it is to get the maximum political impact. of this material is one hopes if journalism is really. if we wanted to present. something up if. download the official. i pod touch from the. life on the go. video on demand policies in mind bold colors an r.s.s. feeds are now in the palm of your. question on the com. mission free critique should free in-store charges free. range month free risk free spirit guide

free. download free blog can plug in video for your media projects for free media. dot com.

ok it's time for show and tell on tonight's program last week we told you that the cia is trying to expand their drone war capabilities and again it may help to launch futures price without knowing who their targets might even be we want to know if you bought the signature rights to be considered a terror topic sort of producer patrice and send you to find out what you have to say. i'm on the streets of d.c. to tell people in the nation's capital what our viewers had to say on twitter facebook and you tube and see which comments we should keep or delete the. cia wants to launch drone strikes in yemen based on suspicious behavior without really knowing the identity of the target so could this be considered a terror tactic i'm going to read your response from yours and i knew he said drone attacks are a terrorist act they demolish buildings kill people indiscriminately and are

operated in secret pretty much the same thing as a terrorist attack if you want to keep that comment or delete it actually i think yeah keep it. because i think you need to have a hundred percent evidence of attacks do you want to keep that or delete it. delete that we're trying to keep the terrorists out so it's not it's not the same as a terrorist strike what if it drones were used based only on suspicious behavior i'm sure there are people that are competent enough to determine that and i trust them enough to make some decision i'm going to read your sponsor john on you tube he told us the only people terrorized by drones are terrorists the u.s. uses drones to stop terrorism not participate in it so what do you think you drones only stop terrorism or can you be a part of the problem well it's going to increase tensions they've taken out quite a few terrorists already with rooms so the cia does their homework pretty good on an unmanned an unmanned aircraft sitting down to

a bomb under one target. these people see it as an act of terrorism oh many people we spoke with support using drone strikes on terrorist suspects launching drone strikes based on suspicious behavior seems like it's a conversation up for debate. as always we appreciate your responses and here's our next question for you just before the break we told you about the case of france's great man tried to burn down a planned parenthood in wisconsin and was facing jail time he's not being charged with domestic terrorism or we've seen people get that charge just for translating documents so is there a double standard on what counts as domestic terrorism i just don't think on facebook twitter and you tube and responses just might make it all here. it's also secret of the culture war is alive and well here in the u.s. we've seen it waged on a mass scale by the religious right this year and the debate over contraception

into the slew of restrictive legislation on abortion rights and making its way through state legislators a lot of religious right will point to their bible to the bible and their ideology for social issues like abortion and gay marriage something that doesn't square up in the pairing of those views with fiscal conservatism just last week we saw that play out the debate between paul ryan and the catholic bishops over his budget a budget that pushes austerity not on the defense department of course but on to social programs but wants to really be a good christian are views like ryan's when it comes to social spending hypocritical what we make of how our friends across the pond approach this earlier i caught up with david sirota talk radio host and author of that's our future how the one nine hundred eighty s. explain the world we live in now how david wrote about this topic last week specifically referring to a new report that was published in the u.k. that looked at religion and political views and participation so i first asked them to tell us more about that report. but what they found in britain is that the more religious you are the more likely you are to be caressed but the center who

believes in me for equality believe in the need for tolerance when it comes to issues of immigration in other words what it found is that in the united kingdom as opposed to the united states the more you so identified as religious the more you actually follow in your political beliefs do you think anomic word of the bible so how is that i mean obviously they're different countries right you can expect everything to be the same but how is it that there are so completely opposite because often you do find this correlation between somebody who is socially conservative and then fiscally conservative as well. in the united states it's actually true i mean you has done studies polls have come out showing really forget . now the more religious you are the more you tend to be economically conservative not just conservative on social issues and you're right in the united states are not the same but i think that what the british report highlights is that american

politics and politics in the industrialized world doesn't have to have have a partner so you can get it at the place where religion and politics intersect that there can be an economic politics but is it worse because expressive of the economic dark rooms in the bible and let's remember the doctrines in the christian bible on economics are quite progressive and where you read the sermon on the mel speech knows that it's kind of ridiculous to claim that the christian bible inspired any economically conservative position well so that you know that's interesting too because as i mentioned last week we saw this is the first time that we've seen it happen when there's a republican budget that's proposed the ends of slashing a lot of social programs programs like medicaid or welfare and food stamps and whatnot and so last week we saw that play out between paul ryan and the catholic bishops but we've also heard certain ways around this from paul ryan even you know

some of them religious guess what they host on fox news a little playing a clip and i want to get your response. when we say something like the importance of taking care of the poor the importance of taking care of the least of these that there is also this other other element of personal responsibility and making sure a higher level of government doesn't our society does not do but in a lower level of government or society can do for itself there's got to be this balance here those principles are very very important and the preferential option for the poor which is one of the primary tenets of catholic social teaching means don't keep people poor don't make people dependent on government so that they stay stuck in their station in life help people get out of poverty and a life of independence. what do you think about that hesitation well i mean my reaction person foremost is that coming somebody up with food stamps is not a way with them up out of poverty so that's the first thing the idea of our own

budget or that mitt romney's got it proposals are aimed it at eliminating poverty and getting people out of poverty is preposterous making somebody more hungry millions of many not be able to afford their health insurance their code we subsidize health insurance is not a way to end their party it's simply a way frankly in my estimation to get more money to give to the very wealthy in this in this country my my larger critique would be this that we have to remember the historical context of our office the intersection of politics and religion in the united states for most of our history was an intersection where the capital t. chain for instance where the christian bible teachings on economics were represented on the progress of the cross of gold speech for william jennings bryan for instance the famous example i think i was of course martin luther king who comes out of the religious world his poor people's campaign to try to end poverty so we have to remember that what you see expressed by paul ryan is is

a modern i guess i'll call it interpretation i would also probably call it of starvation and what the bible as. actually teaches that how do we get there right how did that become the modern interpretation because you could say in many respects to the what we see with you know the religious right nowadays especially with younger population is that when it comes to social issues like gay marriage for example they're moving towards a more appropriate grass of stance in terms of becoming more accepting of it so how is that what is the fiscal conservatism now that the modern way of looking at it but i think a big part of the way that's happened is that you have a situation where religion has become a political grand and now this is certainly something represented by whether people are actually reading a candidate there was a recent study of just a couple months ago that even in america people who actually have read the bible tend to be more progressive than those who haven't read the bible but that's

different than calling yourself religious lot of people can call themselves religious and really have not much of an idea of what the religion in question actually teaches the other part of it i think is that look you have a well funded conservative movement that has tried to create what is an unholy alliance between working class people and very rich and the people who have created that that on will you alliance has used religion had manipulated religion to try to forge their own unholy alliance together the good news is that generational polling tells us that the new younger people today even younger evangelicals are necessarily behind it the best way to pursue the word of god if you were god it is far more progressive on economics to somehow to embrace conservative economics i mean yes one of the things when you think about it and you look at it it seems so obvious that there is that hypocrisy there but it's important to keep talking about it right otherwise they can try to cover it up and david thanks so much for joining us absolutely thank you. we have to take one more quick break but i liken that to

all the time tonight involves that he's being too busy helping a lot of force may infringe on your privacy to park. for privacy and out of the our new clothing rights act and star of record. download the official answer to your highly phone or i pod touch from the i.q. exam still. life. video on demand r.t.s. mind broadcasts and r.s.s. feeds now in the palm of your. question on the t.v. dot com. it's

.

all right it's time for tonight's tool time award and tonight we're giving a collective honor to cell phone providers have a talk show we spoke about or ever expanding surveillance state and this story falls right into that back the t.i.a. the wireless organization is the cell phone industry's trade group and it's involved in state bill fourteen thirty four it's called the california location privacy bill now proposed by state senator mark leno this bill will require law enforcement to obtain a warrant from a judge before getting their hands on phone location information and also require phone providers to disclose why they're sharing that information and how often they're giving it to the police personally i commend them there for this proposal after all police are using mobile data is their number one tool in tracking down individuals and just last year it was julian sanchez discuss how police managed to bypass the fourth amendment to obtain whatever data about you that they can. and it's actually interesting kind of a way of doing a little weird end run around the for the money because look with them it doesn't protect in the same way information that is stored by a third party like

a telecom so that is kind of clever two step they couldn't get this information from you directly without a full blown search warrant but they can say well first a third party has to collect it and i was the third party has collected it your fourth amendment privacy interests diminish and then they can get it with a lesser process. so as you can see law enforcement is learning how valuable cell phone companies really are kind of like the way the bush administration used the telecoms to wiretap and then gave them legal immunity from prosecution but anyway in this case the companies really seem to feel the same loving way about the police and fact c.t.a. the wireless association whose members include sprint horizon u.s. cellular and agency all sent a letter to leno explaining why they oppose the location privacy bill and it turns out of the organization not only finds it to be a burden to disclose how and why they're sharing location with data with cops but they also claim that would be expensive to compile that data and it might create

confusion for providers so ladies and gentlemen protecting your constitutional right is just too much of a burden for these cell phone companies just like the insane can't and because if those reasons are inferior adding enough to listen to house the t.i.a. and that's argument every iterates these are reporting mandates would undo all the burden wireless providers and their employees who are working day and night to assist law enforcement to ensure the public safety and to save lives are so not only have they said there were girls in them financially apparently emotionally to have to be honest about how often they're giving up your data but they're also just admitting that they were day and night with law enforcement so like they're giving up their data all the time is that why they'd be so burdensome and expensive because there's so much of this going on and the mayor's office come out and say the protecting their customers privacy is not a priority hell it's not even an interest for hello this is a constitutional issue we have warrants for a reason i love to see how one of these companies responded to cops to showed up at

their door without a warrant now it's not entirely the same obviously but i think you get the point it's disgusting to see a total lack of interest in protecting their customers but overall their financial argument also doesn't make sense so according to see t.i.a. it would be expensive to put together all this data about how often or why the police are requesting the information because a.c.l.u. and c.n.n. pointed out. info the privacy bill request is already put together it wouldn't require any extra work from the companies and so why is that information already available you might be asking well because the company send a bill to the cops every single time they come begging for that location data data as that on the color pointed out those location data requests they don't come cheap and the companies want to make sure they're giving accurate invoices to law enforcement there's even an example invoice this one actually shows how he charges one hundred dollars to activate the service and then twenty five dollars a day for their assistance so it's pretty clear that e.t.a. lots of protect all the extra money coming in for some providers after all it's

a nice perk to the business but it completely violates the unspoken understanding that cell phone providers should be working for law enforcement they should be working for you the customer right and with law enforcement when it's within the law but once again this is all part of our growing surveillance state well it's been expanding since september eleventh for national security comes in for your personal privacy and where the constitution has been shredded into a million little pieces thanks to the fear that they peddle about needing to be able to gather anything they want on any given day but this california bills try to put an end to that trend while both completely stop police from using mobile data to their advantage it would at least give customers peace of mind the cops would have to go about it the right way by obtaining a warrant but in the eyes of the cia this would keep the phone companies and law enforcement from being best buddies and they definitely don't want that to happen so we're arguing against the rights of consumers encouraging the continuing police practice other tainting location data without warrants c t i a and their member

companies are tonight's tools i'm a winner. ok time for happy hour and joining me this evening lauren lyster host of the capital account here in artsy and medicine loni roll calls her down the hill reporter i know the ladies. it's all the rage these days i mean ever it's the latino vote or it's the female vote and now everyone is talking about the youth vote. you wish numbers suggest that young voters those eighteen to twenty nine year olds are more likely to stay home in the fold rather than helped reelect president obama's little white house sending some of its biggest names down here to its usage will recapture some of that magic from two thousand and eight. it's right above us try to recapture the magic mitt romney is trying to tell people the young people of

the reason are unemployed as they go obama is so bad so you should vote for me but the whole thing about the youth right so in two thousand and eight what they said basically was that young people came out the historic numbers to vote for obama and he did with young people by thirty four points but new research from tufts university points out that wasn't all that historic in terms of the numbers forty eight point five percent of citizens eighteen to twenty four voted in two thousand and eight seems like a lot but in two thousand and four forty six point seven percent in one thousand nine hundred to forty eight point six percent one hundred seventy two fifty one or fifty two point one percent so we're not sure if you aren't actually coming out and voting but they are compared to the slackers in gen x. during the late ninety's. the whole line going to look like it today i mean you know. one thing that was. right about the nader is everybody i remember i'm in college everyone was all excited about nader most of the people seemed to be like super jazzed about it i had friends like really politically aware active friends

that decided very clearly to vote for nader knowing that their vote wouldn't go to these other people and yet the pro you know you have a series of kind of like broken up elections i think. and but i also think that this idea that they used vote is something that capture they used either more active or less active than ever before and really that's used by every election and i'm sure if you go back to the one nine hundred thirty if people are still saying this is the most active or the least fortunate it kind of sad that like the only thing that's consistent about the youth vote is that young people. basically just don't usually come out of people don't know what is the matter with the younger you're going out with that in korean people never had formed in the young people haven't had enough policies that are fair life yet to be like truly understanding or angry about the situation that they're in would be my argument but also i think that this whole you know obsession with the youth candidates might not be so youth driven like the whole student loan thing the student loan interest rates whole load

that affects middle class parents everywhere how many parents get out of their students' debt i think that my dad is still paying a student loan and i have i would also argue that people don't realize how annoying you have your student loan and tell your three drugs in that and you're still not getting the raise. and you're trying to you know i mean life changes you make it so i have a feeling that the people who really care about that are people in their thirty's late twenty's thirty's or they are now you know you still dealing with i mean the people that are actually getting the experience. like ten twelve years. of student loans are as you are to our next one which you know kind of a happy story i guess you could say there's going to be a ballot initiative in california and november the house with the death penalty. supporters tradin some eight hundred thousand signatures to the elections department state wide open to qualify the anti death penalty measure for the

november ballot they say sentenced to prison for life. will save the state millions of dollars. so that's when they were still gathering the signatures now it's on the ballot november sixth we're going to vote for it but i mean the kind of sad thing is that you have to sell this it's going to save you a lot of money hey we should abolish the death penalty because we should. think people especially when we can always prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they are guilty but what i thought was amazing that it was it's what one hundred thirty eight million dollars rate keep them to keep the seven hundred people that are on death row on death row but the ones that have been executed which is not that many i forget the number maybe if you like tens in the tens. it was four billion dollars i mean i think for a state like california to make the economic argument broke right is actually really important i think that will probably have more chance of working unfortunately because the more over. i'll have it on the other hand connecticut

only had what it only have eleven people on death row who unfortunately are still going to be on death row even though that was repealed work earlier this week or early last week or something but they don't have that same kind of economic need and yet it's happening so i think that that's something that should be really looked at as a trend there is there is some kind of going to just say one thing though that i fully support this because i am completely opposed to the death penalty for reasons like you mentioned so many miscarriages of justice that i'm sorry but the death penalty is by no way properly because there are wrongful convictions but i mean i think it's a little bit odd that the matters of life and death go to a vote because of how much is we are doing to these ballot measures that aren't really what they seem to be i mean yes on eight in california. it was very confusing to voters because you were voting actually against gay marriage but yes on eight all of their marketing made it seem like oh i'm voting for what people

were confused and so life and death matters being put to a ballot vote for me just seems very like that's that's the problem with the system the you know that california has very valid initiative is that you get some crazy stuff going on there and so then you have to try to beg people to not have the government kill people anymore or just say like it'll save you money because it was you know do you believe me they probably say yes anyway let's move on here which is basically if you are a gun owner and you know you have a permit to carry concealed weapon there's a new. out there for you take a look. at what. so brian miller woolridge series tactical about the company and so those were the chino pants that he was showing off which cost sixty five dollars and our base

a for the fashion aware gun owner no no there are pleats just so you know to please yeah and men across the world listen to me and hopefully what i think is funny is this is being billed as a covert fashion which is just too funny because yes it is covert fashion. because no i. was about i think that's a really good point i think we got a call up brian over and i want to tell the clearly you can get a female perspective here if you actually want to make the guys look good while they're carrying a concealed weapon it's not just them it's a burgeoning business according to that story said it's under armor to everybody's writers and the bull market in concealed weapons permits this is like the male equivalent of the female pink like the little lipstick gun that you saw in like the old movie is about was sexy i mean not that guns are. you know. i you know know there's a little pink every there's still hot pink guns that they made you know those

little hot pink pepper sprays and rice and everything. like this these are clothing you know. hopefully it's going to say our girls things are doing great and i think that's it for tonight so thank you for explaining it ad they should come back tomorrow are you speaking about arizona as the ten seventy going to the supreme court and meantime don't forget to become a fan of the large scale facebook and follow us on twitter if you missed any of tonight's show or any other nights we stashed the. slash we want to show that coming up next is that me. mission of free critic a should be free. for charges free. range from and free. three stooges free.

old free broadcast quality video for your media projects a free media and on to our teeth dot com. wealthy british style. sometimes violent. market finance to. find out what's really happening to the global economy with mike's culture for

a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune into cars a report. the for.