beware of dog indeed. the 2,306th day since president bush declared victory in afghanist afghanistan. i'm keith olbermann. good night and good luck. and now to discuss why the democrats are missing an opportunity to run on their issue, ladies and gentlemen, here's rachel maddow. good evening, thank you for that. have a great weekend. >> you too. >> thanks to you at home for staying with us the next hour. i want to thank those of you who are back tonight after sitting with us through this last night. one of the things that happens in satellite interviews there's a 1 1/2 second delay between me asking a question and you hearing it. you can interpret that as sarcasm or interruption, but it's the way the medium works. >> no, no, your interruption is not caused by delay. it's just the speed of light. it's much faster than that. >> it's been distracting today

to the whole staff i would have to say. the amount of feedback we're still getting about that interview from last night's show. that was me attempting to interview the republican congressional candidate from oregon's fourth district, gentleman named art robinson. i think most of the reason we're getting the feedback we're getting about this is because that clip we just showed you was probably the sanest moment of the entire interview. of course, even that part ended with me banging my head on the desk. i think the other part of it has to do with the fact mr. robinson is an unusual candidate. some of this got lost in the screaming and shuffle last night. in case you're wondering who this guy is with whom i had an 18 minute trip down the robert hole, he's a man who runs something he calls the oregon institute of science and medicine. i say it is something he calls that because despite the rather lofty name of the eight people listed as faculty of this institute, two are dead and two are mr. robinson's sons.

plus there's him. also the oregon institute of science and medicine has no classrooms and no student body. as part of his scientific work mr. robinson claims he's personally, per personal personally disproven global warming and his position against global warming being true is itself proof, the signatures, themselves on that petition are proof that global warming isn't real. when i raise that issue and described it as his belief last night, mr. robinson shouted at me and insisted i describe his belief as a scientifically proven fact. you're well known for your belief that global warming is made up, that that is not true. that's sort of a source of your national reputation to the extent you have one. your opponent -- >> that's a conclusion i reached as a physical scientist. >> do you mind if i ask you a question about your beliefs? do you mind if i ask you about your beliefs? >> it's not a belief.

it's a scientific -- >> your scientifically proven right it's not true. okay, okay, if i say you proved it will i be allowed to ask you a question? aside from declaring he has proven global warm to be false, art robinson promotes an idea called hormisis. i tried to get at this last night. it didn't go well. the idea is that low-level doses of radiation are good for you. the american spectator did an interview with robinson a decade ago. that was an explanation of his idea. quoting from the spectator, low background levels of radiation seem to be good for you. art robinson points out the data show oregon is not a particularly good place to live. its background radiation levels are below the national average. there's less cancer risk in denver where the background radiation levels are much higher. okay. if he believes that radiation is

good for you, i tried to ask art robinson last night whether that is connect to his past statements that the proper way to dispose of nuclear waste is to sprink l it in the oceans and over america. also his position there should be more nuclear weapons testing in america. does he hold those positions because he thinks it would be a helpful idea to raise radiation levels in america or oregon because he thinks that's good for us? i tried to ask him that. he did not want to answer that. i realize you're an advocate for expanded nuclear weapons testing in the united states. do you think it would be beneficial to up the background radiation levels in the united states because that radiation would be good for us? when the american spectator wrote an article -- >> that's an outright lie. >> i'm asking you a question. is that true. >> you can't find a context quote to support that. >> you can't find an -- except for all your quotes on the record about low level radiation being good for us and you

wanting to sprink l nuclear waste over the country. he is on the record about a lot of this stuff. he publishes a newsletter. it's essentially a contrarian don't believe a word of what you hear science-ish publication. in every edition of the newsletter there's a section called stark raving mad. his words, not mine. this newsletter, he propounded theories that aids is a myth and government plot. he wrote that in 1995. he wouldn't confirm those were his words though they were written purportedly by him in his own newsletter. that would be a heck of a conspiracy if someone were rewriting things secretly under art robinson's name. we'll never know. it's also mr. robinson's news letter where he's propounded one of his other beliefs that public schools should all be abolished. i don't know if he thinks aid is a myth and government conspiracy, but abolishing public schools he definitely

still believes that. >> some guy, i don't know why, he says, what do you think of the public schools? and then i was dead. my credibility was going to be gone. i said, i think the public schools should be abolished. >> instead of public schools he promotes home schooling. he's home schooled all of his own kids. although he says he does not teach them. he lets them teach themselves. that's part of the home schooling curriculum that he sells. mr. robinson has acquired the rights to and reprinted the life's work of a child's adventure book author. a spectacularly racist british writer named j.a. hinty. he recommends you teach your kids based on the novels. this is from a chapter titled the negro character. they are just like children. they are always either laughing or quarrelling. they are good natured and passionate.

clever up to a certain point, densely stupid beyond. the intelligence of the average negro is equal to that of a european child of 10 years old. they are fluent talkers but their ideas are borrowed. they're absolutely without originality, absolutely without eventive power, living among white men, imitated faculties enable them to contain civilization, left alone to their own devices retrograde into a state of native savagery. that's for you to teach to your kids or rather for your kids to teach themselves. again, quoting from a pro-art robinson article in the american spectator, conservative magazine in 2001, art has managed to convert the education of his children from a financial drain into a thriving business. among them, the family members developed a home school curriculum with typical single mindedness robinson tracked down 99 historical models by g.a.

he henty. six cds were shipped in the year, retail for $99. this is art robinson. there's a guy like art robinson i'm guessing in your time somewhere. maybe on the outskirts of town. americans are like this. there are a lot of unusual people in this country and hold extreme beliefs and propound interesting theories. it is not even that weird for people like this to run for political office. it's one of the things that folks like this like to do in my experience actually. it is a little bit weird art robinson won the republican primary in oregon's fourth district. what's really important about art robinson is not how unusual he is as an american or candidate, what is important about art robinson is he's potentially viable this year as a congressional candidate. not because of anything about him and his life's work, but

because of this. >> politicians nancy pelosi and peter defazio made a mess of our economy. their policies aren't working. it's time for change. art robinson is a research scientist, not a politician. his plan to improve our economy stop reckless spending, lower taxes, promote private sector job growth. art robinson, a new voice, a smarter choice. the independent leader we need. concerned taxpayers of america is responsible for the content of this advertising. >> concerned taxpayers of america. that group is running $150,000 worth of that ad in this world district in southern oregon. to make art robinson seem totally mainstream, totally electable. the $150,000 from lord knows where. concerned taxpayers of america doesn't have to tell anybody where the money is from, that that is running that ad. the only thing we know about where the money is coming from to promote this man's candidacy, make him not just the guy who

lives in self-declared scientific institute distributing racial children's books but a viable congressional candidate. the only thing we know about concerned taxpayers of america is this. this piece of paper filed with the federal elections commission. this is it. this is the sum total of concerned taxpayers of america's existence. in this filing the concerned taxpayers of america notes nothing about their donors, nothing about where they intend to raise money from. they note they intend to, quote, raise funds in unlimited amounts. which they can of course spend in unlimited amounts. and so it is $150,000 in this race on behalf of mr. hormisis. is art robinson likely to win this race? no. what if it were $500,000? what if it were a million dollars? what if it were $150 million?

what if somebody decided for whatever reason because they heat peter defazio that much or because they're somebody who thinks that negroes are really childlike and want somebody in congress that promotes that concept. what if that person decided they wanted to spend $1 billion to get art robinson elected to congress and did that by funneling money into a group like concerned taxpayers of america? if that happened there's nothing to stop it from happening. you and i wouldn't get to know that that's who's behind those ads as we see them on the air. we called concerned taxpayers of america again to find out who's behind their ads. they did not return our calls nor do they have to nor do we expect them do. nor are we able to deduce from their filing what might be their donors' motivation for supporting this candidate. we're not allowed to know what they are, we're not allowed to know who supports art robinson to congress to the tunes of tens of thousands of dollars in a small rural district.

that's just how it works now. there's probably a direct relationship between the cookieness of any candidate. as the cookyness of the candidate goes the amount of money you need to keep that candidate viable goes up too. the idea is only true in an environment in which there is not unlimited money to be spent to make that person seem less than cooky. when the money is -- look at the filing again. quite literally unlimited. unlimited by actual dollar ceilings or by the shame associated with being seen to donate that money. when the money is actually unlimited, there is no ceiling on how cooky a candidate can be and seem electable. as long as the money can go to infinity, so can the cook factor. the chart goes on to infinity and beyond. this is the new reality of

american politics. democrats are trying to make a campaign issue of it. will they succeed? that's coming up next. of the refinance offer they got from their mortgage guy, and know instantly if they're getting bamboozled. and i will start after lunch...tomorrow. don't just think about it. introducing lendingtree's free "look before you lock" tool. enter the terms of your existing loan offer to instantly find out how it compares to other offers, areas you may be overpaying, and even negotiation points to help you get a better deal. only at lendingtree. to stay fit, you might also want to try lifting one of these. a unique sea salt added to over 40 campbell's condensed soups. helps us reduce sodium, but not flavor. so do a few lifts. campbell's.® it's amazing what soup can do.™ check this out. boo-yah! shazam! h2...o! hydrolicious! magic bananas! it's the first one click faucet filter

that removes 99% of lead and microbial cysts. adios contaminos!

today two things about the united states chamber of commerce made big news. they're spending $10 million a week on conservative campaign ads. and number two, they hosted a big reception for the bahrain bank's association today at chamber of commerce headquarters. why those two facts together may cause you a talking to art robinson pounding head on desk moment. that's ahead. receiving the bronze star, that was definitely one of my proudest moments.

i graduated from west point, then i did a tour of duty in iraq. when i was transitioning from active duty, i went to a military officer hiring conference. it was kind of like speed dating. there were 12 companies that i was pre-matched with, but walmart turned out to be the best for me. sam walton was in the military, and he understood the importance of developing your people. it's an honor to be in a position of leadership at walmart. i'm captain tracey lloyd, and i work at walmart. ♪

when the stream court ruled back in january to destroy the important rules about campaign donations in our country president obama warned about the consequences and raised the citizens united decision a few days later in his state of the union address. >> last week the supreme court reversed a century of law that i believe will open the flood gates for special interests. including foreign corporations to spend without limit in our election. >> famously that statement from the president prompted supreme court justice samuel alito to angrily mutter that's not true at the president. turns out it is true. sorry, mr. associate supreme court justice, turns out it is very true. president obama is making shady and potentially foreign funding of conservative candidates a major campaign issue for democrats in this year's elections. the president raised the issue yesterday at a rally to get out the vote for maryland governor martin o'malley and raised it at

a chicago fund-raiser for palex giannoulias, who's running to fill president obama's former senator seat. >> and they don't disclose who's behind the ads. could be an oil company. could be an insurance company. could be wall street. you don't know. almost every one of them is run by republican operatives. they're posing as not profits, not political groups. they've got aknonames like amers for prosperity, the committee for truth in politics, or you know, moms for motherhood. i made that last one up. you wouldn't know. are you going to let special interests from wall street and washington and places beyond our shores come to this state and tell us who our senators should be? that's not just a threat to

democrats. that's a threat to our democracy. >> may be from beyond our shores. he's talking about the u.s. chamber of commerce which pledged to spend $75 million to defeat almost all democratic candidates in this year's elections. they spend a few dollars on some conservative democratic races but essentially it's almost all anti-democratic ads. they are spending $10 million this week, alone. as part of its fund-raising operation the chamber takes donations from foreign sources of funding, that's something the group does not deny. they want us to be sure they have internal systems of some sort to keep that foreign money separate. they have an internal system we can't see but we should trust them about it. as part of the excellent reporting on this, think progress revealed $300,000 has been channeled into the chamber of commerce's coffers from foreign companies in india and

in bahrain. they got money from all over the world. just looking at those two countries, it's 300 grand to the chamber at least. today lo and behold the chamber of commerce welcomed members of bahrain banking association to chamber headquarters in washington. the reception advertised on the chamber of commerce's website. quote, bahrain minister of finance central bank and bahrain ambassador will be attending. maybe the delegation is here for a kick the tires tour of the new american congress they're purchasing. can't let you take her out for a drive just yet, but she's a beauty, isn't she? joining us, msnbc political analyst and senior political editor at the huffington post, howard fineman. great to see you. thanks for your time. >> hi, rachel. >> are there signs this is a full scale democratic messaging effort? >> barack obama typically did it in a gingerly fashion today, but yes, it could be. now, just talking about the lack

of spending limits or money in campaigns per se is not a primary sales tool for democrats. or really for anybody. people are so cynical about the political process it actually protects everybody who's in it in an odd way. but if you tie it to loss of jobs and especially to loss of jobs overseas i think it could be, and i think the democrats in the white house think it may be a good issue for them. because polling and i've talked to top democratic pollsters. they say the number one issue clearly at the top of the list for polling is loss of jobs to overseas sources. and the role of foreign corporation in pulling jobs out of america and overseas. out in a place like south dakota, for example, where they have call centers, that's a big business. where's that business going? india. duh. i mean, it matters. if they to it that way it could be a winner. >> if democrats are going to push this we should expect the next shoe to drop to bests to

make it clear that foreign interests are getting what they want from these republican candidates that day are supporting, and also that the chamber, itself, supports outsourcing? >> yeah. it's very interesting about the chamber because i was talking to them last week about all this. by the way, i'm sure you know this, but maybe all the viewers don't. the chamber of commerce is a gigantic massive building directly across lafayette square from the white house. it's like they're glowering at each other. it's very symbolic of what's going on right now. the chamber people i talked to last week were saying, well, we've always taken foreign money. they changed their tune about that because under the law as amended during the cold war, it doesn't go back to 1907 as far as foreign corporations and individuals. it's after world war ii when the united states was concerned about soviet front operations and communist infiltration. that's the source of these bans on individuals, corporations and foreign governments pouring money directly into american elections.

alito was wrong. he didn't realize, maybe, what the chamber would do . >> in terms of the political impact, i'm guessing the reason the outsourcing issue, losing jobs to overseas polls is well is it's a very, very nonpartisan issue. it's a thing that resonates with voters left, right and center. when the citizens united ruling came out, voters left, right and centers were initially horrified by this decision. is the new rules about this, is that a potential crossover issue for democrats? >> well, i think it could be. and if the democrats wanted to start talking about evil influences from abroad, they could maybe do it. the problem is that barack obama is such a we are the world president, and likes to pride himself on not pointing fingers around the globe, but i tell you, for voters and working people out in the country, especially for working men, many of whom have lost their jobs of

one kind or another, not just in construction but manufactures and now service industries, an appeal that says foreign money is coming in and it's taking your jobs abroad through a place like the chamber could be an effective one and for people on left and the right. >> msnbc political analyst and senior "huffington post" political editor, howard, i don't think i poublicly congratulated you on the new gig yet. a terrible, horrible, no good very bad day for republican senate candidate ken buck in colorado. that is coming up. and we're going to get all forensic on who killed a quarter million american jobs on purpose. and why. that's ahead. ♪ when it's planes in the sky ♪ ♪ for a chain of supply, that's logistics ♪ ♪ when the parts for the line ♪ ♪ come precisely on time ♪ that's logistics ♪

♪ a continuous link, that is always in sync ♪ ♪ that's logistics ♪ ♪ there will be no more stress ♪ ♪ cause you've called ups, that's logistics ♪ [ male announcer ] you're at the age where you don't get thrown by curve balls. ♪ this is the age of knowing how to get things done. ♪ so why would you let something like erectile dysfunction get in your way? isn't it time you talked to your doctor about viagra? 20 million men already have. ♪ with every age comes responsibility. ask your doctor if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take viagra if you take nitrates for chest pain, as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. side effects may 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. see if america's most prescribed ed treatment is right for you. their occasional digestive upsets. gastroenterologists do. they've made align the #1 recommended probiotic. ♪ align is the product of 10 years of research... and it has something you can't get anywhere else, a patented good bacteria called bifantis. and when it's added to occasionally unbalanced digestive systems... they can become balanced again. align. great digestion through science.

everything they're doing is killing jobs. >> it's time this administration and capitol hill allies stopped its job killing agenda. >> where's the initiative to try to put americans back to work? where are the offerings from my friends on the other side to get americans back to work? >> republicans would like this year's elections to hinge on jobs. jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs. that said, they have a mass killing of jobs to answer for themselves. we visit the scene of the crime next. the fiber and whole grain... making him a great contender in this bout...

against mid-morning hunger. honey nut cheerios is coming in a little short. you've got more whole grain in your little finger! let's get ready for breakfaaaaaaaaaast! ( ding, cheering, ringing ) keeping you full and focused with more than double the fiber and whole grain... in every tasty bite -- frrrrrrosted mini-wheeeeats! didn't know i had it in me.

if you're taking an antidepressant and still feel depressed, one option your doctor may consider is adding abilify. abilify treats depression in adults when added to an antidepressant. some people had symptom improvement in as early as one to two weeks after adding abilify. now with the abilify (me+) program, your first two weeks of abilify can be free. abilify is not for everyone. call your doctor if your depression worsens or you have unusual changes in behavior, or thoughts of suicide. antidepressants can increase these in children, teens and young adults. elderly dementia patients taking abilify have an increased risk of death or stroke. call your doctor if you have high fever, stiff muscles and confusion to address a possible life-threatening condition. or if you have uncontrollable muscle movements, as these could become permanent. high blood sugar has been reported with abilify and medicines like it.

in some cases, extreme high blood sugar can lead to coma or death. other risks include decreases in white blood cells, which can be serious, dizziness upon standing, seizures, trouble swallowing, and impaired judgment or motor skills. adding abilify has made a difference for me. [ male announcer ] visit abilifyoffer.com for your free trial offer. and ask your doctor about the risks and benefits of adding abilify. here we have a program cbo scored as making the treasure iowa billia billion dollars over the next

ten years and equal credit $300 billion of credit to small this business. republicans are opposing. . there's no national reason unless the goal is to drive the american economy into a double dip recession. >> you feel like honestly republicans are opposing the policies they're opposing and promoting policies they're promoting because they want a bad economic outcome? >> well, you know, i didn't come to d.c. as cynical as i feel here a year and a half later as a senator. what i have seen is everything politicized by the primary elections and the general election plan for this year and it certainly appears that all sense has lost all sorts of partnership to make american economy work for working americans is gone. >> that was senator jeff merkley speaking on this show in july. that case he made, you can see it pained him to make it. has stuck with me now for months. i think about what he said in that segment back in july a lot.

the prospect that some of what congress is doing, that is blowing it on the economy, is happening on purpose. think about that a lot. case in point. there's a program that's part of a stimulus that's credited with creating almost 250,000 american jobs. one program. that many jobs. the overall stimulus on total on track to create 3.5 million jobs. this one program alone is responsible for a quarter million of those jobs. what do you get when you demonstrably create a lot of jobs in an otherwise horrendous economy for little spending? a totally not at all controversial program. when cnn did a report on this program, they called it the stimulus program even a republican could love. republican governors who saw this program working in their states became the most vocal advocates. haley barbour of mississippi, former head of the republican party, current head of the republican governor's association. he arguably the most partisan

governor in the country talked about how much he loves this program. he credits it with creating 5,300 jobs in his state, alone. this is not a controversial program. it works. it essentially subsidizes companies and organizations to hire people or to keep jobs they would otherwise eliminate. it's simple, has little overhead. it's efficient. it does exactly what it is designed to do. republicans and denimocrats ali when they've seen how many people it's kept employed in the private sector, they like it very much. nobody is arguing against it on its merits either in the states or in washington. and yet, and yet the republicans blocked it. in the house where there is no filibuster and the democrats have a large majority, extension of this thing was passed twice. in the senate, well, in march new hampshire republican senator judd gregg blocked it. last month, again, democrats tried to reboot the program. keep funding it. utah republican senator orrin hatch blocked it.

two weeks, before the program was set to expire, it got blocked again. thank wyoming republican senator mike enzi for it this time. >> the majority has known this program is going to expire at the end of this month all year and have taken no steps to reauthorize this important social safety net program. >> not true. democrats tried to reauthorize it in march. you blocked it. democrats try to reauthorize it in september. you blocked it. you, sir, personally blocked it. as you called it an important safety net, that you were blocking. republicans have never made a substantive argument against this program. but they have blocked it not once, not twice but three times. so a totally successful bipartisan endorsed noncontroversial program credited with putting a quarter million americans back to work in 37 states, that program is now dead. so all the people employed in

that program are going to join the ranks of the unemployed which is going to be horrendous for the economy. it is not only a bad situation and an individual tragedy for each of those americans, now out of the workforce again. it's also bad for the economy as a whole because these people are no longer earning money which means they're no longer going to be spending money which means we are all dragged down as a nation. but that personal and collective economic disaster does have a silver lining. as the jobs numbers get pushed into even worse territory than they're already in, that might be great news for republicans in the elections. the last major jobs report before the election came out today. some private sector job gains, but otherwise not good for the unemployed, not good for the employed but still struggling in a lousy economy, not good for the economy, itself, not good for the country. if only we had some sort of noncontroversial effective efficient bipartisan endorsed jobs program. of course that wouldn't be good for the republicans. they'd probably block it.

and asked frequent heartburn sufferers, like carl, to put prilosec otc's 24 hour heartburn protection to the test for two weeks. the results? i can concentrate on everything i'm doing, not even think about it anymore. since i've been taking it, i've been heartburn free, which is a big relief for me. [ male announcer ] take your 14-day challenge. ♪ prilosec otc. heartburn gone. power on.

buck in colorado, that limb didn't look so far out there when you went out on it, did it mr. buck? welcome back to earth. sorry the trip down was a little abrupt. what it looks like when democrats play to win in this year's elections. against republicans who are super vulnerable because they're super extreme. to stay fit, you might also want to try lifting one of these. a unique sea salt added to over 40 campbell's condensed soups. helps us reduce sodium, but not flavor. so do a few lifts. campbell's.® it's amazing what soup can do.™

the anti-common wisdom but still totally true thing about

this year's elections is when republicans hold politically indefensible positions on stuff like, say, social security, and democrats hit those republicans on those politically indefensible positions, they hit a soft target. it hurts the republican candidate. it helps democratic chances. republicans get hit where they are vulnerable, and they fall apart. they stop, squirm and run from their own positions. stop, squirm and run. stop, squirm and run. want to see what that looked like last night in colorado? >> i was outside a church in greeley the other day and a senior came up to me and said, ken, i'm voting for you, but please don't take my social security away. i need it to live. that cuts you to the quick. it's an absolute lie you put on the commercials and you have frightened so many seniors. >> you're right, seniors are scared. it's not because of what i'm saying about what you said. it's because of what you said. you may have changed your mind which is okay, but i'm reading, you know, president bush has tried to some call eed

personalization of social security. how did you feel about that plan? is that something you'd be willing to entertain? but i'd be willing to entertain, but we're going to have to reshape the entitlement programs and privatize to be able to cut down on a large part of the budget deficit. look, look, people know what you're saying when you say this. it's important that we say the same things in red parts of state and blue parts of state, in primaries and general elections. at the beginning of the campaign and the end of the campaign. people are sick and tired of politicians in washington and politicians in colorado that think we're not paying attention. >> i have never said we should privatize the social security system. no words that senator bennett has indicate that. >> march 9th, 2010, quote, i don't know that the federal government should be involved in retirement plan. quote, the idea that the federal government should be running

health care or retirement or any of those programs is fundamentally against what i believe. he said that. i didn't say that. >> democratic senator michael bennett of colorado hitting republican ken buck with multiple on the record times that mr. buck said he wants to privatize social security. ken buck try to deny his own position on the issue then trying to parse what he'd said about it then just reduced to taking it. as bennett hits buck with buck's unavoidable on the record position like he is unloading a burp gun full of ping-pong balls at him. joining us, michael booth, political reporter for "the denver post." thanks for your time. appreciate it. >> thank you. >> ken buck say he never held this as his position. michael bennett continuing to hit him on it. it seems like both candidates think privatizing social security is an unpopular thing to be advocating for in colorado in the general election. as a political reporter in

colorado do you think they're both right in that assessment? >> i think it's a food reason the democrats are going through all their videotapes spending a lot of time in the editing room looking at the footage. there's a good reason ken buck is trying to figure out how to explain what he meant when he was talk about privatization or turning some over to the private sector. yes, obviously both sides agree a rlot of people care about social security. it's not clear it's perfect for michael bennett on this one. after a night like last night the response from coloradans at some point is, senator bennett, you've shredded ken buck on that particular issue but what is your plan? what is your proposal? we know there's a problem coming up. the problem for michael bennett is buck can point out he's punted to the deficit commission on this and said there's a commission for that in most part, in large part, his answer amounts to that. and i think coloradans especially from senator bennett have wanted more definitive answers than that. >> in terms if they believe that social security is heading

toward off some cliff? if they accept that which is probably an argument being made by buck, not bennett, though? >> well, i think bennett, his other points acknowledged that something will -- tweaks will have to be made to social security to bring it in line in the future. he's talked about looking at different levels of the program for different ages of people. similar -- at least in introducing it in a way, the same way ken buck has done. ken buck has been more specific and tried to take credit for saying at least i put a plan out there on the table and yes, everybody's attacking me for it, but i have a plan. i think he's in trouble for some of that. i think that whole opinion, at least i'm standing up for something does resonate in a race against michael bennett. >> yeah. would standing up for something would make more sense if he would admit for what he's standing up for which is awkward. what's interesting is to see bennett going at him so hard on this. that's anti-common wisdom for how democrats are running across

the country. we've seen this from bennett on reproductive rights. mr. buck has changed his position on the personhood amendment on the ballot in colorado. mr. buck changed his position on that a couple times. did supporting that legislation actually help him in the republican primary? >> i think people think that it did. he was definitely trying to be aggressive in going after the base voters that would come out for the primary. since then he's tied himself in knots a couple times trying to explain where he feels about it and finally come to the conclusion he's not going to talk about that amendment and his final conclusion is that he won't give his opinions about statewide opinions in colorado. people say, this was on the ballot in 2008 as well, exact same proposed legislation and what did you think about it then? his response is i don't talk about what i did in 2008 or how i felt about the amendments in 2008 either. so he's kind of stuck now in that position of not commenting. and so there have been a couple

different positions on that. bennett is hitting hard on that, not so much in person yet but in the ads he's running and outside groups are running. that question has come up in a very tough way. i think what you saw last night in the debate instead of michael bennett trying to explain his way out of an argument he decided to punch his way out of an argument. that made for a lively debate. >> michael booth, political reporter for "the denver post." really appreciate your insight and time. our closing section tonight is on election magic. i'm not a witch. i'm also not you, but i do know how to do basic statistical analysis and it's enough to reveal the closest thing democrats have to making magical electoral outcomes come true. tell a frog how democrats win in places like missouri coming up next.

♪ when it's planes in the sky ♪ ♪ for a chain of supply, that's logistics ♪ ♪ when the parts for the line ♪ ♪ come precisely on time ♪ that's logistics ♪ ♪ a continuous link, that is always in sync ♪ ♪ that's logistics ♪ ♪ there will be no more stress ♪ ♪ cause you've called ups, that's logistics ♪

2006 and in 2008 democrats thumped the republicans in the elections. massive democratic gains and then democratic majorities in both the house and the senate, which was great for democrats in 2006 and in 2008. but it has made things really tough for democrats now in 2010. one of the beltway common wisdom things that's actually true this year is democrats are holding seats in both the house and senate now that demographically when you look at the states they really have no business holding those seats. democrats right now are representing seats that really don't look like democratic seats. how did those people win those seats? well, in some cases it was the result of national trends. democrats were just going to win

a lot of races in those years. in some cases something very specific happened. one of the democrats who one was claire mccaskill of missouri. she scored a huge upset victory that year over incumbent republican gym talent. he is a conservative guy. missouri is conservative state. by right, gym talent probably should have run the state, but he did not. he lost. it wasn't because of trends of the nation in that time. something else was going on in missouri in 2006. that year that was an initiative on the state balance that asked voters if they wanted to raise the state's minimum wage. mccaskill was for raising the minimum wage, mr. talent didn't like to talk about it. during the two senate debates held that year, each candidate was given a chance to ask their opponent one question, and both times in both debates claire mccaskill used her one question, used that one opportunity to

hammer gym hall ent over his lack of support for raising the minimum wage. >> tell missourians yes or no, how will you vote on the minimum wage proposal how you will vote on the ballot in two weeks. >> you're going to have to cast a ballot in two weeks. will you vote yes, or will you vote no? >> i have not taken a position on the minimum wage ballot issue. >> okay, is it okay if i just say i don't know? a few weeks later election day rolled under, the minimum wage initiative was approved 76% to 24%. raising the minimum wage passed by 52 points in missouri. the other big result that day, claire mccaskill defeated jim talent by a hair. a democrat ousting an incumbent republican senator in the state of missouri.

en months later when the post more tums of the that race were written, guess what the deciding factor was, the minimum wage proposition passed in every county, winning 76% of the grass roots vote. congressional quarterly, quote. research showed democrats in missouri were twice as likely to vote for claire mccaskill because of on an initiative to increase the state's minimum wage. if you had a secret decoder ring for democratic electoral success, the minimum wage is what your ring decodes to. whenever minimum wage is on the ballot, it blows up. in 2006, minimum wage initiative passed in nevada by 38 points. minimum measure in arizona passed by 32 points. two years earlier one passed in

florida by 44 points. montana, montana! democratic senator jon tester of montana elected in 2006, when was that minimum wage ballot initiative ballot wage on the ballot? 2006. this is the code for democrats. when minimum wage is an issue, not only does it win, democrats win alongside the issue, too. quoting congressional quarterly. in 2006, voter motivation and reported interest in the election was disproportionately high among democratic-based voters. especially where minimum wage initiatives were in play. the minimum wage issue is not something that gets talked ab t aboutically on the federal level very much, very often. but it is a very, very potent issue for democrats. raising the minimum wage is very popular with voters. and republicans know it.

a fact evidence in jim talent trying desperately not to say anything about it in 2006, business interests, the backbone of the republican party have fought minimum wage initiatives tooth and nail over the years. like the chamber of commerce, that brags it continues to propose increase. p.r. spinster rick burr bur man's policy institute. this is is really awkward for republicans. on the one hand, they're so reliant on the support of business interests, they represent business interests. but on the other hand, they recognize that opposing minimum wage increases is really bad electorally, even in conservative states. so republicans have been against the minimum wage, but very quietly. i'm convinced the republican jihad against acorn was not about some fake expose.

it wasn't about that. it was was because they organized people around minimum wage initiatives that always passed. initiatives that also turned out democratic based voters. the grass roots effort by acorn helped put claire mccaskill over the top in missouri. and so, we have to make up something horrible about that that doesn't sound like it's about the minimum wage. why does acon have to be destroyed? because of the minimum wage. republicans and business interests know how potent the minimum wage is for democrats. they know how important it is to take the tool away from democrats. before this year, they've therefore known they need to keep quiet about their position. say acorn was about the fake pump thing. hire a lobby against it, but keep your name out of it. look at your shoes.

not to get on the wrong side of the issue. try to avoid being associated with your position on it. this is a democratic and a liberal juggernaut of an issue. republicans always kept their heads down on this issue over the years. until this year. this year republicans got really confident about their chances of winning. so the position they always had, which is they hate the minimum wage, they are putting their cards on the table about it. instead of keeping quiet like they have in years past, now this year they're so confident they are saying it in public. >> should the federal government be requiring minimum wage? >> that is clearly up to the states. >> so there should not be a federal minimum wage? >> there should not be. that's not in the scope of the powers of the federal government. >> i think we have minimum wages in states. minimum wages in the government. we need to look at all the issues in terms of what mandates are being placed on businesses and can they afford them?

>> should there be minimum wage? >> absolutely not. it's something roosevelt put in during the depression. >> the sound is the sound of democratic antenna beginning up going up across the country. it is proven to energize democratic voters over and over and over again. everywhere in the country. republican john racey running nor senate in west virginia. linda mcmahon of county, joe miller of alaska, all on record arguing against the minimum wage. in connecticut democratic rich around blumenthal already hit lynn la linda mcmahon on it. now she says she misunderstood the question. she didn't understand it at all. good luck. the principle that anyone working a full time shouldn't be poor, the richest most powerful country on earth, you ought to be table to live on what you earn if you live full time as