and that's not the case. if you look at the over a trillion dollar debt that college kids are stranded with, all that is affecting the middle class in a long way. >> arianna huffington, thank you very much for joining me tonight, arianna. >> thank you, lawrence. >> have the last word online at our blog and follow my tweets @lawrence. "the rachel maddow show" is up next, and filling in tonight again is melissa harris-perry. hi, melissa. >> hi, lawrence, thanks. and thanks to you at home for staying with us for the next hour. rachel has the night off and we're going to be coming to you tonight live from the great city of new orleans, a city which at this moment is being physically consumed by this. no, despite all the outward appearances, that is not, in fact, a haboob, but it's a new orleans version of a haboob.

that right there, that big ominous looking grayish-brownish cloud is the result of a giant marsh fire that's been burning for three days now. literally swampland that's caught on fire and is blanketing the city in this lovely haze. if you have the fortune to be walking around new orleans right now, this is what you're breathing in, a thick smokey stew. i know that sounds sort of organic, nice, maybe even southern, but this big plume of smoke is actually a big old problem. first off, it's really dangerous for anyone who has serious breathing conditions, those folks have been warned to stay inside, and second of all, officials here in louisiana can't quite figure out how to put the darn thing out. marsh fires are a fact of life for people who live in marshy

areas like new orleans, they happen. the thing is, marshes are remote areas, they are difficult to get to so your options are limited when a fire breaks out there. this is one option, this is called a marsh buggy, it's basically a big tractor-like vehicle that can maneuver in and around these hard to reach swamps. some models have these long retractable arms that turn over soil that's burning and help stamp out the fire. louisiana, unfortunately, doesn't own any marsh buggies, the department of agriculture wanted two of them, they requested two of them, but they were cut out of this year's budget. the state couldn't afford them. here's another option, big airplanes that can fly over the fire and dump thousands of gallons of water on the flames to help put it out. the problem right now for residents of new orleans as reported by wdsu, the local nbc affiliate down here, the new orleans fire department said several airplanes would be needed and they are costly.

big water-dumping airplanes are just too expensive. the state can't afford it right now, so welcome to new orleans, a city currently being strangled by a thick layer of smoke and ash that you can taste in the back of your throat. it's not gumbo. the national guard has begun to send helicopters in, but the real end game was acknowledged by a state legislator today, we're going to reach out to the federal government to see if they can bring in assets. states like louisiana are so strapped for cash right now that a local emergency situation like this one in new orleans, a marsh fire, may ultimately require federal help. here was a scene today in the state of vermont. hurricane irene left in her wake the worst flooding in that state in nearly a century, and today officials began air lifting food and water to 13 towns in vermont that were left unreachable by vehicle as a result of the flooding irene left behind, and

like new orleans, vermont is also looking for help. the head of fema toured the damage by helicopter today and here was the scene in the state of new york, a handful of towns remain cut off tonight as a result of roads and bridges that had been flooded there by irene, and today that state's governor, asked for federal assistance to help clean up the mess. today, north carolina's governor, bev perdue, reported that hurricane irene destroyed more than 1,000 homes in her state and caused at least $70 million in damage. notably, she made that announcement while standing alongside janet na epal nepalatano.

you as a state can't predict when a disaster is going to strike, you can, of course, set aside money in a disaster fund, but often the scale of the disaster is more than a state can handle. that's where fema comes in, and right now, as states all across the country attempt to pick up the pieces from a 2011 that has essentially been one disaster after another from wildfires out west, to floods and tornados in the heartland, to hurricanes on the east coast. right now we learned that fema, the agency all of those states rely on is running out of money. it has less than $1 billion left to help those states rebuild. and why is fema all of a sudden broke? well, in part, thank you, house republicans. the ongoing disputes over deficit reduction and spending cuts have threatened what is a routine annual exercise to

replenish fema's coffers. in the past, emergency aid funds has been treated as, well, emergencies. no more says house majority leader eric cantor. >> in instances like this, yes, there's a federal role, yes, we're going to find the money. we're just going to need to make sure there are savings else where to continue to do so. >> as much of the east coast sits paralyzed by hurricane irene, house republicans are now threatening no additional funding for fema unless more budget cuts are made else where. sorry. at this hour, mandatory evacuation order is in effect for the town of wallington, new jersey. the town "looks like a third world country." wallington sits alongside a river that is due to crest tonight. 4,000 residents in nearby paterson, new jersey, have been ordered to leave in what's being called tonight an unprecedented evacuation, and as governor

chris christie and governors along the eastern seaboard go to the government for help, will the help be there? to help me answer the question, congressman frank pallone of new jersey. thank you for joining me tonight, i know it's been a tough week. >> thanks. >> what's the latest on the ground there in new jersey in regards to the flooding? >> there's a lot of damage, not so much from the ocean, which is what we expected from the hurricane, but from the rivers, whether the rariton or delaware, it has been a tremendous amount of flooding. as you can see from some of these pictures, in some cases it's getting worse even though it's a few days after the hurricane. >> look, i'm pretty distressed as someone sitting in a city that is currently being overcome by basically a marsh cloud that

eric cantor is basically making federal disaster relief funds part of political gamesmanship. shouldn't emergencies be separate from politics? >> absolutely, melissa. this is outrageous on the part of cantor and the house republican leaders. the fact of the matter is, traditionally, i've been in congress for 24 years now, emergency supplemental appropriation bills were for that, emergencies. the reason they bypassed the budget process is because we wanted to get the money to the states and the towns and the people quickly because they were in distress. so to suggest now we're going to wait around for months or even a year while we can find funding cuts else where and have this debate, and, you know, horse trading if you will for a long period of time and everyone's going to wait when they are in distress, i think, is outrageous. basic government function is to help people in distress, if the government doesn't do that, what

is its function? so i really resent the fact cantor and other house republican leaders are trying to make this into some policy or political fray. it's outrageous. >> it's been said that disasters do not discriminate, you know, ultimately when that flood water comes, it doesn't care if you're a democrat or a republican, whether your house is red or blue, so given we have people on both sides of the aisle suffering in these states from disasters, how is this going to play out for republicans politically, given they've made it political? do you think eric cantor and house republicans are going to reap a kind of political whirl wind behind this? >> well, i hope they recant, in other words, cantor has made this statement, i know he's repeated it again or his staff said he means it, but i'm hoping both republicans and democrats from the areas impacted by hurricane irene will simply step up and say this is not acceptable.

again, it's a question of not getting the relief out, because if you don't do this quickly and do some kind of emergency it's going to be distressful for the states and towns and people. you're talking fema, grants and loans for individuals and small businesses, you're talking about money that goes to localities to pay for police and fire and rescue workers. i mean, it just doesn't make any sense to treat this as, you know, as if you would treat something that you can, you know, sit around and argue over for months and years. that's not the way we do business. that's not what the federal government's role is, so i'm hopeful that cooler heads prevail, i guess, is the best way to put it. >> sure, and representative pallone, you're on the democratic side of the aisle, but your republican governor chris christie has had an awful lot of praise for fema's

response in the past couple of days. what's your opinion on how fema has responded to new jersey? >> i think the cooperation with fema, the state, the governor, local governments, is unbelievable. you mention you're from new orleans, i couldn't help think because of katrina and other hurricanes we've experienced, that when people were forewarned and said you have to take preparations and take this seriously, they did take it seriously. i think in part because they remembered katrina and what happened in new orleans and they believed this was real, but certainly the governor, the president, and the local mayors all reenforce that and made sure people got out and were evacuated so that we didn't have even more damage or loss of life than we had. >> well, certainly all of us in new orleans are happy to see that things are operating better at the federal level this time than they did in 2005, so

democratic congressman frank pallone of new jersey, thank you so much for your time tonight. >> thank you, melissa. there is one story that matters above all these days in america, jobs. and in job news tonight, the story is coming up, yes, as in come ing up on this show and also coming up as in we know a lot more about what's coming up from the republicans and the president about the biggest crisis in the country, and that's coming up next. [ female announcer ] we always try to save you even more money when you switch your car insurance to esurance. i could save 'em 522 smackers. you talkin' dough? bread. benjamins? scratch. greenbacks. moolah. cheddar... simoleons! don't try to out-save me. [ female announcer ] any way you say it, $522 is the average amount saved by people who switched to esurance. 522 bucks! [ female announcer ] to find out how much you'll save, call 1-800-esurance or visit esurance.com right now. that's 1-800-esurance or go to esurance.com.

i admit it, while watching former vice president dick cheney making the media rounds plugging his new memoir, i kept yelling at the screen, "you've got to be kidding me, this is not the way that it happened!" luckily, this show has a section devoted to debunking public misinformation.

we've been pretty critical on this show of the job's plan that was put forth by house republicans this spring, ten pages, clip art, gigantic type, but the unemployment situation right now, particularly long-term unemployment, is so dire that i want to put all that criticism aside. let me said right now that if the republican plan is the plan with the greatest chance of creating jobs for american citizens, then i am onboard. i am interested in seeing what the consequences of the jobs proposals are than how they impact anyone's political futures. house republicans have expanded

their jobs plan this week, specifically the section they want to get rid of burdensome regulations. eric cantor told members in a memo yesterday that when congress returns, republicans will be seeking the repeal of job-destroying regulations to create middle class jobs. environmental regulations, union rules, health care plans, house republicans say those are the things that are impeding the creation of new jobs in this country, and for that reason, they want them gone. it's a radically different approach than the plan being put forth by progressive members of the house. democratic congressman george miller says he wants to offset job losses, especially all the public jobs that have been lost by giving local governments and states $61 billion to rehire public workers. remember, public workers are teachers, policemen, firefighters, who have lost their jobs due to budget cuts, which sounds a lot like

something the president said in a radio interview today. >> we've got the capacity right now to help local school districts make sure that they're not laying off more teachers. we haven't been as aggressive as we need to, both at the state and federal level. >> the president added that he predicts the jobs proposal he is planning to unveil next week could create an additional one million jobs in the u.s., but according to one report, the broad strokes of the plan are still up in the air. president obama is reportedly torn between going big and proposing sweeping stimulus ideas to draw contrast with the gop who are unlikely to actually pass these proposals in the house or a more modest and narrow agenda that has a better chance of getting passed by republicans. to help me sort through these plans, joining me now is economist dean baker,

co-director for the center of economy and technology research, dr. baker, thank you for your time tonight. >> thanks for having me on, melissa. >> listen, i like clean air, i like clean water, but if you tell me at this point cutting the epa will, in fact, create more jobs, the situation seems desperate enough i'm prepared to give up clean air and water. is that realistic and something that can have a marginal impact on job creation? >> this is almost as though we've gone into an alternative universe of the the '90s were not that long ago, go back to the late '90s, we were creating three million jobs a year. we haven't instituted a whole set of stupid regulations that suddenly brought the economy to a halt, in fact, the job growth stopped under president bush. again, not all his fault, but that's when the economy stopped creating jobs. president obama, i'd like to see more regulations in many areas. you can find stupid ones, but

they are not big. >> you know, we're often criticized in media for not giving information, for just giving ideas or opinions, so i'm asking right now an informational question, what do you see as the bottom line for what we must do to get the unemployment rate down? >> there's a couple of things, the basic story is we've lost about $1.4 trillion in demand because of the collapse of the housing bubble. that was in construction, that was in consumption, you have to replace that. the obvious way to do that is with federal stimulus. president obama went a little bit of the way, the stimulus package was $300 billion a year. that's not enough to replace $1.4 trillion, and that's ended now. so you could go the route of a much bigger stimulus, but if we can't go that way, this might be a politically viable route, some republicans like this, work sharing, let's divide up the work that we have and keep

people employed. instead of having firms layoff ten people, have 50 people work 20% fewer hours, incredibly successful in germany, their unemployment is lower today than the start of the down turn even though their growth has been no better than the united states. so there are ways to do it but it requires thinking a little differently. >> so you've offered two different options, a really big stimulus or smaller, more modest plan on job sharing. what do you think the president should do, go big or something more modest republicans might be onboard to do? >> well, i'll tell you, i like the big thing, because i hate to see us waste potential, but the worst potential is having people out of work for long periods of time. if you can talk to republicans and get some of them on board, i know some of them are interested, i don't know, i'm not sitting there cutting the deals, but if you think you can pull the republicans onboard on that, i think you'd be crazy not to go that route.

>> speaking of getting the republicans onboard, do you think that there's anything the president can do to achieve job creation if the republican congress won't, in fact, come along, even with modest proposals? >> well, it's very difficult. i mean, you need to spend money. absence of spending money, it's hard to see how you do that. there's things you can talk about if the f.e.d. were more aggressive, that would help, but that will be difficult. if the dow were to come down, that would help. there are things the president could try to do to bring the dollar down, but absent congress is going along, it's very difficult. >> this is a tough situation, i appreciate you taking the time to think through it with us. dean baker, co-director for the center of economic and policy research, thank you for your time. texas governor rick perry loves small government, and what is small enough? perry likes government just the right size to squeeze into the

most personal corners of your life and your body. texas' jaw-dropping disregard for your rights and your privacy is just ahead.

this week we learned that disposable personal income in the united states increased in july, even more than it did in the month before. disposable personal income, that's the money you have left to pay your bills and buy other stuff after you pay your taxes, so when we're looking for any

signs of life in this sluggish economy, an increase of income is great news, right? maybe not so much. this week's news got an economic analysis -- excuse me, analyst, thinking about a presentation he put together from the u.s. census bureau. the question is who exactly is getting that increase in income? as he so colorfully illustrates, in 2009 the top 20% of households took in half of the income earned in america. the middle fifth took in 15%, that's the red slice on this graph, and the bottom fifth took in the green slice. proof positive of the ever-increasing gaps among the rich, the middle class, and the poor in the u.s. further erosion of the american dream. and it's not like this is some new economic phenomenon, in fact, over the past 42 years while the average income has increased dramatically, the

average household income for the middle class and the poor has remained virtually flat. and when adjusted for inflation, the visual is just staggering if not more so. so the erosion of the american dream did not begin with the obama administration. it began a long time ago, but as president, mr. obama's greatest legacy or defeat will be the extent to his administration that does something to halt this erosion. president obama has limited unilateral power. he must govern with a hostile republican majority in the house and a filibuster crazy minority in the senate. the only basis by which we should judge the effectiveness of this congress is the extent they work to lessen the gap. the work that matters is the work that directly responds to the growing gap in incomes. anything else, the deficit,

abortion, so-called protecting marriage, is a distraction to what is actually happening in this country. so while the rich are getting richer, everyone else is left to fend for themselves, and our lawmakers continue to argue over less pressing issues, rome burns. those flat lines that you see there at the bottom, that's the base of the democratic party. the tea party often claims to represent those red and green lines, they claim to be the voice of ordinary americans, but those americans need relief. they need the congress and the president to do something about the economy, about jobs, and to do something quick. philosophical debates about the size of government are irrelevant when the size of the income gap is growing. sure, getting the ball rolling on creating jobs is key for president obama to ensure his base turns out for him next year. but the issue is bigger than who secures the white house in 2012. maybe this graph is enough to doom the president's reelection

hopes, but our bigger concern should be if it spells doom for the american dream. [ male announcer ] these are volunteers... our neighbors putting their lives on the line. and when they rely on a battery, there are firefighters everywhere who trust duracell. so, look for these special packs to see how you can help your local volunteers. duracell. trusted everywhere.

tonight the congressional black caucus is holding a town hall meeting before its final jobs fair in the morning, it's part of a series of such affairs across the country. in the past month, some members have expressed anger and frustration about what they perceived to be president obama's lack of a specific racial agenda. none more clearly than the host of tonight's final affair, democratic congresswoman maxine waters of california. waters is right when she points out the unemployment in black communities, which now stands stubbornly at an unbelievable, unacceptable 16%. but while she's right about the economic suffering felt in black communities, waters' decision to lay the reason at the president's feet is puzzling. first, it's hardly a new problem. representative waters knows that this has been a tenacious issue for decades, but also puzzling for the obvious reason waters is

a member of the democratic party, the president, also a member of the party, is not facing a primary challenge in the upcoming election. fierce criticism from inside the party could harm the president's reelection campaign and weaken his position in the coming months. the damage is already apparent. a president without a base is on a shifting sands and this criticism has led many to ask whether president obama has a problem with his base. after all, no group of voters supported the president with a higher proportion of their votes than african-americans. other than his immediate family, the black vote was the most reliable constituency for president obama in 2008. those who voted for a president in 2008 voted for barack obama. so the congressional black caucus is called the conscience of congress, but let's be clear, the cbc ability to be the national conscience is not so

much of their personal courage, although many have it, it's a side effect of their electoral security. congressional black caucus seats are some of the safest seats. members have held the office for decades and face few challengers. their security is the result of powerful, racial solidarity operating in their districts. in fact, some cbc members have been accused of crime and fraud and still earned reelection by enthusiastic black constituencies. indeed, african-american voters have showed them extraordinary loyalty, even when their incumbency delivered little in the way of economic benefits. the congressional black caucus is the importance of another representation, descriptive representation. their ability to speak up and out is importance of having

representatives who share their cultural and emotional ties to black communities. and on that score, president obama has shown as much commitment to african-americans as most members of that caucus. remember when hillary clinton held a significant lead among black voters during the primary and media outlets regularly questioned if obama was black enough to earn african-american electoral support? remember when reverend jeremiah wright dominated the news circle and the question persisted if president obama was too black to garner white votes, and later he was charged to be a non-citizen, a muslim, and a terrorist, but no matter what the media cycle said about him, president obama always identifies as a black american. president obama's self-identification, his public recognition of the role of black people in american history, his

embrace of black culture all are readily identifiable aspects of solidarity. today, the president on the tom joyner radio show, many viewers may not know who joyner is, but in some ways joyner eclipsed the urban lead as a primary mobilizing agent among african-americans. if you want to talk to black folks, joyner's show is a good place to do it, and today while talking with joyner, the president discussed how he personally draws strength from the history of racial struggle in america. >> that famous norman rockwell painting right outside the oval office of ruby bridges walking to school, and we pass that every single day, you know, little 6-year-old girl surrounded by marshals, going into that schoolhouse all by herself, a friend of mine framed the original program from the march on washington, so they are reminders as we go through the day and we're working hard here

to make sure we're putting people back to work and getting the economy going again that we stand on the shoulders of a lot of people that made a lot of sacrifices, and it's important to make sure we're following through on those commitments, even if it's slow and frustrating sometimes. >> so despite the claim of critics, president obama embraces blackness, despite the media discourse, public opinion polls continue to show the vast majority of african-americans embrace him in return. this does not mean that president obama should be given a free pass. he has a responsibility to work aggressively to address the economic crisis in black communities, but the responsibility is not his alone. members of the congressional black caucus must also be held accountable for the conditions in their districts, taking the right position is not enough for the president or the members, creating tangible results is a relevant test, but even more

important, all members of the u.s. congress, no matter their race or party, have a responsibility to labor tirelessly to create jobs, reduce inequality, and create more just outcomes. the challenges facing black americans are the challenges facing all americans, our struggle requires all of us, together, to do the work. phone . when i got my medicare card, i realized i needed an aarp... medicare supplement insurance card, too. medicare is one of the great things about turning 65, but it doesn't cover everything. in fact, it only pays up to 80% of your part b expenses. if you're already on or eligible for medicare, call now to find out how an aarp... medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company, helps cover some of the medical expenses... not paid by medicare part b. that can save you from paying up to thousands of dollars... out of your own pocket. these are the only medicare supplement insurance plans...

exclusively endorsed by aarp. when you call now, you'll get this free information kit... with all you need to enroll. put their trust in aarp medicare supplement insurance. plus you'll get this free guide to understanding medicare. the prices are competitive. i can keep my own doctor. and i don't need a referral to see a specialist. call now to get a free information kit. plus you'll get this free guide to understanding medicare. and the advantages don't end there. choose from a range of medicare supplement plans... that are all competitively priced. we have a plan for almost everyone, so you can find one that fits your needs and budget. with all medicare supplement plans, there are virtually no claim forms to fill out. plus you can keep your own doctor and hospital that accepts medicare. and best of all, these plans are... the only medicare supplement plans endorsed by aarp. when they told me these plans were endorsed by aarp... i had only one thing to say... sign me up.

call the number on your screen now... and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan. you'll get this free information kit... and guide to understanding medicare, to help you choose the plan that's right for you. as with all medicare supplement plans, you can keep your own doctor and hospital that accepts medicare, get help paying for what medicare doesn't... and save up to thousands of dollars. call this toll-free number now. a quick programming note, day of destruction, decade of war, a new documentary following the decade following 2001, reported by rachel maddow and richard engle debuts here on msnbc. great! at progressive, you can compare rates side by side, so you get the same coverage, often for less. wow! that is huge! [ disco playing ] and this is to remind you

that you could save hundreds! yeah, that'll certainly stick with me. we'll take it. go, big money! i mean, go. it's your break, honey. same coverage, more savings. now, that's progressive. call or click today.

it's time to believe again in the potential of private enterprise, set free from the shackles of overbaring federal government. >> that, of course, was texas governor rick perry announcing his presidential candidacy earlier this month and pushing his particular brand of small government conservatism, the kind that wants to free us all from the shackles of federal government of say social security and medicare. governor perry makes it clear in his new book, "fed up," that he thinks programs like social security and medicare are unconstitutional. he wrote it in capital letters, so you know he means business.

he wants the government to be so small that it doesn't provide a social safety net, that it doesn't support you when you grow old and retire. that's big government and he wants to set us free from those shackles. he's also helping free texans by way of thousands of public school teachers who are losing their jobs this fall under governor perry and texas republican small government budget cutting, the shackles of a paycheck and work life that contributes to society, so rick perry's version of small government conservatism means government so small it's not there to help you, it's not there as a social safety net when you need it. rick perry is so steadfast in his belief in small government he seems to believe that government shouldn't be there for you at all, it should just back off, because freedom, according to rick perry, is more important.

>> i work every day to try to make washington, d.c. as inconsequential in your life as i can. >> rick perry wants to make the government so small you don't even notice it, you don't even know it's there. government, what government? i don't see any government. it's so small, unless you're a lady. in which case rick perry wants to make government so big that it can control the pregnancy of any given woman in texas. on nearly every other issue rick perry wants government to be non-existent, nowhere near you as a citizen, not even if you want it or need it, but on this one issue, the issue of abortion, he wants government to be right there with you handing your doctor a script, whispering in your ear you should be ashamed of yourself. rick perry wants to get all up in your uterus and take a picture. >> we have actively worked against the rowe vs. wade

decision, and i'm pleased to announce the sonogram bill and emergency item. >> back in january, governor perry helped it along in the state legislature. the bill requires women seeking abortions in texas to get a sonogram 24 hours before an abortion. actually, why don't i let the author and one of the co-authors of the bill explain it to you. >> that's true. i'm a country boy. >> if there's any medical professionals out there, they may get hung up on our terminology before they get through. >> we'll get through it. >> explain to us what the sonogram bill does. >> basically what this bill does, it's not so much about abortions or sonograms, but it's about the woman being fully informed. >> it's a procedure that will inform the lady, the girl, whoever. >> what this bill does would

require that the sonogram be presented to the woman, she have at least 24 hours to go home, think about it, pray about it, make sure she's what she's doing -- >> that creepy piece of video there, the bill doesn't just require a 24-hour waiting period between the mandatory sonogram and the procedure, it also requires doctors to describe the fetus to the woman, to make sure she can hear the heart beat if there is one. the center for reproductive rights sued over rick perry's new i want to get up in your uterus law saying the law intrudes on the practice of medicine, forces doctors to deliver speeches to patients. that new law, set to take effect on thursday, but today a federal judge blocked enforcement of key parts of it as the lawsuit goes forward, ruling that requiring a doctor to show women pictures from a sonogram and sounds from a fetal heart beat violates the

doctor's first amendment rights. if rick perry wants his texas state government with a view of every uterus in texas, he's going to have to fight for it. here to talk with me about this is kelly hart, director of public affairs at planned parenthood of north texas. thank you for joining me tonight. >> thank you for inviting me. >> this injunction, the ruling against the texas sonogram law just came down today, can you tell me how it might affect your operations there in texas? >> as you say, it came down late this afternoon and we haven't had the opportunity to look at it in detail. we are pleased, but we are displeased, we're disappointed that women are still going to have to make an unnecessary trip to our health center in order to receive the care they need. >> tell me a little bit about that. help us to understand what does the sonogram law mean for women in practical terms who are seeking medical care in your facility?

>> in practical terms, it means they are going to be subject to unnecessary medical requirements to receive a safe, constitutional, legal procedure. today, if a woman wants an abortion, she thinks about it, she makes her decision, she calls us for an appointment, she has to wait 24 hours from making that appointment to come to a health center to receive an abortion. as a result of this law, she's now going to have to come to the health center to receive the sonogram and whatever information the government deems necessary, in addition to the medical work that we'll do, then she'll have to wait another 24 hours and make an unnecessary trip before she can have the procedure. when you consider 60% of women in the state of texas already have a child at home, that's much more work for a woman. she's going to have to get off work two days in a row, arrange full child care two days in a row.

if she's coming from less than 100 miles away, she's going to have to figure out where she's going to stay the night, that's going to add to the cost of the procedure for her and the logistics of it. it's a way to demean and shame women -- >> no, i'm sorry, i didn't mean to interrupt you there, because i appreciate where you were going on the question of demeaning and shaming. i wanted to ask you, what are the assumptions about women and women seeking termination services that are assumed by a law like this, assumed by these ladies or these girls, as we heard, needing to hear this kind of forced nar narrated sonogram. >> there is an assumption that a woman doesn't know what it means to be pregnant, there is an assumption they haven't thought it through before they called to make an appointment with us. there is also an assumption that all women who are seeking an abortion are alone, young, without children already, that they don't know what it means to be pregnant.

and that's just demeaning, and it's insulting to women to think that they haven't thought about this and they don't know what's going on inside them until some legislator makes them be told whether they want to know all the little details or not. indeed. kelly hart, director of public affairs for planned parenthood of north texas. thanks so much for joining us tonight and keep up the good work in texas. >> thank you so much, melissa. remember the story about mitt romney quadrupling the size of his mansion? mitt romney wants everyone to know it not near as millionairy as it sounds. starring the imminently bumpable dick cheney. sound effects are at the ready, next.

what's my function? this is the dick cheney edition with special guest star tonight, my daughter, parker, doing sounds. so first up. is this true or false? >> we had an erect survey group that went in and looked at everything, and they are the ones that did not find any stockpiles. obviously that had been falsely reported. on the other hand, what they did find was that saddam had retained the possibility to go back in with short notice.

he had the technology and the people able to resume his program. as soon as the sanctions were lifted and the inspectors disappeared from the scene. >> it rack survey group found that saddam hussein had the raw materials and the people to continue his regime when the inspectors disappeared? is that true or false? false. the iraq survey report actually found, quote, the ability to produce nuclear weapons had effectively decayed since 1991. inspectors found no evidence of concerted evidence to reconstruct the program. the findings were similar on bio chemical and biological weapons. stockpiles had been destroyed and research stopped years before the united states led the invasion of iraq in march 2003. hussein hoped someday to resume a chemicals weapons effort but

had no stock and had not resumed making weapons in a dozen years. in other words, he had no capability to start producing wmd on short notice at all. next up, also about the iraq war. is this true or false? >> i don't think that it damaged our reputation around the world, i just don't believe that. >> that the iraq war did not damage the reputation of the united states around the world, is that true or false? false! back at the start of the millenium, we were looking pretty popular. 83% favorability from great britain, 62% from france, 78% from germany, 75% from indonesia, 52% from turkey. years later, the numbers had tanked. 55% of great britain, 43% of france, 41% of germany, 38% of

indonesia and 23% of turkey. in the bbc, 25 different counts found three of four disapproved of u.s. dealings in iraq. there was even a congressional report trying to find out why america's reputation was in the gutter, why 83% of companies liked us back in 2002 but only 23% liked us in 2006. one of the reasons they found? specific opposition to the iraq war. the world's opinion of us only begins to start to rise again with the election of president obama. you can look it up. okay. finally, true or false? in his new memoir, former vice president cheney reveals the answer to one of the big mysteries of the pro-september world. >> dick cheney spent the night at an undisclosed secret location.

>> vice president cheney was taken last night to an undisclosed location. >> the secret services added more agents around the white house, and vice president cheney has been sent to a secure, undisclosed location. >> we should mention also that vice president dick cheney, david, is said to be in an undisclosed location. >> so dick cheney discloses in his new book the location of that previously undisclosed location. is that true or false? yep. that one is true. we now know where dick cheney was the night after terrorists struck new york city and the pentagon. and it was not a high-tech bunker hidden in the mountains somewhere. vice president cheney says he spent the night of september 11 at camp david. yeah, not that exciting. that's where all the other undisclosed locations where he stayed various times throughout his vice presidency, he showed nbc's