tv The Young Turks With Cenk Uygur Current February 8, 2012 12:00am-1:00am PST
you. >> all right. that's it. 398 days ♪ >> welcome to young turks we are live at 10 o'clock eastern and geez what the hell is happening? rick santorum winning in three different states! kind of, largely. first an update, missouri. santorum's already won it at 55%! with 55% of the precincts reporting, he's crushing romney! 55 to 26. ron paul sitting at 12%. of course, newt gingrich was not on the ballot in missouri because of his own incompetence. now, when you go to minnesota santorum winning 44-27.
not over mitt romney. over ron paul! romney's in third! now mind you only 13% of precincts are reporting there still an interesting start to that. then colorado, only 7% reporting, santorum has jumped out to a gigantic lead there 50%, to gingrich's 22, romney 19. don't take those numbers too seriously, they're just getting warmed up there. in another interesting note there, is that there was not a lot of exit polling done by the networks here, so the reason it's taking so long to get the actual counts and call these elections is because they're waiting for the count. now, normally they have the exit polls, etc. in this case they don't. you know who we have here? epic politics. mike joins us for this, our epic political correspondent. michael, i've got more on the delgado counts there's a lot of interesting things going on. but a week ago if you said rick santorum was going to sweep these three elections they
welfare run -- would have run you out of town. >> a week ago i said he would win minnesota and that would be it. you're right it's surprising. it's more surprising if you're mitt romney, man. this is not just a good night for santorum. it is a good night you can't spin a win in two states and possibly a win in another as anything but good, but what this says to mitt romney and about mitt romney is the part that's really, really tough. >> okay, who's having a worse night, mitt romney because he's getting shellacked by rick sweater vest santorum? or newt gingrich, who's hardly on the board? >> well, definitely mitt romney. >> really? i think it's newt! >> newt's hardly on the board because he's not on the board. he knew going into february he he was setting this bar low. his whole campaign is right now concentrated on march 6 on super tuesday but mitt romney, he's running hard. he's winning, this is going to be my nomination. i want to prove that i'm the nominee. >> okay. i disgrerks and i'll item you why. you make a fair point a very
good point. but on the other hand, newt's whole thing is, i'm the guy who's the anti-mitt romney. of course, him and santorum have been trying to make that argument for a long time, but here he was trying to get momentum towards march 6. all of a sudden santorum, here's your momentum, bam! how is he gonna get momentum approximate santorum sweeps? are you crazy? are you crazy? >> i am absolutely not crazy. well, a little crazy. but the primaries are about geography much more so so than any other kind of election, because you're running spending your money in many different places, in in a targeted way. the republicans are looking rick santorum won in iowa. iowa is attached to missouri on one end and minnesota on the other end. >> indeed it is, it is. good point. >> it's his area, it's his zone. and that's it. >> who knew that rick santorum had a zone? well, that's true. a whole other conversation. >> well, i mean, if you google it, there is a zone, but you wouldn't have thought it was minnesota, iowa. >> no, you wouldn't. >> and missouri. let's talk about delegates for a
second here, and then we'll continue this conversation about the ramifications of tonight. so total delegates that have been up to now not including tonight, romney has 101 gingrich 32, santorum 17, and ron paul at 9. now, there's a lot of different ways to count the delegates. that's the one we're using and it's relatively right okay? relatively agreed-upon, i should say, of course it's right the way that count is done. so how many are at stake tonight? and this is part of my puzzlement with why this night is not taken more seriously right? oh, iowa oh my god, iowa! only three and a half delegates right? do you know how many delegates are at stake? minnesota. 37. that's more than newt gingrich has in entirety, the guy who's running second. colorado 33. missouri 49. now, what you're going to hear on every other network is oh, but it's nonbinding in mowrks
and that is why you know, it's just a beauty contest blah blah blah. i'm telling you right now nonsense. and i'll tell you why it's nonsense. mike, are you going to tell me the people picking delegates in missouri are going to go oh the voters voted for santorum, who cares? i'm going to vote for romney. no way! >> they get another chance on march 17 to caucus and it's going to abtotally different outcome, it could be a totally different outcome, the way it's done. they spent $7 million on having this primary because of a deadlock in the missouri senate. they were at 16-16, so what it did, a tie said we're just going to stick with what our old plan was. it's a really big problem for missouri moneywise and really is nonbinding, more of a beauty contest than anything else. >> no, i understand that, but at the same time to dismiss it like it doesn't matter is crazy talk. >> of course it's crazy talk. >> there's 49 delegates at stake, that's very, very large. remember florida got cut in half, they only had 50 delegates, and florida is one of the largest states. we're talking about an incredibly relevant state where
voting tonight is clearly going to be relevant to how those delegates are decided. it's not going to be binding as if it's final so you can't say all right, santorum gets this nuive delegates at the end of tonight, but he's far more likely right? >> yeah. >> that's very, very relevant. >> and missouri is a big swing state and also a place where they're taking the temperature of the republican party right now. republican voters are not just embracing mitt romney, which is the real problem for the romney campaign. >> at this point who is the number two buy? is it santorum or gingrich? who has a better chance of winning? if these results come in as we have reported so far missouri is already over, that's been called. but minnesota and colorado. >> it's still my opinion if any of these people are going to beat mitt romney for the nomination it's going going to be newt gingrich, of any of the people running. >> then if you're a santorum person you say michael geez what do i gotta do man? iowa, if i do a clean sweep tonight why isn't it me? don't you like my sweater?
>> you have to look at the geography. i do like your sweater, rick, i think your sweat certify great and that's about it. i think that what happens is the reason if you're rick santorum saying that to me i say, yeah you ran well where you're supposed to run well, you don't run well anywhere else. >> but if i'm santorum i make the opposite argument to gingrich. congratulations, you're good in the south, come get your ass kicking in the midwest. >> and that's a good argument, but the problem is these states where santorum is going to peak are running behind him now. the states where gingrich can peak, if there are any are ahead of him. i don't think either of them are going to peak, personally. this is the peak for santorum, and i think it's downhill from here. i'm going to stick with that. >> and is there an issue for santorum here that he keeps winning because the people look and go oh, god this gingrich guy is unbearable, romney is unbearable. ah santorum, i haven't heard much about him. >> i think precisely the reason he's winning.
>> by the way that is i believe, santorum headquarters in saint charles. they gotta be jazzed. >> precisely the reason he is winning is due to the fact that, you know the reason he's in the race is why he's winning. he's waiting for newt gingrich to implode and if that works if that strategy works, he is definitely the beneficiary of the demise of gingrich, because that is where the anti-romney can coalesce, but i don't see it happening for rick santorum. >> you know, missouri might also be for another reason, so when gingrich is not on the ballot, it's a state that favors santorum but santorum crushed romney right? >> yeah. >> so now if you go to super tuesday and gingrich's vaunted southern strategy doesn't work for him and he gets out of the race after super turks and it's just basically santorum versus romney at this point then all of a sudden does santorum go from 0% chance of winning to, oh, president santorum? >> i don't think we get to president santorum. let's also not overstate newt gingrich's southern strategy. the southern states that that are
there, tennessee oklahoma, georgia, he's not on the ballot in virginia, a big state. then there's texas for gingrich, and texas is where he has to make his stand. if he wins takings you're having a different conversation. there's no way that rick santorum wins texas. >> all right, i hear you. but then who does? are the people of texas jazzed about mitt romney? >> no. that's why newt gingrich -- >> you think nobody's jazzed about mitt romney. >> that is the promise of the gingrich campaign, is the state of texas. >> just when you thought the race was over, they pull you back in! and now all of a sudden, rick santorum from behind, exactly where you don't want him! okay. so it's been a fascinating night. going to tip to be a fascinating night, obviously. we will give you more of these results, of course on tomorrow's show, give you a full analysis, and our regularly scheduled young turks program continues, as we continue on this bold, bold program. look at rick santorum. i am amazed.
>> 97% of those services that help women are going to be hurt. a lot of people won't get those exams and might get breast cancer. it's widely counter productive. anna, thank you for doing this story. we appreciate it. >> when we come back, we're going to celebrate the life of don cornelius. we'll tell you things about him that you might not know, when we return. [ jody ] four course feast. man it's great. the guests love it. [ male announcer ] red lobster's four course seafood feast is back. get soup, salad, cheddar bay biscuits, dessert and choose one of 7 entrees. four courses for only $15. offer ends soon. i'm jody gonzalez, red lobster manager and i sea food differently.
all right. we are back on "the young turks." during a healthcare proposal by president obama he said if you are going to provide healthcare coverage, put in contraceptive at no extra cost. but they say if you're a church or religious organization we're going to exempt you. okay. that also makes sense. but if you are a big catholic hospital for example, or college, we can't exempt you because so many non-catholics work there. it would be discriminating to women there.
also makes a ton of sense. the republicans decided to attack. >> i think that's a tremendous infringement of religious liberty. you are saying you can have the name, but you can't actually be a catholic or orthodox jewish institution because we the secular government are going to impose on you. i think that's a very profound moment for americans. [ overlapping speakers ] >> you predict a political cost for the president because of this? >> very substantial, yes. >> of course what gingrich said is ridiculous. he just said if you provide healthcare you can't charge extra for this benefit because not everybody working at your institution is of that same
religion. >> this same administration said that churches in the institutions they run, that they have to provide for their employees free of charge contraceptives morning after pills, in other words aborttive pills. >> so he is making an issue of this. so they asked people, here is a public policy polling asks if mitt romney his position make you more or less likely to vote for him? so this is supposed to be the big catholic vote up here because of all of the catholic schools, hospitals, et cetera. et cetera. what happened? it hurt romney.
fantastic. so far so good. how about more polling. employers should provide birth control without a co-pay. that's a really solid majority. if you think that's a solid majority. you know of women having sex in this country, 99% use contraception. you have all of the women on your side and these nuckle heads are taking a
anti-contraceptive issue. don't turn your back on women. that is catholic's. god, president obama nailed this thing. it's over. he won, right? so what is he going to do? compromises. >> compromises that can be reached. we have great respect for the work that these institutions do. they serve many many americans, and we certainly don't want to abridge anyone's religious freedom, so we'll look for a way to move forward that both guarantees women that prevention they need. >> why on god's green earth are you compromising on an issue you
should crush them on? you should say, hey thank you so much on running on this. be on the side of 99% of women who want contraception, you be on the moronic side of the 1%. it is an enormous win issue, but president obama doesn't have the guts for it. the minute he is challenged a little bit his natural instinct kicks in. it is run for the hills every time. if he doesn't fight on this, when is he ever going to fight? i can give you a million examples of this. i'll give you one more. but i have been covering this for three years. i voted for the guy. i complained for the guy. i was for him instead of hilary clinton. but the evidence has piled up and piled up.
here is another one. the fdic who does he pick? a republican. the guy who orchestrated the bailouts for hank pahlsson. why did you pick him? because mitch mcconnell suggested. mitch mcconnell is the guy who said his primary objection is to make sure you lose. the guy he picked before who suggested him? mitch mcconnell. the guy before him? an independent. you are a democratic president. he angered the republicans by picking richard, oh my god, mitch, are you going to be okay? let me give you a couple more
upwards of a half of million dollars to try to defeat the president. >> all right. so they decided, we're not going to do unilateral disaroundment here. this is going back on his pledge, and there are some people who are upset about it. and one is this former senator. well, i think it's a really interesting question and i can see both sides of this issue, and so what i want to do is bring in two people on two different sides here for both people who want the right thing here for the country and care about this issue, but have two different perspectives. ian millhowser and bob edgar, who has been working on this for
a long long time. first of all welcome, guys and bob, i want to start with you. tell me why it doesn't be unilateral disarmament. >> i think rush finegold is right. if you look at the polls, people all across the country want politicians to be reformers today. and all the president has done is taken away the issue that common cause and other good government groups have been working on and that is to push back on citizens united and not allow this unintended super group, these super pacs to exist. we saw in the romney and gingrich campaign how these super pacs were devastating to each other.
why should the president who wants to be the good guy, the white knight on this issue, why should he succumb and go into the gutter on these super pacs. i don't think it will help in the next few months as we try to recover from citizens united. >> all right. it's tough to be the guy saying this money in politic is corrupting, which is what the great majority of the country thinks, if you are will making the money. >> there is a reason you have all of these very wealthy individuals spending millions and millions and millions of dollars, and the reason why is it works. the president could say i'm going to let the force of my example go forward and hope
that's more powerful than a billion dollars, $10 billion. just one corporation, exxon made nearly $10 billion in three months last year. so the amount of money they can throw to knock him off of his horse is amazing here. and all that obama said is look these rules are abysmal, but when the rest comes out at halftime and say the rules have changed, you can tie one arm behind your back and hope you can still punch the guy out with the other one, or say the reps have created this problem. i have to live with it. and the good news is if president obama gets reelected, he gets to change the supreme court. >> bob, i want to buttress ian's point. president obama has collected a
decent amount of money, and people have seen this. and he has $140 million for his campaign. he has $158 million over all. but when you look at the republicans side are already outgunning him. you have $51 million, $38 million, $100 million, you are at $246 million already, and you barely got started. so as i look at that i think, as you are making your point, you might lose. >> about the president, if he gets reelected he'll fix it the president said three years ago, when he didn't take the financing system -- he said he wasn't going to take it because it was broken but once elected he would work with people like
mccain and others to fix the public financing system that was in place since watergate, and every presidential campaign since watergate had used that public financing system. had this president fixed that if the first two years, we wouldn't be facing this mega campaign where money is going to corrode our system and perhaps democracy it's a. i appreciated what he said last night. that he is going to help work to push back on what corporations and wealthy people can do but he doesn't get a very good example by doing the same things that many of us have been complaining that we have seen in the republican primary. and you point out a very interesting thing about all of
the money. this president knows how to raise money. look at what he did in the last campaign. if he does that and more he will clearly be able to compete person to person candidate to candidate in this presidential year. i fear for the proliferation of these super pacs and i'm also troubled by the president saying while he and the vice president aren't going to raise money for his super pac, they are going to second cabinet members out there. they are not going to raise money. they are just going to speak. in that reminds me of newt gingrich saying i took $20,000 a month from freddie mac, i was a historian. >> yeah, nobody believes that. get out of here. no, it is obviously raising money. i love common cause. i totally agree with it.
>> ian i have to confession i'm more on your side, but i don't believe president obama, and the reason is because of what bob said. he didn't do anything about it. he ran his whole campaign on change. i'm going to change the way washington works, and introduce zero pieces of legislation to make that happen. if i believe president obama was going to win and then change the system i would do it in a flat second, right? but he is not going to. >> there is exactly one thing in america that is more broken than our campaign finance system and that's the senate. >> he didn't even try, ian -- >> he had a long backlog, and the problem with our senate right now is the filibuster doesn't just let you block
things if you don't have 60 votes. even if you have 60 votes, you can build roadblocks -- >> that's a lot of excuses, when he didn't push for one piece of legislation. he didn't say, hey, listen would like to at least submit this. he didn't do anything on it -- >> what he did -- >> he didn't even try. >> what the president did, though, is made sure that 20 million people have insurance. >> but that has nothing to do with this issue. >> it has everything to do with this issue -- >> ian, i love you but about campaign finance reform? >> this is important, though. >> it's important, i know. but that doesn't have anything to do with campaign finance reform -- >> let me tell you what the president can do -- he is going to have to appoint a supreme court justice -- >> we have had an amendment.
it is hopeless. and look -- look i don't want the audience to misunderstand me. i want to thank both of you guys. i'm totally out of time. thank you for coming on. i want the audience to understand something. i'm not saying president obama doesn't do anything right, that's crazy talk. two supreme court justices that are progressives instead of right-wingers, that's a great thing. but he said he would change the way washington worked. he talked about lobbyists, it wasn't kind of. it was definitely. and he didn't introduce any legislation on that. he didn't ask the senate orrhehe use too are a re atat itit wasn't on his priority list. he has lost credibility. my job is to keep it real.
the good and the bad, and unfortunately the ugly sometimes. and that's what we do here. we tell you the actual news. when we come back we'll have totally different perspectives on the komen count a decision............................. the newest voice in cable news is on the new news network. >>it is an independent progressive voice and i love that. >>jennifer granholm joins current tv. she's a political trail-blazer. >>people like somebody who's got >>determined to find solutions... >>we need government to ensure that people have freedom. >>driven to find the truth... >>what's really going on? >>fearless, independent and above all, politically direct.
and above all... and there's only one place you'll find us. weeknights on current tv. all right. we are back on "the young turks." we asked for karen handel who is the vice president of public policy for the susan g. koman foundation to be fired, and today she was fired. i want to thank the susan g. koman for watching "the young turks" and following our recommendations. maybe it didn't have anything to do with that but there were internal documents indicating she pushed for it all along.
>> i think the investigation along with the various state investigations, those were a factor in the decision. but there was a bigger picture than that. there was the granting criteria and it is no secret megan that komen and other foundations had been under pressure for some years long before my time. >> that is not really what we got from the internal documents. in fact it was backed up by emails saying she is the one that pushed it all along, and whenever an issue came up she would blow it out of proportion. a lot of nonsense coming from here. she actually resigned before she was fired. other news they also have ari
fleischer who gave advice on how to handle the karen handel situation, whether to hire in the first place. and when you look at their board, it turns out it is chalk full of republicans. their founder nancy brinker is a bush pioneer. all republicans, all giving a tremendous element of money up to a quarter million dollars for bush. there is nothing wrong with that you can have republicans that are for finding a cure for breast cancer. i'm the guy who made that point a couple of shows ago. but we're going to defund planned parenthood because we don't like abortion. and brinker's salary she is
taking $417,000 in salary. that could go a long way to discussing a cure. i want to bring in our power panel to discuss it now. with us is james poulos. and then shaunna thomas is joining us. she is in new york city right now. you guying were going to do a petition. tell me about that. >> great. thanks for having me. yesterday right after the news broke about handel's involvement in the decision to refund planned parenthood the sent an email to insist that handel resigned. and of course as we know she
did resign. and we're thrilled that our members voices were heard and that she resigned but i think it would be a mistake to say this is enough. >> what else would you do? what action do you want the susan g. koman to take? >> the susan g. koman foundation is a deeply flawed organization. the strongest data point is at this point they haven't actually committed to funding planned parenthood in the future. and this is about low-income women having access to preventative services that they need. and for a lot of those women planned parenthood is the only service they have. i don't think we have pat them on the back for anything. >> james, what do you think? should karen handel basically have been pushed out here? and do you think it's enough? >> when it comes to handel
obviously she didn't do what it took to get komen for preparing for this buzz saw they were thrown into. the organization has a million dollars a year in revenues. the amount of money that komen donated to the organization was about $700,000. the president of planned parenthood is pulling in about $580,000 in salary and benefits per year. it is not as if this is pulling the plug. >> so you think susan g. koman has done enough and we should move on? >> sure. this is their money. who is to tell koman they aren't spending their money the right
way. >> again, if you are in charge you are in the board meeting, do you want the susan g. koman foundation to do next? >> they have a lot of work to rebuild the trust of people who participated in their marches, and put trust in them. i think if i was the board, i would be taking very seriously the fact that thousands of men and women across the country who said i was a big supporter in the past but what they have done in the past couple of weeks is just outrageous. and i think looking at themselves and decide what it was to decide to play politics with women's lives like this. >> all right. thank you so much for joining us guys. we appreciate it. when we come back we have a guest on who will tell us where the stimulus money went.
back on "the young turks." let's talk about the stimulus spending that president obama pushed for. $825 billion. that's a huge amount of money. more than we spent on the moon race, manman project, the louisiana purchase, and the marshall plan. that's still a huge amount of money. did it work and where did the money go? first off to give you some perspective in october 2009 unemployment had gone up to 10.2% and it is now down to 8.3%. michael grabell has said quote, the recovery act failed to live . . .
that's really interesting, and we're going to talk to him about that. michael is joining us now. he is the author of "money well spent?"? the biggest economic recovery plan in history and a reporter. michael great to have you on the program. so first of all, let me ask you about that. where did most of the money go? let's start with that. >> sure. is the stimulus was broken up -- spread far and wide. tax cuts safety net spending infrastructure projects and these long-term investments in clean energy high speed broadband, things like that. >> so where do we run into problems? >> the plan was to bring about a
recovery and to also -- and also seed these long-term investments, but the problem we saw were that these quote unquote shovel-ready projects took a long time to get going, and didn't provide that ump people were expecting in the first year. and high-speed rail and clean energy because they were brought into the stimulus package, there were these arbitrary deadlines that ultimately lead to this be rushed. so you see things like building a high-speed rail in the deserts of nevada rather than in l.a. where people use high-speed rail. >> so michael, is it that it's not that it wasn't large enough. but it didn't go for a large enough project like a grander vision? i read that president obama wanted a grander vision but was
talked out of it by his advisors. >> right there was this constant competition of doing something fast or doing something slow that people would remember. and this was a constant conflict, you know, in the administration in the discussions they were having but one thing -- i had a really interesting conversation with a former obama advisor who said you could have split the package into two different bills, one that would allow the president to come along and said i'm the new president i saved your teachers, i saved your cops. i'm a great president. and then the advise source could be working on a long-term investment plan, and with the unemployment still going up, the administration could have taken advantage of the rare 60-vote majority they were giving in the senate to really pass an investment package that would
have given them this over a trillion dollar stimulus that has been talked about. it could have been designed better in leaving room for a second bite at the apple. >> i love that proposal. because i believe in the bigger projects, vision wise. i think you are exactly right, we rushed into a lot of so-called shovel-ready projects which turned out not to be shovel-ready. and the teachers and cops you calling that an invisible part of the stimulus spending. >> right. a large part of the stimulus more than $500 billion was largely invisible to the public. these were things in tax cuts safety net spending food stamps medicaid and then this issue of saving teacher's jobs.
they actually saved the equivalent of 300,000 full-time teachers and support staff. but if a teacher was in the classroom, the administration didn't get any credit forit, because that was the teacher i always had. it's hard for the public to see them. and the administration did a very poor job on highlighting them. >> yeah and they should -- look, we partly blame them for not giving enough credit, but we also have to blame the media too. and 2 to 3 million jobs have been created or saved without the stimulus the unemployment would have been 12%, which would have been gigantic. michael grabell thank you so much for joining us. >> thank you for having me. >> when we come back anonymous takes on oakland.
who isssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss [ jim ] sam adams boston lager is my favorite because it has so much flavor. so i wanted to design a glass that would enhance the flavor and taste of boston lager. we did a laser etch on the bottom. [ bob ] releases the hop aromas. this bulb is for collecting aromas and there's a little ridge on the inside. and that allows you to sense the hops as it enters your mouth. the way this hits your tongue, you really get the full flavor out of sam adams lager. [ bartender #2 ] having a boston lager in this glass was like tasting a boston lager for the first time again. it sounds crazy, but it really works. ah, claim trouble. [ dennis ] you should just switch to allstate, and get their new claim satisfaction guarantee. hey, he's right man. [ dennis ] only allstate puts their money where their mouth is. yup. [ dennis ] claim service so good, it's guaranteed. [ foreman ] so i can always count on them. unlike randy over there. that's one dumb dude. ♪ ♪ the new claim satisfaction guarantee. dollar for dollar, nobody protects you like allstate.
and make them simple intuitive, and available to all. distill all that data. make information instinctual visual. introducing trade architect, td ameritrade's empowering web-based trading platform. take control of your portfolio today. trade commission-free for 60 days, and we'll throw in up $600 when you open an account. [ jody ] four course feast. man it's great. the guests love it. [ male announcer ] red lobster's four course seafood feast is back. get soup, salad, cheddar bay biscuits, dessert and choose one of 7 entrees. four courses for only $15. offer ends soon. i'm jody gonzalez, red lobster manager and i sea food differently.
>>the blood is in the water and the sharks are bipartisan. >>you got a bone to pick with that? ♪ all right. back on "the young turks." now i want to bring you a story about anonymous. they have released personal information of some of the cops in oakland, and the mayor of oakland, jean quan. her personal information online. on current.com we asked you if you thought this was the right or wrong move. tell us what the people online have said? >> they are totally behind
anonymous. about 90% have decided they are in the right. >> i am amazed by that number. i'm not -- i don't know if i'm amazed that they went in that direction. i'm amazed by how much they went in that direction. and i totally disagree with that. i wouldn't have released that information. jesus what do you think? >> the movement we have gotten later from the occupy movement has been an arkist movement. and it gives me a bad vibe. >> i don't want to neuter it at all, but you don't want to turn off main stream. >> you don't want to demean the message, which this does. but you understand their frustration, they want to do everything, and they want everybody's frustration to be
evented to these people. >> you have corporations pretty much bullying the middle and working class in this country, and for the first time i feel like we have some intimidation against them. we finally feel like we have this powerful force, and i don't think it's a great idea to do that, but at the same time it's an interesting strategy. >> i hear ya. and i love the leaks when they are appropriate. it made a world of difference and sometimes anonymous does these tactics and lets us know what our government is doing. i'm totally in favor of the occupy movement. but don't release their personal information. it's dangerous, and doesn't win any supporters. >> that's why everyone is so down with it. it's just the way it is going to be right now.