threat to shut down the federal government. joy! and that battle is looming because the government is expected to run out of money early next year if indethe debt ceiling isn't lifted. listen to this. >> are you willing to participate in a shutdown of the federal government if that's the only way to get the president to come to the table? >> yeah. you know, if the republicans learned anything from the post-'94 election, it's what we said earlier. the people of america do not want us to go to washington and start acting like the democrats we replaced. >> so shut down is entirely possible. if that wasn't aggressive enough, republicans are promising to investigate the obama and the democrats over and over again once they take over the house in january. here's what the ranking republican on the government oversight committee told politico this week.

quote, i want seven hearings a week times 40 weeks. well, i've done the math on that. that's 280 hearings a year. meanwhile, president obama immediately promised he would investigate republicans when he first came into office. how is that working for him? now to help me discuss these issues, david weigel is here. also, christina belatoni. welcome, both of you. >> thanks. >> christina, we've got these guys who seem to be rather serious about investigations and shutting down the government. is that stuff really going to happen or are they huffing and puffing? >> well, the government shutdown is a really, really fascinating story. you had months ago this starting to brew when you had dick morris, you know, well-known republican pollster who used to work for bill clinton and who has changed sides, saying not

only would republicans shut down the government, but they'd succeed this time, that they learned the lessons from what happened in 19 -- after they won back control in 1995 and 1996. when you look at these new members, they are in a very tough position. voting to raise that debt position is something they campaigned on with the tea party mantle. it's going to be a real big showdown. >> christina, do you have any sense of what lesson they learned? that seemed to have backfired on them back then. what are they going to do differently? >> i think they're going to continue to stand firm. if it comes to this, i think that what some republicans are saying is that they will take it all the way and let the government be shut down as long as possible. now, i would agree with you that it did not seem to work out very well for them, and that's why it's fun to talk about these politics. >> david, we've got to go to obama's reaction. it didn't work the last time part lly because bill clinton stood his ground. are you convinced obama is going

to do the same? >> well, depends what the shutdown would be about. when we start having this discussion, newt gingrich, who was speaker and was reelected speaker after the 1996 elections, after the shutdown, he had been arguing for a while that they should dshut done the government over health care and they would win. let's remember health care was very popular when it was first introduced. it was the months and months of wrangling over the details that -- well, saw, that sunk the democrats. it really hurt them on health care. right now, repeal is kind of popular in the polls. it's more popular than keeping health care as it is, but democrats are convinced the details are popular. if you shut down the government over, you know, preexisting conditions, if you shut it down over letting children stay on health care longer, up to age 26, up to these provisions that are popular, democrats will win. they'll grind them down, just like in 1995 they ground down the republicans over things like shutting down the fda and shutting down all of these services people don't even

realize are part of the government. so the white house -- as wimpy as they look sometimes, and maybe all the time, this is something they really think they can win if they -- especially if it's the debt. they think that republicans are looking at disaster here. >> look, logically speaking, i think they're looking at disaster. you're going to shut down the government? remember, if it's over health care reform, inreason -- part of the season it's no unpopular according to the polls by a 2-1 margin, people thought it didn't do enough. if you're going to go for that tiny sliver of people who thought it did too much and shut down the whole government based on that, it sounds like a bad idea. christina, when have the democrats ever stood their ground since bill clinton? so aren't the republicans capculated somewhat logically, well, that we could push these guys around? >> i think some people could say that. but you have to say that to the senate democrats as well. look at the votes that harry reid forced the republicans on on benefits for federal workers.

so i think that you are going to see potentially it will not get to that point. but the other issue is that the internet breaks down all of the barriers on this. the fact that citizens are much more involved in their government. i think they hold everyone to account. they'll be paying more attention than perhaps they were 15 years ago. and they may not let it happen either. >> all right. david, about the investigations now, obama when he came in said, oh, no, no, no, i don't look backward. i only look forward. issa is saying, i'm going to look backward every single day that i'm there. so is it a bad strategy by obama to once again apparently to do unilateral disarmament on that issue? >> i actually don't think it was. i think you can -- you can look atrops and what they're planning right now without saying that obama and henry waxman and ed town should have opened up this presidency with a bunch of truth and reconciliation.

darrel issa got this job because everyone in the republican conference knew that he had a ton of energy that wasn't being spent on anything useful. they could spend it usefully on him running to cameras, bl bluetooth located right above his ear and explaining the scandals that he thought were important that day. he's calmed down a little bit. he's amped up a little bit since the election, but listen to what he's saying. when he says seven investigations, it's not seven investigations of where joe sestak sharpened his pencil and, you know, what michelle obama put on the menu somewhere. he is saying this will be a happy-go-lucky committee that investigates whether stimulus money is being spect effectively. there is some public desire for that. there's also a lot of room to demagogue that. now, if he was talking about, you know, going after scandals that republicans, you know, amuse republicans and no one else, that's a problem. from what i understand, they're really not interested in doing ten a.c.o.r.n. investigations.

you're not going to hear anything crazy. they might have forgotten the lessons of the shutdown, but they remember dan burton in the '90s making republicans look like fools for investigating every random clinton scandal. >> sure, sure, sure. you know what happened in 2000? they won the election. okay? and they intimidated al gore from running away from bill clinton. those investigations on a political macropolitical level totally worked. and, you know, of course issa said, oh, yeah, yeah, i think obama is one of the most corrupt presidents and then he had to walk that back. he said he was going to investigate sestak, the guy that you mentioned, in terms of what obama promised him. now he's like, oh, no, of course -- here, we have the list for you. he says he's going to go after investigating the stimulus plan, the housing meltdown, the bank bailout and presidential earmarks. and that sounds fine. but notice the last one. unconfirmed czars. but that's a glenn beck issue. they've all had those czars.

once the investigations start, christina, do you really believe that the republicans won't get worked up and get into christmas card lists or whatever other crazy ideas they have for investigations like they did last time? >> yeah, i think that it is important to highlight that the sestak issue, which he says he's going to be dropping, his spokesman told our white house reporter that this was an issue that would be looked as as a partisan witch hunt, even this is something that darrel issa said was an impeachable defense. it's not really about the outcome of the investigation. it's about the hearings. what can you get on television? what sort of witnesses can you call? and that's why, you know, the sestak matter could have been, you know, potentially very big. he said that this was a major issue. he could have called bill clinton, who made the overtures to congressman sestak. but that's not happening. so i think that if you look at some of the specific things he's looking at, allowing inspectors general to have more power within the agencies that they oversee, i mean, those are things that potentially people can get behind. it's all about what sort of

treatment these witnesses get in hearings and how much they're trying to fan the flames. >> guys, i've seen this movie before. when they started the clinton hearings, they're like, oh, no, no, we're just looking into it, government matters, et cetera. oh, how did monica lewinsky wind up here? golly gee willkers, that's where it found up. david, really, you think they're not going to do that to obama? republicans! >> they're not going to investigate monica lewinsky again. i can confirm that. >> you know, i'm not even sure about that. >> why are aware that this could spiral out of control. they're aware they've got incoming members. they've got members who are not, you know, cocktail partied and trained in the ways of washington who are going to go overboard. they've got guys like, you know, steve king and louie gomer who have been playing to the tea party more than anyone else. if they let this get out of hand, they'll have a bunch of scandals that don't make any

sense to voters. you mentioned 2000. there are a lot of clinton scandals in 1996 and clinton -- and bill clinton was reelected handily because he made it look like a waste a time. this is the thing. it's a delicate balance. how do we make sure this is not a waste of time? they have a lot of room if they investigate the stimulus, a lot of stimulus investigations are going to be kind of silly. most of that money is being spent the right way. it's usually on these tiny proportions that go to bear dna research and things of that nature. a lot of good, you know, gains for republicans if they focus on making the obama government look incompetent. if they make it look like it's corrupt, because we know it's not, you know, the heart of the administration or something, it's going to backfire. it does backfire. people voted for republicans because they want jobs, not for any other reason. they don't have jobs, they're angry, they voted for these guys. not because they care about joe sestak or because they think a.c.o.r.n. is a threat to ameri america's moral fabric.

>> by the way -- >> investigations cost money, too. >> right. >> well, of course. you'll have to ignore that. by the way, they've got 50% ofrooms believing that a.c.o.r.a kr a.c.o.r.n. stole the 2008 election. you don't think they'll go there? david, you're more optimistic that i am. but i love the new word that came out of this segment, cocktail partied. david and christina, thank you so much for joining us. really appreciate it. i want to say one word on this real quick before we leave. you've got a wide disparity here. obama says never look backwards. i wasn't going to investigate bush on torture, even though he just admitted it in his last book. said, yeah, i waterboarded them. we're not looking backward. he's not going to go after bush on the iraq war and wiretapping. he's not going to go backwards on anything, even though he had a treasure chest of illegal actions to go back to or possibly illegal actions if you want to be kind.

but when the republicans get in, they don't need anything. they don't need a scandal. look at -- we're already talking bout impeachable offenses and how obama is the most corrupt president. based on what? based on nothing. but the republicans are coming. they're coming for him. it seems like obama for the 88th time in a row doesn't realize it. okay? wake up. they're on your doorstep. all right. now, democrats, there's no more time to lick your wounds. we've got a brand new battle cry coming out. we'll tell you how progressives should fight back. naturally colorful vegetables are often a good source of vitamins, fiber, or minerals. and who brings you more natural colors than campbell's condensed soups? campbell's.® it's amazing what soup can do.™ but the financial landscape is still full of uncertainty.

in times like these, you need an experienced partner to look out for you. heads up! and after 300 years we have gotten pretty good at that.

heartburn that keeps coming back ? then you're ready for zegerid otc. zegerid otc is the first 24-hour treatment ever with two active ingredients: prescription-strength medicine plus a protective ingredient that shields the medicine from stomach acid so it's effectively absorbed. just one zegerid otc capsule a day can relieve your heartburn all day and all night. if you have frequent heartburn, try dual-ingredient zegerid otc. heartburn solved.

one week after getting shellacked in the midterm

elections, democrats and progressives are hanging their heads and wondering how all the enthusiasm of 2008 fizzled so fast. but van jones isn't having it. the former white house advisor on environmental jobs says this is not the time to lay down. he's telling the progressive base to buckle up and prepare for battle. jones says two major fights lay ahead in the coming session of congress. one is the fight to maintain social programs, and the other is to struggle to save the environmental protection agency. we're already struggling with that, apparently. van jones is a senior fellow at the center for american progress. he joins me live from washington now. van, you know, a guy who might really help in this struggle is the president of the united states of america. but it seems so often that he's laying down. in fact, today we see his deficit commission, the two leaders of it, came out and said, yeah, you know, we're going to raise the entirement age. how do you feel about that? >> first of all, i remember the

campaign, the slogan that we had. the slogan was not, yes, he can. the slogan was, yes, we can. most progressives have been sitting back, munching popcorn, blogging and tweeting about what the president is not doing. nothing has stopped us from getting out. there was never a major labor march during one of the worst economic recessions we've ever had. we are the oil spill. people didn't protest about that. the progressive base demobilized itself. now it's time to say it was never yes, he can. it's not about what the president does. it's about what the people do. we have to get passionate about the fact that the epa, the environment protection agency, is on the chopping block and there are people who call themselves patriots who want to weaken america's government to make sure that america's government isn't strong enough to protect the american people. we can stand up on principle and say, look, you keep attacking the federal government, you hate the federal government. last time i checked, the federal government was america's government. america's government should be

strong enough to protect the american people from folks like bp. explain to us why you're on the side of multinational oil companies who are slagging up our coastline rather than the american people. >> van, when progressives did organize, and i can name you dozens of issues. let's pick one. afghanistan. so when some progressives said, hey, we've got to get out of afghanistan, a lot of democrats and other progressives and liberals would go, oh, my god, how dare you criticize the president? don't do that. you're weakening the democrats. so should we take those people and put a boot to them and say get, get and stop listening to them altogether and full-scale attack? >> listen, what i'm saying is -- i love your color. i love your passion. we need more of the color and more of the passion back. ordinary people right now are suffering. we -- these banksters cost us 8 million jobs. people are asking how am i going to get jobs back? we have actual answers andclusiand solutions. the other side doesn't. the other side is -- we're in

danger now of the other side saying the most important thing to is us closing the fiscal deficit. they're not concerned about the jobs. democrats can't go along with that. we've got to fix the jobs deficit. that's how you deal with the fiscal deficit. and if you don't do that, you have a moral deficit. >> van, i hear you on that. i want to get specifics on what progressives can do if they're sitting at home watching this, whether they're munching popcorn or not. but i want to -- look, on issues like this, you've got to talk about the president. because the president is the one that put together deficit commission. now the leaders say, yeah, yeah, yeah, we're going to raise the retirement age. if we're going to fight, don't we have to fight the president, too f he backs that? >> you know as much history as i do. you show me the progressive movement that sat around wondering what the president was going to do 24 hours a day. the president of the united states will have the strength to do what he needs to do when we show the strength that we have. there's nothing to stop us from standing up and saying we want

those 8 million jobs back. there's only a few place wheres we can get the money for those jobs. the banks got our money. halliburton has our money. we want that money to be used to put americans back to work. now, if we stand on principle and say first of all, we refuse to have lisa jackson, who is a hero for the progressive cause, who is a hero for america, who is trying to prevent us from baking the planet with greenhouse gases, we refuse to have her power stripped away with the supreme court says she has the -- the duty to protect america from greenhouse gases, that's a fight on principle. i'm happy to have that fight. people say they hate the federal government. that's america's government. the other thing is, we have right now -- nobody knows this. they're saying green jobs didn't work. that is a bunch of bs. we have 80,000 coal miners in america right now. they're america's heroes. we're proud of them. but there are 80,000 people who went to work today in the wind industry in america as well.

they're heroes. there are 46,000 americans who went to work because of the solar industry. that doesn't count biofuels, the smart grid, smart batteries, all of this stuff that we invested in. if we have a problem in the green economy, it's because congress has been missing in action on the follow-up to the climate bill. but we have to stick up for what we've been doing. we're growing the green economy. we've got a country that is a -- we are a world leader. we have high economic performance and high environmental performance. if you don't want the high environmental performance, go to a country where you drink poison in the water and breathe smoke all day, but leave this country alone. >> i couldn't agree more with you on the issue of don't wait for the administration to do it. you were inside the administration and you were trying to do it internally and they threw you under the bus. so that was one of the times that i decided i'm not waiting for them, okay? now you've got to tell me what can progressives actually do? the guys in the white house are in power.

and unfortunately, we're not, right? so what -- what can an average human being that's out there that care us bout the issues you're talking about actually do? >> first of all, i served in the white house for six months. i was honored to do so. i resigned. nobody threw me anywhere. >> they threw you under the bus and you know it. >> i resigned. let me tell you this. i had a job before i went to the white house and i have a job now. we got 8 million americans that don't have jobs. my critics have jobs. what about people that don't have jobs? you have organizations like green for all, greenforall.org, that organizes people to stand up, to defend the epa. lisa jackson put the word protection back in the equal protection agency. the republicans want to take it out. we've got to fight over that. there will be a fight to impose an austerity program on this country. guess what. the private sector already imposed an austerity program. it was called the wall street collapse. we don't need the federal government to put a public austerity program on thop of th private one.

the american people need to be put back to work. on that basis, we can pull people back together. >> van jones, always an interesting conversation. >> thank you. >> it was great to have you above the bus here. thank you for joining us, van. >> thank you, brother. when we come back, should a man who raped and killed a mother and her two daughters escape the death penalty? i will discuss/debate that. and a republican picks a chief of staff that is out of this world. he's advocated for hanging illegal immigrants. we'll have the details when we come back. developed this softwae that can simulate head injuries and helps make people safer. then they shared this technology with researchers at wake forest to help reduce head injuries on the football field. so, you know, i can feel a bit better about my son playing football. [ male announcer ] how would you use toyota technology to make a better world? learn how to share your ideas

at toyota.com/ideasforgood. if anything, i thought i'd get hit by a bus, but not a heart. my doctor put me on an aspirin regimen to help protect my life. [ male announcer ] be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. check with your doctor because it can happen to anybody. old legs. p.a.d., the doctor said. p-a-d... p.a.d. isn't just poor circulation in your legs causing you pain. it more than doubles your risk

of a heart attack or stroke. i was going to tell you. if you have p.a.d., plavix can help protect you from a heart attack or stroke. plavix helps keep blood platelets from sticking together and forming clots, the cause of most heart attacks and strokes. call the doctor about plavix -- please? i will. [ male announcer ] certain genetic factors and some medicines such as prilosec reduce the effect of plavix leaving you at greater risk for heart attack and stroke. your doctor may use genetic tests to determine treatment. don't stop taking plavix without talking to your doctor as your risk of heart attack or stroke may increase. people with stomach ulcers or conditions that cause bleeding should not use plavix. taking plavix alone or with some other medicines including aspirin may increase bleeding risk, so tell your doctor when planning surgery. tell your doctor all medicines you take including aspirin especially if you've had a stroke. if fever, unexplained weakness or confusion develops, tell your doctor promptly. these may be signs of ttp, a rare but potentially life-threatening condition, reported sometimes less than two weeks after starting plavix. other rare but serious side effects may occur. [ female announcer ] talk to your doctor about plavix.

next on the program, we'll be discussing a controversial stop and frisk program in philadelphia. who are they stopping? who are they frisking? can you guess which race gets stopped and frisked more? we'll tell you when we come right back. [ male announcer ] this is steven, a busy man. his day starts with his arthritis pain.

that's breakfast with two pills. the morning is over, it's time for two more pills. the day marches on, back to more pills. and when he's finally home... but hang on; just two aleve can keep arthritis pain away all day with fewer pills than tylenol. this is steven, who chose aleve and 2 pills for a day free of pain. and get the all day pain relief of aleve in liquid gels. host: could switching to geico realis a bird in the handre on worth 2 in the bush? appraiser: well you rarely see them in this good of shape. appraiser: for example the fingers are perfect. appraiser: the bird is in mint condition. appraiser: and i would say if this were to go to auction today, appraiser: conservatively it would be worth 2 in the bush. woman: really? appraiser: it's just beautiful, thank you so much for bringing it in. woman: unbelievable anncr: geico. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more.

riding the dog like it's a small horse is frowned upon in this establishment! luckily though, ya know, i conceal this bad boy underneath my blanket just so i can get on e-trade and check my investment portfolio, research stocks, and set conditional orders. wait, why are you taking... oh, i see. hey max, would it kill you to throw a guy a warning bark? [ dog barks ] you know i wanted a bird. [ male announcer ] e-trade. investing unleashed.

here's a look at how stocks are trading right now. dow jones industrials unchanged. s&p up four points. the nasdaq higher by 12.5. arriving in south korea today, president obama says a strong job creating u.s. economy would be the country's most important contribution to a global recovery. the president is set to defend the fed's buy of $600 million in bonds. and could a rare pink diamond set a new record for the most expensive gem? sutherby's is auctioning off a stunning 24-carat stone next week. it's expected to fetch between 27 and $38 million which would, in fact, be a record. that's it from cnbc, first in business worldwide. back to you. >> thank you. now, at the same time, steven hayes was being sentenced to death for the murder of a

mother and two daughters in the horrific connecticut home invasion trial, the u.s. state department was getting an earful from the human rights council in geneva for our continued use of capital punishment. it may be impossible to find many americans who don't think that hayes should be put to death for breaking into the petit home and burning mrs. petit and her daughters and beating dr. petit within an inch of his life. but is that just a visceral reaction to a brutal crime? here's william petit sharing his feelings on hayes getting the death penalty. >> i was very much insulted when people asked me last year that if the death penalty were rendered would that somehow give me closure. absolutely not. you know, this is not about revenge. you know, vengeance belongs to

the lord. this is about justice. >> and that's a fair question. the difference between revenge and justice. we'll talk about that right now with richard cohen. he's a syndicated columnist for the "washington post." richard, let's start broad. you think that this gentleman should not get the death penalty, the person who committed this crime. why is that? >> well, right off the top, i also would like to take a baseball bat and beat the hell out of him. i mean, i feel like everybody does. i think the gentleman here has handled himself with great dignity. there's no such thing as closure. any kind of punishment, you won't get closure. the act has been done. his wife is gone, his children are gone. there's no such thing as closure in that case. but you have to look past that and say what will be the benefit of the death penalty? i know -- i know if will efisiate a lot of bad feelings, but a lot of people have been exonerated through dna testing.

these people were a step or two away from going to their own deaths and they were innocent. you have this happening in the united states and all over the world. the death penalty is not a deterrent. we know that, too. it doesn't do any good. it doesn't make any contribution to society. it can be a fatal mistake for lot of people. lastly, you sort of vindicate the thinking of the killer. he can kill, you can kill. i like the government and society to set a standard and say, no, you can't kill. all over the world, the death penalty is used for political reasons. you know, we have to say in this country, no, we're not going to do that. we don't -- we don't execute people. you don't execute people. most of the world has stopped using the death penalty. we're in good company with china and russia and afghanistan and pakistan. >> and iran. >> right. >> now, i agree and disagree. first let's get the agreement out of the way. i used to be pro death penalty. i'm against it now.

the first thing you mentioned, since 1973, we've had 130 people that have been released from death row. that's -- and there it is. because they were innocent. that's enormous. we would have accidentally killed 130 innocent people. that's what switched me over, when it became obvious that we were killing the wrong people. so i can't have it because of that. but once we get beyond that, we get into a disagreement. i think it is a deterrent. look at normal human reaction. if you're going to jaywalk across the street and you get no punishment for it, you're more likely to jaywalk. if at the end of the street you know someone is going to punch you in the face, you're less likely to jaywalk. >> yes, but let me ask you something. can you think of a killer who would say, i will risk life in prison to kill but not the death penalty? the reason is they don't think they're going to get caught. it's the same thing with the jaywalker.jaywalker thinks he's

going to get caught. >> some guys you'll never be able to deter. they're maniacs. they're not thinking ahead. some people will be easily deterred. it's a matter of, hey, if the punishment is harder, maybe we deter a couple of xruf peextra >> so if you say to somebody, you'll spend the rest of your life in jail, they'll risk that. they'll risk that. that's not a deterrent? >> richard, it's a visceral reaction. our reaction to this crime is visceral. we want to see the guy punished. the reaction of the -- of the possible criminal is also visceral. oh, my god, they're going to kill me as opposed to, eh, we'll see. they'll put me in jail, maybe i'll get out on parole. >> visceral reactions can't be deterred. that's visceral. >> no, no, but there's so much that goes into your intuition, into your gut and how you react. it's a cumination of all of the things you've experienced. you've got to recognize that deterrents is something that we discuss because it's a normal part of human nature.

are you saying that human nature stops when it comes to just the death penalty and that's the one place where deterrents don't work? >> no. i don't think human nature stops with life in prison either. i don't think human nature starts. but it's human nature to think you're not going to get caught or act impulsively. i don't think somebody sets off to -- with first degree murder, with murder aforethought and said i will risk life in prison but i won't risk the death penalty. that's -- it doesn't compute to me. >> you know, we've got to leave it there. i think it's a spectrum. i think you will deter some extra people. the bottom line, we're killing innocent people and we can't have that. that's why we're both against the death penalty. a great conversation. thank you, richard. appreciate it. >> thanks. now, some have alleged that newly elected tea party backed republicans can be a little extreme. i don't know who might have alleged that. i'm just saying. as if to prove the critics right, congressman-elect allen west of florida has chosen joyce

kaufman as his chief of staff. here's one of kaufman's quotes about illegal immigrants. if you commit a crime while you're here, we should hang you and send your body back to where you came from and your family should pay for it. if that wasn't enough, she says that the children of illegal immigrants should not receive an education because that will really help local communities to have childreni inrunning around without an education and running around all day. and she says that illegal immigrants should not be treated at hospitals if they come in sick or hurt. if someone is bleeding to death from a car accident, that would be a perfect time to ask them for their papers. but unbelievably, she will now be the chief of staff for a united states congressman. now, joanne reed is editor of the reed report. she's joining me now to talk about this. i can't believe this. she's really going to be a chief of staff in congress?

>> yes, she is, jake. i think what's interesting, joyce kaufman is getting a lot of air time now, but this highlights what i've sort of called the right-wing talk radio callers go to washington. you have a lot of these tea party candidates that are going to washington who essentially represent a right wing that predates the tea party. kaufman is that extreme. but so is allen west. she perfectly represents his id ideaiology. if you think she's out there, well, so is allen west. >> he's been on our show over 100 times. so it's not like he's unfamiliar with her viewpoints. what are the real implications here? are they going to put together legislation to hang illegal immigrants? >> i mean, really what's interesting is allen west and she, they share a very visceral dislike for islam and for muslims, really vicious on the radio. he's been a talk radio caller, not just to her show but to

other shows. they have a very extreme stance on immigration that predates the tea party. and so i -- i wonder about constituent services. there's a relatively significant muslim population in florida. i'd hate to see how the constituent services are going to work there in palm beach and in broward county. and, you know, will allen west stick to his principles and propose the legislation that he and joyce agree on? we'll see. >> is he the guy that went after the co-exist bumper sticker? do you remember that? >> yes, he was the guy -- he went after the co-exist bumper stickers. he does not like the idea of co-existing. he believes that sharia law is sweeping across the country and attempting to take over, like sharron angle believed. he's called social security a giant ponzi scheme. he has gone out and also protested the building of any mosques in south florida. she's been a big supporter of that. these two have been walking in lockstep for a long time. joyce kaufman is getting attention now because she's on the radio, but allen west has been spouting the same beliefs.

he just doesn't have a show. >> you know, he does have a point. the muslims are coming. they're coming. they took over park avenue the other day. i don't know if you heard that. really, in what world are they -- are muslims taking over florida? it leaves you a question of, i mean, what kind of weird conspiracies are these guys going to do in congress? let me give you one more quote from kaufman. she said there are people who want to change your way of life and some of them may be your gardeners. is there a gardener conspiracy afoot and are they working with the muslims? >> well, you know, i question whether, you know, thurston and lovie really understood what they were voting for. i mean, this is a guy who has said you have to gather your muskets and march on washington to end the tyranny of the obama administration. kaufman said that if tea partiers are not elected, people should be prepared to die and be

prepared to get their guns in order to take over congress. so really we're talking about an extreme form of consevrvatism that's severe. it's going after muslims, going after immigrants. we're in for a wild ride. i don't know. i'd love to be a fly on the wall when these two show up. >> yeah. it's going to be fascinating to see how it plays out. one quick question. joyce kaufman is still remaining as a quote/unquote correspondent for a radio station as she's chief of staff in congress. is that even legal? >> well, you know, joyce kaufman is the most popular -- she hosts the most popular program on this station, wftl. the station claims she is going to remain in their employ. it is legal. citizens for responsibility in ethics in washington looked into it. there are ethics rule that limit what you can do as a staffer to a member of congress. up to a point, she can hold another job. look, the issues are going to be

if she's disclosing information on the air shthat she shouldn't be, if he's on committees that deal with national security, she's going to really have to walk a fine line about what she can say, particularly since she's not a reporter. she is a talk radio personality whose job in a lot of ways is to be extreme. so i question whether or not she's going to be able to hold the line on the ethical front. >> and particularly because she's not been overly careful about what she's said in the past. all right. >> not at all. and she's now being paid by the taxpayers. she's all yours. >> joy. all right. thank you so much for joining us. >> thank you. all right. coming up next, why are the cops stopping and frisking philadelphia residents? are they getting more frisky with african-americans?

funny how nature just knows how to make things that are good for you. new v8 v-fusion + tea. one combined serving of vegetables and fruit with the goodness of green tea and powerful antioxidants. refreshingly good.

i'd like one of those desserts and some coffee. sure, decaf or regular? - regular. - cake or pie? - pie. - apple or cherry? cherry. oil or cream? oil or cream? cream... please. when other toppings are made with hydrogenated oil, the real dairy cream in reddi-wip's sure an easy choice. nothing's more real than reddi-wip. fork or... spoon?

a sibyl liberties group has filed a lawsuit in philadelphia challenging the use of stop and frisk searches. the group claims that philadelphia police department is violating the rights of blacks and latinos who have done

nothing wrong. according to a lawsuit over 250,000 people were stopped in 2009. that number is up 148% from 2005. of those, 72% of pedestrians stopped were african-american. shocking. i would have never guessed. but on the other hand, mayor nutter claims that crime is down significantly. joining us, zelmer smith. he's on the philadelphia daily news editorial board and he wrote a column yesterday on philadelphia's stop and frisk policy. first, tell us what the policy is. explain that to us before we get into whether it makes sense or not. >> well, the policy is pretty much what you've seen in new york city and a few other places. that is that police will step up their stoms of people who appear to be suspicious or possibly connected with crime. i think the -- this goes back to a -- a court ruling that 40 years ago, which gave police the

right to stop people on the street if there is a reasonable expectation that they may be involved in illegal activity. reasonable expectation that they may be involved in illegal activity. >> all right. shockingly enough, it turns out that they find that they stop african-americans more for this expectation. do you think that might be racial? >> i think it may be, but you can't tell. part of the problem in philadelphia is that the process is -- the practice is not closely monitored. in new york city, they were required by court order because of an obvious disparity in a number of minority people stopped to keep records of this. in philadelphia, the city was under a consent decree to do the same thing, but apparently when the descent decree expired, the city stopped monitoring. it's lahard to tell. you cannot assume because of the preponderance of minority people being stopped that that in and

of itself is a -- makes a primea fastia case of -- there are police patrols in minority areas. they are more high-crime areas concentrated in minority areas. those could be possible reasons. the problem here is -- this is an anomaly that takes some explaining. of the people who were stopped, about 8% of them were found to be involved in some sort of activity that required further intervention by the police. of those 8%, most of them were stopped for very minor offenses and the majority of people who were finally adjudicated as a result of those stops were white. so what the aclu, who filed this suit, is finding is that if the -- if the majority of the people who are guilty of something are white, then -- and the vast majority of people

stopped, however, are black, well, it seemed to indicate to them that there is a lower standard for stopping minority people than there is for stopping white people. it's a logical conclusion. >> real quick y want to give you numbers. 72% of the people stopped are african-americans. but people might think, hey, there's a lot of african-americans in philadelphia. but the percentage of the population that's african-american is actually only 44%. so you get a wide disparity there. on the other hand, quick question for you. when you ask mayor nutter, he says crime has gone down significantly as well. you have 7% decrease in violent crime and a 10.7% decrease in property crime. is that a val utd point? . >> it may be, but it's not a valid point for him to make. if he really feels this is effective, he needs to be able to say that it's effective based on numbers. and the numbers don't bear it out. crime is cyclical. crime was actually going down,

part one crime, major crimes in philadelphia were going down before this process came into effect. people in new york like to give it credit for being very successful there, but homicide is up 15% in new york city. major crimes are up in new york city right now, despite the fact that this continues. no, it isno, it is not a slamdunk that while this process has been going on, crime has decreased. crime has decreased different times in the city without regard to that. >> all right, elmer smith with the philadelphia daily news. thank you for joining us. we appreciate it. >> thank you. next, i'm going to do my takeaway on the first lady. did she break some rules in indonesia? fascinating. come right back.

yesterday, i did a takeaway supporting muslims, today in the opposite direction. hard to keep up with me. follow me here and see why the obamas were in indonesia yesterday and greated the leaders of that country, one was

the information minister. he happens to be a pious muslim who apparently believes a man should not have contact with a female he is not related to, but then this happened. and you can see here that the obamas are, there he is, and they shook hands in slow motion, there it is i hope he is going to be okay. yes, he actually shook her hand. i hope he didn't get female cooties. but it gets better. you are going to love his excuse, he says she force herd hand on him. he tweeted, by i love the way he is tweeting, i tried to prevent being touched with my hands but mrs. michelle held her hands too far toward me so we touched. wait a minute. let's take another look at that video. see if that is how it went down. he had to do it. by the way, does she look like she is forcing him to shake her hand? he even went with a two-happened shake. she also make him use both hands? look at that goofy smile on his face. also make him smile like a goof

ball? don't look like she is forcing him. all right. now, look, there is a serious side of this. he had to disavow the handshake because muslim fundamentalists think it is a serious problem to shake a woman's hand, like that at least. first, they are wrong it is not. second, what's interesting is how little those fundamentalists think of men. they are worried if a man sees a part of a woman's flesh or allah forbid touches any part of that flesh he will lose himself, he will be intoxicated with lust and not able to control himself. that is the logic behind it at least and i think it's crazy. a handshake shouldn't be sexual, assuming men think it is an insult to men. i think men are better than that i think we can be trusted around women without flipping out at the very sight or touch of them. of course, the president and first lady, unlike me, have to be sensitive to other cultures. but as far as criticism over this incident, here's how i would have handled it.

and if michelle obama never has to shake his hand again, trust me that is a win for her. that is our show for this wednesday, i'm cenk uygur, i'm going to be here all week, don't forget to tip the waiters and waitresses and also on dylan's show next where i will talk about gays and mongols. you don't want to miss that you don't want to miss a minute of dylan's show. it's up next. ♪ [ upbeat instrumental ] [ rattling ] [ gasps ] [ rattling ] [ laughing ] [ announcer ] close enough just isn't good enough. - if your car is in an accident, - [ laughing continues ] make sure it's repaired with the right replacement parts. take the scary out of life with travelers. call or click now for an agent or quote. [in hindi]

and it's like, girlfriend... if you're gonna go with sanjay, what's the problem? i'm okay with it. [in hindi] [crowd cheering] if you're really serious about entertainment... conan, you're on. [whispering] conan. every detail counts. [crowd cheering] having the right real estate agent on your side is more important than ever. at remax.com, you can find the experts you need, whether you're trying to sell of hoping to buy.

nobody sells more real estate than re/max. visit remax.com today. whoa! that achy cold needs alka-seltzer plus! it rushes multiple cold fighters, plus a powerful pain reliever, wherever you need it! [ both ] ♪ oh what a relief it is!

good afternoon to you. my name is dylan ratigan. nice to see you. tough cuts and tougher choices today. the chairs of president obama's debt commission releasing a draft report today on how we can get our massive deficit under control. we will discuss it deep cuts in standing, a mass overhaul of the tax code, an increase in the retirement age and reductions in social security benefits. we will get reaction from former gop presidential candidate and current congressman, dr. ron paul, our guest. we are excited about that also, the