>> ask not what your country can do for you. >> i can hear you! >> the time for change has come. 's republicans say, not so fast, it in tir interests to frustrate the president. will the g.o.p. make sure the next two years are gridlock? don't do us any favors, just when republicans have barack obama right where they want him, along comes sarah palin. is she a nightmare for the g.o.p. washington crowd and a dream for the obama team? andin fally, the marriage divide. the royal engagement has

fascinated the world, but the latest trend shows almost half of americans say marriage is obsolete. more and more, matrimony for the richest and best educated. welcome to the show. i'm norah o'donnell. christh matews is away this week. we have today, hdnet's dan rather, the bbc's katty kay, nbc's kelly o'donnell and "time magazine's" rick stengel. and president obama invited the republicans to a conference this week and the republicans have a scheduling conflict. some senate republicans refusing to consider the agenda during the lame duck session as the white house is urging. since the election, is seems like little has changed. mitch mcconnell doesn't even try to sound cooperative. >> some have said it was indelicate of me to suggest that

our top political priority over the next two years should be to deny president obama a second term. butth fact is, if our primary legislative goals are to repeal and replace the health spending bill, to end the bailouts, cut spendin and shrink the size and scope of government, the only way to do all of those things is to put someone in the white house who won't veto any of these things. >> mcconnell and john boehner are under pressure from the tea party and sarah palin, part of her plan in case she runs for president. in this interview, palin pushed her point. listen to her limp endorsement of boehner for house speaker. >> i don't cringe of the idea of boehner being the leader of the house at all because he has received a message, every incumbent has received this message from the american public. >> isn't there some pressure on the republicans not to deal? >> all kinds of pressure. and i think they're saying it

straightforwardly. politically, they seek to cut out president obama's heart until he's delivered to the dogs. that's what it's going to be. they've said it directly. that's in their political interests and that's what they'll try to do between now and 2012. >> rick, is there upside for the republicans to work and compromise with president obama? >> speaking of dogs, politicians are like pavlovian dogs. the lesson they've learned is not to cooperate. they don't see an upside because compromise seems to benefit obama. obama was going to be the first kumbaya president and if they compromise, it goes to his credit. >> is this a sign that republicans won't deal on foreign policy issues? >> at first blush, people are seeing this as a way for republicans not to go for something the president is trying to pass, but there is another layer to it. when you talk to republicans in the senate, they take very seriously the idea of ratifying

a treaty and there's real substance they're concerned about. some are happy it might be an issue where the president wouldn't get a victory, but more broadly and to give them their due, they say there are substantive issues and they need more time and they don't want people to look at it only in terms of politics, but to see if bigger than that. >> i know you say substantial things, policy differences they have with the president, and yet, katty, the president was there can kissinger by his side, with baker by his side, albright, everybody was around the president saying we've got to get this done. >> but that's the establishment, norah. if there is going to be a division and a wing of the republican party that says do not on any issue, on any case, even on its merits, compromise with the president, it's going to be the tea party. and if the tea party is driving the energy in the republican party, republicans in washington, republicans in congress, are going to have to look carefully at how they deal with them. the tea party is saying, we don't care about whether it's in

the country's interests, the foreign policy interests or economic interests to deal with the party, we want to be the party that obstructs barack obama. many of them ran specifically on stopping and on checking barack obama so that is their priority and the establishment is going to have to either listen to them or try and find a way to overcome that energy. >> how much ill will is there? the president didn't meet with them for two years. he scheduled a meeting at the white house and the republicans, sorry, we have a scheduling conflict. >> i think there's going to be a lot of that kind of push-back. it's very difficult to envision overall in the main a situation that is not classic gridlock. i'm not saying nothing can get through. but you're looking at gridlock. the danger for both parties, for president obama and the republicans, because if i read the "post" correctly, people voted saying we are tired of washington not getting it done. unemployment is up, jobs are not being created, the economy is not moving forward.

and people may throw them all out the next election. >> our nbc news "wall street journal" poll showed that republicans want their candidates to stick to their principles. >> and one of the things you can do is to take it a layer deeper, they weren't ready with the negotiating points. if they get one bite at the apple, a high-profile meeting with the president, they want everything to be organized among the members about what they're willing to give and not give. they want to be ready to sit across the table from the president. >> this is the point that dan raises, in 2012, will american voters more reward confidence and actions that have been seen to be effective for the country, or will they reward politicians who stood on principle and opposed the white house expansionist agenda as they see it. i think it will be a mixture of the two, because if the government -- >> 2012, there's not going to be

many cross-over votes. the republicans are betting, okay, if i stonewall, if i don't do anything, independents will side with me. obama has to make a bet, if i try to be bipartisan and lure the other people, il'l get independents. but every dynamic for 2012 makes for gridlock in 2011. >> but if the republicans stiff the president on start, can't the president use that politically to say, they won't even deal with me on that. >> 1948, run against a do-nothing intransigent congress, say, look, i was elected to work together, and then he will run against the republicans. >> but can he develop into a real slugger? harry truman said from the start, okay, these republicans aren't going to give me anything, i'm going to fight them to the last hand to hand. we haven't seen that in president obama and die-hard obama supporters are getting nervous, does he have it in him

to take a stand and take it to them? >> he may get his mojo back if he has an opponent. sarah palin has a new book and is talkingo t the "new york times." kelly, will she be part of the opposition to the white house that gives the president back his mojo? >> what's interesting to me on capitol hill is one name i almost never hear is sarah palin. in the political world we're covering, she is a forceful presence, but among senators and members of the house, remarkably, if you say tea party, they say jim demint or michelle bachman. her world within that establishment of office holders is strangely quiet. >> but they have a show on tlc. >> no, they don't. >> it shows how out of touch they are. you go to anywhere else in america and you'll hear someone mention sarah palin's name. only on capitol hill is it a name that's not mentioned. and you said something earlier, norah, that if sarah palin plans to run -- listen, she's running.

>> she's not just selling books? >> i do not think so. >> she's creating a hybrid model of the politician, entertainer. it's really fascinating. >> the risk for obama in a sense, he's actually running against her, so from his point of view, until she's declared, the best policy is to pretend she's not there. >> we bottom-line this with the matthews mirror. the question was, is sarah palin's high profile next year a plus or minus for president obama? not even close. 12 to zippo. the meter says, she's a plus. kelly? >> well, i think if you are president obama and his supporters, she is such a foil, and allows him to be the person in office, the person who's trying to appear statesmanlike and who has abundant and growing experience against someone who is entertaining and provocative

and that contrast is something he can use at the moment. >> what's the downside of having sarah palin out there? >> the downside for him, remember that line she said, how's that hopey chain working for you? it takes a little bit of his majesty away from him. she can throw stones in from the outside. if has to seem above it all but someone is cracking at you the whole time, that's not so great. >> she can deliver a one-liner better than any other republican. >> i don't think it's necessarily plus for president obama because she's on television, it's all sarah, all the time, she's everywhere and to be hammering away for two years at him with relative impunity and the business of, he can dream of having her as an opponent. it's a mistake to underestimate sarah palin, whatever you think about her. something new is happening and going on out there and she might

not be all that easy to beat as a candidate if she reaches the nomination in 2012. >> before we break. 10 years ago this weekend, we were in the midst of the long national nightmare known as the florida recount and we were just learning that the whole election could be decided by the woman who became a symbo of florida's controversial handling of the whole thing. katherine harris. here is some of our msnbc coverage that night. >> we are back and suddenly a woman named katherine harris is a big name in the news. she is the secretary of state for the state of florida and she may have the power in her office to end this election friday at midnight. norah o'donnell watches politics for us. she has more. >> good evening. tonight, the future of the florida election and the fate of the presidency may hinge on just one woman, the secretary of state, katherine harris. >> who was that little girl? [laughter] >> of course, katherine harris

was made for that weekend sketch on "saturday night live" and it was snl's first-ever skit involving someone very near and dear to us. >> welcome back, i'm chris matthews. should we throw out the constitution? everything going to hell or what? join us tonight is the woman at the center of this controversy, the secretary of state in florida, katherine harris. >> hello, chris. thanks for having me. >> many people have accused you of being a part of the republican party. >> chris, i am a public servant. i serve the people of florida and will abide by their directives and guidelines. bush won. >> i'm sorry? >> george bush won. we won. i helped him win and he's the president and when he's president he's going to make me an ambassador. >> aren't you worried of the florida supreme court? >> the florida supreme court can chomp on it, i'm getting out of

this backwater state. all i have to do is practice smiling for my ambassador job. what do you think of this? >> good god! >> that was great. and when we return, a huge week for one newly engaged couple. why did they wait so long? [captioning made possible by nbc universal]

k.acelcome b it was a thrilling week f theor tu fure king and queens and billions of the rest of us who love the fairy tale, william and catherine, both 28 and together since college. whatookhe tm so long?

>> weo tok our time. >> back to reality and to america, there's a brand new study of marriage on rick stengel's "time magazine". the story is entitled, "who needs marriage?" if you look at people who finished high school or less, 45% consider marriage unnecessary. 50 years ago, 68% of americans under 30 were married and believe it or not, that is down to 26% of people under 30 today. rick, why have we lost faith in marriage? >> we haven't really lost faith in marriage. this is a study that we did with the pugh research center. people believe in marriage more than they ever have. while 30% of people under the age of 30 believe marriage

should be obsolete, 90% of them want to be married. marriage is aspirational. the problem is that marriage has become more a luxury. high-income, high-educated people are getting married at a higher ratean th low income or low educated people. that's a problem for america, a problem for social mobility, a problem going forward because marriage once upon a time in our society was a way of people moving from classes to classes and in fact, one of the unintended consequences of the women's movement is that what you have now, instead of the old days doctors marrying nurses, doctors are marrying doctors, lawyers are marrying lawyers and they're isolating themselves in an elite class. >> there's an old saying that a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle. isn't it that a woman needs a husband like a fish needs a bicycle? >> this is part of the decline in the numbers of people

supporting marriages because i think a lot of women who are income-earners, themselves, professional women who might have gone into marriage for financial stability don't need that anymore or they get into a marriage, they earn their own income and they can get out again much more easily. >> who does marriage benefit? >> certainly, children. there's a lot of evidence that when people want to have children, they look to those institutions, as people do traditions of every type, from holidays to families, they move back to where their parents live, because of children. and there is the benefit of security when we talk about the benefits marriage permits in a very kind of financial transaction of life. all of the things that you can get as a husband or a wife that you don't get simply as domestic partners. >> should we be worried about so few young americans getting married? does it say something about the state of our union? >> a study emphasizes, i think,

the crushing of the american middle economic class. middle-class people, this study shows, it's become a luxury to be married. it hasn't always been such. it was at one time a way that you could make your way up. if you're going to continue to mash the middle class and both republican and democratic administrations have done it for the last 40 to 50 years, certainly the last 35 to 40, it will affect marriages, the very id of the country. >> before we go, id neeo t play thsome fingouor y andge t you to translatthfor e e rest of us yanks. >> we take the mickey out of each other a lot? what does that mean? >> it means teasing somebody or mocking them. it's an old cockney rhyming slang expression, which was an

alternative to taking the piss which was deemed as too rude for good society. >> it sounded like swahili? >> i think that's brilliant. keep the american accent. scoops and predictions out of keep the american accent. scoops and predictions out of the notebooks of these top ["knock on wood" playing] every five minutes, chase pays for someone's eligible credit or debit card purchase. [beep] chase picks up the tab. it could be you. chase picks up the tab. it's another great reason to bank with chase. chase what matters. sign up at a branch today.

>> dan, tell me something i

don't know. >> the outsourcing business is booming in india. presidential trips, american presidential trips come and go and the american president can talk about creating jobs, but in india, outsourcing is booming and a lot of american companies are at the job fairs in india to hire indians to do outsourcing jobs. >> you have a story about this on hdnet after thanksgiving? >> indeed, we do. >> in both the bipartisan plans out there at the moment from the last 10 days to reduce the deficit, one item is the proposition to tax sodas. this makes sense in terms of health of americans. it also makes sense in terms of reducing the deficit. it would raise revenue. it will go nowhere because people think it's indicative of a manny state. >> i've been covering the rangel ethics trial. charlie rangel was accused of soliciting donations for a

college improperly. the moment he became chairman of the powerful ways and means committee, donations poured in for a good thing but the prosecutor said that shows how he was viewed as powerful and the danger a new congress should be aware of. >> the republican governor's association met in san diego this week and they wanted to coalesce around a figure like they did in 1999 like george bush but instead of that, they were busy taking the mickey out of sarah palin and mitt romney. >> when we return, the big question of the week, would am groped or profiled before they fly?

>> welcome back. this week we saw those very intimate new screening techniques at the airports. our question -- would americans rather be profiled or groped before they fly? dan? >> profiled. not my choice but i think people overwhelmingly would prefer to be profiled over groped. but keep in mind, the country is at war and what we see at the airports is at least one little reminder that we're a country at

war. >> katty? >> i'm tempted to say it depends on who's doing the groping. but i think dan is right, profiling, although many people who are experts in the field say it doesn't work. >> the more you fly, the less you want to be groped. and i'm projecting there will be grope rage at some point. >> rick? >> i also think people want security but are not willing to pay the price for it and both of those are the price and we might have to pay both. >> thanks to a great roundtable, dan rather, katty kay, kelly o'donnell and rick stengel. thanks for watching.