipulator. i am not sure how much difference it's going to make. he has taushd a tough game there. it's a classic approach over the decades. the incumbent tends to be selectsed into a china policied that's at some level more accommodating. the challenger tends to be tougher. in romney's indication he wants to do quite a bit with these defense dollars as best i can tell. that would be largely focused on the broader pacific, to some extension the persian gulf but china's rise. romney is saying let's deal with china right now. let's get in its face militarily

a little bit more. obama is saying the challenge is more down the road. we can afford some military cutbacks in the short-term in order to reduce our deficit as part of integrated deficit reduction to strengthen our long-term prognosis vis-a-vis china. there is agreement about the time horizon we need to be concerned about. it's a good debate. >> finally the relationship with the muss let me world where the president began with a grand speech in die row, an outreach there that was a welcome back let's renew this relationship. has that worked and how would governor romney handle that? >> well, of course romney is much more focused on supporting israel and making that unambiguous, obviously his foreign trip recently did that. his speech making has done that. his willingness to bless any israeli strike on iran's facilities has reinforced that. president obama has been much more of the view we have to reach out to the israeli and broader muslim world simultaneously. i tend to agree with the president, withes president obama, on the other hand i have

to acknowledge it hasn't worked that well in a number of key cases. packtan is a policy area where we are having a lot of trouble. the pakistanis don't like us despite obama being in the white house. you know the arab-israeli peace process is not going well. obama handled the egyptian revolution pretty well. >> that's been an area of practicing matgmatic pragmatic, restrained american support for revolution the egyptians leading themselves. you started with syria. we can finish with syria perhaps. >> that's an area where either guy is going to have enormous challenges and we don't have it figured out yet. >> right. as you body out a few moments ago, michael, in fact, i think any president is going to come in and realize that our omniptins is an illusion of the past and we are -- our hand if not tied are limited in terms of what we can do in so many of these tough regional context. michael o'hanlon senior fellow at the brookins institution co-author of "bending history". thank you. >> republicans love paul ryan and democrats love to

so... [ gasps ] these are sandra's "homemade" yummy, scrumptious bars. hmm? maybe. rich chocolate chips... i just wanted you to eat more fiber. chewy, oatie, gooeyness... and, and...and then the awards started coming in, and i became addicted to the fame. topped with chocolaty drizzle... and fraudulence. i'm in deep, babe. you certainly are. [ male announcer ] fiber one. fiber beyond recognition.

hey joe, can you talk? sure. your hair -- amazing. thanks to head and shoulders for men. four shampoos that give men game-winning scalp protection, great looking hair... and confidence [ male announcer ] up to 100% flake free with head & shoulders for men.

the paul ryan pick does it help or hurt the g.o.p. ticket? first, paul ryan brings democrats and republicans together. he redid he have finds bold. when it doesn't fit anywhere else we put it in the viewfinder. >> this is a cbs news correction. on saturday we mistakenly reported mitt romney had chosen paul riser as his running mate. >> with one choice, mitt romney has done what obama couldn't do in three and a half years: unite democrats and republicans. >> democrats seem as excited about the pick of ryan as republicans. >> this is a hard line. /the federal budget and mid care as we know it. >> conservatives like congressman. liberals don't. >> paul ryan wants to cut $700,000,000,000 out of medicare

and his tax plan would cut taxes to 1%. paul ryan wants. paul ryan wants to cut $700,000,000,000 out of medicare. his tax plan would cut top tax rates to 1%. paul ryan the change america wants? >> little known facts about paul ryan. again, he is only the 32nd white guy to become vice presidential nominee. >> the bold game changing choice here. >> bold. bold. bold. i mean so daring. i mean white, christian and male? >> this young man, this exceptionally impressive man represented the future of the republican party. >> the best pick romney could have made. >> upped rated as a talented politician. >> i never heard a baud thing even when i worked there, he is such a likeable guy. he is wickedly smart and then i

mean that in a good way. right? you need somebody like that. he is also almost painfully humble. >>thies those eyes just so blue. >> and, of course like all republican vp picks, he looked exactly like tina faye. >> america's comeback team? as in come back in four years and try again. >> all right. now, forget the ryan budget for a moment and forget the foreign policy talk. (applause) the best political insight leads to the best political foresight. first pick, i'm going to shock the world and pick, paul ryan. brillant. okay... with the number that just came out he's more inclined to throw long. in which case, i think the long one is paul ryan because the risks are higher. here in the obama war room... putting satire aside, i agree paul ryan would be great for democrats. for us it would fame the intellectual debate. see the future "live" weeknights starting at 7pm. uygur. spitzer. granholm. only on current tv.

[ male announcer ] the inventors of twix had a falling out, so the production of twix was divided between two separate factories. left twix factory cascades caramel and chocolate onto cookie, while right twix factory flows caramel and chocolate onto cookie. today they share nothing but a wrapper and a driveway. try both and pick a side. of sununu, you're wrong. mitt romney, you're wrong. we need more teachers, not fewer teachers and more cops and more firefighters that support our

>> lending much needed electricity itto the campaign, what does it mean to the strategy? is ryan a radical factor who lends substance to mitt romney's lack of style or another example of a george w. bush conservative, a cogservative by declaration only with a record of big spending? how will both sides attempt to frame the man, his plan and what his selection as a vice presidential candidate means for the future of the country? joining us to add to some of these questions, former huckabee campaign manager and former chief of stas to chris cathinis. chip, i have been speaking to the few republicans i know. not one of them actually thinks the paul ryan dmramname will help in a single swing state. prove me wrong.

i think he will help in virginia especially the southwest part. you saw in north carolina a he can switch that state and put in a republican column. i think that's another good grassroots state where paul ryan has energgized not only the party but the base. i think there is a lot of excitement out there. i think he will help in a couple of states and it may be move it to the toss-up column. >> i will get chris in here. chip, if you are worried about virginia and north carolina as swing states you can point to putting in your column, you are in bad shape. >> those are states that president obama won last time. looking at the electoral map, win states barack obama won, florida and ohio big states we have to win. if we can put virginia and north carolina and iowa on the board, that will be a big night in november. >> you need virg north carolina. you have to be taking those as a

begin. you have to talk pins wisconsin, florida. chris let me come to you. is the public going to give mall ryan for saying we are nag train wreck with our budget. pick your metaphor. he is talking sirius answers. with the democratic party isn't? >> i think a little bit of credit in the sense of talking about the big problems that the country faces. i think we all acknowledge need to be dealt with. the problem with ryan is the solutions. once you scratch past the nice rhetoric, what you find is a so-called budget expert that's not good at budgeting. you find a, you know, a fiscal conservative who isn't that fiscally conservative. i think the problem that ryan and romney are going to have is: this ticket doesn't make sense. it doesn't make sense politically. i am going to disagree with chip a lot to say the least. in terms of battlegrounds, this

does not help them in a single battleground at all. i mean at all. i mean wisconsin, i mean, i guess. maybe a little bit but he hasn't ran statewide in wisconsin. so i am not sure you can count that in. he is completely unknown in most of these states. where it helps him with romney is by energizing the conservativebation. doesn't that sound eerily familiar to what happened the last election when mccain was we need to chase up the conservative base and they chose sarah palin, when you are 90 days outed worried about jazzing up your base you have bigger problems than barack obama when i read the ryan budget he doesn't balance until after 2030. the ideas he was putting out there in terms of medicare were twisted in 2010 like a third rail of politics. they didn't work well with the public. what's the logic in bringing back a failed movie i think paul

ryan is one of the few ones talking about solutions. he has put forth a beaumont-- budget in the house that worked. >> chip. >> we have $16 trillion in debt arguing about $2 trillion, spending about $4 trillion, that's the math that doesn't add up. >> chip, chip, you know here is the problem i have. he is not talking about solutions. you cannot talk seriously about the deficit and the debt. right? our national debt is about 16 trillion right now. it's going to hit about 21 trillion by 221. we will spented more at that point on interest than we current do on defense, education, energy combined. >> that's the scope of the problem. if you want to deal with that problem, you can't sit there and actually pretend that you can actually increase defense spending and by a mathematical formula, going to achieve fiscal

solvency. it's laughable. this is frustrating when republicans talk about being fiscal conservatives. your math doesn't add up. >> what is barack obama done over the last three and a half years? added $4 trillion to that debt. what he has done is just keep spending, keep spending and keep spending. mitt romney and paul ryan are talking simple: stop the spending. get the budget under control and that's a good first step. >> out of the four people on the ballot mitt romney balanced the bucket. paul ryan has a plan. >> he had to. be honest. >> well barack obama had a chances over three and a half years and certainly hasn't got close. he hasn't got close. sonstitutional amendment should have a balt answered amendment as well. mitt romney is the only one who has balanced the budget. barack obama has not. >> you tell me how you are going to balance the budget without raising taxes on anybody? >> let me jump in hefor a second. i think we see the disagreement on the budget. i will be the referee. chip, you. your numbers don't add up. i am the neutral arbiter.

>> i am surprised you would rule in his. >> who said you would get an impartial judge on cable t.v. the social issues here is where i think the paul ryan story hasn't been told. explain to me. paul ryan is so far right. i mean, you know on the issues relating to choice and same sex-marriage and guns. how will that play in wisconsin. >> if you look at ohio the numberst it's a very pro life stave. those numbers, again, this is about turn out when we go into the november, and i know chris was talking about we saw that story in 2008. go back to 2004. george w. bush won ohio based on an increase of 4% turnout in the base and that's what got him the win in ohio which won him the election over john kerri. this is a operate simple thing. energize your base and get people to polls in november. paul ryan does that for mitt romney. >> chris, 10 seconds for the last word. is chip right? passion over persuasion? he will get it or not because of having paul ryan on the ticket?

i don't think so. listen i have no doubt vul an energgize base. they have energ job sites unlike i have seen in the last six months. thank you, republicans. you have accomplished a lot, made us really really happy. >> you are right. >> barack everybody hates all of the candidates. chip salzman, chris kofinas, thank you for your time tonight. >> thanks hershey's chocolate syrup. stir up a smile.

>> let's check in with gin fer granholm granholm. what have you got for us. >> you have been doing this, too, mitt romney's selection clearly was bold but it could have been a costly one. we will look at the g.o.p. governors and congressional candidates that are running away from ryan's budget and medicare like the playing. we will break it down with our favorite polsters including mudcat saunders, always a house

favorite. it's going to be a jam-packed show at the top of the hour. >> the question is: will the down ballots run away from this guy because they know people don't like his ideas? we will be watching g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g >> numbers can be cruel. they take away the soft gauzy rhetoric and subject them to a hard-edged reality. so it is for the ryan budget. it was a document lengthy enough such that it and he automatically acquired gravitas. but it was truly examined by precious few. >> that's probably a good thing for ryan. here is the number that is the key to ryan's view to the future: 3.75%. that number according to his analysis is the percentage of gdp that the government by 2050 will spend on everything other than medicare medicaid and

social security. in other words, as both the atlantic's derrick thompson and the washington post, he isra klein klein, point out, the money spent on food stamps environmental protection infrastructure are through the nih, the f.a.a., the f.b.i. veterans benefits and most note a.m.y, defense all together can cost no more than 3.75% of gdp. so what's the big deal? well romney says defense alone requires 4% of gdp. he has pledged that. the way i was taught arithmet tick 4 is bigger than 3.75 f the plans leave absolutely nothing for these critical areas of government spending. okay. let's say they moderate their views and go to 3% on defense leaving .75% for everything else. how much would that be? in today's dollars, that would

be $113 compil yon dollars. how much is that? less than the annual budget authority of the department of education alone. the point is, the line budget simply doesn't work. everything else from the justice department to the epa isn't going to just shut down. the numbers they put in their budget just don't add up. as the old saying goes, garbage in, garbage out. if as the right budget dictates, they refuse to let revenues go above 19% of gdp and refuse to realize an aging population will require additional spending in medicare and social security, they will simply not produce a document that comports with reality. so the ryan budget, even with its endings medicare as we know it leaves us with deficits until sometime between 2030 and 2040. nothing left for anything other than medicaid medicare social security and defense, and a tax plan that shifts more and more of the burden of all of this onto the middle class. in the critique is not ideology.

this is the simply air i thinkarithmettic of the ryan budget. the more folks learn about the r078ney-ryan budget the more folks will realize it is about as reliable as the fiscal plan of the last person to preach this gospel george w. bushshshshshshshshshshshshshshshshshshshshshshshshshshshshsh

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.

>> it is the trillion dollar question. what is holding us back from hiring? the answers, ceo's across the country insist it's the partisan paralysis, ceos blaming tax and regulatory uncertainty. they claim their lack of faith in congress to can compromise is putting off plans for investment and hiring out of fear that banksmanship on both sides would trigger $1.2 trillion in

automatic spending cuts come january 1st. they blame uncertainty about what the tax code will look like from them on. in an article from the wall street article, dennis bur says 35 have vented in the last couple of months okay he writes in separate interviews, executives made a simple point. washington is itself trapping much of the energy needed to real power the economy. find a finalingsmidge of chron ground and business will unleash that energy back. joining me to discuss what the ceo's memos to washington mean for the american economy is the author dennis burman. >> thanks for having me. >> do you believe them? are they pointing the finger? or do they think if washington got its house in hour they would start hiring. >> both. they are disingenuous in not recognizing what they might contribute to the gee bate or lack of civility in washington. but i think whether you agree with what they are doing in

terms of funding what they are their business needs are in washington, even if you don't agree with that in my mind there is no doubt that the paralysis in washington is stopping businesses from spending the money they need to spend. >> washington is a ses position. they can't make a decision. >> i do. >> everything there is a disaster, but the question in my mind is: is that why corporate america is sitting on 2 to $3 thillions dollars of can a be on as paul kruger would argue, a crisis? >> it's a big part of it. if you look a what one of the people in my story said he was a member of the st. louis federal reserve board and they service people around strolls and they are telling the fed: we do not want to spend. we cannot spend because we don't know what the taxes are going to be. we don't have confidence that the fiscal questions that are now being addressed by congress are going to get answered because they are probably not. >> look some other folks have written an article about bruce

bartlett a conservative who says the regulatory uncertainty is a canard. as somebody who is in business in the private sector i can tell you, i don't see uncertainty. i know what the tax it's a will be,a couple of points or two. >> that's enough whether capital gains is 15 or 20, marginal rate is 35 or 39, that won't be despositive on an investment whether there is demand for what i am make something what i look like. >> last july i remember what happened. >> we hit the fiscal cliftf, the last-minute bargain. both sides mulingsdzed along. the credit rating was downgraded. what we are talking alongddled along. the credit rating was downgraded. what we are talking along it may not be as deeply substantive as you want it to be but it's about confidence. it's about feeling. it's about the sense that the nation somehow has got its act together and do you think it does right now? >> sure. >> you have a life of politics. the answer is "no." ? >> there is no question the governing structure of our

government is failing. i take that as a premise. you get a lot of hard work listening to a lot of these calls. >> sure. >> and i applaud you. maybe you had no-doze to make it through these. where i differ i suppose, is where we are now is better from a certainty perspective than last summer. last summer, there was a threat of a government shut down. now we have gotten through that because they passed a continuing resolution to get a budget in order. there may be sequestration. that doesn't change macro economics of the nation. >> for a number of different industries and they pop up in the 35 ceos that i read. if you run a reit what your capital gains tax matters greatly greatly. if you run a health care company, how the government sequestration cuts are going to kick in matter. if you run a defense company, that matters greatly. you can take each individual industry and probably go down the list of 10 where, yes, on a macro basis, you may not feel that way. but one by one how the

government is spending its money matters. >> this is fascinating. when it comes to health care there is more uncertainty there perhaps than in other sectors. we are talking about what the cuts will be over a 10 year time horizon. i don't think the imagine contract orders are that uncertain about whether they will be able to begin the imagine ones. what you have done is highlight a major issue. ceos are talking about, are ceos doing anything about it? bringing their force to bear in washington and say do something. >> they are not. one thing i suggest, almost a bit flippantly in the column is to say, okay. if you believe this why don't you, as a ceo, say i am going to stop giving to both parties and think about the power of such a move if, say, the s & p 50 he on says each one, we are going to stop solving until you solve the problem. that be cool. >> that wasn't a flim ant idea. i wish you were listened to and taken issue is usely. dennis. appreciate your time and your thoughts. >> that's viewpoin