tv The Young Turks With Cenk Uygur Current February 3, 2012 11:00am-12:00pm PST
watching and have a great night. ♪ welcome to "young turks." we have a packed show for you guys tonight. donald trump does an endorsement in vegas, and who does he run into? epic politics man. you are going to love the answer he gave to a michael shure's question. and the insider who saw the healthcare debate unfold. what is he going to tells about the obama administration. plus we have erin burnett. it's not just wealthy people it's retired americans. >> that is totally not true. we'll go after erin burnett and show you what the reality is in
just a little bit. it's go time! ♪ fun campaign news today. donald trump decided he is going to insert himself into this campaign once again. who is he going to endorse? he has been leaking on both sides and then finally came out and said this. >> it's my honor, real honor, and privilege to endorse mitt romney. [ applause ] >> and by the way this is a great couple. you look at this couple. [ applause ] >> but mitt is tough. he's smart. he's sharp. he is not going to allow bad things to continue to happen to this country that we all love. >> there's so much about that i
love. the weird awkward moment of god these guys are kind of attractive. and then he's not going to let bad things happen to the country. thank you donald. here is mitt romney. >> there are some things you can't imagine happening in your life. this is one of them. being in donald trump's magnificent hotel and having his endorsement is amazing. i am not as successful as this guy, but sufficiently successful to understand what to have happen. >> mitt don't get too happy. donald trump also said this about mitt romney earlier in the
campaign. >> if you look at his record as governor, it was not all that stellar. >> and that's the guy you just endorsed. fail. [ laughter ] >> but we're not done with him yet. michael shure epic politics man was in vegas. he went to the press conference to ask donald trump a question. i can't wait to hear more. michael joins us now from a place he feels very at home las vegas, nevada. >> i knew you would like is this background. >> it makes me want to double down. michael tell us what happened today? >> it was kind of a passionate less room. there was a huge romney sign secret service, and maybe a handful of romney supporters
there. there was a little bit of applause but it just seemed like a passionateless endorsement. one of the things i took away from that of course was what you just went over with the way trump talked about mitt romney as being successful. and romney saying he was not as successful as this guy. first thing came into my head is he is trying to play poor guy now. >> this endorsement might have helped newt but romney already had the momentum so i don't think it matters almost at all. but i was curious about the question you asked him. >> yeah after the endorsement donald spoke to a few of the reporters. >> reporter: [ inaudible ]?
>> i think people are tired of watching this nation get ripped off. and that's a lot of people. if you look at my twitter if you look at my anything -- if you look at my ratings, period we bring a lot of people. we are being just ripped to the tune of trillions of dollars by other countries and other places, and i don't think that is going to happen with mitt romney. >> that was michael asking the question, and i loved that answer, michael. his twitter followers. it turns out he had 996,000 twitter followers. here is the problem. paula abdul has 1.6 million. kim kardashian has like 12 million. there is a word for that michael. you know what that is? >> i think it's fail. >> fail. is that the worst answer for why
we should care about an endorsement. >> i thought he would have a better answer than that. seeing him up there -- this is a guy who's motto is you're fired, standing next to the guy who has made a career out of saying -- or mentioned, he likes hiring people. and then he said look at my twitter, look at my anything. what does that mean? >> yeah i don't want to look at trump's anything. >> yeah. >> thank you michael, now go hit the black jack tables. >> obviously. >> another relevant part of the campaign today was mitt romney's faux pas on poor people. >> i'm not concerned about the very poor. we have a safety net there. if it needs repair i'll fix it. we will hear from the democrat
party the plight of the poor and there's not question it's not good being poor, and we have a safety net to help those being poor. obviously the republican party is not going to address the issues for the poor that's for the democratic party. so he spoke eloquently about the values of this country. >> it's also about the biblical call to care for the least of these, the poor the those in the margins of our society. to speak up for themselves who cannot speak for themselves for the rights of all that is destitute. >> he did a great job today. he talked about he was his brother's keeper and what an eloquent response to mitt
romney. apparently the republican party never gets the message. obama unveiled a plan to refinance home mortgages. >> we have done this at least four times where there is some new government program to help homeowners who have trouble with their mortgages. none of these programs have worked. i don't know why anyone would think this next idea is going to work. >> he is like homeowners? we're trying to help them again? i don't remember them donating to my campaign. they are unbelievable. let's talk with our next scott rasmussen. scott thank you for joining us. we appreciate it. i am looking at the latest
polling, if you will out of nevada. and i'm not sure what your organization is reporting, but the last one i saw had mitt romney with a 20-point lead there. romney looks pretty good in nevada. what was your polling indicate for the rest of the race? >> everywhere we're looking right now it's good news for mitt romney. he is up in michigan and arizona. mitt romney is like a football team that has a big lead in the first quarter. he should win but there's a long way to go and there are times that he just can't a very good candidate. forget whether conservatives trust him or not. he says things that get him in trouble. >> is there anything you see in the polling that might help newt gingrich down the road? any signs if it breaks this way or that way, if he could pull in the santorum supporters,
et cetera? or is it pro romney right now? >> it's pro romney right now. if gingrich or santorum dropped out, there is no way all of the support would go to the other candidate. some of the republicans are just unhappy with all of the candidates. there were two things republican primary voters really disliked. one is the president's healthcare plan two are the bailouts from the fall of 2008. romney and gingrich have both supported parts of the healthcare plan and partings of the bailouts. >> you talk in the book about how often washington, they come to conclusions that the american people don't agree with at all, the bailout is an example. you are considered conservative
and i'm considered progressive, and yet we totally agree on the bailouts. >> it is even worse than the fact it happened. it happened despite the fact that voters are overwhelmingly against it. the reason it hand there is a political class that is much more comfortable bailing out their friends than listening to voters. this is a problem that has been growing in the nation for a long time. seven out of ten voters now believe that government and big business tend to work together against the rest of us. >> totally. >> in washington well you know democrats like to say government is the answer. and republicans are accused of being on the side of big business and the rest of us say what are you talk about? they are the same team? >> that's exactly right. my problem is big business and
big government combined equals big corruption. the tea party agrees occupy wall street agrees everybody agrees except the ones in washington. let me see if i can find disagreement between us. >> i'm sure you can. >> in the book you talk about balancing the budget. i want to balance the budget. but i think one of the ways to do that is raise taxes. doesn't it make senses to get back to rates that are sensible. >> 64% of americans today say the nation is overtaxed, but would be willing to pay higher taxes if they were convinced that spending was being cut in a very serious manner. if you make serious progress towards cuts and throw more money into the kitty, they think that would be okay, but they
don't think government spending will really go down. >> scott one last thing, then. doesn't it make a huge difference if you separate it out and say would you like to raise taxes on the rich? republicans always say nobody wants to raise taxes on anyone? but isn't it true it is proposed to raise taxes 70 to 80% on the rich? >> it's really kind of fun to look into that. if you say, yes, this is a good idea. would you support a candidate who promised to raise taxes only on the rich then it becomes a toss up. and the reason is it gets back to everything we have in the government today, we don't trust the government. only 17% believe our government
has the consent of the governed. and that means there is no organization with the moral authority to tackle the issues out there. >> these guys do not rep sent us they represent their donors. and unfortunately we don't get represented on that. scott thank you so much for joining us. >> thank you. when we come back the guy that worked closest with the obama administration from the outside. and we'll give you the real story on what happened with that healthcare fight. it's really interesting. come right back. ♪
(vo)weeknights... >>the weakest citizen in this country is more important than the strongest corporation. my god, this is one of the stupidest things i've ever heard! you got a bone to pick with that? the blood is in the water and the sharks are bipartisan. with respect to the cost of healthcare richard kirsch said
we can't have a false dichotomy between coverage and cost. we can cover more people and lower costs at the same time. presumably because those who are not insured at this time are using extremely expensive emergency care. >> now the largest organization fighting for the affordable healthcare from the outside. and i -- honestly as i am about to tell richard i was a little skeptical at the time. but he explains the obama administration was weak kneed. and most interesting quote for me was this . . .
well richard kirsch who is the author of "fighting for our health" joins us know. great to have you here. >> great to be with you. >> as you were doing that fight i was a little skeptical, and i thought god, i wish they were more aggressive in fighting for this. what was holding you back if anything? >> we were fighting very aggressively for the principals that we believed in and doing that all around the country with a huge operation. and thousands of volunteers. and our principals were principals that the president endorsed when he ran for presidency. so we were out there working hard to do that. sometimes the president -- the white house was request us sometimes they were pulling back. >> talk to me about that.
why do you think they were pulling back? and why did you call them weak-kneed. >> it's a quote supposedly by fdr with the new deal they came to him and said i agree with you, now make me do it. that's an inside out strategy that allows the president to do the right thing because he is getting pressure from the left and the right. they wanted to quiet the left and placate the right. so whenever we try to do things to bolster a strong -- stronger bill they really tried to get us to stop. if we even did things like second letters to the senate for a strong bill they asked us to top. >> why -- as you are telling that i feel the audience screaming why? we elected an progressive
president, you have a ton of money, why wouldn't they want a stronger bill? >> they were so squared they would lose and they were scared if there was pressure from the left that would basically blow the whole deal up. inst d d sayingghaha byavavg pressure frorero thehe left we'll keep this thing closer than we want to be they were so scared they lose -- and they were operating out of fear rather than strength. >> a lot of people would then say, hey, maybe they were right. and that's why they did to do all of these deals. do you disagree with that notion? >> absolutely. people want to rally to believe something they really care about, and fight for something. and the waffling confused and demoralized people. and we found that when we -- we moved and got the votes of a lot
of conservative democrats and we did it by organizing people in their districts, and having people in the districts come and tell them stories. at one point a reverend told the story to ben nelson about being a confer survivor, and ben nelson almost cried in that meeting. we would like to have that reinforced to in the white house so we could push for the strongest bill possible. >>, you know it's interesting, because they said we need 60 and in the end the only did it with 59 anyway. but now they said we can't include the public option. we would love to include the public option, but we need 60. >> well that is a little misleading cenk.
there is a tremendous amount of stuff you could not have done through reconciliation. it would have been much less of a bill. so they went for 60 votes and they got them at the end, but the question is when did you have to compromise. the president three times in hissed a opinion station his advisors said to him, give up. at the very beginning when they said don't do it. and twice in the summer of 2009 and 2010 they said just do kitty care. and the president refused. that's a strong president. on the other hand there is the president who makes a lot of concessions before it's necessary. so he gives this great speech in september of 2009 and he gives this wonderful, wonderful defense of the public option and then in the next sentence he
says, but i'm willing to compromise it away. there are two obamas there. >> so when they were telling us all throughout we're fighting tooth and nail for the public option and i remember having this debate at the time i said no, they are not. you were on the inside having those negotiations had they negotiated away in the beginning? >> we don't really know exactly when they negotiated what. but it was very clear they were making deals some of which were necessary to pass the legislation. if they hadn't made a deal with the drug industry there would have been $150 million spent for [ inaudible ] for the legislation for aggressive eds against it. on the public option in terms of not having a public option that had strong medicare rates.
we might not have been able to get that through the house and senate anyway that was tough, because the hospitals and doctors are lobbying hard against it. but it was better for the president to fight as long as possible. i'm less concerned about the real on the public option as much as the fact it would have been great if he consistently said i'm for this and then take it away in the next breath. >> they apparently tried to get you fired at some point. why is that? >> this has to do with at that time the deputy chief of staff. he worked in montana and a long history there squelching any pressure. i'm not sure other people would have done that. i think there were other people in the white house that didn't do that. but that was his tendency.
baucus put in a much more conservative bill. a lot of con -- concessions to the insurance industry. and he tried to get me fired. it was very clear he was trying to undermine me. but it didn't happen because of my leadership. i wasn't making these decisions. it was the steer committee that was taking those decisions. didn't have a public option because it didn't have stronger consumer protections and we stuck with that. >> richard consistency i see throughout is pulling punches, incredibly conservative advisors who are ready to fold up the minute they are challenged and give the president some credit as you said, at least he didn't listen to all of those knuckle
planned parenthood. anna talked to a conservative and it got a little contentious. drama, when we return. >> 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. 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 a spine. >>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.
all right. we are back on "the young turks." we keep a check on the rest of the media, because they are so important in the message that goes out to the american people and they can be grossly misleading as unfortunately erin burnett and cnn often are. so let's do media watch. all right this media watch is on erin burnett of cnn. she is out in front of the bank and the rich and powerful as usual. she was talking about the legislation to do a minimum tax
rate on the rich known as the buffet rule. i want to give you two rights here watch this. >> would you let corporations not pay tagses on those dividends and let individuals pay it? it is also americans who will be hurt by capital rate gains going up? so will you fight the president when he wants to increase capital gains for everyone? >> now, let's talk about the distortions there. she says at least cut corporate taxes. yeah, that's how tax system works. we tax corporations and individuals. and there's nothing wrong with that. but the second part was much worse.
she talked about how -- well the retired people get so much of their money from capital gains, that's who she is looking out for. >> only 1.4% of the system of people make under $100,000 is from capitol gains and dividends. middle class, you make under $100,000 in the country, only 1.4% of your income comes from capital gains. 54%, the majority of the benefits going to millionaires. not the rich not the top 1% millionaires. that's who erin burnett is trying to protect. she is not done yet. she is going to put another point in here which is totally not true. here she is again. >> the bill would require those earning more than a million dollars to pay at least 30% in
taxes. that's an effective rate. the marginal rate would be 44%. 30% effective is 44% marginal. just to make the point, the effective rate would be 44%, not 35 or 39. again, 44 maybe something people are totally fine with. >> no one has ever introduced that rate. it turns out she is talking about a calculation done by david logan of the tax foundation. he called him and he said if you assume the loopholes exist from the second million it looks kind of like 44%. in other words there's no 44% that's made up. and she claims to be non-partisan. in reality their president has
worked for citizens for a sound economy, which are both deeply conservative, and then they push for tax cuts for the rich that bush passed and guess who they are funded by? the koch brothers. of course. here is what paul said about the tax foundations announced in the buffet rule, quote . . . apparently that does not include erin burnett who tests them when it helps her make the case. oh, please don't raise taxes on the rich. they are my best friends. we're going to hold you to account here and show the american people the distortions you put into your reports in
order to protect the rich. we'll be right back on "the young turks." ♪ [[vo]]...we're the idea nobody wants to hear. ...until the truth reveals itself. boat-rockers. and above all... and there's only one place you'll find us. weeknights on current tv. used to be we socked money away and expected it to grow. then the world changed... and the common sense of retirement planning became anything but common. fortunately, td ameritrade's investment consultants can help you build a plan that fits your life.
a great tasting mint core, frosted in powerful cooling crystals. ice breakers frost. feel the frost. ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] you know why you don't see other full-size pickup trucks straight off the line trying to do this? [ engine revs ] because only one has this equipment. the ram power wagon. guts. glory. ram. ♪ all right. we are back on "the young turks" with our power panel.
joining us today. ryan grimm, washington bureau chief for the "huffington post"ing, dalia lithwick, senior editor for "the slate"; ari berman, contributor for "the nation." god i love these power panels. it's great toe see all of you again and great to have you on the show again. our topic today is are republicans restarting the southern strategy. one is redirecting, another is disenfranchising felons. tell us why you think that might be disenfranchising minority voters. >> in though south they have concentrated the democratic vote in these heavily majority/minority districts as a way to maximize the republican vote elsewhere. so they have ghetto-ized the counties, and this is an intensely racial strategy that
definitely has echos of the kind of strategy that nixon and atwater were so effective at putting forward. it's meant to make the republican party, the, quote unquote, white party, and the democratic party, the, quote unquote, black party. >> it worked well for nixon, and i asked about this to pat buchanan once and he said yeah we had a nice ride. and here they are again doing it in different unique ways dalia. one is voter laws which happen to disenfranchise many of the blacks and latinos in the area. >> this really is the modern day poll tax. we're going to heavenly burden
communities that don't have birth certificates or driver's licenses. this is all based on this fraudulent notion that there is a huge massive vote fraud problem in this country that is non-existent, not documented and absolutely impossible to do. so it's a non-solution to a non-problem that has the effect of very, very disproportionately disenfranchising voters. >> i love that point. let's call it even and this issue is complicated and you make up your own mind. when they should say this isn't right there is almost no voter fraud at all in the country.
>> reporting a negative isn't very interesting. tonight at 11:00 no voting fraud and then the weather. that's not going to draw people in. and even if the main stream media doesn't often repeat the idea that there is voter fraud out there, just the fact that the republican party is out there making the charge so often even if it is not picked up heavily, it still filters through the public consciousness and the kind of email forward nation that we have now, where 20 to 30% of voters out there really get a ton of their information just forwarded to them by like-minded friends who will say, you won't get the main stream media. and they use the fact that the main stream media won't pick it up to vouch for it. >> i tell you what i would do the minute there's any story
about these -- you know voter id laws which there are plenty of, i would point out, hey, you know what there is almost no voter fraud at all. so why are they doing this? that's a very very legitimate question. and ari it's very interesting because the so-called liberal media got that idea during the civil rights period. and now we have a media who says you're doing obviously racist strategy but i don't want to call it out. >> i think they invent a problem and then creating a solution that would allow them to rig the electorate in their favor. and they are afraid to say as i did that it's a gop war on voting, and now with redirecting there is this effort to resegregate the south.
and i know these are -- they sound like charges that are explosive, but we're just looking at the facts here. they have been very very racially motivated ever since the 2012 election because blacks vote overwhelmingly for democrats, so they're going after them not i don't think because they are racist but because they are democratic voters and that's the clear intention here to try to maximize republican gains for as long as possible and make republicans the party of white america. >> i saw ryan and dalia bogging their head up and down at the exact time i was when you said it is not because they are racist. that's might be. but it's because they want to win though elections, and they think african-americans or latinos are more likely to vote for republicans. the intention is to win the
election. that justn't justify it at all i think that's why they are doing it. all right, thank you so much for joining us on "the young turks." really appreciate it. when we come back josh fox was arrested. why? he is going to tell us in person. ♪ only one who thinks an amendment to the constitution may be in order. that's next on "the war room."
he was arrested. that's weird because it is a public hearing. and maybe this is what they were trying to hide. here is a clip from his movie. well that's where they put the light to a water tap and it just lights up. it's an amazing movie. josh fox joins us now. i wanted to ask you why you think you got arrested. tell me from the beginning when you went to go cover it and when did you think there was trouble. >> the hearing was announced on monday. and this was a case we have been followed for three years. these cowboys kicked and screamed and got an investigation done on the ground water there. and epa showed the results. they said there is 50 times the
level of benzene in the ground water. and the source of the contamination is -- the cause is likely frac-ing. this is a huge moment because the industry continually deny there is any link. so epa coming out here is really significant. so the republicans called a hearing specifically to challenge science, and the epa investigator and loaded up the panel with gas industry panelists. we want to cover it. it's publish hearing, public speech. there is a protocol in which you contact the committee and tell them you are coming. and there are credentialed journalists that spend their life on the hill and we're not one of those. this access used to be granted
quite liberally when the democrats ran the house. we hired credential crews, and when they revealed they were working for us they were told you cannot come in. i contacted the chairman of the committee because it is at his discretion, and they gave us the run around and said we'll get right back to you and never did. we had the choice to go knowing there might be a confrontation. my cameraman was barred entry from the hearing room. i was allowed to walk in and began to set up my tripod and shoot. all of a sudden staffers come up and say you can't shoot. and i said we have appealed from the chair. let's hear from the chair. and all of the while the members
are coming in the house, and their staffers -- the video you see was shot by staffers. they are all recording. they knew we were coming because we had put up on facebook the night before that we were being obstructed and our fans clogged up their voicemail. this is very clearly partisan and political. attacking science, attacking the epa's meticulous and thorough 3.5 year investigation. and then barring an investigator willing to report on this and putting me in handcuffs and throwing me in jail. this is thuggery. they threw out john boehner's promise for transparency out with me yesterday. now they are paying for it.
because there is on enormous media backlash because it. >> right. i just saw a john boehner clip on transparency, and it seems like a joke now. you are really right, one, they are already recording this so they don't mind it being recorded as long as it's not to show you wrong they are. and you were trying to record it to see what they were going to say. and then just real quick there, you as a public citizen -- since it was a public hearing could have sat in the hearing anyway. >> but not recorded it. >> wasn't your camera man credentialed. >> the first set we hired were credentialed. but the point is that, you know
our film gasland two is about another level of contamination due to fraccing. every single campaign dollar that's going towards a politician that is going to be supporting frac-ing and there are millions and millions $250 million spent lobying in congress, every single one of those dollar is a confrontation to our democracy. i was arrested because oil and gas excerpts influence on congress. and that is not democracy. >> josh -- >> that is something else. >> josh bingo, you nailed it. i couldn't agree more with that. that's the real contamination. thank you so much for joining us today and telling your story. >> thank you very much for having me on today. >> when we come back boy was there a lot of fallout from the
>> thank you. (vo)weeknights... >>the weakest citizen in this country is more important than the strongest corporation. my god, this is one of the stupidest things i've ever heard! you got a bone to pick with that? the blood is in the water and the sharks are bipartisan. ♪ all right back on "the young turks." yesterday we did the story on the susan g. komen foundation pulling their money from planned parenthood.
ana is here with an update. >> since the story broke planned parenthood has actually received more than $650,000 in donations. people are pouring in their support. two employees at planned parenthood have resigned. molly williams who is a top health official, and deb anthony, who is the executive director for the l.a. chapter. they have resigned from their positions because they do not agree with the policy that the komen foundation has. the susan komen foundation has donated $7.8 million to penn state's medical center, which is very interesting. >> i thought they couldn't do nate to anything that was being investigated. that's fascinating. ana those are great updates. thank you for joining