Skip to main content

tv   The Young Turks With Cenk Uygur  Current  August 6, 2013 4:00pm-5:01pm PDT

4:00 pm
>> everyone in michael jackson's life was out to use him. (vo) no one brings you more documentaries that are real, gripping, current. ♪ theme cenk: what's up? welcome to "the young turks." we had a great show for you guys. we're going to talk about terrific, housing, and then an american hero. >> ana kasparian. cenk: not ana kasparian. ok. you guys are going to be shocked. later in the program, we're going to talk about money and politics. you didn't see that coming on "the young turks." the final story is about how the smart t.v.'s spy in on you.
4:01 pm
fascinating with that you know what? it's go time. just wanted to do it for old time's sake. panel, the lovely and brilliant ana kasparian, though not an american hero. jayar jackson, catch him every night on the young turks.com, a totally different show. joe williams, joe, it's great to have you here. don't make me go through the whole resume of politico. let's talk about the terror attacks. turns out the terrorists have cracked the crowd, their on to us and know we're listening in on the phone calls and emails and have a new way of communicating and that's apparently what happened in yemen, which caused all the panic. >> a senior u.s. official says it was from somewhere in
4:02 pm
pakistan that the direction of yemen's al-qaeda was ordered to carry out a big attack with strategic significance. it prompted the closure of embassies. the official target is believed to be the u.s. embassy in yemen and this is why the state department has ordered the evacuation of all non-emergency personnel from yemen, because of the threat. intelligence officials believe trucks have been packed with exclosives to carry out the attack in yemen, and a frantic search is underway. the u.s. has also intercepted communications, although the content is not known. >> in terrorist communications, the simpler, more primitive forms of communication, the more effective they are. cenk: so, that's fascinating,
4:03 pm
because they're like oh, yeah, you're watching everything we do on line, how about we don't do it on line, how about we just send a postcard. to me, the more interesting part and let me start with you, joe, on this, is wait a minute, i thought that people get put away in jail and those international manhunts, if there's leak of classified and sensitive information, i can't imagine more st. louisifyed and sensitive information that we have figured out the communication between the number one leader in al-qaeda and in the arabian peninsula. which is there no international manhunt for that leaker? >> good question. good question. i think that's in part because you've got a situation here where the united states has to act prudently. the ghosts of ben gas are all over this one. people know the embassies are being shut down or an
4:04 pm
unspecified threat, therefore it's in the government's interest to let you know that they know and how they know is no long important, because all they're trying to do is prevent another high profile terrorist incident. it's kind of like the hypocrisy of secrecy, if you will, that on the one hand, leaking secrets isn't that big of a deal if it's the government doing it. object the other hand if you have individuals doing it in the name of calling the government out on what it's spying on and who it's spying on, that's a problem. so in order to make this justification work, you've got to tell people why you're doing what you're doing and try to avoid panic. it's interesting to me that we haven't heard a whole lot about the fact that this might be a wag the dog situation, where you have a leak that's classified and justifying what's happening in the middle east to justify what's happening domestically. i don't know if i made that clear, talking about how nobody arguing that this might be something that the administration is doing in effect to justify the n.s.a.
4:05 pm
hoovering up of information. >> joe, what you're saying is that this is all edward snowdens fault. if he didn't come out and talk about the n.s.a. spying and how they're spying on oh us in ways we weren't aware of, they wouldn't have to leak these next stories about how they intercepted communications to prove why they are spying on us is justified, so it all goes back to the beginning, he hadward snowden is a traitor. >> it all makes sense now. there is all this orwellian language going on about this. >> margaret. >> still in country, can you explain why the evacuation didn't happen fully until today? is it correct to say the evacuation is now complete? >> first, it is inaccuracies to
4:06 pm
call it an evacuation. this is a reduction in staff. we are still -- we have not suspended operation. obviously you all know that the embassy there is closed through the date that i mentioned, and we'll have updates on them as we have them. there also continue to be commercial flights out of yemen which is something that any u.s. citizen, we would encourage them to undertake. cenk: it's not an evaluation, it's an emergency reduction of staff incredibly quickly and we're encouraging citizens to get on the first damned plane they say. >> wouldn't it be responsible to evacuate those embassies. isn't that what republicans would criticize them for if they didn't do it. >> the republicans are going to criticize in every direction, saying they are cowards for evacuating the embassy. >> why can't the democrats and
4:07 pm
obama administration decide on something and be very strong in their decision, just as soon as they get criticism, obviously not literally do this, but punch that person in the mouth and say no, we made the right decision. cenk: or literally. >> i wouldn't mind if it was literally. i want them to be strong, that that was ridiculous. that weird euphemism was laughable. cenk: they want us to thread the needle where we are on top of the threats and there are a lot of threats and that's why the n.s.a. secret spy program is very important. you throw in that, and community indicated with someone in the united states. we're not telling what you that angle is, but we're throwing that in there. so you go ok, wait a minute, now the thrust of this story is the top al-qaeda leader is communicating with the top leader in yemen. what does that have to do with the u.s.?
4:08 pm
not a dammed thing. the panic is set, because apparently in that communication, this is the quote "do something." all right. well then panic, i got you. so i'm with joe here when he mentions wag the dog. obviously talking about yesterday, but to give you more euphemisms here, there's a great write up in independent currently review. they said add reduction in personnel to kin nettic military operation for unconstitutional war and workplace violence for a domestic terror attack, and or disposition matrix for secret kill list. obama uses these orwellian euphemisms to screw the constitution. >> this decision matrix when we decide who's on the kill list.
4:09 pm
we're figuring out who we dispose of. >> you bring up an interesting point in that what the administration in my view should be dealing with with, and it's a much more difficult problem, is the fact that this speaks to a lot of chronic instability not region. we're talking about disposition lists of people who escaped from prison where the administration in that country either had wind of the break up plan or had no intelligence to stop it. that seems to be the point that needs to be made here, not trying to develop euphemisms and trying to talk your way out of a situation, or moreover, trying to get out of a situation that creates more enemies. it seems a lot more engagement has to happen in order to keep a lid on these kind of things and keep things things under control and keep the administration from having to twist themselves into pretzels explaining what they really want to do anyway.
4:10 pm
cenk: i want to make a couple of points related to what you guys said. to your point, joe, if -- well, let me skip to anna's paint for one second. in benghazi and this whole word play, say it's an evacuation. >> be honest, straight with them and unapologetic. the democrats are apologetic annual try to play to both sides and seem extremely weak. >> i wish we had time to evacuate benghazi. on the prison breaks, the prison breaks are horrible. they're happening literally all over the world. we covered them extensively in the on-line show. they busted out 500 al-qaeda guys out of ago, 1,000 guys out of libya in a different prison
4:11 pm
break and 250 guys in northern pakistan. my god, if you got intelligence, that would be the time to use them, so we prevent all those al-qaeda and taliban leaders from escaping. they were top al-qaeda leaders. our intelligence, it seems like we never have the right intelligence when we need it, whether the boston bombing or giant prison breaks, but every once in a while we get a letter that says do something and we're yes, in the middle of that, let's go to work. now the latest thing everybody is getting scared about, and it's all in the press now, this guy, the leader in al-qaeda in the arabian peninsula has come up with a new way, because he's their bomb maker, too, chemicals that go on your clothes that when they're wet don't explode but when they dry up, they blow up. they're calling him a genius bomb maker. this guy is at the top of the
4:12 pm
disposition matrix. you don't put out that much propaganda on the guy unless they're ready to assassinate him. if you're going to do a drone strike, that's the guy. he's the genius that came up with the underwear bomber, except the underwear bomb didn't go off. you're going to walk through an airport with dripping wet clothes and say hold up, dog, just wait two hours and when these things dry, they're going to explode. who's going to let the guy with wet clothes get on to the plane. jayar, i'm curious what you think. am i taking it too far? >> i always look at the language that they use. in that abc news report,
4:13 pm
significance. we don't ask how the dried off closed work. we hear they are using dripping clothes explosion, we think of james bond. we can't stay ahead of it. we need intercepting intelligence, and we get lost in the words and scare tactics to keep from asking the right questions. >> it's the same fear mongering from the bush administration. >> the downside of getting into knots, because we're looking to continue to hold the power and control over surveilling everyone, we end up missing the real thing, which is my we messed up the boston thing or what happened in benghazi. you're too busy looking for things that you're shotting after that are unnecessary and the necessary things slide by you. cenk: for example, spying on all americans when the real problem is in northern prisons in pakistan and afghanistan.
4:14 pm
what are you spying on us for? >> that's part of the problem, is that this was a plat, these synchronized jail breaks in egypt, iraq and pakistan, those would have been some very -- they were coordinated obviously, number one. number two, that's the sort of information that would really be helpful to have and to prevent that kind of attack to prevent al-qaeda or al-qaeda in the arab peninsula or yemen to get that extra man power to carry out these attacks, but certainly to be able to keep these people under wraps, i think it should be a higher priority than figuring out the guy who's making underwear bombs and who can make bombs explode when your clothes dry. cenk: all this talk about the evil genius and bomb making, by far the greatest damage they did was with box cutters, so it wasn't like some unbelievable contraption that they had in vented. it was box cutters, right?
4:15 pm
jayar, i don't know if you did me any favors here, but you totally convinced me that it's totally prop began propaganda. when we come back, president obama has a new plan on hold. it's very similar to his old plan. we'll tell you if it's a good thing or bad thing. you don't really know with us, right? we're keeping it real. we'll tell you our real opinion on it when we come back. about donald rumsfeld. >> (laughter) >> cutting throught the clutter of today's top stories. >> this is the savior of the republican party? i mean really? >> ... with a unique perspective. >> teddy rosevelt was a weak asmatic kid who never played sports until he was a grown up. >> (laughter) >> ... and lots of fancy buz words. >> family values, speding, liberty, economic freedom, hard-working moms, crushing debt, cute little puppies. if wayne lapierre can make up stuff that sounds logical while making no sense... hey, so can i. once again friends, this is live tv and sometimes these things
4:16 pm
happen. >> watch the show. >> only on current tv.
4:17 pm
cenk: we're back on "the young turks." do you know that we also come back on "the young turks" at 9:00 p.m. on theyoungturks.com which is nothing but fun and exciting. >> president obama's housing plan is similar to his old plan. if you remember the old housing plan, we were supposed to rescue 4 million homeowners underwater
4:18 pm
on their mortgage. it turns out, we got to help 880,000 of them. that's less than 25%. it was a busy of a disaster. he announced that program in arizona, unabated and undaunted, president obama goes back to arizona to announce his new housing program. here's some more on that. >> stopping in arizona, president obama shined a spotlight on the nation's housing recovery. in one of the areas hardest hit by the collapse. >> phoenix has led one of the biggest comebackion in the country. >> the median price rubbed from $114,000 in 2011 to $169,000. the president watts to keep that going helping more middle class homeowners refinance at lower interest rates, cutting the red tape for new buyers and step three. >> that is fixing our broken immigration system. it would actually help our
4:19 pm
housing market. when more people buy homes and play by the rules, home values go up for everybody. >> president obama wants to phase out fannie may and freddie mac, which own or guarantee many of the nation's mortgages and rely on the private sector that were bailed out by taxpayers in 2008. >> i don't know that anything except time is going to heal this wound, but he's going to go after fanny and freddie, so it's nice political capital. >> the south and southwest have seen a rebound in home prices, up 14.2%. phoenix and las vegas are up more than 20% and san francisco 24%. >> i do think housing is going to kick into higher gear. we're going to build more homes and see stronger price growth. cenk: the issue here is who is this plan helping. they say, of course, the obama administration that it helps the middle class, and in some ways, it does. it makes buying a house a little
4:20 pm
easier. there is a downside to it, which is that if things go badly, as we rebuild the housing bubble, and understand that if you're going to have housing get healthy again, you flirt with a bubble, you know, you don't want the housing prices to be low all the time. you do want them to increase, but you don't want to overinflate the market. part of the problem here is in this plan, it appears that what they're doing is saying well, if you run into trouble, the bankers are going to have to pay. all right, that's good. you guessed it, me and you, right? so why are we paying 90% if they run into trouble? that's exactly the situation that creates bubbles, because then the bankers think well, i'm picking up most of the cost, but i'm going to get all of the profit, so i'm a little worried on that. >> first of all, that report was false in a few different ways. they talk about how the housing market has gotten a lot better.
4:21 pm
they give florida as a prime example of that. one thing to keep in mind is it's not middle class homeowners or buyers helping to improve the market. most of the time, it's the banks, it's investors who buy hundreds of homes at a time and then try to flip it for a profit. oftentimes, they can't find middle class homebuyers to buy those homes. usually they do a pretty crappy job in renovating those homes and reselling them. also, right now, the banks are manipulating the market by holding on to a lot of inventory, so the reason you're seeing an improvement is because all of a sudden, there's a limited inventory, a limited amount of buyers that are fighting one another to buy those homes. cenk: as you say that and i hadn't thought of this before, it reminds me of the story on the aluminum market where they hoard it and officially raise the price. could that be what's happening
4:22 pm
here? >> absolutely. >> fanny mae and freddie mac, we had to put in $90 billion to rescue them. the taxpayers don't get profits. when they're on their feet, the profit goes to private interests. it should be what the service hates the most. they partly do, but then use it as an excuse anyway. the homes backed up by freddie mac and fanny mae, the taxpayer has to pay, right? now, new loans? 90% of those are backed by the american government, so overall when you take all the homes, three out of five thunderstorms now in america are backed up by the taxpayers. joe, i find that crazy. does that make me a conservative that i think it's crazy that
4:23 pm
taxpayers are backing everybody -- why would i? i've got nothing to do with them. >> you sound like you're getting ready to qualify for a job... you have a very significant point here. to ana's point, two things are going on. there are a lot of flippers and bank property investors looking at the market here, that has led to 19% increase in the number of flippers who are buying homes this year as opposed to last year, and a 74% increase over the number of people who are buying homes to flip them, compared to 2011. that's fine if you're looking at a rental market, but not so fine if looking at an ownership market, where you are inflating the price by withholding inventory. the theory is that you're trying to create psychological demand, if the price goes up, people assume it's valuable, you get more people on the market trying to buy the same thing.
4:24 pm
the problem that we have here in addition to the fact that you've got a lot of renters and not necessarily first time owners, which the government wants to see, you also have the problem of people who are buying these homes and not necessarily living in them, who are also people who are buying these homes and not increasing the value or buying the homes where they don't have a job sufficient enough to pay for them. you have a disaster here again. the final point i wanted to make is that the mortgage-backed securities market is still playing in this game and we still haven't gotten a fairly firm grip object how to keep them regulated and they caused the bubble and crash in the first place. cenk: two great points that i want to emphasize. one is on the mortgage-backed securities. the taxpayer are backing those. what? it's one thing to back someday's mortgage, you say bob doesn't have anything to do with me, but we're all one big village and
4:25 pm
community, if bob runs into hard times, i'm going to back him up. it's another thing to back up the banks that bungled those mortgages and sell them off as instruments and make a profit off them, why in the world would the american taxpayer back that up with our guarantee? that's insanity. second of all, just real quick, on the flippers, joe, you're right, once the flippers come in, you know we're talking about a bubble. flippers equals dang are, watch out. that's when the professionals come in and start playing their games, we're more likely to be in a bubble. go ahead, joe. >> just that they were going, the flippers are in there to soak up profit, that's it. they're not there to invest in the neighborhood or to see growth happen. the second thing is with mortgage-backed securities, dodd frank was supposed to put a lid on that job by having investors have skin in the game, in other words for every dollar that gets invested, banks, investors are on the hook for 5 cents.
4:26 pm
the banking lobby is trying to gut that rule. they're having lobbying cocktails, dinner meetings to try to convince the senate to gut that particular rule so they wouldn't have any risk at all, so whatever gets put in, they get the profit, take the profit and run, and when the bubble collapses or whenever what happens happens, they get to keep the money and if they do have to default on any kind of loans, we have the four big words, too big to fail. that's what happened last time. we're getting set up for the same thing this time. cenk: i don't know if that's communismar fascism, but it ain't democracy. who in the right mind would say we agree, let the bankers take billions in profits and if they fail, we'll pay the bill. nobody would say that except all of our representatives saying exactly that, because they don't represent us. they get paid by the bankers, they represent the bankers.
4:27 pm
it's obvious. some republicans trying to block this, saying it shouldn't go on the taxpayers through fanie mae and freddie mac. i agree. on the other side, what obama's doing was really good, but it was us. president obama is trying to take credit for the good economic news coming out of arizona, but we all know it's thanks to the economic policies that came out of our republican legislature and were signed into law by our republican governor, jan brewer. >> republicans have been pivotal when it comes to creating a pathway for citizenship, which is part of obama's plan, they've been really good about that. >> and they've been critical in saying the government should help homeowners that are underwater. >> right. >> they haven't said that at all. by the way, if it's just the brilliant republican ladies and gentlemen later of arizona, why are home prices also going up in
4:28 pm
nevada, miami and all across the country? they're so disingenuous. even when they're accidentally right on an issue, it's so hard to agree with republicans. they make it so hard to agree with them. we're out of time on homes. we're going to come back with an american hero story. this guy really is. saved a lot of lives, tackled a guy that had a gun. how did he do it? how did he get the gun away from him? how many lives did he save? we're going to tell you when we come back.
4:29 pm
4:30 pm
cenk: we're back on "the young turks." ana, later tonight, where will web back? >> oh, you tube.com. cenk: where else, jayar? >> the young turks.com, actuall.
4:31 pm
tyt, just three letters, so simple. we've got a gentleman in pennsylvania who decided this gunman bursts in, he's not going to take that lying down. when the gunman comes back, he tackles him. >> witnesses say it was a horrifying and chaotic scene. bullets began exploding through the ross township municipal building after 7:15 p.m. >> it is kind of disturbing for us. you see it all over, and here it is in your hometown. >> that's more than a dozen people inside for a meeting ran for cover, outside police say this man, 59-year-old rockne nuerr was firing through the windows. >> he subsequently entered the building, continuing to fire the long gun as he made his way through the building. >> chris riever was there. it was automatic, like a string of firecrackers, i dropped to the floor, then it stopped and i
4:32 pm
crawled out the side door. >> he exited the building and returned to the parking lot, where he retrieved a handgun from his vehicle. he then again reapproached the building and entered the building, gunfire the weapon. >> the terrifying ordeal reportedly coming to an end when local official bernie coulson grabbed nuell in a bear hug, wrestling the gun away. the man wanted revenge after the property where he lived was condemned thursday. he had a long standing feud with the township, with neighbors complaining his land became a junk yard and he was living there without a septic system. cenk: on the guy who did the attacking, ana just said ooh, right? i hear you. if you hear the guy's story, he's a killer at this point and i've got no sympathy for him. before he took this crazy action, he said look, i of $600 that i get in benefits, that's
4:33 pm
all i have, you want me to take care of my property and you'll take it away from me if i don't, but i don't have the money for it. you're just going to come and take my property? i guess that's what the state does. >> maybe i'm being super insensitive, but how about you clean your yard up. how about you don't -- you saw it, it was a junk yard, he was hoarding a bunch of stuff. i can understand why the neighborhood was unhappy with it. cenk: even if you're poor, you can tidy up the stuff you got in the back yard. >> don't stand out to the point where they have a meeting about condemning your home. cenk: i hear you. none of that really matters, because he comes in shooting those three people. this bernie guy, what an american hero, right? when the guy goes back to his car, he waits for him in case he comes back, and when the guy comes back, he tackles him, right? i don't know that, you know, how many people have the courage to do that. >> i wouldn't. i wouldn't even stand a chance, obviously, but would you consider doing that, knowing that he has a gun?
4:34 pm
>> i have no idea what you would do in that circumstance, but as soon as he left the believe, my guess is i would have done like the reporter, go time, get out, get out, get out, everybody get out, including myself. led me major slightly political here, since we do a political show, number one, automatic weapons and the ability to reload. right? so he got tackled when he had to go get his other gun. now the more bullets that he can fire at one time, the more people he could have killed. he could have killed 18 people instead of three people. he had to reload, so does the number of magazines, number of bullets in a magazine matter? obviously. i mean obviously they matter. >> even with the dreams that a lot of people have that are on the side of -- there were people who criticized the virginia tech shooting about people didn't respond and tackle him and stop him. when do you have an opportunity to when there's continuous gunfire? are you in the matrix.
4:35 pm
you need an opportunity as in this situation, you need an opportunity. if you don't have it, you can't do anything else about it. cenk: right, joe, one other thing here. we talk about the wild wild west and the bad old days, but the wild wild west was never this violent. i've read the history of it and we've brought in a great law professor here to talk about the history of it, and the reason we had the shootout at the o.k. corral, because wyatt earp collected everyone's guns. now they'd shoot him in the head. one shootout in the o.k. corral, everybody talked about it. now, with this story and three people dead and this great hero, you hardly see anywhere, it's like ho-hum, another massacre, and we move on that. >> that's the point, isn't it, the fact that this has become so normalized in our society that it barely raises an eyebrow,
4:36 pm
compared to the newtown school shooting or aurora colorado shooting, or columbine. the body count. as a news man, i regret this, but the body count reaches a certain level, it becomes headline front page news and everyone pace attention. to another point here, you have in one incident, a textbook reputation of n.r.a.'s argument, don't you? you have a good guy without a gun stopping a bad guy with a gun. you also have a bad guy who had to stop and reload and had to go back and get more ammunition and another weapon, which made him vulnerable to the good guy without a gun. with all the n.r.a.'s strictures with what they're talking in doing in making voiding legislation that would have capacity on ammunition clips and on their insistence that everyone everywhere in america carries a gun to make them safe, we have in one story a complete recorrect of that argument.
4:37 pm
cenk: as usual, great points by joe. it's textbook. by wait, i keep saying this, there's going to come a day any second now when a good guy with a gun is going to pull out a gun in one of these shootings and then everyone is going to start shooting each other and they're not going to have any idea who the original bad guy was. let's see if it happens. i hope it never happens. unfortunately, i think we're seconds away from that. >> it happened in new york city, where you had a guy, i can't recall the specifics about it, but i believe it was at the empire state building, where you had a robber running down the street with a weapon, the cops shot and fired at him, and ended up shooting four or five pedestrians who weren't involved in any case. we have trained law enforcement officers here, right, and never left the fact they are talking about if you have somebody with a gun who can stop somebody else with a gun, you won't know who the bad guy is and everybody is in danger. >> it's like nypd.
4:38 pm
i don't trust them too much these days. that connects all of our stories together. ana, look, the whole country is unfortunately soaked in violence. it reminds me of the story we did last night on the 95-year-old world war ii veteran and they busted him with riot police because he was threatening someone with his metal contain. one day they tasered him. >> they tased him and after, shot him with a gun that doesn't have actual bullets, it has little bean bags, but since he was so old, 95 years old web suffered from internal bleeding and died as a result of that bean bag hitting him so hard. it's just a perfect example of excessive force, because there were five to seven police officers, based on what the staff had told reporters and they went in there with riot gear. they had riot she'd. let's say worst case scenario, the authorities claim that he had a knife, even though the staff said no, he did not.
4:39 pm
let's say he did. you have a riot shield. you don't need to shoot him with anything. you don't need to tase a 95-year-old man, who needs a walker to get around. cenk: he survived the japanese. speaking of american heroes, american hero from world war ii, the thing that they shot him was a shotgun that shoots out bean bags. i wonder why they gave a 90 if i have-year-old internal bleeding that killed him. my point is the whole country's soaked and tripping in violence, right? the answer is violence, we forget the question. unfortunately, what does it lead to? more and more deathing. when we come back, josh silver's going to join us. he's one of the leading advocates for getting money out of politics. how is he fight that go battle? does he think it's doable and how is he going to do it? we're going to find out when we return.
4:40 pm
4:41 pm
4:42 pm
cenk: we're back on "the young turks." well, you know that unfortunately, our politics is absolutely riddled with money and the influence of money, but let me give you some stats on this. in 2012, we spent $7 billion in the elections, and of course that money came from largely very, very large donors, and they want something back for that money. in fact, 61 of the big donors equaled 1.4 million small donors. gee, i wonder who has influence over our politics. i can't quite tell. if you had more money in the senate elections, you won 83% of the time, house elections, 93% of the time. didn't matter if you were a democratic, liberal, conservative, what your policies were, if you were in the house and you had more money, you won
4:43 pm
93% of the time. what's determinative is not your positions, but your money. how many people agree with that? too much corporate money in politics? that would only be 89% of the country. it's not like we live in a democracy. we can't get our politicians hooked on that money off of that main even if 89% agree. i believe we have a video here, d0, if you will. oh, we bumped it? my bad. the brilliant people that showed you that video want to get money out of politics and to represent us. led me bring in josh silver, the director of represent.us. great to have you on the show. >> thanks, cenk, good to be here. cenk: what's your battle plan, how do we solve this? >> that's quite a question. i looked at this issue for a long time, looked at it in the
4:44 pm
1990's. there's five things to do to get money out of politics and we better do it, because we're losing on just about every issue. i'm not talking about we being liberals or mad relation or rising number of independents, we're all losing because of this, as you said. i think there's five things you've got to do. that you've got to accept the fact that politicians not going to fix this problem unless you force them to and the only way to force them to is at the ballot box. you to have show that they're going to lose elections if they actually oppose reforming this system and getting money out. number two, if you're going to have to force them, that means you need a movement. you need millions of people who say we're going to lose on the environment, on tax reform, health care, economic justice, on government waste unless we fix this problem. number three, if you're going to have a m with millions, you to have take advantage of that 89%
4:45 pm
statistic you said, you need liberals, moderates, conservatives, everybody united to get money out of politics. number four, you need big, bold proposals that can inspire a movement, and would actually fix the problem. you've worked on this with the constitutional convention idea, we have the anti american corruption act that would completely overhaul, it's the most bold legislative proposal ever on this issue. you need something like that. finally, you need to call it what it is, it's corruption. it's not getting money out of politics, really, it's not even about democracy, when you're talking to ordinary people, what they care about is the fact that the system said corrupt, the politicians being corrupted and we got to stop the corruption and clean it up. cenk: it's basically legalized bribery. we've made corruption systemic and systematic, so it's very easy to do, hand them a bundle of cash and they do whatever you tell them to do. in fact, that's why i think your
4:46 pm
group is called represent.us. they don't represent us, they represent their donors. the problem is, this is obvious, but if you tell politicians that, they are deeply, deeply, mortally offended. now, so we can't have a conversation about this in the media, either. you know, you go, turn on c.n.n., turn on traditional media and they never talk about the role of money in politics and how the senators and congressmen voted based on the contributions they got. how do you solve that problem? >> the media's been terrible about this. i thank you on the "young turks" for being bright lights. it's like the frog in the warming water. it's been so many years where political decisions, laws, politicians are being bought and sold, it's no longer news. that's the travesty, but the reality is when you talk to ordinary people, they get it. i mean, congress has roughly 12%
4:47 pm
approval rating. it's actually lower than com roaches, literally, that the people reward cockroaches higher than congress today. the american people, despite the mediad failure to cover the issue, they get it, and increasingly, they understand that they're going to lose the issues they care about. now, this fall, october 10, the supreme court's going to debate citizen's united two, which would actually remove some of the contribution limits, the last vestiges of campaign finance reform that prevents donors from giving $170,000 as if that's not enough, it would lift of roof off of that, so big, big donors and billionaires can give as much to politics as they want directly to campaigns. if that happens, then it's over, in terms of any kind of reasonable limits that we might still have in the campaign finance realm, and the good news, the upside to that development is that it's amazing, when i go across the
4:48 pm
country, teen partyers, 41% of americans are registered independents. they want going of the parties. moderates, liberals all get it and are having that light bulb moment saying we've got to get involved. we represent us to get millions of people behind the anti corruption act and to say we want this, and we're going to fight for it and unseat politicians who oppose it and keep fighting until we have a congress that has to do this. if we sit around and keep doing what we're doing, we're like mice on a wheel and we're never going to win. >> critical question is how do you beat them is this you know, you're right, the great majority of people think that politicians corrupt, but, you know, the guy that's running against them also takes money, and even if you beat them, that guy my get corrupted, even if he's a good guy, because he's got to sit and make calls for 15% of his day begging for money. how do you beat the original bad guy in the first place, because
4:49 pm
he's got all the money and can republican all these deceptive ads. >> barack obama proved it, he beat hillary clinton, because he had a better ground game. he had a grassroots movement and well organized machine behind him. in 2012, he did it again by out organizedding mitt romney. organizing is critical. karl rove learned that the hard way in 2012. you can't throw millions of dollars at super pac and expect to win elections. i believe that if we can get enough members of congress on the record, you're either for reform, for bold reforms or against it, you're either anti corrupt or you're corrupt, you're part of the problem, if we can get enough members of the congress, all members of congress on the record as for or against, we can create a new -- it's a new way of labeling politicians, if you will, because democratic, republican doesn't mean anything anymore.
4:50 pm
corrupt or anti corrupt, that means something and it's something by which people can start to vote on and vote out members of congress who oppose reform. we're not going to see this happen soon, it's going to take a long time, but if you look at the arc of history, it's the big scandals, scandals in 1947 included unions in some of the limits, it was watergate that created the major campaign finance laws of our era, and it's going to be another scandal. the question becomes what is lying around when the next scandal hits, and what needs to be lying around, so to speak, for politicians to pick up and pass when they have to, has to be something that's bold and comprehensive, no more incrementalism, we have to change all the rules on lobbying, so there's no more quid pro quo. we've got to make everything transparent. we have to completely transform the system and redefine what
4:51 pm
reform is. cenk: the arc of history bends toward us or perhaps represent us. everybody check out josh's group, represent us, josh silver, thank you so much for joining us on "the young turks." >> thanks, cenk. cenk: we'll be right back and talk about smart television sets that are spying in on your living room. we'll be right back.
4:52 pm
4:53 pm
cenk: all right, back on "the young turks." can anybody tell i was just eating a granola bar? >> all right. fascinating story about smart t.v.'s, you can hack into them and watch people's living rooms. two hackers talked about it. cnn went to talk about them. get ready to get scared. go. >> the things that we were able to do with the smart t.v. platform is abuse the browser. we could actually gain access to the camera that's built into the t.v.
4:54 pm
what we can prove here is that with a little bit of extra code, we can turn the camera on in your browser. >> wow. >> the real danger is when people smart using smart t.v.'s or on line banking, we can take a popular bank address, and translate that into a different i.p. address that we control. it may look like your bank's log in, but you're using a password that goes to us instead of your bank. >> ana kasparian, you're freaked out, aren't you? >> smart t.v.'s don't sound so smart. cenk: it's funny. samsung put out a statement, and they said:
4:55 pm
>> we created this television that can spy in on your personal information, spy in on you, lukk at you. but if you disable our surveillance own, you'll be fine. it doesn't matter that we did it, it matters that you can stop us. >> you can unplug it, do encryption and put it into the bezel and you'll be fine. >> people forget it's human nature. i try to cover my webcam as often as possible, because i'm always afraid a hacker is watching what i was doing in my apartment. every once in a while, as i'm undressing to get into my work clothes or whatever, i realize, i forget to cover the webcam. you never know. i don't like that the pressure is placed on the consumer that make sure that a cam race
4:56 pm
covered at all times. cenk: why didn't you use encrypted software? aren't you a computer genius. why don't you just encrypt the software. why didn't you just unplug it in your home? >> the question is how far are we willing to go in order to get advanced technology? how much of our privacy are we willing to let go of. >> joe, are we being paranoid or are i worried about that camera on your t.v., laptop or smart phone? >> i think the camera's watching me right now, i don't know what to do about that. i don't have encrypted software. yeah, technology does advance at a price. we all give up something to make these advancements. i was on my way to orlando the other day and it occurred to me that we give up so much of our privacy, i've about that thinking about it approximate.
4:57 pm
we hand our documents to the guy at t.s.a., go through a full body scan, because it's normal, it's what we expect to do in this post 9/11 era. even your laptop and home computer that you're tapping things on right now at home, they know what you're looking at. the other day on line, i'd gone to zoppo's or something to look a the a pair of shoes, and on my home web page, email from them. wait a minute, this is too scary, i clicked off to get rid of the ad, because it just was kind of disturbing. that's something that everybody goes through without thought and the fact that your t.v. could be used, you could be turned into a spying device, that's almost off the chain. it makes you want to go back to the days of wire loss radio and not even think about it anymore. cenk: absolutely. we're used to
4:58 pm
4:59 pm
if you believe in state's rights but still support the drug war you must be high. >> "viewpoint" digs deep into the issues of the day. >> do you think there is any chance we'll ever hear the president even say the word "carbon tax"? >> with an opened mind... >> has the time finally come for real immigration reform? >> ...and a distinctly satirical point of view. >> but you mentioned great leadership so i want to talk about donald rumsfeld. >> (laughter) >> cutting throught the clutter of today's top stories. >> this is the savior of the republican party? i mean really? >> ... with a unique perspective. asmatic kid who never played sports until he was a grown up. >> (laughter) >> ... and lots of fancy buz words. >> family values, speding, liberty, economic freedom, hard-working moms, crushing debt, cute little puppies. if wayne lapierre can make up stuff that sounds logical while making no sense... hey, so can i. once again friends, this is live tv and sometimes these things happen. >> watch the show. >> only on current tv.
5:00 pm
>> cenk: where are you going to go an hour from now? theyoungturks.com. >> john: jeff bezos buys "the washington post." this is the biggest thing to happen to print media since tina brown turned it into a blog. reince priebus warns cnn if they run their planned mini series on hillary clinton, he will not let them carry the g.o.p. debates. thereby, totally p promotiti ememseselvlves in n adadvance ad guaranteeing cnn and abc will get better ratings than if they carried the debate. tonight's f bomb, it is an open letter to the right wing pro-life anti-abortion repeal roe v. wade community about how the republican

144 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on