it was then i thank you coming out president obama's opposition to reaganomics ransacks baghdad's face trial and women getting the money shaft at work just a few of the rides topics are a little rough. let's not forget that we had an apartheid regime right now and. i think. even on the oil. we have the government says they're going to keep you safe get ready because of

their freedom. you know sometimes you see a story and it seems so you think you understand it and then you glimpse something else and you hear see some other part of it and realize that everything you thought you knew you don't i'm sorry is a big issue. for .

are you ready to rumble joining me tonight of the panel brian darling holliston director of government studies at the heritage foundation eric into the democratic strategist and dr david hallberg washington correspondent at business investors daily welcome to all of you so it started here president obama drew a line in the sand on wednesday presenting his own deficit reduction plan to rival the republican plan but privatizing medicare and cuts taxes even further for millionaires and billionaires perhaps the significant part of the president's speech was when he were butte reaganomics take a look this vision is less about reducing the deficit than it is about changing the

basic social compact in america ronald reagan's own budget director said there's nothing serious or courageous about this point and nothing serious about a plan that claims to reduce the deficit by spending a trillion dollars on tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. and i don't think there's anything courageous about asking for sacrifice from those who can least afford it and don't have any clout on capitol hill. that's not a vision of the america i know. because what he's referring to obviously was not his plan but the republican plan with these words president obama became the first american president since one thousand nine hundred. six that it doesn't work so this is the beginning of the end of the thirty year reign of reaganomics in america but we're bumping don't mix doesn't work i mean president obama what he did i was right it's been tried for the last couple years and you can amuse not doing well in

employment is very well president obama's been president for quite a while now i mean he's at some point he's going to take responsibility over his failed stimulus plan but fact that his ideas just aren't working for the american people we look at gas prices right now that through the roof food prices when people go buy groceries are through they're all his fault you can't blame george bush for everything at some point barack obama has the credit for the damage he's done to our common and erica his stimulus failed i think so much is actually incredibly successful at least. you know rapid decrease in the job loss we've seen economy start to really get going i think that's actually the reason why we're in such why this budget is so important because we've started to have this economic recovery that was kick started by the stimulus i mean i am personally somebody that thinks that we could use to had a second stimulus or maybe a little bit more money in that stimulus a lot of economists agree but that you know this idea that we're going to suddenly go into traffic cuts right now at a time where the economy needs

a little bit more of a boost to really get its feet back underneath it i think is insane so david has a reaganomics was about low taxes and low inflation and we had a period of very long growth there creating over eighteen million jobs and i certainly wish we could go back to reagan on about reagan ran up a three trillion dollar debt you give me three trillion trillion dollars i can show you what it looks like to live watch. would love to only have three trillion and he's run up quite a bit more than that but actually place it in just a back and says it's nothing close but will his budget with a lot of money and his nose would double or do. if you were to serve a second term at the end eight years and horrible i am exposures i think the problem paul ryan's budget is not only that it doesn't reduce the deficit but you're asking people to cut in fact medicare and then any savings that you would have received from that is then being spent on tax cuts for people that and if you're a fan of low tax rates well we want to got incredibly low tax rates for corporations and for the wealthiest one percent but it's as opposed to health care plan that

takes medicare cuts and turns them around spends them on health care a lot of that was that medicare that was medicare advantage which was a privatized you know it's medicare as well the cuts in the hospital have a great all right well in any good way just to wrap this topic will move along with my take on this is that this is the end of thirty years of reaganomics the i think it's toast will you'll see yesterday congress passed a spending resolution to keep the government funded for the next six months given the hopes of the tea party that wanted the government shutdown plan includes thirty eight half billion dollars in spending cuts this year and this is and and is this the first step in the new austerity agenda that mostly republicans are trying to implement in america or look at the ocean across the ocean of the u.k. were conservative austerity policies have been in place for a year clearly shows they are working and said the u.k. has faced since worst economic situation since one nine hundred thirty s. average household income declining two percent resale sales dropping three percent this was just reported yesterday in the financial times this is and it was

predicted actually when cameron first came out with his budget in the financial top's back you know some time ago so is this what the republicans are trying to do in the united states crashed the economy well first of all the what's going on in the u.k. they also had a drop in their in their jobless numbers as well so it's not entirely clear that there are security measures are leading necessarily to a recession i mean if you look at some of our numbers we saw jobless claims jump up recently and we have only you know we haven't even gotten to a security measures you know only recently so i don't know that it all that. security measures leads to recession i think there is am you know we have to look at what we mean by a steady measures is it austerity for one particular part of the population being the disabled children and the elderly or is it i stared across the board because it's an idea that we're going to go in and fix this with entitlements but not look at what we're spending on you know on things like tax cuts for the wealthy i hate

to kind of keep that dog but it's it's really quite i think insane that we're you know fighting over things like five million for n.p.r. funding for planned parenthood and then we're going to keep cutting tax and spending and giving away the revenue to the wealthiest one percent when their income has gone up by twenty you know i think the average of the roughly one percent of twenty seven million for the ninety percent of americans that are below that it's about thirty minutes and thirty thousand dollars to go down the road of greece and portugal and not have the means to get rid of it and deal with a fourteen point three trillion dollars in debt as a nation that we put out there so we're carrying this that we need to do something about it we need to balance the budget at some point in the future and you have to cut government are going to try to get on the road to sweden and germany and sweden is cutting taxes because they're running a budget surplus a massive budget surplus that spends actually you know there's got the surplus i mean it's going to any of it my in my opinion the republicans are actually trying

to create a recession because it'll make obama look bad and help them win the two thousand election we'll see again senator carl levin chair of the senate subcommittee on investigations finally released a report on the causes of the financial collapse back in zero eight in it he points the finger at major banks like goldman sachs and washington mutual for the fourteen investors by selling them junk securities and manipulating the markets senator levin has now handed over his report to the justice department so will bang stores finally go to jail and why isn't it while democrats are investigating the real causes of them. republicans are trying to the thought of wall street regulations that would prevent another meltdown david they're not the democrats are not investigating the major source of the meltdown which was the government sponsored enterprises like fannie mae and freddie mac. if you look at their report i mean again another democrat report it spends about two pages on the g.s. seems look if if goldman sachs and other banks have have really committed

crimes here the justice department should be prosecuting them so far we've seen no prosecutions would suggest that whatever they were doing it was not criminal and i think that's the basis for what makes this situation so incredibly unfortunate and it's very clear that what was being done was wrong and that it hasn't shown that we've been violating any laws or that there's any criminal prosecutions shows that we have a problem with our law we don't allow stealing murder we don't allow rape we don't allow all of these things because it be stabilize our society so if something like this which the stabilized our society or effects our society but yet we don't have a lot of protect against it or to punish those that perpetrate it then we've really got to look at our laws because while there may not be any criminal violations why aren't there just going to would you suggest that had we not had the commodity futures futures modernization act and and. or what was the other one that it blew up glass steagall you know also also by our good friend phil gramm and his wife

wendy who was on the board of enron. that we wouldn't have this problem but we wouldn't have this problem if we didn't have the community reinvestment act in this bubble that was created with the housing already invested really. just in that they're not creating any c.e.o.'s at all we had eight hundred trillion dollars where the c.d.o. there from zero nine hundred ninety nine eight hundred trillion dollars the g.d.p. of the entire planet sixty five trillion dollars he had built these are the result of these two pieces of legislation from phil gramm and i wanted to i don't think you can blame phil gramm for the housing bubble that burst and i think it. probably a greenspan actually we probably agree that the federal government shouldn't build out these businesses but to go in have real good politics and regulate wall street and the stone age that's not going to solve any problems it's just going to harm our economic output as i just mentioned to get any degree and that's magnificent power now is that what it did is that it's that it it's at that banks that were taking money and core neighborhoods and not blending in those neighborhoods they

were using that credit and that and that you know that that money freed out and just putting it into other areas that that was not allowed to really have the real real the real problem is a canard i have to we have to wrap this topic and so i won't even do the last word on the other than to say the u.n. when ronald reagan the regular the cells in eighty two and then they melted down in eighty six as a consequence he put two thousand people in jail and you know one of the s. the nobels in this situation is very similar and they were both backed by government when these things melted i'll never know who the president is or has and i wish he had put some people in jail ennio to tuesday mark equal pay day that recognizes that women still don't earn as much as men for the same job in fact looking at this chart the earnings of women compared to men actually went down last year they were going backwards so nearly a half century after the equal pay act was passed in one thousand nine hundred eighty three and mandating that women was to receive equal pay for equal work we still haven't closed the gap should we resort to more drastic measures my proposal

was for a ten year moratorium on voting by men. i'm dead serious. anybody want to. i don't think we should have the federal government trying to solve these problems big government looking at different different corporations and saying you have to pay a woman x. amount of man why amount that's being out there saying that you need to pay me an x. amount and pay a woman x. amount i think job we're not x. and y. if fame and equal pay and what they were going to meant what if what if the woman has not had as much experience in time at that job as the man that's exactly what those times you know him. that's always going to be hard to complete that way and so when you have a lot of inexperience and it's going to education a degree of chelsea i mean women actually get paid more than men i'm sure you know that is very true and i as a matter is going to work what you're talking about here the difference is accounted for by the fact that women simply take more time off to care for children they do not have as much experience in the work. in in the business world.

that you know bet is what accounts for that wage you know actually willing to trade for that when you control for that the difference to disappear also the washington post had a fantastic article kind of breaking down the five myths about why women are in glass and that was exactly one of them the reality is that women don't get paid for many reasons none of them being particularly fair and the reality is that if you do a job and you do it well and you're a man or woman you should be paid for that job but you're exactly right and that your gender should have nothing to do with it and that if i you know leave and want to have a child that my income shouldn't go down actually another interesting statistic is that should they go down no you know what it should not know my chariot or my performance and my education should be equal for somebody with the same regard of the union has been there longer than you after you leave that you know what if i stay in the workplace because it shows just below that men's income actually goes up about twelve percent for their first child was born in down four percent because men tend to be perceived as something more responsible and if we want to talk about you know i think this is a great country but it's not the greatest country in the world if you're

a woman and we're going to look back at what he did in iceland i mean. in norway forty percent of the parliament by law is women and iceland is fifty percent chance and yet it works and they're not having wars and one of the ire is out of the cell united states is the greatest economy in the world and even though you're one of the smell of your little one i will say that one interesting thing that you private about the inequity in congress is that this was the first year the first election in thirty years that the representation the number of women the percentage went down we've been seeing steady increases but it's roughly about sixteen percent representation and were for. are more than fifty percent you know about fifty two percent of population and it's not that there's not women who are qualified i think that you know there's a lot of reasons out you know we need to encourage women to go and we need to you know bring women were in the process in appointments and all of these things that kind of help with the equity here but the reality is that and you have a situation where in my old boss used to say that we will truly be equal is when there can be as many mediocre women elected to congress as there are mediocre we

don't want to empower government bureaucrats to be the official to figure out how much of me and she make comments a woman should make if you empower the government to set wages the problem's going to get worse and i'm not talking about cutting wages i'm talking about saying that it is illegal and unfair and not something that we stand for as a country to pay somebody differently based on the color of their skin based on their age east on their gender or any of the not they're not paying it based on the gender they're paying it on things like work experience if you take time off to care for your children you're going to have less experience than a man who stays there on the job and that you know that you know they're still going to last we're going to wrap it only that right now. and i'm still in the camp of let's have a moratorium of ten years where men don't get to vote and i think frankly a lot of wars have been under the law you know looks like if i'm running out if you're even i think you're right ok last question this is quick fire senator jon kyl found himself a lot of made jokes after his office admitted that kyle's claim last week that

ninety percent of planned parenthood funds or services go to abortions was not intended to be a factual state it's a twitter for god and his son started with users posting other statements about jon kyl that are not intended to be factual either so the question is what else will jon kyl say on the floor of the senate about planned parenthood that is not intended to be factual will it be a good ninety percent of planned parenthood services go to army in iran with nuclear warheads or be ninety percent of planned parenthood services go to providing prenatal care and scare or babies or c. ninety percent of planned pair. good services go to keeping john mccain alive buzz preventing kyle from being arizona's senior senator or you think we should be president obama what if president obama said i'm going to make sure that on employment never goes below eight percent of president obama saying i'm going to shut down guantanamo bay or how about the fall so that he was going to introduce a bill in the senate in the house so that we could have comprehensive immigration reform those three right there not of our politicians of the. total already there's

a difference between saying guantanamo this thing guantanamo doesn't exist is kind of more parallel ninety percent versus three percent i mean that's like a two thousand per cent exaggeration increase and how much money actually you know i i actually as a as a former senate communications stack represented that he blamed his press person and said that you know that it was really that they were saying it was intended i think if you're on the floor you should intend to use that word correct vaccination can have what you're saying be truthful i mean i think the next thing senator kyl should say is that we should stop sending hundreds of millions of dollars to a big business like planned parenthood which took in over just about a billion dollars in revenue last year has about a billion dollars in assets and frankly i don't know why the government sending them any money for any of the things they should do it should be all it should all be done with private funding was a poor woman in this country but that's a whole other thing but i'd say it could be ninety percent of planned parenthood

services go to funding more and more market off these wardrobe say anyway. brian and ericka david thank you all for joining us thank you much much appreciate it coming up dominance by the filthy rich was not the vision of one of our founding fathers for america prove it and i still it's. fixed. you know sometimes you see a story and it seems so bleak you think you understand it and then you glimpse

something else or see some of the part of it and realized everything you saw. i'm sorry is a big issue. those spending measure was passed out of congress this week a bill chock full of spending cuts aimed at the working class and public servants and not a dime taken away from corporate coffers that right now are sitting on and refusing to use two. dollars in surplus cash and another year will go by before a government of by and for the people does something about republican tax cuts for the richest of the rich and the most powerful of the transnational corporations who

are seeing this new era of legislation written by and for the wealthiest among us is exactly the thing that one of our founding fathers thomas jefferson feared most . after the last shots were fired in the revolutionary war and the final treaty signed america turned toward another battle a battle over which direction our newly independent nation would take the interesting thing about america shortly after the revolution was that it was absent a vast and wealthy ruling elite virtually all of the truly rich people in north america had either gone back to england or had gone to canada was also absent a major corporate monopoly like the east india tea company which america had rebelled against years earlier in the boston tea party so this was the vision of thomas jefferson and most of the other founders of america a nation of independent and free citizens essentially

a nation of farmers an independent family businesses and a gala tarion utopia jefferson felt that the best way to preserve this vision is to enshrine certain protections in the united states constitution there were three things that jefferson feared most at the onset of our nation fear of tyrannical governments like kingdoms fear of organized religion in fact the jefferson bible which is still in print removed all references to miracles in the new testament and portrays jesus as a proponent of natural human rights and peace and finally fear of commercial monopolies are an immensely wealthy ruling elite they could corrupt the fledgling american democracy to defend against these concerns but to ensure that america would be a nation of people practicing self governance like the iroquois in the early greeks . jefferson fought for the constitution to include a basic bill of rights he actually threatened to pull virginia out of the

constitutional convention and didn't get his way he outlined these rights in a letter to his protege and best friend james madison a letter expressing his disapproval with the constitution in its first draft form and seven hundred eighty seven because it didn't include a bill of rights jefferson wrote i will now tell you what i don't like first the omission of a bill of rights providing clearly for freedom of religion freedom of the press protection against standing armies restriction of monopolies and the eternal and unremitting force of famous corpus laws and trials by jury ultimately a few years later jefferson would be successful in lobbying for these rights and a bill of rights would be added to the constitution and ultimately ratified in seven hundred ninety one although two of jefferson's concerns were left out of it protection against standing armies there was a fragment

a remnant left over we call that the second amendment which originally banned standing armies during time of peace and the restriction of monopolies the federalist party which is comprised of people like treasury secretary alexander hamilton and our second president john adams sort of today's republican party only went through a couple of reincarnations through the whigs and the republicans would fight tooth and nail to make sure that there were no limits on monopolies a policy that would later per provide america with an economic boom and secure its place as a superpower of the world but also a policy that so the seeds of today's immense corporate whip on our government but there was one last battle jefferson wanted to fight to make sure his vision of america would be realized and a senator in the united states senate. in one eighteen thirteen jefferson and his political rival john adams had been the president just before jefferson in fact he

was given as vice president clashed over how senators would be elected to serve in congress at the time it was left to the states and most to crony appointments by governors or elected by state legislatures that often boy. former president adams was of the belief that the senate should be comprised of a wealthy elite he was a genuine original conservative he thought we should have a natural aristocracy that was his phrase what he called it that it could serve as a check against the masses for the rabble adams word for people like you and me in eight hundred thirteen letter to adams on this issue jefferson this is five years after he left the presidency lashed out at what he saw as a flaw emerging in our democracy he wrote of this a cub all in the summit of the united states has furnished many proofs nor do i

believe them necessary to protect the wealthy because enough of these will find their way into every branch of the legislation to protect themselves i think the best remedy is exactly that provided by our constitution is to leave to the citizens the free election and the separation of the wheat from the chaff in general they will like the really good ones in some instances wealth may corrupt and birthday blind them but not in sufficient degree to a dangerous society. you see jefferson's idea of an egalitarian senate wouldn't be realized until one thousand nine hundred thirteen with the passage of the seventeenth amendment that declared that all u.s. senators must be elected by popular vote within their states and amendment wildly unpopular with the emerging corporations and the robber barons of the time the carnegie's and rockefeller's of the day the morgans and pierpoint someone who could no longer throw their weight around and state governments to elect or appoint her

corporate body unfortunately nearly a century after the power in the senate was taken from corporations and super rich and handed to the people just as jefferson had visions the supreme court would snatch their power from us and hand it back to the corporations and their citizens united ruling at the beginning of two thousand and ten it was really the culmination of several first national bank verses bloddy before that buckley versus vallejo all the way back to santa clara county versus versus a southern pacific railroad back in one thousand nine hundred six but really from that point on from twenty. from last year citizens united only jefferson's greatest fears a ruling aristocracy of transnational corporations multi millionaires and billionaires has actually in fact emerged to buy off our politicians to give

themselves massive tax breaks and pass laws that only benefit the rich and early battles of the jefferson one as our nation was being founded have now been reversed and america is a vastly different from what he would have dreamed of. we need to make a choice today about the future of our nation particularly as we head into next year's budget battle or would we go with the vision of an american legislature bought and paid for by the highest bidders. that's basically what paul ryan the republicans are proposing are we will will we go with the founding vision of this country as one where the average voter had as much power as the rich as as bernie sanders suggests with public financing who do you trust more to guide us today republicans who are their allegiance and political survival to billionaires and corporations or the author of the declaration of independence thomas jefferson also founded the democratic party and that's it for tonight thanks so much for being

with us and don't forget democracy begins with your it see you. more news today violence is once again flared up. these are the images the world has been seeing from the streets of candor that. corporations are today.