Your partner for magnetic solution & high quality magnet

magnetic products

the rachel maddow show, transcript 07/02/12

by:Newland     2019-10-25
Ed Schulz: Thank you, Bill Nai, for your time.
There\'s a lot to discuss here, no doubt.
Thank you for your time.
Bill Nai: Thank you.
Schultz: That\'s the education show.
This is Ed Schultz.
Ezra Klein will be cheering for Rachel Mado tonight.
Good evening, Ezra.
Moderator Ezra Klein: Good evening, ed.
Nice to meet you.
Nice to meet you.
Klein: Thank you very much.
Thank you for staying at home for an hour.
Rachel is resting at night.
But we did a great show tonight.
In fact, we do have a report that will change your understanding of the fundamental nature of the universe.
I\'m not kidding at all.
But we will start with a smaller but still very important issue.
After Republicans lose in court, if they lose in November, can they still stop the Affordable Health Care Bill?
Will they want to go?
Now, some people say they can.
They came up with an exciting new plan to prevent affordable health bills from stealing all your freedoms.
They will fight against it in the United States.
Now states can\'t actually overturn federal law, but they may, and may, be persuaded to refuse to accept it.
So that\'s what Republicans are trying to do.
Along with 12 Republican senators and 60 Republican House members, Michelle bach mandewatch sent a letter to all state leaders asking them to even beg them not to work with the affordable medical bill
The letter says, I quote, \"the Supreme Court has ruled that a large part of the expansion of Medicaid under the president\'s health care act is not in compliance with the Constitution, and that the individual\'s authorization to violate the business terms, therefore, it will be implemented as a punitive tax on the middle class.
As a member of the United StatesS.
Congress, we are committed to the full abolition of the government\'s takeover of health care, and we ask you to join us in opposing the implementation of this bill.
\"Now, make a quick note on that letter.
That\'s not how I remember the Supreme Court ruling, because I remember that they ruled that the task was constitutional and that the expansion of Medicaid was constitutional, but if the federal government was not involved in the new project, they can\'t take all the Medicaid money in the state-that\'s what we\'ll get in the sec.
But it sounds different from what they said.
More, \"the law is constitutional,\" and more, it\'s a bit strange that the Supreme Court said it would make George Washington cry.
Anyway, what Republicans are asking the governor to do in the letter is nothing at all.
They say don\'t set up a health insurance exchange, which is the place on your bill to buy insurance.
But if states do not set them up, the law says the federal government will set them up.
So, they say, the Republican governor, don\'t build communication.
Let the Obama administration do it for you-it could be a pain for the Obama administration, but well, it\'s hard for me to work on it.
The bigger and more important effort here is to get Republican governors to refuse to participate in Medicaid expansion.
Now they can do that.
States do not have to participate in Medicaid.
In fact, it took Arizona 20 years to join after the initial Medicaid program was launched.
Some Republican governors have said they will also try to get this one to sit down. (
Start Video Editing)GOV. BOBBY JINDAL (R)
Luis Anna: every governor has two important decisions to make, one is whether we set up these exchanges and the other is whether we expand Medicaid.
No, we didn\'t do anything in the state of Luis Anna. (END VIDEO CLIP)
KLEIN: That\'s Bobby Jindal, governor of the state of Luis Anna, who said his state would give up a sweet deal.
It\'s worth spending a little time on this, because it\'s important to understand why.
The design of the Affordable Care Act is somewhat strange, which you will not think of from the political Care Act.
Red states are much better than blue states.
The better reason for the red state is the Medicaid section.
This is how the Medicaid portion of the bill works-now there is a lot of room for states to decide who is eligible for Medicaid.
As a result, in Texas, they only cover working adults below the poverty line of 26%.
The poverty line for a person is $11,170 per year.
So, you may be a person with an annual income of $3,000 and you are not poor enough to be eligible for Medicaid.
That\'s part of the reason Texas has the highest uninsured rate in the country.
In contrast, in Massachusetts, they cover 133% working adults living in poverty.
Now, it\'s partly because a former governor signed a bill that rhymes with Smitt Sromney\'s name.
But put it aside for the time being.
This is an important reason why they have the lowest uninsured rate in the country.
The Affordable Health Care Act hopes to make the whole country like Massachusetts.
Everyone who accounts for 133% of the poverty line receives Medicaid, which is less than $15,000 for individuals.
They will receive Medicaid automatically.
At present, the federal government has paid 57% of the medical subscription fee.
The rest is the responsibility of the states.
This is a good enough deal for every state.
In the Affordable Care Act, in the first three years, the federal government will pay the difference of 100% between where the state is now and where the law wants them to go, 100%.
After 2020, it fell a little, but only to 90%.
So, for every dollar the federal government puts in, it puts in $9.
This is an incredible deal.
But that\'s what\'s abnormal about it.
So far, the less you do on Medicaid, the more the federal government will pay on your behalf.
This is the irony of the health care law.
Overall, red states do less than blue states in terms of covering residents, especially through Medicaid.
So under the terms of the Affordable Care Act, they will get a sweeter deal.
In states like Texas, they get a lot of money because there are a lot of gaps to make up.
States like Massachusetts, they get very little.
In fact, if you look at 10 states, they will benefit the most from Medicaid expansion, nine of which supported John McCain in 2008.
If you look at 10 states, they will have the smallest coverage, eight of which supported Obama in 2008.
Now, one of the states that are committed to the expansion of Medicaid is old South Carolina.
Spokesman Rob Godfrey said to Governor Nikki Hayley, I am sorry to quote this sentence, \"When we know that the best way to find a South Carolina solution for a South Carolina health program is to block grants through flexibility.
\"So, how is the South Carolina solution solved?
19% of South Carolina residents do not have insurance.
This is well above the national average.
The expansion of Medicaid in the new law will reduce the insurance rates for eligible people in South Carolina.
The poor population of these people is less than 133%, reaching 56%.
Therefore, 56% of the uninsured persons in these groups were eliminated at one time.
This is the fourth best deal any state in the country gets under the Affordable Care Act.
Between 2014 and 2019, the cost of the federal government is huge.
Almost $11 billion.
For South Carolina, they will pay less than $0. 5 billion.
In the short term, rising Republican stars like Haley may have reason to reject the deal.
One way to build a national image is to win the support of the Republican Party, \"No, I am the most opposed
Obama race for politicians.
But the game will not last forever, and the governors will have
Republican voters who don\'t want their state to lose billions of dollars.
They have to answer hospitals that don\'t want to pay for patients who don\'t have insurance, and when the federal government offers to pay, these patients end up in the emergency room.
They must be responsible to the insured voters in those states for the higher premiums they end up paying to compensate the hospital for the expenses that the FBI is willing to pay for uninsured personnel.
So if Mitt Romney fails in this election and the Republicans lose their last chance to repeal Obamacare, their governor will not stick to it for a long time.
They can\'t afford it.
When they finally decide the issue, they will have a simple argument to resolve it.
Let\'s say it\'s going to be a way to stick to the blue state where Obama is back in office.
Former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, former governor of Vermont, himself is a healthy doctor. Howard Dean. Dr.
Dean, thank you so much for coming tonight.
Howard Dean, former chairman of the Democratic National Committee: Ezra, thank you for inviting me.
KLEIN: So, your state, Vermont, is one of the highest-covered states in the country, largely because of the line you signed when you were a governor, part of the reason is the Medicaid provisions in the law.
So, is this Medicaid bill a good deal for Vermont?
But you know, we think universal health care is a human right.
So, we used Medicaid for about 20 years for children.
But Bill Clinton gave us a waiver so we could do it, and we also promised to release Community writing in about 20 years.
So we are far ahead.
I want to say that, thanks to Governor Romney, Massachusetts is the only state in front of us.
KLEIN: You know, one of the things that comes to mind when we watch these fights from outside is that we tend to think that party politics is better than interest group politics because it plays in politics
We saw Governor Nikki Haley on TV.
We saw her calling for conservative voters on television.
But it is speculated that she and all the governors will have health care providers in their offices, especially hospitals.
You speak out on this matter.
You have to take the money.
You can\'t leave us here, can you?
This is what will happen.
While South Carolina, when I was running for president, I said this yesterday on the David Gregory show, when I was running for president, we thought, if South Carolina\'s gross domestic product could grow by 2% as Vermont did.
I mean, it\'s just stupid if the governor refuses this, because it\'s not providing insurance for a lot of people, it\'s raising the gross domestic product, because it increases spending by the private sector and the hospital sector in all aspects of the national economy.
Now, Texas-I don\'t care who the governor of Texas is, they will take the money.
This is $52 billion, and they have a very complex network of hospitals, probably the third or fourth most complex network of hospitals in the country.
They are one of the real mechanisms of American medicine.
If you think that both Republicans and Democrats, the governor will be able to refuse $52 billion and not be eaten alive by places like Baylor University or Houston Medical Center, one more thing you have come
There is a payment method called paying states out of proportion of share payments to help them pay unpaid care.
In addition to the state of Luis Anna, payments in each state have disappeared.
So, these hospitals will take responsibility, and if the governor doesn\'t take the money, states like Texas with great medical institutions will be left to second-class citizens, and I think they will.
Yes, I think you are right.
But to be fair, one of the arguments put forward by some of these governors is, of course, that the law says it will match 90% of the law from 2020, but within 20 years, congress can reduce that to 85% or 75% or 55%, and then the rest is holding the bag.
How likely do you think this is?
You see, 20 years later, every nuclear power plant in Texas could explode.
I don\'t think they got rid of the nuclear power plant.
This is an absurd argument.
If this happens, they handle it when it happens.
It hasn\'t happened yet.
Talked about it for years.
The fact is, when the governors work together, the governors are a powerful force in the country, and they used to do so before the 1994 Republican Revolution, and the game was very good.
South Carolina has 80% games.
For Nikki Haley, it is the governor\'s dereliction of duty not to take the 80% from the federal government. It just is.
I mean, it\'s a huge amount of money to get into a state that\'s not very good.
They can do better.
Mississippi and Luis Anna and all that-you know, the same is true for states in their 40 s, as well as for indicators such as the health of all children and adult health.
This is a ridiculous thing.
They have no reason to be in the position where they are, and under some leadership of the governor\'s office, they do not have to be involved in the project.
Look, I\'m not a supporter of the Obama act, but it\'s national law.
We may work with it and I am willing to work with parts I don\'t like.
I think it\'s time for Republicans to grow up a little bit and start dealing with the parts they don\'t like.
Klein: former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, governor of Vermont
Howard Dean, thank you so much for coming tonight.
Thank you. Thank you.
Klein: in front of the behind-the-scenes drama that led to last week\'s Supreme Court decision.
Next, Dahlia Lithwick will share all the details with us.
Also, since we won\'t mess up the little things here, we\'ll have a geek moment, nothing but the secrets of the universe.
This is still in front. (
Business break)
Klein: How about Governor Chris Christie and governor Bruce springs?
Well, they\'re all from New Jersey and it\'s one thing, they-they\'re all-it\'s coming, but I\'ll keep thinking. (
Business break)
Klein: John Paul Stevens, Supreme Court justice, retired on 2010 at the age of 90.
Republican.
Appointed leader of Freedom
Judge Stevens was appointed by President Ford.
If you ask a legal scholar, he has not become the leader of the court Freedom Group by changing his point of view.
During his tenure, the court had been doing well, and in the end, his moderate Republican philosophy-when he was appointed to the court, he is a moderate Republican-he is a liberal compared to others he works.
Court watchers have been arguing recently that the Supreme Court is heading to the right.
They have been documenting this transition for years.
The people of \"mom Jones\" helped do it in the form of charts, which, as you may know, is my favorite form.
There is a very convenient and dramatic one here.
The red line in the Supreme Court shows that conservative judges have become more conservative over the years.
The yellow middle line, the moderate judge has also become more conservative or for years.
Finally, the blue line at the bottom is that liberal judges have become more conservative or years old.
Then it happened last week.
The super conservative court, including the chief justice of the super Conservative, John Roberts, supports a law that is very unpopular among conservatives.
All of a sudden, everything seems possible.
About 45 seconds, court-
The people who watched the expert class thought the court might not be as far as moving to the right.
Today, conservatives within the court proved this.
Now, you need to know that the leak in the Supreme Court has almost never happened.
Forever, forever.
This is a well-known secret institution.
In fact, my colleague at the \"Bloomberg point\", Steven Carter, just last week I wrote a proof of how surprising the Supreme Court is, if there are more agencies, for example, in the Supreme Court, people don\'t complain to the media everywhere. How could it be better just for political interests.
At this moment, the Conservative Party media inside the Supreme Court judge made a large-scale attack.
In fact, the first thing the Conservative Party did after the ruling came down was to reveal to reporters the details of the decision --
Breaking the court\'s code of silence, telling CBS News that Chief Justice Roberts did initially want to overthrow the reform, suggesting that he might just succumb to outside pressure and change the idea of deciding to uphold the law.
Quoting this sentence, \"at least one conservative judge tried to get him to explain his shift but was not happy with the response.
\"It\'s the way conservatives express it through leaks of political accusations, no, no, we\'re really right.
Everyone knows that John Roberts fully agrees with us on everything and he doesn\'t want to support this legislation at first, and then he becomes a huge chicken and he gets the law into effect.
Even in his majority opinion in favor of the law, Roberts took pains to say that, except for a very small, very narrow person, he agreed with everything in the Conservative Party, he decided to adhere to the almost inevitable technical details of the principle-whether it was a matter of fines or taxes.
But he supports conservatives in terms of major legal issues, the scope of commercial terms, and unnecessary and appropriate powers.
He just wants to completely abolish the most extensive social policy legislation enacted in the country in 40 years.
Now, it shouldn\'t be 5-
It\'s almost a 4-4 decision. 5.
It should be 7-2 or 8-1.
Prior to the oral debate, a poll of former Supreme Court clerks and lawyers found that only 35% believed the court would remove the mandate.
After the oral debate, according to the questioning from the judge, it began to look like the law would go down and there was a feeling in the professional Court --
We cannot believe that this will happen.
A clear constitution will be abolished based on politics.
Now, a survey of top constitutional scholars late last month found that 19 out of 21 believe that the law is constitutional and should be upheld by the court-19 out of 21 believe that the law is constitutional.
But only eight out of 21 believe the court will uphold the sentence.
Before the decision was made, all of this was frightened, and with respect to how partisan, political and conservative the court became, it was still a fully effective response to the court, even after it supported health care reform, because the truth is that it barely supports health care reform, it just supports it on a very narrow basis.
The Conservatives in the court seem to argue through political leaks that it is in the 5-
It\'s almost 5-
4 vote, if John Roberts is not so scared --cat.
By the way, the other thing about the Conservatives in court is that they don\'t just want to overthrow this very radical task in itself.
They want to overturn the whole law under authorization.
So the whole thing is not a fully affordable health care bill.
There is no judicial limit to the maximum choice-they really do it.
So, the bottom line is that if you worry about the court before the health care ruling, you should worry about the court today.
It has not changed so much.
Join us in the slate of the Lili Lithwick, senior editor. com.
Dahlia, thank you so much for joining us tonight
Lili LITHWICK, Slate.
Hi Ezra.
Thank you for inviting me.
KLEIN: So, this report kicked off the Supreme Court\'s internal decision-making based on the leak, which is very rare.
Are you surprised by its appearance?
Yes, it\'s eye-popping. dropping.
I think almost everyone who responds to this has the same reaction as you, and this is an exponential event that has never happened in history.
You know, there\'s a big story about the behind-the-scenes deal with Bush v.
But it happened four years later.
To do this, three days later is unprecedented, very unusual, as you said.
KLEIN: This report is a bit unique. It`s an op-
Ed must have written it at other outlets.
The reporter has a good reputation, but you know the court well.
Is it true what you said?
LITHWICK: it is.
Crawford wrote the article for CBS in January, and he was an extraordinary journalist.
I don\'t doubt what she said is true.
This is an interesting statement, Ezra.
Citing \"sources\", she had a specific understanding of the deliberations.
So it\'s really attractive to say this sentence.
The real ring is real.
I do feel that only part of the story is told here, any story is told by those who are very obviously interested, and one wants to hear what is on the other side.
In other words, I think it is very likely that Chief Justice John Roberts assigned himself an opinion as soon as he considered it, and thought he had just begun to fabricate it, you know, a few weeks later, because he did not assign himself another point of view from that meeting, there was no point.
So I think he\'s been thinking about either writing for himself and four conservatives or writing something else.
But, as you said, he\'s just scared and I don\'t think it\'s the whole story.
KLEIN: There is one thing that I think is really attractive, and there is also a strange thing in Judge Scalia\'s speech-his objection.
They really talk about Roberts in a strange way, or they don\'t talk about him at all.
He is not mentioned by most people.
Crawford reported that it was not a mistake, nor was it because he turned over at the last minute.
They want them to stop participating because they are very angry with him.
They don\'t-almost, they don\'t think he\'s worth the debate, they don\'t want to sign the part that they agreed to him.
It\'s a bit different from four people on the right side of the court to Roberts.
LITHWICK: Yes.
Ezra, this part is also a headache.
You have the opportunity to get five votes, get together, support the business terms of the chief justice as necessary, and make appropriate findings where appropriate.
You put your hand on your ear and stom\'s foot said I was going to refuse him because I was so angry that it didn\'t sound right.
I think you\'re right.
I don\'t think we got anything.
More fundamentally-this is the problem, and the conversation we are having is the problem, because it is entirely speculative.
It does have the effect of undermining the integrity of the court.
What we should talk about is detention, not Colonel Mustard with lead pipes in the library.
Klein: Well, hopefully we can get you back and have a look and we\'ll talk more about holding.
Dahlia Lithwick, slate of senior editors.
Thank you again for joining us tonight and sharing your endless wisdom on the pitch.
Thank you, Ezra.
Klein: The universe can be divided into two groups.
Those who know what the Higgs particle is and care about whether or not humans can find it, and those who don\'t.
I will try to reconcile these two groups at an extraordinary moment when geeks arrive. (
Business break)(
Start Video Editing)
Fox News Sean hanniti: The US Supreme Court supports the biggest tax increase in U. S. history.
Fox News: The biggest tax increase in the country\'s history. REP.
Michelle Buckman (R)
Obamacare is the biggest tax increase in U. S. history.
Talk show host Rush Limbaugh: what we have now is the biggest tax increase in the history of the world.
Unidentified male: The biggest tax increase in the history of the universe. (End Video Clip)
KLEIN: You \'ve heard the march of Republicans who have been calling the health care act some of the changes in the biggest tax growth in life history, as we know, and everything in the world and the universe.
Now, while we don\'t have data to specify the history of the universe, tonight, in the chart, who will imitate life, we can show you, president Obama\'s health care bill is not even the biggest tax increase in American history.
Really, not even close.
Getting the personal authorization that the Republicans started in the process is a small part of the health care bill.
It\'s not-even if you\'re looking at the tax section, it\'s not the biggest, second, or third-largest tax increase in the health care bill.
Not to mention the biggest tax increase in Earth\'s history.
But there are other taxes on health care.
It increases the payroll tax for rich Americans.
It taxed unusually expensive health insurance plans.
Let\'s say you put all this together.
Where does it add up?
Well, this is the chart.
It was drafted by Economist Austan Frakt, who wrote a blog on the wonderful attached Economist website.
This morning I put it on my blog at The Washington Post.
This is the biggest 15 tax increases since 1950.
Now, the opposite of the biggest growth is at the bottom.
They are long blue lines.
The smaller the tax increase, the shorter the blue line.
As a result, starting at the bottom, President Obama\'s Affordable Health Care Bill is also known as Obamacare, ranking tenth.
In the country we live in, this is only the tenth biggest tax increase since 1950.
It is comparable to President Clinton\'s 1993 increase in taxes.
Oh, interestingly, it\'s about the same size as George H. W.
Bush increased taxes by 1990.
Wow, you know, President Ronald Reagan, who signed a bigger tax increase bill.
His 1982 increase in taxes is about 40% more than the Affordable Health Care Act.
You said Reagan cut taxes too. He did.
As Obama did in the stimulus plan, and then in 2010, he extended all Bush\'s tax cuts for two years and added more on that basis.
As he promised in 2012, he said he would extend most of Bush\'s tax cuts permanently.
To be honest with you, I don\'t think it\'s great.
To be financially responsible for the country, what we need to do is not just allow Bush\'s tax cuts for the rich to expire.
If the tax has to be no longer a dirty word, but once again a part of the budget, we will control the deficit.
But if we are going to talk about tax increases and tax cuts, we need to figure out the numbers.
The Affordable Care Act is not the biggest tax increase in history, nor is it the biggest tax increase in the last 50, 40, 30 or even 20 years.
If you see Bush\'s tax cut program expiring in 2010 as a tax increase, and the Republicans do, it\'s not even the biggest tax increase to write into the law in the past 10 years.
While it does have some big tax increases, it is authorized by individuals, not one of them. (
Business break)
Hayes: If you watch the show tonight from states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Iowa or Florida, chances are that you \'ve just finished watching the ad during the past ad break. (
Start Video Editing)
Narrator: Mitt Romney is a man who created jobs when he ran for governor. MITT ROMNEY (R)
Presidential candidate: I know how to create jobs.
But as a corporate Commando, he shipped jobs to China and Mexico.
As governor, he did the same thing by outsourcing government work to India.
Now he is doing the same thing.
Romney: I know why there are jobs and why there are jobs.
Narrator: outsourcing, the Romney economy.
It didn\'t work at the time and it doesn\'t work now. (END VIDEO CLIP)
KLEIN: This is the ad that the Obama campaign is currently playing on the battlefield across the country.
There is a reason why the Obama campaign will post this particular ad, not other ads.
Obama\'s campaign is more proud than ever, and in terms of campaign strategy, it\'s not just about relying on opportunities or tuition fees.
No, they rely on hard data.
The hard data tells them that Romney was hit on Bain. At Slate.
Com, Sasha Isenburg, described the analysis process that the Obama team went through in terms of campaign advertising.
Quoting this sentence, \"analysts rely on a wide range of sustained micro-
Target actions to identify who among voters is most responsive to what information.
This cycle of trial and error provides experience-
Thoughtful elections have heard an escalation of the current regime based on intuition close to voters.
So when the Obama campaign handled all the data, they thought the Bain attack would be the most effective thing they could do.
What they don\'t expect, however, is that it will trigger strong opposition from Democratic elites, Democrats living and raising money inside and outside New York City and Washington, D. C. C.
The Democrats know private equity firms.
They know investors.
These people are their friends, their funders, their campaign supporters.
They are the ones Democrats need and want to have a good relationship.
So, you might remember, about a month and a half ago, there was a big stir in the Democratic Party about whether it was wise to attack his record at Bain Capital.
Well-known Democrats like Corey bookers and Ed Rendel are starting to openly express concerns about whether the Bain attack is a good idea.
This criticism has aroused widespread media attention.
The media began to think and report on why the Obama campaign did not deliver the message correctly and did not allow allies to agree.
But there\'s always the question: are those Democrats tactically correct?
Because the content that Democratic elites want to hear and the resonance of actual voters in battlefield states may be very different.
So the Obama team has to make a really important strategic decision.
Do they agree with the Democratic elite\'s feedback in this regard?
Will they give up Bain\'s attack?
Or will they use their data?
The Obama campaign decided very decisively to double its efforts on data and attacks. (
Start Video Editing)
Narrator: President Romney\'s first 100 days of the Iowa people mean less concern about their future.
Worry less?
The Washington Post has just revealed that Romney\'s company is a pioneer in the US shipping industry. S. jobs overseas.
Invest in companies that specialize in transferring jobs for American workers to new facilities in low-income areas
Wage countries like China and India.
Does Iowa really want an outsourcing-in-
Chief of the White House? (END VIDEO CLIP)
Klein: It seems that the decision is good now.
In battlefield states across the country, Bain\'s attacks appear to be happening.
It was a game in Florida two months ago.
Romney held a slim-point lead.
This is the case now in Florida.
Barack Obama is four points ahead.
It was a great Ohio game two months ago.
President Obama is also leading there, but got a razor. thin two-point margin.
Since then, the president has expanded it to 9-point margin.
So, what is the reason for the sudden movement of the swing state?
Here is the analysis of ABC\'s Rick Klein.
Quoting this sentence, \"in the past two weeks, although national polls show little progress in the game, something different has happened in the battlefield states.
In these states, President Obama has been moving forward.
The gap is not big, but on the whole, the numbers strongly suggest that the Democrat\'s relentless attack on Mitt Romney\'s business record at Bain Capital has caused losses.
A recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll also showed the same.
When voters were asked if Mitt Romney\'s record at Bain Capital made them feel more positive or negative about him, 28% said they felt more negative about Mr. Romney.
After Bain learned about his record, only 23% of Romney felt more positive about him.
So these numbers are not very good for Romney.
But among voters in swing states, that number is much worse.
There, 33% of the people said they were talking to Mr.
Romney, after learning about his Bain record, compared with only 18% who felt more positive about him.
Even Republicans believe the strategy is effective, according to the New York Times.
Quote, \"Although some Democrats doubt the wisdom of attacking Obama.
According to strategists on both sides, in Romney\'s business career, Obama\'s commercial advertising portrayed him as a ruthless executive who pursued profits at the expense of employment and began to decide on some that have not yet been decided.
Bipartisan strategists said independent voters speaking in the focus group said they had seen these ads or heard their allegations and they raised questions about Obama in their minds
Romney\'s experience
\"About a month and a half ago, when the Obama campaign faced the elite in their own party, they had a big decision to make.
Stick to Bain\'s attack or retreat.
They decided to stick to it.
They have proven to be correct, at least so far.
Now we are joined by my friend and colleague, the one named \"Melissa Harris-
Perry, broadcast the weekend show on MSNBC.
She is also a professor at Durham University and a columnist for the country. Melissa Harris-
Perry, thank you for coming.
MELISSA HARRIS-
Host: Hi Ezra.
It\'s always nice to join you.
Klein: I \'ve always been struck by how quickly the narrative of the campaign has changed.
I remember that a month ago, all the people who seemed to be talking or wanting to talk about were strategic incompetence of the Obama campaign.
But for Obama, polls have not fallen, and now they seem to be on the rise.
The narrative now is that this strategy is a bit brilliant and now it is working and, in fact, it has always been a good idea.
What is your takeaway here? HARRIS-
PERRY: Well, everybody likes to win.
Last week was a big win for President Obama and the Obama administration, and even surrounded the holder\'s situation.
Obviously, the Supreme Court\'s Affordable Health Care Bill decided, you know, just to have President Obama and the campaign stand up even more when they enter Midsummer here.
But I think the other part is, do you remember that it\'s always the inept of the agent, in some ways, the story, the idea that an agent cannot stay on the message is not exactly the same as whether the campaign itself has the right information.
KLEIN: You know, I think what people think is going to happen is that agents, they get all these media reports, and that\'s going to filter it out in some way.
I was thinking about this today.
According to the poll, 41% of Americans do not know that the Supreme Court ruled on health care last week.
They just don\'t know.
It\'s not over their radar.
This is not something that makes an impression on it. HARRIS-
What world do you and I live in?
This is my concern.
And that reminds me, you know, is someone really not that good?
Qualified to say what is more suitable for swing voters than people sitting in chairs like this, who focus on every little thing and every little thing in the presidential campaign?
Because it seems to me that these ugly things, these little stories that eventually bother us in Washington, actually end up confusing the average voter. HARRIS-
Perry: I mean, this is a very important point.
I mean, obviously our job is to filter the news and try to think about all the small factors that affect the election.
But you know, people in swing states, one of the things that\'s happening in some swing states is their unemployment rate, and in Virginia, for example, it\'s actually not as bad as the national unemployment rate.
So, kind of like President Obama said, \"Are you better off today than four years ago? \" wouldn\'t it be like four years ago in those states that have been affected more seriously by the Romney campaign.
On the contrary, President Obama was able to stay and listen, this guy won\'t do what I did for you to make your hometown better.
He will make things worse.
He will accept that you are finally starting to see the work of recovery and take them out, you know, just like the outsourcing narrative.
But I think the other part is that we just have to remember that there is still a long way to go until the General Assembly and the final fall.
I think the real problem is not what happens on TV, but what happens in the mind --to-
When the two of them begin to present their views, there is a positive debate, you know, standing in front of the American people and explaining why they think the other person is not good.
Klein: Yes, I think it\'s important to remember that at this time in 1992, Bill. W.
Bush and rose Pelo
That\'s great. Melissa Harris-
Professor of Durham University and host of Melissa Harris Perry
Perry\'s show airs the weekend at MSNBC from 10: 00 eastern time to noon-thank you for being here. HARRIS-
Thank you, Ezra.
Klein: one downside to being a rock star is that they can\'t choose their fans. It turns out that there is a drawback to being a rock star.
Every Bruce Springsteen has thousands of Chris.
Who is the boss of New Jersey? Next. (
Business break)
Klein: On Friday, the program reported that Mississippi is about to effectively ban abortion through a new law that will close the only clinic in the state as a whole.
The law adds regulations for one clinic that other types of clinics do not have to follow.
In particular, the law requires doctors in the clinic to have the privilege of admission.
The owner of the clinic told us that her doctor is already at 30-
A mile radius, but no one said yes.
With the law coming into effect on Sunday, clinics face the option of closing or breaking the law unless federal courts step in.
Last night, just hours before the clinic opened this morning, a federal judge blocked the law.
The judge issued a temporary injunction.
Until July 11, they heard the argument of a permanent ban.
He wrote, citing, \"The plaintiff provided evidence, including a reference from important legislative and executive officers, that the purpose of the act was to eliminate abortion in Mississippi.
They also submitted evidence that the passage of the act was not due to safety or health concerns.
The evidence has not yet been refuted.
\"Evidence of legal intent and lack of attention to health and safety may be difficult to refute as it is on video tape. > (
Start Video Editing)GOV. PHIL BRYANT (R)
Mississippi: We will continue our efforts to end abortion in Mississippi, a historic day to begin this process.
Deputy Governor of Mississippi, Tate Reeves: Our goal is to end all abortions in Mississippi.
I believe that the recognition of Privilege Act gives us the best opportunity to do so. STATE REP.
Carpenter (Bubba)R)
Mississippi: We have stopped abortion in Mississippi.
There, of course, you have the other side. They are like poor women who have no money to go out of the state and do it at home with a hanger.
This is what we hear over and over again.
But hey, you have to have moral values.
You have to start somewhere and that\'s what we decided to do. (END VIDEO CLIP)
KLEIN: You have to start somewhere.
The Federal Court ruled that Roy\'s decision on Wade still applies to Mississippi at least for now. (
Business break)
Hayes: it\'s hot outside the East Coast.
Actually, it\'s really hot.
You can understand that people are a little grumpy.
Chris Christie, governor of New Jersey, you can use it more or less to set up your watch. (
Start Video Editing)
Reporter: Are you going to address the legislature on Monday? GOV.
Chris Christie (R)
New Jersey: Is that what I\'m talking about? Are you stupid?
About topic, about topic. Next question. Good.
Thank you, thank you. Thank you very much. I\'m sorry for the idiot over there. Take care. (END VIDEO CLIP)
KLEIN: For those who are following at home, it\'s been countless public appearances since Republican Governor Chris Christie took office.
YouTube is filled with accusations from the governor of New Jersey about people, calling them idiots, telling them that he is the governor and that they can shut up while he is talking.
A teacher like this. He\'s gone.
Teachers like this are gone.
Students like this, the police, he went after.
It is also very manly and very abrupt. Christie also likes it and his supporters like it.
This is another big love from Christie\'s, boss Bruce Springsteen. ph)
From New Jersey.
Rustic farmers in Garden State style.
From his early days as a Republican contender, Governor Christie\'s love of Springsteen has shown that he, Chris Christie, is like the rest of you, there are dozens and dozens of Springsteen tickets to prove.
When media reported that Chris Christie appeared to be asleep at the Springsteen attention center this year, the governor responded that he was not asleep at all.
He is thinking about the deep meaning of Springsteen music.
You know, I believe.
Christie\'s is a big fan of Springsteen.
He\'s probably thinking.
But the sad thing is that Christie does like Springsteen very much, but Springsteen doesn\'t like it when Christie comes back.
Jeffrey Goldberg wrote in this month\'s Atlantic.
Quote, \"despite Christie\'s heroic efforts, Springsteen, who is still a New Jersey resident, will not talk to him at a concert, or even at a club concert --
Springsteen will not recognize the size of the governor.
When Christie left the Springsteen concert on a big stage, his state mounted police moved him to his fleet through the loading dock.
He walked to the foot of the stage and dressing room.
He was never invited in to say hello.
Chris Christie was so sad.
This spring, Christie begged Bruce to meet him in Atlantic City.
He begged printingto come here to celebrate the opening of the new casino.
Tell me it sounds like anything but hurt
Begging in a reasonable and bargaining manner. (
Start Video Editing)
Christie: I\'m asking Bruce directly now, and I think, you know, he missed the opportunity to open the place because Beyonce had picked up the cloak on it.
But I really think, you know, when he finishes his summer trip, he hasn\'t announced anything about the Labor Day weekend yet.
I think Bruce Springsteen\'s Labor Day weekend bash will be an incredible showcase of Bruce\'s support for his hometown. (END VIDEO CLIP)
Klein: Bruce Springsteen doesn\'t listen to Governor Christie.
Although Governor Christie tried to feel guilty about his unrequited love and said the boss should play for the middle class in Atlantic City, Springsteen\'s refusal was based on
Christie\'s politics
Springsteen\'s hero was a man who said his first kick was when he landed and he ended up like a dog who was beaten too much, until half his time was covered up.
Springsteen gave us a world, \"born in the United States, and the streets of Philadelphia,\" the theme of a film about a man who died of AIDS.
For years, Springsteen has called on New Jersey to legalize marriage equality.
When the legislature finally voted to do so, Christie vetoed it and said the country should hold a referendum.
Last year, Christie deprived the union of rights and cut the welfare of state workers.
Last week, Governor Christie cut tax credits for poor workers while providing assistance to cities, schools and health care.
Bruce Springsteen is not the kind of person who is impressed by the people who berate teachers, students, journalists and police at the Town Hall.
It\'s not Springsteen\'s theme to fight the little guy bravely with your strength.
So, no, Mr. Christie, governor.
Springsteen doesn\'t seem likely to go to the river with you, or to the shore with you, or to Los Angeles sand for your career.
But if you see the ghost of old Tom joy around the governor\'s residence, maybe you will get his signature.
It\'s worth asking. (
Business break)
Klein: It\'s a joke.
A Higgs particle works in a Catholic church.
The priest said, we don\'t allow the Higgs particles here.
The Higgs said, how can you have the quality without me? Get it?
The Higgs said, how can you get it without me? No?
There is a joke about two different meanings of mass.
It was a bad start.
Let\'s start over.
Now physicists are trying to explain the universe with so-called standard models.
This equation is a standard model.
You can learn more on \"Minute Physics\", a very valuable channel on YouTube.
But because fist physicists are small, small, small
Bitty, it\'s really hard to see things like sub
Atomic particles, it\'s a bit difficult to verify their ideas.
Most of us stop in high school and find electrons, protons and neutrons in atoms.
Maybe some of you are still learning about the best names of all particles-the quark.
But there are more small, small, small
They can only predict by mathematics.
That\'s how physics works now.
The equations proposed by physicists seem to describe the way we know the world, and then in those equations, we understand where we don\'t know in the world, and how they work, then we hope that one day, some of the more impressive human groups that have machines than we have in the future will be able to check whether we are right or not.
In 1964, a physicist named Peter Higgs came up with the idea that there was a cosmic syrup in the universe that we certainly could not see, but it can help the matter stick together to form something like an atom.
In theory, how it makes a bad TV, so I won\'t tell you.
If you would like to know more, we will add links to the website.
But the particle they are interested in proving this is called the Higgs particle, which also has a fancy nickname \"God particle \".
However, some physicists call it a damn particle because it\'s hard to find, as they say.
But time has passed and our machines have become better. Now scientists are trying to reproduce the conditions that existed after the Big Bang.
They are doing it in a giant particle collider under the Alps between France and Switzerland.
Sounds like an evil villain plot.
They send tiny, itty-
Bitty particles rotate at high speeds along the 17-mile track until they collide with each other at a close speed and break down into uniform ittier and bittier particles.
Scientists generate millions of collisions per second and analyze a lot of crazy data to prove that the Higgs particles are alive and doing well, which is theoretical.
On Wednesday, scientists at the two largest Higgs particle searches will release their latest findings. There is news coming from every corner of the Internet that people care to look for Higgs particles and they will say they have found them or at least they have found something possible.
So while July 4 means fireworks for most of us, for a physicist and their physically friendly person, fun will be a very different spark.
That\'s what it is for us tonight.
You can watch my work on Wonkblog.
On the Washington Post website or on Twitter with me.
Com/EzraKlein and Facebook on Facebook. com/EzraKlein.
It\'s time for Lawrence O\'Donnell to \"Last Word.
Have a good evening.
This is a report card in a hurry.
This copy may not be in final form and may be updated.
Copyright 2012 CQ-Roll Call, Inc.
All materials herein are protected by US copyright law and may not be copied, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call.
You may not change or delete any trademark, copyright or other notice in a copy of the content.
Custom message
Chat Online 编辑模式下无法使用
Chat Online inputting...