look-alike alex wagner. joining me today, rana foroohar, msnbc contributor jonathan capehart of the "washington post," heather mcghee, vice president of demos and michael hastings, author of "the operators." for the former president and ceo of the 2002 olympics, visiting the london games should have been the easy part of governor mitt romney's international tour. instead, it's been something of a false start, starting with this. >> there are a few things that were disconcerting, the stories about the private security firm not having enough people, the supposed strike of the immigration and customs officials. that obviously is not something which is encouraging. >> the british media is now taking the governor to task for criticizing the country's olympic preparation. today's "daily mail" headline reads who invited party pooper

romney? the "london times" says nowhere man. romney loses his way with gaffe about the games. and "mitt the twit." mitt romney is perhaps the only politician who could start a trip that was supposed to be a charm offensive by being utterly devoid of charm and mildly offensive. this is how british prime minister david cameron characterized it yet. >> we are holding an olympic games in one of the busiest, most active bustling cities anywhere in the world and of course it's easier if you hold an olympic games in the middle of nowhere. >> after the dig by prime minister david cameron, romney began walking back his comments and this morning on "today" offered gushing pra ining prais london's handling of the games. >> i read the same reports about all the challenges being faced by the organizing committee but after being here a couple days, it looks to me like london is ready and of course, it is hard to put on games in a major

metropolitan area and what they've done that i find so impressive is they took the venues and put them right in the city. >> so impressive, putting venues in major metropolitan areas. jonathan capehart, you wrote today quote, showing signs of mitt in mouth disease. what is the clinical definition of mitt in mouth disease? >> i just showed some of the symptoms right there. slamming the host city of the olympics before -- the day before you go to see the prime minister of that nation. but there's another thing he did that i don't know if we are going to bring up. after his meeting with prime minister cameron, he walks out in front of the number 10 downing street for the classic shot and then says hey, by the way, i met with -- >> we're going to get to that. we're going to get to that. in terms of international customs, if you think of the uk, that's a slam dunk if you're

going over there. does the question come up now if this is what happens with the uk, what happens with india, what happens with china, what happens with pakistan, what happens with venezuela? >> absolutely. i have been worried about how romney has handled the china talk for some time now. i think he's way too high-handed with that. you can see a number of comments in the media recently about how he will be tough on them and it is important to be tough but behind the scenes, particularly with china in a delicate situation, but just to go back to europe for a moment, the thing that amazes me, he doesn't seem to be looking back even at a year's worth of his ttory. if you remember tim geithner went over to give them a thrashing and they said go solve your own problems. they don't want to hear this from us. >> the point of a trip like this is to look presidential. look presidential and look presidential. that's it. there should be only upsides, especially you talked about a slam dunk. it's the olympics, too, we're talking mr. olympics. romney's whole brand is based off the fact that he saved the salt lake city olympics. to come there, he sits down with

brian williams, gets off a flight, he's jet-lagged, talking to one of the greatest interviewers out there and says these things, takes a pretty hard stand against the people of the host nation. >> i want to play not only the david cameron criticism, but the mayor of london said this in front of 60,000 screaming people. >> i hear there's a guy called mitt romney who wants to know whether we're ready. he wants to know whether we're ready. are we ready? are we ready? yes, we are. >> heather, you work in this field. what do you do there? >> to be fair, he may have angered most londoners but he did collect nearly $1 million from barclays bank and other wall streeters so yeah, i think he was there. he raised a lot of money from a scandal-beleaguered bank and that's also part of his brand as

well. he had to do that and say he's mr. financial sector. unfortunately, it was really terrible timing for him to go. >> there are 20 more banks under investigation right now. we don't know where the next part of the scandal will come from. >> the point you had earlier, jonathan, about mi-6. i want to play what he said about that earlier. >> i appreciated the insights and perspectives of the leaders of the government here and opposition here as well as the head of mi-6. >> michael, i will go to you. you know national security. the mi-6, britain did not acknowledge its existence until 1994. >> i think generally again, i'm going to say jetlag. that's my only answer. you're going to go meet, again, you're taking all these meetings with all these government officials, to show that if you were the president of the united states, you could handle not only how we deal with the world but also our national security. so you take these very sensitive meetings. now, the way to handle this is

not to come out and say it in a press conference, it's to get your aides the leak he met with mi-6. but you don't want to be out there saying you met with that organization. >> one of the rules of international diplomacy, two of the rules, they mirror fight clubs rules. remember? rule number one of fight club, you do not talk about fight club. rule number two of fight club is you do not talk about fight club. you are not supposed to acknowledge the fact that you have gotten a behind the scenes briefing from the head of british intelligence or anyone's intelligence agency. >> it's certainly an interesting dynamic that if you're trying to show off your foreign policy portfolio, that you make an intel mistake like that, considering one of the big things he's been critical of president obama about was leaks coming from the white house. >> very good point. >> let's talk about the president a little bit. he's on the defense, mainly about the "you didn't build that" attacks that have been coming from the romney campaign.

kimberly strassel said this in the "wall street journal" which i found interesting. quote, you didn't build that is swelling to such heights that it has the president somewhere unprecedented, on defense. that mr. obama felt required, teeth gritted, to address the "you didn't build that" means he his vaunted focus groups are sounding alarms. he has ads up around the country saying what i really meant was this. heather, how much is this a problem for him as we head into these olympic games? >> it's as much of a problem as obviously the television ads before people finally just actually turn them off and this election season can continue to try to make it a problem. what's really interesting about it, though, is that the idea that it's trying to express that in fact, if you are successful in this country, it's not only because of your own effort and why is that important, why is that something we're even talking about right now is because we actually have a presidential candidate in mitt romney and a party that is saying that the most successful people in this country, the millionaires and billionaires,

it's okay that hundreds of them don't pay any taxes, that mitt romney himself has a tax rate that's less than half of most teachers and firefighters. >> for the president to be, we have to close up this segment, but for the president to have to play this much defense, that's a big deal. >> it is a big deal. for him to have to respond to it in campaign commercials in speeches shows how much of a problem this has been. what the president said in context makes complete sense, is exactly what you said, but if you have to explain over and over and over again your simple message it wasn't that simple. >> we live in the sound bite world and it gets crazy when it gets run with. coming up, where's the beef. as governor romney prepares for the next leg of his overseas tour, there are new questions about his foreign policy plan. but is there a leg up when it comes to israel? that's next. ok! who gets occasional constipation,

diarrhea, gas or bloating? get ahead of it! one phillips' colon health probiotic cap a day helps defend against digestive issues with three strains of good bacteria. hit me! [ female announcer ] live the regular life. phillips'. [ male announcer ] you've reached the age where you don't back down from a challenge. this is the age of knowing how to make things happen. so, why let erectile dysfunction get in your way? talk to your doctor about viagra. 20 million men already have. ask your doctor if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take viagra if you take nitrates for chest pain; it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. side effects include headache, flushing, upset stomach, and abnormal vision. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than four hours. stop taking viagra and call your doctor right away if you experience a sudden decrease or loss in vision or hearing. this is the age of taking action.

viagra. talk to your doctor. it's your teenager's first varsity game. it isn't just your annual exam. it's your daughter's wedding. did you know with your health insurance you may now have some preventive benefits with no co-pays or out-of-pocket costs? it isn't just your cholesterol screening. it's all the tomorrows you're looking forward to. learn more at healthcare.gov. it's all the tomorrows you're looking forward to. ♪ hello...rings ♪ what the... what the... what the... ♪ are you seein' this? ♪ ♪ uh-huh... uh-huh... uh-huh... ♪ ♪ it kinda makes me miss the days when we ♪ ♪ used to rock the microphone ♪ back when our credit score couldn't get us a micro-loan ♪ ♪ so light it up! ♪ even better than we did before ♪ ♪ yeah prep yourself america we're back for more ♪ ♪ our look is slacker chic and our sound is hardcore ♪ ♪ and we're here to drop a rhyme about free-credit-score ♪ ♪ i'm singing free-credit-score-dot-com ♪ ♪ dot-com

narrator: offer applies with enrollment in freecreditscore.com.

the obama administration is bracketing on an international scale, the day before mitt romney is scheduled to arrive in tel aviv the president signed a bill boosting military cooperation between the u.s. and israel, saying it underscores the united states's unshakeable commitment to israel. joining us now is foreign policy magazine's josh rogin. thanks for being on the program. given governor romney's relationship with netanyahu and he's apparently very friendly

with him, what can he gain the most by this visit to israel from your reading of it and talking to your sources? >> one of the three real main foreign policy issues the romney campaign has been forward-leaning on in terms of foreign policy is the u.s./israel relationship. it fits into the idea that the obama administration has been too cool to allies, it puts distance between the obama administration and netanyahu administration so this is part of their effort to go around the world and hug allies and put their arms around them and say we're going to change the tone of this relationship. what barack obama is saying is listen, the tone may be bad but the substance is good, and what mitt romney will do is say no, the tone is important and we need to really improve that tone. that doesn't necessarily mean he has a strategy for solving the israel palestinian crisis or anything like that but it's an optics thing. he will raise a lot of money while he's there, by the way. >> speaking of substance, that is one thing that anyone who has been following this campaign in regard to foreign policy on the

romney side has been lacking in specifics. you did a series of articles which were fascinating where you actually asked u.s. republican senators, those who were very important when it comes to foreign policy, a few questions. i want to put a few quotes up. you asked cornyn about romney's stance on syria. he said i don't know what it is. jon kyl, you would have to tell me exactly what you mean by his policy. lindsey graham, very important on foreign affairs and afghanistan, i think romney's policy is listen to the commanders and if it's that, that's okay with me. so obviously, he doesn't want to dictate what his policy's going to be while abroad, he wants to do that over here, but there is not a lot of there there, at least on capitol hill, from what you and i are hearing about what the specifics are of romney's foreign policy in regards to the two hottest nations in the world right now, syria and afghanistan. >> right. two things going on here. the first is that the romney campaign doesn't want to wade into very sensitive diplomatic and national security issues

because they want to focus on the economy. they don't want to commit romney to positions on hot conflicts that may change and force him to flip-flop in the future. the real thing behind the scenes is a split inside the republican party. they are just not sure what they want to do on afghanistan, syria. a lot of these issues. and that's been a split that's been going on for about a year. people like john cornyn and lindsey graham and jon kyl are on opposite sides of what we should do in afghanistan from people like rich luger and bob corker. the republican party is going through this crisis of what is going to be their identity in the future of national security. mitt romney as the presumptive nominee should be the leader of that party but nobody in this party wants to stake out a claim. they know the nation is war-weary, the public doesn't want military commitment, so they're trying to avoid it. i'm trying to press them to not avoid it and failing. >> doing a good job of it. fascinating dynamic we're seeing here, and what josh was mentioning, there's no taking of

sides because they're split within the party on the issue but how late can you go without putting your stake in the ground and saying this is what i'm willing to do with the lives of american service members overseas? >> one of the things i wanted to ask josh, if there's a split within the republican party, about what to do in afghanistan, is there a split within the romney campaign about what should be done in afghanistan and is he -- is anyone in the romney campaign actually discussing with any kind of substance, with any kind of urgency what the nominee's policy proposal is or would be and when, you know, he hopes to let us in on it? >> right. that's actually an excellent question because there's actually two splits. the romney campaign is basically -- on foreign policy is divided into two camps. there are people in boston at headquarters, then dozens of advisors in d.c. are filing policy papers and hoping some of it will rise to the level of the

political leadership of the campaign. they don't necessarily communicate that well and don't necessarily agree on priorities. so after i wrote the article exposing the fact that nobody knew what romney's afghanistan policy is, they clarified it and said he basically agrees with the 2014 timeline, basically agrees with the obama administration's policy, but he would have done it differently. that's where we are. now, inside the romney campaign, the two top advisors in afghanistan totally disagree about what should be done in afghanistan. so you've got a d.c./boston split, a split inside d.c. and a split inside the republican party. this is all part of the narrative of listen, let's not commit ourselves to any policy that's going to force us to commit to longer troop presences, that the u.s. public is weary of, or negotiation with the taliban that's going to fail. the idea is avoid making any of these commitments. >> josh is probably on this conference call on tuesday before romney went to the olympics, his advisors had this conference call for about a half

hour, and none of them mentioned afghanistan until a journalist after the call was over said hey, are you guys going to mention afghanistan. so they did a whole foreign policy conference call without mentioning probably one of the most significant, where we have the most invested in foreign policy right now. >> in blood and in treasure. foreign policy's josh rogin, keep up the good work, my friend. after the break, he was bush's brain but now he could be the mind that swings this presidential race. our next guest explains how karl rove is back in a big way. follow the wings.

every communications provider is different but centurylink is committed to being a different kind of communications company. ♪ we link people and fortune 500 companies nationwide and around the world. and we will continue to free you to do more and focus on what matters. five years after karl rove left president bush's white house following a federal grand jury investigation, the advisor known as bush's brain is once

again a driving force in presidential politics. his group, american crossroads and super pac crossroads gps have already spent $94 million on tv ads this cycle. more than twice that of what the romney campaign has shelled out. it's the subject of this week's bloomberg business week cover story, karl rove, he's back big-time. rove tells assistant managing editor paul barrett that his strategy came out of the democrats' playbook. the left pioneered the use of 527s and 501cs years ago, spending millions of dollars to influence public opinion and the policy landscape. paul barrett is kind enough to join us now. welcome to the show, my friend. >> thank you. >> is rove simply playing the same game the democrats did in '06, the move on.org? it seems there's more this time around. >> there is definitely more. the order of magnitude has

increased and rove and his colleagues have benefited tremendously from legal developments in the interim. the supreme court's decision in citizens united has added an accelerant to this fire. but rove has an essential point correct, which is that this is not something republicans invented. these peculiar groups, the super pacs, the social welfare organizations as they're known, these existed before and they were fully in use as long ago as 2004 so in a sense, he's playing the same game but this cycle, the republicans are playing it more aggressively, more successfully. >> i want to put a chart up that chris cillizza from the "washington post" had in an article which is about total ad spending which is fascinating. if you take campaigns plus outside group, pro-romney, $179 million. pro-obama, $128 million. the campaigns alone, romney spent $35 million, obama, $108 million. is it fair to say that without

these super pacs, without this type of karl rove money, that romney would be being outspent to quite the level? >> i think by the time we get to the heavy spending season after labor day, we would find things would be pretty much neck and neck, if it was just the campaign against the campaign. where the republicans have their huge advantage is in the outside spending, both -- primarily from these individual rich people who are just chipping in extraordinary amounts of money. >> i'll open it up to the panel. are we going to look back on this two, three, four years after this election as the super pac election, that it changed the game so much, it's allowed a candidate who would have lost the money wars for months leading up to the election, to stay afloat? >> i think it will. i think we definitely will look back and see it as one of the issues. there are so many things in this campaign that are really quite historically unprecedented. one of the things i find aside from the money question is the fact that with the economy this bad, that romney is actually,

you know, not able to presidecae on that more. that's fascinating as well. >> here's the important difference if you actually just compare the romney campaign to the obama campaign and you take out the outside spending. outside spending is really where it's a millionaire's game. so the actual difference in the profile of the typical obama donor and the typical romney donor makes a big difference. the super pac outside spending, about 80% of it has come from less than 200 people. wealthy people, who are able to write megachecks. of course, the obama campaign is able to really, i think by not quite sure of the statistic at the moment, but by an order of magnitude raised the small dollar donations. that's where it's really changing the color of who is actually giving money. >> it's not like there aren't rich wealthy democrats, and i think one of the issues here is that karl rove and his organization and all these other, not special interest, what are they called? special education or social welfare, social welfare groups,

is that in the democratic party, or among democrats or among progressives, there isn't -- if they are going to give money to something, it's to a cause. it's to, you know, save the whales, save the polar bears, but republicans have shown time and time again that they are willing to write and we're seeing it, millions upon millions of dollars just for the sole purpose of winning. >> well, also getting policy changes as well. >> there's an important thing to point out, which is the republicans this time, 2012, are the challengers. they're the ones going to their very wealthy constituents and saying we have to stop this guy, have to kick this guy out of the white house. in 2004 when this type of spending really kicked in for the first time, it was the democrats who were the challengers and they were quite successful in raising money from people like george soros and peter lewis, the insurance tycoon. when you're trying to raise large amounts of money from individual people and get them

revved up it's really good to be saying stop that guy in his tracks rather than keep things more or less the same. >> one thing i find fascinating is that when you have all this money and the message is being muddled on both sides, is you look at you have the debates coming ahead. you have august 3rd, the july unemployment report. august 12th and 27th, romney probably announces his running mate. but here's what i find interesting. the presidential debates, october 3rd, 16th, 22nd. i have spoken to folks in the democratic side that say these debates are so important for us because to a degree, it's romney, obama unplugged. you have them in the ring together and that's where our guy can do his best. with all the money that's being infused into this race, does it now put a premium in the future that if a candidate who is being outspent has to perform in the debate as the only real place that he can make a real anyoinr? >> i would agree with that. i would also say anyone who

thinks that president oba will not meet an equal in mitt romney when it comes time to debate, they're fooling themselves. mitt romney is going to be someone who will be a formidable challenger in the debates against the president. so yes, it will be terrific when you have the two of them there standing, facing each other and you can look and see do i want to see either this guy for another four years or this guy for four years, but also, as we were talking about in the last segment, that is the opportunity for mitt romney to talk specifics about what he's going to do on a whole host of issues. >> i think you're right. i think the fact it's going to be about authenticity, i like the term unplugged because it's about who are these people. i think in that debate, obama is really going to take the -- >> that's going to be fascinating, unplugged. no money, just roll up the sleeves and debate it out. paul barrett, thank you so much for joining us. we appreciate it. coming up, dysfunction junction. congress renews the fight over

tax cuts. we break down the latest, next. managing my diabetes is part of my life, between taking insulin and testing my blood sugar... is this part of your life? freestyle lite test strips? why, are they any... beep! wow, that hardly needs any blood! yeah... and the unique zipwik tab targets the blood and pulls it in. so easy. freestyle lite needs just a third the blood of onetouch ultra. really?

yep, which is great for people who use insulin and test a lot. max and i are gonna run out and get them right now. or you can call or click today and get strips and a meter free. test easy.

that bringing you better technology helps make you a better investor. with our revolutionary e-trade 360 dashboard you see exactly where your money is and what it's doing live. our e-trade pro platform offers powerful functionality that's still so usable you'll actually use it. and our mobile apps are the ultimate

in wherever whenever investing. no matter what kind of investor you are, you'll find the technology to help you become a better one at e-trade. we call upon our republican colleagues to bring this bill to the floor today, they could do it. we could have it today be on the president's desk, signed into law for this weekend. >> if our democratic colleagues want to offer the president's plan or the senate democrat plan, we're more than happy to give them a vote. >> house speaker john boehner says he will let democrats vote on a plan to extend the bush tax cuts for those making less than $250,000 a year. the senate passed the bill earlier this week but the measure is unlikely to gather enough votes to pass the gop-controlled house. republicans say they will only support a plan that keeps the lower rates for the wealthiest households as well. it's going to set off what i

like to call a political ad week vote next week on capitol hill, where both sides try and garner a good position. but heather, i will throw the question to you. this number 250 or above, if we look at our polling from the "wall street journal"/nbc news poll, 50% of folks would like to see the tax cut end for those making over $250,000 a year, 43% would not like to see it end. the gop always says this is a tax -- raising taxes on small business job creators but democrats have dug down on this 250 number. >> which is a welcome change, because i think what was really important about the senate vote was it showed to the base and to the country that the democrats are not going to do what they did in the lame duck session in 2010 which is actually cave on that question and extend them all. at a price that we simply can't afford. we're going to be looking at reductions in things like head start, transportation, basic things the country needs in

order to keep these tax breaks that have not created jobs at the upper end. >> that's the thing. i feel that message needs to sink in more. tax cuts historically don't create growth. growth is what we need now. they haven't created it over the last few years. they didn't even create it 15 years ago when there were bigger, broader based cuts. that's an important message. >> the important thing about that vote in the senate, it passed 51-48, if i'm not mistaken. but that also showed it wasn't just a message to the base, it was a message to the country that this could happen. the only problem, though, is that by i believe it's by the constitution, this sort of bill must originate in the house for it to become -- for it to have any force of law. it's a very symbolic vote but a major symbolic vote. >> there have been so many filibusters. it was honestly strange to see a 51-48 vote. >> like cloture.

>> interesting point on this is the "new york times" had an editorial about it on thursday and they've kind of broaching what we talked about, the vote exposes the true priorities of the republicans. no republican agreed to support the middle class tax cut because they anticipate the rich get one, too. the rich would have gotten a tax cut on their first quarter million income but apparently that wasn't enough. if you look back through history and you look at how republicans have owned the tax issue, is it smart for democrats to push it like this, or could they fall victim to saying they're raising taxes on job creators, small businesses? that 250 number has always been in play. chuck schumer wanted to move it up to a million. nancy pelosi said perhaps move it up to a million. we have the graphic up there, the $250,000 bet, it's a risk. >> i think the democrats have to play the numbers game. take the small business argument. these cuts would affect maybe 3%

of small businesses. a lot of the businesses the republicans say would be hurt are actually hedge funds, law firms that are set up as partnerships. this is not the mom and pop hairdressing shop. i think democrats need to get that message across. >> you can only fall victim if you fall. i think what the democrats are doing now is that they're saying look, we went through this last year, we're not going to go through it again. we're digging in our heels and actually, we've got you on the ropes. >> one of the interesting things is what i'm hearing from people who support romney, you have these really wealthy people who are like look, i would rather give $10 million to romney now rather than pay $40 million more in taxes later. so the anger on wall street and these different hedge funds and that's where so much of this anger is coming from, the worry that it's cheaper to give $100 million to a super pac. >> we will close out the segment with this, one thing we love talking about. the threat of a government shutdown. there is a possibility of a government shutdown by september 30th, however, there is an editorial from the "wall street journal" that i found

interesting that said the democrats perhaps were rooting for a shutdown. the reasonable fear among the smarter republicans is that president obama and mr. reid want to shut down and show down, if the gop bends, democrats will get more spending and demoralized gop voters. if house republicans resist, mr. obama will blame the prospect of a shutdown on an unpopular congress. mitt romney could be forced into a tough political spot. i got to ask, do we think the democrats want to shut down? there is talk this is not going to happen on capitol hill, harry reid's people and john boehner's folks will put an agreement forward. most likely it won't happen but shutdown talk benefits who? >> benefits democrats certainly because it plays into the president's narrative, which i personally think is the correct narrative that the president for the last two and a half years, since the republicans took back the house, he's been dealing with a recalcitrant congress. he put forth the american jobs act last year, hoping to revive the economy, put people back to work, and the republicans said no. he's been dealing with a senate minority leader, mitch

mcconnell, who said in 2010-2011, his number one job is to make sure that barack obama's a one-term president. so if the republicans or if congress cannot agree on a spending bill or a budget and they shut down the government, it plays perfectly into what the president's been saying. >> in 2011, republicans came into power, they went for the shutdown the first three months, they were moving in that direction, calling their president's bluff, and now it's the flip-flop. democrats are saying no, no, we'll go to the brink. i don't think it's going to happen. they will come up with some sort of agreement because both sides are a little worried. it's a gamble on either side. >> yeah. after the break, let the games begin. we are just hours from the opening ceremony in the 2012 olympics. we'll preview the london games next. you don't want to miss that. look at that beautiful shot of london. with the spark miles card from capital one,

thor's couture gets the most rewards of any small business credit card. your boa! [ garth ] thor's small business earns double miles on every purchase, every day! ahh, the new fabrics, put it on my spark card. [ garth ] why settle for less? the spiked heels are working. wait! [ garth ] great businesses deserve the most rewards! [ male announcer ] the spark business card from capital one. choose unlimited rewards with double miles or 2% cash back on every purchase, every day! what's in your wallet? [ cheers and applause ] with tums freshers! concentrated relief that goes to work in seconds and freshens breath. ♪ tum...tum...tum...tum... tums! ♪ [ male announcer ] tums freshers. fast relief, fresh breath, i've got a nice long life ahead. big plans. so when i found out medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i looked at my options. then i got a medicare supplent insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if you're eligible for medicare,

you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. call now and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, it helps pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you thousands in out-of-pocket costs. to me, relationships matter. i've been with my doctor for 12 years. now i know i'll be able to stick with him. [ male announcer ] with these types of plans, you'll be able to vit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks, and you never need a referral to see a specialist. so don't wait. call now and request this free decision guide to help you better understand medicare... and which aarp medicare supplement plan might be best for you. there's a wi range to choose om.

we love to travel -- and there's so much more to see. so we found a plan that can travel with us. anywhere in the country. [ male announcer ] join the millions of people who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplemt insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations. remember, all medicare supplement insurance plans help cover what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you thousands a year in out-of-pocket costs. call now to request your free decision guide. and learn more about the kinds of plans that will be here for you now -- and down the road. i have a lifetime of experience. so i know how important that is. o0 ovider is different but centurylink is committed to being a different kind of communications company by continuing to help you do more and focus on the things that matter to you.

i'm going to get to see a little tennis. i hope to see some of the swimming, and maybe a little basketball here or there. >> any possibility the president's going to come over -- >> no. no. >> not even the basketball? >> he is so jealous of me right now. he is so jealous but no. >> that was first lady michelle obama on "today" this morning talking about the events she plans to watch as she leads the presidential delegation to the 2012 olympic games in london. in a little more than three hours, the opening ceremony will officially kick off the games. tens of thousands of people are expected to line the streets of london to watch the olympic torch make its way to the olympic stadium, where queen elizabeth herself will welcome athletes from 204 nations. joining the panel now is the host of msnbc's olympic coverage, rob simmelkjaer. rob, thank you so much for

joining us. >> great to be here. >> opening ceremony always a magnificent event that you can watch right here on msnbc, nbc, every single platform. what are we expecting? obviously it's a chance for the british to be british and show everything that's great with england. what do we expect? >> there will be a lot of british history, a lot of the things you think of when you think of the uk. there will be james bond, there will be beatles. danny boyle, who was the director of "slumdog millionaire" who has become quite famous as a great british producer and director, is putting this ceremony together. so a lot of creativity. this has been planned now for five years and i was in the building in beijing for the opening ceremony in 2008 which was probably the most spectacular spectacle ever in human history. i don't think this is even aspiring to that level, but it will do what the british do and

it will do it well, in a way that -- >> what's the most important thing for them to get through in the opening ceremony or is it just to get through? >> that's a good question. usually whatever manner in which they plan to get the torch lit is the key. remember in vancouver when there was actually a problem getting the structure raised, it was actually going to house the olympic flame, that's always the biggest fear, somehow they can't get the fire to the torch. >> we have any idea who is going to light it? roger banister would be pretty cool. >> the london bookies, apparently he shot to the lead in odds over the last 48 hours, since rehearsal started. he's the hot favorite right now but there has been talk of david beckham, there has been talk about somehow queen elizabeth lighting it. there is also talk of maybe not a person, but somehow a thing or a mechanism somehow lighting it. >> a pack of corgis? i'm with you on danny boyle, too. >> i'm a beckham fan but you

can't let him light the torch. >> i think that would be shocking. >> what we do on this show is we make everything political so david brooks, the "new york times," weighed in on why our country likes the olympics so much. he said quote, in sum, the olympic games appeal to our desire for fellowship and our desire for status. the dreams of community and also supremacy. and of course, these desires are intention but the world is, too. the world is in a jigsaw puzzle that fits neatly together. it is a clash of waves that can never be fully reconciled. is there something that appeals to the better nature of our humanity with these games that we are all one world family for two weeks? >> at least for two weeks. david gets at that in his piece. one of the most wonderful moments of the olympics is in the opening ceremonies when you have the parade of nations and people cheering for their own nations but then you have people

from around the world cheering for nations that they have either visited or where they have relatives and so it is that one moment where we can all come together but once they leave that stadium and the competitions begin, it's over. >> i think the other really interesting thing in terms of tensions and what the olympics does for a nation, it exposes tensions for sure. i remember in china, during the opening ceremonies, there was a portion that was supposed to celebrate china's rich minority heritage and they had children in different costumes but they were all hong chinese. on the other hand, the olympics forced them to address environmental issues. >> on that issue, there is some controversy in terms of the ioc's lack of a desire to honor the 40th anniversary of the israelis who were slain in munich. obviously bob costas spoke about possibly doing a tribute tonight. how is that going to be covered, what do you think? >> there has been a lot of talk at nbc about exactly how that will happen. i don't want to give it away.

i think it's still under conversation. but the ioc president, jacques rogge, has said we care about this. they have had moments of silence in ceremonies over the last few months to honor the victims of what happened in munich in 1972. the ioc isn't ignoring it. they just didn't feel this opening ceremony was the right place to honor the victims of 1972. so it's a very tricky issue, no question. >> it is tricky and it puts michelle obama and mitt romney in a tough position because you will be openly critical of something happening right in front of you. >> would they do it if it was israel? that is the reason they're not doing it? if it was another country this tragedy happened to, would they have a moment of silence? >> no, i don't think it's got anything to do with that. it's simply something that happened 40 years ago. the opening ceremony is supposed to be a joyous moment, a moment that really kicks off what will be a wonderful 17 days. i think they didn't want to put the focus on the past. they wanted to put it on the

present and the future. >> we talked about gaffes from governor romney. i think the biggest gaffe is whoever put, there's the game with the north korean soccer team playing colombia, the south korean flag for that. that i think, that was not a good start off the bat. >> that was rough. two days before the opening ceremony and the north koreans would not take the field. >> you know what, i don't agree with north korea on much but i understand what they were saying there. rob, thanks for being on the show. we appreciate it. the opening ceremony of course airs tonight at 7:30 p.m. eastern and pacific time on nbc. rob simmelkjaer, thank you for joining us from nbc sports. watch the next two weeks, it will be great. gymnastics, which in our last poll, we found was the most popular sport to watch. all you gymnastics fans, time to come out of the cave and enjoy it. coming up next, what now? is it done?

[ john ] no. were you just... no. are you supposed to be driving that in here? no! did mom say we could eat all that? [ john ] yes. [ male announcer ] it's nice to finally say "yes." new oscar mayer selects. it's yes food.

do a lot of sending... and receiving. sending...and receiving. sending...and receiving. sending...and receiving. sending...and receiving. [ bob ] i got the tickets. [ male announcer ] and with citibank popmoney, it's even easier to keep sending...and receiving. let me get you back. no, it's on me. i insist. no way. yes way. well let me chip in. [ male announcer ] send money from one bank account to another, with citibank popmoney. easier banking. every step of the way.

welcome back. time for "what now." the current drought that is scorching 64% of the u.s. will cost at least $12 billion according to the usda. making it the costliest drought since 1988. that is i think something we overlook when we talk about the acela corridor. there is serious pain going on in a lot of parts of the country and the farm bill seems right now to be stuck in congress. are we missing too much of this, the scorching earth we have? >> i think we don't get across the fact that food price spikes really, really hurt the poor. food makes up about 13% on average of american spending but it's a lot higher as a percentage of income for lower income people and same with gas.

when it spikes, the most vulnerable people are really the ones feeling it. >> we will see those spikes possibly within the next few months. could be a campaign issue. you never know. let's go back to politics. republican senator scott brown has picked up a high profile endorsement in his massachusetts senate race against elizabeth warren. mayor michael bloomberg, a spokesman for the mayor said he likes senator brown's position on gun laws, specifically his stance on opposing a measure that would require states to honor concealed weapons permits issued by other states. heather, is that a big endorsement for scott brown, mayor mike? >> sure it is. it's also probably going to give him a little bit of cash. he's holding a fund-raiser for him. mike bloomberg has wealthy friends. the subtext here obviously is the wall street issue because that is the big thing for bloomberg, for i'm sure many other people who will be at this fund-raiser, maybe a little less than concealed weapons. >> what's funny, though, scott brown, he's not mr. anti-nra. he's voted with the nra on some

things in the past. it's not that he is the republican anti-gun guy. this is michael bloomberg saying to elizabeth warren screw you, i'm going -- you were too critical of wall street, you don't know what you're talking about. >> i think it could be that. i don't know if it's half of that or 75% of that but we can't downplay the importance of what scott brown did on that gun issue because mayor bloomberg is the co-chair of mayors against illegal guns. this is an issue that's very important to the mayor. so much so that he went out publicly within days of aurora, the aurora tragedy, slamming the heck out of the president and mitt romney alike. >> first person to get real political on it and he's moved the issue to some degree at least out of the senate with frank lautenberg. democrats and republicans may need to reacquaint themselves with spell-check after both sides made unfortunate spelling errors this week. president obama's team said, put

the graphic up there, african-americans. there is also a few typos in the republican bill, they meant to specify their legislation would go forward with monthly unemployment rates if -- unemployed was at 94%. they meant to say 6%. class a stuff. do we need a spell-check in d.c.? >> this item, zeke miller broke this story last night and sent it to me. i said zeke, can i add there by the grace of god go i, because you know how many typos i have on a regular basis in my copy? i think with social media, with the rush of copy, these things are going to happen and when they do happen, we will nail you for it. >> well, we did it. friday, alex wagner, hope we made you proud. thanks to rana, jonathan, heather and michael. that's all for now. have a great weekend. enjoy the olympics. if you're an alex wagner fan, sorry to break the bad news, you have to wait until august 13th before you see her back in this chair. in the meantime, you can follow

"now" on twit ter and on facebook. "andrea mitchell reports" is next. andrea, i know you're fired up for the opening ceremonies but not before you have a wonderful show. thank you so much. you're my olympic hero. >> i love it. i'm handing the baton to you. go light the torch. be well. >> thank you. you be well. we are all gearing up for the olympics. coming up next, british officials and the media hammering mitt romney over his olympic gaffe. also, how president obama is trying to upstage romney before his trip to israel this weekend. and elite scientist free-throw shot t from the international aids conference joins me next. [ kate ] many women may not be properly absorbing

the calcium they take because they don't take it with food. switch to citracal maximum plus d. it's the only calcium supplement that can be taken with or without food. that's why my doctor recommends citracal maximum. it's all about absorption. that's why my doctor recommends citracal maximum. this is new york state. we built the first railway, the first trade route to the west, the greatest empires. then, some said, we lost our edge. well today, there's a new new york state. one that's working to attract businesses and create jobs. a place where innovation meets determination... and businesses lead the world. the new new york works for business. find out how it can work for yours at thenewny.com.

and i thought "i can't do this, it's just too hard." then there was a moment. when i decided to find a way to keep going. go for olympic gold and go to college too. [ male announcer ] every day we help students earn their bachelor's or master's degree for tomorrow's careers. this is your moment. let nothing stand in your way. devry university, proud to support the education of our u.s. olympic team. right now on "andrea mitchell reports" let the games begin.