exercises. but they got to keep their clothes on and presumably stay a little warmer. the correct answer to our gps chlenge question is, b, the mafia is the king of banking italy, said to be making over $200 billion in profits a year on loans of $83 billion. you see, family businesses can still thrive in the era of big box stores. thanks to alof you for being part of my program this week. ly see you next week. stay tuned for rereliable sources. ki tell that mitt romney was heading for a victory, but how big? he carried just under 40% of the vote, but for some in the pundit world, that wasn't enough. >> actually, historically is not a strong showing by mitt romney. not a bit. the average win -- the average winning percentage in the new hampshire primary is 39. >> the press piles on romney as

he makes a classically clumsy comment and plays to the notion that he was a heartless corporate job cutter. >> i like being able to fire people. i like being able to fire people. i like being able to fire people. >> but were those words wrenched out of context as we just did there? plus, we'll look at cbs's launch of a newsy morning show with charlie rose and gale king, and her interview with michelle obama and a controversial book about the first couple. >> you would think michelle obama is angry, she's unhappy, she feels burdened, she feels frustrated. do you feel frustrated as first lady of the united states? >> the question for cbs, do network viewers want that much politics for breakfast? i'm hourt kurtz, and this is "reliable sources." it was almost comical as i flipped around the cable chat shows before the polls closed in

new hampshire to watch the pundits try to set the bar for mitt romney. he needed 35% of the vote. no, it had to be bovl 37%. when the former governor cruised victory with more than 39% in the granite state, some commentators were unimpressed. on fox news, for example. >> well, i think it's a good night for mitt romney. it not a great night for mitt romney. >> everyone is watching. he wins iowa. he wins new hampshire. bounces on to south carolina. that's not a great night? >> it really doesn't feel to me like a great night for him because the expectation was, you know, the polls had been saying he is getting regularly between 36% and 40% of the vote. >> ah, the expectations. well, despite romney's victory, he found himself fending off republican attacks that he destroyed many thousands of jobs while running a takeover firm bain capital, and romney didn't help himself with his line about liking to fire people, even though he was talking about

dumping health care companies that didn't provide good service. >> this yesterday i like to fire people, i guess the only thing worse you could say is in a time like this when people are out of work is that the herbert hoover is my hero. >> here's romney perhaps putting gasoline into the fire speaking today about being able to fire people, like insurance companies it's a bad tone for him to be striking right now. >> joining us now to examine the presidential campaign coverage in columbia, south carolina, nia malika henderson from "the washington post" and nancy hagerman, senior political reporter for politico and glen is mcnichol of "the wire." we are in temporary quarters. our regular studio is being renovated. the political unit has its newsroom here, which is usually buzzing during the week. niamalika, is that line resounding through the media echo chamber, was it really taken out of context? >> well, it was taken out of context. immediately after he said it,

the twitter universe lit up, and the dnc was ready with an ad, a web ad, and some talking points that they mailed out immediately to everybody. again, if you look at the entire context of it, he is talking about insurance companies. he is talking about companies that provide bad service, and i think most people agree that if you get bad service that you want to have that right to fire people. i think, though, it did underscore a narrative out there that romney isn't very good in these emprompt your, spontaneous settings, and there he is obviously speaking off the cuff, and that fed into that, and then this other narrative that he is this capitalistic titan, this corporate titan that can't identify with the little people. i think in tone it probably wasn't the right thing for him to say and people criticized him for that. >> gin -- >> given the entire context of it, it was pretty fair. >> given that that's the media narrative about romney, maggie haberman, candidates are supposed to avoid serving up damaging sound bites. those were his words, whatever

he meant. was the media at fault here, or was it a romney misstep? >> i think it was a romney misstep. we do van obligation to present the context, which i think i saw a bunch of people doing and we did as well, but i do think that was a really ill turn of phrase for a couple of reasons. it would be generally certainly as nia said place to a narrative about mitt romney. i would argue that it was less than romney was off the cuff and more that he was very comfortable. he was heading into a large win in new hampshire. he had just come from a very, albeit, narrow win for him in iowa, and he was speak about br a chamber of commerce. he is generally comfortable in a business setting. i think it was a misstep on his part, and i think his campaign is in a position now where it's very hard for them to complain when something is taken out of context because his initial campaign ad quoted president obama out of context, and i think this is where it's problematic for them going forward. >> dow seem to remember that. on new hampshire, primary night, as on iowa caucus night, msnbc went not with straight reporters

in the hosting role, but with five liberal commentators from its prime timelineup. that led to a situation like this, i'm going to play for you, when john, the former white house chief of staff, and the first bush administration was being interviewed. chris matthew hz a question for him. it had to do with this theme about romney's business background. let's take a look. >> this is a country in which somebody can start and have that kind of great success, and begrudge him now for having been successful, i think, is kind of anti-american, don't you? >> i just wonder why a fellow who has been to boarding school and is going to elite universities and never had a sweat in his life, never had to worry in his life about putting a meal on the table, should go out there and offer himself as some sort of -- is that fair? >> so by having chris matthews and rachel maddow and al sharpton on the gang on primary nights, does that change the tone and tenor of interviews like that and of the entire coverage? >> of course. of course. msnbc has redirect its style for

the entire lean forward campaign as leaning to the left with sort of a political slant, and they've had some success with that. i think they're really trying to exploit that to its most profitable end, and having chris matthews there, you know, knocking mitt romney for his upbringing is a little ironic considering chris matthews, inevitably, compares everyone to j.f.k., so this is, i think, what we can expect for this whole political election season is what we have seen cable news channels setting themselves up with for the past two years, and how they've been successful with their punditry, and then bleeding over to what is technically news coverage. >> you'll have to make a distinction that fox news and cnn did not do that on primary night, although we can debate on what they do the rest of the time. let me come back, nia, to this question of what i think kind of rereferred to as the media narrative on mitt romney. when we get to bain capital, he knows what it's like to worry about a pink slip. that raised a lot of eyebrows. is the press now seizing on

every comment and a very perceived bit of awkwardness around these parts to further this narrative in a way that might not be true of a different kind of candidate, with a different background? >> well, i think in some ways they are, and obviously, the democrats are doing that too in the media. we are involved in that too. seizing on some of these comments. i think in part it's that there's this contest where there does seem to be this inevitability surrounding mitt yom hi, right? you know, there is i think a need and a desire to inject some interest, some talking points into the coverage of it, so i do think in some ways he is going to see that. if he is the nominee, which it looks like he will be, this is the kind of reporting that we'll see. i think in talking about this narrative of him being, you know, this sort of corporate elite guy, i think the reason why it's catching on and the reason why the press is also focussing on it because he is

setting up this narrative of obama as this guy who is all about entitlements, all about, you know, this welfare president. that's more like what newt gingrich is doing, but i think because he is doing that, it's setting himself up to be this guy that himself has been a very entitled, privileged figure. he is some somebody who as chris matthews gtsd,did go to boarding school and has led a very charmed life. i think this whole narrative we're going to be exploring it, and as he tries to change it and tries to thb guy that -- yesterday he gave somebody, like, $50 or something like that who was struggling. i think he is feeding into it too because he is trying to -- >> i have never seen a candidate -- i have never seen a candidate give money to somebody in the crowd. >> i have never seen a candidate do that either. >> there's a good story on the front page of the "new york times" this morning which notes that romney has been praising a for profit -- it happens that the guy that runs this is a major donor to the romney campaign and the tuition at this full scale university, $80,000,

low graduation late, and we are learning more about his affiliation and background. let me circle back to some of the sound i played at the top about mitt romney, you know, winning by double digits in new hampshire and, yet, some of the commentators saying, well, it wasn't a big deal, and is he from the neighboring state and all of that. i am wondering whether some in the press just trying to keep this race alive as we head into south carolina. >> i think there is no question that the press would like to see more of a race than is taking place than, you know, as we've seen. it has been fairly boring, fairly predictable. you know, if we're being honest about it, i think people would always rather see a race. i also think the democrats would like to see this go forward, and i think they're doing everything they can to amp this up, whether that ends up feeding off one another is a different issue. i think that regarding what you said at the top about mitt romney and the expectations on new hampshire, a win is a win, period, and he won pretty sdis he havely. he won very handily over his closest competitor was ron paul. >> right. a win is a win, and, yet, i turn on the tv, and i hear all these smart people saying, well, you

know, he didn't really exceed expectations, and the margin, and it seems like a win is only a win if the geniuses of the press say so. >> i think that's right. although i think that generally speaking, even those that are arguing perhaps if the press says so, this isn't still quite a win, i think reality is setting in. if he wins south carolina, it is going to be very hard for anybody to argue that he is not seen as the leeblg if not presumptive nominee, presumptive might be a bitterly, but he will have run the table on the three early states. it is hard to argue that is not a positive. i am not one that thinks that the new hampshire win was something that should be minimized. i think it was a pretty decisive win. >> all of you will have your expense accounts curtailed if he wins south carolina next saturday. you spent some time in new hampshire during the primary, and you wrote something very interesting that caught me eye. you say the media is not telling you the whole story. you say the excitement in new hampshire is "barely palpable." you said the primary felt very

routine to you, but that wasn't reflected in the excited coverage pouring out of the networks, and i would say pript too. tell me about your observations and the gap you saw in the way it was portrayed? >> i think if you were paying attention to political coverage for the last few weeks, you think you're watching the super bowl or the lead-up to the super bowl. ok the ground, the energy level was much lower. not just with voertsz, but with the press that was there. it just seemed a little routine in this sort of awareness that this might be over next weekend, that romney has had some decisive wins, that there's not really a competition, but the cable channel advisory all poured a ton of money into make this a huge competition, so when you tune in on primary election night and hear people saying, well, he didn't really win because he didn't hit 40%, et cetera, et cetera, that's not really reflecting any reality on the ground from voters or the press i spoke to who are covering this. there is a real sort of resignation that this will not be the competitive election season that we saw in 2008. >> if you are a reporter covering that election season, even a good one, you go to a lot

of repetitive speeches before the candidates are hitting their marks, offering it is same sound bites, and you kind of seize on a little moment of drama here and there in order to make it sound more interesting. anybody else want to challenge the notion that the media made new hampshire sound more exciting than it actually was? >> i think -- >> there's silence. >> i think -- >> you nailed it. >> i think that's exactly right. we were trying to make it much more exciting than it was. i was at a newt gingrich speech at some point, and there was a guy in the audience. i said are you excited? he said no, i'm a little interested, but i'm not 2002ed excited. there was another guy, and i said, oh, this is a really interesting race where we got to see who is going to one wynn, and he said, well well, kind of know who is going to been brsh the real race is for second. i do think that we knew sort of where it was going to hit. >> okay. well well, do have a possibility now. up next, just when the campaign was in danger of getting

serious, stephen colbert is thinking about jumping in. he had this super pac that he has now relinquished. here's an ad it just cut about mitt romney. >> if mitt romney really believes -- >> corporatings are people, my friends. >> corporations are people, my friend. >> then mitt romney is a serial killer. [ laughing smchl ] >> mitt the repper. like these sweet honey clusters... actually there's a half a day's worth of fiber in every ... why stop at cereal? bring on the pork chops and the hot fudge. fantastic. are you done sweetie? yea [ male announcer ] fiber beyond recognition. fiber one. hey, i love your cereal there-- it's got that sweet honey taste. but no way it's 80 calories, right? no way. lady, i just drive the truck. right, there's no way right, right? have a nice day. [ male announcer ] 80 delicious calories. fiber one. i'm going to own my own restaurant. i want to be a volunteer firefighter. when i grow up, i want to write a novel.

i want to go on a road trip. when i grow up, i'm going to go there. i want to fix up old houses. [ female announcer ] at aarp we believe you're never done growing. i want to fall in love again. [ female announcer ] discover what's next in your life. get this free travel bag when you join at aarp.org/jointoday.

steven kol better is trying to make a serious point about campaign finance, i think. he formed a super pac. he toptd prove he could run for office and still transfer the super pac and still got a few

laughs in the process. >> colbert super pac transfer activate. >> ah! >> ah! [ applause ] >> i am proud to announce that i am forming an exploratory committee to lay the ground work for my possible candidacy for the president of the united states of south carolina. i am doing it! drop them, jimmy! whoa! whoa! >> nice balloon drop. is this pure political theater, or is there a form of almost journalism here in illustrating some of the absurdities involving these super pacs? >> i don't think it's pure political theater, but, unfortunately, i think the thee at ricks are going to be what people remember from this. is he trying to make a serious point about how porous the current campaign finance laws are, about coordination between super pacs and the campaign that is they support bshgs how anybody with a certain level of

celebrity can run for president. you know well, saw the donald trump finish no, ma'am in an early last year. i think to some extent this plays on this, and this primary has been marked by that. i don't really think this is going to be seen that seriously. he is also on the air with an ad. you showed a pours of it before, about mitt romney. it's a small buy, what we would normally call a fake buy in south carolina aimed at getting headlines. i don't know that people are going to see the parody element of this and just be entertained by the thee at ricks, and that's the risk whereby. >> it's a fake buy. we make it a bigger guy, and that's called free media. colbert was on abc's "this week" this morning. i wasn't running a clock, but it seemed to me he got more time than rick perry. he came on after perry. george asked him an interview about john stewart and you'll let me play for you part of that and we'll see his response to that at the end. >> roger, the chairman of fox news said about him. you said that stewart hates conservative views, he hates

conservative thoughts, he hates conservative verbage, he hates conservatives. he is crazy. it wasn't polarized, he couldn't make a living. he makes a living by attacks conservativetives and stirring up a liberal base against him. it's not going help you all that much in south carolina to have someone who according to him, hates conservatives support you. >> roger is a friend. we hit the steam room together a lot. i usually do his back. i agree with roger. i mean, that's why i am disavowing anything that john stewart does that is not accurate. i believe that john stewart is a loose canon. >> throwing jon stewart under the bus. so here he is appearing on a serious sunday morning show. is the yeetd world taking the colbert phenomenon seriously because we're tired of digging into intrick assies of what did bain capital buy and how we jumped through -- >> right. on the one hand stephen kol better is giving a great civics lesson, and that made this

theatrical and entertaining, and then they're a lot more to remember. he is playing a persona which gives him so much more wiggle room to have fun and say something possibly more truthful without having to sort of involve his true self in it. i think we saw john stewart give some of those interviews on fox where you could see he was getting frustrated and angry, and because colbert is playing a satirical person, committee have so much more fun with it, while making really, really hard points about our election system and what's wrong with it. >> but nia, this isn't just a stunt. i mean, obviously, it is a stunt, but at the same time this p pac that colbert formed, has 30,000 donors and can remain anonymous under the campaign finance rules, and could all of the attention that we in the media collectively give him, could it have some impact on south carolina, which is colbert's own state? >> absolutely not. no, i think this is just funny. i mean, i can't help but laugh when i see him. i don't see him really impacting the race down here. it looks like mitt romney and

the most recent polls has a pretty strong lead here. obviously you've got santorum and gingrich, but, i mean, voters will go to the polls, and they're thinking about thinking of a president. they're not thinking of picking a comedian. granted, obviously, steven kol better is a funny guy. he is a charleston, south carolina, native. he has something of a home court advantage here, but i think it's only fun and games. does -- is there an underlying message about super pacs and the seriousness with which a lot of journalists have taken fake candidacies, whether it's donald trump or herman cain. that is the message. ultimately people will look at this and laugh. yeah, thanks. >> you know, it will have one real impact, i predict, and that is on the ratings. colbert and maybe some of us ourz when we have him on various shows. when we come back, ron paul and the press. the congressman gets testy with another cnn reporter. we'll show you what triggered his temper.

it's the only calcium supplement that can be taken with or without food. that's why my doctor recommends citracal maximum. it's all about absorption. that's why my doctor recommends citracal maximum. now there's no need to hold back. new revolutionary scope dualblast obliterates strong food odors leaving your breath minty fresh. hey. [ male announcer ] so there's no trace of evidence... new scope dualblast.

just before the new hampshire primary dana bash interviewed ron paul spshgs she asked him about the woman in the crowd who obama supported and bash said that the woman had told her that if she had been able to shake ron paul's hand and look him in the eye, she might have voted for him, and that produced the following scene. >> now she's turned off. does that say anything about your ability to connect? >> this is a joke question. we're stopping. >> no, i'm -- >> we're moving on to the next one. >> these are joking questions because you, the media, did that to her. >> she they didn't play that part about the campaign manager saying these are joke questions. we got that off youtube. anything wrong with dana bash's question asking the congressman if he is having trouble connecting to voters? >> i'm not sure there's anything wrong with that question. i do think, though, ron paul has a lot of success with his followers by not playing nice with the media.

he sort of doesn't speak in talking points. he is not terribly interested in flattering interviews. he says what he means, and when he gets asked the same question again after he has explained it, he gets irritated, and he is more than happy to have that on tv, and i think that sort of authenticity on his part is what people who support him find so attractive about him. the unpolishedness of it. >> maybe part of the irritation -- this is the second time he has sort of walked away from a cnn interview. it has to do with the fact that, you everyone, he finished second in iowa. he finished second in new hampshire. he may well finish second in south carolina, and, yet, the press really doesn't take him seriously, i would argue, as a threat to win this nomination. >> i think that's right. i do think there's a legitimate frustration on the part of his campaign with the mainstream media. although i would say that a lot of people are taking him seriously now. there is a fairly wide recognition that he is the only one who has built up a campaign apparatus that's poised to come in second in delegates if it keeps going this way, that will make him a force to have to contend with at the gop convention and for a while going

forward, but i do think that what glenda says is accurate. this plays well for his supporters. i think it was an effective thing the last time when he was asked about the racest news letters that bore his name. he has disavowed them and says he didn't write them. i don't think asking him about whether he connects with voters is ill legitimate. michelle bachman got asked if she was a flake from chris wallace. he apologized, but, you know, it was seen as an inbounds question at the time. i think mitt romney has gotten asked questions about flip-flops and activity as well. i think this is somewhat schtick-ish. i think he has a problem with the mainstream media, but he will have to find something else to hang it on because the media is taking him seriously. >> well, i say this again. when you are in a scrum and trying to ask ron paul questions, he does not answer them. i tried to ask him questions many times, and he gave the response that he didn't like to walk and talk at the same time. i said, well, we can sit here

and you can answer a question, and he at one point said that his voice wasn't working. sde play this weird game with the press. i think there is a realization, a, that he has a disdain for this process, but also in some ways he is not really the best messenger for his own message. it seems like in some ways they pass off paul as a better messenger. >> it could be a messy process. thanks for joining us this morning. coming up in the second part of ""reliable sources" "pushing back on the "new york times" reporter's book on the obamas. cbs says it's putting more news in the morning. we'll talk about the debut of charlie rose and gale king. which candidate took an unfair slap in a new hampshire debate? this is an rc robotic claw.

my high school science teacher made me what i am today. our science teacher helped us build it. ♪ now i'm a geologist at chevron, and i get to help science teachers. it has four servo motors and a wireless microcontroller. over the last three years we've put nearly 100 million dollars into american education. that's thousands of kids learning to love science. ♪ isn't that cool? and that's pretty cool. ♪

man on tv: ...rbis and 36 homers. swings at the first pitch and fouls it deep back into the stands. [ding] [fans whirring] announcer: chill raw and prepared foods promptly. one in 6 americans will get sick from food poisoning this year. check your steps at foodsafety.gov.

noits surprise that a book called the obamas would make waves and the portrayal of the first lady. the author says the first lady clashed with rahm emanuel, and a cursing fit over her reported comment to french first lady over bruno sarkozy that she can't stand life 234 the white house. cantor talked about the book with soledad o'brien. >> your argument is that the first lady shouldn't be covered in a serious way by journalists. i look forward. >> i think if you are going to -- >> that a reported book by an outside fair observer is a totally different project. it's not a legitimate -- >> you haven't interviewed her. you haven't -- i don't know even know the first lady. i interviewed her once many years ago, four years ago. you haven't interviewed her since 2009. >> white house says in a statement, "the book is about a relationship between two people whom the author has not spoken

to in years. the author did not interview the obamas for the book, so the emotions and private most moments described in the book, which often seemingly ascribe reflect little more than the author's own thoughts." joining us now to talk about the coverage of the white house and the presidential campaign in new york, aemy holmes, anchor for "the blaze." here in washington david shoeser, chief substitute anchor for "countdown." don't all reporters draw conclusions by reporting around major public figures who won't talk to them and interviewing aides and friends and thing like that? >> sure. of course, they do. i thought it was telling in the statement that the white house tried to attribute this to the author's sthauts, not to the thoughts of those who work in for and around the obamas. particularly michelle obama, but one of the most telling stories, i think, in this boom that came out was how what leapt out for

me was the fact that we didn't see reports of this party johnny depp was in attendance, tim burton, and it was a very extrav gantt affair. either the white house press corps was colluding with the white house not to report on this event, or they didn't notice all those party trucks going into the white house with big alice in wonderland decorations. >> i read a good chunk of this book, and it's pretty good. a lot of people on the record, and she had to interview them for the "new york times" magazine years earlier, and the white house hasn't pointed any factual errors. >> the fact of the matter is michelle obama, if you read the entirety of the book, as a lot of us have, it's incredibly flattering. my surprise is that the white house would push back and essentially punch down. i think unfortunately they drew more attention to some of the foybles that jody cantor described. every white house has infighting, and i think if michelle obama looked at the entire context of this book, she would be thrilled. >> what really helped the book, in my view, was the interview that the first lady did on cbs's new morning show, that we will

talk about later in the program. here's gale king asking the first lady of the united states that question that elicited the response about, well, i'm not some angry black woman. let's check it out. >> if reading the book and you take out parts of the book you would think michelle obama is angry, she's unhappy, she feels burdened, she feels frustrated. do you feel frustrated as first lady of the united states? >> that's been an image that people have tried to paint of me since, you know, the day barack announced that i'm some angry black woman. >> first of all, there seems to be a nice chemistry there. you have known this person for a long time. >> you know, i think we should say it's no secret here at the table that we're friends. >> a friend of michelle obama to conduct this interview. >> you know, i was -- i'm very sort of ambivalent about that. on the one hand, gale king could land this interview with the first lady and we know that the first lady apparently from the obamas can be quite restrictive about access to her if she

doesn't like the coverage she's getting. we do get a glimpse into the first lady, but, on the other hand, you know, michelle obama if that interview, she did inject the issue of race when she said she doesn't like this portrayal of herself as an angry black woman. she brought that up, not gale king. i wonder if gail king was the right person to send into an intu to sort of unpeel those layers simply because she knows michelle obama so well, maybe like her, you know, flag didn't go ding, ding, ding when she heard that, to be able to ask the follow-up questions and dig deeper. >> david, gail asked good questions, but if cnn had sent someone to interview the first lady, and they said i'm a friend of michelle's, they would have been barbecued for it. >> i'm surprised that cbs wasn't barbecued for this. gail king, she's a terrific interviewer. she's gotten her share of gets. this was inappropriate. i mean, they should have sent charlie or somebody else or simply not done the interview. >> they couldn't have gotten the interview if they sent charlie. stoo that's the whole problem about access journalism that's persuasive in networks today. >> i want to turn now -- we were talking earlier about mitt

romney and although stories about his role at bain capital and cutting jobs and that sort of thing, and irks amy, i'm wondering if you think physical this controversy exploded on the -- in dissecting what goes on, the takeovers -- was it just the sort of game of assessing the political damage? >> it was just the political he-said-she-said or she said-he said in this case, and newt gingrich's super pac is not his officially, but it's fortunate that gingrich with the cigar chomping, the suitcases full of cash, and we actually dug down into what is bain capital? what is venture capitalism? what do private equity firms do? so much of the coverage did not actually inform the reader about what exactly this type of firm would do and, therefore, are these charges fair? >> i'm cure whys. did you dig down to the fact that at bain capital they actually pay a 15% kerry interest rate as opposed to the

rest of america? >> we sirnl didn't get into those sort of financials. >> why not? because that was a key part of bain capital, and that's a key argument here, and the other thing is that did you get into the fact that mitt romney essentially -- >> i'm not going make this a debate between current tv and -- your boss and my boss. however, the question that howie asked is did the mainstream media look at what does bain capital do, and i would say for the most part it didn't. >> why are we talking about that since that was howard's question. bain captain engaged in public-private partnerships, including, for example, the ad that mitt romney just ran in south carolina featuring a steel mill. that steel mill got $37 million from the state of indiana in subsidies. >> we did talk about that, as a matter of fact. >> that's great then. >> there are conservative arguments to be made against bain capital. getting to the larger point, did viewers -- did readers learn about bain capital in detail? i would say no. they learned about republicans attacking one another on the primary campaign trail. >> would i just inject this

point. wall street journal and rite reuters ran good pieces about bain. washington post fact checker glen kessler has been getting recognition for the pinocchio awards. he says this -- that got -- i'm not -- romney got three pick ohnos, and it's interesting that the referee role the ref sometimes plays getting as much attention as it is. i want to turn to one more thing about romney, and that is i'm hearing a lot this week, a lot of it on msnbc -- i even heard howard stern talking about it. that had to do with an incident three decades ago with the romney's dog. let me play a little bit from the rachel maddow show. >> mitt romney put shameus, the family's hulking irish setter, into a dog carrier and attached it to the station wagon's roofer rack. >> what were you thinking? >> this is a completely air tight kennel, and mounted on the top of our car. he climbed up there regularly,

enjoyed himself. >> are we seriously going to report on what happened with romney's dog 30 years ago? >> we didn't on current tv. this week on current tv we focused on the fact that mitt romney hasn't made public his taxi turns, and that is financial disclosure forms show that he and his wife have millions of dollars in the caymen iltsdz. we focused on the fact that how bain capital got the public-private partnerships and we haven't gone there. >> you used to work at msnbc. they love this dog story. why? >> i have no idea because there's so much other legitimate things to be talking about, and the fact of the matter is, look, maybe it's because it's entertaining, and everyone loves dogs and cats, and it's one of those stories. >> it's also a story that was reported fwour years ago. there's nothing new about it. you have the first dogs and current dog occupant of the white house when bill clinton got a dog. it's really silly. maybe it's because the public

likes stories about babies. >> maybe there's a subtext here. this guy, romney, he is kind of weird and strange. look what he did to his dog. is that why this story is gaining trakdz at least in liberal media circles? >> i suppose that maureen doud made a reference to it in one of her columns that it's this idea that sort of like unfeeling sort of tight men. he doesn't even pay attention to his dog on the top of his car. i think it's strange and i think it's unfair, but, again, puppies -- it's media fascination. >> i'll agree with this. the whole story is bizarre. the media is focussing on it. who cares what he did with his dog? the dog was in a kennel. it wasn't like he was torturing the dog. there's so many important issues to talk about. >> some super pac will do an ad on the dog. we've got a rare moment of agreement here, and amy hoemdz, david shuster, thank you for stopping by this morning. >> cbs that says morning show has more news and less fluff.

why were there so many celebrity interviews? atisfied with 50% more cash, send it back! i'll be right here, waiting for it. who wouldn't want more cash? [ insects chirping ] i'll take it. i'll make it rain up in here. [ male announcer ] the new capital one cash rewards card. the card for people who want 50% more cash. what's in your wallet? sorry i'll clean this up. shouldn't have made it rain. i want to fix up old houses. ♪ [ woman ] when i grow up, i want to take him on his first flight. i want to run a marathon. i'm going to own my own restaurant. when i grow up, i'm going to start a band. [ female announcer ] at aarp we believe you're never done growing. thanks, mom. i just want to get my car back. [ female announcer ] discover what's next in your life. get this free travel bag when you join at aarp.org/jointoday.

have more fiber than other leading brands. they're the better way to enjoy your fiber. cbs executives were adamant from the start this wouldn't be just a typical morning program, just another "today show" or "early show." this week charlie rose, gail king, and erica hill now unveiled the new luck. >> welcome to the debut of "cbs this morning." >> that suggests that you have to gain some momentum fwi bitearing down mitt romney. >> it seems millions of dollars of negative and false ads in iowa to stop the momentum which we had a purely ideas oriented campaign. almost a charlie rose style campaign. >> i'm so thrilled. this is what's to cool. you have nothing to promote. you just wanted to join in the

conversation. the big news certainly in new york and it's making national news. it's one of the number one things on twitter. beyonce had a baby girl over the weekend. >> yeah. >> so does the show work, and can it help cbs climb out of its third place hole in the late ratings? >> eric, critic. and in stan tored, connecticut, verne gay, television critic for "news day. you wrote after that first show, it's supposed to be brain food bushgt it had celebrity interviews, weather cuts-ins and everything that passes for morning tv drivel. i understand you're not eh an immediate fan. >> i wasn't, howie. i was initially very cranky, and i'm a little less cranky now, but my initial reaction was we've been down this road before. it's a morning equivalent of groundshog day again. you know, we have a beyonce story. there was a story -- a long network promotion with juliana

mrguilles. you only get a few chances in life, and you don't want to keep making the same mistakes. i feel lying cbs news is making the same mistake with this program to a certain extent. >> juliana -- has a cbs show "the good wife." television critics are entitled to be cranky, it's almost a job requirement. the show is produced by the former producer of "msnbc's morning joe." it has a lot of politics. you described it in your review as a brisk line-up of substantive news stories. you were impressed. >> well, impressed -- what i liked was that if you watch the other morning shows, "the "today" show" and "good morning america "ow you have ten or 15 minutes of fluff news. at least they waited until 8:00 to give us that constitustuff. i did like the fact that they talked about a great story that he had done on "60 minutes" the night before, and they had arman on to talk about a great story he did about the bcs bowl system, football system.

there was some substantive stuff in there that we would not have seen and probably did not see on the other morning shows, and at least there's an oasis. where there's an hour where they will talk about relatively serious news before we are inundated with the "good wife" crossover and melissa ethridge. >> there were a number of taped news reports on the kind you usually don't see in the morning, so at times it almost felt like the evening news. >> that's true. it really did. eric points out, correctly, there was some intelligent pieces there. there's no doubt about it. once again, you hit 8:00, and you're pretty much doing what the other guys are doing. there's no reason to do what the other guys are doing. you have an opportunity to do two hours of smart, intelligent news analysis. do something on iran. get an expert on that. don't do the beyonce story. there should be a sign in there saying we will never ever mention in the studio there should be a sign saying we'll never mention kim kardashian ever on the air. you get enough entertainment

fluff elsewhere. you should always be smart. cbs has been smart with "60 minutes". it's about an smart with "cbs sunday morning," and it should aspire to excellence always and keep kim kardashian off the show. >> but there is a difference, and that is that the other shows usually at 7:30 you usually see what i would call kind of a tabloid story about a missing child or love triangle murder or something like that. i didn't see cbs going there, tn that you both talk about the 8:00 hour is the audience is primarily women. that's who they're trying to appeal to in that hour. either. >> i would say as somebody who was compelled to write a "jersey shore" story not long ago, i can say that i do think it's possible to talk about the kardashians and "jersey shore" in an intelligent way. some of the problems i have with morning shows is they don't bother to do that. we get these recycled stories that are basically commercials for other programs they have within their broadcast family. there are ways to talk about pop

culture subjects in an intelligent way. and what i'm hoping that they will particularly push gaylgayl king do that. >> go ahead. beyond the story lineup, there is this undeniably important thing in the morning that's called chemistry. even though there isn't much happy talk between the hosts -- and that's by design -- how would this pairing of charlie rose and gayle king work? >> i think it's a little rough right now because charlie is a solo act. it's a brilliant solo act. he's a wonderful interviewer, a smart guy, he can handle questions on the fly as well as anybody on the planet. >> but he's probably a better interviewer when he has the luxury of doing the long-form interviews on his pbs show. a little harder when you've got four minutes with newt gingrich. >> there's no question about it. he's not -- he's a long-form

guy. now he's stuck in this short of shor shor short-form format. i think it's something he'll have to work on. >> eric. >> i was just going to say, it seems to me that what you do with the debut of a show like this is you want to make sure that sort of the format is something that you can build on. and i do think that they've come up with a format that's interesting, that they can build on, that they can grow. and i think the anchors are still quite tentative. i think their chemistry is a little odd. i think having them at this desk in the round where you can never really get a shot of the two of them together where that takes an effort, i think that's a little odd. and i do think charlie, you know, one of the things -- i don't know how fair this is to say -- but it looked like his eyes were a little red. it looked like he was a little sleepy. >> he's not used to getting up early. he did make that. i wonder if you were both being elitist media critics because there's a reason that the "today" show and "gma" are very successful. millions of people watch, right? >> all right. well, i'll say this.

"today" show on friday reminded millions of viewers why it's been so successful for 60 years. "gma" is successful, and it's been successful for a number of years, too. this is a golden opportunity to do something different. you're not going to take on "today" show. you go smart. go high class. do the best you can do and do hard news for two hours. >> we will see how they do in the second week. i've got to go. thanks very much, guys. good to see you. still to come, joe paterno opens up to "the washington post." suze orman is pitching a financial product, huh? and a cnn anchor is mocked over a misplaced call. "media monitor" straight ahead. it's the only calcium supplement that can be taken with or without food. that's why my doctor recommends citracal maximum. it's all about absorption. my high school science teacher made me what i am today. our science teacher helped us build it. ♪ now i'm a geologist at chevron,

and i get to help science teachers. it has four servo motors and a wireless microcontroller. over the last three years we've put nearly 100 million dollars into american education. that's thousands of kids learning to love science. ♪ isn't that cool? and that's pretty cool. ♪

metamucil uses super hard working psyllium fiber, which gels to remove unsexy waste and reduce cholesterol. taking psyllium fiber won't make you a model but you should feel a little more super. metamucil. down with cholesterol.

time now for the "media monitor," our weekly look at the hits and errors in the news business. we begin with kudos for "washington post" sports writer sally jenkins who landed the first interview with ousted coach joe paterno since the scandal that rocked penn state. >> i spoke with joe paterno who was dismissed in november in the wake of the child sexual abuse scandal involving his former assistant coach, jerry sandusky. >> i called my superiors, and i said hey, we've got a problem, i think. would you guys look into it? because i didn't know -- you know, i had never had to deal with something like that. >> jenkins pressed paterno on exactly what happened after he learned of the awful incident in which a young boy was sodomized in the football team showers but also portrayed him as a somewhat confused 85-year-old man who was struggling with chemotherapy treatments. "the new york times" got bashed when newt gingrich was asked about his attacks on mitt

romney's portray on capital. the former massachusetts governor then blamed the messenger. >> well, i'm not surprised how "the new york times" try and put free enterprise on trial. >> but it turns out that reuters, not "the times" published the story a perfectly fair on bain capital's purchase of the steel mill that later shut down. so does not romney owe "the times" an apology? suze orman is a host, author and financial guru who has been touting something new, a prepaid debit card called the approved card. >> it will allow you to do so many things i can't tell you all for $3 per month. there are so many features. >> these kinds of cards have drawn criticism for high fees. and beside, should someone dispensing advice to cnbc viewers be peddling her own financial product? a cnbr spokesman told" the financial times" said she's just a contractor and said that we have editorial guidelines in place. i think suze orman should stick

to the advice business and not lend her name and prestige to a money-making scheme. if i were designing an early morning show, and this is just me talking, i don't think i'd add a regular segment on calling people and waking them up. i sure don't like to be woken up. but cnn's "early start" has such a segment and things went a little awry when ashleigh banfield tried to call a comedian named chuck nice, an ill-fated exercise that landed her on "the daily show." >> hello? >> hello, chuck. >> chhello. >> chuck, this is the fbi calling. >> no. >> this is somebody else. >> oh, is this chuck nice? >> no. >> hello? >> oh, my god. >> perhaps the wrong number. >> it's bad enough you have the wrong number, some poor shmuck who doesn't get up till