head to the toe. she goes with the husband or the brother and we tell them, wait, wait, we want to see your wi or mother's body naked. for what? for what? >> just add a few things to their anger. isaac yeffef, thank you kindly for your time tonight. it's been an education. >> thank you very much. >> that's november 17th, 15 days since republicans took control of the house. mr. boehner, where are the jobs? i'm keith olbermann, good night and good luck. and now to discuss why john kyl wants to stop the start vote, ladies and gentlemen, here is rachel maddow. good evening, rachel. thank you. and thanks to you at home for staying with us for the next hour. we begin tonight with ronald reagan, with ronald reagan being subjected to a totally unexpected smackdown today in washington. >> the importance of this treaty transcends numbers. we have listened to the wisdom, though my pronunciation may give

you difficulty, the maxum is trust, but verify. >> translator: you repeat that at every meeting. >> i like it. >> trust, but verify. trust, but verify was not only ronald reagan's best-known phrase in russian and his approach to negotiating nuclear arms control with the soviet union, it also became one of his signature ideas. when people -- when particularly republicans want to pay homage to ronald reagan, and oh, boy do they want to pay.

>> i remember his phrase, trust, but verify. >> i agree with ronald reagan, trust but verify. >> we ought to go back to trust, but verify. >> republicans love the trust, but verify thing. they love it. but today, senate republicans decided they no longer believe in trust, but verify. well, president reagan was talking about when he said that was a treaty he signed with the soviet union and said they would reduce their nukes, their nuclear weapons stockpiles and so would would we. and the key part of the deal is that the soviet union wouldn't just get to say they were getting rid of these weapons, we would get to look to make sure they were doing what they said they were doing and vice versa. >> this agreement contains the most stringent verification regime in history.

including provisions for the inspection teams actually residing in each other's territory and several other forms of on-site inspection, as well. >> trust, but verify. trust, but verify. that idea, that approach not only reduced the number of nuclear weapons that we had pointing at each other on hair trigger alerts, it reduced that number by about 17,000 over the past 40 years. it did that through essentially political consensus in washington. when these kinds of treaties that we have with russia get voted on in the senate, they pass by margins like 93-6, by margins like 95-0. but this year, right now in washington, things are different. this is the year that the republican plan on air pollution, that's called cap and trade became something that republicans are now against. this is the year that the republican plan is an individual mandate of health insurance became something that the republicans are against. this is the year that the republican plan for a bipartisan

deficit commission became something the republicans are now against. this year in washington, under this president, there is no idea that is too republican for republicans to be against it. if they think that being against it will hurt barack obama. >> this law failed by seven votes. when seven republicans who had co-sponsored the bill had co-sponsored the idea suddenly walked away from their own proposal after i endorsed it. so they make a proposal, they sign on to the bill, i say, great, good idea. i turn around, they're gone. what happened? >> the latest iteration is on a huge national security deal that is a republican idea. that republicans say they're for. but now that president obama wants it, they are turning against it. again, the ronald reagan trust,

but verify idea about us and russia is we two countries agree to reductions in nukes and then we go look at what they've got. we get to inspect their facilities, to verify what it is they're promising. even if you're not afraid of the -- what used to be the soviet union anymore, russia anymore, there is a massively important side benefit to this. which is that we get to inspect russia's nuclear sites, which is all of the experts in the field say terrorists are likely to get nuclear material if they're ever going to get nuclear material. their nuclear sites fell apart too in some ways. and us being able to monitor those sites is a way we've helped keep there from being a rip roaring network of nuclear material being smuggled out of the soviet union. this is scary stuff and also totally non-partisan scary stuff. and when the last agreement expired and we couldn't keep going there and inspecting nuclear sites, everybody freaked out. for good reason.

republican senator john kyl of arizona, for instance, he warned ominously on the floor of the senate that "for the first time in 15 years an extensive set of verification, notification, elimination and other confidence-building measures will expire." the u.s. will lose a significant source of information that has allowed it to have confidence in its ability to understand russian strategic nuclear forces. that was last november. john kyl saying he does not want this agreement to expire. he says he wants there to be a new deal with russia. says he wants to go back to doing this thing that we have always done. trust, but verify. reagan's big idea, we've got to get back to that says john kyl. but now the fact that barack obama wants to get back to that too is enough to get that specific guy, that specific senator to block our country from doing it. this past april, president obama secured an agreement with russia to get our inspectors back in there. another start to nuclear arms

treaty. all the senate had to do was ratify it, sign off on it. did that happen? no. back then, they said the deal couldn't be considered before the august recess. the august recess came and gone and no, no, no, no we can't ratify it before the midterm elections. now the midterm elections have come and gone, john kyl, now can we ratify it? you say it is so awful we don't have an agreement with russia on this, you want to make sure we have this agreement, it's awful it's been allowed to expire. now can we do this? >> the treaty was dealt a serious blow when a key republican, senator kyl of arizona said he wanted to push the vote to next year when it would require more republicans to support for it to pass. >> next year. when everybody acknowledges it'll be much harder to pass. after 29 meetings, phone calls, briefings, or letters involving mr. kyl or his staff the white house thought they had given him everything he wanted. after john kyl himself lamented

about how this thing wasn't done and how important it was to the country. senator kyl now tells reporters he doesn't think it can happen now. during the fight over health reform, republican senator jim demint on a conference call with political supporters, jim demint let the cat out of the bag on the strategy of health reform. >> if we're able to stop obama on this, it will be his waterloo. it will break him. >> that was not a substantive argument against health reform on its merits, it was the argument that if we can stop him, that will be harmful to the president, and so that, itself, is reason enough to stop it. mitch mcconnell, the top republican in the senate has reiterated multiple times what his number one goal is for republicans in washington now. >> over the next two years, he says, "the single most important thing we want to achieve is for president obama to be a one-term president." >> his number one goal is not jobs. his number one goal is not the economy. his number one goal is not

anything to do with any specific policy. the number one goal, the goal that is more important than any other goal is to hurt president obama, no matter the cost. admitting to this type of strategy shows that republicans have calculated that any policy passing in washington at all, anything, might reflect well on the president. might create political capital for the white house. they're determined to prevent that from happening under any circumstances. forget policy, forget what you're supposedly for, forget your own ideas that you're on the record supporting or even proposing. nothing can pass. no matter what the country needs, no matter what you believe the country needs. nothing can pass in washington because something passing, something getting done might have a side effect, a horrible side effect of making barack obama look not bad for a second. if you are a republican who cares about policy, this is sort of a moment of truth. republican senator dick lugar of indiana, the ranking senator on the relations committee cares about this whole inspecting the nuclear facilities thing a lot.

he cares about locking down loose nukes, and that whole smoking gun might be a mushroom cloud thing and he cares about it for real. and today senator lugar went after his own party in almost astonishing terms over their decision to block this. he said republican senator dick lugar says democrats should call his own party's bluff and bring the treaty up for a vote right now. he says members of his own party are shirking their duty to protect america's national security. "every senator has an obligation in the national security interest to take a stand, to do his or her duty." maybe people would prefer not to do his or her duty right now. joining us now is josh rogan. his article about senator lugar's discontent appeared today. thanks so much for coming on the show. >> great to be with you. >> how much turmoil is this causing among republicans? what was senator lugar's level

of frustration today? >> well, senator lugar is one of the few remaining elder statesmen left in the senate and as such he usually conducts himself with tact. today was a sharp divergence from that in what can only be seen as his deep frustration with the way his party and the leadership is handling this treaty. there's no doubt he's been frustrated for a long time, he decided to voice it today. the bottom line is that the administration, its supporters in the senate, including senator lugar are running out of options, running out of time. they know if this treaty is delayed until next year, that could be a nightmare scenario. and as such, he is sounding the alarm and it remains to be seen if that'll have an effect. >> what is senator lugar's explanation for why republican leadership don't want their members to vote on this? >> you know, in an unusual candid way he said very clearly that the leadership does not want to put the rank and file members in the position of

taking a tough vote if they don't absolutely have to. and they feel they don't absolutely have to. there's a concerted effort among the far-right groups in the party including the new lobbying group action for america and tea party groups including liberty central, which used to be run until recently by ginnie thomas. to demonize and attack republican senators, including john kyl who may be inclined to vote for the treaty. as the senators look for the 2012 runs in fear of primary challenges, they would rather not weigh in and give their opponents something to accuse them of endangering national security in the future. >> is it true that if this treaty is not ratified, we are in a situation where inspections that we would otherwise be doing of russian nuclear sites don't happen? right now inspectors we used to have there under the old trea y y aren't there.

>> we've had zero inspectors on the ground. there's a good faith debate over how important that is. but the bottom line is that some inspectors are better than none, and a lot of inspectors are better than some. and right now we have zero. as long as this goes on, the less we know. of course, there are other ways of monitoring russian nuclear activities, but this would be a great one. >> this was supposed to be the first item in a whole series of arms control efforts by the obama administration. and this is supposed to be the low-hanging fruit. if they can't get this one done, it spell spels doom for the rest of the administration going forward and takes a huge bite out of obama's promise to reset relations to russia and hurts obama's credibility in negotiating treaties around the world. >> which is sort of a key part of american power. josh rogin, writer for the daily web column. i really enjoy your work. thanks for being on the show. >> thank you. so tomorrow was supposed to be the big post election meeting between republicans and president obama. supposed to be. but now it's off. did you hear why it's off?

if you did, you probably heard a lie. you probably heard something that is not true. why you got lied to in the political press today next. stay with us. >> ( laughing ) >> yay! no! no! no! no! aah! >> that's your water? it's bad water. isn't that right? >> healthcare that goes everywhere.

still to come tonight, we just had breaking news on don't ask, don't tell i'll bring you in a moment. also, a whole lot of facial hair and its response in our office to the news today. plus, the fluorescent blue liquor. a totally dorked out moment of geek still to come.

here is the thing that actually happens. a little less than a year ago, back in january of this year, the president spoke and took

questions and engaged in what was by all accounts a very lively debate with republicans, with house republicans at the republican house conference in baltimore. remember this? the republicans invited the president to this event of theirs. the president accepted their invitation, the whole thing was negotiated and arranged in advance. during those negotiations about the appearance, right? the white house asked that the camera crews that were already scheduled to cover the president's remarks to the republican conference, those crews be allowed to stay for the question and answer session that would follow. the republicans talked it over, they agreed in advance, and then not at all surprisingly because it'd been negotiated in advance, the president did go to that event. and it made for amazing television. i remember this in particular because we launched into what was in effect special coverage here on msnbc because it was such an incredible moment in television to be able to have this unscripted confrontation between the parties like this. we couldn't help but spend most of prime time playing it and talking about it even if i

didn't have time to comb my hair that night apparently. even though all the terms of this event had been carefully negotiated by the white house and the republicans together. it wasn't what you usually see in politics. it made for some pretty intense and interesting tv. >> you have repeatedly said most recently at the state of the union that republicans have offered no ideas and no solutions in spite of the fact -- >> i don't think i said that. what i said was, it was in the context of health care. i -- i -- i remember that speech pretty well. it was only two days ago. i said i welcome ideas that you might provide. i didn't say you hadn't provided ideas. i said i welcome those ideas that you'll provide. >> multiple times from your administration, there have come statements that republicans have no ideas and no solutions. in spite of the fact that we've offered as demonstrated today positive solutions to all of the challenges we face, including

energy and the economy and health care. >> look, i have to say -- that on that -- let's just take the health care debate. and it's probably not constructive for us to try to debate a particular bill. this isn't the venue to do it. but if you say we can offer coverage for all americans and it won't cost a penny, that's just not true. you can't structure a bill where suddenly 30 million people have coverage and it costs nothing. it can't just be political assertions that aren't substantiated when it comes to the actually details of policy. because otherwise, we're going to be selling the american people a bill of goods. >> i remember that fox news channel that night got sort of uncomfortable and cut away from it in the middle. but pretty much everybody else

carried the whole thing live as it was happening. that was a thing that actually happened. that was real. that was real history. recent history from less than a year ago. here, for example, are some of the headlines that ran about that televised event. around the time that it happened. here's the "new york times." off script, obama and the gop vent politely. here's the washington post. obama, house gop hold a wide-open exchange. here's one from a website called politico widely read in the beltway. their headline was as cameras roll, obama faces down gop. that was a thing that actually happened. a real thing. today cable news all day was driven by a story from that same website, politico, that was purportedly about that same event but was completely made up. i don't mean to say it was completely made up by politico. quite transparentally it was made up by unnamed republican staffers who were trying to inject a new anti-obama story into the news today that didn't have any basis whatsoever. those were the folks who made it

up. it was politico who printed it. on the story on the delay of a new planned upcoming meeting between obama and republican leaders. politico reported the roots of the partisan standoff date back to january when president barack obama crashed a gop meeting in baltimore to deliver a humiliating rebuke of house republicans. obama's last-minute decision to address the house gop retreat and the one-sided televised presidential lecture many republicans decried as a political ambush has left a lingering distrust over obama invitations and a wariness about the request from the west wing aides tell politico. he has a ways to go to rebuild the trust said a top republican health staffer. the baltimore thing was unbelievable. there were house republicans who only knew obama was coming when they saw secret service guys scouting out the place. none of that is true. i mean -- i should be specific here. i should be precise.

i am sure some unnamed republican operative said exactly those words and that's why there are quotes in the article to justify those words being written. but just printing something somebody said is not itself -- what do you call it? news, right. it's publicity. and in this case, it's publicizing somebody's totally fake, untrue story about a knowable, reported on, real thing. i don't know why republicans want to delay their meeting that was planned for this week with president obama. i don't know why that is. i can say with confidence and so can you that it's not because the president needs to regain their trust that he lost when he crashed their retreat in january, when he ambushed them at the last minute with tv cameras they didn't know were coming. i know for sure that's not the reason the republicans canceled that meeting this week because that never happened. politico did make revisions to the piece over the course of the day. at one point today. check this out.

here's the full, original, totally made up quote from this unnamed republican staffer. says he has a ways to go to rebuild the trust, said a top republican hill staffer. the baltimore thing was unbelievable. there were house republicans who only knew he was coming when they saw secret service guys scouting out the place. that was a staffer being quoted by politico saying something that is provably, knowingly, definitely, factually, and the fact they invited him had been widely reported weeks in advance. josh marshall pointed out today the republicans even issued their own press release, announcing that the president had accepted their invitation more than two weeks before the event. so there is no way republicans as this unnamed republican source tells politico, there's no way republicans didn't know president obama was coming to their retreat until they saw the secret service at the event

itself. it's just not possible. so when the folks at politico today revised the article to make it less lie-ish after facing some criticism for this online today, they just dropped the second part of that quote. and they kept the first part. they kept the attack on the president that preceded the totally, provably, untrue thing. here's the revised version. "he has a ways to go to rebuild the trust," said a top republican staffer. the baltimore thing was unbelievable, end quote. they're now quoting the source that we know lied to them. a source who we know is telling lies for the purposes of political spin. and even as that has been proven by politico's own editing, they keep in the spin! they keep it in there. this is beltway journalism today. and this is what drove the beltway conversation today. republicans say president obama

ambushed them. republicans say obama broke their trust. republicans also say they're fiscally conservative. republicans say they're cracking down on our national debt by cutting earmarks. it is true that republicans have been saying all of these things. that is not the same thing as those things being true. in that spirit i hereby declare that if there is, in fact, a coup in madagascar today, it is to make me queen of madagascar. it is true that those things have all been said, i just said them. you can put them in quotes. it is true that someone has said those things that is not the same thing as those things being true. there is a difference and it is really, really, really important. without taking pills around the clock? try thermacare heatwraps, for all day relief without pills. i was surprised, thermacare worked all day. you feel the heat. and it relaxes and unlocks the muscle.

you've got to try it. [ man ] thermacare, more effective for back pain than the maximum dose of acetaminophen, the medicine in tylenol. go to thermacare.com today for a $3 off coupon. thermacare. no pills. no pain. just relief. [ exclaims ] ...with...stage presence. ♪ a new phone with dolby surround sound speakers. only from at&t. rethink possible.

but now, to get it really cooking, you need a little website development. some transparent reporting, so you know it's working. online ads and 1-on-1 marketing consultation. yellowbook's got all that. yellowbook360 has a whole spectrum of tools. the perfect recipe for success. visit yellowbook360.com and go beyond yellow.

tomorrow in d.c., nine senators, joe liberman, rowland burris, dianne feinstein, all planning on making a big splash in person statement on getting don't ask, don't tell repealed. what's important about that other than reminding us that roland burress is still a senator is that eight of nine of the senators are all democrats and the ninth is a liberman republicanocrat. and right now the republican plan is to filibuster the entire

defense authorization bill in order to prevent the military from repealing don't ask, don't tell after it releases its study on the issue. because senator john mccain has been the republican point person on trying to uphold the ban on gay people serving in the military because senator mccain is the one who says he will leave the filibuster of the entire funding of the military in order to stop the ban from being lifted. much of the political attention on this issue has been on him blocking repeal. the fact that his best campaign trail buddy and best friend forever joe liberman is one of the strongest voices for repeal is just one of the difficult nuances here. but on the democratic side, carl levin today indicated he might be willing to let the big pentagon bill pass without the repeal of don't ask, don't tell in it. karl levin says he wants to get rid of the policy, but here he is today saying "i'm trying to get both done. and if i can't get both done, i want to get one of them done." isn't that always the way?

i stand with you, unless and until it's hard to stand with you, then i stand wherever i find it easiest to stand. isn't that always the way? but, carl levin's brave gesture today toward giving up got some very strong pushback from a very strong place, and now there is some new news on this subject. a meeting at the white house late today between senior white house officials and advocates of ending don't ask, don't tell, result in ending a call, allegedly telling the senator he didn't want to drop repeal out of the pentagon bill and didn't want him giving up on getting the repeal passed before the end of the year. the center for american progress released a statement that the president and harry reid in the senate are both committed to moving forward on repeal by bringing the measure up for a vote in the lame duck session after the thanksgiving recess. now, this is the new news. senator levin responded himself just tonight, just recently

saying this, "i welcome senator reid's announcement he'll bring up the defense authorization act after thanksgiving. i'll work hard to overcome the filibuster so don't ask, don't tell is repealed and the ndaa which is critical to our troops is adopted. i have asked senator reid to make his motion to bring up the matter after my committee and following hearings i plan to hold on the matter, which should take place during the first few days of december." hearings on repealing don't ask, don't tell in the first few days of december. still time to vote on it. is there a strategy at work here? an opaque strategy, but still a strategy? is there any chance this happened? a man whose own career hangs in the balance joins us next. the ir concerning the medicare part d changes this year. so she went to her walgreens pharmacist for guidance

and a free personalized report that looks at her prescriptions and highlights easy ways for her to save. because norma prefers her painting to paperwork. see how much you can save. get your free report today. expertise -- find it everywhere there's a walgreens. get your free report today. and word is people really love got our claims service.ffice gecko: 'specially the auto repair xpress. repairs are fast and they're guaranteed for as long as you own your car. boss: hey, that's great! is this your phone? gecko: yeah, 'course. boss: but...where do you put...i mean how do you...carry... waitress: here you go. boss: thanks! gecko: no, no i got it, sir. anncr: geico. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more on car insurance.

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.

just as it looked like all of the news tea leaves were predicting a failure, news broke late today that president obama has reportedly stepped into the breech to keep alive the possibility of repeal this year.

joining us now is a man who has a great deal at stake in this issue, lieutenant colonel victor farenbach. he is in the process possibly of being discharged from the air force under the military's don't ask, don't tell policy. colonel, thanks for coming back on the show. >> thanks, rachel, it's great to be here again. >> we know now at least a proposed time line. this late-breaking news. senator mccain reportedly demanding hearings on the pentagon's study of repealing don't ask, don't tell. carl levin says he will get those hearings in the first couple of days of december and after that they plan to vote. are you encouraged by this? >> i'm very encouraged. i was at the senate today. there were several votes, we were able to sit in the senate gallery. we hope to hear some news by the time i leave thursday afternoon. and on the train ride up, i thought i don't have much to say on the show since nothing happened. but on the train ride, we got word that late this afternoon at a meeting at the white house with senator harry reid's senior staff and white house senior staff that senator reid was

committed to bringing up the ndaa in the lame duck session right after thanksgiving with don't ask, don't tell repeal. so that gave me great hope. and then i saw senator levin's statement. so these are some very, very good signs today and very good to hear that the white house and president obama's actively engaged this time. >> for as long as there has been a president obama, you and other advocates have really pushed the president to take a more active role in getting don't ask, don't tell repealed. it's a matter of whether or not he's doing enough to make that happen. do you feel like there is a -- you're seeing a change from the president. do you feel like he's living up to his promises more than he was before? >> very much so. the meeting today i understand is another meeting tomorrow. we heard some public statements recently and even last week i believe we heard secretary gates say not only is he for repeal, but wants them to do it before

the break, as well. i worry about the time line on these hearings because the report's due out december 1st. i wish they, as i understand it, the report is typed up and ready to go, release it now that can give people time to absorb it. and hopefully as soon as they get back from thanksgiving, we've got about a ten-day window to hold hearings right away and get us to a vote. >> do you think if there is a vote, there's a prospect it will pass? there are some senators who filibustered the spending bill before the elections in part because of don't ask, don't tell even though they'd been at least flexible on the issue before. do you think it could pass? >> i hope so. you know, one of the most disappointing things that happened last time, not just the filibuster itself. that was very, very disappointing, was there was about 10 or 12 senators are committed to repeal. they know it's the right thing to do. one of those is senator voinovich from my own state of ohio. i'd hoped to meet with him just to tell him my personal story. others, snowe and collins from maine, senator brown from

massachusetts, senator gregg, new hampshire, and lugar, indiana. all republicans voiced they would support repeal. some of them did have concerns, they wanted to wait until the study was released on december 1st. well, we see the study is going to have very good news in it. so hopefully we can get their votes this time around. one of the most disheartening things was that they cited, you know, politics and gamesmanship and procedures when they made their vote. i would like to talk with them. hopefully we can have some talks tomorrow just to tell my story. this isn't about procedure and politics. this is my life. this is 65,000 others who are serving right now in afghanistan and iraq all over the world in silence and in fear. they deserve more than that, more than just quoting politics and procedure. they deserve to serve in dignity and integrity. >> i know you're heading back to washington tomorrow, and i think you deserve those senators being willing to speak to you. >> i hope so. >> lieutenant colonel victor

fehrenbach, thank you, my friend. still on the last word with lawrence o'donnell, lawrence will be interviewing lisa murkowski. her first live interview since her upset victory in the alaskan senate race. that's going to be awesome, i highly recommend you watch it. coming up on this show, moment of geek involving caffeine testing and a whole lot of weird liquor. ♪ [ smack! ] [ smack! smack! smack! ] [ male announcer ] your favorite foods fighting you? fight back fast with tums. calcium rich tums goes to work in seconds. nothing works faster.

♪ tum ta tum tum tums oh. about what? uh, they don't really think you're an exchange student. what? they think you're a businessman, using our house to meet new clients in china. for reals, player? [ woman speaks chinese ] they overheard a phone call. [ speaks chinese ] something about shipping with fedex to shanghai. and then you opened a bottle of champagne. that was for a science project. [ man and woman speaking chinese ] i'm late for...soccer... rehearsal. [ man speaks chinese ] you and i are cool? i'll be home by curfew. [ male announcer ] we understand.® you need a partner who can help you go global. fedex.

are you shaving your beard? >> there's so much wrong with that idea. >> today was a very weird day at work for an explicitly political reason. i'll explain when we come back. ] what if clean sheet day became clean sheet week? new ultra downy april fresh has scent pearls that give you a whole week of freshness with just one wash. ♪ and from day 1 to day 7, ultra downy april fresh lets you climb in to more freshness

than this other fabric softener. so why settle? get more freshness.

there are apparently only two things in modern america that hpen in 56-year intervals. the giants win the world series, and, someone wins a seat in the united states senate as a write-in candidate. it was 1954 when the giants last won the series, but they won it again this year, and it was 1954 when strom thurmond mounted the last successful write-in candidacy for the senate before lisa murkowski did it today. lisa murkowski is the apparent winner in her write-in bid to hold on to the senate seat after she lost the primary to joe miller. murkowski is expected to declare victory any moment now. and also expected to be a guest on "the last word" with lawrence o'donnell immediately following this show. very much looking forward to that.

when we last heard from joe miller, he was demanding a hand recount of all the ballots. mr. miller is at this hour still not conceding. should although be noted that the election results won't be officially certified by the state until the monday after thanksgiving at the earliest. still, though, the "ap's" called it, nbc news says murkowski is the apparent winner. huge news for us here at this show because of one specific thing. because of this. this is bill wolf's beard. i can't tell you what a good time we had taking this show to anchorage before the election to cover this senate race. bill wolf, our executive producer did not shave while we were on the road on that trip, and he vowed when we returned that in solidarity with the people of alaska he would not shave until the people of alaska had a new u.s. senator until this race was over. well, now the senate race is finally ending. and that's a big deal around here.

>> says she's the apparent winner. >> i love nbc! >> "ap" called it, we don't count on "ap" for senate races, we only count on them for house races. but do you think that's good enough? >> apparently i can shave my beard? and then my face will become a parrot again. >> are you going to do it right now? >> we've got to do it now. i've got a date tonight with my wife. >> nbc has called lisa murkowski as the apparent winner. >> oh, mustache is apparent. mustache is the caveat. >> it's an asterisk on your face. >> it's an asterisk, i'll say. >> all right. excellent. >> okay. thanks, appreciate it.

appreciate all the support. >> how you doing? how's it going? how are you? >> how you been today? >> i'm bill. very nice to meet you, how are you? >> good. >> i've got a terrible-looking beard i need to -- i'm very excited about this. i've been waiting a long time. three weeks. they had this crazy race for the senate in alaska. and so i kept on the beard until it was settled, and it's almost settled. although, not quite. >> yeah, yeah. >> oh, look at this. this is already the best day of my life. anything for my job. it's all in the name of journalism. cold towel. >> cold towel. >> oh, dear god. you're not kidding. >> okay.

>> you have done it. thank you so much. that's horrible. >> this is your fault. >> oh, my god, you look like such a used car dealer. >> i'd like to think of myself as a stereosalesman. >> actually, you know what? the guy who you hired to clean the ceiling of your van. i can't hear your voice. i can't even take you. >> you don't see that every day. >> i know -- i know that i asked bill to keep on the mustache because lisa murkowski is only an apparent winner, it's an asterisk. none of us in good conscience could let him go out in the world let alone on a date with

his wife looking like ron burgundy. so after about e-mails and pictures, bill went ahead and shaved the mustache off too. congratulations to senator murkowski on her historic win and on performing the minor miracle of causing minor miracle of causing bill wolf to lose five pounds in four minutes. helps us reduce sodium, but not flavor. so do a few lifts. campbell's.® it's amazing what soup can do.™

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.

today the fda put out a warns to four companies, they put out a warning that really alcoholic and really caffeinated drinks like these ones are not

safe. the fda stopped short of declaring these drinks illegal. but by telling the company their product is unsafe, they're essentially giving the companies about 15 days to get the drinks off the shelves before the feds start proceedings to force them to take these drinks off the shelves. what the fda sees as the problem is the mix of a lot of booze and a lot of caffeine. drinking a can of four loko, which is the top selling one of these drinks is drinking the same amount of alcohol roughly as an entire bottle of wine. both wine and four loko are 12% alcohol. a bottle of wine is 25 ounces. one can of four loko is 23.5 ounces. there's a bunch of caffeine. now, since caffeine is

considered safe and alcohol is also considered safe. i mean, it's regulated, sure, but generally safe. why is it that the combination of the two things, caffeine and alcohol in one drink, that that combination is considered unsafe? the argument is, when you drink alcohol and caffeine together. the caffeine stops your brain from noticing from how hammered you're getting. your natural inclination to slow down and/or pass out as your alcohol intake goes up, gets counteracted by the caffeine buzz. then the caffeine buzz wears off before the alcohol does, and all of a sudden you're this guy. so that's my layman's interpretation of the fda sending a warning on these other caffeinated booze drinks. that's today's news. here's today's moment of geek question, though. haven't we been drinking

caffeinated booze forever? i'm from san francisco, home of the irish coffee. remember when we had the king of all bartenders making irish coffee? coffee and whiskey. nobody calls that blackout in a heavy footed glass mug the way they call this blackout in a can. that said, people don't drink 24 ounces of irish coffee that contain seven shots of whiskey, which is what you would be talking about in terms of equivalent dosages. it did get us thinking about booze and caffeine. we're thinking about the combination of them. these little strips are called d-caf strips. they used to be marketed so you

could check to see whether that waiter who assured you it was d-caf was telling you the truth. these strips are not made any more, we managed to score some because that's the kind of thing we're really good at. here's how it goes. you take one of these little strips. here's the four loko, it works like a little pregnancy test. it doesn't give you an exact measurement, but it tells you whether or not there's caffeine in it. this shows you this is definitely pregnant with caffeine. we also get a positive caffeine reading on the irish coffee. so a bunch of stuff that is marketed as vaguely coffee like or caffeinated that is also booze produces much more interesting results than these things do when you use these caffeine strips. for example, kaluha, if you test

kaluha, you find out that kaluha reads no caffeine at all. tia maria actually does turn up a little bit of caffeine. bailey's, which rumor has it, has some caffeine in it. we got a negative caffeine reading. on sort of the adopted drink of one of the producers on this show, whose name shall remain nameless, coffee flavored tequila, we measured some degree of shame but no caffeine. astor brown coffee la core, no caffeine reading. vincent van gogh, double espresso, double caffeine vodka, they market it as being caffeinated.

it pops as having caffeine in it. maynard's drink so much coffee brandy, it averages out to $10 per person per year spent on allen's coffee brandy and this is not that expensive. people in maine drink a lot of this. it's hard to get outside of maine. this registers mildly as having some caffeine in it. what's the takeaway here? there's other stuff out there that americans drink that combines caffeine and alcohol. the problem is not some inher t inherently deadly chemical mix of two otherwise benign things. the problem is deliberately combining and packaging and sizing stuff in a way that ensures when you use this product as directed in what is marketed as a single serving, you are more than likely going to be drunk to the point of illness. also the point is, that i really wish someone was still selling these caffeine test strips.