warm your seat. >> thanks, dana. we appreciate it. nice job. >> thank you. >> special thanks to jedediah, bill schulz, robert and charles. i'm tv an dye >> hello, everyone. it's 5:00 in new york city. 10:00 p.m. in brussels. this is "the five." i'm your tiny talker, greg gutfeld. the show's packed tighter than a kangaroo's pouch, so let's do this america. "the five" starts as soon as i stop staring at kimberly. >> so on the latest episode, "south park" on the beloved occupy wall street movement. as usual, they nailed it. >> the protest has quadrupled in

size since this morning. as you can see from the aerial photograph, the protest now covers two square miles. we have riot officers here, here and here. the media has been contained to this area. where are the actual protesters? oh, these two people right here. how are we going to contain this thing? >> even the enabler of envy, michael moore, didn't escape. >> word is that filmmaker michael moore has joined the protesters outside. >> i look out at the faces of you protesters and i see the future of america. we are the 99%! >> so how was this show reviewed? not that funny said, "entertainment week's" ken tucker. translation, i only laugh when it agrees with my left wing assumptions. now the usual charm of this reporter. >> aren't you part of the 1%? >> i do very well. >> how are you helping them? >> i want taxes raised on people that do well, including mine.

>> how are you helping people with your $50 million? >> i don't have $50 million. you're punk media, is all you are. you lie. >> talk about thin-skin, which can happen when it's stretched. so who could top that? how about a union thug asking for real action. >> you're damn right. we ought to do more than occupying parks. we ought to occupy bridges, the banks, places themselves. this is nuts. >> someone should occupy that brain. so you've got that pos bozo essentially calling for revolution, plu. what's going on? the usual suspects are fading in relevance. they exploit class envy. they say the love protest when they really hate you for not

loving them. what happens if you don't buy the phony baloney, you're the problem that needs to be fixed, and the media will be there with pompoms to cheer them on. juan, i go to you for no particular reason. is jesse jackson right about saying this is similar to the civil rights movement? >> yeah, when you think there's no change in the country without a struggle. dr. king used to talk about creative struggle, that you would create situations with protests, sometimes breaking the law. you think about the vietnam war movement, to get the feminist vote in this country. >> these personally much more -- >> in the '60s, you would have said that king was an agitator.

>> there was nowhere the violence we're seeing now, and, by the way, the violence escalating, oakland a couple of times, shutting down ports. look at these pictures. breaking windows, spray-painting walls, occupying bills in new york, police having to come in. this is a scary moment, and getting scarier. >> i would argue -- maybe juan, you disagree, but the civil rights movement had a specific aim. when it was achievable. there's no real specific aim for this, except they want more. they want michael moore. >> it's confusing. they're not specific in terms of what they want. they seem angry. they're obviously violent. there's been over 3,000 incidents, assaults, rapes, theft crimes, property destruction. how is that benefiting anyone when you're destroying of lives of people and property trying to make a living, going to work, provide for their families. >> including the police officers. >> i think that there is a lack of coherence to the overall message. i think that when i see those

videos it looks like -- >> that's not true. the incoming message is inequality. let me finish my point. when i look at the videos, i see anarchy, and i don't think anybody would approve of it. >> right. >> especially when you're not clear in the goals. folks in oakland, i think they have psychological, or other problems, because that's not about the larger subject here. the larger subject is one a good number of americans embrace, which is there's tremendous income inequality, and the guys on wall street keep getting the big bonuses and float along with an economic structure that punishes the poor and the middle class. >> you contradicted yourself. you compared it to the civil rights movement and then looked at that tape and said they're nuts. >> i don't think they're reflective of occupy wall street movements across the country.

you guys pick out one specific place with one specific -- >> no, no. >> kimberly talks about rape and bad behavior. >> juan, i'm not making it up. >> the stds, the girl that was raped. >> come on. >> juan, hold on a second. there's inequality around the world. america happens to be about in the very middle of the income inequality spectrum. >> you know, the america we all grew up is an america that was at the top when it came to ability to have income mobility, to move up the scale, to promise your kids will get a better education, have a bigger house you had. that's no longer true. >> i disagree. >> i want all of those people that are protesting that had the opportunity we all seek, for what you just said. i think the way to do that is not through destroying capitalism, but through lowering the corporate tax rate, lowering and flattening out the tax base, so that you do get --

>> they don't understand. >> reducing regulation. >> there's two ways to get at the answer for what they're calling for. and one of them is to try to destroy the system. like the union guy calling to occupy the port, go occupy the bank. okay, really, with the bank tellers? what's that going to achieve? >> think about the other unions. >> absolutely. >> do you think the police union is grateful to hear that from another union head? >> no. it's counterproductive. they're not on message whatsoever. i guess what's the most appalling thing about this is this sounds like a country that i don't recognize, that they're calling for this redistribution of wealth, socialism. whatever happened to trying to make better for yourself, going out there and working hard instead of expecting a handout or somebody to, you know, park a fancy sports car out in front of your house? talking about the 1%, millionaires and billionaires, they don't even have their facts right. 1%, $344,000 a year, yes a significant amount of money, but

nevertheless they're angry at people that tried to work hard and do better, be a success? >> they're asking to forgive student loans. next year, there could be a trillion dollars in student loans, juan. they say just let them go. that's exactly what it is. it's income redistribution. if you're going to forgive a loan, someone has to pick up that tab. that's the people who pay taxes. >> let me ask you guys something. so in other words you guys say, you know what, what's been going on in this country is fine and dandy. dana rightly says we need to have changes. dana has her own set of prescriptions. we might disagree, but she has policy prescription. if folks say let's have change, we're tired of the big guys who control the politicians, control wall street, looking out for themselves, and screwing everybody else, you guys say don't raise a fuss, don't inconvenience us, don't block traffic -- >> the tea party did that. they did it peacefully with permits. nobody got arrested, nobody got

raped or assaulted. >> oh, come on. that's a ridiculous comparison. >> they had issues and followed through, got people elected. >> you know what, these guys, the reason you guys are so afraid of occupy wall street because they have the power to change the national narrative. i th love that "south park," bye way. >> you can say you want change, not to capitalism, but to what? what system works better than capitalism? >> i'm a big capitalist, you're a capitalist, and those folks out there are capitalists. >> they're not. they're anti-capitalism. >> let me tell you something, there's excesses to every structure, and when you have the bankers and wall street guys at

the trough like greedy pigs -- >> the most greedy, communism. >> up next, your latest 2012 polls. it looks like president obama is doing awesome. just kidding. he may want to rethink his game plan. also, i'm researching my next vacation. anybody has ideas, email us. i want someplace hot where they don't check ids. i'm only 19.

♪ >> welcome back to "the five." we're going to talk 2012 now. in my personal opinion, president obama has a very weak re-election strategy, but no matter what polls show it's going to be a very tight race. there was a new poll out by "usa today" gallup. one of the things they did was to match up potential republican nominee with president obama. and so if you put together obama and romney in a matchup, 47 to

47%. obama and perry was 49% to 45%. obama and cain, let's see, 48% to 46%. actually cain it would go romney, perry, cain, if you're a we know, looking who could do the best. in addition to that, what they looked at in the poll, because we have that electoral college, is the swing states, states that can go either way. if bob were here, i'm sure he could give us a better explanation of what that means and i would stay blushing. in that, romney beats out obama by 1%, but obama would beat perry and cain. my home state, colorado, and very florida, iowa, michigan, nevada, new hampshire, new mexico, north carolina, ohio, pennsylvania, virginia,

wisconsin, we'll see him visit those states a lot more. do you think he's on the right track? >> all the numbers you just read, two things jump out. number one, obama doesn't get over 50% in any of them. >> good point. >> number two, whoever is up against obama, the widest margin is 3%. it's anyone's race. it proves it's anyone's ballgame right now. >> i don't think a strategy is the right one. whoever it is, call them generic rbirepublican, if you're only at 49% -- >> this tells me he's vulnerable. you have perry, romney, cain. >> and gingrich is on the rise. >> absolutely, he's on the upswing. romney is looking the best, but all are within the 4% margin of

error on this. so it's basically too close to make too much of it at this point except for what you said about obama, which is not over 50% still. >> i was surprised to hear today from somebody that i trust -- >> me. >> no, it wasn't you. that president obama could actually lose north carolina, virginia, indiana, ohio, and florida, and still win, because of the electoral college makeup. >> it's hard. it's hard. i mean, then you're counting on the midwestern states really sticking with him, especially the industrial midwest. the thing that struck me out of this was -- well, first of all, what struck me, i think any state you come from is a swing state. i must say, you all have on rose-colored glasses for the republicans here. >> oh, perfect. >> none of the republicans get 50% either. nobody has 50%. >> but there's eight of them. >> i'm saying head-to-head, nobody gets 50%. what you get here is a situation where the country has gone

through a terrible economic stressful situation, high unemployment, even as we've seen unemployment come down, and most people think the country is headed in the wrong direction. people are angry at both sides. so he's the incumbent, he's going to get beat up. in a campaign, what does it come down to? give me a republican that's more impressive than the incumbent. >> i want to ask you, greg, republicans who think obama is toast are probably like those who thought that clinton could never get the nomination in '96. >> yeah. let's face it, the solution is for obama to gain ground against republicans he has to focus on a key demographic, what i call stupid people, have no idea what's been going on for the last three years. if he can uncover the stupid people, get them out to vote, he'll win by a landslide. >> get them out to vote again you mean. >> he's doing it already, focusing on people that never voted before, people that weren't old enough to vote. if they lower the voting age to 6 years old, he has this thing in the bag.

>> if he somehow gets the amnesty for the 15 million or 20 million illegals. >> what's interesting, let's use the stupid people measure. you know what, if he got the smart people to vote, college-educated americans, this wouldn't even be a contest. >> those are the ones he's losing. in fact, on the independent side of things, i had one more thing i wanted to point out, if you look at some of the differences, he'll have to deal with, which these numbers are important to him, hispanic latino unemployment in october of 2007, so almost four years ago now, was 5.6%. now it's 11.4%. african american unemployment from 8.5% up to 15.1%. there are other factors in that. i thought those two were interesting, because one of the things they were counting on in the memo, political memo, they wrote early on was the change in demographics for the hispanic population. >> right. >> in a lot of states we just

talked about, that will be a key factor. >> it's an opportunity for the republicans there. >> but on those nightclubs, latino -- on those numbers, latinos and blacks are strongly with the president. >> and the republicans have been smart, in those swing states, places where they have candidate recruitment, they have some strong hispanic governors, like susana martinez and brian sandoval, focusing hard to say the democratic party is not the only answer. >> i think that's healthy, i hope it's true, but i'm telling you if you ask latinos and blacks right now, two-thirds and 90% of the blacks are president obama. >> if you look at latino values, family, conservative, religion. oh, yeah, we like our jobs, too. >> but they can't stand republicans beating up on immigrants. >> they don't like that so many have lost their jobs under president obama. hope and change. one more point about enthusiasm. 2-1, you look at enthusiasm

about republicans in the swing states, they want to get out there and vote for their president. that's a big deal go this election, who can get out the vote. >> you can't be surprised by enthusiasm. white demss busy occupying parks and traffic islands, the republicans can't wait to occupy voting booths. >> that's what we're going to do, occupy the booths. >> a slight improvement in the unemployment numbers today. eric will talk about that coming up, but the economy not in great shape. we'll analyze the stats upcoming in just a minute. ♪ stoke ♪.

♪

>> welcome back to "the five." the economy added 80,000 jobs last month, according to the department of labor. only enough to move the needle slightly from 9.1% to 9% unemployed, and certainly not enough to signify a healthy economy, but according to former speaker of the house nancy pelosi the 14 million americans should thank her and obama because things could have been worse. >> i'll tell you this, if president obama and the house, congressional democrats, had not acted we would be at 15% unemployment. >> greg? >> it's quite impressive that she can say that with a straight face. >> whoa! >> by the way, my seven favorite words in the language, former speaker of the house, nancy pelosi. >> she wants to be the speaker of the house again. and i think she's probably a

little defensive. i thought her body language was strange. i think the question surprised her. you should always stay away from percentages like that, because like when you say the unemployment rate will be above 8% if you pass president obama's stimulus bill, and it comes back to haunt you. it's like an albatross around their neck. >> the crazy thing, she came up with 15% off the top of her head. >> arbitrary. >> no, it's not arbitrary. there's some economists who have written just that. in fact, they say 16%. >> can i mention something on that, though? >> yes, go ahead. >> those economists assume a 3.5% economic growth rate per year, and we're nowhere near that. >> there's no evidence to suggest we're on a path toward that at all. >> here's the bigger thing. they're also talking about steps by the bush administration, like the bail-out and tarp and -- >> do you think she's taking credit for the bush

administration? >> she'll take credit for anything she can take credit for, she's a politician. that's not an irrational statement, but that's political high per bowly to the max. >> the country is in trouble if we think unemployment dropping to 9% is a good thing. let's face it, the reason yet dropped had to be because of -- why it dropped had to be because of seasonal hiring. >> besides the elves, greg, there are somewhere around 9 million people who are called marginally attached to the economy, which means they'd like to be working full time, but all they can find is part time. >> like seasonal work.

that's why you'll see the numbers shift a little bit. is that something that's sustainable? they want to take the part time jobs. they need to be turned into full-time employment, but you have to have the revenue, the sales, the consumers to be able to sustain it. and real economists that aren't afraid to show their face will tell you we're not on track for that yet, and that's the problem for obama's re-election in 2012. >> the growth -- the job growth was anemic, better than going down, but it doesn't keep up with population growth. so we're not even keeping up with that. and also the employment age ratio is at the lowest it's been since, like, the 1920s. >> one more number to put out, and it's really disturbing. when obama was sworn into office, on average, people who were unemployed stayed on the unemployed line for 19 weeks. this month? 39 1/2 weeks. more than doubled. so three years into the presidency, people are staying unemployed twice as long.

>> so you think people are that dumb that they won't remember that we had a terrible economic crisis, a collapse of the housing market? you think that people -- >> can't blame them. >> i'm just saying that's crazy for you to say, guess what, it was shorter then, it's longer now. guess what. we went through a terrible crisis. we're all trying to dig out of it. there's no reason to dog america. >> i'm not dogging america. i'm dogging the policy. >> that's a good point. so tell me, what is the policy that would have changed this? where do i hear republicans or libertarians, anybody else, say we have the answer? >> juan, i've done it here, done it everywhere. actually it's in herman cain's book, repatriate all those $2 trillion or $3 trillion and -- >> and what happened last time? >> wait. before we go, next topic, fannie

and fred die asked for $6 billion more in bail-out money bringing the total from $171 billion, this is your money, to $177 billion. >> stop the presses. bolling and i agree. they are thieves. >> you guys want to occupy something in occupy this. they took $13 million in bonuses on top of their $2 million salaries. >> fannie and fredie sounds like a porn film. >> why are we giving them bonuses? >> i don't get it. >> this is the way i feel about

wall street. >> if wall street gets it, they're fat cats. if the government gets it, it's we're rewarding private expertise. >> got to leave it there. up next, good news for you long-haired pot-smoking potheads in california, next on "the five." ♪ back to new york

and my colleagues with "the five." ♪ >> welcome back to "the fab four" plus me. i was having a feeling we'll see more medical marijuana smokers popping up in one california

town. city officials in sebastopol have approved an amendment that prevents medical marijuana smokers from a smoking ban, but get this you're not allowed to smoke cigarettes. what's going on in your favorite state? >> one is supposed to save you, one is supposed to kill you. what do you want me to tell you? california is out of control. >> they're saying medicinal marijuana has a lot of benefits. people use it when given a cancer diagnosis. that's the reason behind this. >> it's a scam. it's for people who want to get high. let's face it, medical marijuana is a complete lie. it does relieve pain, but that's not why it's happening. this is the beauty of the tolerance movement. you can tolerate one behavior, but not another. so smoking pot is cooler than

smoking cigarettes. >> studies don't show, if you smoke pot, you get cancer at the same rate? >> i think there's a risk, yeah. >> how can one be bad, the other okay? >> i thought if you smoked pot, you would want to smoke a cigarette, too, right? doesn't one thing go for the other? >> not really. not that i would know. what goes with pot is doritos. what goes with a cigarette is -- >> this goes back to revenue generation. >> oh, my gosh,. >> if you do more medical marijuana, then you could tax it, then people would buy more snacks, and we'll increase taxes on fatty foods and sugar so maybe -- >> and we need more jobs. hmm. that's an argument for more drug legalization. >> come on. >> we should know this, do you tax medical marijuana sales? >> of course you would. >> this is big plan. most of the states in the

country have a balanced budget amendment. one of the reasons they like to get the money from the federal government, because that means they don't have to balance their budgets and do the hard stuff, like pension reform. instead you look for other ways of revenue. medical marijuana is a good one. you're right, it's not cool. smoking is considered not cool. and also i was reading that secondhand smoke from cigarettes is much more dangerous for you than secondhand smoke from marijuana. >> that's also a lie. >> is it? i read it on internet. >> secondhand smoke studies are basically scams, too. i'm for legalization. >> for what? >> of marijuana, but be honest about it, don't hide behind this trojan horse of medical marijuana. >> what about heroin, methamphetamine, you know, all the other drugs? >> i don't have on any me, eric. >> are you in favor of legalizing those? where do you draw the line? just curious. >> remember ron paul says -- >> your buddy. >> -- legalize it and nobody will run out and do it. what do you say to ron paul?

>> i think he's out of his mind. >> your fellow republican, he's out of his mind? >> forget it. i have a 13-year-old. the last thing i want him to do is decide between the candy machine, the coke machine and the -- >> in our society where it's illegal, it's still easy to get all of those things. once you ban something, it gets worse, we know from prohibition. >> the california voters wanted, this put it on the books. the feds aren't doing anything about it. >> smoking cigarettes doesn't impair your reaction time or judgment. >> it just kills. >> you medical marijuana, if you drive after getting high, isn't it the same as driving drunk? >> i don't know. i haven't had marijuana or a cigarette. >> potheads never get violent. >> we sale that not sexist or not violent. that's not druggist. >> it's from a life experience being around drunks. >> let me ask you about another

california thing. >> yes. >> eating in the nude. what do you think about that? >> i know, amazing. pass the ice cream. yeah, no, i don't think it's a good idea. >> wait a minute. we're not having dinner? >> exactly. baskin-robbins. >> baskin-robbins, that would chill the whole thing? i'm not going to baskin-robbins with you in the need. that's crazy. >> moving on -- >> the wheels just came off the bus. okay. here's what happened. so in san francisco, people were going around nude, and going into restaurants, totally inappropriate, and having dinner, there's families in there. now they're saying maybe we toot rethink this, dial it back, a good sign that they're reigning in progressive behavior. so i'm glad they're taking this small step in the right direction, because i don't know who thought this was a good idea to begin with.

eric doesn't like it. dana doesn't like it. >> it started in the summer, the naked protests. they were, like, why should we have to wear clothes? they were going into restaurants. the owners of the restaurants are thinking, well, could you at least put this under -- >> yikes! >> they gave you a newspaper, like you're a little puppy. >> you're a taxpayer, and your city council just had to debate whether or not there should be naked dining in your city. >> can i make a point? this falls under a rubric called the nudist movement, which is nothing but a scam. they're perverted exhibitionists who like people to look at them when they're nude. you're ugly. our right is not to see you in your ugliness. >> they stand outside and do it too, around the circle thing in the castro. >> slow down, take it easy.

"the fab five" is out of control. the fate of michael jackson's doctor conrad murray is with the jury. a verdict could happen any minute. stay with us. we're coming right back with our predictions. ♪

♪ >> welcome back to "the five." now, any moment a verdict in the michael jackson manslaughter trial could come down. right now jurors are deliberating whether or not dr. conrad murray is responsible for the pop star's death. discuss. okay, so greg, you get to choose. >> uh-huh. >> who do you feel is responsible? is it that man, dr. conrad murray, or michael jackson because of his drug dependency and -- >> i think they're both guilty of boring the hell out of me, but also they're both guilty because the doctor and michael jackson benefited from their relationship. michael jackson got all the drugs he wanted. the doctor got the fame that

comes with being a doctor to michael jackson. if you've noticed, the amount of girlfriends this guy has had in court, dr. murray, five ex-girlfriends, and they're all really attractive. that only happens if you're michael jackson's doctor. they both benefited from it. >> it's sort of hike being your assistant. >> yes. >> great points about the dating life of dr. murray. dana? >> we all know that michael jackson was of perfectly sound mind, so there owe. >there -- >> yes. >> i'm kidding. i've gone back and forth on this. my gut instinct is the doctor was wrong. it was clearly that michael jackson was not able to take any more medicine and he was probably going to overdose. i actually think the doctor is in the wrong. >> i do too. >> you think that the doctor is wrong? >> yeah. >> i agree with dana. since when can you go to a doctor and say, just give me all the drugs i want? by the way, i'm injecting into

my vein something that would normally knock me out for surgery, that's what i want, so give it to me. if he does, he's wrong any way you slice it. >> is it wrong because the doctors -- i'm not pointing at you. >> she's pointing at me. >> i'm wondering about all the steroid issues in professional sports. don't the doctors also get in trouble for providing it? >> sure. >> even if the player says, i want it. >> it's illegal. >> juan, i'll go to you now. here's the question, whether or not he should get his license revoked. should it be a criminal matter? is it an issue of medical malpractice or rise to the level of manslaughter? >> i think it's manslaughter. what's interesting, the defense in this case is making the argument that michael jackson might have injected himself. >> right. >> or michael jackson wanted these drugs, and that he simply had a doctor because of the -- i think the doctor was paid $150 a month -- that the doctor simply

complied with the patient's wishes. that still is not in line with the hip carattic oath, which is due no harm. he killed a man. >> he should get his license revoked, suspended. that's up to the medical board, and manslaughter, doesn't have to have a criminal intent, just that you did an act that caused -- >> you're being kind, because he intended to give propofol. >> what if it wasn't propofol? what if it's vicodin or heroin. doesn't matter how they use it, i think you're still breaking the law, your medical oath. >> kimberly, what is the jury deciding? >> the jury is going to decide whether or not dr. murray is guilty of involuntary manslaughter. >> what does that mean? >> did he provide michael jackson with the drug propofol, and ultimately what they allege is, what's ultimately in the medical examiner's report, that michael jackson died from an

overdose of propofol. the defense is trying to muddy the water and say, look, you can't say for certain that it was just the propofol that killed him because there are other drugs found in his body, and there was an amount of propofol dimimimus. they had a doctor come in, i did an experiment with propofol, it didn't kill me. there's a question of whether he had other drugs in his system. on cross-examination there was a prosecution witness that did admit that. maybe the jury will say, we have reasonable doubt as to how he died. we can't say for certain that what dr. murray was the final lethal blow. maybe they can hang their hat on that. he's looking at four years behind bars. >> when michael jackson died, it was a surprise to me, but the autopsy showed he was a pretty healthy guy, right? he didn't have a great illness. he wasn't on bad, illegal drugs. so i think maybe the argument

is -- >> well, propofol is -- >> if he's healthy, what did that make me? oh, my goodness. >> super human. >> i know. >> what about the music company that was trying to keep him going, doing all the concerts, had him on that ridiculous schedule? >> i have a real problem judging them and judging the doctor. let's be honest this cast at "the five" is destined for a geraldo special. especially you, dana. i keep worrying about you. >> if i keep doing this commute, there's going to be a request for propofol. >> oh, jeez. >> just kidding. we'll keep you here happy and healthy in new york. you want to blame the record company, but they're getting sued, too, because they're the westbounones that had the docton board. >> oh, blame everybody. >> guess what. we'll be right back. oh

♪ >> welcome back to "the five." i think this may be one of the most ridiculous lawsuits i've ever heard. a man who got married in 2003 is suing his wedding photographer to get him to pay for a

recreation of the wedding. see, the groom says the photographer missed key moments from the day and wants a new, and i guess fake, wedding to capture them. but there's a catch, greg. they've been divorced, and his ex-wife lives in latvia now. i mean, is this ridiculous? >> same thing happened to me last year, believe it or not. i got to finder. this is incredible, asking for $48,000 to recreate the wedding. what's outrageous, the judge okayed it. when she said it was okay, she started quoting from barbra streisand, trying to be the quirky judge you see in "the good wife." she thinks it's funny. how this got this far, it's amazing. >> what's so wrong with the photos? >> he said they mysteried bouquet toss. >> who cares. >> by the way, she's a 10, he's

a 4. something wrong with this picture. >> hello. she's in latvia now. >> if someone is this sad and pathetic to do this lawsuit, is it wasn't wonder she went back to latvia? >> my son says to me all the time, if he sees a good-looking woman with a guy that's not, he's swinging above his weight class. that picture is revealing. i agree with you, greg. >> he also -- >> i can sympathize with him. >> well, no, you're not very heavy. >> he can proceed as to whether there's a breach of contract. >> they haven't been able to talk to her. they're trying to reach her by her facebook page. >> why don't they photoshop her? >> i got alabama-lsu saturday night 8:00. i'm going with the lsu tigers. >>