good morning from new york, i'm chris hayes. forecasters issued a strong warning about the chance of tornadoes today across the middle of the country from texas to minnesota, only the second time in u.s. history the storm prediction center issued a high-risk warning more than 24 hours in advance. and the food and drug administration says yellow fin tuna has been linked to a salmonella outbreak that has struck more than 100 people in 20 states and washington, d.c. we're going to talk more about food safety today and this week's developments in the trayvon martin shooting, but i want to start off with my story of the week. the 2012 republican presidential nominee. this week rick santorum publicly acknowledged what pretty much everyone who was watching the race already knew, the primary's over. there is no way to game out a scenario in which mitt romney doesn't become the republican nominee. and while newt gingrich probably clings to life and ron paul soldiers on, we are now in squarely act two of the campaign the general election.

there's a tried and true trajectory for presidential candidates as they enter act two, the legendary pivot where they try to wriggle from the ideological positions in the primary in order to appeal to the base of the party. often it's done retorically, a softening of tones but sometimes it's done substancively, an actual change of positions when president obama opposed immunity for the telecon companies that partied in wiretapping and then signed off on the immunity deal that was struck by president bush and the congressional democrats. mitt romney has been on both sides of more or less every issue. he already has a well-earned reputation as a habitual position changer, a finger to the wind politician who alters his pronouncements based on what's politically expedient, he would seem to have less flexibility to do that now as he

enters the general election. it is possible that ironically romney's now legendary reputation for insincerity will actually help him in the general. if voters come to believe that all the terrible positions he's previously held were just insincere panderings, they may think that he'll jettison the nastiness and govern as the genuine moderate he actually is. when i was interviewed this week he made precisely this point. >> he was governor of massachusetts, after all, where he's still fairly popular. he did institute universal health care, he's not rick santorum or gingrich or ron paul on the economy, you know, with all that those names imply. can democrats get really scared of romney the way they might have with the others and if he's elected might he actually turn out to be a bloomberg pragmatist? >> i think the answer is no. i think the analysis is flat wrong. mitt romney is a product of the

coalition, moneyed interest and constituencies that make up the institution of the republican party and he will per sue the policies that they demand. lockstep discipline and ideological extremism are hallmarks of the contemporary republican party that he's won the honor of hem in helping, tog the litany of genuinely extreme or horrible substancive policy commitments romney has made the last year while running for the nomination. >> if they are 45 years old and they show up i want insurance because i've got heart disease, hey, guys, we can't play the game like that. if congress were to pass the dream act, would i veto it, yes. first of all, we'd have a fence. don't ask, don't tell should have been kept in place until conflict was over. i do not believe in new laws restricting gun ownership and gun use. we don't know what's causing

climate change on this planet. i will defend the defense of marriage act. i will fight for an amendment to our constitution that defines marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman. i fought for abstinence education in our schools. planned parenthood we're going to get rid of that. >> he also supported after appearing to oppose the blount amendment which would have allowed an employer to deny birth control. and he's on record wanting to eliminate title ten a family planning provision that provides contraceptives to low income women instituted under richard nixon, and almost zero out all federal nondiscretionary funding by 2050. he we reject a deficit deal that features $10 of spending cuts to every new $1 of revenue. the experienced watcher will

note that many are new or are repudiations of previous positions, but if you are looking at the real mitt romney, focus on what he's saying now, because the position the president pursues are far less a product of the person than they are of the party and the institutional structure that produces the nominee. remember when george w. bush said this during the 2000 campaign? >> our nation stands alone right now in the world in terms of power and that's why we've got to be humble. >> well, whatever he said, the fact was that the foreign policy elite of the republican party was dominated by neo-conservatives and so they were the ones running the show when bush accepted the presidency, humility be damned. we saw where that led. or remember that barack obama spent almost the entirety of the primary campaign criticizing the health insurance mandate and using it as a chief point of contrast between himself and hillary clinton. >> she believes that the only way to get universal health care is to force you to buy insurance. even if it's not yet affordable.

now, i believe that the problem is not the people don't want health insurance, it's that they can't afford it. so, i want to lower cost, get people subsidies. i think people will buy insurance. >> but the health care policy elite of the democratic party had already settled on a framework. partly based on the law in massachusetts that included a mandate. that cake had already been baked and after becoming president barack obama served it up. that's just the way these things work. the president is a product of the party that nominates him and the party that will nominate mitt romney is unwaiveringly committed to a singular regressive agenda. no post election private reversion to the moderate mean will change that. as we enter the era of the pivot, don't listen to what mitt romney says, look at what his party is doing. right now i'm joined by msnbc political analyst mike

eric sidyson, huffington post senior political reporter and politics managing editor, amanda che cherkel, "washington times" reporter kerry pickett and mark bitman coming back, author of a number of books, "food matters," "a guide to conscious eating" and "how to cook everything" and he's also a food and opinion columnist for "the new york times." okay, my thesis, that basically this pivot is -- that mitt romney is going to be a product of the moderate republican party in all of its manifest glory. and any kind of -- any sort of rhetorical backsliding or softening he makes ultimately is not what he will govern as, as someone who is i think more intimately versed with the conservative movement of the republican party, kerry, what do you think about it? >> firms of all, any candidate that, of course, works in the primary is always going to work towards the base and then, of course, this is just general

politics, starts going toward the general election. they're going to end up going towards the middle because they, of course, want to go towards voters all over the country. but that being said, though, while many people within the conservative base are going to be concerned that, oh, gee, he might be pivoting towards the left and so on and so forth. something to be remembered here, with george w. bush when immigration reform was up on capitol hill, what happened? you had a number of conservatives who said, huh-uh, we don't want that and they made sure that that bill didn't happen. harriet miers, when her nomination was beginning to stir up on capitol hill, conservatives came up and said we don't want her, and she didn't happen. look, a number of conservatives now who may not have been happy with mitt romney are counting on congress as well as conservative activists who could very well keeping it in check.

>> we are hearing the same message to the upset roiled conservative base, we're saying the same thing, chill out, it's going to be good, you'll get essentially a veto over what the coalition's policies will be, so don't freak out. i think that has been borne out broadly by the way we've seen policy pursued in previous administrations and i think that a p aapplies, it's the geographical interests that produces what the policy emanations are much more than a single cyindividual. >> who does mitt romney surround himself with, marco rubio and paul ryan, notables in the tea party. theems a these are pro-corporate republicans and it's the social conservatives in congress try to push the conservative measures on gay rights and abortion rights, mitt romney, they may not be his priority, but i don't

see him stopping. i think he will surround himself with the people to set the agenda much like in the bush administration. >> i think -- >> please. >> on the other side it's a cautionary tale against democratic fluff, we're in the face of, oh, man, we've got mitt romney, great, our guy is great. he'll do well. the cautionary tale is that mitt romney appears to be more reasonable than he is. he appears to be more willing to be conciliatory than he is, because as our distinguished colleagues have indicated, the willingness to govern and the mandate to operate within a narrowly prescribed framework of republican ideology will make sure he doesn't do the bipartisan stuff, he's learned from obama that it doesn't work. >> the people around the obama campaign are really worried about. they are worried about precisely this bizarre, ironic twist in which his insin sierrety becomes a kind of plus for him in the

general election because people generally think he was pandering, he doesn't mean it. he doesn't mean it on immigration. he doesn't mean it about the stance he's taken towards iran, we know he had to get the points. and that could be end up being exculpatory for him in the primary, more so than in the generally. [ male announcer ] this is lawn ranger -- eden prairie, minnesota. in here, the landscaping business grows with snow. to keep big winter jobs on track, at&t provided a mobile solution that lets everyone from field workers to accounting, initiate, bill, and track work in real time. you can't live under a dome in minnesota, that's why there's guys like me. [ male announcer ] it's a network of possibilities -- helping you do what you do... even better. ♪ that's good morning, veggie style. hmmm.

for half the calories plus veggie nutrition. could've had a v8. i would not say i'm into it, but let's see where this goes. [ buzzer ] do you like to travel? i'm all about "free travel," babe. that's what i do. [ buzzer ] balance transfers -- you up for that? well... too soon? [ female announcer ] fortunately, there's an easier way with creditcards.com. compare hundreds of cards from every major bank, and find the one that's right for you. creditcards.com. it's simple. search, compare, and apply. blast of cold feels nice. why don't you use bengay zero degrees? it's the one you store in the freezer. same medicated pain reliever used by physical therapists. that's chilly. [ male announcer ] new bengay zero degrees. freeze and move on. the chevy cruze eco also offers 42 mpg on the highway. actually, it's cruze e-co, not ec-o. just like e-ither. or ei-ther. or e-conomical.

[ chuckling ] or ec-onomical. pa-tato, po-tato, huh? actually, it's to-mato, ta-mato. oh, that's right. [ laughs ] [ car door shuts ] [ male announcer ] visit your local chevy dealer today. now very well qualified lessees can get a 2012 chevy cruze ls for around $159 per month. e.p.a. estimated 36 miles per gallon highway.

let me note something which hopefully will not be lost upon the people who have come into this country legally and illegally as immigrants, and that is, this has always been a priority for the president, he chooses to do nothing about. all right? he campaigned saying he was going to reform immigration laws and simplify and protect the border and so forward and then

he had two years with a democrat house and democrat senate and a supermajority in each house, and he did nothing. so, let the immigrant community not forget that while he uses this as a political -- as a poli political weapon, he does not take responsibility for fixing the problems we have. >> that's mitt romney attacking the president on immigration. i thought it was a note worthy sound bite because it does represent a recasting of his immigration rhetoric. his immigration rhetoric was extremely, extremely hard-edged, right? he delighted in bludgeoning rick perry for allowing illegals to get a state subsidy for college education. he got to the right of his primary opponents on it. he's polling worse than mccain finished among latinos and here he is essentially trying to at least recast or sort of do a little burden shifting on immigration that that represents -- represents a sort

of general election pivot. my question to you, kerry, is, i imagine you call yourself a conservative, right? when you think of yourself as a conservative, do you, yourself, feel this way for romney when you think about your priorities, or do you feel the personal intutive sense that he understands you and will pursue your objectives? because barack obama was amazing about making liberals feel that way, that was part of the phenomenon, an all visceral connection that inside his minds his thoughts mirror what's inside my own mind. >> i'm not looking for mitt romney to somehow read my mind. i think the most important thing here as far as latinos are concerned, and this is true for boat democra both democrats and republicans. it's not the immigration issue at the top of the latinos' list, it is economy and jobs. i think it is a complete mistake for people to just take latinos as a group and say, immigration,

that's the big issue. and for the record here, i am half puerto rican, and one of the things that my mother who happens to be my puerto rican side, it gets her so incensed when she hears why is it they always bring up immigration? and that's a big mistake that both democrats and republicans always tend to make on this issue. >> i think that's an interesting point. let me say this, i think you are absolutely right, and this is borne in the data we have in terms of polling, economy and jobs are highest among latinos and latinos have lost the most amount of wealth in the great recession and its aftermath particularly in housing wealth. what i do think is true, however, before you can get to those issues, there has to be, again, this is visceral politics, intuitive sense that the one party isn't fundamentally tied to a subsection of people that hate you. no, i'm serious. and i think that that actually -- we saw what happened in 2008, which is that john mccain who, remember, had co-sponsored comprehensive

immigration reform, was successful successfully yoked to rush limbaugh, and people understand whether an institution wants them. >> it's a folklore. it's not just about policy, it's the visceral thing you are speaking about, the psychology of appeal and the folklore of identification. do you absolutely resonate with the world view? but let's flip it. what do you have to do to mess up with latinos so that only 30% are supporting you? given what you just said they are concerned about all the stuff that republicans are concerned about, then how come they ability polli inain't poll first of all, you have to be here to identify with anybody. and partly what you are also getting, you know, is first, second, third generation, hey, don't associate us with those issues, with those latinos who don't speak english and so forth and the squabbles of the ethnic group are coming to bear. but i would not overplay that

and suggest that latinos are not deeply invested in issues of immigration reform. because the stereotypes about latinos gets spread broadly and they don't get quarantined to those who are literally, quote, illegals. >> but do you know what, though, even after 1986 when there was that amnesty-like bill that -- >> signed by -- >> yes. absolutely. but, still, even after that happened, republicans still only got about, say, 30% of the latino vote. and this was true, not just for presidential candidates as far as republicans were concerned, but all across the board. >> right. >> and people are -- i'll even bring up the liberals' favorite candidate, sharron angle, seriously, i'll do that -- >> i never heard of that. >> and here's the thing. people say the reason she lost was because of the whole immigration issue. well, actually, she got about 27% to 30% of the latino vote out in nevada, okay?

and, in fact, brian sandoval who actually won who happens to be hispanic himself, he got, i think, about 45% of latino vote and, of course, you have to put in the fact that obviously he's latino himself. >> right. >> that's something to really think about. >> really quickly, i want you to answer the original question. do you feel viscerally connected to mitt romney, yes or no? >> i feel more or less connected to conservative policies. i wouldn't necessarily say that i feel connected to any candidate -- >> sprindividual? >> yes. >> that's an enlightened position. >> isn't it true that whoever -- just in the way that obama has pretty much disappointed most liberals, most committed liberals, you can expect that mitt romney is going to pretty much disappoint the real right wing of the republican party? >> i don't -- "a," first of all, i think the polling shows that the approval rating for the president among self-professed

liberals -- >> approval rating means we'd rather have -- >> that becomes a very complicated conversation because i do think that there can be a little bit of a perceptual gap between people like yourself and i who are in the media for the living and broadly those who are liberals and are disappointed. i don't think mitt romney will disappointment them as much although the base will be disappointed because of the nature of american politics. but if you took an amoral robot who landed on the planet and said pursue an efficient course of guiding the modern republican party, that will be what mitt romney is and that will be pretty hard right. we got provocative feedback on beef and pink slime from last week so we'll pick up on this. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 like a lot of things, the market has changed, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and your plans probably have too. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 so those old investments might not sound so hot today. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 at charles schwab, we'll give you personalized recommendations tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 on how to reinvest that old 401(k)

tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and help you handle all of the rollover details. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 so talk to chuck tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and bring your old 401(k) into the 21st century. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 my high school science teacher made me what i am today. our science teacher helped us build it. ♪ now i'm a geologist at chevron, and i get to help science teachers. it has four servo motors and a wireless microcontroller. over the last three years we've put nearly 100 million dollars into american education. that's thousands of kids learning to love science. ♪ isn't that cool? and that's pretty cool. ♪

♪ listen people listen to what i got to say ♪ a vocal introduction on this saturday morning.

all right, last weekend we had one of our panelists mark bitman on our show to talk about pink slime, the substance that the meat industry calls lean, finalfinely textured beef. this is t-shirt in case you wanted to know what the message was. so, afterwards mark wrote a follow-up to the discussion which i loved on "the new york times" blog and we wanted to invite him back not only to continue the conversation but because a lot has happened this week in the world of food and the politics of food. on toils the governor of iowa spoke at a rally at iowa state university in support of lean finely textured beef, while a competing rally was held outside by family farm activists and consumers. the fda made an attempt to regulate the widespread use of antibiotics in animals we eat saying, quote, under this new voluntary initiative certain antibiotics would not be used for so-called production purposes such as to enhance growth or improve feed efficiency in an animal. these antibiotics would still be

available to prevent control and treat illnesses in animals under the supervision of a veterinarian. in other words, the same way that humans need a prescription for antibiotics, so do animals. did you catch the word voluntary, that's led the fda opponents to say it's not enough to solve the problem of antibiotic drug resistance in humans. mark, let's start with things you were unable to say last time, not brief for television, but brief given your life's work at this point and you have seven minutes, go. i want to play this clip from a rally on tuesday which is because the way this lean finely textured beef pink slime issue is playing out particularly in farms state is the jobs argument, right? we've seen one of the companies declare bankruptcy. another one bpi, it had to basically shut down, cease production at five of their six plants, something like that, three of six plants, and here's

iowa governor terry brandstand making the jobs argument. check it out. >> our governors are working day in and day out to try to create new jobs and to get -- make sure that we have great facilities and that that's why it's so disconcerting when we see over 220 jobs lost in waterloo, iowa, and jobs lost in texas and in -- on -- in texas and in kansas as well because of unfounded information being circulated in the media. we're here to strongly push back against this poisonous tone that is so detrimental to the beef industry and to jobs that support it. >> clearly one of the most electrifying speakers we have. >> governor life. >> also the t-shirt over the button-down shirt. >> pretty good. pretty good. >> this puts the expression

chaps your hide this jobs argument. >> the whole jobs thing is -- whenever something that happens that closes an industry or where people get laid off in an industry that republicans support, it's suddenly a job issue. is it a job issue in general? no, it's not a job issue in general. of course, as things transition, as the will changes, people are going to lose jobs. do you support training of workers? do you support a safety net so that workers can continue to have decent lives if they get laid off? no, republicans don't support those things. they just want to kvetch about job loss when it suits them. it's true that people lost jobs at bpi and that is unfortunate. but where they are going to go? i mean, this is -- it's like saying, well, if we reduce -- if we all start eating better and, therefore, we're somewhat healthier and therefore we don't need as many health care workers, that's a bad thing because we've lost health care jobs, you know? it's like i know we'll get into this later it's, like, if we start having stricter gun control laws and we make fewer

guns, then gun producers lose jobs, that's unfortunate, but it's for the greater good. >> let me take the other side of the argument, because that mirrors exactly the argument that gets made about trade, right? so when you say -- that's exactly the argument made about trade, you know, jobs leave ohio because we're going to outsource manufacturing to china and the sort of economists will say and people that support the free trade deal, look, we can't just, you know, keep these jobs here because inefficient, they'll find work somewhere else. and my response is that may be true from a macro perspective but if you are the person representing the district in ohio that lost the factory, you'll fight to keep it. that's what political representation is about. is it so wrong for governor branstad to fight for the jobs? >> you can't take him seriously. of course, he should want jobs for his state. but the other question is, there is going to be unemployment. full employment as well, 7%?

what do we call -- >> 4.5%. >> that's what we call full employment that means already, what, 15 million people are unemployed or something like that? what do we do about that? we don't care about those people because we just accept that? the question is what does it mean that people don't have jobs. why don't they have jobs? what do they do when they don't have jobs? >> i want to talk more about that and also about the new antibiotic ruling, it's fascinating, i spent a little bit of time about reading about multiple drug resistant viruses, you get superterrified. >> you get scared. >> if that's not a tease, i don't know what is. chinese takeout taco truck free range chicken pancake stack baked alaska 5% cash back. right now, get 5% cash back at restaurants. it pays to discover.

water was meant to be perfect. crisp, clear, untouched. that's why there's brita, to make the water we drink, taste a little more, perfect. reduce lead and other impurities with the advanced filtration system of brita. on our car insurance. great! at progressive, you can compare rates side by side, so you get the same coverage, often for less. wow! that is huge! [ disco playing ] and this is to remind you that you could save hundreds! yeah, that'll certainly stick with me. we'll take it. go, big money! i mean, go. it's your break, honey. same coverage, more savings.

now, that's progressive. call or click today. let's see what you got. rv -- covered. why would you pay for a hotel? i never do. motorcycles -- check. atv. i ride those. do you? no. boat. house. hello, dear. hello. hello. oh! check it -- [ loud r&b on car radio ] i'm going on break! the more you bundle, the more you save. now, that's progressive.

all right. it's 8:30 on a saturday morning, let's talk antibiotics. i just misspoke and to all the people on twitter, you are correct, and obviously this is the case, antibiotics do not work against viruses. if they did, the world would be a very different place. they work against bacteria, those are two distinct entities,

i apologize speaking just there. why antibiotics are really important. he's a stunning statistic about the use of antibiotics in this country. we have a little pie chart. almost 80% go into animals, so when you think about how often -- and humans use antibiotics all the time and, in fact, there has been tremendous efforts undertaken in hospitals and throughout the health care delivery system to reduce the use to not oversubscribe and the reason is there's a public health danger which is the more antibiotics you use and if you use them too liberally and not enough judiciousness you create resistant trains of bacteria and we don't have the antibiotics to fight them. meanwhile this effort is undergoing in humans the industrial food system is using 80% of all antibiotics in animals and the fda has proposed new regulations to try to curtail that. why are so many antibiotics being used in industrial farming? >> let's just back up one second. >> please. >> and say what is the impact of all of these -- i think it's 30

million pounds of antibiotics a year fed to animals. what's the impact of that is that it gets into the food supply, so even if you are successful in reducing the number of antibiotics prescribed to humans, we're getting antibiotics anyway. there's antibiotics in our food. >> a little penicillin in your t-bones. >> less likely to get strep throat. what's the impact? why are antibiotics used that was your question. they are used because animals are kept in conditions that make them sick, so use them effectively prophylactically. if you crowd animals together, if you feed them foods that they're not meant to eat. cattle are meant to eat grass, but all industrially raised cow are fed grain. it messes with their stomachs. this enables the presence of e. coli and salmonella in their stomachs and in other parts of the animal and the antibiotics help to keep this under control,

not entirely successfully as we've seen from all the outbreaks of salmonella and e. coli. >> so it doesn't make a difference -- would it make a big difference if you just treated animals better? >> it would make a big difference if you treated animals better, but the fact is that in much of europe, they even do -- not that i'm a fan of this but they even do industrial agriculture without use of antibiotics, it can be done. it's not as easy and it's not as efficient. >> my understanding is denmark is the leading pork exporter in the world if i'm not mistaken and they do it -- or high up in pork exporting and they don't use antibiotics. >> they don't use it prophylact prophylactically, they use them prescribetively. the fda ruling is a step in the right direction. give them credit where it's due. the key is voluntary as you said and the problem is it doesn't address disease prevention. you can't use antibiotics -- we don't want you using -- we would prefer if you didn't use

antibiotics for growth promotion. doesn't say anything about not using antibiotic for disease prevention. >> let me briefly explain this so we can get into the weeds of the fda ruling, but it is important. farmers discover if you give antibiotics to cow one and not on to cow two, cow one gets bigger. it fastens them up quicker and makes them yield more meat, et cetera. the fda is saying that the pharmaceutical companies, which, again, pharmaceutical companies make a lot of money off this industry, obviously 80% of the antibiotics, pharmaceutical companies voluntarily should label things as needing a prescription if used for growth purposes, right? but if it's disease prevention, you still can just use them. so, the fear is the industrial farms can just switch the label under which they are using the antibiotics, right? >> some people are arguing that the pharmaceutical companies may do the right thing and veterinarians may exercise more control. i don't know if i buy that. the thing is, why does the animal get bigger when you --

antibiotics are not growth horm h hormones, they get bigger because they are less sick. they grow larger because we are healthier and live longer. >> kerry? >> i want to go back to the other chart you were talking about, pink slime, and you were talking about, well, if people lose jobs for the greater good, so be it. let's point out here the pink slime you like to talk about, you know, you have to remember that the -- that the schools stopped using it, and they went back to ground beef instead, which is more expensive, which means that if the schools are going to be paying more for a different type of beef, then that means that the precious school programs like the music programs, perhaps a teacher cannot be hired for that matter. that means that -- yeah, that means that the schools are going to buy more expensive beef as opposed to the -- the pink slime that everyone right now is calling such a horror. >> they didn't stop using it,

because it's in ground beef, it can be up to 15% ground beef. it's in ground beef. they are not knoare not using i 80 cents a pound. >> it's 27 cents. that's a thing to consider because a number of schools stop using this particular type of, like, finely text turned beef a number of these plants ended up shutting down because of it. >> wait, wendy's doesn't use pink slime either and mcdonald's decided to stop using pink slime also. and it's true that usda said to the schools you don't have to buy pink slime. >> because of bad publicity. >> people don't want it! people don't want it! >> because of the falsehood, because of the -- >> what's false about it? there's ammonia -- the stuff is mechanically extracted and there's ammonia, you want to eat meat with ammonia in it? >> you had a disgruntled -- >> do you want to eat meat with ammonia?

>> you had a disgruntled fda fellow in 2002 who had a line in a report that was pulled out -- >> he was a microbiologist he should be said. >> he was a disgruntled usda fellow -- >> that's an interesting adjective. they were processing met with ammonia in it. >> it was pulled out from a 2002 "new york times" article and all of a sudden it was blown up into a big publicity issue and then i think it was, like, a chef in 2011 that ended up saying -- >> jamie oliver. >> jamie oliver. >> it's true that this was -- if you are saying the point that this has been there all along and now people know about it and they made a big deal about it and they ate it all along and retroactively decided they didn't want it, but to answer mark's point, yeah, why not know what's in there? >> they've been using it since, like, the 1990s, okay? >> but people didn't know it. >> and there's mercury and lead in a lot of things and people didn't know about it. >> how retrogressive is that, we're going to deny knowledge?

we're going to actually repudiate -- we're going to actually repudiate what we know? if we found out the stuff we've always been eating there but we can account for other diseases and products and other ways we've been disadvantaged by it, how about that? >> how is it harming people? one of the problems with pink slime it was sold as actually itself if you mixed it with a beef would make the surrounding beef safer because it had gone through this treatment process. that was the part of the marketing of it, right? it self killed the bacteria in the surrounding ground beef because it itself had gone three the ammonia process, and later cases found that not to be the case. there was a problem in so far people thought it could work in a prophylactic way and that proved not to be borne out, i think it was from the same "new york times" article in 2009 there was eight times as much salmonella found in beef that had it as beef that didn't. more on this right after we take a quick break. everything that i've gained in life has been because of the teachers and the education that i had.

they're just part of who i am. she convinced me that there was no limit to what we could learn. i don't think i'd be here today had i not had a wonderful science teacher. a teacher can make a huge difference in a child's life. he would never give up on any of us. thank you dr. newfield. you had a big impact on me. [♪...] >> i wish my patients could see what i see.

that over time, having high cholesterol, plus diabetes or high blood pressure or family history of early heart disease, can put them at increased risk for plaque buildup. and they'd see that it's more important to get their cholesterol where their doctor wants. and why for these patients, when diet and exercise alone aren't enough, i prescribe crestor. adding crestor lowers bad cholesterol by up to 52%. and is also proven to slow plaque buildup. >> announcer: crestor is not right for everyone. like people with liver disease or women who are nursing, pregnant or may become pregnant. simple blood tests will check for liver problems. tell your doctor about other medicines you're taking or if you have muscle pain or weakness. that could be a sign of a rare but serious side effect. >> is your cholesterol where your doctor wants? ask your doctor if crestor is right for you. >> announcer: if you can't afford your medication, astra zeneca may be able to help. [ male announcer ] this is genco services -- mcallen, texas. in here, heavy rental equipment in the middle of nowhere, is always headed somewhere.

to give it a sense of direction, at&t created a mobile asset solution to protect and track everything. so every piece of equipment knows where it is, how it's doing or where it goes next. ♪ this is the bell on the cat. [ male announcer ] it's a network of possibilities -- helping you do what you do... even better. ♪ but when she got asthma, all i could do was worry ! specialists, lots of doctors, lots of advice... and my hands were full. i couldn't sort through it all. with unitedhealthcare, it's different. we have access to great specialists, and our pediatrician gets all the information. everyone works as a team. and i only need to talk to one person about her care. we're more than 78,000 people looking out for 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.

♪ informing mark bittman during the break he was doing a great job. in case you didn't know. >> guess who is working saturday morning. >> yes, exactly, welcome. i wanted to go back, the usda estimate on the amount of cost that removing pink slime from ground beef would be is actually 25 cents a pound, not 27 cents, very close. rounding error. >> i like the way you fact check. >> keeping track. you were right on the money. >> this is the peril of the live show like this it's very easy to have facts flowing around that aren't likely -- like the 92% of women that lost jobs in the economy, in the recession, but that's another matter. here's my question for you and i think this comes back to kerry's point about the cost issue, right? because it seems like this conversation comes back to that a lot. i want to read a tweet.

we got a lot of responses when we were having the food conversation because i think it's something people feel strongly and emotionally and intuitively about, it affects them every day, we all eat several times a day, if you are me, more than several times a day. here's -- it says maybe others suspect the top 20%, 30%, but the bottom 40% or 50% can't afford it with time or money not with two jobs to make ends meet. this is discussing basically the notion of all of us moving towards food that is more locally sourced that is not industrial produced. yes, response? >> the alternative to pink slime is not necessarily -- this is what always happens. >> yes. >> is that you shouldn't be eating lousy food, but everyone says well not everybody can afford to shop at whole foods. there is a middle ground. there is something healthier than pink slime that is not shopping in the organic section of your supermarket and it's called normal food, real food,

regular food, not highly processed food. >> define that. >> even if we wanted to say in the meat world there are cuts of animals that are obviously preferable to the cheapness, most highly treated meat possible. but the problem -- the problem with getting into the cost -- or not the problem, the opportunity of getting into the cost discussion is if you are going to say we need to eat 160 pounds of meat a year -- >> is that the average? >> -- which is the average per capita in the united states and nearly 300 pounds of animal product a year, we'll have to produce it the way we're producing it now because there is no alternative. the only alternative is really to eat less, and i'm not saying -- i know you think this, but i am not saying eat no, i'm saying eat less meat, eat fewer animal products, eat less expensive protein, less expensive nutrients and then you don't have this problem.

>> amanda? >> kerry was talking about how pink slime has been demonized and as sort of this public campaign that sort of it was there but we didn't notice it for a while. but the way that it made it into meat, too, wasn't it also the well-funded campaign, this is cheaper, it won't hurt you by monsanto and other companies, isn't that how it got there in the first place? >> it got there in the first place as a way to make more dangerous cuts from a bacterial perspective, more dangerous cuts of meat safer, so it wasn't a way of extracting those cuts of meat producing ground beef with those cuts of meat and making it safe without treating it with ammonia. that was the -- that was the -- yeah, it was obviously a profit motive. >> this first of all, benefits all the corporations involved in producing the meats as opposed to healthy dietary restrictions. it isn't about being a vegan, it's about whether or not the

consumption of beef has led to predictable diseases that are entirely preventable, should our diets change. number two, where does it end up getting distributed, the hood market has higher concentration of sugar and antibiotics in meat and so forth and you have food deserts and you have the overprocessed beef that lead to more problems that people without health care can't address anyway. it just gets into a big problem. >> exactly. there's the food production system and then there's the food distribution system which melissa did great work last weekend, melissa harris perry talking about food deserts and you it's hard to get good food in neighborhoods in east harlem where -- kerry, you have this sort of jaundiced eye. >> she's hungry. she's hungry. >> lasers coming out. it's one thing, and it's all coming back to -- it's the evil meat corporations all of a sudden because all they want to

do now is just poison all of us and put us into some horrible health situation. but do you know what, remember, the meat companies also were talking about before also want to employ people as well. they also, of course, want to have a bottom line. >> so does the drug industry. the drug dealer industry. they are at a premium right now. >> michael, why would they want to make a product that is poisonous because they'll think to themselves, gee, how can we actually make money -- >> because it's easible accessible -- is it really food if it lasts more than two days? is it real food? >> it doesn't make any sense. if you are making a poisonous product, you won't make any money in the end. >> yeah! >> you are not going to in the end. >> the issue on the table resolved, if you make a defe defective or poisonous product, you will not make money. we'll talk about it after the break. your money deserve. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 at charles schwab, that means taking a close look at you tdd# 1-800-345-2550 as well as your portfolio. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 we ask the right questions,

tdd# 1-800-345-2550 then we actually listen to the answers tdd# 1-800-345-2550 before giving you practical ideas you can act on. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 so talk to chuck online, on the phone, tdd# 1-800-345-2550 or come in and pull up a chair. [ male announcer ] want your weeds to hit the road? hit 'em, with roundup extended control. one application kills weeds, and stops new ones for up to four months. roundup extended control. ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] at nissan, our ideal is innovation.

5 all-new models over the next 15 months, including a completely reimagined altima. welcome to our most innovative year ever. nissan. innovation for all. ♪

t there.n. innovation for all. - one serving of cheese is the size of four dice. one serving of cereal, a baseball. and one serving of fruit, a tennis ball. - you know, both parties agree. our kids can be healthier... the more you know. okay. moving to something very

provocative before the break and this is an argument i heard before and it's an argument the conservatives talk about which is, look, we overregulate. regulation is not necessary because if an industry or business does something that is harmful, they are harmful to consumers, then the market forces will price that information in and they'll be driven out of business. a lot of people on the internet are talking about the big example. >> exactly. what exactly is happening to tobacco companies since the testing has found out that cigarettes are bad for you? well, they have been sued up to wahoo ever since. they've been extraordinarily regulated ever since. and the taxes on them have been passed along to the consumers, and not only that but the tobacco companies are also -- the ones who are supporting our schip programs as well. so, at this point they are paying for it as a result.

so, until, you know -- >> trillions of people are not dying as a result. >> exactly. the point is that is a confluence of public pressure, public health campaigns, regulation and all sort of state regulation. mark, i want to sort of give you the last word on this issue about regulation. >> you did. >> you'll have to write another column and we'll have you back on the show. this is what you do for a living. you have too much knowledge. >> okay. what's the question? >> the question -- the question is about where -- how we start thinking about regulating this industry in a way that gets us to the middle place. that's what i think is interesting, because, you're right, we have the two polls either eating things wrong or buying the $9 tomato. what's the foot system in the middle place, what would it look like? >> what the corporations are supposed to do? the corporations are -- >> maximize profit. >> -- make money, right. and if it creates jobs incidentally, that's great, and if it pays taxes incidentally, that's great also. but it's an amoral entity if it

can provide fewer jobs, it's okay with that. it can pay fewer taxes, it's really happy about that. who is supposed to change that? the government is supposed to change that. so, what we have to look at is, you know, obviously kerry and i are going to disagree strongly about that, but what we have to look at as stringent regulation as we possibly can get. and tobacco is the perfection example of that, that's the example we need be following. >> except when the corporation has a stranglehold over governmental processes, they are in bed together. >> what are the triumph in many ways the tobacco story has been, tens of millions are alive today wouldn't be if not for the full-scale assault that we waged on tobacco. charges filed in the trayvon martin killing, the other huge news in the week. what about corporate money fueling dangerous gun laws after this. [ male announcer ] we put a week's worth of bad odors in a home.

some aerosols may just mix with them. can febreze really remove it. we asked real people what they thought. [ moderator ] take a deep breath for me. describe the smell. it's very pleasant. fresh. some kind of flower maybe? [ moderator ] remove the blindfold... awww, oh yuck! i didn't smell any of that! [ male announcer ] febreze air effects doesn't mix, it actually removes odors. [ laughs ] wow, that's incredible. [ male announcer ] so you can breathe happy. guaranteed.

[ laughs ] wow, that's incredible. pull on those gardening gloves. grab the nearest spade.

and let's see how colorful an afternoon can be. with certified advise to help us expand our palette... ...and prices that give us more spring per dollar... ...we can mix the right soil with the right ideas. and bring even more color to any garden. more saving. more doing. that's the power of the home depot lay down a new look, with earthgro mulch, now three bags for just $10.

good morning from new york, i'm chris hayes here with msnbc political analyst michael eric dyson, amanda cherkle and mark bittman, author of the book "how to cook and eat everything." on tuesday george zimmerman's lawyers called a news conference to say that since they couldn't locate their client they were quitting, with the somewhat bizarre side of him speaking to fox's sean hannity, and a week later hes were in police custody and then second-degree murder charges were brought against zimmerman for the shooting of trayvon martin. corey was insistent that her office was not influenced by the

racial undertones of the case. >> we do not prosecute by public pressure, we prosecute on the laws of the state and sovereign state of florida and that's the way it will be in this case. we only know one category of prosecutors and that's a "v," it's not a "d," it's not a "w," it's not an "h," it's a "v" for victim. that's who we work tirelessly for, and that's what we know, justice for our victims. >> i always refer to florida as the great and sovereign state of florida myself. now that there's a pending case, zimmerman is presumed innocent, and on the "today" show, trayvon's mother, sybrina fulton said this. >> i believe it was an accident. i believe that it just got out of control. and he couldn't turn the clock back. >> fulton later said her comments were mischaracterize. there was nothing accidental about the shooting. on thursday zimmerman made his first court appearance accompanied by his new lawyer,

mark omera. up until he signed on to present zimmerman, he was providing legal analyst for orlando local 6 news, here he was a few weeks ago playing the role of legal expert. can you confront someone, shoot them and get away with it. omera, under circumstances without laws the way they are today, yes. and it sounds like they have a license to kill. some people call it the license to murder statute because it doesn't require actions to avoid the confrontation. michael eric dyson, i've seen you talk about it on air. what did you make of the week's developments? >> they were amazing. the vindication in the belief of the justice system. what reverend al sharpton, our colleague here at msnbc, have asserted we don't want to try it in the court of public opinion, we want him to be brought before the court of justice which means he needs to be arrested.

the fact that he was arrested is a monumental move in the right direction. the fact of the second-degree murder charge i think was exemplary of the intent of a hard-nosed prosecutor like angela corey to take this to the mat, but predicated upon evidence and not upon the emotion of the moment. people say, well, all of the conflagration and all of the consternation that was generated in the movement out there had no bearing on what was going on. well, in one sense that's right. the spotlighting of the injustice forces people to take another look, but it doesn't have anything to do with how he's actually charged. so, in that case i think that it's very important to underscore that. and finally what's important here is that if it took all of this just to get this man arrested, when we know that -- were it in reverse that a black person had killed a person that was not black, that no matter what you put in jail until we find out what goes on. we have to deal with all of the trayvon martins out this, the structural impediments to equal

justice under the law and to take another look at this ridiculous law about stand your ground which i think is under serious scrutiny. >> you raised the counterfactual of this, if the races had been reversed and actually there's a really interesting case in arizona which i have just read the one news account of and was a black man doing the shooting, a white victim, 29 years old, his family says actually mentally disabled, has a cognitive capacity of about a 12-year-old who was killed, walking his dog. the shooter said that he had a pipe. he didn't have any pipe found on him. and the shooter has not been arrested in that case. and to me what was interesting about that case is to me it points to there's a bunch of things running together in this case and it's the reason this case i think has exploded to the national consciousness because the way that racial bias manifests itself and suspicion, because of the gun laws and the criminal justice system arbitrating it. but nosing around the world of the case and particularly the stand your ground laws, there are lots of incidents of

shootings around stand your ground laws that go in a bunch of different directions in terms of the racial composition of the shooter and the victim, but all of which are sort of scary in so far as you have an incident which someone ends up dead and no one is arrested. >> absolutely. but it's the exception that proves the rule. the reality is you take as a subsection all cases of murder that are committed by a member of one race against another, the stand your ground law certainly has exceptional iterations, but the reality is overall, black people who are victims are not treated fairly, equally, and not seen as quite as human as those who are not. >> michael, are you referring to, say, blacks who end up shooting other blacks -- >> all of it. blacks who kill other blacks. blacks who are murdered by other blacks. blacks who are murdered as whites, blacks as victims are not given -- >> to the fact that there is imperial wisdom about this.

the despaisparity is racially dependent on the victim as opposed to the shooter. >> in terms of the perpetrator. >> assailant. but in terms of the victim, so sentencing, for example, death penalty cases, death penalty is more likely when the victim is black than white, et cetera. i'm curious what the rest of you think about this, too, i feel that now that we have -- we are talking about the reverend al sharpton and saying, he's whipping up a frenzy and bill keller says this, he wrote this column that i found sort of frustrating. facing a narrative from the hate crimes textbook, bellowing analogies to birmingham and selma is just political opportunism, this could prejudice a prosecution or mobilize a mob. it echoes bill o'reilly, who is saying there will be blood on someone's hands when violence breaks out. i want to get historical context

on the conjuring of the notion of a specter of a mob brought about by racial animus. here's a little bit of "meet the press" in 1963 and 1965 as journalists question mlk and naacp executive secretary wilkins. >> a great many people as i'm sure you know would believe it would be impossible to bring more than 1 h100,000 militant negros into washington without riots. there are an increasing number of people saying that if the full civil rights program is not passed by congress, there will be charge scale violence in this country. do you believe that? >> your movement has been distinguished for its nonviolent approach, but your people are under great pressures in many cases. how much do you fear the pursue of negro violence in the pursuit of negro rights? >> this is an echo of the specter because, you know, there's this -- again, i'm not a

neutral arbiter in this, i think that everything that was done by people focusing on the arrest was sort of squarely within the bounds of calling for justice, right? i do think part of the problem in the way the case has developed because in an sense of an arrest that, yes, cable news and the media does rush in to try the case, right? >> right. >> the whole point is that should being done in a court of law and now it's done in a court of law and that's basically a victory. it doesn't give us much to talk about, but that's sort of like -- >> well, it is a victory because it should have been done from the get-go and the fact that it wasn't done from the get-go reveals a powerful, you know, example of the contradiction of the ideals of justice and their application. and then when you look at what happened there, the march on washington, what happened, they mobilized 4,000 troops. paratroopers were stationed outside of d.c. ready to pounce. judges held their courtrooms open all night figuring all the black people would come and they

could arrest them and they had a kill switch from the administration should somebody say something wrong on the plar of. the keller argument is especially damaging even more than the o'reilly because, again, here we don't talk about the offense itself, we talk about the response to the offense. we don't talk about the injury, we speak about the people's response to the injury and that's problematic. >> the response so far has been peaceful. you haven't heard of violent incidents or any sort of fights or anything like that. it's brought out a group of people that aren't usually politically engaged who maybe aren't following the policy developments, raising more developments about the stand your ground laws, bringing more awareness to the case and it's bringing the media out and i think, you know, this process has largely worked the way it should and now it's going to the justice department -- >> not as much violence as white figures who responded to a loss of a final four game. >> wait, wait, wait, wait, you guys, hold on a second. first of all you had the new black panther party -- >> four of them. four of them. name a member. who is the head of the new black

panther party. that's what i'm saying. you ain't got it. that's wrong. you are playing the race card. >> they put the $10,000 on george zimmerman's head. >> that was idiotic and ridiculous. >> the doj did not even have a counterresponse to that. look, f if it was a white neo-n group who ended up putting bounty onto anybody else's head. >> they do, president obama, of course, they are. they haven't been arrested. >> okay. >> okay. >> what is your question? >> you are ignoring the offense and reinjuring the wounded. >> no. because we're looking at a double standard. >> you are right, it's a double standard. white people get justice in america routinely and their lives are taken seriously whereas african-american and latinos are dismissed or at least marginalized. i agree with the double standard. and you are citing a marginal case of new black panthers who -- >> how about this, how about this -- >> you are putting latinos down and all of a sudden george

zimmerman is a white latino and he's been completely dismissed by la raza and all the other left wing hispanic groups. >> god bless you, i'm sorry to hear that. >> wait a second. i want to ask something. hold on a second. i feel like we're in sort of important territory and i am supposed to go to break but i'm not going to do it. okay. so, clearly we've hit -- there's some sort of bedrock here that we're hitting that you have just manifested to me what has been an interesting but also dispiriting phenomena to watch which is the need -- we just were versus this conversation, right, and i was basically saying, look, justice has been done in this country, tried in a court of law and what i've seen basically happen is the general consensus that we have, yeah, a kid of 17-year-old buying skittles and ice tea shouldn't be shot and left dead, right? and what happened is we've seen the great american polarizaton machine work itself up and i've seen all of a sudden, you know, on conservative blogs it's about the new black panthers are doing this or that. and my question is why is that

the important thing? why is there this -- just because reverend al sharpton is doing something, why do conservatives feel they had need to take the other side of the bet, why does it have to be the case that you sort of mobilize in favor of george zimmerman or point out double standards? why not just leave well enough alone, and say, yeah, the guy should probably be arrested and let the trial work. i'm curious about the emotional or intellectual core of response to the fact that liberals are making a big deal of this, i'm asking this honestly and genuinely. >> we've seen as far as the new black panther party is concerned a whole line of shadiness that actually went on with the doj back in 2008 and anytime we actually saw al sharpton get involved with situation, we saw it with freddie's market and anytime a lot of the race baiters ended up getting involved, a lot of the intent has ended up going you. >> the death of trayvon martin doesn't count as much as to your attention to what are flagrant

examples of misapplication of law and this did why african-american people are tired of hearing justification for the kind of misbehavior that is at the core and the heart of the american justice system. >> michael -- >> you are straining at camels. >> do you know what, michael, i have not made any type of -- >> you are talking about the new black panther. you didn't answer his question. >> let me take a break. let me take a break because i blew through the last one. i'll let you respond after this. .

[worker 1:] we need to produce our own energy. [announcer:] and, to those who say... [worker 2:] we need environmental protection. [announcer:] conocophillips says, you're right. find out how natural gas answers both at powerincooperation.com. that is better than today. since 1894, ameriprise financial has been working hard

for their clients' futures. never taking a bailout. helping generations achieve dreams. buy homes. put their kids through college. retire how they want to. ameriprise. the strength of america's largest financial planning company. the heart of 10,000 advisors working with you, one-to-one. together, for your future. ♪

all right. say something self-deprecating right before we came in. >> that's right. never on the air. >> let's try to cut it in one direction, i don't want to sort of entirely -- here's what i don't want to do, i do not want to act out the process of the polarization that i am

identifying. i want to under stand it, right? and also it's my show so i want to set the terms of what i think is worth discussing and what not. i don't want to talk about immaterial things. to me the idea of sort of changing the topic to, you know, the new black panther party, to the right wing bet noir, which are people that in some sense have stupid and sort of hateful views on things, the question of why -- here's what we think. this is how blacks and whites see race in the trayvon martin case, this is a daily beast poll which was an internet poll cited on reuters, which i thought was dodgy and it's unclear what the results were. 80% of the killing was racially driven and 35% for whites. we think it's personal experience and all these sort of

things, but i just don't understand, to go back to the question, not to talk about the new black panther party or whatever al sharpton has or has not done, why feel the need to take the other side of the bet? why is it the case that conservatives feel like, okay, now -- this is how it looked to me, it looked like liberals took up the cause, and if liberals are taking up the cause, we have to be on the other side of this. maybe we don't have to. >> chris, what conservatives also saw in this circumstance was also the attack on gun rights. and so -- >> you're very nicely pivoting to the next segment. keep going. keep going. >> and so i think that conservatives also felt the need to make sure that the -- thad they had an appropriate response as well because what, of course, happens in one state could very well happen in another state and it two have a huge domino effect. >> i get that point. but can they also -- look, that's legitimate. but what to me is problematic is that there's no time taken out,

even the lawyer, mark murphy, to me was remarkably graceful. that this was a loss of life. that's the first thing he said. and it seems to be conservatives can't even take the cue from the defender of george zimmerman by saying, the loss of life was tragic, this is a tragic occurrence in american society. now, we happen to disagree about what the consequences of that are, but the fact itself remains that this is a tragedy. >> i will say as a factual matter that is exactly the note that bill o'reilly began his interview of trayvon martin's mother. >> i don't just mean the rhetoric of it, i mean the actual acknowledgement, engaging with human beings, talking to people in african-american communities that perhaps you haven't talked to before to see why, do you know what, we're white guys, bill o'reilly acan wear hoodies whereas the dress of black people come under scrutiny, those kind of concepts

need to be taken seriously, so it doesn't end with rhetoric, it begins in your own life of modeling beav modeling behavior of reaching out to people with whom you disagree. >> but i think as far as rhetoric is concerned and what a lot of the protests have sort of scared people over has been sort of the other perhaps crimes that have happened outside of florida. there's been reports of perhaps crimes that have happened where maybe the perpetrator has perhaps said trayvon martin's name. there has been -- this is just -- this is just reports that -- >> right. >> the only verifiable also where some white guys killed black guys in response to trayvon martin. >> i was going to go into that actually. so, whether it was that -- was that perhaps in oklahoma? >> but that's a point we can verify. can you verify the one you're speaking about? >> no. i'm just actually making my case here with both cases and that is what concerns people. is that what exactly -- >> but white panic is not

justification. when i say about white panic, let me say this is what i mean. during the civil rights movement, the clip played earlier, look at the reporters asking dr. king not about the vicious police brutality, not about segregation, not about jim crow, they are asking about what are the negros going to do. we're not going to acknowledge what we've done, we simply want to talk about black response. and here now black people are being put on trial, not just trayvon martin, we're put on trial. >> the response of white spry lens against blacks, we are so scared that black people will respond. >> exactly. >> it's not how black people are going to respond we're seeing these, like, white neo-nazis who are also going to florida as well and people are thinking, oh, my goodness, what's going to happen now, are all these -- we're going to see -- >> the neo-nazis from the conservatives. >> no, no, no, this isn't about -- we're seei ining these crazy groups going up there. >> and sean hannity is speaking out against that? >> yes.

he is actually. >> i missed that. >> let me return to a few things. one is my concern as the case goes forward is the court tv-ization of this trial. i worry about six months of essentially lots of lawyers not involved in the case on tv talking about the case, right? it's absolutely a circus. and do you know what, trials of the century and that sort of thing if you want to hang it on cable news, that's fine, but read your history books about trial of the centuries that happened before cable news. people get worked up about trials. secondly, though, the point about guns is a substantive core where part of this is happening. and obviously yesterday was the nra convention and mitt romney gave a speech at the nra and we had a reporter and colleague and a friend of mine, gary young, at the convention, and he'll join us via satellite after this break. [ male announcer ] this is the at&t network... a living breathing intelligence bringing people together to bring new ideas to life. look. it's so simple. [ male announcer ] in here, the right minds from inside and outside the company

come together to work on an idea. adding to it from the road, improving it in the cloud all in real time. good idea. ♪ it's the at&t network -- providing new ways to work together, so business works better. ♪ ♪ why do you whisper, green grass? ♪ [ all ] shh! ♪ why tell the trees what ain't so? ♪ [ male announcer ] dow solutions use vibration reduction technology to help reduce track noise so trains move quieter through urban areas all over the world. together, the elements of science and the human element can solve anything. [ all ] shh! [ male announcer ] solutionism. the new optimism. ♪ you make me happy [ female announcer ] choose the same brand your mom trusted for you. children's tylenol, the #1 brand of pain and fever relief recommended by pediatricians

and used by moms decade after decade. ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 let's talk about the cookie-cutter retirement advice ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 you get at some places. ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 they say you have to do this, have that, invest here ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 you know what? ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 you can't create a retirement plan based on ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 a predetermined script. ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 at charles schwab, we actually take the time to listen - ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 to understand you and your goals... ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 ...so together we can find real-life answers for your ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 real-life retirement. ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 talk to chuck ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 and let's write a script based on your life story. ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 until i show them this. the new oral-b pro-health clinical brush. its pro-flex sides adjust to teeth and gums for a better clean. the new pro-health clinical brush from oral-b.

guys. come here, come here. [ telephone ringing ] i'm calling my old dealership. [ man ] may ford. hi, yeah. do you guys have any crossovers that offer better highway fuel economy than the chevy equinox? no, sorry, sir. we don't. oh, well, that's too bad. [ man ] kyle, is that you? [ laughs ] [ man ] still here, kyle. [ male announcer ] visit your local chevy dealer today. right now, very well qualified lessees can get a 2012 equinox ls for around $229 a month. nobodies exactly how many americans own guns, because not

all states release their numbers. but based on background checks done by the fbi that's the sort of metric we have of gun sales. take a look at this chart. it's really kind of remarkable. as you can see verypronounce growth up to more than 14 million in 2010 and you should know that a person can buy several guns with one background check. still republican presidential candidate mitt romney feels the need to go before the nra like he did yesterday and say stuff like this -- >> we need a president that will enforce current laws and not create new ones. president obama has not. i will. we need a president who will stand up for the rights of hunters and sportsmen and those who seek to protect their homes and families. president obama has not. i will. >> i thought the appearance before the nra yesterday was interesting for a number of reasons obviously, it's happening against the backdrop of the zimmerman case, obviously there's consternation and fear of the community in the people

who are in the nra orbit and the gun lovers, the stand your ground laws or the zimmerman case will lead to a backlash in terms of policies at state level. i want to bring in gary young, columnist for "the guardian" and "the nation" magazine, you spent a day yesterday reporting from st. louis. i believe we have a picture of you showing your mettle, there's gary at the nra. gary, welcome, thanks for joining us. >> thanks for having me. >> i've been reading your reporting for a while. you are a great reporter and i want to start off by getting a sense of what the atmosphere was like at the convention. what your impression was of it? >> well, i mean, the thing -- two things i was impressed by. the first was that had there been more black people there, i would say some of these people could have been their grandfather. they were well -- you can talk about memphis and barbecue and chat about all sorts of things. so, the effort of some liberals

to put horns and tails on some of these people kind of doesn't work when you meet them. they're real people. and they are interesting people and are decent people was. all of that is true until you start to talk to them about guns and then things really do go off the chart. i have heard obama's america being described to nazi germany and soviet russian, stalin's russia, i'm kind of used to that reporting the right. i've never heard it being described to rwanda and in which the white people are the tutsis, the people who are murdered, and that they kind of under the cloak of kind of an increasingly insurgent black america. one guy said i don't need a permit to -- for free speech for my first amendment rights, why should i need a permit for my second amendment rights.

kind of verifiably kind of odd and crazy things. and the thing that strikes you more than anything after a day there is the kind of underpinning of the climate of fear on two levels. one, a fear that they have for their person. a fear that i think is manufactured and exploited. that never before in a single day have so many people painted somalia as if i might be killed unless i have a gun. and the other one is a fear, a completely unfounded as far as i can fathom, that someone, obama in this case, is out there to take their gun. and when you say, well, what evidence do you have of that, you get "f" ratings by the brady campaign in 2010. what has he done to suggest that that would be true. then they say, well, you never know, and that seems to be their argument. >> that's a really -- i want to sort of linger on that point for a bit, and, kerry, you are a gun

owner. i've seen a facebook picture of you proudly toting one. i don't think they would let you in, but this is an interesting point that gary just brought up is the broad context as i understand it is this. guns are very politically issued. they are sort of a partisan polarizing issue. democrats were pushing gun control and the assault weapon ban, of course, then there was essentially a full-scale retreat of the democratic party at the national certainty, after gore lost tennessee many people pointed out to the nra and bill clinton in the first memoir that it was the nra that ensured his defeat in tennessee, had he won tennessee, he would have been president. there was a full-scale of retreat on the issue in the national policy circles. obama has signed a law to allow guns in national parks, permitted guns to be in checked bags on amtrak and he signed in his first year more repeals of

federal government policies than george bush did in his eight years. and still there is a sense that there's a threat to gun owners. i want you to tell me if you think he's a threat to gun owners and explain that psycholo psychology. >> because even though the assault weapons ban was certainly expired during the bush years, there is the sense and the confirmation that the clinton -- excuse me, that the obama administration will want to bring it back. and i'd like to point out -- >> what does that sense come from? >> well, that eric holder certainly would want to bring it back. and, remember, it was eric holder who -- he was the one who said that -- who actually did the -- actually supported the clinton campaign to have the assault weapons ban during -- during the '90s. >> so did mitt romney. >> and mitt romney, by the way, during his time in office every year when he was governor did a

pro-second amendment bill. fyi. >> he also supported the brady law. >> in 2005. >> continue. >> and also as far as -- going back to the assault weapons ban, they later on found out, this is the clinton doj, that it wasn't exactly useful because -- because all of the weapons that they ended up banning weren't used for any kind of violent crimes. >> let me ask this question because it sounds to me like you are saying that you are -- you also think that there's a threat particularly in the second term if you would be unrestrained by -- i guess, my feeling is i have the sanity of having a summit where i can sit down where, like, the liberals can come and be, like, you want us to do, wave the white flag, do the thing, do the formal ceremony at the end of world war ii on the ship in the pacific and say, you won, you won this. >> do you realize how this -- >> demobilize. >> look, you already have anti-gun legislation coming in

from the democrats going up into capitol hill. >> it's not going anywhere. >> it's not going anywhere. >> you report on -- i'm asking you to -- no, i know, but i'm not asking you to define -- >> the gun show right at the beginning of obama's presidency and everyone said that they were stocking up on guns because they were very afraid he was going to take them away. we're now seeing that gun sales are soaring in places like texas and elsewhere for the same reason, but obama never talks about guns. he can't get even sort of the most basic legislation through congress, i don't understand that why there is this fear that it's going to happen because it's not -- i mean, progressive legislators introduce all sorts of things on the hill. they want single payer health care, it's not going anywhere. >> okay, okay, okay, but amanda, if let's just say these particular anti-gun pieces of legislation were to ever make it to obama's desk, do you think he would actually sign it? >> wow, but see, that's a big "if." here's the point if santa claus comes down and -- >> yeah. >> look, i'm now on the other

side of the question i posed at the beginning and i say this quickly. when we were talking about la teen kno latinos and people said they know if you are wanted in their coalition, that's what you are pointing to, you are saying that people that are gun owners have an intuitive sense. >> it's not policy, it's not policy. >> they have an intuitive sense that they are not part of the coalition. that is not a ridiculous thing to say. i want to come back and talk more to gary young about his experience and i want to talk about our gun laws and where they're going after this break.

all right, guns, guns, guns. actually, this is for you, gary. do you have any sense of -- when you talk about the sort of culture fear there and you made mention a little bit about there not being many black people at

the nra convention and one thing we've seen with trayvon martin is the intersection between gun culture and race. there's this amazing quote, this comes from "gun retailer" magazine, and it's from 1997. all of the usual customers the industry reaches people of northern european descent who wanted a gun now have one and a major effort needs to include the groups that are referred to as ethnic minorities but are rapidly becoming the majority and there's tremendous potential within this largely untapped market. >> it's capitalism. >> it is, trying to overthrow the old biases. do you see evidence of that in terms of the nra looking towards a future america that is less white, or do you see this as a kind of fundamental fear based on the fact that america is going in that direction? >> i'm going to have to go with the second one.

and really just on the eyewitness account. there were very few nonwhite people at this convention. it's a kind of demographic you could sell viagra and dependz to. there was a meeting i was at where they held up the four people that they thought were the biggest problems, one was obama, one was hillary sitting in front of a u.n. flag and it was the u.n. taking away people's guns and one was eric holder and then the other one was sonya soia sotomayor, i'm n trying to make the case that there was some kind of intentional racist kind of gibe going on there. but i looked around me at these mostly old white guys, and then you look at the screen, one

white woman, one latina and two black men and you thought, this is a group of people looking at the future of this country and really not liking it. and they're not liking -- not just who they are and what they've done, but -- not just what they're doing but kind of in a sense who they are. and that fear when -- because i'm british and so i don't fully get guns, like, one of the interesting things for me is, like, why is there a need for this. people talk about this is how america was founded. these are -- you know, one guy said to me, there wouldn't be a west without the gun. >> right. >> meaning the western world. saying, well, yes, exactly, like, there was -- this country was founded, among other things, on violence and this is about kind of maintaining that sense of violence. >> kerry, i want to give you a very quick chance to respond. >> gary, real quick, the last

time the president that we had when the gun sales shot up very quickly, people were getting very scared that the president was going to take their guns, do you know who it was? bill clinton. and the gun sales rose right through the roof and it had nothing to do -- >> what's your point? what's your point? >> oh, yeah, and by the way, do you know who was attorney general, it was janet reno? it's the same thing -- >> what's your point? >> because guess what, people get scared when democrats get in office because people believe that when they are in control -- guess what, it has nothing to do with race. i hate to break it to you, but that's the truth. >> people also get scared when they see black people. >> it has nothing to do with race. guess what, bill clinton is white, okay, i hate to break that to you. >> quickly, we have to go, but quickly respond. >> well, people also -- the whole zimmerman case to me is about people getting scared when they see black people also. the point i was making was not i actually officially said it's not something there was implicit of racist ideas there but that they are looking at the future

and they don't like it. every time i make a point about guns or trayvon martin you seem to go back to clinton in 1990. we're in 2012 now, and these things are happening now. so, kind of you need to bring some of this stuff up to date. >> gary, who no longer lives in new york much to my chagrin, i want to get you as a contributor, gary young, contributor to "the nation" magazine, thank you for being. >> thanks for having me. ♪ [ male announcer ] we believe small things can make a big difference. like how a little oil from here can be such a big thing in an old friend's life. purina one discovered that by blending enhanced botanical oils into our food, we can help brighten an old dog's mind so he's up to his old tricks. with this kind of thinking going into our food, imagine all the goodness that can come out of it. just one way we're making the world a better place... one pet at a time. vibrant maturity. from purina one smartblend.

we asked total strangers to watch it for us. thank you so much, i appreciate it, i'll be right back. they didn't take a dime. how much in fees does your bank take to watch your money ? if your bank takes more money than a stranger, you need an ally. ally bank. no nonsense. just people sense. today is gonna be an important day for us.

you ready? we wanna be our brother's keeper. what's number two we wanna do? bring it up to 90 decatherms. how bout ya, joe? let's go ahead and bring it online. attention on site, attention on site. now starting unit nine. some of the world's cleanest gas turbines are now powering some of america's biggest cities. siemens. answers. so, there we go, so what do we know now we didn't know last week? well, we know apparently all democrats including the president of the united states must answer for and condemn any stupid thing said by any other democrat after hilary rosen said this on cnn -- >> what you have is mitt romney running around the country saying, well, you know, my wife tells me that what women really care about are economic issues, and when i listen to my wife,

that's what i'm hearing. guess what, his wife has actually never worked a day in her life. >> the right and the romney campaign threw a fit despite the fact that rosen is a person talking on tv without official connection to the obama white house, campaign, or the dnc. we also know that if cnn is looking to represent the left in their cross fire style segments, they could do a lot better than a messaging guru with a who'ses who list of clients, head of the recording industry of america when it was crushing napster and when it was forced to sever ties with huffington post in 2010 because she had bp at a client when it was, time, well, in the news. we know there are literally thousands of if not tens of thousands of people that could better represent the left in our national conversation. we now know that the state of connecticut has taken one more leap forward in outlawing the death penalty. statehouse voted 86-62 to repeal the state death penalty following a vote in the senate and democratic governor dannel malloy has said he'll sign it into law. we know this will make the

nutmeg state the 17th state to ban the death penalty and the fifth in five years only 33 more to go. we now know that last month was hottest march in the united states on record thanks to the national oceanic and atmospheric administration which has temperature records dating back over 117 years we know 15,000 distinct all-time temperature records were set across the country and thanks to the environmental visualization lab we just know what climate change actually looks like. we now know that the president will not be signing an executive order that will require those companies with federal contracts not to discriminate against gay, lesbian, or bisexual people. he is on record supporting the employment nondiscrimination act that would make it the law but there aren't the votes for it and the white house as part of the we can't wait campaign has been far more muscular to push through other policies. we're reminded in 2012 it is not

against the law to fire someone simply because of who they love or how they identify. this might be -- this one might be our least shocking now we knows ever, but we now know thanks to a study from the usda that the supplemental nutrition assistance program more commonly known as food stamps lowered the poverty rate during the great recession. in the deepest recession in 2009, it cut the poverty rate by 8% with larger effects for child poverty. we know the ryan budget would cut the program by $127 billion over the next 9 years. and finally, thanks to viewer heather christianson, we now know just how extreme reproductive politics have gotten in arizona where law makers have passed a bill that not only makes aborting a pregnancy after 18 weeks illegal but statutory decrees when it begins calculated from the last menstrual day of the pregnant woman or as much as two weeks before contraception, in other words you can have a bun in the oven before you've been to the baker.

rim shot. you can submit your own "now we knows" at msnbc.com, and we'll talk about what my guests know that now what they didn't know in the weeks before. to understad how math and science kind of makes the world work. in high school, i had a physics teacher by the name of mr. davies. he made physics more than theoretical, he made it real for me. we built a guitar, we did things with electronics and mother boards. that's where the interest in engineering came from. so now, as an engineer, i have a career that speaks to that passion. thank you, mr. davies.

in here, great food demands a great presentation. so at&t showed corporate caterers how to better collaborate by using a mobile solution, in a whole new way. using real-time photo sharing abilities, they can create and maintain high standards, from kitchen to table. this technology allows us to collaborate with our drivers to make a better experience for our customers. [ male announcer ] it's a network of possibilities -- helping you do what you do... even better. ♪

♪ all right. in just a second i will ask the guests what they didn't know when the week began, but right now a preview for melissa harris-perry and what is coming up this morning? >> all right. chris, it was so good and heated on your set at a certain point that i almost ran up to have a chair. >> i wanted you on to have this. it is a bummer i can't book you anymore, but that is besides the point. >> this morning we will talk about a serious issue and uncovering a human rights crisis happening right here in america that has mostly been invisible, and we are talking about sex trafficking of young people especially. an actress and goodwill ambassador will join us for the

conversation, because she has been fighting human trafficking for years. this morning we are also going to have a conversation about where is the work for women? what kind of work do women do? what is it worth? and i will tell you that nerdland has found way to bring austin powers into the political conversation. >> i am looking forward to it. thank you, melissa. i want to know what my guests know now that they didn't know when the week began. michael dyson? >> well, i knew it before, but it is revealed to the world that reverend al sharpton is the leader of the new magnitude and we have seen the quiet transformation of a person who was seen as a pariah and a nonstarter when it came to issues of american democracy become the foremost civil rights leader of his civilization and power broker and glenn beck meets jesse jackson, because the media savvy has been tethered to the moral and the public moral creativity to result in, i

think, a savvy, interesting and engaging model for what leadership is about, and i salute him. >> i hope for the reverend's bookers are watching that just so you know, michael dyson, is not available. and what do you now know, ann? >> well, i will be in a debate with him tonight at the washington, d.c. lincoln theater for 150 years of emancipation. >> okay. check it out. amanda? what do you now know? >> i learned that in addition to people of color, elderly students getting sort of caught up in pennsylvania strict voter i.d. law where you need a photo i.d. to go to the polls, it is hurting the amish who are objecting to being photographed for religious reasons and that is what it takes to get the republicans worried about the law, because amish vote republican and now some republicans who supported the law are look into this. they are concerned, but not earli earlier. >> and don't lose the amish. >> more on the positive side,

the story of a 9-year-old boy in california, east of l.a., and he opened up a cardboard arcade. >> it is the coolest thing ever. i saw it this week. >> and it absolutely shows that even though, someone could be young and have all types of xboxs and playstations, it shows that if you have a little imagination, you can build a amazing type of, you know -- >> miniature amusement park. >> we will put that video up on the website, because it totally made my week. i was almost crying watching it. it is awesome. >> and forbes is calling him the next billionaire. >> and mark wittman, what do you now know? >> two things, that north korea is a paper tiger and that is a relief i'm sure, and also that we are relearning again that public opinion matters and no matter what angela cory says, it is a fact that there was a lot

of noise about the zimmerman and martin case that got george zimmerman arrested, and that is a good thing. >> yes, public opinion does matter. thank you to the political analysts joining me this morning. thanks for getting up all of you. thank you for joining us today for "up" and coming up next is melissa harris-perry. next sawn sund next sunday we will be joined by congress tom perriello and catch you up on your taxes. thanks for getting us. the chevy cruze eco also offers 42 mpg on the highway. actually, it's cruze e-co, not ec-o. just like e-ither. or ei-ther. or e-conomical. [ chuckling ] or ec-onomical. pa-tato, po-tato, huh? actually, it's to-mato, ta-mato. oh, that's right. [ laughs ]

[ car door shuts ] [ male announcer ] visit your local chevy dealer today. now very well qualified lessees can get a 2012 chevy cruze ls for around $159 per month. e.p.a. estimated 36 miles per gallon highway. but when she got asthma, all i could do was worry ! specialists, lots of doctors, lots of advice... and my hands were full. i couldn't sort through it all. with unitedhealthcare, it's different. we have access to great specialists, and our pediatrician gets all the information. everyone works as a team. and i only need to talk to one person about her care. we're more than 78,000 people looking out for 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.

this morning why the news this week proved that the arc is bending just a little bit more. and it is shrouded in secrecy, but right here