question i asked you do you think that newt gingrich actually believes that the things that he says. 43% of you said yes, 57% of you said no. that's the "the ed show." "hardball" with chris math use starts right now. we'll see you back here tomorrow night for "the ed show" on msnbc. which of these stories will you be talking about tomorrow. the midterms and the party of the rich versus the party of everybody else? all hell breaks loose in the gop when john boehner hints he might vote for tax cuts that don't include tax cuts for the top 2%. >> if the only option i have is to vote for some of those tax reductions, i'll vote for them. >> john has had to walk that back so far that the gop now says it will vote against, might even filibuster against tax cuts for the poor, middle class, and slightly well off if there aren't also cuts for daddy warbucks. and they're even talking about another government shutdown if they take the house and, by the way, the federal deficit under the first full fiscal year of of obama is down.

it's down by 8%. the federal deficit is down by 8%. it would seem as if you could make enough out of this and the tax cuts for the rich to save the midterms. we'll ask obama campaign manager david plouffe. newt goes nuts. even andy carr was upset. saying president obama is following a kenyan anti-colonial world view. a new straight to dvd horror movie. >> this is the end of time. this is the time -- >> so, newt, your order of the apocalypse is now islam-aphobia, kenya and bed bugs. o'donnell of delaware. the tea partyer two out there even for dick armey and the tiny little detail left out of the islamic center debate. there was a mosque inside the world trade center.

inside the south tower of the world trade center on the 17th floor. all the news and commentary now on "countdown." good evening from new york. details about the economy are rarely gripping, surprising, or even digestible. nevertheless in our fifth story tonight, republicans, as we told you, want to extend the bush tax cuts for those families making more than $250,000. democrats only want to extend the tax cuts for those making less. as the president pointed out, even if democrats win, the rich will still get a tax break on their first quarter million, which means the gripping detail is really this. democrats want to cut everyone's taxes. republicans want to cut taxes on every dollar earned above $250,000. and the surprising detail, the deficit is down. the treasury department reports the u.s. is on track to record a $1.3 trillion deficit for the first fiscal year of president obama's presidency.

8% lower. that is 8% lower despite the stimulus spending than the 2009 deficit which included the last months of the bush presidency and reflected economic policy signed into law by the end of 2008 by president bush. house republican leader john boehner wants to increase that deficit by $700 billion over ten years by extending those bush tax cuts on income over a quarter million. but with bob schieffer, he even admitted 97% of small businesses will see no benefit from the cut and that 3% of what he calls small businesses make half the money. >> in a joint committee on taxation, which is a nonpartisan body, says that only 3% of the small business people you keep talking about all the small business people that are going to get taxed, only 3% would be affected by that, or do you quarrel with that figure? is that a right figure or a wrong figure? >> well, it may be 3%, but it's

half of small business income because obviously the top 3% have half of the gross income for those companies that we would term small businesses. >> when boehner said he would have to vote for obama's middle class tax cuts if that was his only option, schieffer was so incredulous he asked, again, twice. >> so you are saying you would vote for the middle class tax cuts if that's all you can get done? >> if that's what we can get done. >> i want to make sure i heard what you said correctly. you are saying that you are willing to vote for the middle class tax cuts even though the bill will not include extending the tax cuts for the upper bracket of americans? >> bob, we don't know what the bill is going to say, all right. if the only option i have is to vote for those $250,000 and below, of course i'm going to do that. >> oh, you think so? running damage control today, senate republican leader mitch mcconnell said republicans will vote against tax cuts if the rich are not included.

he then said he had no idea who john boehner was. connecticut senator -- i made that up -- senator joe lieberman says he will, too, and four democrats have indicated they, too, including income over 250,000 in the tax cuts. but mcconnell's office declined to tell the associated press whether republicans will filibuster. let's bring in david k. johnson author of "free lunch" columnist for "tax notes" and an author on the subject of taxes. thanks for your time tonight, sir. >> thank you. >> so mr. boehner admits that the nation's richest 3% make half of all income earned by small businesses. can you fact-check that or at least explain that figure? >> well, it's a little misleading. about 44% of all of what the irs calls business profits go to the top 3%, but that includes lawyers, big law firms, not exactly a popular republican group. doctors, particularly surgeons and specialists.

so these in many cases are not what we think of as small businesses that are creating and adding to the economy, manufacturers, the creators of new kinds of services. >> the report from bloomberg news today was quoting moody's that moody's had studied tax cuts for the wealthy and confirmed what common sense would tell you, that when you cut the taxes of the rich, which is essentially what this boils down to, they don't go out and suddenly hire a bunch of employees. they just put more money into savings. so the question then becomes what happens to the economy when you cut the taxes of the rich people? >> well, they pile up these huge amounts of capital that they have no place to put to work because there's no demand. there aren't enough people working and earning incomes to buy the goods and services that are being sold. what you do see is increases in the sales of second, fourth, fifth, ninth luxury homes, personal jets, his and her personal jets, $600,000 wristwatches, oil paintings, unproductive assets that do not

build the economy. >> well, you need somebody to polish the $600,000 wristwatch, perhaps. the president still wants to borrow $3 trillion to renew the rest of the tax cuts for the lower 97%, 98%. is that a smart move but doing so for the top 2% is not and why? >> well, in the long run the government needs to balance its budget. we've only done that four times in the last 50 years. let me make an analogy about this. suppose, keith, that you suddenly buy a new house, you're living out in the country so you have to have two cars, one for you and your spouse and there's an unexpected pregnancy and both your cars suddenly die. are you going to say, well, the prudent thing is to not take on more debt and give up your jobs and therefore lose your house and not care for the baby or say, well, i'm going to have to borrow some money to get two replacement cars and knuckle down to pay this off and build my economic future? and that's essentially what the president is proposing.

also, the americans in the bottom 98% are much more likely to spend the money, which, therefore, creates jobs by circulating it than they are to save it. >> putting this all together, obviously the rich will do better when the economy does better in almost any economy that you can calculate or create. if that's the case, why don't rich republicans support whatever will actually make the economy better even if it means giving some money back to the not so rich so they can spend it and it still winds up with the rich eventually? >> well, some rich republicans do but not the ones we're seeing on capitol hill. this is the triumph of ideology and the idea that tax rates are what's important. what's important is how we spend our tax dollars and whether our tax system is encouraging investment in things that produce jobs, or is it encouraging you to buy unproductive things like real estate and to move your factory to china so that you can make more profit by hiring low-cost

workers there while destroying work here? so we need to get away from this debate that this is class warfare, and, by the way,if it's class warfare, it's being waged in both directions and to the idea of how do we distribute the burdens of government and the best way to do that is create a tax system that encourages more investment here at home and more jobs, and right now we're focused on a tax system that just lets you save money so you can spend it in unproductive ways. >> and $600,000 wristwatches. pulitzer prize winning journalist david k. johnston, the author of "free lunch" and now with tax notes. thanks for your time tonight. >> thank you. if republicans win the senate and win the house, some say the party should consider a tried and true tactic for getting what they want, threaten to shut down the federal government. you may remember then speaker newt gingrich did this in the '90s in a showdown with president clinton. clinton did not budge and gingrich was not bluffing. the government shut down. veterans hospitals, social

security checks, all of it came to a halt, and it worked beautifully -- for democrats. the political outrage crippled the gop and helped clinton win re-election if it didn't win it for himself. naturally republicans want to do this all over again. on friday congressman lynn westmoreland said he had recruited republican candidates for the house who would stand with the party to block health care. how? by threatening a shutdown. one day later minnesota house candidate teresa callet told think progress if the stakes are high enough, we might have to shut things down. tea party leader dick armey refused to endorse the idea after possible government shutdown. it's not clear whether or not he means it. why do we say that? huffington post reports four years ago armey said the reason the republicans got blamed for the shutdowns of the '90s is they were honest beforehand and revealed they would do it. you've set the stage for the press to report that the republicans are now doing in october what they said they'd do in june even if, in fact, they thought it was the right strategy to shut down the government, they should have kept their mouths shut about it.

let's bring in a government shutdown veteran. former author of "aftershock." good evening, sir. >> hi, keith. >> two real world implications here, one for government employees and the other for taxpayers, starting with the taxpayers, what happens to the services they rely on and pay for? >> well, i was there november 14th, 1995, a day that shall live in if not infamy at least stupidity. republicans suffered by closing government because, look, not only social security checks were jeopardized and unemployment insurance and medicare checks but also the cops on the beat in terms of health and safety, protection of consumers, protection of workers. all of the things that we take for granted the government has to do, even the justice department could not prosecute because there was no money. the government shut down essentially woke a lot of americans up to the fact that they need the government and anybody who threatens to shut it

down is not acting in the public interest. >> and when government employees go without pay, what happens to their lives, and what is the ripple effect into the economy considering how many government employees there are? >> well, obviously millions of people no longer get paychecks. they no longer get benefits. they pull into their shells. they're not going to spend any money. it becomes sort of a worse and worse situation on top of the already extended great recession that we are experiencing. if we had a government shutdown things would get even worse in terms of just people not spending. >> politically does the '90s shutdown tell us anything about the ones republicans have started to invoke this time around? >> well, here's what we did learn, keith, and you referred to it before. it was a terrible travesty for republicans. newt gingrich was the one who essentially pulled the plug. he did not like the deal that bill clinton was offering on the budget, and he said, okay, we're not going to play. we're going to shut down the

government, and it turned out that the public did not like the government being used as a pawn in a partisan battle over the budget. i mean, the constitution does not say that one party can shut down the government. it gives one party, and there are checks and balances and all sorts of other things that a party can utilize but not shutting down the government. and this proved to be a disaster for republicans in the '96 election. i remember a lot of democratic candidates across the country in congressional elections, they used pictures of newt gingrich basically to knock down their opponents. >> let me ask you about this data that came in from the treasury department that seemed to project this total yawn. 8% lower fiscal deficit for the first year of the obama presidency for the fiscal year of the obama presidency. why is that not bigger news than it seems to be? >> well, it should be bigger news. i think that a lot of the public has become just sort of eyes

glaze over, keith, when it comes to any sort of numbers or the budget deficit. the fact of the matter is that most people in this country are concerned about jobs and wages. they are not terribly concerned about the budget deficit. a lot of people, particularly republicans, have been whipped up into a frenzy over this long-term budget deficit and are told that the government cannot and should not do anything to bring jobs back again even if that means maybe a little bit more deficit spending and as a result, stories like this sort of get buried. but they are important. the public has got to understand that the obama administration is actually heading in the right direction both in terms of improving the economy, slow as it is, remember, this economy was in terrible shape when obama took over and also getting some long-term control over the budget deficit. >> former labor secretary robert reich as always, sir, thanks for your time. >> thanks, keith. >> republicans literally threatening to vote against, even filibuster against tax cuts for everyone else if the rich don't get them too.

they drop 8% in the first fiscal year of president obama. you'd think maybe the president's old campaign manager david plouffe could work with those details in a campaign. we'll ask him next. the man who got out the vote for obama two years ago on getting out the vote two months

the man who got out the vote for obama two years ago on getting out the vote two months from now, david plouffe on where is the midterm messaging. newt, nuts. now new noodle-headed nonsense. first she makes gay innuendos about her opponent in the gop senate delaware then she does not get the endorsement of dick armey. coincidence? and amid the talk of hallowed ground and sensitivity, what about the unpublicized truth that before the world trade center fell, it contained a mosque? ahead on "countdown." nationwide insurance, let me hear it.

i've never had an accident. is there anything you can do for me ? yeah, i'm here with liz. i need a brilliant idea right now. guys ! i just gagged. here it is. deductible. take $50 off. wait. take $100 off for every year she doesn't have an accident... ... and call it vanishing deductible. hook, line, sinker. done.

with 50 days until the midterm elections, republicans are not merely preparing to hold the tax cuts hostage, they're twisting themselves into knots over whether to admit they're holding those middle class tax cuts hostage. the uselessness of them is proved again for the rich. the deficit is down 8%. but yet in our fourth story still today a national magazine, "newsweek," wrote another premortem for the democrats. what to do with president obama's former campaign manager david plouffe in just a moment. the president will be ramping up his fund-raising efforts as the midterms approach. evidently a necessity. according to "the new york times," over the past six weeks the gop has outspent the democrats in advertising. republicans, $20 million. democrats, 13 millions. that includes a gop advantage in spending from outside groups like the advocacy group americans for prosperity.

as promised let's turn to barack obama's presidential campaign official, david plouffe, now democratic party campaign consultant. also author of "the audacity to win: how obama won and how we can beat the party of limbaugh back and palin." thanks for your time, sir. >> good to be with you. >> the house leader hints, just hints, at flexibility, maybe he would vote for just the tax cuts for lower class, middle class incomes, and his party comes out at him like it's the lord of the flies and they've decided to re-enact it and he has to backtrack to the point where now filibuster that position that he says he was open to might be a realistic possibility. why is the narrative, look, this is the rich people's party, that's what this election is about -- why is that narrative not the narrative of every campaign for the next 50 days? >> well, listen, i think it should be the narrative of a lot of campaigns. what we have right now, two things are going to help us have a better election than a lot of the pundits think. one, we turn this into a real

choice for voters, and voters want to have a discussion about candidates in districts and states of differences. second, democratic turnout so what we have now is very clear. the president and most democrats want to give a tax cut for the middle class and as you said, everybody, up to $250,000 in income. the republicans want to take $700 billion, the same folks who lecture us about spending who created this deficit mess in the first place, almost as big as the recovery act, by the way, which saved us from the great depression, saved us from the policies that led us off the cliff the republicans brought and created over 3 million jobs. they want to give $700 billion to millionaires and billionaires. this is not a single mom and pop small business person. the people they want to give tax cuts to are people like glenn beck and sarah palin. so this is a great contrast and we need to drive it home. first of all, less about the politics than the country can afford this. this is the same policies that took the country to the brink of a great depression and these guys want the keys back.

so we've got to make this clear to every voter that this is the distinction. as robert reich said, the economy -- no one is satisfied where we are today but we are heading in the right direction. they want to take us back. >> you said, point number two, to point number two, the polls look dire if you look at likely voters. if you look at the registered voters, the polls look tie. how do the democrats in 50 days turn their supporters from registered voters into likely voters? >> well, first of all, we have to work at it. we had great turnout in '08 and i can tell you it was not easy. it didn't just happen. was really hard. so we have to go out to those voters and say there's a real choice here, a real stake. these are the same policies that led the country off the cliff. as you mentioned all the spending out there, it's by the big oil companies. it's by the big health insurers, karl rove and his secretive groups are trying to take over this election. why is that? because the special interests, the millionaires and billionaires like it when the republicans are in control. and we ought to tell them who the real republican party is. that will be on display in delaware. mcconnell and boehner is bad

enough. it is the party of limbaugh, beck and palin. we just got to do good politics, good grassroots work. i've seen in the last couple of weeks a real increase in activism and volunteerism. democrats are starting to get big. we have to find these voters, talk to them and tell them if they don't vote, then we're going to hand the keys back over to the republican party and the unprecedented assault that they brought to our economy, to the middle class, to small businesses, that's what we're going to get again. >> in your book you have written and i'll quote it "barack obama and his supporters created something powerful and real, the likes of which we may not see for a very long time with the exception of 2012, i hope." how does that apply to 2010 in the next 50 days, if it does. >> well, listen, you know, just historically you're going to have a lot less people voting in an off year. 140 million just about in '08. you may have 80 million this time. a lot of that drop-off were the types of voters we got out in '08. so we've got to work hard. first of all, you can't take them for granted. and so you've got to persuade

them just as we would an independent swing voter about the stakes of the election, if you're running a campaign, you've got to introduce them to the candidate and then, secondly, we have to do great organizing. so are we going to replicate what we did in '08? of course not. if we can get turnout among sporadic voting democrats and first-time voters, we're going to turn 51/49 losses into 51/49 wins. >> david plouffe's new book is "the audacity to win: how to win the party back." "thanks for your time and good luck with your book, sir. >> thanks, keith still, for the gop it is not all cigarette trees and lemonade springs on the big rock candy mountain. andy card says what newt gingrich has said was out of line and the puppeteer of the tea party will not endorse the tea party senate wanna-be in delaware.

newt goes too nuts even for andy card. the twitter report follows over -- up 10%. last tweeted photo of self like two weeks. coincidence? i think not. tweet of the day, google has a miss teen south carolina speech maker and the address, type something and then hit enter a bunch. so i tried it. i tried it. type in one word and then keep hitting enter. what i got was i would like to state that the purpose of the present invention is to provide a login for this account as well as the ability to make a difference in the lives of the people. we're not in the same way to

doing all this and more on facebook in the album named after the famous tv show, and i have been a number of different ways to get the best deal for this single-family house in the big apple to the punch scribe.goinglabs.com. sounds like sarah palin. let's play "odd ball." we begin with moroccan soccer. rabat and penalty kick to see who moves on. rabat keeper makes a diving save to his left and there was much rejoicing. too much rejoicing as he is pounding his chest, the ball rolled into the goal and ended up being the winner. this, in sports, is what we used to call premature jocularity. to another one, armenia with a chocolate bar that would make willie wonka weep. it's the world's largest, over 18 feet long, 10 inches thick or more. the entire bar weighs close to five tons.

an armenian chocolate company made the gigantic bar to celebrate its tenth anniversary. no word if this is a one-time creation or the new plan to market to the giant demographic. either way, we should see the signs of the peanuts in the crunchy version. finally to lincoln center for the performing arts where we see people making it work. the annual spring fashion week which takes place in the fall because, well, because fashion is a different calendar. and she sticks the landing. down goes frazier. not bad but in her defense it is hard to walk and hold an apple at the same time. can it core an apple? but it is tough to decide if this even creeps into the favorite catwalk catastrophes. taking a look back it's hard to imagine surpassing the '80s. the good thing about fashion week, in fact, it goes on for a week. "oddball" will be on the lookout for the next splash. jean robinson on nattering newtism as gingrich claims the president is pursuing a kenyan

anti-colonial world view next.

gingrich wants you to know he can deal multiple fear cards all at the same time. in our third story the screening of his straight to dvd thriller on radical islam the former house speaker starts pedaling highbrow birthism calling barack obama a kenyan anti-colonial con who quote, is beyond our comprehension. in other words the president is so other we can't even understand him. perhaps linking his phobia with popcorn he linked it to the screening of america at risk, the war with no name with newt and callista -- i thought his wife was jackie -- no, not jackie. that was the first one. marianne. marianne's out? callista is in? how long do you think she's got? anyway, the film, in conjunction with the astro turf group citizens united it warns of end time and the final struggle. speaking afterwards with the national review and msnbc contributor dave weigel gingrich

praised a recent piece in "forbes" magazine about president obama by conservative writer mr. desouza who writes the u.s. is being ruled according to the dreams of a luo tribesman in the 1950s. this philandering, inebriated american socialist who raged against the world for denying him the realization of his anti-colonial ambitions is now setting the nation's agenda through the reincarnation of his dreams in his son. mr. gingrich believes that is stunning insight. >> what if he is so outside our comprehension that only if you understand kenyan, anti-colonial behavior, can you begin to piece together and that that's the most accurate, predictive model for his behavior? >> gingrich suggesting obama is following in the olinski tradition. >> this is a person who is fundamentally out of touch with how the world works, who happened to have played a

wonderful con as a result of which he is now president. i think he worked very hard at being a person who is normal, reasonable, moderate, bipartisan, transparent, accommodating, none of which was true. he was authentically dishonest. >> but could that be a case of projecting his own life's experience onto somebody else? his second wife, marianne, telling "esquire" magazine about when he cheated on her while ginning up the clinton impeachment. he asked her to tolerate the affair. she refused. then he went on to give a speech in erie, pennsylvania, on family values. questioning his expertise, the ex says the former house speaker told her then, it doesn't matter what i do. people need to hear what i have to say. there's no one else who can say what i can say. it doesn't matter what i live. this morning white house press secretary robert gibbs said it does. he called him out. >> he's trying to appeal to the fringe of people who don't believe the president was born in this country. you would normally expect better from somebody who held the position of speaker of the house.

>> former bush chief of staff andy card said gingrich's words are not helpful and he's, quote, disappointed by the rhetoric. former bush speechwriter david frum less measured in his response. nothing more offends conservatives than liberal accusations of racial animus. yet here is racial animus unconcealed and unapologetic. and it is seized by savvy editors and an ambitious politician is just the material to please a conservative audience. that's an insult to every conservative in america. and we haven't even gotten around to the liberals. joining me "washington post" associate editor, pulitzer prize winning columnist eugene robinson. gene, good evening. >> good evening, keith. >> years and years ago, i was seated at the white house correspondents dinner next to tom downey, a nine-term congressman from new york. and gingrich got up and he spoke and i said to thomas, or whispered, i don't agree with a word of this but at least the man believes in his own convictions and tom nearly snapped my head off. believes it? he's reading back what his focus groups and his polling tells him it wants to hear.

so, gene, i don't agree with a word of this but at least the man believes in his own convictions, right? >> keith, i don't know how to break this to you -- >> fooled again, am i? >> i have a feeling, yes, you've been fooled again. this might, just might be a cynical political ploy. clearly i think robert gibbs called him out quite accurately as did david frum. it's an appeal to the fringe birthers, an attempt to make the president seem exotic and other and also black, by the way. and, you know, the actual scary thing would be if gingrich even believed a part of this nonsense about anti-colonial kenyan behavior. >> but there's something different about in this time as opposed to all the other crap that gingrich has thrown out. this is trying to paint the president as this other sounds to me like george wallace going

from a reasonable, tolerant, i don't give a damn what people look like as long as they vote for me politician in the south in the '50s into seizing on racial animus as the way to get to the white house. i mean, it's a little david dukish even, isn't it? >> well, this is way out there in that, you know, he's essentially trying to say foreign black militant in another language. the interesting thing, though, is that gingrich has kind of been out there on the edge about the lower manhattan mosque. he was about sonia sotomayor and about shirley sherrod and, you know, in a way that suggests this whole sort of bizarre clash of civilizations idea, the notion that what he would consider as us, the whole kind of anglo-american, judeo-christian white enterprise as being besieged by other civilizations, number one among them being islam.

you know, and i hope he doesn't but one wonders if that idea actually has some purchase inside the unkempt thing that is the head of newt gingrich. >> given that we were colonies and we rebelled, that we were anti-colonialists, when did anti-colonialism become anti-american? i thought we've almost always also worked with the colonies who sought to get out from under the thumb of the european colonists. >> yeah, because we didn't like being colonies. we didn't like colonialism. but somehow, again, inside his head, that narrative has been twisted, and one imagines that he fancies himself, you know, a retired british colonel in 1963 sitting around in his armchair puffing his pipe saying who lost kenya, you know, that sort of thing. >> yes. why do they call row desia rhodesia? >> why do they call -- what's his end game? nobody's blown himself up more in america except wile e.

coyote. >> i suppose we could give him a nice assortment of fine acme products as a parting gift. >> one big anvil. >> other than that, nothing really. this doesn't lead anywhere. i don't know a single republican involved in politics who believes newt gingrich could be president except newt gingrich. so i think this leads perhaps, i don't know, to a cable tv show, a radio show, to becoming one of those small business people like glenn beck and rush limbaugh. >> not with that diction. no, no. no. msnbc political analyst, eugene robinson, great thanks, gene. >> great to be here with you. >> too tea party for dick armey. it's the home phobic anti-masturbation candidate and she's not going to win tomorrow. so she just burst out with it on the air in the middle of her newscast, the one thing those of us in news are never supposed to

tell you next in "worsts." when rachel joins you at the top of the hour, katie miller, the top cadet who resigned her position over don't ask, don't tell, was lady gaga's special guest at the vma.

if you're a tea party candidate for the senate and dick armey won't endorse you, what do you do then? a little detail absent from the debate, there was a mosque inside the world trade center.

the problem with unleashing the crazy the tea party is rapidly discovering is when the crazy is too crazy for you which is why freedom works is not endorsing christine o'donnell. first get out your pitchforks and torches. the bronze to newscaster to miss petterson in oslo, norway, formerly of radio station nrk, she started her newscast saturday the 18-month veteran complained that her employers why putting too much pressure on everybody and since she wanted to be able to eat properly again and be able to breathe, she was quitting and walking away. she then grabbed a couple of beer, pulled the cord and jumped down the emergency slide. seriously, her last words on the air were, nothing important has happened anyway. don't tell them that. what are you telling them that for? you're going to ruin our whole profession's purpose in life, the something about something near you could kill you and if you don't listen to me, you'll never know what it was. this is a nice business. you have to go and tell them that every once in a while

there's nothing to worry about? gees. runner-up, michael steele, the rnc chairman with a bit of an about-face. see if you can spot it. the issue is opening up capital and credit lines for small businesses. last week, mr. steele claimed it was a good republican idea. >> the republican leadership on the hill has offered time and time again it will continue to do so until they take the majority in november when they can actually begin to act and put into place these policies that empower small businesses by creating -- by helping them create jobs, by opening up capital in credit markets. >> of course that was last week when steele liked credit lines for small businesses. now -- >> you have the president proposing a small business bill which is nothing more than t.a.r.p.-3 or mini-t.a.r.p. in which basically you're going to put money into financial institutions on the assumption that small businesses are going to go and take out credit loans or credit lines. they don't need that. >> clearly small businesses only need republican lines of credit not democratic lines of credit.

our winner, news media in general, the tokyo rose limbaughs of this world in particular for omitting a fact buried deep in saturday's editions of "the new york times." there was a mosque in the world trade center. it was on the 17th floor of the south tower, world trade center number two, and it was in operation no later than 1999. it even included a sanctified washing area for the ceremonial cleansing before prayer and there was a less formalized mosque in the stairwell between the 106th and 107th floors of the tower where the workforce at windows on the world, the restaurant, prayed and where they presumably died throughout the attacks. and throughout this stupid childish xenophobic debate, there was nobody who mentioned this fact until in "the new york times" this path saturday, september 11th. there were two mosques in ground zero the moment it became ground zero.

damning words today from one of the tea party's astroturf group about tomorrow's republican primary in delaware. we are not convinced that christine o'donnell can win. our number one story, the hostile takeover of the republican party by former officials of the republican party has turned into a circular firing squad of the republican party in delaware. tomorrow's primary in the first state pits moderate establishment candidate mike castle against christine o'donnell, a marketing consultant, political pundit and relative unknown before the tea party express sarah palin and jim demint backed her candidacy. on radio, congresswoman michele bachmann hopped on the bandwagon only to find out she got on the wrong bandwagon. >> what a privilege to be on the air today with delaware's next united states governor. >> freedom works agrees o'donnell will not be the state's next governor nor senator, which she is running for, michelle.

former congressional aide and rnc official matt "the sideburns" cubi explaining to reporters at a christian science monitor breakfast with a group he leads with former republican house leader dick armey, quote, stayed out of that race because we're not convinced christine o'donnell can win. that assessment borne out by nate silver's projections. according to nate, mike castle is 95% likely to beat in november. o'donnell's chance stands at 17%. still o'donnell who portrays herself as a fiscal conservative in spite of her own troubled financial past explained to fox republican news this morning that she has a larger tent than you think. >> i'm excited that the tea party has gotten behind us. but i do want to point out that we have broad-based support. we've got a lot of hillary democrats working behind us with us, because they're frustrated with what this administration is doing. >> apparently that's 42 women actually named hillary democrat. 42 hillarys agree.

incidentally, what does it tell miss o'donnell if she wrote this in 1998? when a married person uses pornography or is unfaithful it compromises not just his or her purity but also compromises the spouse's purity. as a church we need to teach a higher standard than abstinence. we need to preach a righteous lifestyle. what does it say if she could write that and say it on mtv and still not get the endorsement of dick armey? there are other headaches for republican tea parties tomorrow. in new hampshire sarah palin and jim demint would are normally on the same page have endorsed opposing candidates on republican ticket for senator. in the race to become gop candidate for governor of new polling suggests carl paladino is now tied with rick lazio. the tea party candidate best known for sending out e-mails that contain racism, porn and pictures of bestiality. and then there are the charges of anti-semitism the tea partiers are addressing or fighting perhaps. politico's ken vogel reporting about the new effort by freedom works called diverse tea, a new outreach program aimed at recruiting african-americans, hispanics and jewish people into

the tea party. the last group is up first. ads will begin running in jewish publications shortly. why start there? freedom works president kibby explains "i think there is a more open debate to be had in the jewish community but there is no genius behind that. i had to start somewhere. joining me now is the senior reporter for politico, ken vogel. thanks for your time tonight. >> great to be with you, keith. >> to your piece in a moment. first christine o'donnell. what does it say that armey's group is refusing to endorse but is obviously the tea party candidate in delaware? >> it says that they're pragmatists. they realize that though mike castle is a centrist and also an insider, two things that are really anathema in the tea party movement, he stands the best chance of winning in the general electric. that same set of considerations is clearly not what is driving tea partyer, they have thrown their weight behind a series of candidates who are less electable than their primary election competition and that has democrats in the sort of strange but increasingly common

position again on tuesday of rooting for the tea party candidate, in this case miss o'donnell. >> is that where her claim of support from hillary democrats comes from, is it, in fact, democrats who are trying to get her nominated so that he has a prospect of winning that race? >> this one is a little more puzzling. i wasn't sure what she was referring to. she said she seemed to be suggesting that voters who supported hillary clinton in her democratic primary bid against barack obama and who have become frustrated with the obama administration, that there might be some potential traction for her there in a general election. the folks who are frustrated with obama including those democrats who supported clinton, the democrats are frustrated with him are frustrated with him because he hasn't been boldly liberal enough. those people are not going to vote for christine o'donnell. >> mr. castle told kelly o'donnell, the entire world seems to have this last name apparently between norah, lawrence, kelly and christine, bottom line is, if christine o'donnell is nominated, republicans lose the election automatically. is he right?

>> well, certainly the polls would suggest that mike castle has a much greater chance of running against the likely democratic nominee chris kunz as opposed tohis year where tea party candidates and candidates who effectively seize the banner of the tea party are able to trump not just electoral odds but also what seems to be pragmatic electoral strategy. who knows? >> what happens to castle if indeed he wins tomorrow? what happens with the tea party in delaware and the o'donnell -- o'donnell, there was a series of extraordinary cheap shots and innuendo first on her staff's behalf and then she finally just ripped the pretext off of it and made these man pants jokes from last week. what happens to castle even if he wins that thing tomorrow? >> i think castle will be okay to an extent. let's not forget this guy has held office in delaware for 30

years, probably shaken every single hand in that state. democrats will probably try to present him as having tacked to the right a bit on abortion rights, climate change in his primary against miss o'donnell. however, what could potentially damage him more is that he was forced to go negative and delaware is not a state in which negative politics are sort of de regueur. this is not new jersey. this is not illinois. so the fact that mike castle can now be sort of presented in a different light by democrats is not the same mike castle that has been so popular for so long in delaware could potentially be more problematic than any alleged tax to the right on policy positions for castle in general. >> your piece today, the naacp highlighted anti-semitism in its statement that called for tea party leaders to get their house in order. define the reality and the perception of the tea party's issue with the jewish community. >> well, i'm not sure that there really is a significant issue, certainly not as much as there is with the black community or the hispanic community so this struck me as a little ham

handed, pun intended, to be reaching out to jews initially to try to bring them on board with the tea party movement. if you think about jews who tend to be conservative, which are the small minority of american jews, they're either conservative fiscally in which case they tend to be sort of country club republicans to generalize, probably grossly, or they tend to be national security conservatives. so-called neo-conservatives, primarily because of their interest in a strong israel and an american foreign policy that supports a strong israel. neither of those two things, country club conservatives or neoconservatives are really big parts of the tea party base, so it was a little puzzling that they identified jews as the first groups that they were diverse -- tea. >> the tea party always with a surprise for all of us including politico's ken vogel. great thanks, ken. >> thanks a lot, keith. >> that's september 13th, the 2,081 since president obama declared victory in afghanistan.