[ ♪ theme music ♪ ] >> eliot: good evening i'm eliot spitzer and this is "viewpoint"." paul ryan admits that when it comes to asking for federal stimulus dollars constituent services trumped fiscal purity. the obama administration makes a modest reduction from ten to five in their demands that mitt romney release more tax returns. and the latest poll numbers show romney got a modest bump at best for putting ryan on the ticket. and while romney was puttered around for funds at the southampton, new york, golf club today. >> undoubtedly president obama inherited a difficult situation when he came into office. the president obama is he made things much worse. >> eliot: the question for ryan. did he make things worse for the

g.o.p. ticket when he denied knowing he had requested federal stimulus funds for his district? the wall street journal published four of the letters on tuesday. which led ryan to admit today that while he condemned the stimulus as a failure he forgotten the letters because, and i quote, they were treated as a constituent service requests, but they should have been handled differently. i take responsibility for that. meanwhile, mitt romney's attack on the president's cut for medicare providers trigger this response from the obama campaign. >> the ryan plan? aarp says it would undermine medicare and lead to higher costs for seniors. and experts say ryan's voucher plan could raise future retiree's costs more than $6,000. >> eliot: the obama campaign tried to raise romney's political costs for his refusal to release more than two years of tax returns. jim messina sent a letter to his counterpart matt rhodes with this offer. if the governor will release

five years of returns, i will commit the question that many have been asking. how has it worked out in the six days since mitt romney made the announcement. a gallop shows that romney moved up point and then two points shortly thereafter. not much of an increase there. and the president is leading romney among registered voters 49 to 45%. and obama, 44% to 38%. and in michigan, had the president out in front, 49% to 44%. the president even led romney in a poll of the g.o.p. candidates natural constituents according to the financial times, business executives worldwide said president obama would be better

for the global economy than romney by 43% to 26%. for more on the race for president let's go to craig crawfords politics blogger at craig crawford.com and the author of "the politics of life." craig, always great to have you on the show. >> yes, i would say that ryan is a blip than a bump, but certainly not a bounce. >> eliot: we will who knows what it will turn into. we got a statement from somebody senior in the romney campaign today saying we don't want to put out specifics just specifics get campaigns in trouble. my first thought was man they're admitting they're trying to scam the public. they're not even willing to tell us what they believe. how do you understand this? >> well, it's actually pretty good politics against the challenger who wants to keep the incumbent's complain negative. i thought the romney campaign has done a pretty good job keeping it vague and not getting into trouble on specifics but

they've boned that up because here is a guy known for his specifics, and they've spent the last week stalking about details of medicare in ways i can't imagine they wanted to. i don't know how they predicted that. that's what you get with ryan. >> eliot: with romney they were committing fraud because it was all double talk. with ryan, the numbers don't add up. either one of them is fraud. even the sec would not accept these numbers if someone summited them with an ipo. >> maybe they'll get distracted with the new release of ryan's shirtless photo. we have him shirtless. >> eliot: there is no question that it will be good for the economics, they've got all the hot talking point. the ryan ticket can't talk specifics, but they did give us one number this week, 13%. i hate to intrude into your personal life, but how do your

tax rates compare to that? >> i think it's about double. as a matter of fact, i pay whatever my turbo tax software tells me to. i think it's about 27%. at 13% romney's tax rate is almost as low as ryan's body fat percentage. >> eliot: that may be the new marginal rate he's setting for people with income over $100,000. if you're over $100 million, then you pay the percentage. this is logical with what they're doing. how does this play? you're the political consultant. does 13% stick in the craw of most vote whose say this guy is worthy a gazillion dollars, a why am i paying more than he is. >> doing some focus group polls and they're finding strong evidence that this tax issue with romney hurts among women lots of women who see it as suspicious. that's the word that keeps coming up in the focus groups.

maybe because a lot of women know that husbands hide their fans from them, i don't know. but they do find it a problem among women. >> eliot: i hadn't taken that gender gap analysis, i hadn't heard that before, we'll have to think about that one. you're also from florida. you grew up in florida. you have a better sense and feel for the floridian electorate. the medicare issue plays different with seniors than other groups. has florida become a real battle ground in your perspective as opposed to being a state that the democrats would say we'll fight for but we knew it would not end up in our column. >> we didn't know, but hours before ryan was picked i said it wouldn't happen. that he wouldn't pick ryan. then one of the big reasons i thought i couldn't believe they would want to risk this whole medicare debate like we've had in florida. even the polls that show a little bit of a blip for romney, it's not showing up in florida. there you have a lot of medicare

retirees who are actually leaning toward romney. romney has given up a niche of voters where he was doing well among white retirees and non-college working class. both of whom, while they like the rhetoric of cutting government, when you talk about actual entitlements that they depend on, that gets to hem. then this argument that romney and ryan are making, oh, it's okay, if you're over 55 we're not going to touch you. what they're saying is we're not going to touch you. we're just going to screw you and your grandchildren. do you think people are that selfish? >> eliot: they're republicans. they might. they're basically saying throw your grandkids under the bus. that's never been a political slogan that worked before, but you me know what works. craig crawford. thanks for being on the program. >> good to be here. >> eliot: joining us, nate silver who writes the 538 block

thank you for coming by. your numbers are known to be the best out there. they trust you from baseball to politics. how do you evaluate this, has ryan helped or is it not discern edge yet. >> you look at it apples to apples. if you look at those polls there have been a few now, 12 to 13 between the states and the national numbers. romney has gained about a point on average. in some cases more, some less. there is variance statistical noise in the polls but it has not been an earthquake. often the v.p. will give a larger pound four or five points instead of one point. so the public has had a luke warm reaction. >> eliot: as one with a candidate at one point in my career in politics, when you get polls number and you move one point that's background noise than a fundamental shift. but when you break it down state by state wisconsin, the

republicans are saying that wisconsin is in play, and they hope to pick those up. do you see that? >> i think potentially. that's the one thing that you are going to guarantee. you're going to do a couple of points better from your home state. one thing to remember with paul ryan he represents one congressional district and has done pretty well there. obama won that district in 2008 but he's not necessarily that well-known in greenbay or other parts of wisconsin. you might have a large home district bounce, and it's a swing district, so it's morning. >> eliot: but not for the whole nation. >> yes. >> eliot: one thing, when i look at the numbers the gallup poll consistently has romney doing better than other polls. can you explain that? how do you make sense of that. >> even the best polling firms like gallup are getting 10% of the people that they want to get on the phone. most people don't take pollsters phone calls. we have better things to do.

>> eliot: i don't want to seem to be critical of you. >> i'm not a pollster, i'm a poll critic. what that means is you have to take the sample of people you do get and make that representative of the whole population. the techniques that different pollsters use vary. you want to take an average of different firms. in gallup's case there will be fewer minorities in the electorate than in the big turn-out year for democrats in 2008. it's assumptions of who is going to vote and who is going to turn out. >> eliot: what you're saying is so important. you get raw data, but then you have to impose on that data a series of presumptions and assumptions about turn-out, demographics and extrapolate that throughout the whole campaign. that old saying, garbage in, garbage out. >> you don't just pick up the phone and dialing numbers. you're going to get older people. they tend to answer the phone. more women. if you don't call cellphones you'll have problems. it's part art and part science.

we've been lucky. the last election cycle polls have been pretty good. one of these years we're going to have a disaster and a business surprise, and i'm not sure which direction it will wiped up in. one point moving the poll, we're not sure that it's statistically signature, probably but we're not sure. >> the advent of cellphones. people are less likely to answer the call, and we don't know if that group is different. >> you might except it's a person call on your cell phone. but some polling firms don't bother to call cellphones the all. it's more expensive to do it. a third of american voters only have cellphones. only one-sixth or so have landlines but use it to filter out spam calls and everything else right? if you're missing cellphones now, you're not really taking a scientific survey where everyone has the same chance to be called

in theory. >> eliot: and presumably they're youngish i don't know what it would be, but it would be different. >> if they're using cellphones, and obama is doing better than once who aren't using them. cellphones tend to be younger and correlate voting democratic. you can correct for that, but it is not perfect. >> eliot: other than polling there is a whole market, the republicans have a marketplace where people bet on the outcome of the election. they are coming up with a statistical pricing system to predict the outcome of the election. and their number for mitt romney is--i had it written down. >> 43%. it bounces around. and below 40% a couple of days ago. >> eliot: and there is a divergence there what do you think it is, likely to romney's success. >> i think romney has 30% one in

three chance to win this election. right now it should be a good period for him. you name the v.p. and you get a good bounce, the fact that he's tied, it's high watermark then its money. obama seems to have enough of an edge where you do have to have a polling crew up. >> eliot: do you think people who are playing on the intrade market are more conservative and they have bid this up. >> maybe a little. i think it's good to have money on the line. it makes you more accountable potentially in some respects. we're all trying to look at the same set of information. we're fewer polls than we had four years ago. people trying to make guesses what the economy will do. it's a hard thing to predict. one thing we do know that obama has been ahead in most of the polls. i don't think with these early returns that we're going to see too much of a change over the long term. we'll get a g.o.p. bounce as mentioned. and we're kind of back in the

same holding pattern where obama is the favorite, but obviously not a slam dunk. >> eliot: i couldn't agree more. it's not until after the conventions are done and everything is back to the new normal that we'll get an accurate read on what the race will look like through november. >> look at that number, the most honest read we'll have gotten by far up to that point in time, and what people will do in november. >> eliot: "new york times" 538 blogger nate silver. always great to have you on the show. the governor in florida got his wishes. stick around. >>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.

it starts with you. rich, chewy caramel rolled up in smooth milk chocolate. don't forget about that payroll meeting. rolo.get your smooth on. now in minis. it's like chicken and crunchy stuff got married! i only use french's french fried onions on my crunchy onion chicken because it's america's number one brand. just minutes to make, then bake!

you want to save money on car insurance? no problem. you want to save money on rv insurance? no problem. you want to save money on motorcycle insurance? no problem. you want to find a place to park all these things? fuggedaboud it.

this is new york. hey little guy, wake up! aw, come off it mate! geico. saving people money on more than just car insurance. i don't when it comes to public approval congress has dipped back to its all-time low of 10%. that's abysmal. but the number of the day isn't ten. it's nine. as in nine things that are more popular than congress as polls collected by "abc news." to begin with, president obama's last approval rating was 50% five times higher than congress. but in fairness, mitt romney's approval rate something 40. even bush 43, our least popular living president coincidentally has an approval rating of 43. none of that might surprise you but here's someone who might. the president of pakistan. really? in a nation blighted by bombings and food shortages his abysmal ratings in his country were still twice as high as our

congress'. even the banks and financial institutions that crashed our economy beat congress in public opinion by 12 points. and while members of congress love to rail against socialism socialism beats them by 20%. all right you can't please everyone. 16% of americans said they didn't even like the olympics. the legislature even got beat by the most hated company in america, the long island power that is right, how can you be less popular than a power company that keeps having blackouts. and you're not going to believe the last one the transportation safety administration. that's right. the people who stop you from taking mouth wash on an airplane, even they had an higher rate. they probe people and pat them down but still they leave us with more dignity than congress. >>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: when your party platform includes policies that are zenophobic and down right racist you give up the vote of minorities. to combat this problem the republicans have done everything to strip the minorities but disenfranchising the voters is not exactly legal. in florida last year governor rick scott signed sweeping voting reform, and a provision which a panel of federal judges knocked down yesterday. in the decision the judges ruled tothat itruled, quote that we find the minority voters will be disportion positiver lay effected by because they use disproportionately voting.

here to joins us with the naacp legal defense education fund, thank you for coming in. >> thank you for having me. >> eliot: this is one victory is that in itself significant and where does it lead us to the overall effort. >> it's absolutely a development. they look to scale back their voting by half. it's a substantial impediment for many vote necessary florida. african-americans used the early voting channel as a way to participate meaningfully in the voting process. in 200828% 2008, 28% of african-americans voted early. they found that it was an important pathway of partition by african-americans. >> eliot: i hate to be a gnarly lawyer, but in order to win that case, did you and the litigators

on behalf of right to vote, did you establish that the law tend tended to turkey african-american voters mother than other voters. >> because florida has a history of discrimination in voting. section five recovers places like florida to submit all of their voting changes to the federal government before their laws can take effect. since florida sought the changes to early voting law and a few other voting procedures as well, it had to submit those laws to the federal government for pre-approval. the federal judge found that these measures would have a harmful impact on minority voters. >> eliot: the reason why i asked, and this decision and a wolf development in contrast to what happened in pennsylvania, where a state judge not in the mandate of the federal voting rights act the state judge said that the state law which is heinous in requiring types of i.d. that people won't have,

that withstood the challenge. can we now go to pennsylvania and overturn that law. >> the cases are differently procedurally. it was brought before state law and it was on a preliminary injunction. that case is not technically over but they just did not issue an injunction. the florida case is not over but the court recognizes there are some people who don't have the required photo i.d. what is baffling about the opinion, pennsylvania does not actually demonstrate any record of in-person voter fraud that justify them in enacting the law in the first place. >> eliot: it was amazing to me. they stipulated where there had not been one case, one investigation of in-person voter fraud and the judge still permitted the law. other states you're involved in litigations around the country. south carolina you have ongoing

litigation. >> that's right. both of those laws are subject to litigation in a three-judge federal court in washington, d.c. i think what is important for your viewers to know, when you think about photo i.d. measures and efforts to make voting more difficult, where we should be as a nation at this point in time given the historic turnout by many voters, voters of color young voters, women in 2008 given what the 2010 census shows, our electorate is growing increasingly diverse. those two factors should give us encouragement to expend the electorate further. what we're seeing an alarming trend to make voting more difficult. what i couldn't viewers should know about voting i.d. measures is the circumstance where i ryan haygood come to the voting place as eliot spitzer. i probably would not get away with it, but that time of voter

fraud is incredibly rare. you're much more likely to see an ufo or be struck by lightening than seeing that type of voter fraud. there are populations in our electorate that do not have photo i.d. >> eliot: we're going to continue this conversation in weeks ahead. you're right. this has been a concerted effort to limit access to the voting booth. i think it's wrong and anti-american. ryan haygood, thank you for joining me. >> thank you for having me. >> viewfinder. that's coming up.

>> eliot: it's football wrong? we have the answer and that's next. first, there are american heroes athletic marvels and excel eight their events. but olympics should probably stick to sports instead of television. when it doesn't fit anywhere else, we put it in the viewfinder. >> the emotionally how do you prepare yourself for this kind of strength to do what you have to do in front of the entire world? what is that process? >> i think once you have a dream for something you can really put your mind to it and work towards anything. >> years and years of practice. >> yeah. [laughter] >> what was the hardest part for you? what did you learn from this experience? >> memorizing lines and trying to like say them and still do movement and all that. that was hard. >> don't worry. the rope course is a piece of cake. >> that's scary. >> yeah, seriously.

i would love to race on that. >> they're talking about condoms, how there is a shortage and they have to get more and stuff. >> there is a condom shortage? >> i guess so. >> is that due to global warming? >> i want to stay. >> you did. >> i wanted the whole experience. >> be one of the village people. >> yeah, be one of the village people. >> thank you james. >> i feel like it's lonely. everyone leaves it out. four golds but my bronze. it's there and everyone jumps right over it. >> i think taking the time off i didn't exercise. then i went right back into the pool and hit a wall and herniated a disk in my lower back. >> not literally hit a wall. >> well, with my feet. >> you hit a wall. >> yeah, when i flipped. >> i thought you were speaking metaphorically like hit a wall. but you actually hit a wall. >> yeah, i hit a wall.

>> gosh. >> how did you celebrate? >> we didn't have time to celebrate. it was around finals and event finals after that. after the competition. i splurged on an egg mcmuffin. >> an egg mcmuffen. >> we don't. >> eliot: i still love them. is it morally wrong to watch a football game? that's next on "viewpoint." build

>> eliot: once more you didn't see in the olympics, american football, a violent and brutal sports. the players are modern-day gladdaters battling for our enjoyment. this has always been the case but it seems to be getting worse. ba scott said, i don't want my son to play football. i played football so he won't have to. kurt warner stated he too would not allow his children to play the support. have we reached the point where we can no longer ignore what we know about the game, and are we complicity in modern-day gladiator behavior. joining me now with is football wrong? you're taking away our remaining pleasures. >> it's a question mark. >> eliot: the article is power it's a statement. explain why.

>> it's one of those things. football has always been a violent sport but recently in recent years we know mo ity of life issues. not just that, but football players compared to other professional sports have less rights. they have a weaker union their contracts are shorter and there are no guarantees. in a lot of ways it's hard to look past the issues--the nfl league has always not one to look behind the curtain. they're brilliant at public relations. they've always been wary of you knowing too much about the game. >> eliot: take away the stars. we know the names of the quarterbacks the receivers, a few of the linebackers. one of the many points in the article, the linemen who are banging against each other. they're not only bigger than they used to be but they're anonymous. they're ground and thrown to the

side and they suffer huge injuries. >> in a lot of ways that's always been the case. we just know it now. the thing that is different about football now the players are so much bigger. do you remember william refrigerator perry. >> eliot: how can you forget him. >> at the time he was the refrigerator. he was the largest--he was so big. now he would be small for someone who is on the defensive line or offensive line in football. so much of the game that players are faster, stronger, bigger, but humans have not become less fragile. you're seeing more like you saw with some of the suicide of seiu and others. the famous players are having a lot of issues. >> eliot: there have been more lawsuits, we're paying more attention to the lawsuits and injuries are becoming more diagnosed we're learning more what the concussions do to the brain. is the league reacting to protect the players or remove them more rapidly when there is a possibility of injury?

>> certainly they are getting better about diagnosing concussions and making players stay out longer. that said a lot of issues of the things they have done has been more in the public relations. the best example is the new orleans saints players. the idea that you can make a strong argument that the nfl is trying to make the saints look like lone rogue actors in a sport that is inherently violent violent. >> eliot: that they're the only ones doing that in the defense. >> if we hit the saints really really hard, you might not think that everyone else is doing it. >> eliot: make them look like outliars. >> the rest of the nfl would never do anything like that, but it's very common in the league. >> eliot: the league knows it's been going on, and the players know it's going on. what does the sport look like if you try to take care of the players and say we're not going to let these lines men become

fodder for a big ugly machine can the sport survive? >> i'm not sure that you can take that away from football. i don't think the nfl is purposely trying to make their sport more dangerous. i think they have a sport that is very dangerous and they're trying to hide that as much as they can. if you look at players in the past, players are getting hurt more now only because the game is more violent. but the idea of players were some how healthy before, one of the major things in the last lockout, one of the major fights was benefits for retired players already because they needed the help desperately. >> eliot: you make a persuasive case. the injuries are serious. the players are taking the brunt of this. look forward. soccer is growing in popularity. it is a cleaner sport. will soccer replace football? will football loss it's magical place in our culture. >> it depends on the reaction of the fans. that's where he came down to ending the a piece.

as someone who has loved football his entire life now that i know what is behind the curtain it's harder for me to feed into it in a lot of ways. the debate is not--look at college football and high school high school, the lawsuits involved in that whether people want their kids playing the game that long. it's real question is not will soccer take over the nfl. will the nfl become a sport that intelligent, engaged socially conscious people be a part of any more. and if it doesn't improve and it continues like that, you may see-- >> eliot: in terms of players, are you saying that different kids will avoid it? will have acquired a social aspect to it. >> i think on one hand in certain areas of the country it will always be popular. the nfl's real danger is not that the nfl is going to vanish or football will go away. it will come rodeo ufc not

that it's not lucrative but it's banned in the state of new york. the idea that the nfl could not necessarily be this massive juggernaut that it is. >> eliot: you end the article that we're all part of the problem. is there a movement of fans to not watch to not go, is there a movement that would not inhabit the sky boxes and do anything different right now? or is it just not to di minute theiring, but mattering among janelistsjournalists say, gee, this is a crisis. >> i think most people don't think about it that much in a larger sense. but that said, penn state would never have gone down if it were just up to the penn state fans if they were going to the games or not. a lot of stuff comes down to people of influence administrators at colleges. the major advertisers which is the live blood of the nfl television ratings and sponsorships. if all of a sudden there is a

stigma to being involved to that in the same way there was all this stigma to be involved with penn state football. if you see that, it will come incrementally. >> eliot: until the auto industry decides it won't advertise during an nfl game, nothing will change. >> that's accurate. >> eliot: and the question becomes will there be a movement that persuades the auto industry where they want to advertise. hard to see even though your argument is exactly right, it's hard to see that happening. >> it's hard to see--it's really hard to imagine a lot of things. everything moves quickly. the idea is, really, like there was a great piece on how would football end? it would start with high-level administrators. you know what, maybe we can't be a part of this. you lose one conference and then it becomes a movement. even though your average fan is not going to be like, i don't want to watch--your face-painting fans are not going to be like that. there are people above football

as much as they may not like to think of it that way. as the movement gets going in that direction as always these things come down to wallets. >> it's all about money. contributing editor will leitch. >> thank you for having me. >> eliot: a comedian, john fugelsang joins us coming up. [ beads rattling ] [ male announcer ] spearmint that tingles as you chew. stimulate your senses. 5 gum. now in micro pack. [ 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?

>> eliot: witch' heard about medicare, but you know what is about to hit medicaid. that's later in the show. but first let's check in with jennifer granholm. good evening governor, what have you got for us tonight. >> that medicaid issue is a big issue. we're going to be talking something sort of related. the election is slipping up to be a referendum of the roll of government. we'll tackle that issue with someone that i admire, global committee jeffrey sacks. then we have congressman chrismanchrisvan holland.

we're going to talk debate prep and getting inside the psyche of paul ryan. those stories and more at the top of the hour. >> eliot: sound awesome. jeff sacks is perhaps the smartest economist i know. he gets this it. that's coming up. spitzer." >>questions, of course, need to be answered. >>we will not settle for the easy answers. [ ♪ theme music ♪ ] >> eliot: the hot issue right now, medicare. who is doing what to it and why. according to the recent tracking poll 73% of american adults think medicare is extremely or very important. ranking it highest among the healthcare issues. there is another issue out there that we should be talking about

just as much, if not more, medicaid. because unlike the medicare reforms in paul ryan's budget which kick in years from now the all the on medicaid start immediately and could have devastating affects. ryan's budget starting in 2013, that's right. next year, would cut $1.4 trillion from medicaid. the government's health insurance company that primarily serves low income individuals. it would block grant dollars to the states, consequently leading to the measure of nonpartisan universally respected budget office a minimum of 14 million people being dropped from the program. this does not include the 11 million people who would be dropped from medicaid if the romney-ryan plan to repeal healthcare reform is up employmented. folks would be dropped from medicaid are going to be incapable of getting private insurance. the vast majority would go without health insurance at all. without health insurance they will get vastly inferior

healthcare usually with little preventive care. the choice between the president's program which will lead to 17 million gaining coverage and the ryan plan which would lead to 25 million losing coverage could not be more stark. play the scenario out a bit more. what will happen when these 25 million low income americans need care? sure some of it will be paid throughout out of pocket payments but an awful lot will be deemed charity care by providers. that cost will be picked up by everybody else. through higher premiums and private insurance payments to state government that is used as charity payments to the hospital or to direct charity. why explains why the president expanded medicaid and the mandate. it may not be fashionable these days to spend much time talking about how we insure the social safety net gets torn in too many places but the ryan budget tears

a gaping hole in the very is center of that net. it's good that we're talking about the medicare issues in the campaign. let's spend a few minutes talking about medicaid as well. that's my view. >> 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.

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.

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: it was revealed this week that paul ryan has next to no body fat. most of us known for a while that he was devoid of any substance. chris o'donnell's business return to an imac theater near

you if you live in tampa down the street from the rnc. and romney and ryan will balance the budget. just don't ask them or their advisers when. >> how many years would it take for the romney budget to result in a balanced budget? >> um, well, i'm not sure of that myself. i'll get back to you and i'm sure it's on our website. i should know it. i'm embarrassed that i don't have that number at the top of my head. >> eliot: that's okay. the candidate does not have the answer either. we look back at now member of the current team john fugelsang. thanks as always for joining us. >> thank you. >> eliot: chris o'donnell. i long for those days. what is i coming back for. >> he's very good at promoting herself. i've had the pleasure of meeting her and working with her. >> eliot: working with her? explain, in the convent of some sort? >> we were together on

politically incorrect with bill maher a couple of times. i had the pleasure of meeting her. the first time i met her we had a heated conversation. i told her that my parents were ex-catholic clergy. she said that she broke up with a catholic boyfriend because he wasn't sure he was going to heaven when he died and she knew that she was going to heaven. if a muslim said i know i'm going to paradise no matter what, people might be a bit skittish in parts of this country. >> eliot: you and she did not get along. >> no, we butt head, but then we met up again a few weeks later and i made nice. >> eliot: did they explain to the certainty? she's holding on to this herself. >> i'm half brooklyn and half southern. which means i'm bilingual. >> eliot: or some might think you don't speak any language. >> it's the y'alls, as spending

my summers down south i used to see a bumper sticker that said, christians are not better. just saved. which is a nice way of saying they're better. they're not roasting in hell. and to believe that your country is the best because you were born in it. this is the essence of christian fundamentalist. it's the team, the tribe, not the one-on-one teaching of jesus who was a raging liberal. >> eliot: when is she going to be doing. >> this is going to be a fascinating event that c-span will document. she'll be there speaking on the tea party side. there will be special guests, alan grayson on the occupy side or michelle bachmann or allen west will be there on the tea party side. something from both hemispheres. >> eliot: on c-span, i don't know if this is going to be world wrestling federation, fascinating personality. >> and its happening at the imax

theater down the road. >> eliot: more exciting than the convention. >> i think people need to watch current tv's coverage of the convention. >> eliot: we'll cover both. let's move on to paul ryan. he may not be doing well, but this workout tape he's promoting, it's going nuts on tv. >> it's a shame. he would make a great gay porn star. oh come on, if you can't make a gay porn. >> eliot: i hadn't heard of that. that's great. >> i made a lot of eddie munster jokes last week about ryan, but i don't do that again because i look like kd language. they were talking about their partnership and how awesome they are. two men who are opposed to gay marriage and looking like one. a precious week. >> eliot: i'm more interested in my biceps. >> it's the p 90, and.

my buddy stephanie miller did it. look at that right there. i'm like a before picture next to that. we hear politicians and sometimes their spouses talking about-- >> eliot: that's really paul ryan? that's not a body double. >> like lee harry oswald. >> eliot: now i'm getting jealous. >> these guys will talk all day about fitness. they never talk about the crap we put in our bodies. you hear politicians talking about the importance of being physically fit. they won't talk about the fact that most of the food that comes in boxes is garbage. >> eliot: are you complaining about the wine you buy. >> pardon. >> eliot: the wine you buy. >> i get wine in a juice box kid size. >> eliot: does he have an investment in this company? the thing everybody is talking about is the work out. >> no, he is a guy in his 40s and he looks great. the flipciness of his budget. >> eliot: don't guess serious on

us. >> i won't. this guy voted for tarp. he voteed for "no child left behind." he voted for the stimulus, he voted for the iraq war but he really hates government spending. paul ryan has a great chance to teach all of our conservative friends. >> eliot: but he has good abs. what is more important. >> what is with the abs. >> eliot: i'm going home to work out. >> i have posture pediatric abs. firm with cushion on top. i don't. >> eliot: the number of the week romney, do we shut up paying 13% should he be paying more. >> he should pay more. our loved ones who pay 24% and this guy who pays all off interest that's income. people who work for a living deserve to pay a higher proportion of their income in taxes than those who don't work work

for a living. he doesn't talk about income. he talks about taxes and his wife as well. if you're watching mitt romney speak and you want to have a drinking game, a few words you don't want to make your drinking game. bush bin laden, or income or you'll be the guy driving everybody home. >> eliot: he wants to reduce the tax on his capital gains almost to zero. >> yes, mitt romney is a millionaire at birth who is a very wealthy man who is asking working class conservatives to give tax cuts because the rich have had it tough for a very long time. who was the last president to ever balance a budget? >> eliot: eisenhower. >> nixon. eisenhower was the last one with a surplus. >> eliot: john fugelsang thanks so much as always. friday gives us what the week is all about. >> thanks for the commentary that you gave last