appreciate it. thanks for joining us this hour. in 1994 the year i graduated from college in the great state of california where i'm from and where i went to college, the streets of california for a while looked like this. all over the state. massive, massive protests. the state frankly torn apart that year by something called prop 187. it was more or less the arizona papers please laws of the 1990s. proper 187 was a ballot initiative that said people who were in california illegally there as illegal immigrants could not use basic social services. they could not go to the hospital, for example. you could die on the streets instead. if you were a kid, you'd be ripped out of school. prop 187 was supported by california's thence republican governor pete wilson, and california voters passed it at the ballot box. that brought forth a long and loud and very, very, very emotional political battle. but it also brought forth some truly excellent political

satire. a guy calling himself daniel d. portado and he founded a fake group and then naturally put an the end of it. it's halt-on. the daniel d. portado character founded hispanics for wilson. it was described as formerly it was described as formerly governor wilson's top latino official. his landscaper and personal groomer. the group said they would support republican governor pete wilson in his anti immigrant efforts to pledge to retrain white collar workers and middle management in the agriculture, restaurant and hotel maintenance arts once illegal immigrants are

displaced from highly sought after fields. they would create deportation centers which encourage all hiss pang members, he is special their elderly i have to return to their countries of origin. this was a fakes news release back in the 1990s. this was a hispanic group. they pledged to never speak a word of spanish again yesterday for adios amigo when they were seflt deporting. they did radio ads pushing the sell deportation jokes. >> immigrants are you tired of being push around in america?

well, don't on your serape. do something about it. join the political action group, halto. hispanics against take over. is self-deportation, you ask? think of it as a permanent vacation. just imagine in one easy step you could avoid all this crazy aend immigrant harassment in america. how? self-deportation. >> that's a trademark of hispanics. also self-deportations are final. no exchanges or refunds. tickets are one way only. >> tickets are one way only. it's political satire at its very best, right? like all of the very best political satire, it's close enough to something that seems like a perversion of the truth that some people actually didn't get the joke like for example california's republican governor

pete wilson who was a specific target of that satire. he did not get the jock. in an interview with "the new york times" columnist mr. wilson explained without irony that the goal of prop 187 was, in fact, self-deportation. you will self-deport. he used the exact phrase used as satire without him woupt understanding it's satirical origins. the prop 187 episode was an important moment in republican politics. not just because it was literally a moment of self-parody but important about what it said about where the republican party was headed. now, there have always been nativists and anti-immigrant movements in the united states. prop 187 was the start of the modern republican party trying on super anti-immigrant policies for otherwise mainstream and ambitious republican politicians. when george w. bush tried to be a moderate on immigration, the

reason he got no legislation passed through it is because he ran up against that other post-prop 187 pete wilson wing of his own party. pete wilson himself was essentially lost to history and forgotten after his role in the prop 187 con flag rags in california, and for all the fallout that it caused, for all that he did to rip the state apart and drive this divide down the state's population on the issue of immigration, for the generations worth the damage that pete wilson did on the relationship with hispanics, ultimately prop 187 never went into effect anyway, it was ruled unconstitutional. then pete wilson retired or something and became largely forgotten until, until mitt romney dug him up. for his presidential campaign this year, mitt romney went trolling through the dust bin of republican history and lo and behold he found pete wilson there. mr. romney went and found pete

wilson from whatever he's doing now and brought him on board as his special honoree california campaign chairman. mitt romney also brought on board a man named chris cobak who is essentially this year's pete wilson in republican problem. even though he's from kansas, he's the secretary of state in kansas, even though he's not from arizona, he's responsibility i believe for writing arizonas papers please law and antiimmigrant laws. the paper issue has torn apart ha state as well since it was first proposed and signed into law. we're awaiting a supreme court ruling on its constitutionality. as that rule approaches, it's somethinging spanish language media in arizona have pulled out all the stops. they have long form no commercial break broadcasts in spansish in arizona trying to prepare people for that supreme court ruling and what it means for latinos in that state. that lou is so divisive sh.

that hugely desooifive legislation in arizona constitutional or not is seen by presidential candidate mitt romney he says as a model for the nation. >> should there be aggressive, seek them out and find them and arrest as sheriff arpaio advocate science. >> i think you see a model in arizona. >> we should have known from his snuggling up to chris and dragging pete wilson out of the past he was going to do this. mitt romney still sort of surprised some people when he poxed himself in the republican primary this year as the most anti-immigrant of all the primary contenders. he was like this year's krad doe. >> if i were elected and congress passed the dream act, would i veto it? the answer yes. >> should there be aggressive, seek them out and find nem and arrest them as sheriff arpaio investigates. >> we hired a lawn company to mow our lawn, and they had

illegal immigrants working there. when that was pointed out to us, we let them go. we went to the company and said, you can't is any illegals working on our property. i'm running for office for pete's sake. >> you don't want to round up people and deport them, but you say you have to go back to home can you understands and apply for citizenship. if you don't deport them, how do you send them mow? >> the answer is self-deportation. >> self-deportation invented by brilliant latino satirists in california and now embraced without irony by anti-immigrant republicans. pete wilson was that guy in the 1990s. mitt romney is that guy right now. as we await the supreme court ruling on the papers please law, which romney says should be a model for the nation, mr. romney today spoke before a latino political group about what it is like to run for president as the son of mexican immigrants.

>> throughout my campaign i've often had the chance to speak about my dad, and how proud i am of him. he was born to parents, american parents living in mexico. when he was 5 they left everything behind and started over in the united states. his dad, my grandfather, was a builder, and he went bust more than once. my grandfather didn't make much money. there were times in my dad's life when he lived in poverty. but my grandfather had big hopes for my dad and tried to help him as best he could. my dad didn't finish college, but he believed in the country where the circumstances of one's birth were not a barrier to achievement. >> by these circumstances of one's birth, what mitt romney means, at least whether he speaks to a latino audience, is his people come from mexico. substantively many mr. romney's

speech today he would not say whether or not he agrees with the new policy president obama initiated which allows people brought here as kids to get work permits to stay and work here legally. republicans are tied up in knots to figure out how to respond since the president announced that policy change on friday. he criticized the president for having done it himself as president instead of asking congress to do it. >> it's disappointing that president obama even though he had a democratic congress for the first two years of administration promised the country and particularly the hiss pang community he would enact comprehensive immigration reform and he dint it. he come us up with the executive order. we have to do a comprehensive immigration reform plan. >> that's exactly wrong.

that's exactly opposite to what really happened. i mean, the republicans are trying to say here, or at least trying to avoid saying whether they agree with the president's policy. they're just saying he should have done it through congress, and never tried to do it through congress. that's wrong. when democrats controlled both houses of congress, they actually passed the dream act. that's nancy pelosi when the democrats had the house when it passed. she's happy becausist a democratic idea and president obama supported it. they passed it in the house and it went to the senate, and democrats were, in fact, in control of the senate. they sort of passed the dream act there, too, in the sense they got 55 votes for it, which ought to be five more votes you need to pass something in a majority rules body. the reason it didn't actually pass through the senate and become law is because republicans filibustered it even though democrats had a majority. republicans blocked democrats from passing the dream act with the majority she had, even

though democrats had lined up 55 votes. republicans are saying it's an outrage that president obama never tried to take this through congress. they make it sound like they wanted something like this to go through congress. they've been waiting for the opportunity. republicans did not want that. democrats went for it and republicans stopped it from going through congress. so now president obama found a way to get it done anyway. president obama him will address the group that mitt romney addressed today tomorrow. he has the disadvantage, of course, of not himself being a son of a mexican immigrant, but he has the distinct advantage of having a specific, observable policy on this issue. and of not having aan alliance with the most virulently anti-immigrant elements of republican politics hanged around his neck. johns us now is jonathan, and it's nice to have you here. thank you for being here.

>> thank you, rachel. >> let me ask you about the republican history on these matters. orrin hatch was an original sponsor of the dream act. when it went up for a vote in the senate, he skipped out and did not vote on it at all. is orrin hatch kind of a parabole or microcosm for understanding republican politics on this now? >> remember, when president obama was elected when he was on inauguration day, republicans were already meeting and discussing how they were going to make barack obama a one-term president. if you look back at the history of things that the president has tried to do, adopting some republican ideas and adopting some republican plans and plenty of complaints about the president bending over backwards to work with republicans to get things done only to have sand kicked in his face time and time again to try to reach out it to republicans to get things done. republicans just decided that if we were for it before barack

obama but barack obama wants to work with us on it, then we're going to oppose barack obama on whatever it is he wants to work with us on. you know, rachel, it in may of 2010 lindsey graham put out a statement criticizing the president for reaching out to republicans, other republicans other than him, to work on an immigration reform plan. that had befuddled the white house because they did it because lindsey graham urged them to work on in a bipartisan manner. this is part of the gop amnesia on immigration reform and dream act in particular that is just unbelievable in how boldly they erase people's memories of history. >> jonathan, you writing about that lindsey graham episode from a couple of years ago today was the reason i wanted to talk to you about this today.

it's the exact opposite of what's going on right now. what lindsey graham was saying at the time was, how dare you reach out and try to start a kvshgs with republicans on there. it will go nowhere. you have john boehner, mash co-rubio and mitt romney saying how dare you go forward on this without coming to us? as if we were willing to do something on this. i think the substantive question here is it possible they make republicans want to do something on immigration, or is this a pure bluff? >> look, who knows. i mean, the idea we can predict what republicans are going to do on a substantive matter, particularly on this, is, you know, i don't want to really go there. look, the republicans are in a bind and particularly mitt romney is in a bind. he was supposed to at this point now being the presumptive nominee of the republican party was supposed to pivot to the center, moving to the center,

etch-a-sketching his way to the center if you will on a whole host of issues. immigration being one of them. but the idea that on last friday the president does his dream act maneuver. two days later mitt romney goes on face the nation and is asked five times by bob schieffer whether he thinks the president did the right thing. mitt romney doesn't answer. he doesn't give a concrete, clear, focused answer. so folks figured well, on thursday, he's speaking. surely he's going to talk to latino elected officials and tell them definitively where he stands on this issue. last i checked he may have mentioned it, but he did not say specifically where he agreed with the president, what he would do differently, whether he would keep it. to this day we don't know exactly where mitt romney is on what the president did, and if you remember a couple of days ago, senate minority leader mitch mcconnell, when he was asked about this, he said, well,

you know, i think mitt romney is going to tell us where we could be on this issue on thursday when he speaks to nalao. i think mitch mcconnell and wonders what to think about this. >> i think they hope it goes away again instead of getting pressures for an answer on it. jonathan, thank you for being with us. >> thank you so much, rachel. >> all right. gun owners, are you a gun owner? has president obama come to dwrur house to personally pry your firearms out of your fingers yet? the late ers on the right wing conspiracy series that is now the operational lodge logic on one-half of the partisan divide in our great country and the efforts to make you believe it. that's next. [ jennifer garner ] why can't strong sunscreen feel great?

actually it can. neutrogena® ultra sheer provides unbeatable uva uvb protection and while other sunscreens can feel greasy ultra sheer® is clean and dry. it's the best for your skin. ultra sheer®. neutrogena®.

wednesday, july 1st, 2010 was a very big day for the obama administration. president obama that day signed into law one of the signature achievements of his entire presidency. it was four months after signing health reform into law, but the new president put pen to paper once again and he signed into law wall street reform. two years after wall street imploded and nearly took of rest of us down with them, president obama and democrats p in congress finally brought some rules back to a banking industry that had run amuck. after signing the bill into law, the president announced to those in attendance, it's done.

wednesday, july 21st, 2010, a huge day for the obama administration. a bill like that is the kind of thing presidencies are made of, and this is how "nbc nightly news" opened its show on that historic night. >> from nbc news world headquarters in new york, this is "nbc nightly news" with brian williams. >> a short time ago in washington the secretary of agriculture entered a press conference and apologize it had to a low level employee he fired after a short piece of video came out that hardly told the full story. >> on the day that president obama signed wall street reform into law. the news media, as well as the obama administration, were consumed entirely by something entirely else. shirley sharrod. remember the shirley sharrod scandal. she was an agriculture employee

who was thrust into the spotlight after a clip on her was posted online by a conservative website. it was played on a constant loop on fox news and conservative blogs. it showed an african-american government official admits to denying assistance in white farmers. it made it seem like the government was employing an openly proud reverse racist, an anti-white people bigot. while the rest of the news media was covering, you know, news, fox news and right wing blogs were running with this story like it was watergate on steroids. >> break news tonight about an ags culture department official caught on tape making racially charged comments. >> that is simply unacceptable and miss sharrod must resign immediately. >> it was fox news online proclaiming that this is racism plain and simple. this is a big story. why isn't the rest of the news

media paying attention? around the same time the rest of the news media paid attention to what was happening on fox, the obama administration perked up and pressured shirley sharrod to resign before her story appeared on glenn beck's fox news show that night. she resigned almost immediately. you know how this story ends, right? all of the non-fox news outlets that one with the deceptively edited video looped on fox were very, very sorry they did so. she was not a racist. she was talking about racism. she was not being a racist herself, but because of a made-up crusade on a right wing website broadcast on fox news and that somehow got treated credibly by other media and then by the obama administration, a life-long public servant had her acarry destroyed. one of the obama administration's signature

achievement was drowned out as they were forced to apologize for being suckered into the whole mess. the great fox news conspiracy about shirley sharrod the racist that nobody else was covering, was, in fact, a paranoid dell lugs of the conservative movement and media machine. now we find ourselves a couple years later facing another test for the news media. do you take the bait again? do you follow the latest fox news conspiracy theory. >> people forget how all this started. this administration is a gun control administration. they tried to put the violence in mexico on the blame of the united states so they concocted this scheme in actually sending our federal agents guns down there and trying to cook some little deal to say that we've got to get more guns under control. that's how this all started. >> that was republican

congressman john mika of florida on fox news, obviously, advancing the latest conspiracy on the right about this thing you might have heard of called fast and furious. we talked about it on the show last night. if you're unfame with the fast and furious thing you were forgiven. it's a law enforcement strategy that started during the bush administration. it was a problem to let sketchy gun sales go through in hopes of following the guns across the border could them to where nekd arrest. the idea was born in the george w. bush administration. it was a failure. the obama administration shut it down. on the right this whole thing was a seek the plot to create gun violence in mexico. they wanted that for a political reason. having lots of gun violence in mexico would make people feel bad about gun violence and stirring up anti-gun feelings in this country would allow the obama administration to element

the second amendment and take away everybody's guns? if you think that is freak cuckoo for cocoa puffs, it appears to have originated from this militia blogger guy from alabama. he incited conservatives to break windows around country during the end of the reform fight while the rest of the country was focused on fuse and stuff, he promulgated the idea that the obama administration was allowing bad gunle sales a a secret plot to detroit the second amend: he was cited on fox news dolt come on the investigation. television in their coverage of this scandal. this whacky conspiracy theory is what the whole fast and furious thing is all about.

>> the whole point, don't forget, the whole point of fast furious was to create mayhem in mexico among drug cartels with american-made weapons easily procured so you and i would stand up in outrage and demand tighter gun laws. it was deceitful. it was sneaky. it was going against the will of the american people. it was liberalism on parade. it's who these people are. they want tighter gun laws? >> could it be what they were thinking of was, in fact, to use this walking of guns in order to promote an assault weapons ban. many think so, and they haven't come up with an explanation that would causes us not da gree. >> rather than investigation in dangerous operation, the federal government is doing what it does best, creating gun control regulations to solve a problem it created.

>> this is not some weird, bloggy offshot of what the fast and furious scandal is. this is what the fast and furious scandal is. this is it. it is a conspiracy theory on the right that president obama is secretly trying to take away all your guns. that's what it was. this program was started by george w. bush as a means of upsetting people about gun violence and abolishing the executive amendment. if you watch fox news, you marinate daily in conservative media. this is drilled into your head over and over and over again. >> were the guns actually out there because the guy is against second amendment and would like more gun roll in the country. >> the political agenda behind this entire thing was to blame american gun shops for cartel environments in america in order to push one and more regulations. >> the president told mexican tv fast and furious was a mistake and some say it was needed to justify tougher gun laws.

>> others believe it was justified. others are -- others? just like with the shirley sharrod story. fox news has been very upset that they haven't yet been able to bait the rest of the real media into following this crazy conspiracy theory of theirs yet, and they are starting to overtly bait the mainstream xheed ya into covering it and they lash out and blame people who do not cover it yet. >> "nbc nightly news" is playing some serious catch-up, because the network news show has only mentioned the failed gun tracking program, fast and furious, once for a few seconds since the scandal broke last year. keep in mind attorney general holder has testified before congress no less than nine times. >> that was a host named brett bayer on fox news last night. he's supposedly one of the straight news, no opinion anchors on fox.

that's the same brett bayer whose news program is ifg the militia blogger guy, the throw bricks through their windows guy. he's identifying him as an online journalist helping out with their coverage of the fast and furious scandal. this is a test. this is a test. we have been here before. we know how this ends. news media of america, you are getting baited to cover this story that fox and the right have cook up in their own marinade for more than a year now. are you going to swallow this one, too?

something weird happens once, it's an aberration, twice is interesting and make a fluke. three times, something is going on here. three times is at least a trend, and right now massachusetts senator scott brown is way past trending. that story is ahead. stay tuned.

all right, open question. do political parties matter? does the republican party specifically matter? not republican politicians or the voters for the republican nominee for frez but does the party? does the republican party matter in the states? i think it's an open question and a really interesting one. we think what happens in the states matters because of the presidential primary system. once even party has a nominee until they park in the parking lot of ross's restaurants and ordering magic mountains like the old iowans from way back.

while the republican party has chosen the nominee and the press corps forgot about the states, something interesting is happening in the states. we've talked before how after mitt romney locked up the nomination, and ron paul continues winning the majority of delegates in a bunch of states last weekend. ron paul won most of the delegates in iowa to go with wins in nevada, maine, and minnesota and maybe louisiana. republicans in idaho and oregon are holding their conventions in week, and the ron paul folks say they're trying for a couple more wins in those states. you see a lot of ron paul delegates at that republican convention this summer that's supposed an all-in thing for mitt romney. now more than 100 delegates are suing the republican party to be ail louse to vote their conscience to show up at the mitt romney coronation and cast des sending votes, that count against romney's nomination.

here's the other things going on with zero beltway attention in the states. ron paul loyalists are not just winning the majority of delegates in some states since romney clenched the nomination. they're taking over the republican party itself as an organization. a ron paul loyalist is a chairman of the party in iowa, so is the organizer who watching over the presence in iowa's counties. that matters in iowa. they have taken over the party in alaska. electing a ron paul supporter as a new chairman. they took over the county party in nevada where three-quarters of the state resides. they replaceded two members of the republican national committee. they voted down the supporters and picked round paul supporters as well. in maine they elected a new republican national committee woman and staying over dozens of seats on the state committee. does the party matter? does the republican party matter

in the states, because now that the ron paul revolution has overthrown the republican party in at least four states and taken over at least portions of the party in half a dozen states and counts, you know what they do with their new power? they're changing what those state republican parties do. so if is it does matter what republican parties do, you should know. they're about to start doing something different. exhibit a, virginia, where ron paul supporters have won a lot of new spots on the republican state committee this year. last week the newly ron paul populated committee voted to change the way the state picks nominees for top virginia offices like, say, governor. they used to pick the republican virginia nominees by holding a primary. now they're going to pick them at the republican state convention starting next year. by their nature party conventions tend to attract the hard liners and hard core, right? you have to show up and sit through speeches and sometimes

it goes on for days and it's always really boring. back in 2010 hard liners in utah were able to oust the relatively moderate republican senator bob bennett at the state convention. this year hard liners forced the other republican senator orrin hatch into a primary? consider also the otherwise staid and seersucker world of connecticut republican politics where twice now wrestling executive linda mcmahon has emerged from conventions with the party's endorsement for nature despite pleas from the party to choose someone more moderate. again, i ask whether the many state republican parties matter? does it matter what those parties do, and what does it mean that the republican party establishment in important states is losing control of what those parties do now? joining us now is someone thanz, nicole wallace, former xhuk says directions from the bush administration and importantly the author of "it's classified," a novel that came out in

paperback and it's enjoyable and you should read. thank you for being here. >> thank you for having me. >> i don't want to have a partisan discussion about right and wrong here. i'm interested in the tactics here. running campaigns that have to work through the parties. now, you got to count on the party for something, right? >> sure. >> even if it's a national -- at the national level. is what -- is the stuff that the parties are responsible for doing, is that stuff that somebody else could do, if the party decided they didn't want. >> you spent a lot of time talking about the consequences of our changed finance campaign laws. there are party functions that could be -- some of the most important things -- one of my first jobs in politic was for the california republican party, and i'll be grateful to the california republican party to give me one of my first jobs in politics. i koent tell you now what you described about congressman paul's folks going in, you have

to answer the question that you laid out there at the end. do the state parties matter before you answer the question and what are the consequences of paul's supporters going in and taking them over? if the answer to the first is no then the answer to the second is -- >> what's want answer to the first? do state parties do something important? >> historically they have. they put politics aat a more accessible level. a state convention is much more accessible. we tend to look at politics and politics in a cynical way for just justifiable reasons. a lot of people get involved in politics at a pure community and civic interest and engagement. so you can't discourage those people or suggest that the state parties no longer is an outlet for their enthusiasm or activism. that's forever the most important reason for the state

parties to be strong and vital. >> you can't suggest it won't be consequenceal. come along and place and we're overridden by the people in washington that they're we're crazies, right? >> you can't understate the peril to doing away with the state parties. they have historically been the place where grassroots activists go to begin to learn. that's where political professionals go and have some of their first jobs. you learn how to knock on doors and turn out bodies to go to voting booths and vote. in this country that's still how we vote. so there's something so fundamental understanding what a state party does, to understanding and appreciating and knowing how to function and thrive in our democracy if you're a political professional. people don't have to vote. they have to be inspired to get out and vote. just understanding the mechanisms and the structural way to motive voters to vote for a candidate in a congressional district. i think the consequences of the state parties going away where tragic. >> they're going insurgent. clark county, nevada republican party is supporting ron paul and overtly not supporting mitt

romney. somebody from the executive board at that county republican party, which again, is three-quarters of the population in nevada, put up a billboard deriding mitt romney as the second coming of george w. bush. i'm sure that's offensive to you, and saying ron paul is the second coming of reagan. you can't look it to those folks and say, okay, he help us elect mitt romney. how do they win nevada? >> i think they have to have a thick skin about it. it appears that they have. i think you have to appreciate in a democracy, and we don't live in a dictatorship where everyone falls in line. >> the party is a dictatorship. >> four years ago the most dramatic convention i'd seen in a long time, and i've been doing a lot and i've been to both parties' national conventions for the last two-cycles, the hillary people. there was a lot of drama there and what do you do at the convention. >> there were no hillary clinton coups in the states, right? there was no hillary clinton --

>> they didn't take over the state parties. it opportunity or appetite to take over ate state party is glorious. how great. they cared the most and worked the hardest and took over a few state parties. we'll see if it has the consequences of derailing mitt romney's chances in the states. the fact that we can still do that. i can't imagine we did that with a lot of money. they're activists. paul's supporters are true believers. no one pays them to go and do anything. if they were able to stay over the state party, good for them. i think the fact that barack obama and mitt romney are there every day until election day is going to overtake the story about the state parties as the bigger and more interesting question. >> what they're able to do with what they got is amazing. we're on the same page again. beware, america. enthusiasm for people being into

it. i'm with you on that. nicole wallace, of course, was a senior adviser to mccain/pailn for the aforementioned george w. bush. "it's classified" is out in paperback and it's a perfect beach read. i really appreciate it. >> thank you. >> we'll be right back.

sleep train has your ticket to tempur-pedic. experience the pressure-relieving comfort of tempur-pedic,

and sleep risk-free with sleep train's 100-day money back guarantee. get 36 months interest-free financing: no down, and no interest for 3 years. plus, get free same-day delivery. sleep train's 100-day money back guarantee, interest-free financing, and free delivery? that's the ticket! sleep train's ticket to tempur-pedic is on now. ♪ sleep train ♪ your ticket to a better night's sleep ♪

wall street watchdog elizabeth warren against republican incumbent scott brown who takes a ton of money from wall street. really interesting, right? interesting enough if that were the whole story. but scott brown keeps making it way more interesting in very unexpected ways and that story is next. [ jennifer garner ] why can't strong sunscreen feel great? actually it can. neutrogena® ultra sheer provides unbeatable uva uvb protection and while other sunscreens can feel greasy ultra sheer® is clean and dry. it's the best for your skin. ultra sheer®. neutrogena®.

to get your feet moving to the beat. it's time to start gellin' with dr. scholl's and feel the energy from your feet up. thanks to the energizing support and cushioning of dr. scholl's massaging gel insoles, you'll want to get up and go. perhaps you have heard the turm humble brag. you may have encountered it in its natural environment on twitter. it's also a twitter feed for a character on "parks and recreation." it's a statement that makes someone look humble but it's bragging. being famous and having a fender bender is weird. they're just so giddy that it's you. humble brag.

here's another. joe jonas. one of the three brothers in the jonas brother, quote, totally walked down the wrong escalator from the airport from the flashes of camera. go me. humble, i walked down the wrong stairs and brag, i'm really famous and paparazzi follow me everywhere. a humble brag. or this one. yes, i know, bad hair but good fish. humble as in my hair looks funny. but brag i caught a huge fish, as in the size of a buick. so that's the humblebrag. doesn't necessarily make you a bad person. you're just doing two things at once. you're multitasking. now for your consideration. fumblebrag. which we require specifically to

understand the latest otherwise inexplicable strangeness from scott brown. running for re-election this year against elizabeth warren. this morning, here was senator brown on a local radio show in boston. >> each and every day that i've been in a united states senator, i've been either discussing issues, meeting on issues, in secret meetings and with kings and queens and prime ministers and business leaders and military leader, talk, voting, working on issues every single day. >> you do what? what do you do in secret? >> i've been either discussing issues, meeting on issues in secret meetings with kings and queens and prime ministers. >> it's a brag. i'm very important. i meet with royalty. kings, queens, prime ministers even secretly. but it's also a fumble because what in god save the queen's name are you talking about? a few hours after that interview aired, senator brown's spokesman

clarified his boss' brag saying, quote, general brown was referring generally to private meetings with leaders. he misspoke when he said kings and queens. he sent out a fundraising ad saying a tv show host was running against him. friends, it's only been a couple of months before i've gotten into office and the political machine is looking for someone who run against me and you're not going to believe who they're supposedly trying to recruit, liberal on msnbc rachel maddow. brag, i've already gotten an opponent. and fumble, a big scary liberal tv show host. he also had a fumblebrag off bin

laden. the navy s.e.a.l.s reportedly took pictures on the very day we learned the president would not release those pictures to the public, scott brown went on tv in boston and said actually he had already seen the pictures. >> i've seen the picture, he's definitely dead and if there's in i conspiracy theories out there, you should put them to rest, okay? so brag, i'm a united states freaking senator. even though they have not released the pictures to the public, i have obviously seen the pictures bin laden's body. brag. fumble? the picture he saw wasn't a closed door classified meeting. it was on the internet. it was an internet hoax that everybody saw but nobody else was gullible enough to think was a special secret real thing they were being show because they were so important. a fumble brag is when you're trying hard to seem important but it goes horribly, horribly wrong because you're horribly,