can cain weather sexual harassment questions? can romney quiet conservative critics? and can michele bachmann, once near the top of the polls, regain her standing in the first tier? we'll ask them. with us this morning, presidential candidate and minnesota congresswoman michele bachmann. then, the view from the democrats. how does the president overcome america's high anxiety about the economy? will he have to run away from his record against the republican nominees? joining us the leader of the democratic party, congresswoman debbie wasserman schultz of florida. and finally our political roundtable. how wide open is the race for the gop nomination?

and more on the national conversation over the penn state candle. with us, "washington post" columnist e.j. dionne and "the new york times" columnist david brooks. good morning. on the subject of foreign policy, the republican presidential candidates met last night for their tenth debate, and leveled more attacks against president obama than against each other. >> look, one thing you can know, and that is if we re-elect barack obama, iran will have a nuclear weapon. and if we elect mitt romney, if you elect me as the next president, they will not have a nuclear weapon. >> and if there's anything that we know, president obama has been more than willing to stand with occupy wall street, but he hasn't been willing to stand with israel. >> there are a number of ways to be smart about iran, and relatively few ways to be dumb. and the administration skipped all the ways to be short. >> more on that in just a couple of moments. but first this morning, the child sexual abuse scandal at

penn state. after 46 years on the sidelines, head coach joe paterno was not at yesterday's penn state/nebraska game. there was, instead, a subdued mood in happy valley. >> the nebraska and penn state players, with the sentiments of many around the nation, gathering in prayer for the victims in these allegations, showing solidarity and support. >> the scene on the field yesterday. we go now live to harrisburg, pennsylvania, where we are joined by the man who as pennsylvania's attorney general in 2009 began the investigation into allegations of child sexual abuse by former penn state assistant football coach jerry sandusky, who you see here, as he was arrested, and a subsequent cover-up by penn state officials. he is now the governor of the state, and as such is a member of the penn state board of trustees. governor corbett, welcome to "meet the press." >> thank you, david. >> i know you're limited, because you were attorney general, in speaking about the criminal investigation.

but i have to ask you more broadly, are there more victims that we don't know about? >> i don't know the answer to that, david. when you conduct investigations like this, and in my career i have conducted investigations like this, the more that you can get public about what has happened, the more that you can demonstrate that law enforcement and authorities are going to assist the victims of these types of crimes, it is not uncommon to see more victims come forward. hopefully there aren't any more victims. hopefully we know who they all are. but if there are more victims, we encourage them, the state police, the attorney general's office, and i, encourage them to come forward, let us know. and we're going to work to do everything we possibly can to help you. this is about the victims. >> you have to understand, people, those of us who are parents, including myself, i have a 9-year-old boy at home, and you hear about instances of a graduate assistant coach, mcqueary, who sees a 9 or 10-year-old boy being sodomized

mcqueary, who sees a 9 or 10-year-old by sandusky in a shower, according to his testimony, does nothing to physically stop it. calls his father, does not call the police. his father does nothing to stop it. runs it up the chain. nobody calls the police. and you have to ask yourself, why isn't mcqueary or his father actually charged with a crime? >> well, the attorney general made a decision, and i'm going to make this from observations, not from conversations with the attorney general, that he is a witness to this case. that he met the minimum obligation of reporting it up, but did not, in my opinion, meet a moral obligation that all of us would have. i answered a question the other day of, what would you do? and i think everybody believes that they would go in and break that up. unfortunately that isn't what happened. and that's clear from the presentment. but we need to move forward. >> mcqueary is on administrative leave by the board of trustees. >> right. >> should he still have a job? >> well, that's a determination that the board of trustees, but

more importantly the new administration, with rod erickson as the president, will make a decision on. but they have to keep in mind that this is also somebody who is a witness to this crime, and is a very important witness to this crime. >> let me ask you as governor about the law in your state. now, when mcqueary goes to joe paterno and says, i saw something of a sexual nature. by law, and people may not know this, in pennsylvania, unlike a lot of other states, some 40 other states, all paterno has to do by law is report it to the head of his department. and then the institution, the head of the institution is responsible for calling the police, or calling child services. so if paterno does what he should have done by law, did he do enough? and should that law be changed? >> well, obviously the attorney general, one, made the decision that he did enough. and said he's not a subject in the investigation. should the law be changed? absolutely.

i know that members of both parties, republican and democrats, have already introduced measures to make that change. and we have to make sure that the change in the law is one that is effective. it's easy enough to take a look to see what other states have done. but i'm sure that within the next few weeks, you will probably see bills become public. i wouldn't be surprised to see if a bill was passed between now and the end of this year. >> there's a very key point here that has to do with the charity that sandusky set up called the second mile. which according to the grand jury report, is where he targeted kids for sexual abuse. now, in 2002, when one of the victims was allegedly sexually attacked and mcqueary witnessed, all the administration at penn state did, according to the report, was tell sandusky, don't bring kids onto campus. nobody tells the police. nobody tells child protective services. they do tell the second mile. and the lawyer at the second mile used to be the lawyer at penn state, who was himself

aware that the police had investigated a prior incident with sandusky back in 1998. you no doubt have some serious questions about that charity and who's on the board of the charity and those who knew what was going on. >> well, first, the determination has to be made as to what was going on. as the attorney general has indicated, this is an ongoing investigation. and i'm sure that that is part of it, as to what information, and when it was communicated to the executive director of the second mile, to the lawyers of the second mile, and from there, what was passed along to the members of the board of that organization. and there are many members who are from the community of state college who are on that organization. the second mile has done a lot of great work with students. unfortunately, though, mr. sandusky has done a lot of bad work with these students. >> i just have to ask you as a trustee, as the governor of the state, as the former attorney general of the state, how did

this happen? i mean, was this -- was this a culture of indifference? a culture of cover-up? did it extend throughout the university? go beyond the university to the police, to the d.a.? where? >> well, two things, david. number one, as you know, i was just elected last year. i'm new to the board of trustees. in fact, thursday and friday were my first meetings with the board of trustees. i've had representatives there. one of the reasons that i went there, in addition to having planned to be there already, is to understand and get a better handle on what's going on. to see exactly what's going on. but secondly, the board has appointed ken frazier to conduct an investigation. his vice chair is ron tamales, my secretary of education, to investigate exactly what happened. and i think some of the questions that you just asked, including is this just a culture of people not questioning what is going on. not passing information along as they should. i think that is going to be the

subject of that investigation, and i always wait for the results of investigations before i issue an opinion. >> do you think that the culture of football at penn state ultimately corrupted the rest of the institution, and forced it to fail a basic moral test? >> well, i'm not going to call it the culture of football at penn state. it's -- your question should be, is what is the openness at penn state, and, frankly, maybe at all major universities, and even small universities. small colleges. i had somebody indicating to me that they told me a story earlier about a small community, and their programs, and people not talking about things that they should talk about. i think one of the lessons that we need to learn is from this, is that when people see something like this, or hear about something like this, you need to investigate right away. you need to report it. we have lost the focus of what's in the best interest of the

child when you see something like this. >> what about the future of the football program. as you remember, usc, when it had financial improprieties with running back reggie bush had to decline a bowl invitation for two years. should that happen at penn state? should the football program be suspended for a period of time? >> well, i keep in mind this had nothing to do with the men on that team right now. and i don't think that they should have to suffer because of the actions of maybe a few, including mr. sandusky. but i think it is a question that not only should the investigation by ken frazier take a look at, but that the board of trustees should take a look at. >> should they go to a bowl game if invited? >> i think that's a question that has to be determined by the board of trustees. and i'd have to give that thought. >> what about funding for penn state and ultimately the financial health of the state? moody's has said they're going to take a look at its bond

rating because of the allegations at penn state. the financial liability of this institution through lawsuits, through loss of support from donors, could be monumental. do you not believe? >> well, it could be. but, i don't engage in speculation like that. i think if you look at the financial statement that was actually presented to the board on friday, they're in very strong position. and people should take a look at that. they do get some funding from the state of pennsylvania. i think it's maybe 7.5% of their total operating budget. but i think from a financial standpoint, penn state is in a very good position right now. >> from a criminal point of view, is there more to come? >> from a point of view of having conducted investigations like this in the past, you never know what's to come, but the more that you press, and especially now the charges are filed against individuals, should some of them decide to

cooperate, if they tell us information that we don't have, that maybe many in the media and in the public are speculating on, is there the potential for that? sure. there's always potential for that. >> all right, we'll leave it there. governor corbett, thank you very much for your time. >> thank you for having me, david. >> joining me now, republican presidential candidate, congresswoman of minnesota, michele bachmann. congresswoman bachmann, welcome back. >> thank you, david. good to be with you this morning. >> there's a lot to discuss on the campaign trail. but i have to ask you first about this horrible event, series of events at penn state. and ask you whether you think, as a national figure, whether there is a role for congress to play in investigating this? where you think the national conversation has to go from here on what has happened at penn state? >> well, there's a national conversation, and the lens that i look at this through is as a mother. i'm a mother of five biological children and 23 foster children, and my heart is, i think reflective of that of the

american people. this is so horrific on the level of a parent. i think about my children. if that was my child. and i think my automatic reaction would be, even though i'm a small woman, i'd want to go find that guy and beat him to a pulp. i think that's what any parent would want to do when they think about their child. but clearly, this is very high profile now, as it should be. and i have no doubt that this will, with this level of scrutiny, justice will be done. and this is a state matter. it needs to stay at the state level. and i think that it's good that the media is paying a lot of attention to this, because this should never happen to any child. >> just one more on this. you say it's a state matter. as you know, the department of education is looking into this, as well, to see if there was an area where federal law applies. do you think it's a matter for congress to get involved in? as you know, congress can look at anything. they did in terms of steroids. they can look at it in terms of institutional abuse, or conspiracy of silence. >> well, i think that the

pendulum swings, and when something horrific happens, people's automatic reaction is somebody needs to do something. but it doesn't necessarily mean that this issue should be kicked up to congress. i really do believe this needs to stay exactly in the jurisdiction where the offense occurred. congress has a lot of other things to pay attention to, but i think this needs to be handled, and again, i think this is one place, the media gets beaten up a lot, but i think is is exactly where the media is needed more than ever, to bring light on to this situation. that's the best thing that can be done. >> all right. let me switch gears now and talk about the important issues of this campaign, as well. and talk about your standing in the campaign. here's a flyer that you are circulating, and as a key point it makes, it is that i am the one, true conservative in the race, and i can win. you've got a book coming out, and here's the cover of it, "core of conviction: my story." what is the distinguishing character, as a conservative,

between you and mitt romney? >> well, i think the distinguishing characteristic is that i have been consistent throughout my career. i'm 55 years old. i spent 50 years in the real world, and then 5 years in the lion's den in washington, d.c., fighting against out of the out-of-control spending. probably the number one thing between governor romney and myself, it's not personal, it's just issues, would be the fact that i was the lead opponent of president obama's obama care. that's the government takeover health care. governor romney instituted that program in massachusetts, and i think it's highly unlikely to think that he will be the one who will be able to fully repeal obama care as president of the united states. i brought 40,000 americans to washington, d.c. to fight against the implementation of obama care. i have the commitment. and i also wrote the law, the legislation, to repeal obama care. so i have that core of conviction. and i'll see this through.

so that we can get back to patient-centered care. and really the real issue is to bring costs down in health care. unfortunately, that's not what obama care brought. >> as you know, the president's senior adviser david plouffe said on this program about mitt romney, he has, quote, no core. do you agree with that? >> well, there's certainly a sharp contrast between myself and governor romney. he has been pro-choice. i am pro-life. he has been for marriage between people of the same sex. i am for marriage between one man and one woman. obama care, obviously. if you go issue after issue, governor romney has been on both sides of the issues. i've been on one side of the issues. i make no apologies. and that's why i say i have a core of conviction. and of all of the candidates in the race, you won't find any surprises. and that's why i invite your viewers to go to nosurprises about 2012.com. and that website shows the compare and contrast between the candidates.

there's no surprises with me. so nosurprises2012.com. >> one of the surprises in this race were sexual harassment allegations against herman cain. his lawyer said this week that other women should, quote, think twice before making allegations. you talk about yourself as a woman in the race, as a mom in the race. are these disqualifying allegations, in your mind, if proven to be true, for herman cain? >> well, of course, that would be for the voters to decide. but, that is -- that's something that would have to be proven. because on one hand, it's a terrible thing to be falsely accused of something that you didn't do. but on the other hand, women have the right to be protected in the workplace. and so ultimately, it really depends on the truth of these allegations. i have no information about that. so i don't have anything i can share. but i think that, again, that would be up to the voters to decide. this race, if anything, david, has proved to be extremely fluid. the voters have not made up their minds. this is wide open. it's a state by state race.

it's iowa first, then new hampshire, then south carolina and on florida. and that's what we're paying attention to, is the schedule of these early primaries. and i think that we have a very good chance, after all, i won the iowa straw poll in less time than any other candidate in the history of the straw poll. and i'm the first woman to win the iowa straw poll. >> let me ask you about this. you had a lot of momentum after that but it seemed to be taken away when rick perry got into the race. you fell down to the polls. you're now at 4% in our most recent poll and yet rick perry appears to be stumbling. how do you get back to a place where you're in that top tier? >> david, that's a very good question. i think doing exactly what we're doing right now. i'll be getting on a plane and flying back to iowa from south carolina today. and what we're doing is meeting with people on the ground. we have a very good organization in iowa. we have a lot of identified supporters. and so we need to do the very hard work of meeting people and greeting people, talking to them, listening to them, and organizing.

because iowa is a caucus state. it's getting your actual supporters out to the caucus, and then they make their decision. it's a great form of government. it's true grassroots politics. then from there on to new hampshire and on to south carolina. so we're doing exactly what we can do, and i think that the momentum is turning in our direction. >> so let's take a few minutes and talk about a few quick issues. foreign policy was the topic last night at the debates. you said you would reinstate waterboarding in terms of how detainees, interrogated detainees, are treated when they are in -- held captive, held prisoner. you went on to say the following here about the president's foreign policy. watch. >> today, under barack obama, he is allowing the aclu to run the cia. it is as though we have decided we want to lose in the war on terror under president obama. that's not my strategy. >> that the president almost wanted to lose the war on terror. did you feel that way after he

killed osama bin laden, ordering that raid? do you feel that way after he ordered more drone attacks on terrorists in pakistan than the previous administration? >> those are good, tactical moves that were made. and those, i think all americans would agree with. but the bigger picture, the strategic blunders that this administration has made have had a profound consequences. i mean, this is what we need to understand. we are conducting a war on terror. but what we have -- we have no jails for terrorists. so what this means is either we kill them, or we release them. >> but that's not true. >> we also have no authority -- >> we have guantanamo bay. we have some secret prisons that have remained open. that's simply been looked at and found to be not true. and there are other ways that they can actually be held for some smaller period of time on ships, on navy ships in the region, as well. >> we all know that that isn't a long-term solution to this problem. we aren't adding any new terrorists to guantanamo bay.

we only have khalid shaikh mohammed, the admitted mastermind of 9/11, who is at guantanamo bay and others, as well. but we don't have a place to put al qaeda when we pick them up. it's either catch and release. which is a terrible idea. or we have to kill them. what we need to win this war on terror is interrogation. this is where my comment about the aclu comes in. because today, the cia is no longer able to go through the interrogation that yielded such profitable information that saved american lives. that's what i'm interested in. >> but you realize -- >> saving american lives and winning the war on terror. >> you say that -- >> this is say real difference. the only thing -- let me add this. >> yes. >> the only thing that we have available to us today is the army field manual. that's online. so, terrorists can go ahead and read ahead of time what will happen to them when we capture them. and it's really ostensibly, when we capture them today, it's a slap on the wrist. i want to save american lives, and that's why i want the cia to

have every interrogation tool available to them so that we can win the war on terror. >> one more thing. congresswoman, one more. you say the aclu is taking over the cia, it's run now by general david petraeus. >> their philosophy. their philosophy. i agree -- >> i understand what you're saying. let me just make the point. your view that waterboarding should be reinstituted, you understand that puts you at odds with most of the generals, okay, the former republican nominee of your party john mccain, general colin powell, you realize you're on the opposite end of what they believe. do you not trust them and their views? >> well, but -- but i'm on the same side as vice president cheney on this issue, and others, as well. because, again, what we're looking at is what will save american lives. and that's what the most important thing is. we've got to decide that we want to defeat the terrorists. and when we make that decision, we need to -- we need to employ the methods that will best help us to defeat them.

and president obama is not doing that. again, president obama was given a war that is won in iraq. and he's choosing to lose the peace. that's a desecration of the memory of 4,400 americans that gave their lives to liberate iraq. and also, over $800 billion that we have expended. i believe that iraq should pay us back for the money that we spent, and i believe that iraq should pay the families that lost a loved one. several million dollars per life. i think at minimum. this is a terrible situation that the president has left the war on terror in. >> all right. we're going to leave it there. more discussion to come. congresswoman, thank you. >> thank you. more decision 2012. the head of the democratic national committee, congresswoman debbie wasserman schultz, on the president's re-election efforts. and a looming super committee deadline on the debt. can the party unite to make the case for another four years for

president obama? and later, a special conversation with david brooks and e.j. dionne on the national outrage sparked in the wake of the child abuse scandal at penn state.s store, it's really not about you. they say, "well, if you want a firm bed you can lie on one of those, we provide the exact individualization that your body needs. it's really shaping to my body. once they get our bed, they're like, "why didn't i do this sooner?" at our semi-annual sleep sale, save $500 on our classic special edition bed set, and for 5 days only enjoy 36 month financing on selected beds. only at the sleep number store, where queen mattresses start at just $699. a beautiful new room is what you're after-- but look out! spill the paint... and what a disaster! well, not anymore. introducing pouch painter the world's most ingenious no-spill painting solution that combines a high-quality smock with a no-spill paint bucket

that you can take up ladders, around the house, or anywhere you need to paint. i love pouch painter! it's hands free system makes painting a breeze. and no spills! pouch painter helps me go up and down the ladder with ease with never having to worry about a messy clean up! pouch painter is easy to use. just fill the paint container, replace the spill proof lid, slide it into the pouch, you're ready to go. big enough to hold 1.5 quarts, this patented spill-proof painting system lets you twist, turn and move around with ease and never spill a drop! but that's not all! pouch painter is also the most versatile painting smock ever invented. and it protects your clothes from any mess. best of all, it is cleverly designed to hold everything you need. there are pockets for scrapers, brushes, straight edges, even a handy towel loop. going up and down the ladder can be messy and dangerous, but with pouch painter you are always safe and secure. i used to spend more time cleaning up spills than i did painting. pouch painter makes it easier, faster and cleaner than ever before.

just fill, take a dip, and you're ready to paint, mess free! and when you're done, simply pour the unused paint back in the can. and then clean your pouch painter with just soap and water. call now to order your pouch painter system complete with bucket, smock and handy tool pockets for just $19.95! it's the perfect no-mess painting solution for any do-it-yourselfer! so whether you're painting just one room, re-painting the entire house, or you paint for a living, pouch painter is the best thing to happen to painting since the invention of the paint brush! best of all, it costs just $19.95. and when you call, ask your operator about our pouch painter pro, complete with brushes and no-stick painting tape. making a mess will ruin everyone's day! so paint clean, safe and easy the pouch painter way!

coming up, more decision 2012. with the head of the democratic national committee, congresswoman debbie wasserman schultz. and the looming super committee deadline. that's up next.

joining me now, the chair of the democratic national committee and congresswoman of florida, debbie wasserman schultz. congresswoman, welcome back. >> thank you, david. great to be with you. >> as we talk about the republican debates, and the president said this week that he effectively could campaign by just showing these debates, and that he thinks he comes out in favor, whatever people think about the republican field, the

way they feel about the economy is incredibly pessimistic. here were the personal views of folks, according to our latest poll, in terms of their own economic situation, and you have 84% who think their personal economic situation has either gotten worse or stayed the same. americans are simply not better off after president obama's leadership. >> well, david, i think also reflective in your poll is a recognition by the american people that president obama is focused on trying to make sure that the middle class and working families get a fair shake, and that he's fighting really hard to get the economy turned around, and has made progress. taking us from leading hundreds of thousands of jobs a month to now having 20 straight months of growth in the private sector. that's why your polls show that president obama would defeat any of the candidates in the republican field right now. simply because they understand that he is fighting for the average middle-class american, to ensure that there's some prosperity to them, and the entire republican field is

focussed on helping keep the wind at the backs of the wealthy. >> congresswoman, he's had the jobs, there have been his policies. you concede americans are not better off after his leadership? >> well, what i concede is that we do have a long way to go. but we absolutely have begun to turn things around, and we have made steady, but not quick enough, progress. i mean, before president obama took office, we were losing 750,000 jobs a month, david. and now we've had 20 straight months of growth in the private sector. we've added 2.8 million jobs in the private sector alone. we've gone in to add millions of jobs in manufacturing. we're starting to focus on making things in america again. that's what we -- it needs to be all hands on deck. we need -- president obama knows and believes that we need to put the partisanship aside. we need republicans and democrats to work to the. that's what he's pushing so hard for. why he proposed and is pushing for the american jobs act. and why? because he knows we can't wait that he signed an executive order to move the economy

forward on his own, since the republicans won't work with him. >> and yet, folks are overwhelmingly pessimistic about dealing with the debt situation in this country. this is an exclusive politico poll. the full results will be out tomorrow on politico.com. 69% do not believe that the super committee will reach its goal. if he's so committed to bring being down the nation's debt, why is he not in there driving toward a solution? my own reporting tells me, from people involved in those talks, that the white house has had much more of a hands-off approach to dealing with what the super committee will agree to on reducing the debt. >> well, david, the president, as you probably know, called both of the co-chairs, patty murray and deb the other day and made it unequivocally clear that they need to come together and put forward a solution and do everything they can to make sure that those triggers don't kick in. and he also has proposed his own detailed plan. he has laid out for the super committee how he believes that we can reduce our debt, do it in a balanced way, make sure that

we ask more from millionaires and billionaires, and balance that with cuts that we know are painful, but that are absolutely essential in these tough times. president obama has absolutely been engaged. but you know, this is a congressional committee. and there's the members of congress on that committee need to come together. and we need republicans to step up to the plate, and agree to come to a compromise, and not engage in the my way or the highway politics that they consistently engage in. >> listen, they did agree for tax increases that democrats have not accepted this week. but i want to ask you specifically about -- >> well, no, no, no. because that wasn't a serious -- come on. david, that was not a serious proposal. what they proposed was, reducing the number of itemized deductions, in exchange for a package, an extension of all the bush tax cuts, which actually would have resulted in less revenue, and brought the overall tax rate, top tax rate down to 28%. so that was not a serious

proposal. we need a serious proposal with sound basis -- >> if there was new revenue that was proposed, but i realize that's still a subject of debate. >> there was less revenue overall. >> well, again, that's in dispute, according to my reporting on that. on the debt, how irresponsible is it that this president has allowed america's national debt to increase by 41% over his term of office? >> well, president obama inherited a -- a significant, significant debt. one that president bush handed him after receiving a record surplus from president clinton. so, i mean, what we're talking about is president who inherited the results of two wars that were unpaid for, a prescription drugs program unpaid for, and 2001 and 2003 tax cuts that went to the wealthiest, most fortunate americans, unpaid for. and had the most significant economic problems that the republicans had driven us to the brink of economic collapse of any president probably since fdr. so, making sure that we could make investments to get this economy to begin to turn around was incredibly important.

and this president did that, and that's why we've had 20 straight months of growth in the private sector. and he stopped the decline. that was critical and began to turn things around. >> well, but, he certainly didn't stop the decline when it came to the debt. the debt has gone up. and this was candidate obama in july of 2008. watch. >> the problem is, is that the way bush has done it over the last eight years, is to take out a credit card from the bank of china, in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion the first 42 presidents, number 43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome. that's irresponsible. it's unpatriotic. >> that's his rhetoric. should it not be turned on him now? >> no. what should be turned -- well, what we should be turning on is that mitt romney, for example, who was -- who purports to be the alternative to president obama would have allowed detroit to go bankrupt.

would have allowed more than a million jobs in the pipeline to just evaporate. we wouldn't have had an american automobile industry. he's also said that housing is something that we shouldn't address. we should just let investors come in and buy up all the properties, and leave people who are struggling to remain in their homes out in the cold. i mean, so in the alternative, in the fields of republican candidates, they continue to focus on making sure that millionaires and billionaires continue to have it good. and president obama has focused on trying to make sure that the middle class gets 17 different tax cuts for small business owners. 95% of americans got a tax break at the outset of president obama's administration. we are focused, under his leadership, on getting things turned around. and we've made 20 straight months of progress. so while, yes, we have increased our debt, we have done so in a way that has made sure that the economy can start to turn around. so we've made progress. and we've moved forward. we would make even more if the republicans just stop rooting for the economy to fail, and

join us in trying to focus on all of america's jobs, not just on the one job they care about, which is barack obama's. >> we're going to leave it there. the debate will continue. congresswoman, thank you. >> thank you. >> and coming up, a busy week in the republican presidential race as the candidates were back together on the same stage for two debates. one just last night. and we have a brand-new, exclusive, nbc poll that will tell us what, if anything, changed this week in the race for the republican nomination. that's next. plus more on the penn state candle. was there a conspiracy of silence within the football program and the university overall to protect one of their own? joining us to talk about it all, e.j. dionne of "the washington post," and david brooks of "the new york times." brooks of "the new york times." life moves fast. we're often so busy dealing with what's in front of us that we lose sight of the big picture. that's why it's good, every now and then, to pause,

take a new look at your financial plan and make sure you're headed in the right direction. for more than 140 years, pacific life has been offering integrated solutions that help to create a secure financial future. ask a financial professional about pacific life - the power to help you succeed.

we're back now with our roundtable discussion. joining me columnist e.j. dionne of "the washington post" and columnist david brooks of "the new york times." if you are a country music fans, e.j. dionne. the famous cowboy. let's talk republican politics and look at the republican field in the nbc poll. this is where we stood as the poll came out this week. romney and cain on top. gingrich impressively at 13%. ron paul hanging tough at 10%. perry, bachmann and santorum. now what we did this week, we recontacted some of the previous respondents based on the cain allegations and his denials and the perry debate moment, and we tried to gauge how it had

changed the race some. and this is what we found and we can report this morning. an uptick for romney. slight erosion of support for cain. big uptick for gingrich, who seems to be an emerging story. perry, down 4. some real trouble for his campaign. so, david, where are we now in this republican field? >> today the big news is cain not going down as much as i would have thought or most people would have thought. why is that? peter hart who does the nbc/"wall street journal" poll with you guys asked people what sort of schoolkids would the candidates be. and when they thought of rick perry they thought, i think he's a bully. when they thought of mitt romney, oh, he'd be the rich kid. when they thought of herman cain, they thought he'd be the popular one. so cain has a reservoir of support that the others don't, so even with these scandals. i think at the end of the day it will hurt him. the second question is what kind of campaign are we running here? usually people are raising money doing ground support. this year it's all based on the debates. i happen to think eventually it will turn into a normal campaign. but maybe it doesn't. maybe cain will still be

sticking around there. so his resilience is impressive. >> let me talk about the debate cycle. so perry's big moment in the debate had to do with really an unforced error as he was trying to level an attack, this is how it went. >> it's three agencies of government when i get there that are gone. commerce, education, and the -- what's the third one there? let's see. the third agency of government, i would do away with, education, the -- >> commerce. >> commerce. and let's see. i can't -- the third one, i can't. sorry. >> the oops moment. last night, the cbs news debate with scott pelley made some light of that. have a look. >> governor perry, you advocate the elimination of the department of energy. if you eliminate the department of energy -- >> i'm glad you remembered it. >> i've had some time to think about it, sir. >> me, too.

>> e.j., can perry recover? >> you know, i think that that moment is painful every time you watch it. and i think that's the worst thing for perry. which is that you can get by if voters can't -- if some share of voters can't stand you. you can't get by when they start feeling sorry for you. so i think this is a huge problem. i do think the democratic national committee is going to put up some money so that you can have a republican debate every other day. because i think, in general, these debates have not helped the field. and i think that the -- what you're seeing is something very interesting. the cbs poll, which has more undecideds, given the way they conduct it, their last poll showed that if you combine the number of republicans who are undecided with the number of republicans that say -- who say they want someone else, you get 31% of the vote. the field is losing as this race goes on. and while the conventional wisdom is, it's going to get to romney eventually, what you're

seeing pretty consistently is that romney is having a lot of trouble getting much beyond a quarter of the republican vote. you still feel there's an opening for another republican candidate. even if the process won't make it easy. so i've been thinking, there is room for some kind of draft movement. again, maybe a light in new hampshire. that's why out there. but i just cannot see a race that has so much trouble gelling, and i think it's because conservatives are having trouble getting to mitt romney. >> and that's a continuing problem. but it's also sort of, while the president has said this week, look, i could just -- i don't have to attack the republicans, i just play these debates, the reality is our poll and an analysis showed that he suffers from the lack of a defined image in voters' minds. he should be more defined at this stage. >> right. people still don't know -- e.j. and i don't agree on who he is. and that's generally a problem. among independents, still 38%, 39% support. it's really hard to win without independents.

45% approval ratings. and then finally, the field is pretty weak. mitt romney is really strong. and i think he's going to be the nominee. and a lot of democrats are basing romney's weak, we'll show he's a flip-flopper. we'll show you. they're judging romney by the way he was four years ago. he's a very different candidate, much stronger. they're underestimating him. >> you know, he is strong compared to this field. i was struck by how bellicose his rhetoric was last night about foreign policy in iran. >> he would stop iran from getting a nuclear weapon. >> and i think everybody is obsessed with moderate and independent voters. after the war propaganda that got us into the iraq wars, i think moderate, independent voters in america are very wary of that sort of talk about foreign policy. and you know, it's the one area where president obama has been strong in the polls. so again, this may help romney start rallying some conservative support in the republican primaries. but i think it's very dangerous for him in the long haul. >> i want to talk about penn

state. shift gears to something so horrible and disgusting as the allegations there. and you know, when i read maureen dowd's column this week, she brought it home to me and brought home what is so disturbing about the report. like the roman catholic church, penn state is an arrogant institution hiding behind its mystique. and sports, as my former fellow sports columnist at the washington star david israel says, it is an insular world that protects its own and operates outside of the societal norms as long as victors and cash continue to flow bountifully. penn state rakes in $70 million a year from its football program. that is what is alleged to have happened at penn state. a conspiracy of silence to protect their own. >> no, and i was actually listening to the penn state/nebraska game yesterday while i was doing some errands. and then i thought, this is really eerie. i'm listening to this football game, when you have something here that defies words. horrific, disgusting, abusive.

and it makes you say that self-protection, institutional self-protection in these matters are always seen to win especially where powerless boys are concerned, 10-year-old boys are abused. so a penalty must be paid here. and the question is, what is the proper penalty? certainly football programs suspended for far less than this. and we do use the word alleged. but you read that indictment, and you see how penn state has already responded. they know that this was a crime, and they covered it up. and yes, you say, you don't want to punish this generation of kids, these football players on the field yesterday. they had nothing to do with this. and yet, you've got to have a penalty extracted or else there is no penalty to be paid. >> and look at the scenes out of penn state this week. paterno -- paterno with the shifting statements, you know, and sort of hanging onto his job. kids rioting on campus, protecting joe pat earno. not understanding what's really going on there. do they get it there?

what does accountability look like? >> it is not just a penn state problem. we've lost our clear sense of what sin is. so when people see things like that, they don't have categories to put it into. they vaguely know it's wrong but they've been raised in a morality that says, oh, it's probably okay. so that waters everything down. the second thing is a lot of the judgment is based on the supposition that if we were there we would have intervened. that's just not true. >> is it really that we don't know right from wrong? is there anybody who doesn't know that sodomizing a 10-year-old boy in a shower by another man is wrong? >> if you're -- to what evil is. what the evil is within yourself and what the evil is in society you have a script to follow. it's not a vague sense. you have a script to follow. and this is necessary because people do not intervene. there's been a ton of research on this. they ask people, if you saw something cruel, if you saw racism and sexism, would you intervene? then they hire actors and they put it right in front of them. people do not intervene. it's called the bystander effect. it happens again and again, people don't intervene. that's why we need these scripts

to remind people how evil can be all around. >> i think david is way too abstract here. i think he really underestimates human beings. you know that what was happening in that shower as alleged in the indictment was wrong. and, yes, the people may be uncertain about what to do. they may worry about their standing and their job, but, god, you hope that if you had been standing there, and i think most people feel this way, you would have gone in and you would have tried to stop that from happening. so, yes, i agree that maybe we don't have as full, as rich a sense of evil as we used to, but that was evil. >> we had a murder where we live in bethesda, maryland, and people heard it, did not intervene. there's case after case where people don't intervene. and so you've got to arm yourself before hand about that. and we haven't done a good job of arming people. >> we have to take a break here. we'll be back. ♪

a refrigerator has never been hacked. an online virus has never attacked a corkboard. ♪ give your customers the added feeling of security a printed statement or receipt provides... ...with mail. it's good for your business. ♪ and even better for your customers. ♪ for safe and secure ways to stay connected, visit usps.com/mail

just closing moments here with e.j. dionne and david brooks on the penn state scandal. so you heard the governor on the program saying that laws have to be changed. what he's talking about are reporting laws. most states require anybody who finds out about a sexual crime to report it to the police or department of child services.

this case, if you were in joe paterno's case, all you have to do is go up to the head of your department, and it's their responsibility. and we all know, i mean, in this situation, there was nobody more powerful than joe paterno. not the president of the university was more powerful than him. is this the script you're talking about, in part? more robust state law? >> well, i think they obviously, you can make the law more robust. but we can't rely on law and rules. it's up to personal discretion. we've taken a lot of moral decisions and tried to make them all legal-based. but there has to be a sense of personal responsibility regardless of what the rules are, here's what you do to stop it. if you try to make everything legalism and rules you're going to get people doing the minimal and thinking it's not my responsibility, it's somehow lodged in the rules. >> given how much of this has gone on, and somehow we haven't taken child abuse as seriously as we should, i was shocked to learn that you weren't required to report that to the authorities. >> in the catholic church, you covered this, this has been a huge national issue. >> right.

and you know, it's odd that in the catholic case, because people could point to particular things in the church, particular things they might have seen as wrong in the church, or that were wrong in the church, this may actually end up having even a wider resonance, which might get us to take this more seriously. because you can't just say, well, the church is one thing, sports is something. no, this is a big problem that we have. and that institutions try to get off the hook too easily. >> all right. i'm going to leave it there. thank you both very much. before we go, you can watch an interesting conversation on "press pass" this week, a person who our viewers know well from this program, longtime former senator chris dodd who knows head up the motion picture association of america. we talked about politics and hollywood. at presspass.msnbc.com. that is all for today. we'll be back next week. if it's sunday, it's "meet the if it's sunday, it's "meet the press."