itself. the challenge for each of the republican contenders and the president tomorrow is not the words that they'll speak but the actions that they'll take. let's hope that the anniversary of 9/11 painful though it is will force them to consider the better aspects of their nature for the good of this nation. thank you very much indeed for watching. we've all been waiting for the man to return. he saidhe was going on a brief vacation. he didn't come back for three weeks. but, ladies and gentlemen, i give you the one and only professor of economics at the university of tribeca, new york, dr. dylan ratigan. >> well, it's interesting. a very flattering introduction. i believe your name is martin, correct? >> right. >> i haven't been here in a while but that is how they refer to you? >> thank you. that is correct. >> and you have a reputation obviously as being a notably effective debater and journalist and i've read some things about you. i am interested, though, as to

how it is you might, with the mantle of authority that you've accumulated over decades of effort and brilliance on your part to offer up a factual inaccuracy like the suggestion i was away for three weeks. >> how many days was it? >> i don't know. like 20. >> it felt like much longer. it's all yours. now get on with it. >> it's good to see you. thank you, martin. our show does begin right now. well, good afternoon to you. nice to see you. our big story, well, jobs. things don't seem to change when you take a week off, do they? good wednesday afternoon to you. my name is dylan ratigan. i am back and so, too, is the american congress. jobs being the big talking point. i emphasize talking point. members of both sides of the aisle already pressuring president obama to send them

so-called free trade pacts with huge export markets for american products. places like colombia, panama, south korea. >> the president, himself, acknowledges these trade pacts would help create tens of thousands of jobs right here at home by vastly expanding the market for u.s. goods. he should send them to congress today so we can finally ratify them. >> let me see. we're vastly expanding the market for u.s. goods to miniscule countries that have a pittance of a population compared to us and that's going to solve our jobs problem? what our leaders don't seem to understand is that the trade deals actually drive jobs out of our country. if you look at history, nafta and other trade deals have yet to work in america's favor. they continue to put america at a disadvantage. the frustrating part is that in theory and potentially in practice trade deals can create millions of u.s. jobs. we do want and desire places to export american goods and services globally.

but politics, as we all know, are never as they seem. in the case of panama, their bank secrecy laws create more tax havens for wealthy americans. not much to export to there but it's great to have a place to hide your money. there are even websites with step by step instructions on how to go about doing it. colombia, meanwhile, not a lot of people to sell to there but it does happen to be the most violent nation against union organizers. union organizers routinely kidnapped, even murdered by the dozen in fact in that country. and the benefit of that is that the fear and violence makes labor very cheap in colombia, lest you get murdered. wider profit margins for us, baby. means more jobs sent overseas to some cheap labor. and then the south korean trade deal could end up subsidizing the north korean region. south korean companies, which i just learned this, and we all are learning through this i suppose, but south korean companies employ some 40,000

north koreans. the south pays the wages for the use of the north korean labor directly to the north korean government so we're funding the north korean government at the same time we have sanctions. you're in the room with me. still, for once, the washington wrestling may work in our favor and block or at least revise some of these deals so we have some advantage for us not just for those who want tax havens, cheap labor, and the ability to hide assets. never mind the fact that the populations of these countries are a fraction of ours. so the idea that they're going to buy our products to create jobs and boost our economy is preposterous. a trade deal with india, brazil, a good deal with china. that would be some jobs. a deal with panama? really? democratic congresswoman linda sanchez serves on the president's export council and the ways and means committee trade subcommittee. even better, she agrees with

those of us who see these particular deals as bad deals. it's a pleasure to see you again. >> thank you for having me. >> trade deals on principle can create tremendous flow of investment in jobs to any country. fair? >> potentially, yes. >> at the same time, we continue to seem to entertain trade deals that explicitly don't do that and have other specific benefits for wealthy interests whether it's tax havens, cheap labor, or whatever it is. and i think that confuses people because the rhetoric around trade can be very appealing and the benefits of trade are very concrete and, yet, when people do it, they push for it, say okay. let's do this. they get punched in the face and worse. they lose their job and we watch our country spiral into poverty. >> correct. you've hit the nail on the head. i couldn't have said it better myself. >> so how do we -- how is this happening? who is doing this? >> well, the fact of the matter is that trade deals that have

been pushed under the bush regime and now that republicans are calling for obama to move forward are based on the -- >> hold on. with all due respect i've heard your president and the president in general advocate these deals explicitly absent any republican pressure. to suggest this is a republican agenda strikes me as incomplete information. >> you didn't allow me to finish. >> sorry. >> i would have said republicans are newly calling on the president to move forward these trade deals and there has been a desire by the obama administration to move these deals forward. some of the trade agreements have had minor changes but the fact of the matter is the fundamental changes that need to be made to the current sort of template for trade agreements, they need these vast improvements if we're going to make trade work for the american worker. the fact of the matter is the united states has been hemorrhaging manufacturing jobs since 2001. there are about 5.4 million manufacturing jobs that have

disappeared and in large part because of these so-called trade agreements that are supposed to create markets for us to export into which sounds great and would be great for the american economy but little do we realize that in these trade agreements that have been negotiated we are giving big advantages to countries to export to the united states. all under the guise that cheap consumer goods are good for americans. well, okay. but if you're an american who loses your job because of these trade deals, doesn't matter if toothpaste is 50 cents less. if you don't have a paycheck you can't buy toothpaste at all. >> the thing that's most outrageous about this is when you dig to the bottom of the rabbit hole what you find is that it's not china in lobbying u.s. congress people to do these agreements for instance. it is american ceos. american, treasonous if you will. >> large, multinational corporations who stand to benefit, by the way, from moving

operations overseas, oftentimes to developing countries, that don't have strong labor protections. let's take colombia, for example. colombia has the highest rate of murders of union activists in their country and folks in the united states may say, well what do we care about union activists in colombia? the fact of the matter is, if you have no right to bargain for better wages, then you're basically forced to work subsistence wages and the american worker cannot simply compete with subsistence wages in colombia. what happens? large u.s. corporations have moved their manufacturing overseas because, guess what? they can pay pretty much nothing to these workers. how does that help the american worker? it doesn't. >> right. i get it. >> it certainly helps that corporation because they make a heck of a lot more money. >> let's get into this a little bit. it's easy to demonize or vilify the american corporate ceo who is seeking these advantages but at the end of the day the people

who are paid by way of tax dollars from the american people to defend the principles that created this country from any special interests whether the multinational corporations -- i pay taxes, you pay taxes. the panelists on this show pay taxes. every human being who works in this country pays taxes. to hire a staff of people, the congress, the president, etcetera, to defend the integrity and the principled interests. you sit around like, oh, well if only the corporations weren't so evil. no, no. i'm not saying you're saying that by the way. i'm saying people fall into that because it's easy to make it their fault. but the fact of the matter is, we don't know, the american people are confused as to why the politicians we pay are so willing to do such obviously destructive deals that clearly could be done differently. it's easy to point at the ceos but it's the politicians we don't understand. >> clearly, there are a lot of

people in the government that don't understand that the current model for trade is not working for american workers. but with one twist to what you just said, i would agree. a lot of times the american public doesn't know how bad these trade deals are. >> for sure. >> they are just assuming it's going to create all this business between the united states and these other countries and that somehow that is going to be good for them. >> yes. >> the fact is they don't -- they, themselves, workers themselves often vote against their own interests because they're electing members to represent them in the congress to create policy with respect to trade that hurts them economically and yet they're voting for these people to remain in office. so there's a lot of blame to go around but certainly, you know, the more i think that people understand what is in these trade agreements, the less likely they are going to be to want to support these policies or support the people who are pushing these policies. >> the mindless rhetoric of the word "free" is very powerful

even if what you're doing is a rigged agreement with currency manipulation, back end tax deals and all the rest of it. you just tell people it's free and you're off to the races. congresswoman, thank you for your efforts in regard to this. and not only to work on it directly but to educate others to help better understand it. appreciate it. >> my pleasure. thanks again. >> all right. linda sanchez, again, on the trade -- or the president's export council. if you want to learn more yourself about all of these current pending deals in particular you can head to our website dylan ratigan.com for our special series "trading our future" published recently with "the huffington post." lots of detail and perhaps answers to questions. and of course once you're done feel free to send me or anybody, any of us your thoughts. twitter and facebook, always watching those comments. with that said let's bring the panel in. i'm sure they have plenty to say about the trade deals and jobs. joining us right now, our panel. i want to start with you.

there is a great basis and very sound economics in the theory of trade. very sound economics. >> yes. >> in the theory of trade between nations. where is the sound theory, and articulate it a little bit. where does it go awry in the political process so that something that could be tremendously beneficial to everybody involved too often either becomes one sided or dysfunctional? >> well, i mean, there is a fundamental problem that we do have in america, which is that we may have a labor force that isn't quite priced for a global free market as you say. we go into a deal with panama, colombia, colombia, club workers who ask for a raise, sort of oliver twisty type scenario. but there is a fundamental problem we have. we can't just insist that we close ourselves off because we do want to open up new markets as you know. we want to fix it and you want to make sure there is a certain

return. there is a problem we need to address. if we have a labor market that somehow has priced itself out there is a structural problem we need to look at. how do you deal with it? i don't know. >> before we get into labor, because that gets into what then are the threshholds in china and colombia, etcetera, very quickly before i bring everybody else in, at its best, what is a trade agreement capable of in terms of job creation and economic activity? >> well, it opens up new markets for american goods and services so long as they are highly competitive. and in many fields they certainly are. you can sell more iphones. that means jobs or profits at least in the united states. you can sell more automobiles that are made here in canada where i am today or in the united states. that's good for america. the problem we have is if our products and services are not competitive there is no matter what you do. you can shut us off for a while. then we're going to become a shrinking nation, shrinking economy. it means more people you can

sell your goods and services to. it's not just about getting cheaper stuff. >> exactly. it's been creating markets. but jonathan capehart, how do you create a market when my competitor is discounting its currency at 40%, in the case of china. >> right. >> how do i compete with that? when my competitor is taxing my imports at 25% and i'm taxing theirs at 2.5% i can tell the kids on the football team to run faster but if the guys on the other team are greasing the football, it's not -- you're not going to catch it. >> right. and you either have to come up with ways to get around the team that's greasing the football or you got to figure out ways to punish the team that's greasing the football. and so far i haven't heard anything about punishing those countries that are greasing the football or are at least not playing on a level playing field. and to get to something you were saying, these trade deals make possible for the united states to sell its goods and services but he said something

interesting. he said, you know, you get to sell more iphones and then he said the profits at least come back to the united states. i think there is a recognition of the fact that the united states, what exactly does it make that it sells overseas and then it comes back to the united states in terms of more jobs with the american worker? >> not only that. i hate to bring it up but the fact of the matter with the iphone is it is a classic example of exploiting broken trade in my opinion because you have a deal with millions of workers in china who are making the iphones, ten to a room, 75 cents an hour, suicide jumper nets in place. you have millions of dollars being made selling iphones but the reality is not what it appears to be. you think oh, my goodness, apple is so wonderful. oh, hang on a second. apple is one of the largest employers of chinese slaves in the world. >> absolutely. it's very important we're shining a spotlight on that. >> just to understand the whole thing. >> as far as china goes, things

are changing there. the regime, i've spoken to you about this before, is in trouble there. they're spending more on internal security than on their external military now. they are worried about those workers. so you'll see i think more, possibly even the rise of trade unions say in china moving forward. >> yes. >> but, yes, we have to make changes here in america. >> the real point with trade ultimately is that it is fixable. this is something that has been fixed before. it can be fixed again. there are huge incentives to fix it insofar as the theoretical benefits we've all been offered are real if you in fact have a reciprocal environment where you have a balanced relationship of tax and the rest of it. the panel stays. coming up on the d.r. show fight night for the gop. you probably know this. four hours until the republican hopefuls face off. we ask whether america will get the debate it deserves on jobs. and what an amazing archeological discovery is teaching all of us about the ancient world of gladiators.♪ [ barks ]

[ cat meows ] [ woman ] ♪ i just want to be okay ♪ be okay, be okay ♪ i just want to be okay today - ♪ i just want to know today - [ whistles ] ♪ know today, know today - [ cat meows ] - ♪ know that maybe i will be okay ♪ [ chimes ] travelers can help you protect the things you care about... and save money with multi-policy discounts. are you getting the coverage you need... and the discounts you deserve? for an agent or quote, call 800-my-coverage... or visit travelers.com. to make baby food the way moms this would. happybaby strives to make the best organic baby food. in a business like ours, personal connections are so important. we use our american express open gold card to further those connections. last year we took dozens of trips using membership rewards points

to meet with farmers that grow our sweet potatoes and merchants that sell our product. vo: get the card built for business spending. call 1-800-now-open to find out how the gold card can serve your business. her morning begins with arthritis pain. that's a coffee and two pills. the afternoon tour begins with more pain and more pills. the evening guests arrive. back to sore knees. back to more pills. the day is done but hang on... her doctor recommended aleve. just 2 pills can keep arthritis pain away all day with fewer pills than tylenol. this is lara who chose 2 aleve and fewer pills for a day free of pain. and get the all day pain relief of aleve in liquid gels.

do you have a jobs plan? >> i did. the only specific one in the race. nobody cared. >> and now you don't have a job. >> well, will anyone offer a concrete jobs plan during the republican debate tonight or will the eight contenders be too busy slamming the president and for that matter each other to offer any sort of real solution? if you're playing along at home, if they're not talking about trade, bank, or tax reform, then you can be assured they're full of hot air. let's bring back our megapanel. jobs cannot be created if you do

not have money and investment and ideas flowing into the household, the school, the state, the country, the world. how is it possible to have a political debate that has no basis in fact or arithmetic? >> we'll see it tonight and ironically in the reagan library. reagan the president that raised taxes 11 times. we come back to that infamous moment in the last debate in iowa when they were all asked would you agree to ten parts of spending cuts to one part worth of tax increases and they all said no. that is completely ridiculous. it's against the majority of economists, american people. we are just going to see a play fight tonight. wrestling as you say. >> pro wrestling. >> real wrestling is kind of cool. they actually have to wrestle each other. pro wrestling is made to distract you while they take all your money. jonathan, anybody in the republican field right now who could be a president of the

united states? >> well, president of the united states by whose definition? yours? >> by the definition of, you know, in general -- a lying reality show seeking mad man. >> in that case i think jon huntsman is one who has a jobs plan. >> yeah. that's true. >> that is apparently so good "the wall street journal" editorial page actually likes it. >> yeah. >> mitt romney, former governor of massachusetts, he put out his job plan yesterday. the 59 points which "the wall street journal" editorial paged it right at 59 economic flavors. i don't know if michele bachmann has a jobs plan or if rick perry has a jobs plan other than saying, look at what i've done in texas. but then you have to ask the question, okay. you've created all these jobs or jobs have been created in your state while you're a governor but what kind of jobs are those? so in terms of -- can any of those people standing on the

stage be president of the united states? i would say maybe there are two or three but tonight we're going to see for sure whether that is the case. >> the last word on the gop field from you, robert. >> yeah. no, i think there are three very credible candidates. actually i think mitt romney, even though his 59 issues all look exactly like the 59 issues he came up with a few years ago. i like huntsman's stuff. he's come up with -- he's kind of done a whole smorgasboard across the aisle. just basically he's looking for good ideas. that's exactly what we need. the problem is he is of course not going to get the nomination at the moment. then you have rick perry. i mean, i think that's going to be quite interesting as jonathan points out. it's great if everyone wants to work at taco bell making six bucks an hour. that's a lot of jobs but those are not the good jobs we talk about on the show. but, you know, look. all three of them have really credible backgrounds as governors which really do make

them contenders for the presidential nomination. >> fair enough. names to watch and a show that continues. we'll keep the panel. next a look at wall street and whether the 18th or 19th century, shouldn't say 18th but 19th or 20th century apparatus of the s.e.c. is remotely capable of monitoring a 21st century financial system. new whistle blower allegations out of the s.e.c. and our specialists call to shut the doors and start over after this. [ groans ] you okay? i'm not looking forward to my flight. try this. bayer aspirin? i'm not having a heart attack. it's my back. no, this is new bayer advanced aspirin... clinically proven to relieve tough pain twice as fast as before. what, did you invent this or something? well, my team did. i'm dr. eric first, from bayer. wow. look. it has microparticles. it enters the bloodstream faster and rushes relief right to the site of pain.

better? great! thanks. [ male announcer ] new bayer advanced aspirin. extra strength pain relief. twice as fast. test our fast relief. look out for your coupon in this sunday's papers. i could not make working and going to school work. it was not until the university of phoenix that i was able to work full-time, be a mom, and go to school. the opportunities that i had at the university of phoenix got me to where i am today. i'm mayor cherie wood, i'm responsible for the largest urban renewal project in utah, and i am a phoenix.

[ male announcer ] university of phoenix is proud to sponsor education nation. because we believe an educated world is a better world. kiss those lines goodbye! university of phoenix is proud to sponsor education nation. bye bye! discover juvéderm® xc, the smooth gel filler your doctor uses to instantly smooth out those parentheses lines around your nose and mouth for up to a year! temporary side effects include redness, pain, firmness, swelling, bumps or risk of infection. lose those lines! the way you look with juvéderm® xc... might just change the way you look at everything. ask your doctor and visit juvederm.com.

when an entire industry that you were supposed to be regulating disappears due to unregulated, unchecked greed, then you are both a captive regulator and a failed regulator. the s.e.c. needs new senior staff because the current staff has let our nation's financial

system be led to the brink of collapse. >> a very blunt take on the financial regulators in america, the s.e.c., in 2009. if you look at new revelations things not only haven't gotten much better, they look like they're getting worse. regulators turning into corporate execs through that revolving door currying favors with cronies. an agency paid for by u.s. taxpayers and trusted to protect investments and retirements of all of us instead destroying evidence that could protect us. in a new "the washington post" article a long-time s.e.c. attorney blowing the whistle on what he calls systematic destruction of documents related to closed files and formal investigations, the latest example of why our next guest says the s.e.c. our financial regulator and really the model for the world at least our financial system is the model for the world so how we regulate it is that much more important that that model has to be changed. joining us now is william cohen, columnist for "bloomberg view" and author of "money and power,

how goldman sachs came to rule the world." just in the past ten years the change in the financial world has been quantum. swaps, all this. how out of step is our regulatory apparatus with the financial system that's trading or just closed up a half hour ago? >> dylan, it may be the fact that it has never been a fair fight. i mean, always based on the kind of talent you get at the s.e.c., what they can pay people versus what people on wall street get paid to evade the s.e.c. regulations it is possible it was never a fair fight but in the last ten years you're absolutely right. the innovation on wall street has gotten exponentially more complex and the regulators just aren't positioned well to handle that. i mean look at what's going on now in the wake of the dodd/frank law. 2200 pages. a year plus later still writing regulations. they're going to wall street to get their help to write the regulations. doesn't seem to me you put the fox in the hen house and then when -- as mr. flinn was

describing, in his "the washington post" column, his letters to senators in congress, you know, destroying case files, destroying evidence that people used to try to figure out what happened here to -- so we can understand and not have these things happen again. well that is beyond the pale. that's a straw too far. >> this is quite extraordinary. i mean, unbelievably shocking destroying documents and so forth. who should be running a new version of the s.e.c.? >> well, first of all, you know, look at who is running it now. mary shapiro. she may be the most wonderful woman, you know, in the world. she used to be head of wall street's self-regulatory agency. on her exit she got paid $9 million to go away. she goes to the s.e.c. the head of enforcement is the former general counsel of the americas at deutsche bank. who does he choose to go after? goldman sachs a year plus ago. even though deutsche bank was bigger in mortgage backed

securities than goldman sachs. where is the justice and fairness in all of this? you need people who are not affiliated with wall street regulating wall street. they're being paid like the top lawyers in the country to go to washington to regulate with a firm hand an industry that is in bad need of regulation. >> rob, go ahead. >> well, william, i mean, in theory i get all that but let's face it you need poachers turned game keepers. that's what the s.e.c. has always been. going back to joe kennedy who was, you know, famous for his shenanigans on wall street and he led the first s.e.c. the issue, i guess i have with this is i agree with you your recitation of the failures of the s.e.c. are spot on. you know, they've missed just about everything, every great scandal. their failure to regulate the wall street banks is just, you know, at this point a part of history. but they no longer do, you know, regulate the wall street banks.

that is all moved to the federal reserve. >> they are the -- they are in charge of regulating wall street banks. >> their responsibility is to investors. they are in charge of regulating -- they're in charge of protecting investors. okay? they do things like telling groupon when it comes up with a completely loopy calculation of its earnings that they can't do that because that's misleading to investors. >> well look. >> guess what happens? they pull their ipo. >> great respect for you and your writing. >> we need people who understand wall street. >> well, people that understand wall street but who take it too far. okay? for instance, when goldman sachs was sued by the s.e.c. by robert kuzami in 2010 and paid their july for $550 million, you know, the people at goldman sachs told me the reason they settled was because there he didn't want to be in a war with their regulator. so, yes. wall street, s.e.c. is responsible for protecting investors of course but they always have a big hand in regulating wall street.

>> what confuses me when you look at the 2200 pages of dodd/frank you look at all these -- the complexity basically, the complexity in the markets and the complexity in the attempt to regulate the markets. have i lost my mind when i look at this and i think, well if there was simply a north star, a principle in the financial markets in the banking system with investors across the board that revolved around retained risk of some kind, capital requirements, period, and that you simply were -- and you know that you're not there, we know you're not there and you say over the next ten years we're going to work toward actually enforcing capital requirements, which doesn't require 2200 pages, which doesn't require 15,000 lawyers, which doesn't require all this stuff. that's not to say what rob's point about the quality of earnings and accounting that there is not obviously a lot of rules and regulations that still have to be assigned if you're going to publicly trade companies and all the rest of it. but are we not making the solution too complicated? >> yes.

dodd/frank is way too complicated. way too complicated. you need to have people on wall street have it be in their self-interest not to make stupid mistakes. not to make imprudent decisions. honestly, it used to be more or less when they were private partnerships and their own capital was on the line. they weren't rewarded for taking risks with other people's money. >> why is this, i feel i -- >> the simple solution. >> i feel like i've lost my mind. rob, they did this forever. the banks -- it was, you know, or jonathan, it was lehman brothers. and i mean whether you like it or not it was a bunch of guys got together and say, hey, i think we work together with this pile of money. we can make it into more money but i tell you what, don't do anything stupid because i don't want to lose my money. and they took that out of the system, jonathan. it just seems nuts. >> well, william, i have a question for you. and i've been struggling with this. if the s.e.c. and wall street

are too close together and you have, you know, people who are supposed to be policing the industry that they came from or desire to go to, then who is it, who is the perfect person to run a revamped s.e.c. who doesn't come out of wall street who probably doesn't know where the bodies are buried or the customs or how things are done? is there a person you have in mind, not affiliated with wall street, who would be the perfect police person for wall street? >> you know, you're putting me on the spot. do i have a name in mind? no. i don't. >> eliot spitzer. >> eliot spitzer would be an excellent choice. >> that's what i think. >> an excellent choice. >> thank you. >> he knows exactly where the bodies are buried. yes. jonathan, there is my answer. eliot spitzer. >> go ahead, rob. >> you have to have a whole staff though. so, you know. it's not just eliot spitzer. >> of course. >> they need to be paid well. >> they have to know how to unravel a credit default swap that takes the polish currency

versus the japanese yen -- >> private agreement that nobody knows exists. i mean, the unwind of swaps, if it's the simple act of moving the swaps market to an exchange, ten years, i don't even know. to your point, rob, anyway, the fact that the conversation exists i take hope in because i think if we're not talking about it we're definitely not going to solve it. i appreciate you driving us to this point, bill. >> thank you, dylan. >> the panel stays? goes away? i haven't been here for a few weeks. i came back and i'm like goit to go on tv, i got to shave. i do apparently. a pleasure to see you. wonderful to see the panel. next we fight the big banks. here and well our predecessors had to fight actual, live tigers. what a cool new find is revealing about the lives of roman gladiators. [ male announcer ] for sore muscles use new bengay cold therapy.

it's pro-cool technology releases armies of snowmen masseuse, who cuddle up with your soreness and give out polar bear hugs. technology.

[ male announcer ] new bengay cold therapy. the same technology used by physical therapists. go to bengay.com for a 5-dollar coupon. the same technology used by physical therapists. do you have an irregular heartbeat called atrial fibrillation, or afib, that's not caused by a heart valve problem? are you taking warfarin to reduce your risk of stroke caused by a clot? you should know about pradaxa. an important study showed that pradaxa 150mg reduced stroke risk 35% more than warfarin. and with pradaxa, there's no need for those regular blood tests. pradaxa is progress. pradaxa can cause serious, sometimes fatal, bleeding. don't take pradaxa if you have abnormal bleeding, and seek immediate medical care for unexpected signs of bleeding like unusual bruising. pradaxa may increase your bleeding risk if you're 75 or older, have kidney problems or a bleeding condition, like stomach ulcers. or if you take aspirin products, nsaids, or blood thinners. tell your doctor about all medicines you take, any planned medical or dental procedures, and don't stop taking pradaxa without your doctors approval,

as stopping may increase your stroke risk. other side effects include indigestion,stomach pain, upset, or burning. if you have afib not caused by a heart valve problem, ask your doctor if pradaxa can reduce your risk of a stroke. for more information or help paying for pradaxa, visit pradaxa.com. ♪ got so many scratches and scars ♪ ♪ maybe time can mend us together again ♪ ♪ it's not what we've done but how far we've come ♪ ♪ i know that we will recover [ male announcer ] here when you need us most.

that of course russell crowe entertaining movie audiences as a hollywood gladiator and now they've actually made an amazing discovery in austria shedding light on the lives of true gladiators and their violent and brief careers using ground penetrating radar computers researchers have found the first gladiator school outside of italy on the outskirts of vienna. they've even been able to create as you can see here a 3d simulation of what the complex would have looked like about 1700 years ago. the grounds as portrayed here included 40 tiny sleeping cells, a large bathing area, training facilities, even the remains of a wooden pole that gladiators used as a practice opponent. researchers are now planning to scour the site range and weapons, armor, even coins as

they excavate them while archeologists dig into ancient gladiators sparring. brian williams our emperor of news here at nbc will watch over a different battle tonight in california, the gop debate likely to be a lot less bloody than those matches of old but like maximus said we can at least hope we will be entertained and maybe informed. just ahead. >> it is very important we did rebuild. it gave us an chance to rebuild better and that is really the glory i think of this, the statement that we came back. >> a project a decade in the making. incredible. behind-the-scenes look at the innovation and engineering of the replacement building at ground zero right after this. [ man ] ♪ gone, like my last paycheck ♪ gone, gone away ♪ gone, like my landlord's smile ♪ ♪ gone, gone away ♪ my baby's gone away

with dedicated claims specialists... and around-the-clock service, travelers can help make things better quicker. will your auto and home insurer... be there when you need them most? for an agent or quote, call 800-my-coverage... or visit travelers.com.

have i got a surprise for you! yeah, it's new [ barks beneful healthy fiesta. gotta love the protein for muscles-- whoo-hoo! and omega-rich nutrition for that shiny coat. ever think healthy could taste so good? [ woman announcing ] new beneful healthy fiesta.

her morning begins with arthritis pain. that's a coffee and two pills. the afternoon tour begins with more pain and more pills. the evening guests arrive. back to sore knees. back to more pills. the day is done but hang on... her doctor recommended aleve. just 2 pills can keep arthritis pain away all day

with fewer pills than tylenol. this is lara who chose 2 aleve and fewer pills for a day free of pain. and get the all day pain relief of aleve in liquid gels. we came up with a design that i think will do the things we want to do. give the families a place to mourn and tell the story to our children so they won't forget our freedoms are fragile. >> you just heard the mayor of new york michael bloomberg that this morning. we're now a decade past september 11 or a few days short of that and today we're taking a look inside the epic rebuilding effort at ground zero as chronicled in a new pbs documentary. years of controversy and delays finally new york city will unveil the 9/11 memorial to the world this weekend as the building, the freedom tower that

will replace the twin towers so to speak will be finished by 2013. lots of hard lessons learned in that tragedy, some of them documented here. take a look. >> i remember walking up to a window and a young man turned to me with tears coming down his face and he said, will they fall down? i said, no. never has a steel structure building in the history of steel structured buildings ever fallen do down. >> one of the main structures at ground zero will be one world trade is expected to be the tallest building in "new york times" america. think of it as the steeple on a church if you will that marks this location which will have a variety of experiences and offerings. david childs is the man responsible for this architectural feat. he is also featured as you saw in the new documentary engineering ground zero and it's a pleasure and a privilege to welcome you here. >> thank you.

i'm very glad to be here. >> we were just discussing. the old world trade center was basically an elimination of the environment in a goal to establish these two models, the old one. >> right. >> the new one is inspired by or is directed toward what goal? >> well, the master plan called for putting back in the streets to the maximum amount possible. that's what healed the wound caused when the original buildings were built and destroyed the fabric of manhattan. that will now be restored, new york will be in its place, but of course now with the memorial there which will also be used as a park we'll have new buildings, well functioning, up-to-date modern buildings with good codes and environmental factors all part of it. i think we'll be very proud about that. >> this is an interesting architectural assignment. >> i'll say. >> because you have on the one hand a massive project.

>> yes. >> forget any of the history. you're dealing with how many square feet? total? >> 10 million. >> 10 million square feet. >> it's a city. bigger than many cities in this country. >> but it's in addition to that 10 million square feet that is widely viewed understandably and i think appropriately so as sacred, as tragic land, as historic land, it's also located on one of the busiest, most sort of economically vibrant islands on the planet earth. >> right. >> which is manhattan. and i'm interested to hear how you dealt with manhattan's forces, the emotional forces, and the scale and what was your goal? do you think you got it? >> i do. i think that the tower which play these multiple roles unlike many buildings will be able to do all those things about the

environment and the view and the marker as you called it on the steeple on the church will be a role that for example the chrysler building does for 42nd street. so the steeple, the sky line will be restored again downtown. but more than that, we'll have a commercial building that will really work well. the old towers weren't very good office buildings. we'll have a really well functioning office building for the creators or users of whatever kind go into the building and i think it will be in great demand. it is serviced by the best infrastructure in the world. we have the -- all the subways there. we have the path train moving through. this is why manhattan and new york city is one of the most environmentally sound places in the world. people have all this infrastructure concentrated in one location. >> what would you say is the biggest physical change that a layman would understand in the new building, in this tower one that's currently being built? and other buildings that we are

familiar with? >> well, for example, in new york it's very different because it has now what has been used in other countries, which we have designed, and other cities of the united states, it has a concrete core where the elevators go up and the fire stairs. >> in the middle as opposed to the corners. >> in the middle of the building. the spine of this building is in a concrete solid core that wants to be robust and dense and -- >> and upright. >> and upright. but on the outside, where you want the flexibility and the long stand of steel construction, is steel construction that allows a tremendous amount of light and air coming into it. so it's that combination of a concrete core and a steel surround that makes this for a very efficient building, very flexible, with lots of light for all the people working. >> how is that different from the past few decades of large building design? >> well, in the past in new york

it was always built with a steel core as well as the exterior. so one trade would be working on each floor. steel is very efficient also in compression but it has to be braced and that's fine. and then covered with gypsum board or sheet rock as a way for fire protection and it's very good at that. these buildings lasted for those two hours the people got out. but it's no good for the punching shear. you can put your hand through a piece of sheet rock. when the planes came and hit the building of course they breached that whole area, caused the breakage of the water supply to the upper floors, and the -- all the protective systems that had. so now that core is a much more stable, stiff piece in the middle which has the protection, added protection for all the activities. >> how much of this building is

viewed -- to what extent is the building viewed as a target? >> well, you'd have to ask different people would have different opinions and there are all sorts of security people that know about these things a lot more than i do. but i will tell you this. there is no safer building to be in than 1 world trade center. it's a very strong, robust building. the new codes in fact we helped write because of what we learned from the tragedy will have designs for all buildings that if one column is damaged because of a hurricane, the next one takes over and can do its job as well. so there are lots of features here that are beneficial for all of those safety reasons and for the usefulness of how the building works. >> it's a real pleasure. >> thank you. >> somebody who lives in the neighborhood, nice to meet the man responsible for the architecture. it's pretty cool. >> thank you so much. >> appreciate it. >> okay. >> david childs, architect at 1 world trade and the surrounding

regions including 7. nice to learn that stuff. coming up on "hardball" chris matthews anchoring from the site of the gop debate. before we get to that though our friend arimelberg with a rant on who is truly angry at the president today.

here with the daily rant. >> thanks, dylan. >> this week the big news is president obama's approval numbers at an all time low. that is not a surprise to many democratic critics who have been slamming obama's compromise on taxes, deficits and stimulus spending. there are many theories for why obama keeps coming up short. a lot talk about some force holding the president back. could be gop obstruction, limits

on the u.s. presidency or his own plodding temperament but the premise we keep hearing is something is blocking obama from delivering on boulder change. if you look at these poll numbers obama's record is better understood by noting a very unusual dynamic. there is no force pushing him from within his party because of the remarkable fact that obama has the highest support among his base than any democratic president in modern history. that's right. even with the flagging economy and the drop in overall approval that you've heard about over the past year obama's support among democrats has hovered around 80%. during the same period in their presidencies, bill clinton and lbj were in the 70s. truman was in the 60s. carter was stuck in the 50s rebuffed by half his party. now if the white house is concerned about losing democrats, take a look at this. they're not on the left. obama's support among liberal democrats is holding pretty strong in the high 70s. his approval among moderate democrats though is in the low 70s and among conservative democrats it dropped to 58%. in fact, liberals' support for

obama has only slipped three points over most of this year and that's despite all the liberal criticism of obama's ka compromises. the "new york times" recently made a key observation on this point. he said although many leading liberal voices were unhappy with the debt ceiling deal mr. obama struck with republicans it just isn't showing up in a big way among the liberal rank and file. still plenty to be angry about. but for whatever reason, personal loyalty, or just anger with the political alternatives, obama's base is holding pretty strong. now that doesn't mean the only logical response here is taking them for granted. we all know that faced with a supportive base some presidents focus on mobilizing their flock not reaching out to the politically fickle. george w. bush had 90% party approval at this point in his first term and he governed from

the right. by 2004 he won 93% of his party's voters, lost independence in one re-election. but granted unusual loyalty, president obama has pursued unusual bargains. there was the grand one to reform entitlement programs which republicans rejected but remains unoffered and finally there was that hurried one to slash deficit spending without any of the revenues that obama originally sought. well, those deals may overlap with his personal reputation for excessive compromise but i think they also reflect this electoral math. when forced to choose obama leans away from the coalition he already has and toward the coalition he wants. so far, the fact is that strategy has favored reprovement over loyalty without much to show for it. dylan? >> all right. you think that's conscious? do you think what you described is a deliberate set of decisions? >> absolutely. i think there is a conversation that happens between politicians and their numbers experts. they say how am i doing and they say you're doing fine over here.