of ibm have all been given membership to augusta national. the iconic green jacket that goes with it became theirs. but she is a woman and that makes all the difference at augusta national. the club has never invited a woman to join so this is a big moment for them. will they invite her, as they did each of her predecessors? she is a woman to admire. 31 years at ibm. she graduated with a computer science degree from northwestern. her former boss, ibm's last ceo told "the new york times," quote, ginni got it because she deserved it. it's got zero to do with progressive social policies. so it might not surprise you to hear that she isn't jumping on this issue with the augusta national golf club. she's been silent. today it was augusta national's billy payne who addressed the media saying he wouldn't talk about membership. >> all issues of membership are now and have been historically subject to the private deliberations of the members, and that statement remains accurate and remains my statement. >> now, private clubs can do what they want, within reason. in 1990 ibm withheld its sponsorship of the pga championship in alabama in protest to the shoal creek club's refusal to allow black members. the club caved and so did augusta, which let its first black member in that year. then in 2003 the president of the national council of womens organizations, martha burk, protested female membership at augusta national. the masters pushed the public brouhaha aside going without any sponsors that year due to the public pressure being put on them. once it was done, the policy didn't change. still no women. and sources today told me that the pressure on augusta and its sponsors this time is much less from the public. but this time might end differently. because this isn't about female memberships. this is about treating a major sponsor the way you have always treated a major sponsor. first of all, there's the precedent of her predecessors all being invited to join but secondly there's ginni herself. she is not a woman who made women's issues her cause but like any successful woman, she has dealt with them and here she is last october. >> i can remember being offered a big job and i can remember my reaction to the person who offered it to me. i right away said, you know what, i'm not ready for this job. my husband at the time -- as usual i'm blah blah blahhing and he's just sitting there. he just looked at me and he said do you think a man would have ever answered that question that way? >> augusta national chairman billy payne may be waiting for the big photo op moment at the masters with ginni by his side with the other sponsors in their green jackets. he might have already invited her to join. maybe today was, hey, it's private and then they're going to come forward. if he doesn't, money talks. ginni now controls ibm's marketing budget. with the company's contract with the masters worth a minimum of $10 million a year, she holds the cards. it's going to be interesting to see what happens there. nick gillespie joins me now. let me ask you, nick, are you surprised that ginni rometty has not been more outspoken. >> no, ibm is a flag corporation. i think private clubs should have the right to exclude people for whatever reasons they want. i also think that it's just idiocy on the part of augusta national if they don't extend the same courtesies that they have to previous sponsors to the current one. >> so this is not an issue of caving to pressure on women's rights, this is different? >> it's part of that. golf has a problem in america. it only became a mass sport when it opened up to blacks, to women, to lower -- to middle class and lower class people. i think it should push for that. but again, they have the right to do it and i think people have the right to exclude, you know, watching the masters and actually if ibm wants to be party to a sport that is held at a club that would refuse the ceo of ibm, people should boycott ibm then. >> nikki is with us as well. what's your take listening to what nick had to say? do you agree or feel differently about this? >> no, i agree with nick. i think it makes good business sense for augusta to allow -- to extend membership to her. again, ibm doesn't have to sponsor them going forward. and all that being said, augusta is not the worst of the bunch. there actually is a club in maryland outside bethesda that used to -- all the presidents used to belong to called burning tree and they don't allow women in the door. so women just can't be members. >> and we should point to this in a way this is a story about progress because we're talking about a millionaire being excluded from a golf club that only gives out memberships to extremely rich people. we're not talking about a woman who couldn't become ceo of ibm. so with that as a backdrop, i mean it's kind of hard to get too worked up over this situation. >> you just hope that they will resolve it. talking to sources today, there isn't a real public uproar on this. if they don't do anything, i mean maybe there won't be, nick. what would that say? >> it's interesting ha in the past, sponsors have dropped out of sponsoring the masters because of the exclusive policies of the club it's held at. why not continue that. ibm really should -- i think ibm should take a stand on this if they get kind of the back of the hand of the club. >> nicki, it would seem to me, i think it's pretty obvious how i feel about it, but that seems to be the right thing to do. last time around when martha burk was saying -- made this a big issue, there were three sponsors. there's always three. there were ibm, coke and citigroup. two of them never came back. it's interesting that ibm did when the club refused to change its policies to women. >> yeah, i mean on packing the virginia rometty issue from what's going on is will this have an impact on companies promoting women to ceos in the future. if we have an opportunity to sponsor the masters, will we or will we not. absolutely not. she's serving as a good, strong role model and that's a positive influence for women. ibm, as you said, can really make an influence in that they can influence the debate by sponsoring it next year or not, demanding on how the masters acts. >> nick, let me ask you a broader question here. you want the government out of people's business, so private clubs. this is obviously -- and you made it clear how you stand on this specific issue. but in general, private club that say do things that are offensive, exclude people, that offend some people. is that okay? >> yeah, i think it is. for the same rights that they have to exclude people, give people the right to give social -- on them and what do you with groups, organizations, like churches or charities that have really strong ideological or thee lauological views. we don't want to live in a world with bigotry but we don't want to live in a world where they can create the world they want. as long as it's peaceful, you should allow it to continue and use outrage and public discussion to change people's minds. >> nick and nicki, thank you very much. appreciate both of you taking the time. obviously tee-off is tomorrow, so we will be eagerly, avidly awaiting. all right, nuclear talks with iran have hit a major hurdle today. we have some late-day reporting on that. mitt romney has accused of president of hiding something. is he? and whitney houston's final autopsy report. we have the full details coming out. sanjay gupta comes outfront with the details. yeah... i knew that i was doing the right thing, when i gave him the bayer. i'm on an aspirin regimen... and i take bayer chewables. [ male announcer ] aspirin is not appropriate for everyone so be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. so he's a success story... [ laughs ] he's my success story. [ male announcer ] learn how to protect your heart at i am proheart on facebook. in here, the landscaping business grows with snow. to keep big winter jobs on track, at&t provided a mobile solution that lets everyone from field workers to accounting, initiate, bill, and track work in real time. you can't live under a dome in minnesota, that's why there's guys like me. [ male announcer ] it's a network of possibilities -- helping you do what you do... even better. ♪ that is better than today. since 1894, ameriprise financial has been working hard for their clients' futures. never taking a bailout. helping generations achieve dreams. buy homes. put their kids through college. retire how they want to. ameriprise. the strength of america's largest financial planning company. the heart of 10,000 advisors working with you, one-to-one. together, for your future. ♪ so how much do we owe you? that'll be $973.42. ya know, your rates and fees aren't exactly competitive. who do you think i am, quicken loans? [ spokesman ] when you refinance your mortgage with quicken loans, you'll find that our rates and fees are extremely competitive. because the last thing you want is to spend too much on your mortgage. one more way quicken loans is engineered to amaze. ♪ a possible delay in talks with iran over its nuclear program tonight. these were the first talks in more than two years and they're scheduled for the end of next week in istanbul. but today the iranian foreign minister said not so fast. in fact they say they haven't set on istanbul and they want to talk about possibly other locations. the iranians offered to meet in china or baghdad. asked about the last-minute changes, secretary of state hillary clinton said time is running out for iran. >> the time for diplomacy is not infinite. and all options remain on the table. to prevent iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. >> this is -- this could possibly be a serious issue because it's not just about a venue. a venue could be part of a broader stalling tactic and the nuclear issue with iran is one of the most important in the world right now. william cohen is former secretary of defense and he's outfront tonight. secretary cohen, first let me ask you how much should we read into this? is this literally just a change of venue or is this opening the door to undefined delays? >> i think it's a typical iranian tactic. first of all, we have to start with the premise the iranians are not interested in reaching any kind of agreement. they are not interested in producing a nuclear power, they're interested in acquiring nuclear weapons. if it was just nuclear power for civilian and peaceful purposes, they could have done that in the open and would have had international support. they had a covert program nearly two decades. they have kicked out the iae inspectors from time to time. if they want a program, let the inspectors come in and conduct full inspections without any hiding and seeking on this and go forward so that you can join the international community and have a nuclear power for peaceful purposes. so they're not interested in that. what they're interested in doing is stalling. now it's an issue of, well, the site is wrong. well, if we change the site, then the shape of the table will be wrong. so you can see they're trying to put president obama and the others in a position of caving in to them on the little issues so that when the time comes to the big issues, they'll be able to stall even more. i think it's just a tactic. i think time is running out. i think the more they do this, it conveys to everybody the understanding they're not really serious about wanting to reach an agreement that prevents a war from taking place. >> i'm curious, secretary cohen, as secretary clinton says time for diplomacy is not infinite. is this rhetoric going to heat up again? there's a huge question of what is the timing that we're talking about and what is it that the united states is talking about doing when that clock theoretically runs out? >> well, as we know, there are two different clocks running here. the israelis have a much narrower time frame as far as they're concerned. the president of the united states has said we need to pursue diplomacy for as long as we conceivably can, reasonably can. if that proves to be a failed option, then we'll look to the military option as a last resort. i think what they're doing now is they're looking at a win-win situation. if they can paint the president as caving in to the site location, then they can make him look weak to the republicans, to be sure, but also to the other members of the national security council. so i think that they will cave in at some point on the little things, but stall on the big issues, which are you really willing to sit down and negotiate an end to your pursuit of nuclear weapons? i don't think they are. >> secretary cohen, my question though, the u.s. doesn't have proof of what iran is doing. it thinks it knows what iran is doing but it's not sure. if it's not going to have that proof, maybe the american people will never be willing to do any kind of strike and would be willing to let iran, if that's what they are actually doing, go ahead and acquire that nuclear weapon. >> that may be the case. i think that the israelis are looking at that as a conceivable option. the issue then will be will israel take action whether the united states is supporting them or not. so this is one of the big issues that need to be resolved. some people say let them have a nuclear weapon. well, that means the gate is open, others will want the same thing and then we have a situation of proliferation of nuclear technology. is the world safer with that taking place? i think not. can iran be deterred from launching a nuclear weapon attack against israel, the united states? i think deterrents will work in those cases. the issue is once iran gets nuclear weapons, others will want it. then that means the entire world is at greater risk of a nuclear weapon at some point in time being exploded. that's the situation we don't want to see take place. so i hope that china in particular will come down very hard. they have said rhetorically they're opposed to them getting a nuclear weapon. now is the time for china and russia to put more effort and more meat behind the sanctions. >> thank you very much, secretary cohen. it's going to be a very tough decision for the president and what he does if this is a 38. now to politics. the next phase of the white house has begun because now you have president obama versus former massachusetts governor mitt romney. all right, it's not formally there yet, but, you know. we're there. okay, full steam ahead. after winning three primaries yesterday, he has ignored his republican rivals and focused squarely on the fall election just a day after president obama launched a very harsh attack on the republican party, romney went on the exact same stage where the president stood yesterday and, well, he returned fire. >> the president came here yesterday and railed against arguments no one is making. and criticized policies no one is proposing. it's one of his favorite strategies, setting up straw man to distract us from his record. while i understand the president doesn't want to run on his record, he can't run from his record either. >> our political panel is here. john avalon, ryan and jamal simmons is washington. jamal, do you think this was a good attack? >> i do actually. i think -- i'm not sure it really holds water in the sense that he can make it effectively over the course of the next six months but i do think he's on a better track than he was. when you're running for president, getting to these questions of character and qualities of leadership are really where people make the decision about who they want to elect to be the president. i think mitt romney is trying to zero in on that. this is a reminder to my democratic friends that although the primaries have been very hard on mitt romney, he does really have a chance to reset the clock and try to get a better stab at it. he's got a vice presidential pick coming up, a convention coming up, he's got new arguments he can make. i just don't think this attack works over time because he doesn't have enough evidence to prove it out of president obama, but it is a better strategy than the one he was waging before. >> john avalon, what jamal says brings me to this point about the skbpindependents. 40% of people say they're independent. in december 39% of them would vote for obama, 46% for mitt romney and that's now flipped, 48 for the president, 39% for mitt romney. >> that's right. >> how set in stone are those views? how much could they change? >> there is still time to make the case and to move the independents. they are swing voters, they are persuadables. they are not hard partisans. this is a big deal. this is a sea change over four months, a complete reversal. the advantage romney had to advantage obama. that is directly a reaction to the republican primaries. the further they have dragged the candidates to the far right, the more they have alienated the independents. that is the tale of the tape here. it is a big deal and mitt romney will have to take serious action to counter balance that because he cannot lose the independents and win the presidency. >> one thing i think that will be really interesting, we'll have to see what happens to gas prices. they're up 20% this year and as they have risen, the president's approval rating has taken a hit. let's put whether a president can or can't aside for a second and just acknowledge the fact this is going to be a political fight. the president is coming out running an ad trying to pit mitt romney as friends of big oil. here he is. >> why is big oil attacking him? because he's fighting to end their tax breaks. he's raising mileage standards and doubling renewable energy. in all these fights, mitt romney stood with big oil, for their tax breaks. >> mitt romney says it's unfair and he fired back. >> obama attack machine has started. spending millions to sling mud or oil at mitt romney. why? because in the five states where obama is attacking romney, gas prices are roughly doubled, but obama's mud can't cover up his failed energy policies. >> who's the winner there? in that duelling ad war? >> i've got to say i think romney has a very strong case for a very simple reason. all of the tax breaks for the oil and gas industry amount to about $4.4 billion a year. if you get rid of the most important of them, the break for so-called intangible drilling costs, then natural gas prices will go up by about $11.5 billion for consumers. that is you get back $4.4 billion for the tax man and then consumers have to give up $11.5 billion. so it looks like a good deal. oh, we're attacking big oil. it's actually going to be sdp that hits the pocketbooks of every american who counts on natural gas. not only that, but also a lot of those states, the utica shale formation in ohio, the marcellus shale pennsylvania, upstate new york, these are all areas where natural gas development is a huge economic boone. so do you really want to sock those guys and that big development with these big new taxin kre increases? i think romney has a strong case to make and i think he'll press that case more and more. >> that is a very nuanced discussion though. >> it's benefiting in particular swing states like pennsylvania. this is nothing the obama campaign or obama administration wants to squelch. i don't think ending a long-term tax incentive amounts to an outright tax hike. it's been a benefit baked in the cake for oil companies for decades and decades. but i think it's a great point to not wanting to stop the shift to the natural gas. >> that break has been there since 1913, for what it's worth. >> there's also another point that the president was trying to get to which you see in some of the polling. is that people in america do feel like there are two sets of rules. the big boys on top who play by thei