block a vote on a nuclear arms treaty with russia. it would allow us to reduce their nuclear stockpile and check in on their program. kyl is the chief gop negotiator and he says that congress is just too busy to deal with a new treaty during the lame duck session. that's, of course, not true. the republicans will have six more senators when they take this up next year. the white house is reportedly shocked and angry about the move, but tells the "new york times" it will keep pushing for approval of the treaty. they probably would like to talk to republicans about it, but gop, quote, scheduling conflicts caused the meetings set for thursday to be postponed until after thanksgiving. does anyone really believe that they had a scheduling conflict more important than a white house meeting with the president? or they were too busy to approve a treaty signed to security weapons of mass destruction and

enhance america's national security? president obama, how is that bipartis bipartisanship thing working out for you? not too good. let's bring in mike viqueira. he's live at the white house. mike, look, as you can tell from my intro, i'm not buying it from the republicans. >> i gather. >> let's talk about why they might have delayed this treaty. is it to get bigger numbers so they can negotiate better next year or do they just not want to do it? >> there are billions of the table that the white house has said that they will devote towards modernizing the remaining nuclear stockpile. jon kyl wants to look at it longer. jon kyl, the influential member on these issues that the republicans are looking to for leadership here. today, not withstanding jon kyl and influence he has on conservatives in the senate who have 41 members at this moment,

come january 5th, they'll have many more. so the margins will be narrowed. but the white house insists all is not lost. quite the opposite. a full measure of confidence, robert gibbs says that they have the votes, it will come up this year and it's going to pass this year. another influential voice, been around for a while on foreign policy issues, has been the ranking member of the foreign relations committee in the senate, richard lugar of indiana. he wants to see this thing passed. the problem is i told you the numbers the way they stand right now. to ratify a treaty in the senate takes 2/3 of the senate. that's 67 votes. so a lot of people today are questioning where that confidence that robert gibbs expressed today is coming from. so very much up in the air at this point. >> that's interesting and good news. that means the white house is going to push forward on this regardless. if they take the vote, they might win it. i don't think that confidence is misplaced. luger has always been right on

this issue. the fact that he's on their side, it could help if there are any moderate republicans left. let's go to the second issue. they're not going to show up for a meeting. >> yeah. >> it looks like a slap in a face, right? but the real question for you, mike, you're at the white house. how is the white house perceiving it? is there any chance they'll say, look, if you pull that kind of maneuver, then i don't even want to meet with you after tha thanksgiving? >> well, if it is a slap in the face, the white house today is trying to put the best face on it. they say, look, this is a bipartisan deal. we've agreed to move the meeting. only half in jest. it's going to take place after thanksgiving on november 30th. republicans said they were never consulted and when they tried to get back to the white house, the white house was out of pocket for ten days on their asia trip. that might be hard to imagine. the white house may not have gotten back to them. but the president did mention it several times including on that asia trip that he was going to have the republican leaders here

tomorrow night. they were going to meet in the -- in the west wing presumably and then head upstairs to the residence for dinner. at that point, they were going to try to hash out these issues. these big issues like s.t.a.r.t., but more prominently the tax cut and whether that's going to be the -- extended to the wealthy and on what basis, temporary or permanent. that was what, you know, was expected to be hashed out at this meeting. there have been moderately mixed signals from republicans on which they want to go on that compromise. a lot of people are upset that the white house would consider it. but jim demint, the republican from south carolina, himself off an overwhelming reelection a couple of tuesdays ago said that he signalled on sunday that they could go along with the president's idea or at least it's been signalled from the white house that they would go along with the temporary extension. on the house side, they're drawing a harder line saying they're holding out for a

permanent extension. nobody really expects if it were put on the floor of the house and the senate that wouldn't pass. so bottom line here, congress goes away next week for thanksgiving. when they come back, then they'll have their meeting. >> all right. i know that if i invite a girl to dinner and she says she can't show up, that means she's really not that into me. but that could just be me. >> darning her socks, washing her hair. >> all right. mike viqueira, thank you so much. >> okay. >> all right. now, following the compromises on health care, finance reform and don't ask, don't tell, it look like the obama white house will now waver on the bush tax cuts as well. they call it a compromise of course. the administration has already granted over 100 health care waivers to employers that cover over 1 million americans. that means those companies don't have to actually implement the new health care rules. wow. the white house making a deal

with powerful companies to game the system. didn't see that coming. but if you think that's bad, wait until you get a load of this next story. president obama has granted a waiver on using children to fight wars. so which countries got the waivers? oh, only sudan, yemen, chad, and the congo. why? because according to a presidential memo to hillary clinton, it is in our, quote, national interest to keep sending military aid to those nations despite their failure to end the practice of using child soldiers and comply with the rules passed by none other than president george w. bush in 2008. when you can't keep up with george bush's war ethics, you've sunk pretty low. josh and joe are joining us now. all right. you know what, joe, you're here. let me start with you. let's talk about what we just talked about there. waivers, exemptions, compromises.

does the white house have the memo that it might be an interesting thing to do to stand up every once in a while? >> you know, this has been my complaint about this white house from the beginning. that the president's obsession with bipartisanship has basically emasculated him in dealing with the republicans. when you sell half of what -- or give away half of what you're supposed to be selling before you get to the deal, who is going to make a deal with you? they will push back every time. and the s.t.a.r.t. treaty issue that you're talking about before is the perfect example of this. this is a treaty that every republican secretary of state has endorsed. dick luger has endorsed. every responsible person involved with foreign policy knows that this is essentially to our national security and our strategy for non-proliferation. and yet -- and by the way, jon kyl was complaining last year that it wasn't moving fast enough, but now they -- they suddenly realize they have a

little more power. they're not as weak as they were last year. and, you know, so they're going to push back every time on this guy because i think they know the president can't really take a punch. >> that's a strong statement that i totally agree with. josh, let's talk about this s.t.a.r.t. treaty. because if there is a real objection, i don't get it. is there a triprincipal objecti to the s.t.a.r.t. treaty or is this just politics? >> i have to ask, how is the carter administration going for you? >> well, look, i don't -- i think it's going terribly. look, it's weakness. >> exactly. >> people hate that comparison. but if you don't want that comparison, stand up every once in a while. >> well, look, if i were a democrat, which i'm obviously not, i would be absolutely with you. it's a weak president. it's a president who has a very unsure grasp on his own agenda. it's a president who politically gets rolled time and time again. it shows up in the election results. look, to directly answer your question, there are some

legitimate critiques of the existing -- of the new s.t.a.r.t. treaty. and they depende on which side f the spectrum you come from. but the three substantial critiques are the limitations on missile confidence, the limitations on conventional weapons delivery systems and then a weak verification system. on the political side, the president is trying to push through the first major arms control treaty in a lame duck session ever. that's not something that's going to fly. a little bit more political competen competence, a little more reaching out to amenable republicans would have precluded all of this. what kyl is doing should not be a surprise to the president, but it is and that is an indication of a broken white house political machine. >> i mean, it shouldn't be a surprise because of course the republicans are going to not agree to it. look, i've got to challenge you on that more. the substance of criticism of s.t.a.r.t. is honestly absurd. i mean, look, is a treaty ever going to be perfect? of course not. it's a treaty. you negotiate with them.

whereabo without the treaty we can't do verification of their program. it's a terrible idea. my sense of it is that the republicans are not honest actors. they don't care about the treaty. they don't care about the national security. they care about the politics. they're going to block the president for political reasons. >> i'm trying to think back of when you did think the republicans were honest actors. the fact of the matter is that accusing one side or the other of not caring about national security is neither accurate nor helpful. there are legitimate and differing views on whether s.t.a.r.t., the new s.t.a.r.t., is necessary and useful. frankly -- >> i don't believe that. really? not necessary to renew this treaty? are you kidding? >> no, no. i'm not kidding at all. we don't live in a cold war world. this s.t.a.r.t. treaty would have been very, very good in, say, 1978. it's 2010. it's a multipolar world. you're talking about a bilateral treaty. if you want to -- >> what's the down side?

what's the down side? >> they still have the weapons and who know whose is going to be in power in russia. it's not a democratic country. the -- the future of russia is -- is not something that one would want to bet on and say, hey, we don't need a nuclear arms treaty with them anymore, aside from the fact that our position in the world as a -- as a -- as an enemy of proliferation is dependent on the perception of the united states as a country that wants to reduce its own nuclear weapons. you know that. now, conservatives don't agree that, many of them. conservatives have always been suspicious of treaties. the problem with treaties, you have to make them with foreigners. and from the right-wing point of view, that is an inherent problem. but it is -- that doesn't mean we don't need them. and every -- >> isn't the -- i mean, come on. that's ridiculous. i have traveled to work and negotiated and talked with many

countries. there are many conservatives who have, too. it's very absurd to hear you say that republicans and conservatives don't care about foreigners. >> i wouldn't say it that boldly. as i pointed out in the beginning -- >> okay, look -- >> i said, look, every republican expert on this and every republican former secretary of state has said we need to do this now. and there's a reason for that. they've understood for more than 30 years that this is an essential part of our national security strategy on both sides of the aisle among sane people. >> you can see that republicans and conservatives don't care or you can cite republican secretaries of state for defense of your position. which is it? >> josh, let me ask -- >> i was gently mocking you. i hope you can handle it, okay? >> let me clarify that, okay? >> please. >> i don't want people to think that republican voters don't care. or that no republican cares. richard lugar is on the right side. the former secretaries of state are on the right side. i'm talking about your current republican politicians.

i'm not saying they don't care about foreign policy or national security at all, but i'm saying it is clear that they're putting politics above that. are you really telling me, josh, that this doesn't have to do with politics? that they didn't want to hand some sort of weird defeat to president obama and go ha ha and they have legitimate concerns about this? come on. >> it's all political on both sides. it really is. yes, this is a defeat that's being handed to the president, which he's acquiescing in, as you rightly pointed out. the hyperbole that's necessary, that's essential to our national security, is absurd. this is a domestic political football. if s.t.a.r.t. is not ratified, which it's not going to be right now, certainly not in the lame duck session, there's not going to be a new arms race between russia and the united states. this is just an accurate assessment of what russia/u.s. relations look like and where they're likely to go. joe is painting this picture of a dangerously volatile russia.

russia is essentially a semi-fascist state at this point. it's got a pretty stable regime. we're going to see some combination of the putin/medvedev combination in power for a long time to come. that's not likely to change. s.t.a.r.t. is not going to affect that one way or the other. >> their stable, somewhat fascist system does not sway my concerns. guys, we've got to leave it right there. josh and joe, thank you both. we appreciate it. >> thank you so much. up next, are the rich destroying the country? how do you like that tease? why it's such a bad idea for the top 1% to have so much money. is the u.s. turning into the third-world country? and is the tsa getting carried in how much of your bodies they want to see? interesting stuff coming up on msnbc.

the idea behind the reagan revolution was that if we kept cutting taxes for the rich, it would trickle down to the rest of us. well, that didn't work. instead the rich got richer. but even more importantly, that unequal distribution of wealth has hurt our whole economy. let me show you what i'm talking about. the richest 1% of americans used to take home 9% of the national income in 1976. but now they take home 24% of the national income. that is enormously high and creates a dangerous imbalance. the united states now has more unequal distribution of wealth than it did before the great depression. that didn't turn out too well for us. it has more unequal distribution of wealth than countries that we're now calling traditionally banana republics. but extra wealth was created since reagan took over in 1980.

where did all the money go? well, more than 4/5 of the total increase in american incomes went to the richest 1% of americans. so almost all the money went to the top 1%. trickle-down economics is a lie. as reagan would say, facts are stubborn things. nicholas christoph wrote a great topic about this and he joins us from the "new york times." nicholas, you can tell how i feel about this. tell me why you think that this imbalance might hurt the whole economy. >> well, i think that traditionally we used to have the view that there was a trade-off between growth and equity. if you wanted more growth, you maybe needed to accept some disparities between rich and poor. and at some level, that's true. you need a certain amount of inequity. i think what we're seeing is that when you get huge disparities, and i think that we've reached them in this country, then that concentration

of wealth becomes an impediment to growth. there is both evidence -- if you look around the world, those unequal countries have had more trouble maintaining economic growth and also there is now some evidence that great concentration of wealth leads to more financial crises that, of course, retard the entire economy. that's what we're going through right now. >> i want to show you one other thing that you wrote about as well. it's about ceo pay. the largest american companies, their ceos used to average 42 times as much as the average worker in 1980. that's a lot, but they're the ceo. in 2001, that was now almost ten years ago, that number increased to 531 times more than the average worker. now, i think that creates two issues. one is -- and correct me if i'm wrong here, nicholas. one is they have more money to speculate with. and the second problem is the henry ford problem. henry ford knew he had to pay

his workers more so they could buy his car. now workers can't buy the cars. it even create as problem for the ceos in the long run, doesn't it? >> i mean, it does. and more fundamentally, if you look around the world -- this issue speaks to me so much because i travel to countries that have great gaps. it becomes corrosive to the country's political system, to the social fabric, to the sense of national purpose of a country. you get donut countries where there's nobody left in the middle. and it seems to me that at this point where in the u.s., for example, the top 1% own more national wealth than the bottom 90%, then we've reached that point. i think that backdrop of extraordinary inequality has to shape the present national conversation about priorities such as right now is our top priority, do you give tax breaks to the -- you know, to people with incomes over $250,000 or is to extend unemployment benefits for people who have been laid off in the worst recession in 60

years? >> well, let me make it more stark. if we just took the obama republican compromise, it looks like -- it hasn't happened yet, but it looks like they'll compromise on two more years of tax cuts for the top 2%. that would cost our budget 1$14 billion. now -- and i'm being kind here. $140 billion. the republicans say, hey, those guys are job-creators. wouldn't it make more sense if we took the whole money and actually created jobs with it instetd i instead of hoping that the rich create jobs here? we take the whole $140 billion and hire people wouith it. wouldn't that make more sense? >> absolutely. if you cut taxes for the rich, there will be some jobs created. they'll buy some second porsches and some new yachts and there will be some jobs created, but economic theory and practical experience suggest that it's not that many jobs. the multiplier effect for tax cuts for the very wealthy is very modest.

because some of that money is actually saved. the top .1% of taxpayers will get an average tax break of $370,000. now, you can't say that that entire $370,000 is going to go toward goods and services. it's not. you'll get much more bang for the buck if you extend unemployment benefits. >> and let me ask you one final question about that. you write a lot about microloans. how about microloans here? the big banks aren't helending t the money. why don't we take that $140 billion and give it in microloans to women and see what they can do with it. >> i mean, there's so many ways we can indeed help people. there are microloans, there are education programs, preventing people from being laid off, for example, just to keep people in the market. so there are a zillion ways to do that. the least effective is to give

large tax cuts to the wealthy. >> all right. nicholas, thank you so much for joining us. we appreciate it. >> thank you. coming up, will eva longoria have to pay spousal support to tony parker? is the tsa storing naked images off of full-body scanners? and is there no man that a woman won't get tired of? we'll try to answer those provocative questions when we get back. 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.™ but i wasn't winning any ribbons managing my diabetes. it was so complicated. there was a lot of information out there. but it was frustrating trying to get the answers i needed. then my company partnered with unitedhealthcare. they provided onsite screenings, healthy cooking tips. that's a recipe i'm keeping.

( announcer ) turning complex data into easy tools. we're 78,000 people looking out for 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare. so i take one a day men's 50+ advantage. as a manager, my team counts on me to stay focused. it's the only complete multivitamin with ginkgo to support memory and concentration. plus vitamin d to help maintain healthy blood pressure. [ bat cracks ] that's a hit. one a day men's. took some foolish risks as a teenager. but i was still taking a foolish risk with my cholesterol. anyone with high cholesterol may be at increased risk of heart attack. diet and exercise weren't enough for me. i stopped kidding myself. i've been eating healthier, exercising more... and now i'm also taking lipitor. if you've been kidding yourself about high cholesterol...stop. along with diet, lipitor has been shown to lower bad cholesterol 39% to 60%. lipitor is fda approved to reduce the risk of heart attack and stroke in patients who have heart disease or risk factors for heart disease. [ female announcer ] lipitor is not for everyone,

including people with liver problems and women who are nursing, pregnant or may become pregnant. you need simple blood tests to check for liver problems. tell your doctor if you are taking other medications or if you have any muscle pain or weakness. this may be a sign of a rare but serious side effect. let's go, boy, go! whoo-whee! if you have high cholesterol, you may be at increased risk of heart attack and stroke. don't kid yourself. talk to your doctor about your risk and about lipitor. i won't. ♪ [ female announcer ] clear some snow. ♪ or spread a little warmth. maxwell house gives you a rich full flavored cup of coffee so you can be good to the last drop. mafor constipation relief...ch full flavored cup of coffee nothing works better than miralax. it's the one. the one recommended by more doctors. only miralax is clinically proven to relieve constipation with no harsh side effects. miralax is the only one. restore your body's natural rhythm with miralax.  i'm bob kearn, president of coit cleaning services. these pictures are the history of my family

and they're also the history of coit. we've been in business for 60 years and our greatest asset has always been our people. we use the plum card from american express open to purchase everything we can and with the savings from the early pay discount, we were able to invest back into our business by hiring more great people like ruben here. how can the plum card's trade terms get your business booming? booming is a new employee named ruben. we have breaking news to report now. the ap reporting that the write-in candidate in the alaska senate race lisa murkowski is the poernt wapparent winner of . also breaking news on the house leadership. ja john boehner has been elected the new speaker of the house. he says this is the dawn of a new majority.

eric canter will be the majority leader and nancy pelosi wins as democratic leader with a vote of 150-43. [ coughs ] [ breathes deeply, wind blows ] something wrong with your squeegee, kid? uh, i'm a little sick. sick?! you gonna let a sore throat beat you? you're fearless! ahhhhhhhhh! atta boy! [ male announcer ] halls. a pep talk in every drop.

here's a look at how stocks a doing today. losing some ground in today's session. kind of a tough day on wall street. all the major indices are trading lower. today's meeting of european finance ministers ending with no agreement for a financial lifeline. irish and eu officials are working to stabilize the banks to keep the crisis from spreading to other fragile economies connected by the euro. and some good news for american workers. companies' fringe benefits like work-day massages and free dry cleaning are making a post-recession comeback. more companies plan to bring back the perks to keep up employee morale and retain top

talent. we need that here at cnbc. that's it from cnbc. back to you. >> we don't have that here either. >> what can you do? >> one day. we can hope. thank you. after nine long years, prince william finally asked kate middleton to marry him and now the focus shifts to the woman who will join the royal family. did you know it turns out she's a commoner? she does not have any royal blood and despite the fact that her parents are millionaires they're still considered commoners in great britain. middleton, who had aggressively pursued prince william earlier was later overhead saying that he was lucky to be dating her. so it turns out they're just like us after all. no much how much the guy might seem like prince charming, he eventually turns into a frog. at least in her eyes. neal was at the official announcement of their engagement. he joins me now live. neal, first of all, let's tackle this commoner thing.

americans aren't used to this shenanigans. do these commoners have any chance of breaking through to be royalty other than marrying a prince? what's the standard here? >> i just love the way you refer to our future queen as a commoner, you know? it's an interesting question, actually. what you're actually saying is, of course, that she doesn't have any royal blood, any blue blood. what she does have is breeding. breeding really comes from obviously having multi-millionaire parents and stuff like that. ultimately, this is a real breakaway from tradition. most royals do mary within their own stock, as it were. everybody said that princess diana was a commoner, but she knew prince charles from 13 years old. kate middleton is the real deal, a true commoner. >> you know, you guys got to get beyond this stuff. commoners and the lords and the royalty. all right. anyway, and the blood lines. that's the american in me

speaking. all right. let's talk about this idea that she was originally pursuing him. some people are poopooing that. was she? there was this talk of the poster on the wall and she's zeroing in on that target. did that happen or not happen? >> i tell you, it has a whiff of tom cruise and katie holmes, doesn't it sn? it's a strange one. her confessing that she had this picture of him on her wall, she did. that's a true story. but like with all girls, once they set their sight on a guy, then they know what they want. whereas men are slightly more indecisive. what kate middleton thought was this is what i want and pursued and and it ended up with princess diana's engagement ring. kissing a frog, your prince comes true. >> then later turns into a frog because then she was overheard saying, this guy, he's lucky to be dating me. but it made me feel better,

neil, but it apparently happens to everybody, even an actual prince. >> yeah. well, you see, then again, if you watch the actual engagement tape, it's interesting because you can see that when he's talking about their time away, but she's basically saying is when you dumped me, when you left me high and dry, i was still in love with you. a typically man says we had a few problems and we worked them through. behind those doors afterwards, a few words there. not as quiet and shy as she makes out, shall we say. >> all right. neil sean, thank you. a lot of fun. >> my pleasure. thank you. now the head of the transportation security administration got a verbal pat-down on capitol hill today. he defended the controversial new passenger screening methods at airports. john pistole made it clear that he intends to continue the pat-downs and body scans because he says they are necessary to help prevent terrorist threats. take a look at this exchange for mike johanns. >> i get the impression that you're expressing your

understanding. i'm thinking nothing is going to change. >> well, so if your question is do i understand the sensitivities of people, yes. am i going to polici policies? no. i think that is what being informed by the latest intelligence, the latest efforts by terrorists to kill our people in the air, no, i'm not going to change those policies. >> well, he's very clear about it. but at the same time, recently some full-body scans were stored in florida and they, of course, leaked online. who didn't see that coming? there's no way that wasn't going to happen. the question is how much privacy are we willing to give up in the name of security? tom blank is former head of the tsa security policy. i'll ask him that same question. look, tom, you guys say that the tsa -- i shouldn't say you guys. tsa says they're not going to store these body scans but we find out later that in some cases they do. so isn't that a real concern? >> well, it shouldn't be a concern. right now, the debate has skewed

too much more on the side of the passenger experience and issues about privacy and we're losing sight of the fact that there's a very real threat to the aviation system. for years tsa has known that the real challenge is trying to detect explosives at the checkpoint. their technology hasn't been very good to do that. it was brought home to us all last december with the underwear bomber. it spurred tsa into action. they're putting this equipment out there and they're trying to find the right balance between the passenger experience and trying to keep explosives off the airplane. and the truth of the matter is that while we're having a great debate right now, the american public really does support the deployment of this equipment. there's a major poll done by a major news organization today that shows 81% support, 15% opposition to the deployment of these things. when tsa has piloted this equipment, which they did for a number of years before going

towards full deployment, 90% of people chose to go through the ait equipment, the body imager, rather than have the full pat-down. >> they're in support of it until they go through it. there was the worker that went through it and his coworkers started making fun of his downstairs and then he got upset and then there was violence, et cetera. are you 2telling me that these things aren't -- if a celebrity goes through them that they're not going to leak into the press? >> the incident that you cited is a blemish on tsa's record. and i hope that they've taken steps to correct that and prevent it from happening ever again. but i think the answer is oversight. and what we know is that tsa has a privacy officer that looks at such things. we know the department of homeland security has a privacy officer. there are ombudsmen through the department and the agency. there are dozens of committees on capitol hill that have

oversight authority and look at these things. i really do think that in the context of tsa screening several million passengers a day, literally putting thousands of people through this ait equipment in the pat-down that they have a pretty good record of keeping these awful incidents to a bare minimum and hopefully they'll be able to eliminate them. >> tom, if we really think this keeps us safer on planes, by that same logic, shouldn't we use them on trains, buses, before you go to a movie theater, a mall? all of those places are incredibly crowded. people could sneak bombs in there. >> it a risk assessment. the aviation sector continues to be a major area of interest for the mbadnies. that's why we concentrate on that. in trying to find the balance of the free flow of people in commerce and security, there's a lot of steps we take in the aviation sector that aren't practical to take. therefore, we have to accept

certain risks in transit and on light rail and passenger trains. >> all right. well, you're clear on that. tom blank, thank you so much for joining us. >> thank you. all right. now coming up, bristol palin and the situation from the "jersey shore" are doing an ad on abstinen abstinence. eva longoria and tony parker break up. is he asking for spousal support from him? and who claims to be the greatest man ever. yes, somebody made that claim. trust me. trust me. ya i like that. trust me.

bankers are known to be a little bit in love with themselves. are we going up? we can get the next one.

i'd like to get your advice on hedging - risk... exposure. what makes us different? for 300 years we've chosen to focus on our clients. what a novel idea. you need to do the preventative things that you need to do for your heart health. for me, it means an aspirin regimen. before you begin an aspirin regimen. speak to your doctor. before you begin an aspirin regimen. [scraping] [piano keys banging] [scraping] [horns honking] with deposits in your engine, it can feel like something's holding your car back. let me guess, 16. [laughing] yeeah. that's why there's castrol gtx... with our most powerful deposit fighting ingredient ever. castrol gtx exceeds the toughest new industry standard. don't let deposits hold your car back. get castrol gtx. it's more than just oil. it's liquid engineering.

i was living on welfare and supporting a family of four. after i got the job at walmart, things started changing immediately. then i wrote a letter to the food stamp office. "thank you very much, i don't need your help any more." you know now, i can actually say i bought my home. i knew that the more i dedicated... the harder i worked, the more it was going to benefit my family. this my son, mario and he now works at walmart. i believe mario is following in my footsteps. my name is noemi, and i work at walmart. ♪ the younger generation is beginning to stand out in the political and reality tv world. bristol palin and failed senate

candidate alvin green and the situation are all making headlines this week in some fun and ridiculous moments. just take a look at this ad featuring bristol and the situation touting safe sex. >> i hope you're as committed to safe sex as you are those abs. >> i know you're all about that abstinence thing. you know, but, i mean, come on. are you serious? you're not going to hook up -- like with before you're married for real? >> for real. >> for real, for real? >> for real, for real, for real. >> i want to make sure that you are situated. if you're in a situation with a situation, you may end up with a situation and you may not like that situation. >> trust me, i'm not getting myself into another situation. >> oh, that was painful. that actually lasted for a whole other minute. brian unger is joining me now. >> hi. >> was that the most disn j disingenuo disingenuous, uncomfortable and ironic ad ever recorded? >> yes. and i'm just happy to see that

america can finally see its royalty on television. i believe that these two are our royals and we need to celebrate them. in fact, i think they would look good together in a union of some sort. it's a perfect marriage so to speak. >> could you imagine -- the flip side is levi johnston has nice abs. he's kind of alaska's version of the situation. she obviously hooked up with him. >> people with no skill or qualification can speak for just about any cause whatsoever and we'll just sort of, i don't know, buy it. really? >> it's funny because i was making fun of the british earlier with their commoners and their lords. on the other hand, this is what we've got. >> this is. is he a prince, a king? what is he? >> look, i went to the jersey shore when i was young, but i hope he's not our prince. >> i'm glad they're both being

abstiinant, though. >> that would be awesome if they actually were. eva longoria and tony parker look like they're going to split up. and she is saying, hey, he's not going to get my spousal support from me. that's in the prenup. why? do you think -- is she making more money than him? is he going to go around saying give me money, eva? that seems crazy. >> she might be making more money. her praogram is very successful. the laws of california are such that you have to split your property 50/50. but more importantly, i know eva longoria. i've met eva longoria. and she's very nice. i like her. so if there is a dispute, i'd like her to win in it. she dated a friend of mine for real, and here's the thing i remember about her the most. this was all clean. and it was very polite. she was changing into clothes with my friend and i was just kind of sitting on the couch

waiting. she's a size zero. you can quote me on that. she's a size zero. i didn't know there was such a thing. there's an absence of zsize. she doesn't even -- she's this big. she really is. so i hope she pulls it out. i hope she soaks him for all his money or whatever. >> i'm getting the sense that you're ready and standing in line. but i'm not saying anything. i'm just saigh. i'm just saying. let's go to alvin green. he was the failed candidate in south carolina running against senator demint. he had an amazing quote to a paper in south carolina. this is what he said. i'm the next president. i'll be 35 just before november. i was born to be president. i'm the man. i'm the man. i'm the man. green is the man. i'm the man. i'm the greatest person ever. i was born to be president. i'm the man. i'm the greatest individual ever. it doesn't get any better than that. >> you know what he is? the man.

but you know what? he -- this -- i think he's competent and ready to assume the office of the presidency. i think we're confusing charisma and competency and what we all know now is that you just have to be charismatic to be president. or a governor. or something like that. let's not get carried away with this idea that you have to be qualified for anything. >> right. >> okay? >> look, he's learned a lot from bush. first, enormous confidence. bush had that same confidence. second, while bush used to say, you know, i like to repeat things to kind of catapult the propaganda, right? so this guy gets it through. remember when he went on lawrence o'donnell's program and said jim demint started the recession. now whenever i see jim demint, i think he started the recession. maybe now i'll think this guy is the man. >> i think he's ready to assume the office. i think obama might learn something, too. he's got to stop being so competent and start being

charismatic and start talking in these weird -- >> can you imagine obama, all right, i'm done with this. here's my new policy. >> i've tried reasoning with you people over policy. i'm the man. he should borrow those lines. it might work. he ought to try something. >> it's kind of mohammed ali-esque. that's the keeper, i'm the greatest individual ever. >> that's why he's suited for the office. >> if he runs, it will be awesome. >> it will be awesome. and he will be the first man. the man. >> the man. >> the man. >> all right. brian unger, thank you so much. >> thank you. next, my takeaway on republicans and their affairs. uh-oh. i don't think you want to miss that one. ♪

it's true. you never forget your first subaru. 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.™ [ man ] ♪ trouble ♪ trouble, trouble trouble, trouble ♪ ♪ trouble been doggin' my soul ♪ since the day i was born

♪ worry ♪ oh, worry, worry worry, worry ♪ [ announcer ] when it comes to things you care about, leave nothing to chance. travelers. take the scary out of life.

senator john ensign from nevada planning to run in 20126789 he has a bit of a problem, he kind of slept with his staffer and turns out that

staffer was actually the wife of one of his former best friends. former, obviously. and so that has created an issue for him and might be republicans running against him in the primaries, if he can get beyond that, it looks like -- it is too early to tell you about probably, he will be able to get away with it. what do i base that on? because republicans have gotten away with it before. there seems to be kind of a double standard here. so for example, when bill clinton slept with an intern, he was impeached. and that could cause a tremendous problem for him but newt gingrich, at the same time, while going after him had had been married, divorced and also had affairs. newt gingrich has now been divorced twice, married three times, and when you look at a recent case, look at david vitter versus eliot spitzer. they were both caught with prostitutes. when david vitter returnsed to the senate, of course as republican senator from louisiana, he literally got a standing ovation. and in these elections, just got

re-elected, seemed like even though he ran on family values, who cares? allowed back into the senate with no problem what is so ever, including with republican voters will claim to be voting for family values. on the other handing you look at spitzer, he was run out of town, he is doing all right now but not allowed to remain as governor and had to resign in shame but when you look at the republicans, it is fascinating the difference between what they say and what they do and what their followers are following tolerate. you had rush limbaugh caught with the oxycontin and the painkiller abuse there you had newt gingrich with the three wives. you had david i will have the we are what he did. you have john ensign with the staffers. unless you get caught, honestly in some sort of gay affair as larry craig did although he was -- that senator allowed to serve out the rest of his term, you are probably all right. now here is the thing had, i don't mind any of that if you want to have affairs that is not my business that's your business. all you got to do is say, hey,

listen, we are full of it we say family values, we are just kind of kidding around, we don't actually pretend -- not actually going to take those family values on for ourselves. so, if he just said it and stopped being so judgmental, well, then i actually wouldn't have any problem with t you say, okay, i have conservative ideology, the way i will go and everybody would be okay, but please, enough with the double standard. that's all we're saying. all right. now, that's our show for today. i'm cenk uighur. i will be here all week. in fact, all through november. i'm also on the young turks.com. that will be later tonight. but more importantly, i will be on the dill.rat again show next to talk about republican welfare queens. that's also interesting. you don't want to miss that either. plus, they are about to start the show with what i hear is an explosive first segment. i don't think you want to go anywhere. stay right here. hey guys. sorry we're late. milk looks warm. finally got the whole gang together.

maple brown sugar, strawberry delight, blueberry muffin. yeah, a little family reunion. [ wind rushes ] whoa! whoa! whoa! whoa! we're cereal here! what? just cooling it down. enough said. gotcha. safety first. whoo-hoo! watch the whole grain! [ female announcer ] try kellogg's® frosted mini-wheats® hot. just add warm milk and you've got a hot way to keep your kids full and focused all morning. oops. dude your eight layers are showing. [ female announcer ] mini-wheats® hot. keeps 'em full, keeps 'em focused. i've been looking at the numbers, and i think our campus is spending too much money on printing.

i'd like to put you in charge of cutting costs. calm down. i know that it is not your job. what i'm saying... excuse me? alright, fine. no, you don't have to do it. ok? [ male announcer ] notre dame knows it's better for xerox to control its printing costs. so they can focus on winning on and off the field. [ manager ] are you sure i can't talk -- ok, no, i get it. [ male announcer ] with xerox, you're ready for real business.

good afternoon to you, i'm dylan ratigan. what is old is new. nancy pelosi and the rest of the gang staying put in democratic leadership. got a special treat for you today, the exclusive trailer for minority report and we promise you haven't seen this one before. plus, the coming cyberwar with china. are computers in beijing poised to attack the united states? and follow the money with jimmy williams, how earmarks are used as lowell bribes to buy multitrillion dollar votes that are destroying our country. the show starts right now. good afternoon to you. it is not often we talk about movies here on "the d.r. show" but as you can tell from looking around, stothd exception. we have got a snow peek, in fact, of the trail fear big new movie coming in january of this year, just in time for the oscar