and work low income jobs but a lot of low income jobs are actually going out to the suburbs so you know tom kingsley who i suppose you from the urban institute spoke about this and it's good because you know you're getting these more affordable housing out there and you know strip malls are moving out there so they can get jobs that you know the wal-mart or whatever retail store but what you don't have is services services for people who need that extra help you know food pantries things like that those are located in rural areas so. you know it can go both ways really but tampa itself is really interesting because it actually has one of the highest rates of homelessness in any city there's a group called the national alliance to end homelessness and you know as you mentioned in your introduction half of those surveyed said you know this is about you know having financial problems this is about businesses that were here no longer being here that means we don't have jobs anymore and of course live as you know the problem with the foreclosure rate florida the second biggest you know the second highest rate after california

a much larger state. home prices have significantly decreased there and we just seen you know certain parts of this state you drive across and its foreclosure sign after foreclosure signs i do want to point out there are two zip codes where seventy percent or higher of homes there are underwater zip codes three three six zero five and three three six one zero those zip codes are in the highest one percent of you know the places where it's the worst and you know some of the zip codes that could be called lucky those are places in which only about thirty thirty one percent of the homes are underwater so when you look at the numbers and you see the pictures it is a really important story a really important thing that's happening that's unfolding you know as we move into this election time we were at the convention and we heard so many promises and so many ideas to to make this country better will guess what you're going to have to answer that. question of foreclosures of poverty and this housing crisis that is

still very much alive it's interesting there was so much media there and so close to this happening and really very little mid mention of the problem this huge problem in tampa well you know a lot of people who simply had to stay within the security zone a lot of people locked inside the convention center to file their stories and you know interview some of the high paula high ranking politicians but we thought it was important and we try to do this wherever we travel not only to cover the main story and to make sure that we're there witnessing that but also to see hey what else is this city about you know what kind of stories can we bring back to our viewers to show what's happening here unless i want to ask you because some reports of homeless homeless people within tampa were facing more hostility and more pressure as a result of the chaos from the r. and c. did you see that going on you know i didn't see that happening we did interview

those homeless people living in you know what they called romney ville and you have had some run ins with the police but mostly everything was peaceful but this is something that happens i certainly read about it happening here i witnessed it several years ago back in san diego where i'm from we had the r. and c. there back in the late ninety's and the rumor was that they gave all the homeless people and of course there are a lot of homeless people in san diego because if you were homeless where would you want to live somebody where it never rained and was so the rumor was that they gave a lot of those people a one way ticket to arizona i don't know if that was true but we certainly did see you know a whole bunch of homeless people in our downtown area disappear who knows where they went it's about making your city look good to all those cameras to all those tourists who are there tampa had this opportunity and you know certainly it is a popular thing to do to try to get the unsightly things out of the way interesting christine thank you so much and a great job covering the convention over there and we'll be in charlotte yes

definitely i mean what i've excited to i had over there that was a r t correspondent christine. alas a former massachusetts governor mitt romney took center stage at the republican national convention officially accepting his party's nod for president as the dust settles in tampa all eyes are now on charlotte for the democratic national convention so to kick off in just a few days but have americans really been glued to convention coverage laurie harshness from the resident does that hit the streets of new york to find out. in the us republicans and democrats are holding their national conventions and here the media and politicians talk about them that the most important things going on right now so who's watching and what have they seen this week let's talk about that have you been watching why not because i don't like either one of those guys. so you don't watch and you don't vote in that then no i do but i like voting for the

we're. not the worst of the two. but don't you need to watch the conventions to be informed know it's all crap have you been watching it all absolutely none of it why now what i hate the republicans are you going to watch the democratic convention probably not why not i don't need to do you think there is actual information being said sad at the conventions or is that just kind of b.s. but i think it's sort of you know sounds good on camera do you think that these conventions actually do anything you know. spend money our money our money how do you feel about that i don't like that. i do we get them to stop because you know romney's going to leave town. the content is not so much the port important outside how people perform the my first impression the people are choosing the heads not the phones i think most of europeans are through obama. and you don't

need to watch any of the bad. you know really want to show us that i was really i mean congress or us is smarter than that that was really awful and she was sad when it bad irritates me is that these people are actually really think we're stupid what are they covering up well that she's a very intelligent lady but i mean she sat there for an hour striking mitt romney's a go with you know america's you know that we i mean america needs someone to stand up and take charge of think. people that are out for themselves that's it i give up on it but don't they when i mean you're not happy with the way things are going and so on you've chosen is to check out doesn't that mean they went. yes. yes so it seems like most people aren't even watching but if you do decide to tune in and remember to watch it for what it is extremely calculated very expensive showmanship designed to influence the way you think whether or not that works to

you. well as rhetoric heats up over iran the most senior u.s. military official has something to say about it general martin dempsey voicing his opposition to israel taking unilateral military action and you broad he says an attack on the country would quote clearly it's a way of probably not destroy iran's nuclear program i don't want to be complicit if they choose to do it but this admission comes after republican presidential nominee mitt romney criticized president obama at the r. and c. for failing to take decisive action military action in iran this after the latest report out of the international atomic energy agency reportedly shows iran's nuclear program is advancing now dempsey also said he didn't know what iran's intentions are because there is no intelligence that makes it clear so we want to ask why are top military leaders using caution when it comes to military action in

iran while members of the g.o.p. continue to ramp up pressure and advocate hard line military intervention. oh we turn now to the saga of juliana saunders officials from both the u.k. and ecuador continue to meet in the hopes of putting an end to the diplomatic stalemate assad remains holed up at the ecuadorian embassy in london last night the embattled wiki leaks founder predicted he would have to remain inside that embassy between six months to a year all this comes a day after foreign secretary william hague admitted seeing no solution in sight to the conflict but it looks like a song that is remaining optimistic yesterday he told venezuelan t.v. he believes that the swedish government would likely drop the case against him after a thorough investigation the ecuadorian state media grabbed an interview with julian assad to work he argued that wiki leaks wasn't dangerous or deadly especially in

comparison to the u.s. as wars in iraq and afghanistan well stay tuned here on our t.v. for the latest on the case of julian a song. still had on our t.v. first the washington post now the new york times it seems the line between reporter and subject is more blurry than avar and media outlets aren't just covering the news they're part of it that story ahead.

mitt romney trying to figure out. what. far left wants the usa to defeat terrorism. neighborhood. the olympics and a. whole lot. of the. you know the corporate media distract us from what you and i should care about because they're profit driven industry that sells us no facials to garbage because the breaking news i'm having martin and we're going to break that.

decline of american power continues. things in our country so bad might actually be time for a revolution. and it turns out that a popular drink of starbucks has a surprising in radio. welcome

to the capital account i'm lauren lyster. we just put a picture of me when i was like nine years old and just you know look through. i have a confession i am a total get a friend that i love grabbing hip hop music and for. that he was kind of a yesterday. i'm very proud of the world with its

place. at first very let's just burn gerard's right right i mean it's like a derivative of actual pepper it's a food product essentially. much stronger than anything it's you buy off. thousands of times i'm stronger than any one of the ever put you know. one journalism gets controversial is it time to get the cia involved apparently that's what a new york times reporter dead times reporter mark mazetti reportedly forwarded an advance copy of doubts column to the cia spokesperson the piece was about the film

zero dark thirty which is about the killing of osama bin laden here's a look at the trailer. well. the only thing to do. well dowd's column criticized the white house for giving hollywood insider information while leaving the public in the dark about the operation this is all coming to light thanks to documents disclosed by the transparency group judicial watch to talk more about this i was joined by jeff cohen media critic and journalism professor at ethical college i first asked him if sending an unpublished column to a government agency violates media ethics. well there's no doubt that it is you know the job of an independent reporter who's covering a powerful institution like the cia your job is to get leaks from honest ethical

people inside that agency so you can tell the american public what's going on with that powerful agents those leaks are not supposed to go in the opposite direction where the newspaper a newspaper reporter is giving a column two days before it's in the newspaper to the cia that's just not how it's supposed to work it's an example of the kind of collusion that often happens in big u.s. media outlets you know when it comes to national security stories like those involving the cia we have a media that sometimes operates more as a fourth branch of government then as an independent for the states and i think this that's what's reflected not only in this reporter sort of helping the cia by giving them a column and saying look you didn't get this from me delete it after you read you

have nothing to worry about see there is little to worry about for the cia that's not the job of a reporter in a free society you're not supposed to assure someone of the powerful agency they have nothing to worry about if you're an independent reporter you want that powerful agency to worry about you and your news outlet and what you might be digging up about that what do you think it says a balance the times are at least this reporter is a priority is that and i guess they're looking out for i mean usually your first loyalty should be to the public to this information but i mean what does this say that their priorities are there's no doubt that your your priority if you're an independent journalist that's in a free press in a free democratic society your obligation is to the public but here are. this reporter clearly was trying to show an obligation to its source the most powerful

intelligence agency in the world the cia and the problem isn't just this reporter the managing editor of the new york times when asked about this kept going on about how this is much ado about nothing. and then the spokesperson for the new york times said oh this was a mistake this was a guy who was doing some fact checking no the e-mail correspondence between this reporter and they cia official shows a relationship that's completely unethical that's completely involved with collusion and i repeat believe that it's a pattern at the new york times you know the new york times bill keller one of the top people there during wiki leaks he admitted that he was taking direction from the federal government on what wiki leaks material could be published and could not be published during the bush administration the new york times had a story before the two thousand and four of action that the bush administration had

spied on many americans through warrantless wiretaps which was a clear violation of federal law and the new york times was asked by the bush administration hold that store and they held it for all for more than a year it didn't come out so late in two thousand and five so it's part of this collusion you know the u.s. media like to lecture the rest of the world about the need for a free press and how the state should not control the media but when it comes to national security in our country there is all too much collusion between the elite media outlets like the new york times the washington post time magazine n.p.r. there is too much collusion between these institutions these press institutions and the institutions of the national security state so you're saying that too often the media works with the government instead of trying to expose their wrong doing the government no doubt about it i mean what kind of what kind of reporter are.

wouldn't do this kind of think of the sort of helpful p.r. role for the cia and then the next day turn around and try to expose possible wrongdoing by that agency to the american public no it's not unlikely and as i say the problem at the new york times as we saw from the reactions of the bosses here not just this reporter has not spoken but the reaction of the new york times p.r. spokesperson and the new york times managing editor that to me is more worrisome almost than what this reporter did which was outrageous enough kind of brings up this interesting relationship because it near reporters oftentimes in order to get the inside scoop they develop these relationships with their source says it should be this professional relationship clearly means that he has this relationship with an official within the cia want to ask you what is the line between this and

unethical behavior how do you keep that relationship and check so you don't while a if the rules of journalistic ethics well clearly when you're leaking information from your newspaper to the agency you're covering that crossed all at the called lines. the problem you're getting at one of the biggest problems in u.s. media that these these reporters sit on these beats for two whether it's wall street whether it's the white house whether it's congress whether it's the cia and they often develop a. healthy cozy relationship with their sources and the main obligation you said at the beginning of this interview should be to the american public to the reading and viewing public but when you get that when you're too long at your beat and too cozy with your sources after a while you know you're no longer exposing things about the agencies these powerful

agencies to the public. too often you're sitting on information you're so cozy with your sources that you couldn't expose them if you tried so this surely has to be embarrassing for the new york times as this becomes public do you think that this revelation will lead to any changes nothing's changing at the new york times it seems to get worse you know at the journalism department in ithaca college there's a bunch of us that study us media history and you look back over forty years since the pentagon papers where the new york times another paper said on a national security issue no our agency is to the public we're going to stand up against the government you look from pentagon papers to today and you see forty years of these big institutions like the new york times just getting cozier and cozier and cozier and one of the classic examples i mentioned was sitting on a story for more than a year that the bush administration was engaging in warrantless wiretapping on

americans and holding out till after the two thousand and four election that's pretty telling and and asking for federal government direction on what wiki leaks material at the time should publish or not publish things are getting worse at the new york times i don't expect them to turn around because of this incident really interesting jeff thank you so much for coming on the show appreciate it that was jeff collins journalism professor at a college and a media critic. that's going to wrap it up for this hour but for more on the stories we covered you can check out our you tube can only post on our interviews on line and fall there that's you tube dot com slash artsy america you can also head on over to our website r t dot com slash usa and you can follow me on twitter at landfall will be very fact here at six pm.

limitations free could you take three months for charges three arrangement three. three steers three player loans three broadcast live video for your media projects a free medio don carty dot com. to . play. hello and welcome to cross talk on people about is the u.s. still number one in the world opinions differ sharply though there can be no doubt american supremacy is being challenged by a number of international players however if indeed the u.s. is in decline aren't all americans to blame. play and.

play. to cross whether america is still number one i'm joined by bruce fein in washington senior policy adviser to ron paul two thousand and twelve presidential campaign and the founder of the link field group and american freedom agenda also in washington we have michael hughes he's a journalist and foreign policy analyst and in harrisburg we cross to jeffrey lord he is a former reagan white house political director and author all right gentlemen cross talk rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want but before we start our discussion here let's take a look at a very well known clip from h.b.o.'s program newsroom let's have a look. just in case you accidentally wander into a voting booth one day there's some things you should know and one of them is there is absolutely no evidence to support the statement that we're the greatest country in the world we're seventeen literacy twenty seventh in math twenty second in science forty nine. in life expectancy one hundred seventy eight an infant mortality third in median household income number four in labor force and number four in exports we lead the world in only three categories number of incarcerated

citizens for capita number of adults who believe angels are real and defense spending where we spend more than the next twenty six countries combined twenty five of whom are allies none of this is the fault of a twenty year old college student but you nonetheless are without a doubt a member of the worst period generation period ever periods when you ask what makes us the greatest country in the world i don't know what the fuck you're talking about somebody. sure used to be. we stood up for what was right. we fought for moral reasons we passed laws struck down laws for moral reasons we waged war zone poverty not poor people. we sacrificed we cared about our neighbors we put our money where amal's were and we never beat our chests we built great big things made on godly

technological advances explored the universe cure disease and we cultivated the world's greatest artists and the world's greatest economy. we reached for the stars. acted like men we aspired to intelligence we didn't belittle it it didn't make us feel inferior. we didn't identify ourselves by we voted for in the last election and we didn't scare so easy. we were able to be all these things and do all these things because we were informed. by great man men who were revered. first step in solving any problem is recognizing there is one. america is not the greatest country in the world anymore.

i'm not ok michael very powerful acting extremely powerful words how do you react to that i mean because a lot of the facts mentioned there are correct ok they're easy to find and they've been known for a long time now is america still number one. and maybe but there's a there's a gradual decline and it has to do with a lot of what he said there's. a lot of it is political gridlock because a special interest groups you know we have a sixteen or fifteen dollar outstanding public debt and seven hundred billion dollars defense budget and for some reason we need to be projected worldwide we have this global footprint that does not match up to the actual threats ok it's very uncertain bruce if i can go to you i mean ok go ahead jump in. i just say i think the the diagnosis is correct but i think the reasons are wrong ok one or the

really shouldn't be a country and the reasons are that we have lost our way from what we were in visioned as a country from the founding we shouldn't be going abroad in search of monsters to destroy what would make a country number one is complying with the rule of law on during the liberty over big government making sure you have a level playing field so everyone has the opportunity to develop their endowments and faculties and achieve what their ambition and industry will achieve it's not having government favor one side of the other side and say honoring respect for international law and not invading anyone sovereignty because we say that in our viewpoint you're harboring someone at some time someplace could be a danger to the united states global projection of military power going back to what john quincy adams said when he was secretary of state in eight hundred twenty one before was president that we could be dictators of the world what our policy would then shift from a policy of liberty and freedom to a policy of domination and control and now we are

a country that's lost its way and it's not because we may not be number one in the amount of arms we sell you know we sell about three quarters of all the arms abroad or have the greatest military power but because we lost our moral stature and values of who we are as a people our influence of broad should be the influence of example period we should have self defense but not preemptive war for everywhere ok where we are now where the lines are all night these are all nice things jeffrey how did we get to this point then. well first of all let me say in terms of and terms of what bruce has just said and i should note here for the record that bruce is a former colleague from the reagan administration although we've not met and i can't see him i recognize his distinctive voice and it's safe to say that bruce reflects what i think has become a difference among conservatives about america's role in the world and i certainly would challenge the thought that congressman paul has expressed and that proves just tried to do.