i'm lauren lyster. are guys it's time for you said it i read it right take time to respond to my brilliance and engaging viewer comments from facebook twitter and you too because you got me to say i listen well tonight we're going to have a special edition for you is the last week we were asked by viewer to participate in a group and be a poet it's good for ron tweeted out us at the low to show anyone up for a group and a poem i'll start if some day i get hauled away tell my family it was the n.b.a. now we gladly got that challenge and so we were spotted by adding on the following why wait obama promised americans would be excluded and other products. he must

think we're easily deluded so then we decided that you know it we really need to keep this whole thing going and so we just asked the rest of our viewers to join in on the depressing get. entertaining and devore and we actually got a lot of responses so as promised we put together a few of those into a nice little poem about the death of our civil liberties vote out incumbents tweet it oh well obama has spoken what the hell another promise book broke it headed for get mo for choke and croke and back to revolution for a tweet it jefferson mind was not polluted when he said a law can be refuted when the bill of rights has been denuded redwood to eat it a terrorist you are by presidential decree and da was for then you cry i should be free and steven reynolds to eat it if it has not happened during broad day tell my family that it was ok and finally at redwood tweeted another winter adding liberty and justice are now a thing of the past the police state is here her rape we're safe at last are i think that i'm going to leave it at that but thank you to everybody for

participating and let us know if you have any other brilliant ideas for how we can make poetry together that's it for tonight and we'll be back with more next week as usual. now tonight we have good news to report on the occupy movement for the first time since november fifteenth the barriers put in place as a coffee party were removed by the park's owners brookfield office properties but as the protesters re entered their former headquarters they were met with a new set of restrictions on people are allowed to return there are police closely monitoring who came and went from two entrance points of the park police are also to forcing a no loitering type of rule where anybody who's sitting or laying down on cardboard or some sort of padded material within the park will be removed or arrested or the restriction against food doesn't seem to be being put in place allowing many people to stay at the park for longer periods of time so it looks like this is a little bit of bittersweet news for the occupiers all they do get their space back the original spaces the park is going to come with some notable changes. now

it's going back to the topic of iraq yet another nuclear scientist that has been killed do we have something to do with it or don't we at this point there is no proof but let's take a look at shifting attitudes as claimed greenwald pointed out today when glenn instapundit read old suggested in two thousand and seven at the u.s. respond to iran's aspirations for a nuclear program by murdering their religious leaders and their nuclear scientists the media specifically the liberal media they went berserk but today when scientists are indeed being killed when a number of the g.o.p. presidential hopefuls are openly advocating that we do the same the outrage seems to have disappeared so what changed joining me to discuss it is scott horton contributing editor on legal and national security matters for harper's magazine scott thanks so much for joining us tonight and let me start off by going back to what i just mentioned glenn and as well as a couple other bloggers out there went back and remembered in two thousand and seven where everybody was up in arms and going crazy that this kind of

a suggestion could be made and now you have new king great and you have rick santorum saying it should be done and nobody seems to care anymore. yeah there is something of an outrage deficit right now but it's about it's was are it's an interesting situation in that you know the evidence that there is some sort of a campaign to assassinate the nuclear scientists of iran it is clear in a general sort of way but there's no specific evidence telling us who's doing it so that's a question hovering over the whole situation and you've got the arabians pointing a finger at israel and the united states but there's a failure of proof right now but one of the things if we go back to this lack of rage or lack of anger like you are saying is you think the people at the notion that if it's iranian nuclear scientists that it's ok you know rick santorum said that those in north korea those in iran those in russia if they're working for the nuclear program then they should know that they're in trouble but if it's our

nuclear scientists then it's totally fine to get carte blanche well i think i think statements have been made by rick santorum by newt gingrich by by glenn reynolds have created an atmosphere in the united states that facilitates all of this i think there's also a widespread sense in this country better as sasa nations that target scientists then war then bombing on the other hand of course what's going on is an act of war if this is being done by a country this is an act of war that and they can justify up hostilities but there is no war right now between the united states and iran or between israel and iran and the state of war actually would justify. acts of these sorts i mean they were actually worse state of war between iran and the united states senate americans would be able to target scientists who's working on

a nuclear weapons program that would be legitimate under the laws of war even though quite distasteful. but so in the meantime let's say that some evidence were to come out and that there is no war that is declared then that's just part or it's not or either there's no question about that what's going on right now is murder if they were to nab someone who was involved like the man who was riding a motorcycle who attacked this magnetic bomb to the car that killed a scientist yesterday you know he could be charged with murder and anyone else who was assisting him who gave him the explosive device or who trained him but could also be charged. now you know i think that some people out there also brought up a good point jeffrey goldberg for example today said that if you really are trying to attack iran nuclear program and ineffective way if you want to stop it

and you think that just killing a few nuclear scientists is going to completely. stop their ability even though only a few people have this kind of knowledge and that's an effective means of trying to halt it yeah i was actually surprised by jeffrey goldberg marcus because it was so rational and he doesn't tend to be a friend of iran by any stretch of the imagination but he makes some very salient points here and that is if you're actually trying to negotiate with the iranians to to cut things down or even build an international consensus for sanctions against iran that will block their program this isn't the way to go about it this is going to be is going to pull in another direction and we're over frankly if you look at the people who are the targets here academics scientists we're talking about individuals in iran who mostly have secured a training overseas who by and large don't like the regime of arc within a shot and the mullahs who are asked to it. you know it it's odd that they should

be the targets and that they should be murdered in fact it seems it would make a lot more sense to go about dealing with it with them by offering them a bungalow in los angeles and a job at a college in pasadena i think they would know if a lot of them would love to have the opportunity to just leave iran and that would be a far cheaper way of dealing with the problem. and there are you know happened scientists that have showed up in cia custody and the united states in in the past too if you were iran i mean couldn't this be detrimental for whoever is trying to stop iran you know when it comes to their aspirations towards getting a nuclear weapon because wouldn't you speed it up now if you see if there is a sustained campaign went to really try to bring it home so you can be like ron paul said at one of the debates finally get that respect the nuclear power does around the world but i think that's exactly right i mean if you look at u.s. policy now or it's iran and you compare it with us or we see towards north korea it

becomes pretty clear that once you cross that threshold into actually very nuclear weapons and being able to make military use of them haven't you the posture that's adopted by the united states is quite different so i think a more rational response around would right now be to extol rate those nuclear programs and to get across that warrants quickly as you possibly care now leon panetta at the same time came out just this week secretary of defense the united states and said that there is no evidence that iran is building a nuclear weapon and he said they are not building a nuclear weapon even though i even report couldn't conclude any of that and so then how do we put into context not only the murder in the nation of nuclear scientists but stuxnet also the drone of the down drone that iran now has its possession that you and i have spoken about. exactly right i mean i think the whole

question of whether they actually have a weapons program and if so how far it's advanced we're told by by commentators on the american political right all the time that they're weeks away or months away from having nuclear weapons but actually most of the experts studies are quite a quibble about this and quite skeptical about the status of their operations in the end and even the conclusion that this is really a weapons program and orientation so i think a lot of what's going on in the united states serves a certain domestic political agenda but it may not be accurate intelligence given the experience of iraq i think we have to be very cautious about this and certainly we have to be very certain about the status of the nuclear program before we take steps of the sort they're being act they're being advocated are even reaching to

extraordinary steps like assassinating scientists i mean that's not only a violation of international law it's also a violation of american law american was unequivocal on that point nass ever have a little bit of a deficit in that sense because partly what we've been talking about a lot on our show this evening scott thank you so much for joining us tonight great to be with you. still to come tonight the supreme court justices weigh in on whether or not people like john can use foul language on t.v. and you think it's nightfall time and coming up at happy hour mayor michael bloomberg puts his foot down to alcohol and pat buchanan a racist say to himself we're going to be right back with all that and much more. into that only a military making it difficult to bring justice or accountability. i have every right to know what my government should do if you want to know why i pay

taxes. i would characterize obama as a charismatic version of american exceptionalism. you know sometimes you see a story and it seems so. you think you understand it and then you. hear or see some other part of it and realize everything you. are welcome to the big picture.

mr. to the police to let you know. what a protest nobody seems to know. but never a pepper sprayed the face but part of the argument that they're being overly dramatic.

hi guys it's time for tonight's tool time award and tonight it goes to the highest court in the land the supreme court of the united states is responsible for being the last word on many of the big questions of face this country from citizens united to weighing in on who won the gore bush presidential election they get the last say and yesterday they heard arguments for a case that deals with profanity and indecency on broadcast airwaves meaning the channels that you can pick up with an antenna so the question at hand here is whether or not the federal communications commission the people who monitor those airwaves can it constitutionally enforce their current policies on indecency and there's a lot of history behind the f.c.c. these regulations but here's the really short version of it a ruling made back in one nine hundred seventy eight prevented radio and television stations from using the words were made famous during george carlin's seven dirty words segment in their broadcasts. thank. you both.

that was my original list i knew it wasn't complete but it was a starter's you know. now those words set the standard for what can and cannot be played over the airwaves however in two thousand and four the f.c.c. further restricted broadcasters from expletives and what they define as indecency i decided that networks could be fined for breaking the rules just once and so that's why this entire supreme court argument comes into play cases of from all the major t.v. t.v. networks like a.b.c. n.b.c. c.b.s. and fox we're taking a lower appeals courts for incidents like these. have you ever tried to get out of her not. really. brains. art so the argument is that statements like that should be allowed to air because the rules regarding and should be excuse me are you against the whole thing they should be allowed to air because the rules regarding indecency are overly vague and totally confusing

a lawyers the broadcast networks are calling for the fines against them to be thrown out and the laws in general to be struck down but it is part of an ongoing dispute that now even the justice department is way to not cover the one supreme court justices weighed in on the case seemed like a lot of them didn't really seem too fond of actually dropping at these regulations justice scalia for example said the government can insist on a certain modicum of decency justice kennedy expressed it he isn't interested in seeing a time when celebrities and want to be celebrities have the right to utter profanity on t.v. and radio chief justice roberts said all we're asking for is a few channels where parents can be confident that their kids won't hear profanity or see sex scenes justice alito made a point that this argument could be pointless because broadcast networks could be moved in a few years there were two justices however who did speak out in favor of striking down the indecency laws justice ginsburg said that the expletives are common in common parlance today and i think that children are not going to be shocked by them the way they might have been

a generation ago justice kagan was on the fence she said it seems to work and it seems to be a good thing that there is some safe haven but then she went on to say it seems no one can use dirty words except steven spielberg and so see here can you brings up a really good point the lawyers for the networks presented their case to the justices explaining of the f.c.c. seems to be rather arbitrary and their actions they went on to say how films of the were aired on television like schindler's wrist list and the movie saving private ryan were able to show scenes of foul language and evil for frontal nudity without any outcry. if you feel. right so that was able to air but sharon nicole richie's statements during an awards ceremony that was met with a fine sounds like the people of the f.c.c. are huge steven spielberg fans either that or they're picking and choosing who gets

punished defense lawyers also point out the supreme court's all decisions to allow foul language and nudity in other situations as a protection of free speech under the first amendment so virtual child porn videos of animal cruelty those are just a couple examples where the justices ruled in favor of free speech and so that's what i have an issue with the supreme court if we're going to protect free speech then protect it you can't create an island of a decency and a sea of filth it's just not possible if fox can't show nicole richie's rant about her stupid prada purse then spielberg's spielberg's masterpieces should be shown either but the answer is restricting it spielberg is letting rich she speak her mind so is on the supreme court you don't see that we're going to try to grip into outdated ideas what the role of television is in our society the government can't make people be decent call the nanny state not to be a few more months of for the courts make their final decision but if reasoned arguments imply anything it's that the biased regulations are here to stay so for expressing sympathy for an archaic set of indecency rules the supreme court and its justices are tonight told time winners.

it's time for happy hour joining me this evening is our t.v. producer jenny churchill and tanya sama nader reporter and blogger for think progress dot org thanks for joining me guys thank you so let's start out with obviously citizens united has been a hot topic a big deal and we have seen even g.o.p. politicians come out in favor of it like mitt romney. christians are people my friend we can raise taxes and of course they are everything corporations are and also that it goes to people. what you think you are right so according to the r. and d. citizens united didn't go far enough because corporations can now spend freely on elections but it all goes to these super pacs these other organizations they can't give directly to the candidate so the r. and c.

is now suing again to make it so that you can directly contribute to the candidate what are your thoughts i mean i just think that this is so insane given that right now people are taking to the streets across the nation to fight money in politics and yet we're trying to find out easier ways to let the money in the poll it never stop the never stop trying to find the easy while it's kind of the air of the nascar candidate you know you kind of look for ad space on the suit maybe that's not just like see who's sponsoring you all around but that's the weird thing about this and we were discussing this in our editorial meeting this one is i don't support either one of these things but it's almost like this is better than citizens united because there nothing is disclosed you don't know where it's coming from and here the candidates at least have to tell you who's donating to them it's really really sad when that's the political world we live in where you have to be are well rationally yeah it's actually a better deal that's true while thinking of other rational things and some people

get a little pissy when they think that prisoners because we hate prisoners in this country get nice things so here's the thing prison t.v. for example. prisoners have a luxury that many taxpayers don't have at home we're talking about premium cable t.v. there are nine state prisons where inmates can actually have television in their cells they paid for however in a letter sent to me from a prisoner at attica he complained that there are inmates convicted of sex crimes who have cable television with premium channels that show pornography. knowing it's a little bit creepy but we're talking about there's a specific prisoner from california who gets the atlantic. and so she wrote to them to tell them that she didn't get to read her december issue because the cover of it had a picture of a taliban fighter with a gun on it i'm not sure if we have the image or not but. really. this also is

completely insane to me i mean you've got a prisoner who's trying to educate themselves who wants to learn more about what's going on in the world and more restricting that i think that anyone who's spending time doing things other than you know making sure and figuring out ways to get out of jail should be rewarded not punished well that is also where it is kind of saying that a picture somehow leads to criminal acts it's like i'm not going to rob a bank because i saw a poster for ocean's eleven you know it's just not going to happen and if you kind of thought about it like that it seems like a good idea well good for you know i mean that so there's a reason for the rule and study but i mean if you actually look at the letter that the warden wrote in saying why they would allow her to see it it said assault rifle but they spelt it assault riffle so it's almost like why don't you just let the prisoner write the letter because clearly they're more well read and probably could also dangerous to you know to journalism you know it's so frightening too that she might get a magazine with a gun on it when there's people walking around the jail all day with guns on their

hips i mean i just it's. completely. other shocking thing to listen to pat buchanan who is getting the boot from m.s.m. as a contributor there this is his reasoning as to as to why he thinks that's happening . for a long period of turmoil. militant gay rights groups. groups . approachable right people of color. and others. and i said we see you decide to give the boot over his new book the end of white america which has a very clearly racist things in it but is it really is are they like is this a new thing to them and said b c do they not know who the candidate is it's nice to know that they have finally reached a sense of a standard but it is it is bizarre i mean a little too late yeah i mean at some point i mean when you when you put it in

writing i guess for once. at least people can point back to it and say this guy really is crazy he's selling it you guys don't like colored people yes better serial of colors like i have no no no colored people is very different for people of color very different it is like every single minority group in you know displaced or just privileged group in america is on his lawn and he just wants them off i think that kind of isn't that just right so i'm super. hot against it and i know what i'm super excited because i think pat buchanan is destined to be the next person that is glitter bombed and i'm so psyched for it like whoever is in control that out there glitter bomb him now and i want to see it all right let's move on real quick to mayor bloomberg who well he's been on a whole thing to get all kinds of healthy foods and stuff out of the world take a look. government levels must make healthy solutions the social.

that is ultimately government's highest duty. they've cracked down on salt they've cracked down on smoking in new york and now he wants to target alcohol not as in like make it legal or anything but he wants to reduce the alcohol retail outlets the density and and illegal alcohol so basically you can have a liquor store on every corner this is this is some plan this is it actually read into law yeah but come on i've had enough with his war on fun it is i feel sorry for every person that knows him every person who's for staying out with them he has to be the most miserable human being on the planet like i'm not allowed to eat my fries i can't have my soft drink now and now i can't go where you're invited to dinner you know luxury is parties you can have all the food and all the booze that you want it's just the rest of us that apparently don't know what it's for and enough this it's winter this is mean that it's like us that's an eating plan i mean you know the rent rates in new york post people i would not play my heating bill

and i was going to plan on buying you know some walk around the corner or something a little bottle you know i'm very good or a bit of her at a time but thanks for joining me that's it for a night so thanks for tuning in and make you come back on the show tomorrow we'll have radley balko on in the meantime and over to follow us online and coming up next to you. 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 or see some other part of it and realize everything you thought you knew you don't know i'm tom harvey welcome to the big picture. wealthy british style. but on the title of.

markets why not come to. find out what's really happening to the global economy with mike's cars or for a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune into cars a report on our. download the official ante up location on the phone on pod touch from the choose ops to. life on the go. video on demand all t's mine gold costs and already says feeds now in the palm of your. questions on the dot com.

i'm sam sacks in for tom hartman in washington d.c. and here's what's coming up tonight on the big picture the big question coming out of new hampshire isn't what exactly a mitt romney win means for the republican race it's why the heck did so many new hampshire vote against their best interests we'll take a closer look at how the republican candidates economic plans screw over the middle class and there may be a lot of things wrong with our elections right now but not enough corporate money and there is.