tv The Rachel Maddow Show MSNBC July 2, 2012 9:00pm-10:00pm PDT
would embrace it in the united states. i was born here. i'm a patriot and so on. the united states would be a world leader in this stuff, rather than watching everybody else not only have better quality of life but also have a better economy. the people who are going to get rich are going to do it elsewhere instead of here. >> bill nye, thank you for your time. a lot to talk about. no question about it. thank you for your time. that's "the ed show." good evening, ezra. >> good evening. >> thank you for sticking around for the next hour. rachel has the night off, but we have a really great show. in fact, we literally have a report that will change your understanding of the fundamental nature of the universe. i am not kidding about that. but we're going to begin with a smaller but still pretty important question. after republicans lost in the court and if they lose in november, can they still stop the affordable care act? and would they even want to? now, some say they can. they have come up with an
exciting new plan to keep the affordable care act from stealing your freedom. they will fight it in the states. states can't actually overturn federal law, but they can maybe, possibly be convinced to refuse to go along with it. that's what the republicans are trying to do. representative michele bachmann has joined 12 republican senators and 60 republican house members to send them a letter to all of the house members asking them, begging them no not cooperate with the affordable care act. it says the supreme court has ruled significant parts of the medicaid expansion of the president's health care law unconstitutional as well as ruling that an individual mandate violated the commerce claus. and therefore will be impemted plemted as a punitive tax on the middle class. as members of the commerce, we're dedicated to the full repeal and we ask you to join us to oppose its implementation. a quick note on that letter. that's not really how i remember the supreme court ruling because i remember them ruling the mandate is constitutional and the medicaid expansion is
constitutional. but that the federal government can't take away all of the state's medicaid money if they don't participate in the new program. something we will get to in a sec. but it sounded different the way they put it. less constitutional and more it would make george washington cry a thousand tears. which is a little odd. any way, the republicans are asking governors to do in that letter does not amount to much at all. they're saying don't set up the health insurance exchanges which are the places you go to buy the insurance, but if states don't set them up, the law said the federal government will set them up instead. so they are saying pun can governors, don't set up the exchanges, let the obama administration do it for you. which is maybe a pain for the obama administration, but eh, i have a hard time getting worked up about it. the bigger, more consequential effort here. the one i got worked up about is getting gop governors to participate in the medicaid expansion.
now, they can do this. states don't to have participate in medicaid. it took arizona 20 years after the original medicaid program was set up to join in. and some gop governors have already said they're going to try to sit this one out, too. >> every governor has two critical decisions to make, one is do we set up the exchanges and secondly, do we expand medicaid. in louisiana, we're not doing either. >> that's bobby jindal saying his state is going to pass up on a sweet, sweet deal. worth spending a moment on this because it's important to understand why. there's something weird in the design of the affordable care act. something you wouldn't expect from the political care act. -- rhetoric. it's way nicer to red states than blue states. the reason is the medicaid part. the medicaid part of the bill works like this. right now, states have a ton of leeway to decide who is and who isn't eligible for medicaid. texas, they only cover adults at 26% of the poverty line.
which is low. the poverty line is $11,170 a year. so you could be a single person making $3,000 a year and you're not poor enough to qualify for medicaid. that's part of the reason texas has the highest uninsured rate in the entire nation. in massachusetts, by contrast, they cover working adults up to 133% of the poverty level. this is partly due to a bill signed bay former governor whose name rhymed with smitt sromney. everyone making up to 133% of the poverty line, they get medicaid automatically. right now, the federal government pays 57% of medicaid's costs. states pick up the rest. that's a good enough deal that every state participates. in the the affordable care act for the first three years the feds will cover 100% of the
difference between wherever the state is now and where the law wants them to go. 100%. after 2020, that drops a bit. it only drops to 90%. so for every dollar the state puts in, the feds will put in $9. it's an incredible deal. here's what is perverse about it. the less you have been doing on medicaid so far the more the federal government will pay going forward. that gets to the irony of the health care law. red states in general have done les than blue states to cover their residents, particularly in medicaid so they get a sweeter deal under the terms of the act. texas gets a ton of money because there's a ton of gap to make up. massachusetts gets very little. if nine states went for john mccain in 2008. if you look at the ten states that will see the smallest bumps in coverage, eight went for obama in 2008. one of the states that is promised to sit the medicaid
expansion out is south carolina. the spokesman for governor nikki haley says we're not going to shove more south carolinaens in to a broken system that ties our hands when we know the best way to find south carolina solutions for south carolina health problems is through flexibility that block grants provide. how are those south carolina solutions working out? 19% of south carolina residents are uninsured. that's well above the national average. the medicaid expansion in the law would cut south carolina's insurance rate to folks making less than 133% of poverty by 56%. 56% of the uninsured in that group wiped out in one go. that's the fourth best deal any state in the nation will get under the affordable care act. the cost of that for the federal government is significant. almost $11 billion. for south carolina, they will pay less than 500 million. in the short term, the rising
republican star might have reason to reject that deal. the republican-based law and one way to build a national profile right now is to win the gop's ongoing, no i'm the most anti-obama politician contest. the contest isn't going to last forever. governors have to answer to non-republican voters who don't want their state missing out on billions in federal dollars and those who don't want to pay for uninsured patients that end up in the emergency rooms when the federal government is offering to pick up the tab and to insured voters who pay a higher premiums to compensate the hospitals for paying for uninsured people who the feds are willing to pay for understand ed. if mitt romney loses the election and republicans lose their last chance to repeal obama care dst care, the governors can't afford to hold the line long. when they decide to flip-flop on the issue, they will have an easy argument with which to do it. it will be a way to stick it to
the blue states that put obama in office. joining us now is formerer democratic national chairman and former governor of connecticut, howard dean. dr. dean, thank you for being here tonight. >> thank you for having me on. >> so your state, vermont, has one of the highest rates of coverage in the nation, in large part due to laws that you signed when you were a governor and the medicaid provisions in those laws. is this medicaid bill a good deal for vermont? >> not particularly, but we think universal health care is a human right. we have had it for children for about 20 years, using medicaid. bill clinton gave us a waiver so we could do than and community rating for 20 years. we are pretty far ahead of the curve. massachusetts is the only state ahead of us thanks to governor romney. >> one thing i think of when we watch the fights from the outside is we tend to see party politics better than interest group politics because it plays
out better. we see glov they will have health care providers streaming in to their office. you have to take this money, you can't leave us in the cold here, right? >> that is what will happen. south carolina, when i was campaigning for president i said this on david gregory's show yesterday we figured south carolina's gross domestic product would increase 2% if they had the same medicaid program that vermont had. it is stupidity if they refietz. it raises their 2k3w7d gross domestic product and increases spending by the private sector and hospital sector in every aspect of the state's economy. texas is going to -- i don't care who the governor is in texas they will take the money. $52 fwl billion and they have a sophisticated network of hospitals. the third or fourth most so fisty dated in the country. they are one of the real meccas
of american medicine. if you think the governor, whoever it is, republican or democrat will turn down $52 billion and not be eaten alive by baylor or houston medical center you have another thing coming. there's a payment, called a disproportionate share payment that is made to states to help pay for uncompensated care. every state except louisiana that payment disappears. these hospitals will take it on the the chin and states with great establishments like texas will be left to second class citizens if the governor doesn't take the money and i think they will. >> i think you are right. to be fair, one argument some 0 governors have made is the law says it will match it in 2020 but i congress could vote it down to 75, 85 or 55% and then the state is left holding the bag. how likely do you think it will be? >> in two decades every nuclear power plant in texas could blow up. i don't see them getting rid of
the nuclear power plants. if it happens it happens. the governors when they pulled together, which i used to do before 1994 and the republican revolution the governors are a powerful force in the country and the match has been good. south carolina gets an 80% match. for nickki haley not to take it is governor malpractice. that's a hell of a lot of money coming to a state that isn't doing so well and the same with mississippi, louisiana and all of the states that are in the 40s and all of the indicators of child health and adult health and so forth and so on. it is ridiculous thing to document no reason for them to be in the position they are in and with the leadership in the governor's office they wouldn't have tog to be. i wasn't a big support of the obama bill but it is the law of the land and we may as with well work with it and i'm tlog work with the parts that i don't like and it is time the republicans grow up and work with the part that's don't like. >> former governor of montana,
howard dean, thank you for being here sglont thank you. ahead, the behind the scenes drama that led to last week's supreme court decision. we will have the details next. plus, because we don't mess around with small stuff here, we have a moment of geek featuring nothing less than the secret of the cosmos. that's still ahead. but kate still looks like...kate. [ female announcer ] nice'n easy with colorblend technology is proven to give more blends of tones. for color that's true to you. i don't know how she does it. [ female announcer ] with nice'n easy, all they see is you. thin coffee shops. people who i thave been out of work. you can [ female announcer ] with nice'n easy, tell it wears on them. narrator: he's fought to pull us out of economic crisis for three years. and he still is. president obama's plan keeps taxes down for the middle class, invests in education and asks the wealthy to pay their fair share. mitt romney and his billionaire allies can spend milions to distort the president's words. but they're not interested in rebuilding the middle class. he is. i'm barack obama and i
sven's home security gets the most rewards of any small business credit card! how does this thing work? oh, i like it! [ garth ] sven's small business earns 2% cash back on every purchase, every day! woo-hoo!!! so that's ten security gators, right? put them on my spark card! why settle for less? testing hot tar... great businesses deserve the most rewards! [ male announcer ] the spark business card from capital one. choose unlimited rewards with 2% cash back or double miles on every purchase, every day! what's in your wallet? here's your invoice.
when supreme court justice john paul stevens retired in 2010 at the age of 90, think court lost the grand liberal leader. it's republican-appointed liberal leader. justice stevens was appointed by president ford. legal scholars say he didn't become the leader by becoming liberal and changing his opinions. the court moved so far right during his tenure by the end his moderate republican flosser was liberal by comparison who everyone serving with him. court watchers have been arguing, the supreme court is proving to the right. an they have been documenting the shift for years now. the folks at mother jones did it in short form. and here's a handy one. the red line at the top shows conservative justices becoming more conservative over the years.
the middle line is moderate justices becoming more conservative over the years and finally the blue line at the bottom is liberal justices becoming more conservative over the years. then last week happened. this super conservative court, including the super conservative chief rob rt upheld a law that was unpopular among conservatives and suddenly anything seemed upon. for 45 seconds the court watching pundit class thought, maybe the court hasn't moved that far to the right. today conservatives from inside of the court proved that it has. you need to know that leaks from the supreme court just about never happen, ever. never, ever ever ever, never ever ever. it is notoriously secretive institution. my colleague steven carter was just writing last week about how amazingly leak proof the supreme court is and how would it be better if there were more institutions like the supreme court that people didn't blab to
the media all the time for political gain. right on cue, massive blabbing to the media from conservatives inside of the supreme court. just about the first thing conservatives did after this ruling came down was leak to a reporter de details of the decision-making process breaking the court's code of silence to tell cbs news that chief justice roberts initially wanted to underturn health reform and maybe bowed to pressure and decide to uphold the law instead and revealing, quote, at least one conservative justice tried to get him to explain his switch but one satisfied with the response. it was the way of saying, no we are really that far right. and so everyone is clear john roberts agreed on everything and didn't want to uphold the legislation and then became a giant chicken and let the law stand. in his majority opinion, upholding the law, roberts took dare to say he agreed with the
conservatives on everything except for a teeny, tiny, narrow, legally inconsequential technical on which he decided to uphold it whether the individual mandate is a penalty or tax but he sided with the legal questions the scope of the clause and the necessary powers. he didn't want to strike down entirely the most sweeping piece of social policy legislation to be enacted in the country in 40 years. now, this should not have been a 5-4 decisioning that was almost a 4-5. it should have been 7-2 or 8-1. before oral argue s who argued before the court found 35% expected it to strike the mandate down. after the oral arguments based on the line of questioning coming from the bench, it looked like the law would go down and there was a feeling in the professional court watching community that holy crap, we can't believer this is happening. a clearly constitutional law is going to be struck down based on politics. now, a survey of top
constitutional law scholars found that 19 of 21 found the law was constitutional and should be upheld by the court. 19 of 21, but only 8 of 21 were confident that it would be upheld by the court. all that freaking out before the decision was handed down about how partisan and political and conservative the court has become, that is still a totally valid reaction to the court even after it upheld health care reform. because the truth is it barely upheld health care reform and it only upheld it on really narrow grounds. and the court's conservatives seem to be arguing by way of catty political leaking that it almost wasn't narrowly upheld, that it was nearly struck down on a 5-4 vote and it would have been if john roberts hadn't been such a scaredy cat. the other thing about the conservatives on the court, they didn't want just to strike could be the mandate which would have been radical in and of itself. \they wanted to overturn the whole law based on the mandate. so no more affordable care act entirely, the entire thing goes.
the maximalist option, no judicial restraint. they were going for it. the bottom line is if you were worried about the court before the health reform ruling, you should be worried about the court today. hasn't changed that much. joining us now is dolly elizabeth. senior editor from "slate".com. thank you so much for joining us. >> hi there, thanks for having me. >> this report that pulls back the curtain on the supreme court's internal decision making built on leaks, this is pretty rare. were you surprised by the fact it came out at all? >> yeah, this was jaw dropping. i think almost everyone who reacted to this had the same reaction you did, which is this never, ever, ever, exponentially more ever happens. there's a big, big story about the back room dealings of bush v. gore, but it happened four years later. for it to happen three days later is truly unprecedented. and as you said, quite
extraordinary. >> now, this report is somewhat unique. it's an op ed. the reporter has a wonderful reputation, but you know the court very well. did the report ring true to you? >> it did. and jan crawford who wrote it for cbs is a phenomenal reporter. i don't doubt that what she said is true. the locution is interesting. she has access to quote sources with specific knowledge of the deliberations. so the locution is really fascinating. what rings true rings true. i do have the sense that only part of the story is being told here, and any story that's being told by folks who quite palpably have an ax to grind, one wants to hear what the other side has to say. it's likely that chief justice john roberts assigned himself the opinion immediately after deliberations and the idea that he just started cooking up this opinion, you know, weeks into the case, just doesn't make
sense because he didn't assign himself another opinion from that sitting. so i think that he was thinking all along he was either going to write for himself and the four conservatives over he was going to write something else, but the notion, as you said, he just chickened out, i don't think that's the whole story. >> and there was one thing that was really fascinating about it, a weird locution in justice scalia's dissent. they talk about roberts in a weird way or they don't talk about him at all. they don't refer to him in the majority. what crawford reported it wasn't a mistake or he flipped at the last minute. it was because they were so mad at him they wanted it to appear they stopped engaging. it was almost, they didn't think him worthy of debate and they didn't want to sign on to the parts they agreed with him. it was kind of a diss from the four on the right side of the court to roberts. >> that's right. and that part also was a head scratcher. you have the opportunity to have
five votes to get together and get behind the chief justice's commerce clause necessarily and proper findings. the idea that you put your hands over your ears and stomp your feet and say i'm going to deny him this because i'm so darn mad doesn't seem right. there are pieces we're not getting, and more fundamentally this is the problem, that we're having the conrsation is the problem, because it is entirely speculative. it does have the effect of undermining the integrity of the court. we should be talking about the holding, and not about colonel muster in the library with the lead pipe. >> dahlia, thank you for joining us tonight, and sharing your wisdom on the court. >> thanks, ezra. the universe can be divided into two groups. those that know what the higgs boson is and care whether humanity is locate it and those who do not.
i will attempt to reconcile those two groups in a remarkable moment of geek coming up. ♪ hajimemashite. hajimemashite. hajimemashite. you guys like football ? thank you so much. i'm stoked. you stoked ? totally. ... and he says, "under the mattress." souse le matelas. ( laughter ) why's the new guy sending me emails from paris ? paris, france ? verizon's 4g lte devices are global-ready. plus, global data for just $25. only from verizon. begins with back pain and a choice. take advil, and maybe have to take up to four in a day. or take aleve, which can relieve pain all day with just two pills. good eye. car insurance companies say they'll save you by switching, you'd have like, a ton of dollars. but how are they saving you those dollars? a lot of companies might answer "um" or, "no comment."
then there's esurance. born online, raised by technology, and majors in efficiency. so whatever they save, you save. hassle, time, paperwork, hair-tearing-out, and yes, especially dollars. esurance. insurance for the modern world. click or call. a great clean doesn't have to take longer. i'm done... i'm going to read one of these. i'm going to read one of these! [ female announcer ] unlike sprays and dust rags, swiffer 360 dusters extender gets into hard to reach places so you can get unbelievable dust pick up in less time. i love that book! can you believe the twin did it? ♪ [ female announcer ] swiffer. great clean in less time. or your money back. ♪
the supreme court of the united states of america upheld the largest tax increase in american history. >> the largest tax increase in the history of the country. >> obamacare is the biggest tax increase in american history. >> what we now have is the biggest tax increase in the history of the world.
biggest tax increase in the history of the universe. >> you heard the parade of republicans calling the health reform law some variation of the largest tax increase in the history of life as we know it and every and the world and the universe. while we don't have the data to rule specifically on the history of the universe claim, who does? tonight, in chart imitates life, we could show you that it's not the biggest tax increase even in american history. not even close, really. the individual mandate which got republicans started on this whole kick is a tiny, tiny, tiny part of the health care bill. even when you're looking at the tax section, it's not the biggest or the second biggest or the third biggest tax increase in the health care bill. much less the biggest tax increase in the history of the earth, but it has other taxes, a it increases payroll taxes on wealthy americans and levies tax on unusually costly health care plans. let's say you add all of those together. where does it add up? here is the chart.
it was drawn up by an economist. i have put it on my blog at the "washington post" this morning. it ranks the 15 biggest tax increases since 1950. the biggest increases are at the bottom. they're the long blue lines. the smaller tax increases are at the top. the shorter blue lines. so counting up from the bottom, president obama's affordable care act also known as obamacare, comes in tenth. only the tenth biggest tax increase since 1950 in this one country that we live in. and it's about equal in size to president clinton's 1993 tax increase. and oh, here's something interesting, it's also about equal in size to george h.w. bush's 1990 tax increase. and whoa, you know who signed an even bigger tax increase into law, president ronald reagan. his 1982 tax increase was about 40% bigger. reagan also cut taxes and indeed he did, he cut them big. much like obama did in the stimulus and then again in 2010
when he extended all of the bush tax cuts for two years and added more on top of that, and like he's promising to do again in 2012 when he said he would extend most of the bush tax cuts permanently. i don't think this is great. to be fiscally responsible in the country, we're going to need to do more than let the bush tax cuts for rich americans expire. we have to get deficits under control, taxes have to stop being a dirty word and start being a part of budgeting. we need to have the numbers straight. the affordable care act is not the largest tax hike in history, not the 'lanchest tax hike in the last 50 years, 40 years, 30 years, even 20 years and if you count the scheduled expiration in 2010 of the bush tax cuts, it's not even the largest tax hike written into law in the last ten years. while it does have some big tax hikes in it, the individual mandate, not one of them.
what makes a sleep number store different? you walk into a conventional mattress store, it's really not about you. they say, "well, if you wanted a firm bed you can lie on one of those. if you want a soft bed you can lie on one of those." we provide the exact individualization that your body needs. welcome to the lowest prices of the season, not just on ordinary beds, but on the bed that can change your life. the sleep number bed. this is your body there. you can see a little more pressure in the hips. take it up one notch. oh gosh, yes. when you're playing around with that remote, you get that moment where you go, "oh yeah" ... oh, yeah! ... and it's perfect. they had no idea that when they came to a sleep number store, we were going to diagnose their problems and help them sleep better. and don't miss our special financing now through july 4th only. plus enjoy the lowest prices of the season on selected bed sets
once you experience it, there's no going back. wow. it's the lowest prices of the season on the amazing sleep number bed. special offer ends july 4th only at the sleep number store, where queen mattresses start at just $699. there is a pretty good chance that if you're watching this show tonight from a state like ohio or pennsylvania or iowa or florida, you just got done watching this ad during the past commercial break.
>> running for governor, mitt romney campaigned as a job creator. >> i know how jobs are created, but as a corporate raider, he shipped jobs to china and mexico. as governor, he did the same thing. outsourcing state jobs to india. now, he's making the exact same pitch. >> i know why jobs come and why they go. >> outsourcing jobs. romney economics. it didn't work then and it won't work now. >> that is an ad being run in battle ground states across the country by the obama campaign. it's a reason they're running that particular ad and not some other ad. the obama campaign more than any other campaign that has come before it prides itself not on priding itself on intuition. they rely on cold hard data. what that was telling them was hit romney on bain.
at slate.com, sasha described the analytics process they go through when it comes to campaign advertising. >> they rely on an extensive ongoing marketing operation to discover which slivers are the most responsive and to what messages. the cycle of trial and error offers impeericly-mind ed empirically-minded electioneers an upgrade over the current regime of approaching voters based on hunches. they determined the bain attack would be the most effective thing they could do. they had nod counted on it would trigger such a backlash among democratic elites who live and fund raise around new york city and washington, d.c. these democrats know private equity guys. they know investors. they're their friends, their funders their campaign backers. they are people they need an want to keep good relationships. so you may remember that about a month and a half ago, there was this great uproar in the democratic party about whether it was rise to attack him on his record an bain capital.
high profile democrats like corey booker and ed rendell began voicing concerns publicly. that got a lot of media attention. the media began wondering and reporting about why the obama campaign couldn't get its message right. couldn't get its allies to agree wit. but there was always this question. were they tactically correct? there could be a big difference between what democratic elites want to hear and what resonates with actual voters in battleground states. so team obama had a genuinely important strategic decision to make. do they go with the feedback they were getting from the democrat, elites on this? do they back off the bain attacks? or do they go with their data? the obama campaign decided to double down on their data and on the attacks. >> president romney's first 100 days for the people of iowa, fewer worries about their future. >> fewer worries the washington post has just revealed that romney's companies were pioneers in shipping u.s. jobs overseas.
investing in firms that specialized in relocating jobs done by american workers to new facilities in low-wage countries like china and india. does iowa really want an outsourcer in chief in the white house? >> that decision now appears to be paying dividends. in battleground states across the country, the bain attacks appear to be taking hold. two months ago, romney held a slim 1-point lead. now, it's barack obama leading by four points. here's how the race looked in the great state of ohio two months ago. president obama was leading there but by a razor thin two point margin. since then the president has blown it up to a nine-point margin. what accounts for the sudden movement in swing states? here's the analysis from rick klein. over the last two weeks, even as the national polls have shown little movement in the race, something different has been happening in the battleground states.
in those states, president obama has been pulling ahead. the gaps aren't huge, but taken together, the numbers strongly suggest the democrats' relentless attacks on romney's business record at bain capital have been taking a toll. a recent poll showed the same thing. when voters were asked if his record at bain capital made them feel more positive or more negative about him, 28% said it made them feel more negative about mr. romney after learning about his record at bain compared to 23% who said it made them feel more positive. the numbers were much worse among voters in swing states. 33% said they felt more negative about mr. romney after learning about his record at bain compared to 18% who felt more positive about him. according to the "new york times," even republicans feel the strategy is working. despite doubts among some democrats about the wisdom of attacking mr. romney's business career, obama commercials painting him as a ruthless executive who pursued profits at the expense of jobs are starting to make an impact on some undecided voters.
they have indicated they have seen the ads or charges and they have raised questions in their minds about mr. romney's experience. the obama campaign had a big decision to make about a month and a half ago when they faced the elites in their own party. stick with the bain attacks or back off. they decided to stick with them. so far, at least, they have been proven right. joining us now is my friend and colleague, the host of the aptly named melissa harris-perry show. airing weekends here on msnbc and a profuser at tulane university and a columnist for "the nation." thank you for being here. >> nice to join you. >> i'm always struck by how quickly the campaign narratives shift. a month ago, all anyone seemed to be talking about was the strategic incompetence of the obama campaign. then the polls didn't go down as everybody seemed to be
expecting them to for obama, and now the strategy was brilliant and was working and was a great idea all along. what's your take away here? >> everybody loves a winner. last week was a big winning week for president obama and for the obama administration, even bracketing the holder situation. the affordable care decision on the part of the supreme court gives president obama and the campaign a bit more swagger going into sort of midsummer here. i think the other part of it is it was always sort of the incompetence of the surrogates and in some ways, that story, the idea of surrogates not being able to stay on message is not the same thing of whether or not the campaign itself has the right message. >> you know, the thing i think people figured was going to happen, the surrogates were getting the media coverage, and a poll came out and 44% of americans didn't know the supreme court ruled on health
care last week. it didn't cross their radar? >> what world do you and i live in? >> that's my concern. it made me think about, you know, is anybody actually less well qualified to say what might work or not work with swing voters than the people who sit in chairs like this one who are following every piece and movement in the presidential campaign? it doesn't seem to me the gaffes and stories that obsess us in washington matter to ordinary voters at all. >> that's a critically important point. our job is to filter the news and try to think about all of the small elements that will impact the election, but you know, folks who are in the swing states, one of the things that is going on in the swing states is that unemployment rates are not as bad as the national unemployment rate. hitting president obama on are you better off today than four years ago is not going to work for the romney campaign in those states in the way it will in the much harder hit states. and conversely, president obama being able to stay, look, this
guy isn't going to do for you what i have done, kind of make things better in your home state. he's going to make things worse. he's going to take the jobs you finally started to see recovery and take them and send them out, outsourcing narrative. i think think the other piece is we have to remember it's still a long way until both the conventions and then ultimately the fall. i think the real issue isn't what goes on on television, it's what happens in the head-to-head debates where they get to make their case and really sort of stand up in front of the american people and explain why they think the other guy is no good. >> right, i think it's always important to remember at this time in 1992, bill clinton was behind both george h.w. bush and ross perot. kind of amazing. melissa harris-perry, host of "the melissa harris-perry show" right here on msnbc, thank you for being here. >> thank you. one downside to being a rock star if there is a downside to being a rock star, and they
can't choose their fans. for every bruce springsteen, there are thousands of chris christies. who is really the boss in new jersey? next. [ male announcer ] don't miss red lobster's four course seafood feast, just $14.99. start with soup, salad and cheddar bay biscuits then choose one of 7 entrees plus dessert! four perfect courses, just $14.99. come into red lobster and sea food differently. but they haven't experienced extra strength bayer advanced aspirin. in fact, in a recent survey, 95% of people who tried it agreed that it relieved their headache fast. visit fastreliefchallenge.com today for a special trial offer. thin coffee shops. people who i thave been out of work. you can tell it wears on them. narrator: he's fought to pull us out of
economic crisis for three years. and he still is. president obama's plan keeps taxes down for the middle class, invests in education and asks the wealthy to pay their fair share. mitt romney and his billionaire allies can spend milions to distort the president's words. but they're not interested in rebuilding the middle class. he is. i'm barack obama and i this mom has been doing it for years. she's got bounty. in this lab demo, one sheet of new bounty
leaves this surface cleaner than two sheets of the leading ordinary brand. bounty. let the spills begin. on friday, the show reported the state of mississippi was on the verge of effectively banning abortion by way of a new law about to shut down the only clinic in the entire state. the law added regulations for the one clinic that other types of clinics do not have to follow. in particular, they required doctors at the clinic to have admitting privileges to the hospital. the owner of the clinic told us her doctors have applied but not one has said yes. with the law taking effect on sunday, the clinic faced a choice of shutting down or breaking the law. unless the federal court stepped in. last night, hours before the clinic stepped in, the federal judge blocked the law. he issued a temporary restraining order until july 11th when they hear arguments for a permanent injunction. he wrote, plaintiff has offered
evidence that the act's purpose is to eliminate abortions in mississippi. they like wise submitted evidence no safety or health concerns motivated its passage. this evidence has not yet been rebutted. no safety or health concerns motivated the passage. because it is on videotape. >> we're going to continue to try to work to end abortion in mississippi, and this is an historic day to begin that process. >> our goal needs to be to end all abortions in mississippi. i believe the admitting privileges bill gives us the best chance to do that. >> we have literally stopped abortions in the state of mississippi. the other side, they're like well, they can't afford it, they'll go out of the state or do it at home with a coat hanger. that's what we heard over and over and over. but you have to have moral values. you have to start somewhere with
on topic, on topic. next question. good, thank you. thank you. thank you all very much. i'm sorry for the idiot over there. take care. >> for those of you keeping track at home, that was republican governor chris christie's umpteenth public fit since taking office. you tube is peppered with new jersey governor telling people off, calling them idiots and informing them he is the governor and they can shut up while he talks. he's gone after teachers, students, a policeman. it's macho and brusque and he loves doing it and supporters love watching it. now, this is mr. christie's other great love, bruce springsteen, the boss, the heart of new jersey. the dirt farmer of the garden state. from his early days as a republican contender, governor christie 's love of spring spooen steen has been a way of showing he is like the rest of yous with dozens and dozens of springsteen ticket stubs to prove it. the press reported that chris christie appeared to be asleep
at a springsteen concert this year. the governor responded he was not asleep but meditated on the meaning of the music. >> you know what, i believe that. chr christie is a huge spring teen fan but he does like love springsteen a lot but bruce springsteen does not love governor christie back. jeffrey goldberg writes about it in this month's "atlantic." despite heroic efforts by christie, spring teen will not talk to him. he will not acknowledge the governor. when christie leaves a springsteen concert his troopers move him through loading docks. he walks within feet of the stage and the dressing rooms. he's never been invited to say hello. so sad to chris christie. this spring christie begged bruce to meet him in atlantic city. he is beg springsteen to play there to celebrate the opening of a new casino.
tell me if this is sounds like begging with overlay of rationalizing and bargaining. >> i would make a direct plea to bruce right now. i think, you know he's missed out on the opportunity to open this place because beyonce picked up the mantle on that. i really think, you know, when he gets off of the summer part of his tour, he hasn't announced yet for labor day weekend. i think labor day weekend revel for sprus bruce springsteen would be and ed credible show of support for his home state. >> springsteen is not listening to governor christie. for all that rejection it is grounded in christie's politics. springsteen's hero is a person who says in the first kick he took is when he hit the ground and like a dog that has been
beat too much. springsteen gave us "born in the usa" and "streets of philadelphia." a story about a man dying of aids. springsteen has been calling for fj new jersey to pass marriage 'quality. . last year, christie stripped union rights and cut the benefits of state workers and the working poor along with aid to schools, cities and health care. bruce springsteen is not the guy who's impressed with a guy that berates, students, teachers, supporters in town halls. using your power to stand up to the little guy is not a springsteen theme some no, governor, springsteen seems unlikely to go toe this river or the shore or raise a shalala for your cause. if you see a ghost of tom shore in the governor's mansion, perhaps you can get his autograph. it's worth asking. [ male announcer ] it seems like every company
it's all about absorption. a higgsboso in walks to the catholic church and they say we don't allow higgs boss sons in here. and he says how can you mass get it? no. it is a play on two meanings of mass. that's a bad way to start it. right now physicists are trying to explain the universe by using the standard model this equation is a standard model you can learn more on an invaluable you tube channel called minute physics because physicists work with hard to see stuff like sub atomic particles it is tough to verify their ideas
most of us stopped in high school with the electron, pro toen on the and neutron. maybe some of you went on to learn about corks, but there are a of the teeny things out there and only predicted by math. this is how physics work. physicists come up with equations that seem to explain how we world weerngs we learn about the parts we didn't know were there and how they work and hope that someday some future group of humans with machinery more impressive than what we have will check whether we were right. in 1964 a physicist by the name of peter higgs came up with the theory there is a something that sticks things together to form atoms. if you want to know more we will have links on the website the particle they are interested in for proving it is called the
higgs boson which has the nickname the god particle some physicists call it the god damn part call because it is so hard to find. scientists are trying to recreate the conditions that existed after the big bang. they are doing it in a giant particle collider under the alps between frants france and switzerland. sounds like an evil villain plot and they are doing it by sending tiny part 8:00s along 17-mile track until they crash at the speed of light almost breaking up in to tinier particles they are producing millions of collisions in a second for evidence with the higgs boson is alive and doing what it is theorized to do. this week they will present their findings. today word is leaking out in every corner of the internet where people care about