mistake. >> well, i don't think anybody's ever run the perfect campaign, and actually, these debates are set up for nothing more than to tear down the candidates. it's pretty hard to be able to sit and lay out your ideas and your concepts with a one-minute response. so, you know, if there was a -- if there was a mistake made, it was probably ever doing one of the -- ever doing one of the campaigns when all they're interested in is stirring it up between the candidates instead of really talking about the issues that are important to the american people, about how you're going to get us back to work. >> bottom line, he says the debates are rigged for conflict and against the candidates. but keeping them honest, the candidates themselves agreed on the rules for all the debates, including the recent one we held in las vegas. after most of governor perry's complaints break down. remember, his first beef that the debates are set up for, quote, nothing but conflict. here's a question i asked that night, giving him an opportunity to respond to criticism of his health care record. >> governor perry, in the last debate, governor romney pointed out that texas has one of the highest rates of uninsured children in the country, over 1 million kids. you did not get an opportunity to respond to that. what do you say -- how do you explain that? >> well, we've got one of the finest health care systems in the world in texas. as a matter of fact, the houston -- the texas medical center, there's more doctors, nurses go to work there every morning than any place else in america. so the idea that you can't have access to health care, some of the finest health care in the world. we have a 1,201,200-mile borderh mexico. and the fact is, we have a huge number of illegals that are coming into this country. and they're coming into this country because the federal government has failed to secure that border. but they're coming here because there is a magnet. and the magnet is called jobs. and those people that hire illegals ought to be penalized. >> now, you can agree or disagree with what he said, but it's a perfectly clear, on-point, straight-forward answer to a pretty simple, straight-forward question. a question, i might add, we specifically designed to give him a chance to set the record straight, which he did, and not to start a fight. yet in the very next sentence, it was governor perry who starts a fight with a sucker punch, a direct personal attack. we'll roll back the tape just a bit to see how he makes such a sharp turn from his answer to an attack. >> and those people who hire illegals ought to be penalized. and mitt, you lose all of your standing, from my perspective, because you hired illegals in your home, and you knew about it for a year. and the idea that you stand here before us and talk about that you're strong on immigration is on its face the height of hypocrisy. >> governor romney? >> rick, i don't think i've ever hired an illegal in my life. and so i'm afraid -- i'm looking forward to finding your facts on that, because that just doesn't -- >> i'll tell you what the facts are -- >> rick, i'm speaking. i'm speaking. i'm speaking. >> so objection one, the debates are designed for nothing more than tearing down the candidates, that doesn't hold up. governor perry himself took that opportunity and others to tear down mitt romney with what was clearly a prepared attack on the governor. mitt romney did the same in return. three years ago, hillary clinton did the same to barack obama and vice versa. some use a scalpel, some use a meat ax, but it's hard to imagine how to stop it, especially when candidates can pivot as governor perry did, from the question you ask to the answer or response they want to give. >> governor perry, the 14th amendment allows anybody, a child of illegal immigrants who's born here, is automatically an american citizen. should that change? >> let me address herman's issue -- >> actually, i'd rather you answer that question. >> i understand that. you get to ask the questions and i get to the answer like i want to. and herman talked about -- >> that's actually a response, that's not an answer, but go ahead. >> and he did. just as some of the other candidates steered the dialogue in the direction that suited them or pressed for more time, or simply took more time. it wasn't the format, again, that they agreed to, it was their own behavior that truly shaped the debate and what they wanted to do in that debate. governor perry also complains that debates don't give candidates enough time to lay out their ideas. but i want to show you an example how he used what seemed like ample times in a fox news debate last month. a lot of political observers point to moments like this to explain why governor perry might want to back away from debates, and maybe that's really behind his talk lately of backing away from the debates and also why he's slumping in the polls. >> i think americans just don't know sometimes which mitt romney they're dealing with. is it the mitt romney that was on the side of against the second amendment, before he was for the second amendment? was it was before he was before the social programs, um, from the standpoint before he was up for standing roe versus wade, before he was against roe versus wade. he was for race to the top, he's for obama care, and now he's against it. i mean, we'll wait until tomorrow. >> that debate was september 22nd. the next day we did some polling and that was the last time rick perry was in the lead at 30%. the next poll by fox showed him in second place. nearly every poll after that showed him third at best. again, after this story circulated all day, the perry campaign came out with a response. spokesman ray sullivan telling us, "there have been eight debates so far, the governor has participated in five of them, but there are 18 debates scheduled between now and the end of january." sullivan went on to say, "at some point, the candidates have to spend time out with voters in iowa, new hampshire, and south carolina. so i simply question whether 18 was a realistic number. that's all. we haven't ruled anything out at all." joining us now, democratic strategist james carville and erick erickson, someone excited by the perry candidacy when he first got in the race. erick, what do you make of this. do you think he'd be saying there are too many debates, we're taking up too much time with this stuff? >> of course not. and it looks like the end of january, there would be 21. i don't blame any of the candidates for saying in the december debates, most are on small networks and they're not going to be watched, yeah, they might want to skip one or two, not all of them. i think the bigger issue here, anderson, is the absolute lack of message discipline. he released his economic plan last week and we spent a week talking about his birth certificate comments and now we're going to spend another week talking about his debate performances and it's all because of the perry campaign. >> james, what about this? what does this say about rick perry? >> you know what, i think the biggest mistake he made was on august 11th when he got in the race. and i don't blame erick for being frustrated. i think a lot of conservatives thought this was going to be somebody that was going to articulate his position. he's for a flat tax, and in the same day, he says, but you can fill out the regular form if you want to. a part of the attraction is you get rid of the irs, that doesn't work. then he says in his book he's going to eliminate the department of education, then he says, no, i'm just going to cut it in half. and then he said he's not going to debate, now he says he will. and the stupid birther stuff, he steps all over himself. this guy, i thought he would be a pretty good candidate, i the turned out to be just a terrible candidate. i don't know what's wrong. i think people are just sort of exaspera exasperated. and now he says he's not going to debate. you wouldn't debate barack obama? that doesn't fit in the republican culture, you're running away from a general election debate. and there you're just kind of mano y mano. it looks indecisive. a terrible campaign. >> erick, i saw you wrote, i don't think the republican campaign understands how uninspired rick perry has left his base of supporters. and is rick perry wasting our time? you were a big fan of rick perry's early on. are you one of those supporters, you've talked about, who's left been uninspired? >> i wouldn't say i was a rick perry supporter. i certainly like the guy, he's a friend, he announced in my event. you know, i am actually really surprised that a governor of the state, the second largest state of the nation, he's been governor for a decade, gets on to the national trail and just flops over. the campaign has been completely off message. they've yet to find a message. he's actually got some very good policy issues from a conservative perspective, but the campaign can't find its foot. and i get the strong sense, anderson, that they don't really understand what their own base of supporters, a lot of whom i hear from on a regular basis, are really dejected right now, looking at this race. mitt romney has capped at 25%. everyone comes up behind mitt romney, falls behind, gets ahead of mitt romney. they think, this is the guy who should be able to beat mitt romney, yet he's flailing around like someone's cut his tendons or something. >> james, what is the problem, though? because he's the governor of the state of texas. he's, you know, an accomplished politician. is there such a huge difference between running for a statewide office and running for president? at this stage, in the primaries? >> yes. yes. and apparently, he don't -- he's in over his head. it's evident. it's almost like -- like somebody needs to do an intervention on this guy and say, hey, rick, let's go back to texas and, you know, have some tequila shots and chicken-fried steak and maybe go out and go to some ball games. he's obviously in over his head. and the sooner he gets out of this, the happier he's going to be. this is not -- >> you're saying there's no way he can come back? >> -- it's a slippery slope out there. well, i don't want to say there's no way, but unless something really changes here, it's just been awfully disappointing. and i don't see him -- i thought he'd try to get a message -- look, i was kind of hoping he'd do well. i wanted the thing to protract out. i wanted him and romney -- i like a good campaign. erick can understand that, just as someone who likes politics. it's good for cnn, it's good for all of us. it's all fun, you know? and this is turning into a big nothing. it's just nothing, and it's really disappointing on some level. if anything, i'm a little mad about it, that -- >> yeah, i -- >> i want it to be more interesting. >> i would give that to james, but i would say, he does have two months, he does have more money in the bank than anyone but romney. he just brought in some really good team players this week, but they'll have to act very fast. because this debate issue really overshadows what is this lack of message discipline. he can't talk about the issues he wants to talk about because he's having to play defense on the stuff that his spokespeople have put out there or he's put out there. >> interesting stuff. erick erickson, appreciate it, james carville, thanks very much. let us know what you think on facebook or on twitt twitter @andersoncooper. coming up, the occupiers say they speak for the 99% of americans who are not super rich. we'll talk to cornel west. >> what do you think my -- what percent of my income -- >> get rid of the bush taxes! >> no, just give me a percentage. what percent? >> marginal. >> so you think -- >> he's a cpa, ask the tax guy. >> what do you think's -- >> what's fair -- >> also tonight, jack hanna on why the few surviving animals from that private zoo in ohio where the guy released all the animals and then shot himself, why those surviving ones could end up back where the nightmare began, and why they got a welcome reprieve today. and later, did michael jackson give himself the fatal dose that killed him. we'll talk to our two experts, marcia clark and dr. sanjay gupta when we continue. [ male announcer ] every day, thousands of people are choosing advil®. here's one story. [ regis ] we love to play tennis. as a matter of fact it was joy who taught me how to play tennis. and with it comes some aches and pains and one way to relieve them all is to go right to the advil®. i have become increasingly amazed at regis's endurance. it's scary sometimes what he accomplishes in a day. well i'd rather not have time for pain but unfortunately it does comes your way every now and then. and that's when i take my advil®. [ male announcer ] take action. take advil®. [ male announcer ] how could switchgrass in argentina, change engineering in dubai, aluminum production in south africa, and the aerospace industry in the u.s.? at t. rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex, global economy. it's just one reason over 75% of our mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper average. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment information, risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing. whether you're an allstate customer or not. all you have to do is call. [ female announcer ] call allstate now and you'll get a free lifetime membership in good hands roadside assistance. [ dennis ] shop less. get more. make one call to an allstate agent. well, no sign the occupy wall street movement is dying down, but protesters will soon face a serious challenge from the weather. rain today in lower manhattan's park could become snow this weekend if the forecast is correct. protesters who describe themselves as the 99 percent of americans who are not super wealthy also face a challenge to explain what they want. up close tonight, recently investment strategist wall street ceo and radio host peter schiff went down to the park with a sign reading, "i am the 1%, let's talk." he also had a camera crew. let's watch. >> you're in the 1% and we're in the 99%. >> wouldn't you like to get into the 1%? >> no -- >> you don't want more money? >> i would pay my share, and get rid of the bush tax cuts immediately! immediately! >> let me ask you a question. hold on. >> warren buffett and his secretary, i would -- >> let me ask you a question. hold on. >> -- i would pay my share so these folks could pay their student loans, just like you would! they don't have a car! >> what do you think my fair share is? what percent of my income -- >> get rid of the bush tax cuts. >> just give me a percentage. >> marginal. >> so you think -- >> he's a cpa. ask the tax guy! ask the tax guy. what's fair for his clients? >> what do you think -- >> runs close to 17%. a whole bunch of people, about 50%, don't pay pay taxes. >> what do you think i should pay? what would be fair for me? >> i don't know what your income is? i can't tell you that. i believe in a progressive income tax. that is fair. >> look, i'm paying -- well, that would be a huge tax cut for me. i pay much more than 35% of my total income in tax. i am giving the government half of what i earn. do you think they should take more? >> i think we should get rid of the bush tax cuts. >> that means i would be paying more than half of what i earn to the government. >> there's no way you can cut all of the expenses you want without increasing revenues. >> if you raise my taxes, maybe i'll just decide to sell my business and fire 150 people. >> peter schiff joins us now. he's the author of "how an economy grows and why it crashes." also with us, princeton university professor, cornel west, author of more books than we've got time to mention, and co-host of the smiley and west radio program, that's also been part of these protests quite often in recent months. both, thank you guys for being with us. peter, one thing we haven't seen a lot in occupy wall street protests is wall street businessmen like yourself going down there. what are you trying to accomplish in doing that? >> well, you know, i sympathize with the situation that they have, but i'm trying to help encourage them to direct their anger towards washington. you know, it's big government that has wrecked the u.s. economy, not capitalism. they need to understand that. and if they really want a bright future for this country, it's capitalism that's going to provide it, not government. >> cornel west, what do you think of what mr. schiff is saying here? >> well, one, i just think it's a beautiful thing that brother peter goes down for dialogue. democracy's all about public discussion. i think it's very clear that the occupy movement is very much not about hating any individuals, but rather we hate injustice, that we hate obscene inequality, and i think that peter would agree that there are human values that are not reducible to market price. there's precious human life that's not reducible to market calculation, and the real question is, how do we deal with social justice and market price? there's always attention there, and that's where the tire hits the rope. >> peter schiff, do you think these protesters should be angry at washington, not wall street. but wall street didn't force investors to give themselves million-dollar bonuses. do you think that any of the anger at banks and corporations is justified? >> no. >> none? >> washington did create that environment. it was the federal reserve that kept interest rates down at 1%. if we didn't have a central bank, keeping rates so low, we never would have had all the speculation, we never would have had the mortgage bubble. and in fact, it was freddie and fannie, government-created entities, that were insuring all the mortgages. that was responsible for the bad behavior. you know, the people down there -- >> but aren't people responsible for their own bad behavior? aren't companies and individuals supposed to be responsible, rather than just blaming government for bad behavior? >> well, as i -- look -- >> if the government liquors you up and now you're drunk and you do stupid things, you've got to understand why wall street made all these mistakes. remember, i was there for years warning about these problems. i saw this crisis coming from a mile away, because i saw how government was distorting the market. >> professor west? >> no, no, no, peter, it was wall street that put the pressure on government to undercut glass-steagall so investment banks and commercial banks could merge so they could trade rather than lend, and speculate rather than provide resources. that was -- >> i don't -- >> let him finish his point. i'm sorry, professor, finish your point. >> -- with politicians who are themselves, either shaped and forced by big money or sometimes involved in legalized bribery. i think you got the story wrong. it was the influence from outside, it was the 1%, the oligarchs putting their pressure on government. >> the problem is that washington shouldn't have that influence to give out. the problem isn't washington having the power that people are lobbying to benefit from. but, remember, glass-steagall was put in place to counteract the damage of another government regulation, which was guaranteed bank accounts. the government has already poisoned the banking system by guaranteeing everybody's account. that's not capitalism. if the government wasn't guaranteeing bank accounts, banks would be a lot more responsible, because the depositors would actually care what the banks did with their money. but the government has told the depositors not to care. it doesn't matter what the banks do, because the government's going to bail you out. >> professor? >> no, no, no. we need a governmental guarantee, because