>> only on current tv. >> john: good evening, friends. president obama is reportedly planning to bypass congressional republican obstruction tactics and use extensive executive orders to enact his agenda. this guy acts like he was elected by the majority of americans or something. how arrogant! also, a-rod may be banned from baseball for life. and if we police the banks as thoroughly as we police the baseballs, there might be no financial crisis. meanwhile, somewhere in america, a deranged woman you probably worked with is now writing her first love letter to ariel castro in prison despite the fact he slut shamed his victims during sentence. we'll uncover the slut shaming from rush limbaugh to castro on tonight's f bomb. today is the birthday of the

late jerry garcia, also the birthday of my favorite rapper, public enemy leader chuck d and coolio is 50. how did that happen? i mention the musical artists today because mtv has a birthday they launched on this date in 1981 when the letters in their logo stood for music television. they dropped the words music television in 2010 proving once and for all that mtv now stands for nothing. this is "viewpoint." >> john: good evening, friends, i'm john fuglesang. this is "viewpoint." white house officials and democrats in both houses screamed from the rooftops about how bad sequestration would be. after the g.o.p. rammed it through both houses and john boehner boasted he got 98% of what he wanted, republicans said

and i'm paraphrasing here, eh. well, that was then. this is now. republican senator lindsey graham was clear when he talked about the sequester's impact on defense spending. guys, i can hear this very well throughout the response from this morning's senate appropriations committee. can we play it? >> we screwed ourselves here. >> john: beautiful. thank you, lindsey. too bad your party is pushing for a fight that could lead to sequestration, the sequel. seriously? sadly, a new "washington post" poll reveals 54% of americans didn't even know enough to say whether sequestration was a good or a bad thing for the country. again, i ask, seriously? here are just a few numbers. according to the white house, 70,000 preschoolers will be denied a place in head start, 125,000 poor families risk losing rental assistance which could leave them homeless. another 100,000 people who used to be homeless, including veterans will be kicked off programs to prevent them from going back to sleeping in cardboard boxes outside.

this hurts you, america. hey, lindsey, what was that you said about sequestration? >> we screwed ourselves here. >> john: for the first time in my life, i couldn't agree with you more, lindsey. the impact does not end there. our next guests have a pretty solid insight on the problems. amara jones is an economics contributor to color lines.com. he served in the clinton white house on international trade policy and our old friend joel burg is a usda coordinator of community food security. he's the executive director of new york city coalition against hunger and the author of the essential how you can eat, how hungry is america. gentlemen, thank you both so much for joining us on "viewpoint." >> thanks for having me. >> john: what a pleasure. joel, you've been seeing poverty on the front lines for a long time. what impacts are you see from the sequester? >> over the last few years of the recessions, things have gone from bad to worse and since the sequestrations, things have gone from worse to worser.

now, worser isn't a word but it is the only way i can describe what's happened. you've taken people living on the edge of homelessness, you've taken people forced to use soup pantries and somehow you've managed to take away food from them at the same time you're still giving out massive dollops of corporate welfare to corporate agribusinesses. it really is everything that's wrong about american politics today. >> john: joel, any theories as to why our friends aren't upset as opposed to food stamps? >> yes, their hypocrites. i actually was wrong. it is not rare, i admit that but i actually gave them some credit in the tea party. i thought gee, they'll vote against the farm bill when it is stripped of food stamps because it has all of this corporate welfare. they couldn't possibly -- billions and billions of dollars going to rich people who don't need it. programs that are actually far more socialist than obamacare which is going through private

insurance companies. these are payouts to the private sector directly from the government. and yet only eight republicans voted against a farm bill, stripped of food stamps, pure orgy of corporate welfare. there's no ideological consistency. the only good part of the farm bill vote is it took away any fig leaf that they were about deficit reduction. they're about rewarding their corporate donors. >> john: there are democrats who are part of the problem as well. i don't think eisenhower or roosevelt or nixon would recognize a g.o.p. that recognizes socialism for the wealthy and darwinism for the poor. we saw from the poll a second ago that americans still don't know whether things are even bad. does this mean "the washington post" only does polls with people who have land lines, who are older and that they don't have the cell phone numbers of homeless people? how can the numbers be so off? >> that's the reason that romney polling people, i think they encountered that problem during the campaign. >> john: serious problem with poll. it is land lines which tends to

be older and financially secure people at home. >> it is a serious problem. what struck me was during the president's speech last week in illinois, one of the largest applause lines that he got was when he mentioned the word sequestration which means that in the country, there is a growing feeling about sequestration and its negative impact and how can it not be? it is a devastating, downward impact on the economy when it looked as if it was going to reach velocity. we're set, according to the congressional budget office, to lose 1.6 million jobs because of sequestration. if you care about deficits, if you care about debt, then what we need to concentrate on is getting the economy back on track because a hit economy solves all problems. one of the things that came out is that the deficit has fallen by 30% in the last three years. that's because revenues are up. revenues are up because the economy is an eemically working

its way back to some semblance of resembling something we once knew. so the problem is if you do anything to harm the economy which is exactly what sequestration is doing, losing almost two million jobs, you're actually make the thing you're saying you're solving by implementing it, worse. which just goes back to what was being said before. none of this actually makes any sense. this is one of the things i think is key about sequestration is that if you look at it policywise, it doesn't make any sense. and or from the budget standpoint. what it actually is a political resolution. >> john: policywise it makes sense if you're a republican who cares about getting re-elected. in fairness, at the obama rally, there were obama fans there. they're not the problem. let me ask you the same question i asked joel. you're in touch with people who are suffering. what are the effects you've seen firsthand from sequestration on our fellow americans? >> some of the biggest ones are military families and education have received an enormous cut this year.

there are -- at the national institutes of health, lead researchers are having to take furlough days which is disrupting research into ground break medicines and new ways of caring for people who are sick. there are thousands of medicare patients across the country that can't get access to cancer treatments because of this. there are children that are being, as you pointed out, being denied head start, a program which has been shown to save money in the long-term. and the same is true for the housing program. interesting thing is that the government that -- the republicans are actually campaigning against the government that doesn't exist anymore. you can't get government assistance in the united states without actually working or contributing. so that means that what government programs we have now are actually a bridge for people to work and to participate in society. so taking away housing is in a sense kick away education assistance, denying healthcare, an impediment to work. >> john: poverty hurts people,

too. joel, what is the biggest misconception americans have about snap, the food stamp program? >> most people think is welfare. people didn't earn it. they don't deserve it. more than 2/3 of the people receiving snap benefits are children, working parents, senior citizens and people with disabilities. 80%. 80% are the people on the snap program. adults working the year before getting snap, the year after getting snap. the average time on snap before the recession was five months. since the recession it is ten months. look, let's talk about government dependency. when i ride a jet, there are 250 people on it. i'm glad to get help from government air traffic controllers. when donald trump rides a jet, he gets the same help for one person. he gets 250 times the help from government that i do. so you know, the wealthiest are the most dependent on government and we never hear discussions. >> john: we know that right wing strange doesn't mean what

they say. government is only evil in that did imposes regulation on the 1% and forces them to take care of employees and not pollute our rivers. they benefit from the very government they deanize. >> they believe the only good government program benefits them and their cronies. >> john: we've seen celebrities speak out about poverty. springsteen releases a great album every year or two. we've seen comic relief where comedians put their reputations on the line to help the less fortunate. we don't see it much from politicians. who is the most prominent politician to speak out? john edwards. wrong messenger. why do you think it is? is it a losing deal for politicians to crusade on behalf the poor who as we know, tragically, don't vote? >> the problem is that the poor in the united states since reagan have been stigmatized and are seen as less deserving. so even though now, according to an a.p. study that came out early this week that 80% of americans are either near poverty or at risk of being near

poverty. >> john: will you repeat the stat? >> 80% of americans. >> john: four out of five. >> are either near poverty or jobless or in economic distress that could lead them to be poor. >> john: you mean at some point in their life will need help from the state. >> right and who actually fall below -- or at-risk of falling below the poverty line designations which are already a bit generous. >> john: we're talking about seniors here. when we talk about this, we're talking about future seniors in many case. just because you think you're comfortable now doesn't mean ten years down the road you won't seek the assistance you demonize. >> in it is not only about seniors. young people disproportionately now because of the economy and the inability to get jobs be and to get a start in life are staying poor longer and there's a lot of studies that say the gains will never be made up during their lifetime. >> john: i don't know how a society is supposed to reverse something like this. it looks to me how empires

collapse. that's why i have you here to talk me off a ledge. we heard lindsey graham bemoaning sequestration. john mccain this week said that it was the worst vote i have cast in many years. that's the worst? well, he could be right. this is all political, of course. if they go around in circles, endless debates, kids lose out on crucial education. it took a major tragedy in newtown just to get a vote on gun safety legislation and the victim's family is speaking out. what's it going to take to make our politicians pay attention and listen and do something actionable about poverty? >> we put out an april fool's release every year. this year it was illinois senator discovers son is poor, changing is stance on poverty benefits. the truth of the matter is elected officials, even liberal democrats, barely meet poor people anymore. even progressives spend most of their days in little cubicles calling rich people for money and most of their nights at receptions, whining and dining

with rich people and forget about the conservatives. they spend less time. unless we have a people's mainstream revolution of organizing people at the grass roots to fight back and say we're going to demand there are elected officials responsible to all of us, we are going to go away as a major world figure but the truth is we can fight back. every major social revolution, every major period of reform has been preceded by the worst possible despair. slavery came before the civil war. the age of excess, the gilded age came before the depression era. my hope is this horrible, horrible breakdown of the american political system is finally going to wake all of us up to take our country back and say we've got to have it working for us, not just the billionaires. >> john: public financing of elections? >> that's part of it. part of it is more accountable for where the money is going to and understanding and transparency. the truth of the matter is the greatest crime in america today is what's legal.

corporate agribusinesses have donated over $600 million to federal campaigns over the last 12 years. that's how a system of corporate agribusiness subsidies opposed by not only progressives but the heritage foundation, the club for growth, the cato institute, groups i don't agree with on the time of day, they agreed policies stink, moderates who are against the deficit believe these policies stink. the only reason these horrible subsidies still exist is because this massive campaign spending and we've got to change that. >> john: imari, just about out of time. a lot of americans think don't pick my pocket to pay for it. don't steal from me to help the poor. steal from me for wars if you want but not to help the poor. make churches do it. we know churches can't pick up the slack. how do you get beyond thinking like that? >> i think we have to be honest with the american people about what the government does and why it's important. too many cheap votes have been gotten over the past 30 years by demonizing government when, in

any responsible modern society, what the government does is it plays an essential role in fostering economic growth for everyone. and that means doing things for the par but it also means being smart and making the right investment so everyone can go and prosper and the less we've done that, the worse we're off. >> john: the best part of my job is getting to meet and work with people who are smarter and more moral than me. thank you, imara jones and executive director of new york city coalition against hunger, mr. joel berg. thank you for being with us tonight. >> thank you. >> john: major league baseball is threatening to do something that no one elimination has been able to do. make alex rodriguez go away.

cenk off air alright in 15 minutes we're going to do the young turks! i think the number 1 thing than viewers like about the young turks is that were honest. they know that i'm not bsing them for some hidden agenda, actually supporting one party or the other. when the democrats are wrong, they know i'm going to be the first one to call them out. cenk on air>> what's

unacceptable is how washington continues to screw the middle class over. cenk off air i don't want the middle class taking the brunt of the spending cuts and all the different programs that wind up hurting the middle class. cenk on air you got to go to the local level, the state level and we have to fight hard to make sure they can't buy our politics anymore. cenk off air and they can question if i'm right about that. but i think the audience gets that, i actually mean it. cenk on air 3 trillion dollars in spending cuts! narrator uniquely progressive and always topical, the worlds largest online news show is on current tv. cenk off air and i think the audience gets, "this guys to best of his abilities is trying to look out for us." only on current tv! >> john: alex rodriguez is in duff negotiations with major league baseball to save himself from a lifetime ban and of course, to salvage his potential spot in the hall of fame. somewhere mark mcgwire is laughing at those chances.

but a-rod's now among nine players who are about to face severe penalties for use of performance-enhancing drugs or peds. rodriguez is the highest paid player in baseball and easily the most famous linked to the doping scandals. he got his peds from an anti-aging clinic in florida called biogenesis is of america. since then, he's accused of recruiting other athlete to the clinic and lying about it and trying to destroy evidence. you know, guy stuff. lawyers for rodriguez said they would fight any lifetime ban, then he could possibly return to play. while the appeals process is taking hold. so the question is what impact will all of this have on what used to be america's past time? well, nadia is the founder and host of caught offbase with nadia.com. a show chock-full of great interviews with nadia and various athlete and celebrity the and even a lot of my guys on the new york mets. >> thank you for having me. >> john: great to have you here. we just saw ryan braun of the

milwaukee briers get a 65-game suspension for using performance-enhancing drugs. eight others could get 50 game suspensions. what is this doing to the perception of the game at this point? it is like the catholic church. can the p.r. get any worse? >> it is pretty bad. baseball took such a hit off the strike in the '90s so it was ironically the steroid era that brought it back. so now that we're seeing the effects of the steroid era in the hall of fame and what it's doing into these little kids, i think it is going to be hard to bounce back. it will bounce back. it always has. it always will but i think it's tough. i think you're asking -- they're asking these fans to, you know, a family of four saves up to go to one baseball game a summer, i think it is asking a lot to accept all of this as well. >> john: because you're helping give $61 million to a guy who cheats. >> that's right. >> john: considering how powerful the player's union is and assuming they don't cut

a-rod loose which i don't think they will, how long could his appeal process go on for? >> it depends. first, they'll never get a lifetime ban on him. it's not going to happen no way. they may ask for one and they negotiate down but even if it's let's say the rest of this year and next year, just over 200 games, maybe 2 do, that sort of thing. he appeals, he gets to someday in the game. if he sits out with this quad strain, he's 38 so by the time he comes back, he's almost 40. and the yankees still owe him three years. over $60 million. >> john: that leads me to two questions. number one, would a 200 game suspension effectively end his career anyway? >> did depends on what you mean by end it. will he play? is there a team that would have him suit up? >> john: will he hobble out? >> i think he's just arrogant enough and massively insecure that his whole career has been about trying to prove himself and prove himself and the irony

is he had all of the skills. he absolutely was better defensively than derek jeter and nomar and everybody knew that. and he just has been living in derek jeter's shadow for all of these years and i think it just kills him. >> john: if he did get to come back, one could presume a g.m. -- people will pay to see this guy. >> yeah, i don't know if it will be in new york. my guess, in my opinion, i would say that the yankees would probably try to negotiate a settlement with him rather than this three years and $61 million. >> john: what is the lifetime ban really about? and why would they leak it if it's not to try to shake him down, get him to cooperate and name anybody? >> i think that's bud selig's way of trying to have his last hurrah. he's the one who took a big hit in the '90s with mcgwire and sosa and the home run chase, not coming down harder on them and taking so long to implement the rules for testing and steroids

and i think this is his last hurrah to try to seem like he's coming in with the calvary. >> john: it seems like baseball was our national past time then basketball was our national past time then hating lebron was our national past time. when you look back to the '90s, you were referencing the big home run era. are the fans the real hypocrites here when you think about the fact that we'll cheer on a home run race if it's driven by steroids yet we'll boo the same guys who gave us those thrills years later? >> it is a very good question. i don't think so. i think people love a home run but they also really love a great pitcher's duel and we're sort of entering oddly that era again after they were juicing the balls and they lower the mound and i think -- >> john: which i like. a lot less home runs but much more intense games. >> i prefer the '70s where the pitcher dominated everybody. but it remains to be seen. >> john: all of the hall of fame inductees this year, as you

know, were old-timers who died several years ago because the sportswriters said they wouldn't vote for players from the steroid era although some did because nothing's proved so they did it anyway. >> that's right. >> john: how are you seeing the sport suffer long-term from all of this? can the sport bounce back? >> i think it does bounce back. it always does but there's going to have to be a michael jordan -- there's going to have to be an alex rodriguez in baseball. >> john: a clean alex rodriguez. >> there was a quote he did in 2009 where he said i would never put that in my body. his quote is i'm pretty tired of being stupid and selfish, you know, about myself. and i thought well, is there another way of being selfish? >> john: not as tired as we are. wow. i look forward to seeing what happens over the next few days. should be very interesting especially for yankee fans. host of caught offbase with nadia.com, nadia, thank you for coming on "viewpoint."

>> thank you for having me. >> john: what did edward snowden, vladimir putin and ecuadorian broccoli have in common? so that happened. we'll tell you the greatest global conspiracy coming up next. (vo) current tv gets the conversation started weekdays at 9 eastern. >> i'm a slutty bob hope. the troops love me. tv and radio talk show host stephanie miller rounds out current's morning news block. you're welcome current tv audience for the visual candy. (vo) sharp tongue. >>excuse me? (vo) quick wit. >> and yes, president obama does (vo) and above all, opinion and attitude. >> really?! this is the kind of stuff they say about something they just pulled freshly from their [bleep]. >> you know what those people are like. >> what could possibly go wrong in eight years of george bush? >> my producer just coughed up a hairball. >>sorry. >>just be grateful current tv doesn't come in "smell-o-vision"

>> oh come on! the sweatshirt is nice and all, but i could use a golden lasso. (vo)only on current tv.

(vo) later tonight, current tv is the place for compelling true stories. >> jack, how old are you? >> nine. >> this is what 27 tons of marijuana looks like. (vo) with award winning documentaries that take you inside the headlines, way inside. (vo) from the underworld, to the world of privilege. >> everyone in michael jackson's life was out to use him. (vo) no one brings you more documentaries that are real, gripping, current. >> john: friends, not all that along ago, we were playing where in the world is edward snowden until, of course, he settled into the loving bosom of mother russia. putin will give you asylum or

you'll get put in jail. but it turns out the story is much bigger than just ed snowden. do you want to talk conspiracy, my friends, the man snowden is connected to everything happening in the last ten years and we're going to show you on our telestrator -- we were going to show you on the telestrator but then al jazeera duke it away for their brand new prime time show on portuguese soccer bloopers, not to be missed. we proceeded with the next closest level of technology, current tv can still afford, a paper map and magic marker. so let's begin with edward snowden's father who lived here in pennsylvania. and who pointed out that none of the leaks in the nsa which is here in maryland, would have occurred if not for the sequester ordered here in washington, d.c. and and reluctantly agreed to by president obama who many right-wingers feel is from kenya. why do we have sequestration in the first place? well, w who is from texas, decided to occupy afghanistan right over here and then go to

iraq for causing 9-11 even though most of the hijackers were really from saudi arabia right here. they got bogged down. war is really expensive when you're cutting tax on millionaires. since the u.s. had to pass sequester, the government had to let a lot of its d.c. employees go and all american employees go around the country including snowden who, if he hadn't been fired, would never have wound up at the tech firm, booz allen hamilton here in hawaii where he gave access about the nsa's program. about the firms located here in silicon valley. after whistle blowing "the guardian" based here in london, snowden fled to hong kong all the way over here where he sought asylum with ecuador over here and they were considering it but they were already taking care of julian assange who is from sweden over here. snowden fled to moscow in russia where russia got bogged down in

afghanistan. wikileaks reported snowden was on his way to cuba which wasn't true. and venezuela which said they would take snowden but he couldn't get there from russia. so now ecuador won't be getting special tax status to import cut flowers and broccoli to u.s. because ecuador is mad it was considering taking snowden even though it was putin who gave him the asylum. it is all linked together. everything that's happened in the last 12 years and this is exactly why you may wind up having to pay a little bit more for broccoli. coming on to me all the time (vo) she gets the comedians laughing and the thinkers thinking. >>ok, so there's wiggle room in the ten commandments, that's what you're saying. you would rather deal with ahmadinejad than me. >>absolutely. >> and so would mitt romney. (vo) she's joy behar. >>and the best part is that current will let me say anything. what the hell were they thinking?

this show is about analyzing, criticizing, and holding policy to the fire. are you encouraged by what you heard the president say the other night? is this personal or is it political? a lot of my work happens by doing the things that i am given to doing anyway. staying in tough with everything that is going on politically and putting my own nuance on it. not only does senator rubio just care about rich people but somehow he thinks raising the minimum wage is a bad idea for the middle class. but we do care about them, right? vo: the war room monday to thursday at 6 eastern >> john: not since grover cleveland has a president signed so few executive orders as your very own president barack obama. let's take a look at the recent numbers. ronald reagan signed 381 executive orders. single term president george h.w. bush, 167. bill clinton, 364 and w, 291. folks, it is never too late to

make up for lost time. with a mere 157 executive orders and almost five years, this president apparently has decided it is time to stop waiting for congress to work with him and it is time to start getting stuff done by himself and many would say hey, man, it's about time. i'm happy about this panel. please welcome a bipartisan national public affairs firm tom doherty, author the rude pundit's almanac, it is the rude pundit himself. you know from "the stephanie miller show." mr. lee papa. welcome back. always insightful democratic strategist mr. bazell mike isel. very happy to have you here. according to politico, the president said he's planning a surge of executive action on issuens like voting rights, healthcare, job creation, the economy, climate change and immigration. bazell, why do you think the president has been so reluctant up until now to use this power?

>> i'm not entirely sure. i think he's always tried to do things -- to work with congress. he acts like he doesn't know the power of his office. his numbers are down. he's going around the country on the road show to build some support for some of his policies but i like what he does this because it shows me that he's actually willing to use the power of the office. so i think part of it is just a frustration, number one that he's tried to sort of play both sides and do this bipartisan thing that hasn't really worked but more to the point, i think the country is blaming him for it not working and now he needs to actually show he's doing something. >> john: it shows him engaging with people and not being this distant vulcan that he can be painted as. what do you think about the executive orders? >> i think it is going to cause further divide between legislature, certainly the house which will go back and fight him on many of these executive orders, they'll talk about him on a daily basis.

you know, i think that, you know, one of the reasons for the executive order to begin with is so far down right now, the first two years of his first administration, he controlled everything. so i mean he could have gotten basically a lot of stuff passed. i just think that at this time this moment, the people of the country across the aisle are craving for people to work together. we spend less time -- even if you disagree, i think that remember we had this moment in the springtime where they were having dinner together. people liked that. >> john: no matter what he does, he won't get cooperation. they've got their playbook. >> what he should do though -- i believe that listen, he's a very charismatic president. no question. if he takes the high road, he has an opportunity to continue to beat down, as you've talked many times, he'll lower the house republicans, he'll raise himself up. he'll look better. by doing this, he's getting back into a mud fight with them. i don't think that that works. >> john: i do think he's smart to do did in this year as

opposed to nextea today, the president signed the first of what we can presume is many executive orders and it is a great one, to improve the safety and security of chemical facilities and to pretty much reduce the hazardous chemicals to workers and communities. this has been embraced by republicans and democrats, clearly inspired by what happened in west texas a few years ago which makes you wonder, lee, you're rude. congress is rude. why couldn't congress get together and make something like this happen on their own? >> because they don't want to do anything that would in some level make the president look like the leader. >> john: it would make them look good. >> when do they do that? when has it happened lately? no matter what the president has proposed to them, even when he meets them more than halfway on things they want, they have always moved the bar. one of the things i think to respond to something that tom said, one of the things the president wanted to do when he first came into office was make congress do its job. and to try to say -- because he

came from a legislative branch to say legislative branch needs to legislate. i'm going to stand back for a moment and allow you to do that. and then everybody started begging him to come in on issues and he -- then he was accused of being aloof. and then -- so now we have congress having the congress -- the house of representatives and the republicans in the senate just turning on him and viciously flinging mud any chance they can. >> john: the charm offensive appears to be over. i want to move from washington to the kremlin. i don't know if it was vladimir riding bareback or the sweet smell of cinnabons wafting from the airport but edward snowden was granted military asylum in russia and walked freely out of the now infamous moscow airport. why do you think vladimir putin would do this? >> just to make america crazy. >> it is what america would have done in all honesty. i think that, you know, this is the -- affairs game that we see

on tv. if we had a guy who came here and was stuck at la guardia, you know, depends on how you want to treat somebody. you could keep them at la guardia, that would drive somebody crazy. we would keep them and use it as a negotiating ploy, et cetera. because what do you think? we're going to pick up the phone and say we've got a guy with a lot of secrets. we're going to send him back home. we would do the same exact thing. >> john: basil, i'm old enough to remember july when putin was saying we don't want you to harm our american friends. it seemed to be like they were making a play to help us. we have to assume there's diplomatic back and forth between the two nations. >> of course, there has to be diplomatic -- conversation going back and forth and perhaps there is some truth to the effect it is now some tension also building because the president is, you know, he can't get what he wants out of mother russia. this is like tinker tailor, solder spy. the reality of the situation is i don't think -- not ever but it

will be awhile before we get him back if at all. >> john: he's contained. >> he can't leave the country at this point. so i think it will fray tensions with russia but as the president had previously said, we're not going to do a military strike to get this guy back. >> john: lee, you may have heard this. it is russia's answer to a social networking site. they've already offered him a job. facebook offers hackers a job to help write code. if i cared about someone's private information, i wouldn't hire snowden. >> did you hear all of the russian women have been writing to him saying i want to be your girlfriend. having gotten many of those e-mails in my e-mail, you probably should ignore them. [ laughter ] but you know, the thing that always strikes me about this whole where in the world is edward snowden thing is that it actually has taken away from what snowden revealed.

and we spent so much time on the personality and you know, examining what's going on with russia that we've let go of the story. >> john: you have no privacy. database in utah. >> john, my sense is they were listening to stuff before snowden, they're listening to it now. they'll continue. i talk to a lot of people, nobody went yeah? so? that's the bottom line. he didn't shock us. >> john: i think lee makes a good point. i've got to go to break. we're talking about the personalities, not what they're revealing. bradley manning is going to jail for exposing war crimes no one is going to jail for. no one circles the wagons like our friends at fox news. compelling true stories. >> jack, how old are you? >> this is what 27 tons of marijuana looks like. (vo) with award winning documentaries that take you inside the headlines, way

inside. (vo) from the underworld, to the world of privilege. >> everyone in michael jackson's life was out to use him. (vo) no one brings you more documentaries that are real, gripping, current.

cenk off air alright in 15 minutes we're going to do the young turks! i think the number 1 thing than viewers like about the young turks is that were honest. they know that i'm not bsing them for some hidden agenda, actually supporting one party or the other. when the democrats are wrong, they know i'm going to be the first one to call them out. cenk on air>> what's unacceptable is how washington continues to screw the middle class over. cenk off air i don't want the middle class taking the brunt of the spending cuts and all the different programs that wind up hurting the middle class. cenk on air you got to go to the local level, the state level and we have to fight hard to make sure they can't buy our politics anymore. cenk off air and they can question if i'm right about that. but i think the audience gets that, i actually mean it. cenk on air 3

trillion dollars in spending cuts! narrator uniquely progressive and always topical, the worlds largest online news show is on current tv. cenk off air and i think the audience gets, "this guys to best of his abilities is trying to look out for us." only on current tv! >> john: we've heard about fox news and lauren green and her interview with reza aslan who will be on the show on monday. she ignored his resume and repeatedly demanded to know why a muslim wrote a book about christianity. bud feed said is this the most embarrassing fox news has ever done. it is time for damage control. what's foxx going to do? they apologize for their own zealotry and take the high road. i'm kidding, it is fox. they hosted brent boseel to defend this widely criticized

interview. >> i'll be the first one to applaud lauren green for the question she asked. it was the exact correct question that needed to be asked. this man was a christian who converted to islam and she had every right to ask him are you -- she's asking him, do you have a bias? are you being influenced by your faith to write what you're writing. he should have first and foremost said yes, i am. to deny it shows the arrogance. you saw his answer. just the aloof arrogance that how dare she ask that question. >> john: of course he has several degrees including a doctorate in new testament studies. to comment on this bold tack, i'm rejoinedded by tom doherty, lee papa, basil smikle. i was watching brent say this yesterday. you agree with him. >> i do and i'll tell you why i agree. because what i have seen over the last 50 years of my life is

that any time we dare question a muslim, it becomes an outrage. i have just seen catholics my entire life attacked, attacked, attacked and nobody gives a damn. so -- >> john: i think a lot of people give a damn when it is unfair. i'm as catholic as you. >> john, there is nobody who knows more and the knowledge of religion than you. however, we have seen time and time again in new york city, synagogue, graffiti. it is a big story. we've seen tombstones, it is nothing. we move on. i'm just taking a pass on this one is that i think it is always the catholics who get their brains beat in. he got asked tough questions, too bad. >> john: in fairness, i think it has more to do with the catholic's condemnation and i think the muslims have had it tough. >> i haven't had that condemnation of people's sex lives. >> john: let me open it up to you guys. where does a christian get off

talking about islam? >> have they ever asked frank gaffney or cliff mades when they published books against islam. has that question been posed to them on fox? do you think your christianity influences this? do you think your judaism influences this? no -- is just when reza aslan goes on. >> i mean converted. >> you know what? i go-go up to ska -- scalia and ask him does your whitens affect you? i have to assume his intellect of the law -- >> you just answered your own question. how many times you get that in life is you're not black. you don't know what i feel like so there's that -- we go in that direction. you just answered it yourself. >> no. here's my point. my point is that i am not allowed to assume that the people that are in power that are make the decisions because they're white biased, that

they're somehow intellectually superior. >> i don't have voting rights. >> john: it is okay to say how dare a gay writer write a screenplay about straight people. i was wondering if this was done to generate controversy. ms. green and fox were trying to delegitimize aslan as a scholar. did it work? >> i once said hello to reza aslan. now i'm disappointed he didn't blow himself up. >> john: sure. here's the thing. i think this helps both parties. i think it helps dr. aslan. his book shot to number one. maybe it that means it backfired for fox. no one disagree with me when i said it would help ms. green. any time you bash a muslim on fox, no disrespect to our friends, you won't get too much outrage from the right wing. i'll bet you roger offered her an on-camera job.

>> maybe they really like aslan and they knew dhld shut the book up. >> john: i don't agree with you. >> a conspiracy going on. >> i disagree. >> this is like fox did this and let's go after fox. >> john: a straight actor has no right to play a gay character. it is no different. people say -- well, no. people say it all the time in my field. you've also got the situation where jesus was a jew. this is a christian telling a muslim you have no right -- >> and a prophet. >> and the jew -- >> john: yeah, okay. you heard it. he said it, not me. that's also true. jesus is one of the most venerated prophets in the muslim faith so who better than a muslim prophet -- >> who are we to talk about this muslim? >> oh, okay. >> i'm a big supporter of israel. let's be clear about that. >> all religions equally.

>> john: that's a healthy thing. >> equally is good. >> you would agree that fox news does single out our islamic friends much more than the christian hypocrite friends. they got so much ratings on the ground zero mosque issue. as soon as the midterms were over, they dropped it. >> i think that fox is the only one at times who is willing to take on those issues. the other political correctness is we can't talk about it. >> john: you're never going to hear fox holding saudi arabia to task for having 15 of the 19 hijackers. >> there is no political correctness in this. it is foolish. they're not attacking him on the merit of his scholarly research. they're attacking him because of his religious belief. >> john: i would disagree it is foolish. they're giving red meat to their viewers. >> ratings are really good. >> there are a lot of shut-ins and senior citizens. >> john: all right. dr. aslan will be on our show on monday.

we'll all ask him how dare he. >> we'll be picketing outside. >> john: thank you tom doherty, lee papa and basil smikle. i hope i can see you before we go to the big cable box in the sky two weeks from tonight. the f bomb will be dropped on the word sweeping the nation, slut shaming. you don't want to miss it. ç]

>> did anyone tell the pilgrims they should self-deport? >> no, they said "make us a turkey and make it fast". >> (laughter). >> she gets the comedians laughing. >> that's the best! >> that's hilarious. >> ... and the thinkers thinking. >> okay, so there is wiggle room in the ten commandments is what you're telling me. >> she's joy behar. >> ya, i consider you jew-talian. >> okay, whatever you want. >> who plays kafka? >> who saw kafka? >> who ever saw kafka? >> (laughter). >> asking the tough questions. >> chris brown, i mean you wouldn't let one of your daughters go out with him. >> absolutely not. >> you would rather deal with ahmadinejad then me? >> absolutely! >> (singing) >> i take lipitor, thats it. >> are you improving your lips?

>> (laughter). >> when she's talking, you never know where the conversation is going to go. >> it looks like anthony wiener is throwing his hat in the ring. >> his what in the ring? >> his hat. >> always outspoken, joy behar. >> and the best part is that current will let me say anything. what the hell were they thinking? >> only on current tv. >> john: in tonight's f bomb, it's time to talk about sluts. it has come to mean any woman who is promiscuous. in america, promiscuous has come to mean anybody getting more than you. it has been used an ugly slur out of fear, envy or when a far shuttier male gets turned down by a hot chick. in spite of the plague, men who enjoy their sexuality are called stud. if you want to know how vicious the sexual double standard is,

compare the two words in a thesaurus because it turns out common euphemisms for stud include casanova, macho man, charmer, said user, playboy, lover, he man, romeo, wolf and smooth operator. whereas common euphemisms for slut include prostitute, tavern, whore, floozy, piece of tail, mattress, fleshpot, trollop and fallen woman. i kind of like some of those words. there is actually no word for male slut. actually, there is but i'll get to that at the end of this. we're now in the golden age of slut shaming where the culture, media and the men demand women's sexualize themselves to prove their value to society but then punish those women if they dare to actually enjoy it. slut shaming is social control of female sexuality. admonishing or attacking women over how they dress, how they love, what they believe is used to smear rape victims, women who want birth control, women who like sex as much as men or women

who use choose to have agency over their lives. hypocrisy perpetrated by males who crave female sexuality. but it has been used to shame women victimized by rape. in the middle east, in africa and right here in america. and we saw it in the ariel castro sentencing hearings when in between apologizing for keeping three women as sex slaves, he actually attempted to slut shame the three women by pleading to the judge and the court that they had all had multiple partners before he abducted them. so it is not like he did anything that bad. but the grand daddy of modern slut shaming is rush limbaugh. when college student sandra fluke testified before congress that access to bit control is a legitimate women's health issue because men still need to be told that it really is and health plans which cover viagra but not birth control are discriminatory, the two tons of hate in a half ton bag which is limbaugh called ms. fluke a slut.

if you care about women's freedom, then we're all sluts now. i predict it will be the next slur word that makes the minority take it back as a symbol of pride like nerd or other terms i'm not allowed to say on tv. some of the finest people i've known have been people, these misogynists would call sluts. give 20% dips and pay their slutty packses. they happen to enjoy sex. and the more conservative your rereligion is, the more you despise women who take control of their lives, dress how they like and aren't victims. if you don't like female sexuality, take it up with the manufacturer because the real judgment day may be when the far right rapture folk and jihadists find out slud went to heaven and hypocrites went to hell. the truth is that slud is secretly an acronix for secretly liberal and unapologetic and

truthful. there is a word for male sluts, it is called male. thank you, gentlemen. all of our guests. this is "viewpoint" on current. two more weeks. good night, mom. o. >> joy: tonight is our final episode ever. joining me, my pal who was also at my final taping of "the view" on tuesday. can we say ambulance chaser? plus tlc's newest reality star is a man with a 132 pound scrotum. this show is over but the guy with the big balls gets his own series. the circle of life is now complete. all of that and then no more tonight on "say anything."