powell. do republicans care about victims of natural disasters? 8% said yes, 92% said no. time to go big. let's play some "hardball." good evening. i'm michael smerconish in new york filling in for chris matthews. leading off tonight -- go for the bold. that's the advice president obama is getting from some people about his jobs speech next week. in other words, forget about

trying to get something through congress. republicans will oppose anything simply because mr. obama proposes it. go big. even unreasonable. make a statement, take a stand and then campaign against republicans who just say no. will he do that? will it work? that's our top story. plus, as if he didn't have enough problems, president obama suddenly finds himself having to worry about his base. african-americans and labor feel the president is taking them and their votes for granted. they won't vote republican but could stay home next november. also, torture the law and dick cheney. the former vice president defended again waterboarding as an effective, necessary and humane method of interrogation. but wait until you hear his answer when matt lauer asks if it would be okay for a foreign government to waterboard an american? how fast will rick perry run away from his positions that social security is a failure and unconstitutional, or that texas might want to consider seceding from the union? he's about to find out, because his fellow republicans are going on the attack.

finally, funny she doesn't look jewish. why some people seem to think michele bachmann is jewish, and that's why it's costing mitt romney some money. we start with the president's jobs initiative. eugene robinson, a columnist and for "the washington post," and howard fineman, huffington post's editorial director and both are msnbc political analysts. eugene, you wrote, president obama's promised jobs plan needs to be unrealistic and unreasonable at the very least and if he can crank it all the way up to unimaginable that would be even better. i take it from what you wrote what you're really saying is, hey, nothing's getting done in the next 15 months? >> well, what i'm saying is, go for it. you know, the plan should be what ought to happen, rather than what he thinks he can get through a republican house that's not going to let anything get through. they're not going to pass anything that he sends up there, because they don't want to. a, they don't believe in it, and b, they don't want to help him out.

>> if he throws the hail mary and you get more intransigence from the gop freshman class, where do we assistant for the next 15 months? >> the next 15 months both sides can take their case to the american people and let them decide, hear the arguments pro and con, some sort of large scale attempt to get this stalled economy working again. and i think that's a fight the president should relish, given that he's going to have a fight anyhow, and he's not going to get through the small ball kind of program that he wants to get through in the first place. >> here's one criticism of gene's proposal, and i think it's worthy provocative to kick around here tonight. doesn't he lose reasonable ground? to the extent the president is commanding more respect from independents, who are going to determine the outcome of this election, doesn't he foresee

that ground if all of a sudden he goes for bold, as we put it? >> yes, to some degree, and i don't think gene is really for, you know, impossible, crazy proposals. but i think gene's point, or the point that he makes is a good one is that the president right has deeply disappointed a lot of his democratic colleagues. you mentioned at the setup of the show, african-americans and labor, talk to members of congress as i was doing last week, and there are democratic members, they're really disappointed in barack obama. they think that -- they're not sure he has the fight in here. they're not sure he understands how politics is played in washington. they'd like to see the fire and the fight. so politically, in terms of his base, i think he's got to give some kind of sweeping speech that says, let's really get the country moving again, and do it in an aggressive political way.

>> but is that his nature? let me show you -- >> no. no, it's not. that's the problem. >> let me show you the president earlier speaking at american legion conference in minneapolis about jobs. let's all watch. >> our economy has to grow faster. we have to create more jobs, and we have to do it faster. and, most of all, we've got to break the gridlock in washington preventing us from taking the action we need to get this country moving. that's why next week i'll be speaking to the nation about a plan to create jobs and reduce our deficit. a plan that i want to see passed by congress. we've got to get this done. >> eugene, if he's talking about 6 breaking gridlock in washington i don't think he had your "the washington post" column in his hip pocket. >> no i don't think he had it in his hip pocket. if the election is going to be a referendum on the state of the economy on election day, then that is of consider trouble for the president, because the

economy is likely to still be lousy on election day. if it, however, is a referendum on two visions of the future, one in which we -- maybe we spend now but we get the economy moving. we do -- we retrain the unemployed for 21st century jobs. we jump-start new industries. we find a new path, in this complicated century versus the republican vision, which i think is old ideas, frankly, the tax cuts and deregulation. i think that's an argument that you can win. >> go ahead. >> sure. >> here's the problem. gene just said better in 35 seconds what the president needs to say than the president himself has said. what he's got to do with this stuff, i know it sounds even maybe naive, but he's got make it exciting, and optimistic as a

challenge to be met by the american people. to talk about the country's future in a way that doesn't sound like gamesmanship about washington, but sounds like an exciting adventure for the new century that we share and do together. >> i thought he was at his best when he was extemporaneous and hot under the collar that friday night that the talks broke up with john boehner. i have another concern, though, about what's to come. i don't know about your households, but next week is the worst week in my household. the kids are all going back to school. it's just post-labor day. the gop debate is going to take place. republicans are going to announce their plans, then the tenth anniversary of sept 11th. i guess mine is a political question. why in the world are they doing this next week? >> beats me. you know, i mean, you know, right after labor day is the traditional kind of start of the new year. the political new year, i guess.

so maybe it's -- maybe that's the -- >> he's got his years wrong, michael. it's the president -- the president does. you kick off the fall campaign in the presidential election year if you're a democrat on labor day, and right immediately after labor company that a big american city and talk about jobs. that's the way they used to do it. that's what they're going to try toy do. >> they've been told they have to hurry up and do something. that's why they're doing it. >> i'm only suggesting a week or two delay. is it troublesome for supporters of the president it doesn't appear right now the white house knows what's going to happen? we don't know what the white house will prone next week, but here are ideas the president is considering according to politico. the administration might push to give tax credits to businesses that hire new employees, considering giving homeowners help, refinancing mortgages even homeowners who have fallen behind in payments. there could be a job training program to help the long-term unemployed, renovating schools roads, bridges and railways.

i guess the question, eugene, first to you, is that unrealistic and unreasonable to the extent you were looking for? >> well, depends on the size of those components, but i don't think all that would get through the house, obviously. if you're talking about infrastructure, for example, you're at the very least talking about the infrastructure bank the president has described. it takes at least some federal seed money, and even though some of these may have been republican ideas, or republican endorsed ideas in the past, they're quite likely to oppose them, wouldn't you agree, as we head towards the election? >> yes. go ahead. >> react to that list of -- >> he's in a very difficult spot here, because if he goes big and goes for the long ball, as gene's saying, he'll open himself up to the charge of playing politics with it, and a notion that he descended to the republicans level on this kind of thing, but if he picks a bunch of smaller, more modest proposals that would actually in a reasonable congress have a

chance of getting through, everybody will say he's just playing small ball. he's in a very, very difficult situation. and the fact that they haven't decided on the components, and that there doesn't seem to be, at least from what i've heard through back channels any kind of sort of big overarching lift of a driving dream to this, makes me think that the thing is going to be -- is going to be picked apart the moment that it's unveiled. >> howard, you wonder, here we are on the outside looking in. you wonder if they know what they're going to do. "the washington post" reports the white house is still trying to figure what direction to take next week. behind the scenes obama and top aides had yet to reach agreement on the major tenets of the plan and it remained unclear whether the president was looking for narrower ideas or more sweeping stimulus proposals to excite the liberal base and draw contrasts with the gop." the three of us are all saying, we can agree, they're at a crossroads.

throw the long ball or go for reasonable ground. either way, dealing with the intransigence on the part of the freshmen class of the gop house? >> i think that's absolutely right. it's not unusual there would be factions inside the white house arguing for either approach. i doubt the president himself is quite so undecided. he probably has a good idea of which way he wants to go, but he hasn't shared it with us yet and we'll have to wait for him to do that. >> howard fineman, it would seem like some kind of reformation of the people who are upside-down because of their mortgages might be a smart tack for him to take. >> yeah. that's one that i know some members of congress or democrats are pushing. for example, representative john yarmouth of kentucky, who i know. he's in a swing district in kentucky but he's pretty solid liberal democrat, and a businessman by background. very much pushing for that kind of thing. an arrangement for the federal

government to refinance even if under water. apparently it's complicated to do logistically. the government owns half the mortgages. you know, you have to be why about how you do it, but the notion that the american government and the american people lent banks trillions of dollars at essentially no interest, but can't lend the american people money for their mortgages at 3% or 4% interest certainly is a powerful political talking point, and if they could find a way to do it structurally, if they could make it -- pencil, as they say in the accounting business, you're going see that in the president's speech. >> thank you both for being on the program. >> thank you. >> thank you. coming up, the question of torture keeps coming up every time dick cheney's name is mentioned. the former vice president again defends waterboarding. what if a foreign government decides to waterboard and american? we'll get to that. you're watching "hardball" only on msnbc.

this may come as bit of a surprise, but a new poll shows there's no rising anger among american muslims towards the united states. the vast majority of muslim americans surveyed by the pew research center, 79%, rated their communities as excellent or good places to live. and 56% of muslim-american are satisfied with the current direction of the country. that's compared to 38% in 2007. this poll, one of the largest ever done on muslim attitudes in the united states shows only a small portion of those polled who said they felt anti-muslim bias in their everyday life. we'll be right back.

welcome back to "hardball." former vice president dick cheney is at it again defending water were boarding which he calls enhanced interrogation and his critics call torture. today on the "today" show he insisted to nbc's matt lauer waterboarding works. >> you know if you were to conduct a poll in this country

and ask people is waterboarding torture the vast majority would say it is. >> and i would argue, matt, that it's important for us not to get caught up in the notion that you can only have popular methods interrogation if you want to run a counterterrorism program. the fact is it worked. we learned valuable, valuable information from the process and kept the country safe over seven years. >> not everybody would agree with that assessment. joining me now, former cia operate tiff and columnist bob bear, and cliff may, the president of foundation for the defense of democracies. you don't agree with what you just heard from the former vice president? >> i'm not sure it's a question of disagreeing or agreeing. but i haven't seen any evidence of it. i have seen directors come out of the cia, and i've seen cheney defend it, but we haven't really seen proof of this. i'd like to see the transcripts from the interrogations before and after waterboarding. we simply can't rely on the word of a politician or a cia director. >> to the extent it occurred as

he explained -- i'm looking at the excerpt printed this morning in the "wall street journal" relative to abu zabaida, but if it credited it did work with regard to zabida. >> the officer that came interrogated him, came out and said it didn't work. he'd got the information before the waterboarding occurred. the fbi pulled out of waterboarding, afraid it was ineffective and illegal. we've got two parts of the government arguing over this, someone has to sit down and truly look at the evidence and see who's right. >> here's what the former vice president said in his book. as a matter of fact, he pointed to two instances he maintains waterboarding had a huge impact on u.s. intelligence. with enhanced techniques became a found of information. the preeminent source on al qaeda according to the 2004 report.

ksm had become key in the al u.s. understanding of al qaeda plots and personalities. by that account, it worked. >> yeah. and i think it's important to understand a couple things. one is that waterboarding is one method of, one enhanced interrogation methods. there's a lot of other ones. the real question is, did we use any methods, or do we only ask politely for cooperation? i think it's important we use some enhanced interrogation methods. only three individuals, exactly three, were ever waterboarded. one of them, as you say, was khalid sheikh mohammed, who became our most important source on al qaeda after he was waterboarded, including among other things a plot called the second wave, meant to knock down the largest building in los angeles, and so i think the evidence there suggests that had we not used enhanced interrogation techniques including waterboarding on khalid sheikh mohammed, there would be a hole in los angeles the size of new york city. the other go ask is one of common sense. you have a terrorist. you try to persuade him to

cooperate. he won't. can fear and pain at all help persuade him to become cooperative? not torture, but fear of pain, which is what enhanced interrogation are meant for. common sense, that could probably make someone more cooperative. >> professor alan dershowitz is the most effective advocate for the ticking timebomb example. in that case, where you have someone who you believe actionable intelligence and no method short of waterboarding is working, you'd still say no? >> absolutely. i mean, why can't we do that in, locally inside the united states in criminal cases? if you had a kidnapping, you think somebody's life's in danger and have certain suspects, why not run them through the same waterboarding and everything else? if you go by the logic, why not where does it stop? i served overseas, carried a weapon and was considered an illegal combatant. i hope my government would prevent me from being waterboarded had i been

captured? it's a slippery slope when you go down this and secondly, it's illegal according to the third geneva convention. we have to come to terms with this. >> cliff, the vice president seemed to sidestep matt lauer's hypothetical question this morning about whether or not countries should have the right to torture. let's all listen and you can react first. >> would it be okay for the iranian government to waterboard that american citizen? >> well, we probably would object to it. >> on the grounds that it's torture? >> on the grounds we have obligations toward our citizens. we weren't dealing with american citizens in the enhanced interrogation program, and secondly, there were people like khalid sheikh mohammed, two or three actually waterboarded and good reason to believe they had information we could only get from them and that they knew more than anybody else. >> the criticism being, if we used this methodology, they will use this methodology, although

if one looks in the way in which mr. pertain from "wall street journal" was de-capitated, it doesn't seem they need to take their cues from us. >> they're not signing on to any geneva conventions. is shouldn't be used lightly, three individuals waterboarded, one was khalid sheikh mohammed, the other was abu zabaydah, and terrorists who knew about plots where innocent lives were at stake. even leon panetta said innocent lives were at stake. director for the cia for president obama. when you know innocent lives are at stake you may have to use these methods. i think bob bear is making logical areas. this is not just a criminal template. we killed osama bin laden. you couldn't do that if he was suspect in the holdup of a seven 11:00 and the murder of a clerk behind the counter. we killed osama bin laden had we taken him into custody, because they thought he knew of a plot we thought he knew about, if we brought him to a base and we left him alive, you would say

that's beyond the pail and terrible, but killing him is okay? i don't understand that logic. someone needs to explain it to me. >> you want to respond? >> my real problem with this, because a politician says that waterboarding works is not good enough for me. dick cheney said there was wmd in iraq and there wasn't. we really need to get to the evidence and there should be a independent commission appointed on this. >> i'm happy to have a commission. i think it's a good idea and have written columns on this that would look exactly at what techniques -- enhanced interrogation techniques including sleep deprivation, various kinds of music and light and boredom and other inherent interrogation techniques, what actually work. and probably the president say, of these methods that work, there are some some we won't use no matter what and some i will authorize and some the cia can authorize. keep in mind, the reason these techniques were used was because they were believed to be illegal, partly because they

were all techniques used on our own special forces and often on our own spies. people like you, bob, maybe not you, who are trained as spies, had to undergo waterboarding. the reason, they did, believed to be no torture, short of torture, stress and distress. the idea, nobody volunteers for torture or a hot poker in the eye or fingernails cut off, torn off, but waterboarding you can do in the afternoon and you can have dinner tonight with your family and you will not be the worse for wear. khalid sheikh mohammed is alive and well and gaining weight. >> were you waterboarded? >> no, those techniques were not used on trainees when i was inside the cia, but before i came here, i looked at the clips from the hearings in congress, and general after general have gone up there and said -- >> what they want is with this. they don't want to be using these techniques. the military is not and should not the question, whether with

the intelligence community there can be a small cadre that uses them in exceptional circumstances by the director, addressed only by the president. not the military, not by the police or every interrogator absolutely. but should it not -- would you prefer that khalid sheikh mohammed had not been waterboarded even if it means the second wave attack against los angeles would have proceeded? >> or said differently, cliff, is there anyone that would argue we shouldn't have waterboarding we had the option on the 9th or 10th of september? i don't think anybody would make that appointment. i'm sorry i'm out of time. up next, a case of mistaken identity. why some jewish voters cannot resist michele bachmann. that's next in the "sideshow." you're watching "hardball" only on msnbc. [ male announcer ] your mouth can open doors,

erase boundaries, it can earn cash and start a movement. -it can... -[ beatboxing ] [ male announcer ] it can buy time and tell time. -shhh. -[ baby giggles ] [ male announcer ] we use our mouths in so many ways to open up to the world. so make sure your mouth is at its best. crest and oral-b. life opens up when you do. tell us your story at lifeopensupproject.com.

welcome back to "hardball." time now for the "sideshow." first up, not sure what to make of this one. it's no secret that religion might play a larger role in the gop campaign than in years past, with two mormon candidates and deeply religious christians whose beliefs play a role in their political philosophy, but a piece in the "new york post" this morning points out a rather startling road block faced by the mitt romney campaign. according to the piece, some jewish donors are telling fund-raisers for romney, a mormon, while they like him, they'd rather open their wallets for the jewish candidate. last i checked, there were no jews running for president, so who's being mistaken as the jewish candidate? would you believe michele bachmann? am i missing something here? true that bachmann mentioned her affinity towards the jewish committee and boasts are working on a ka butte in israel, but it appears that her name has been fooling some people. still we're talking about the poster child for christian conservatism here.

something is not adding up. more for the 2012 campaign front. this time it's texas governor rick perry and his past is catching up to him, although perry promised to do everything he can to undo president obama's health care plan, he wasn't always so opposed to reform. seems back in the 1990s, '93 to be specific, as first lady hillary clinton was leading a task force on health care reform, she received a letter of gratitude from none other than the texas agriculture commissioner, you guessed it, rick perry. he said, i think your efforts to trying to reform the nation's health care system are most commendable, and later said, i would like to request that the task force give particular consideration to the nation's farmers, ranchers and agricultural workers and other members of rural communities. a far cry from the candidate rick perry who describes federal health care reform as "massive overreach that intrudes in the lives of every american." how things change. now for the big number everyone has been hit at one

time with late fees and apparently the pentagon is no exception. what's the culprit? 20-foot storage containers used in iraq and afghanistan, each one returned late can rack up fees over $2,000, not cheap. how much has been spent over the past decade on the pentagon's equipment with overdue library books? would you believe $720 million. initially the problem was put on the back burner since neither war was expected to last very long and clearly it's backfired. that's tonight's big number. up next, african-americans and labor unions say president obama is taking them for granted. does the president need to worry about his own base? you're watching "hardball," only on msnbc.

we want to give him every opportunity, but our people are hurting. unemployment is unconscionable. we don't know what the strategy is. we don't know why on this trip he's in the united states, we don't know that. when you let us know it is time to let go, we'll let go. >> welcome back to "hardball." that was congresswoman maxine waters speaking at a job fair sponsored by the congressional black caucus. it was at these job fares that some black leaders made clear with an unemployment rate of nearly 16% their community wants more from the president and labor leaders criticized the president on jobs, too. here's afl-cio president richard trumka.

>> i think you made a strategic mistake when he confused job crisis with the deficit crisis. a number of months ago. when he would talk about job creation and in the same sentence talk about deficit reduction, and people got the two confused, and he helped with that. >> the president will address union pleas when he visits detroit on labor day. but could dissatisfaction among these core members of obama's constituency put his re-election in jeopardy? the member of the congressional black caucus and ed schultz the host of aef the ed show." make it clear. talking about turnout when we think of this problem for candidate obama. we're not thinking whether he garners the vast majority of the vote or the labor vote? >> correct. had you look add obama's slogan, fired up and ready to go. they're ready to go but certainly not fired up. and though they may still have hope, they don't see change.

because of that you're going to see a lot of people, who, yes, he's the african-american president. we're glad about that, celebrating that, and we want to see some of the change we talked about. i think people are very hurting, as you heard in your earlier segment coming up and i think they want to see that real change. >> but ed, in firing up one component of his core constituency he runs the risk of alienating perhaps another element of the constituency he needs to win in 15 months? >> well, i think that the congressional black caucus sent a strong message to the white house. the fact of the matter is, what are their options? go support governor perry? the fact of the matter is we are living in radical times and this president is dealing with a landscape no other president has had to deal with when it comes to obstruction. i view his speech coming up on jobs as a last-ditch effort to deal with republicans and the i think congressional black caucus and the black community doesn't

want to hear this, but this is a time where patience will have to be used in a sense, because the president is exhausting every olive branch he can to show the country he's doing everything he can to work with the other side to create jobs, and everybody in this country feels a hell of a lot different when collecting a paycheck and right now we have obstruction in washington that's taking place not making it possible for the president to move ford on his agenda on jobs. that's really the crux of the whole thing. nobody's basis is going to feel good if they're not working. >> we had a good conversation at the outset of the program. eugene robinson encouraged the president to throw the long ball in his remarks next week. i said if he throws the long ball, he's ceding to the middle ground, reasonable ground, to the intransigence and becomes part of the intransigence. would you share that? >> unemployed voter, as well, and the middle class is struggling. there is no question that we've got an economic divide in this country that the president ought to be able to easily identify on the campaign trail, but he's got an image problem right now. this white house has got an image problem right now that they don't fight hard enough. i think a lot of these job fairs taking place, these

congressional members are hearing the same thing. i heard it yesterday down in new orleans. they do want more out of the white house when it comes to fighting, but fighting the republicans on what they're trying to do to middle class families. and i think that's where the level of frustration sets in. >> congresswoman what specifically would you like to hear from the president? are you looking for words, actions, a combination of both? where does it begin? >> i am looking for help and i think the american people are looking for help. let me point out a couple statistics for you. the president talks how we were able to increase pell grants. great. in the uc system and cal state system here in california, simultaneously they increased tuition by 40% over the last three years. see what does that say to our young people? in the african-american community, 39% are unemployed between the ages of 18 and 25. so when you get to what ed said,

and i'm glad to participate with you this evening, ed, is that the issue is, they're not going to go some place else, or vote for a republican. the problem is, are they going to come out and vote? because without having a job or food on the table, without having something to look forward to, people are disillusioned an i don't think you're going to see not only minorities, young people in general that were a huge base for president obama, i don't think you're going to see people sleeping, you know, in church halls and on grandma's couch to be able to come out and advocate. they're concerned and can't even afford to get there if they wanted to. >> congresswoman, i think the president, his campaign will have to make the case that things could be worse, if the republicans get in charge. they continue to favor the corporations and the wealthy in this country, the middle class will be gone. and the opportunity for those young americans that you're talking about, that's going to change. and the fact of the matter is,

that we are facing some very radical times in this country when it comes to an agenda about what our priority list is. the president's juggling a lot right now. as far as the unions are concerned, they're going to be there for this president. if we're concerned about turnout, this is what president obama is going to have to do. he's going to have to convince them that the alternative is a hell of a lot worse. it's not a good platform to be on right now but he's going to have sow explain the obstructionism that he is facing right now. >> congresswoman, allow me to show you what the atlanta mayor -- you can respond to this. >> look, the president were to start speaking directly to african-americans what he has done for them as the first african-american president that during a general election campaign that could have very adverse results, and i believe that black people understand that. i think they understand it well. >> and i think congresswoman, he

was responding in part to words like your own where you said, hey, i don't even hear president obama use african-american as an expression any longer. the political dynamic of what would happen if he began speaking in those terms? we have just a mind, but take it and respond. >> first of all, clearly, the president didn't run a campaign the first time as saying only talking about african-americans. and i don't think he's going to be reelected by doing it, either. but what i would venture to say to you is that all of the americans, whether they're african-american, latino or caucasian, in my district, even in the most affluent areas, an unemployment rate is at 10%. the young whites, 18 to 25, they have unemployment of 23%. so i would venture to tell you that a lot of people are hurting. he's going to have to speak to all of us. >> got it. >> and by speaking to us, only then will he get the ready to go fired up. >> thank you, congresswoman.

ed, the final word later tonight. >> i will do that at 10:00. thank you. >> congresswoman richardson and ed schultz. up next, texas governor rick perry seems to be the leader of the republican pack. what about his comments on secession and calling social security a ponzi scheme?

good news for congresswoman gabrielle giffords shot through the left side of her head in january. she's now walking with a cane, and writing left-handed according to her aide. that aide says giffords, seen here earlier in the month is on a path of full recovery. he also said during meetings giffords recognized and responded to every place, person and issue mentioned and asked to drive by some of her favorite local haunts. we'll be right back. ♪ ♪

[ male announcer ] sitting. waiting. hoping. that's a recipe for failed investing. open an e-trade account and open doors, seize opportunities, take action with some of the most powerful yet easy-to-use trading tools on the planet all built to help you maximize the potential of every dollar you invest. successful investing isn't done by throwing ideas against the wall and hoping. it's done by lowering your costs and raising your expectations by using unbiased research and powerful screeners to build a diversified portfolio with stocks, bonds, mutual funds, and every etf sold. and we'll help you every step of the way. with 5-star research and free education covering everything from the basics to advanced investing strategies. start now and we'll give you up to $500 and let you trade free for 60 days. visit our website, call us, open an account. e-trade. investing unleashed.

and we're back. texas governor rick perry has quickly gone from a non-candidate to the leader of the pack in the recent 2012 polls, but will his comments on secession and calling social security a failure and a ponzi scheme make him an easy target for fellow republicans? for more on perry and the rest of the gop field, let's britain in jonathan alter, and chris cillizza, who writes for the fix for "the washington post." both men msnbc political analysts. jonathan, you know, those elements that we're focusing on, are they the sort that will be criticized of perry by his combatants next week in the debate? >> you know, i don't think the secession comment will be, because in some ways, there's he was quoted out of context there, when when politifact and other fact checking and other sites that look closely at that, they found found he wasn't really calling for secession. he was saying he understood why people are mad. but the other business, social security and medicare, even tea

party members, the most radical tea party members, are strong supporters of social security and medicare. so rick perry is going to have a terrible problem on that issue going forward, michael. >> but will the gloves come off next week at the reagan library? >> i don't think so. you know, i think it's his first debate. you might see mitt romney talking about how he doesn't think america needs a career politician. that will be code for rick perry. you might see jon huntsman talking about how we need, you know, less extremism in the party. he believes in science. that will be a veiled shot at perry, but i don't think you're going to -- he's going to go -- >> you're telling me you think they'll take a pawlenty in the

debate? >> not a full pawlenty, a half a pawlenty. >> watch this now. rick perry leads the pack of republicans in the latest cnn opinion research poll. he nearly doubles mitt romney while palin, bachmann and giuliani lag behind. if you take out giuliani and sarah palin from the field, he still leads romney by 14 points. you've talked a lot and written about recently the palin factor. i guess it's not the cleanest survey. seems to me a giuliani voter would go for romney if giuliani is out of the race, and a palin person is probably going to go for for perry. what are the dynamics? >> look, first of all, it's hard to gain this out because a perry voter, excuse me, palin and giuliani voter, they are not the same. the one governor to endorse rudy giuliani's 2008 presidential campaign, rick perry. odd, because ideologically they are far apart, but whether he endorses him down the line, he endorses him. so maybe some of those folks come along. my argument with the race at the moment, i agree with jonathan about the fact that i don't

think you'll see any of the top tier people take a shot at perry. i do think huntsman, santorum, gingrich, some of those people might, but rick perry is still in his honeymoon period. the guy announced his campaign august 13. we're not even to the end of august yet, so i think the first month or so you're not going to see anyone take the shots, but that said, september 7 and october 11 or 15, some time in there, rick perry is going to come under serious debate scrutiny. >> i maintain it's early, but i can make the argument mitt romney stands the best chance in a general election. if that's true -- >> no question. >> okay, probably the three of us might agree on that, how would mitt romney make the argument and would the gop base care? we want to get rid of obama, i'm the only one that can do it, nobody else on the stage stands a shot.

>> you're better situated to answer that question than i am because you know a lot of republicans, but my sense is this year they are looking for somebody who appeals to their hearts less than their, you know, rational minds in terms of who's going to be the best candidate against barack obama. right now republicans think anybody can beat obama. they are so down on the president they believe 9% unemployment is unsustainable for his reelection campaign, so i think they are going to go for the person they like best and that might be rick perry, but he's going to have a problem with this book, "fed up." this book did not come out five years ago or ten years ago, it came out ten months ago and is full of bobby traps for rick perry. he wants to appeal the new deal, and a lot of the new deal is popular with the american people. >> jonathan, the sort of thing we have a tendency to sit back

and say oh, my god can you believe he or she said that, that's exactly what a certain part of the gop base wants to hear. that's what earns you stripes in a primary process. chris, you take the final minute on that issue. >> you're right, and i think what we have seen throughout primaries, and i put democrats and republicans in this boat is they run and try to moderate in a general election. the question is whether rick perry can put enough of a foot in both camps. can he be tea party and be enough establishment that he isn't by winning the nomination defaulted out from winning a general election. people like michele bachmann and sarah palin would struggle to get back towards the middle. >> we're out of time, but we're going to find out soon. thank you jonathan alter, thank you chris cilizza. don't forget, 8:00 p.m. eastern,

the republican candidates debate here on msnbc live from the reagan library in california and it's moderated by our own brian williams. when we return, let me finish with the political gaffes of michele bachmann.

let me finish tonight with republican presidential candidate michele bachmann and her tendency to commit gaffes on the campaign trail.

her public pronouncements made waves again over the weekend, this time it was in florida when she said i don't know how much god has to do to get the attention of the politicians, he said are you going to start listening to me here? listen to the american people, because the american people are roaring right now, they know government is on a morbid obesity diet, and we have to reign in the spending. bachmann later insisted she was joking. look, i'm probably more sympathetic than most when it comes to public/political faux pass, i don't know how dangerous it can be, i made plenty of mistakes. during an interview with ronan tinan, i took the step to ask him to walk us through the tremendous adversity he'd encountered in his life. famously said a gaffe is when a politician tells the truth. everybody makes mistakes, the question is when do the miscues

cross the line from a harm lesser less error to a trend worth monitoring? bachmann had said the revolutionary war started in concord, new hampshire. she mixed up the birth place of john wayne with that of a serial killer and encouraged supporters to celebrate his birthday on the king's death. despite its collapse in 1991, it's true that bachmann isn't the only candidate capable of offering silly public statements that require embarrassing clairifications later. what should be concerning is the nature of her blunders. bachmann consistently eres in her presentation of consistent facts. her's are mistakes. if the faux pas parade continues, it would be fair for voters to reconsider their support for bachmann due to her