the frustration, but that none of us are, and i thank all of you for that. i hope you have a wonderful holiday and matt miller will be with you tomorrow and i'll see you on monday. that will do it for us. i am dylan ratigan and "hardball" with chris matthews starts right now. veto. let's play "hardball." good evening. i'm chris matthews down in washington. leading off tonight, battle lines. the failure of the super committee to do its job has defined the fight for 2012. it's now clear that republicans would rather protect tax cuts for the rich mainly than strike a balanced deal with democrats to put the deficit and the debt. the "washington post" ezra klein said it well when he wrote that, quote, in these negotiations, quote, the democrats move right and the republicans move further right. and the president is betting

americans will see it the same way, that republicans are idea logically driven zealots incapable of compromise. his vow to veto their attempts to undo the automatic cuts look strong. will his party and the country be with him? that's a great question. why have liberals been so dissatisfied with president obama. we've got a guest who says the problem may not be the president but the expectations of those liberals who aren't ever happy with any democrat in the white house ever. i may have to admit to some problem here of my own self here. and mitt romney is running a new tv commercial in new hampshire called "believe in america." but you shouldn't believe what you hear in this commercial. check out what romney has obama saying in the ad. >> it's going to take a new direction. if we keep talking about the economy, we're going to lose. >> well, that last line isn't merely out of context, it's out of bounds.

here's what obama actually said. >> senator mccain's campaign actually said, and i quote,$# we keep talking about the economy, we're going to lose. >> so obama -- actually romney is taking something obama said about john mccain and sticking it back in the president's mouth. talk about dishonest advertising. and on this day, 48 years after president kennedy was assassinated, we've got new video evidence from daly plaza that may help answer the lingering questions about kennedy's death. finally let me finish with some thoughts on what happened in this day in dallas 48 years ago. we start with the battle of the super committee and the battle of 2027. dana milbanks and jonathan allen, a great reporter. gentlemen, a great team to look at this the morning after, if you will. let's look at this political climate. why isn't congress working now? look at these approval numbers. congressional approval as of november 13th and november 15th,

that was the field days, 12%. you know, that's one in eight. they approve the job congress is doing. who is that one in eight person, jay-mar? who likes -- is it the far right person that loves gridlock, what? >> probably those folks that wendt mega tense. 530 members of congress, 300 million americans and i can't think of anyone that approves of the job congress is doing. you've got the right idea in general. those who like gridlock, those who don't want to see anything moving forward have to be somewhat satisfied. perhaps a few people that just love their own member of congress or love the speaker of the house at the time. >> or haven't been reading the newspapers for two or three years. >> or didn't hear the question right. >> couldn't hear the question. john, your thoughts. why is there still a residual -- it seems it should be a strikeout, a complete strikeoutç they don't get anything done. >> some colleagues of my at the post looked into this question and there are a few people, a

few conservatives that are just happy nothing is happening in washington so they approve of what congress is doing. >> do nothing types. >> and others don't want to say anything about anybody so they just say oh, it's fine with me what congress is doing. whether it's 9% or 12% support of congress, and this is before what is perhaps the biggest debacle of all, you can only imagine how much worse can things be. >> i keep thinking about those european countries or south american countries before a coup. but in some countries with weaker constitutions and a failed political class, things happen. the tanks start moving in the streets. think about this. >> if this were italy, we would presumably have a new government. >> the colonels take overall those countries in latin america. let's take a look at what the president said with in hope about the payroll tax cut. he wants that extended and unemployment insurance extended. let's take a look at obama in new hampshire. he talked about this today.

let's listen to the president. >> this payroll tax is set to expire at the end of next month. end of next month, end of the year this tax cut ends. if we allow that to happen, if congress refuses to act, the middle class families are going to get hit with a tax increase at the worst possible time. if your members of congress aren't delivering, you've got to send them a message. make sure they're listening. tell them don't be a grinch. don't vote to raise taxes on working americans during the holidays, put the country before party. put moneyç back in the pocketsf working families. do your job. >> so, jonathan, why do you think the president shifted from the disaster yesterday so quickly to what he wants done at the end of the year, which is to continue unemployment benefits and also extend the payroll tax cut? why is he more focused on those issues? >> one of the things is venue.

the president in 2008 in the primary ran as a tax cutter. if you listen to the robo calls, they said barack obama is the only one in the race that's cut taxes before. he's going to show the payroll tax cut, the only tax cut that's happened this year is also something of his. i think that's popular in new hampshire. i also think that it's something that he wants to be able to say not just there but all across the country, i'm cutting your taxes and maybe the republicans will stand in the way of this payroll tax cut that they don't like as much as i do. >> so here's the president on the popular side of a fiscal issue finally. not for raising taxes, which is never really that popular, exempt if it's somebody else', the rich people's. but nobody wants to play around with medicare and social security and cut those benefits. but here he's doing something almost everybody wants, a payroll tax cult giz for businesses. >> and looks at the juxtaposition. he was just in this fight with the republicans who are insisting on protecting tax cuts for millionaires, now he can go on the other side of this and

say they're trying to increase taxes by a thousand dollars on somebody that earns $50,000. they're trying to take away their unemployment benefits. it works out well for the president. a lot of people were critical for obama not getting more involved with the super committee. he said, look, this isn't my baby. they forced this super committee on me as a toll for raising the debt limit. he would much rather be talking about the payroll tax cut and thingsç to get the economy goi. he also has to get these things going or we're going back into a recession. >> this has an economic impact if these things don't happen. if it costs more to hire somebody, that slows whatever there is of this recovery. the republican co-chair of the super committee blamed the failure on democrats in an op-ed. he wrote democrats on the super committee made it clear that the new spending called for in the president's health law was off the table. still committee republicans offered to negotiate a plan on the other two health care sbien

minutes, medicare and medicaid. they offered modest adjustments but they were far from sufficient to meet the challenge and even their modest changes were made contingent upon a minimum of a trillion dollars in higher taxes and made sure to stifle job creation during the worst economy in recent history. it seems to me they're coming out with something here. the republicans are saying, you know, the democrats didn't want to really do -- didn't want to put forward a plan and, therefore -- and they also wanted us to raise taxes. they don't want to be stuck in the corner admitting that they screwed this whole thing up by refusing to raise taxes. >> well, clearly already no mirrors left in the capital because everyone is pointing at someone else to blame and they ought to be looking in the mirrors on both sides. the republicans refused to raise taxes. they talked about new revenues. revenues don't necessarily mean new taxes. if you do new taxes, they were going to have a net of nothing. that is to say lower tax rates to make up for it. they're not willing to do it. it is the party brand, it's the

image. grover norquist talks about this a lot. on the other hand democrats think they'll be able in 2012 to make the argument that some folks at the top ought to have >> as ezra klein said in the "washington post," here's something to watch if you watch the politics of this. basically the further right democrats tiptoed to catch the republicans, the further right they went. the strongest proposal by a republican on the super committee was a plan by senator po by pat toomey. boehner proposed $800 million in new tax revenue and dropping the tax rate of the wealthy down to 35%. now, that was the thing from this summer. look what toomey did. he said i'll save $300 million

in new tax, mainly from the rich and i'm going to drop the top rate down to 28. so here's a guy -- frankly it's hard to find even one area in which super committee republicans offered a substantially new compromise or even matched what boehner offered obama a while back. if the question is whether the democrats or republicans moved further in the direction of a compromise, there's no doubting that compared to the last set of negotiations, the democrats moved right and the republicans moved further right. it looks like there was a little give on the democrats' side even though they had a risk getting blamed by their own skp constituents. they're willing to play with entit entitlementes if they could get some revenues. >> now, interesting, though, from what i understand there was the framework for this, some of the senate democrats, like max baucus, was working with some of theç house republicans.

>> i know he was. >> they really could have probably struck a deal, but they were four or five members of the committee doing that but the rest had no interest in it. so there was really never a serious proposal to come forth in the first place. >> let's talk about the president's veto threat. i was taken with it last night. it seemed to have a lot of stiffness in it. he did say that he will veto any attempt by the congress to wiggle out of these automatic cuts which include big cuts to defense. >> i don't think he'll have to worry about it because i think it's going to be a very hard sell for conservative house republicans who want to keep the budget cuts in place. it's going to be a hard sell to get them to reverse that. they may shift around what gets cut, but that overall level of $1.2 trillion, i'd be shocked if you saw something move out of the house that lifted that and allowed for more spending. i think it's something the president wants -- it's good politics and he's going to win that argument. >> he's going to stick to his guns and go strong into the general. >> defend the manage airs and

defense contractors. >> i think he can win this fight right now. if you guys want to cut spending and deal with cutting spending and don't want to cut defense, cut something else. or, by the way, pay for the military, something you don't want to do. anyway, thank you, dana and jonathan. coming up, last week mitt romney tried to make us think president obama called americans lazy. do you remember that? he never did, of course. he never used that word on the people. now romney's new attack on the president is also based on distorting his words. that's ahead. dishonest advertising coming up from mitt romney. you're watching "hardball" only on msnbc. back pain. then i tried this. it's salonpas. this is the relief i've been looking for. salonpas has 2 powerful pain fighting ingredients that work for up to 12 hours. and my pharmacist told me it's the only otc pain patch approved for sale using the same rigorous clinical testing that's required for prescription pain medications. proven. powerful. safe. salonpas.

that is better than today. since 1894, ameriprise financial has been working hard for their clients' futures. never taking a bailout. helping generations achieve dreams. buy homes. put their kids through college. retire how they want to. ameriprise. the strength of america's largest financial planning company. the heart of 10,000 advisors working with you, one-to-one. together, for your future. ♪ well, the gingrich surge is on in south carolina. let's check the "hardball" scoreboard. republicans in the first in the south primary state picked fellow southerner gingrich over his rivals by two to one. he gets 31%. wow. in a new poll from kelly conway's polling company.

herman cain is next at 17. romney third down at 16. look at that lead. south carolina has been the primary to pick republican winners for president. right now gingrich is the leader. we'll be right back. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 let's talk about fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 there are atm fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 account service fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 and the most dreaded fees of all, hidden fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 at charles schwab, you won't pay fees on top of fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 no monthly account service fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 no hidden fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 and we rebate every atm fee.

tdd# 1-800-345-2550 so talk to chuck tdd# 1-800-345-2550 because when it comes to talking, there is no fee.

i want people to remember that when he was candidate obama, that he said he was going to get this economy going, he was going to bring people together, be a realç leader fo change in america. so i'm going to run an ad that shows him and the things he said here in new hampshire in a speech here and the contrast between what he said and what he did is so stark, people recognize they really do need to have someone new lead this country. >> that was mitt romney last night previewing his new tv ad that will run in new hampshire today. it's getting all kinds of attention for being misleading, that ad is, and what it portrays. let's watch. >> thank you, new hampshire. i am confident that we can steer

ourselves out of this crisis. we need a rescue plan for the middle class. we need to provide relief for homeowners. it's going to take a new direction. if we keep talking about the economy, we're going to lose. >> wow, it sounds like a devastating ad, doesn't it? here's the context. >> senator mccain's campaign actually said, and i quote, if we keep talking about the economy, we're going to lose. >> so he's quoting mccain in person there in 2008 and in this new ad by romney, romney's ad maker is suggesting that those are his words about his own campaign strategy. a completely dishonest distortion. michael steele is the former chairman of the republican national party and msnbc political analyst and bob shrum is a democratic strategist. michael, was that on the level, that use of the quote from candidate obama to the effect that if we talk about the

economy, we lose, was that a fair take from him? >> well, i don't know if i'd use the word "fair" but you said the word that's most appropriate. you said devastating and that was the point. look, this isç politics. and you know, chris, you've been in it a long time, as i know bob does as well. this is hardball. beginning to step it up. we're six weeks away from the first votes being cast and romney is beginning to lay down some tracks and he wants to lay those tracks on the back of the president. so yeah, in terms of the politics of it, it's absolutely a fair play ad. >> but did candidate obama ever say in regard to his own strategy if we keep talking about the economy, we're going to lose? >> clearly not if you've got the complete quote there, but that's not the point. the point is -- the point is that what he said then, quoting senator mccain, is applicable today because he's absolutely right, the president doesn't want to spend a whole lot of time talking about the economy

because it reminds people of the fact that there's 14% -- 9% unemployment and $14 trillion of debt. >> bob, this is a take from something he was quoting mccain in. the way they portray it in the romney campaign, he's talking about himself and his strategy. >> michael's double talk steemz equate hardball with lying. this is a lie. michael during the campaign last year was out there saying that the democrats believe america is in decline. if you clip that and put him in "america is in decline" he would have screamed foul. you can do this to anybody. you can take lincoln's first inaugural address and clip it and you can have a sentence that says "slavery is right and must be extended." now, i think this is as phony as romney is and people will see through it. i also think he's going to pay a price for it. because you don't have to clip his stuff. he's pro-choice, anti--choice pro-gay rights, anti-gay rights.

you can use real quotes. >> go ahead, michael. 2 c1 >> you played this game, bob, a long time. >> i never played that game. i never once did anything like that. >> don't act like this holier than thou attitude. >> michael, michael. >> another example, michael. >> bob, i'm not the moderator. >> do not act as if the democrats have never done this themselves. >> michael, michael. >> name an example. give an example. >> i can go back to an rnc chairman who gave a speech in new england last year about afghanistan and watched the democrats clip that speech. >> what was it? what happened? what happened? tell me. >> can we not surprise, the liberals have gun to use romney's tactics against him. here's a spoof ad. let's watch. >> we should just raise everybody's taxes. >> there's nothing unique about the united states. >> government knows better than free people how to guide an

economy. fiscal responsibility is heartless and immoral. let us just raise your taxes some more. america is just another nation with a flag. >> i like it! michael, that's fair game by your definition. >> yeah, exactly. so why -- why is everybody getting upset. >> that's a spoof, not an advertisement. that's a satire on the corruption of these campaign ads. >> it serves the same purpose and this is going to be a hard-fought campaign. there's going to be a lot of third-party organizations out there that will be running ads. you can call them spoofs, you can call them political, you can call them what you want, they're going to have their intended effect on both sides of the aisle so don't sit here and act like this is something new to politics, folks. >> let me ask you, bob, so you have the high ground here. we've just shown an example of satire, making fun of the dishahn tee of the romney campaign. even in this case michael steele says that's fair game. theç satirical version he sayss okay so we've really lowered the bar here, mr. shrum.

we can't all jump over this bar. >> michael can't name a single example of a major candidate for office ever doing something like this. there's going to be a lot of attention paid to it because romney has put it out there. i actually think he's going to hurt himself, voters are not dumb. they're going to see through this. as i pointed out, the irony is you can could this to romney without clipping him. >> let's take a look at rush limbaugh's show. he talked about michelle obama's appearance at a nascar race this last weekend where she was booed by some of the fans and somehow it all went back to the vacation she took in spain several months ago, according to rush. here's rush using an interesting bit of american language here to describe michelle obama. >> the nascar crowd doesn't quite understand why when the husband and the wife are going the same place, the first lady has to take her own boeing 757 with family and kids and hangers-on four hours earlier than her husband who will be on his 747.

nascar people understand that's a little bit of a waste. they understand it's a little bit of uppityism. first ladies have not been known to hop their own 757s four hours ahead of their husband when they're both going the same place. >> now here's rush limbaugh going back several months to a trip the first lady took and using it as an excuse, i would argue, to use the word uppity in describing her performance as first lady. michael, you've lived this life more than i have and i've never heard the word used exempt in connection with the "n" word. >> it is never used in a positive way and it is defined asç someone who is acting or trying to be above their station in life. it is being used by certain whites towards african-americans as a reminder that they need to be kept in their place. now, if that is the application

of the term with respect to the first lady of the united states, then please tell me what is her proper place other than being at an event where she's acknowledging and welcoming home our war wounded who have served this country. so i think this kind of rhetoric is misplaced. it is inappropriate and is, quite frankly, stupid. so let's get past this craziness and stop using pejorative terms that have no place in conversation unless you're intending some other inference. >> why does a man like rush limbaugh who uses this language that appeals this sentiment command such authority in your party where members of congress will end up kissing up to him after he has spanked them. why does he continue to have this commanding authority in your party if he talks like this? >> i don't know, to be quite honest with you. i think a lot of folks are long

past that point. i think, you know, we all move forward. we all have, you know, goals that we set towards, i guess, embracing and sort of making us more relevant than some of us want us to be. i just think that the nascar crowd that booed the first lady and the vice president's wife did so for, you know, political reasons. they don't like the president's agenda but it has nothing to do with the first lady being uppity. that is just baloney. >> good for you, michael. >> there's no debate on this point. thank you for being so well -- well, you made it clear what you michael steele who has battled his way pioneering that altitude in the republican party. up next -- by the way, happy thanksgiving, gentlemen. up next, michele bachmann has something to say about her republican rivals but she saves the best zinger for rick perry. that's next in the sideshow.

you're watching "hardball" only on msnbc. ♪ [ man #1 ] i was fascinated by balsa wood airplanes since i was a kid. [ man #2 ] i always wondered how did an airplane get in the air. at ge aviation, we build jet engines. we lift people up off the ground to 35 thousand feet. these engines are built by hand with very precise assembly techniques. [ man #3 ] it's gonna fly people around the world. safely and better than it's ever done before. it would be a real treat to hear this monster fire up. [ woman ] i think a lot of people, when they look at a jet engine, they see a big hunk of metal.

but when i look at it, i see seth, mark, tom, and people like that who work on engines every day. [ man #4 ] i would love to see this thing fly. it's a dream, honestly. there it is. awesome. that's so cool! yeah, that was awesome! [ cheering ] i wanna see that again. ♪ or a can of paint, you turned millions of votes, and hundreds of volunteer hours, into a real difference for over 100,000 people. what's next? tell us on facebook. what's next? ♪ sen♪ co-signed her credit card - "buy books, not beer!" ♪ ♪ut the second at she shut the door ♪ ♪ girl started blowing up their credit score ♪ ♪ she bought a pizza party for the whole dorm floor ♪ ♪ hundred pounds of makeup at the makeup store ♪ ♪ and a ticket down to spring break in mexico ♪

♪ but her folks didn't know 'cause her folks didn't go ♪ ♪ to free-credit-score-dot-com hard times for daddy and mom. ♪ v.o.: offer applies with enrollment in freecreditscore.com

back to "hardball." now for the sideshow. first up, word play. last night michele bachmann was the latest in the lineup of republican 2012 contender that say hit up the late night comedy scene. she sat down with jimmy fallon and agreed to play the first thing that comes to your mind when you hear this word game. the topic at hand, no surprise, her opponents. let's see how it all panned out. >> romney. >> hair. no, just a minute. vice president. >> gingrich. >> newt. >> cain. >> 9. >> perry. >> i've got to do three.

governor, texas, can't remember the other one. oops. >> bachmann. >> president. >> was that a hint she would pick mitt romney as her running mate? at this point it's not too likely we'll ever find out. more from the bachmann front. how's this for a one-sided show of affection. in her new book "core of conviction" bachmann sheds praise on garrison keeler. quote, his paul licks are very different from mine, but i love his gentle, knowing humor. he understands minnesota and his ability to squeeze laughs out of serious-minded midwesterners makes him a legend. well, do you think he feels the same minnesota bond? not even close. during last year's midterm election season he called bachmann embarrassing to me and a great many minnesotans. what does he have to say in response to the nod in bachmann's book? well, as an old democrat, i wish that michele's presidential

campaign were doing better than it is. there are many other democrats who would like to second that one. finally, clarity or more confusion? in the past couple months it seemed that just when gop and abortion under no circumstances. >> no circumstances? >> no circumstances. >> because many of your fellow candidates, some of them qualify that. if one of your female children, grandchildren was raped, you would honestly want her to bring up that baby as her own? >> you're mixing two things here, piers. it comes down to it's not the government's role or anybody else's role to make that decision. so what i'm saying is, it ultimately gets down to a choice that that family or that mother has to make. not me as president. >> so he's not pro-life, he's

pro-choice. it's mind boggling to watch. now it looks like the proof is in the pledge. he joined his fellow 2012 republican candidates signing a new pledge saying, quote, i am an associate baptist minister and am 100% pro-life. where my powers in the executive branch are concerned, i will work at all times to oppose government funding of abortion. i will veto any legislation that contains funds for abortion. well, first of all, that happens to already be the law of the land. secondly, i have no idea what this guy believes. up next, why are so many liberals dissatisfied with president obama? john shnathan shade writes the problem isn't the president, it's the liberals that are never satisfied with any democratic president. he joins us next. you're watching "hardball" only on msnbc. last thanksgiving, about 2 million people

tried to deep-fat-fry their turkey. 15 succeeded in setting their houses on fire. at christmas, there was a lot of driving over the river and through the woods.

and a little bit of skidding on the ice and taking out grandma's garage door. so while you're celebrating, allstate will be standing by. trouble never takes a holiday. neither should your insurance. that's allstate's stand. are you in good hands? ♪

i know you're worried about making your savings last and having enough income when you retire. that's why i'm here. to help come up with a plan and get you on the right path. i have more than a thousand fidelity experts working with me so that i can work one-on-one with you. it's your green line. but i'll be there, every step of the way. call or come in for a free portfolio review today.

i'm brian sullivan with your cnbc market wrap. modest losses as the third quarter gdp is revised down and there is a new enhanced lending program in europe. the dow jones industrial average dropped 53 points, s&p off 4 and the nasdaq giving up just 1 point. the commerce department says the economy grew a little slower than we had originally believed in the third quarter. they revised their gdp annualized growth estimate down to 2% from 2.5%. meantime, the imf beefing up its lending with a six-month liquidity line for countries in who's that? in stocks, at&t finished higher after an unsuccessful but well organize d attempt to hack into its accounts. news breaking moments ago. the federal reserve announcing a new round of stress tests for 19

firms, including america's six biggest banks. that is it from cnbc. first in business worldwide and now back to "hardball." well, this will be fun. welcome back to "hardball." the latest issue of "new york" magazine asks the question when did liberals become so unreasonable. he writes liberals are dissatisfied with obama because liberals on the whole are incapable of feeling satisfied with a democratic president. they can be happy with the idea of a democratic president. indeed, dancing in the streets delirious. but not with the real thing. the various theories of diskauns lat liberals all suffer from a failure to compare obama with any plausible baseline. instead they compare obama with an imaginary president. either an imaginary obama or a

fantasy version of a past president. whoa. john than shade writes for "new york" magazine and joan walsh is editor at large. joan, this man has tapped into our very being here. first of all, joan, i want to ask you, what do you think when you read this article, just to get -- i like you so much i want to -- when you read that it was your psychological condition that is the problem, not the president's track record, what did you think? >> i was very irritated and dissatçis dissatisfied, chris. i got very angry. apparently that's my nature, jonathan says. >> you're one of those professional progressives, right? >> progressive left, always whining, joe biden wants me to stop whining too. okay. look, first of all, liberal democrats, let's be clear, liberal democrats are very happy with this president and they were happy with president clinton too. if you look at the gallup weekly tracking poll, obama stays in

the 70s, goes up into the 80s with liberal democrats. >> joan, you have perked me up here. i'm going to challenge you and you can tell me what you're thinking here. here we have the latest nbc/wall street journal poll making that same point. should the democrats nominate obama again. 73%, that's a pretty good endorsement by the disgruntled liberals. only 20% nominate someone else, hillary or someone else. how can you say that crowds like the one who say watch this show and myself oftentimes are disgruntled and permanently so? >> you know, there's a difference between wanteding to dump a guy out of office and being happy with him and liberals are in between there. they're not ready to dump obama. some of them are but most of them aren't ready to dump him. but there is a broad dissatisfaction, right? the people who are approving of him are saying, well, it could be worse. well, things are hard for him. circumstances were tough. maybe it will be better in the second term. no one is saying he's actually done a pretty good job. it ranges from like angry, betrayed, let down,

disappointed, dissatisfied. generally he's better than the republican but still it's a let down, it's not that good. >> do you think part of it is age? i'm older than joan, i'm older than you, i'm sure, and yet i think a lot of very young people in their 20s do have idealism up the kazoo and i understand it. they want perfection. is that it or"i&jeñ people my age as well who are just difficult to please by your writing? >> i think it's all ages. you see it in the baby boomers, in the young people. what i try to show in the piece is this historically has always been the case. when there's a democrat in office, liberals spend most of their time complaining. >> let me challenge you because i really respect your writing. i'm going to read this piece a number of times again. when bill clinton came in with all the baggage and the girls, everybody said he might be a pretty good president but nobody thought he's going to be transformative. let me show you a person who was really excited way back in 2004.

by obama at the very prospect they would be the first african-american president. here i am, big promotion here, 2008 talking about barack obama and then again in 2004 back when he delivered that amazing keynote address at the democratic convention. let's watch later and then earlier. >> the feeling most people get when they hear barack obama's speech, i felt this thrill going up my leg. i don't have that too often. >> i have to tell you, a little chill in my legs right now. that is an amazing moment in history right there. it is really an amazing moment. a keynoter like i've never heard. dick gephardt, thanks for joining us. a star is broken. amazing reception. i thought the speech remarks, you and i were talking about them, as they proceeded. amazing stuff. >> okay. chill and thrill, not tingle, which is the favorite word of the right wing. it's great, they love to giggle with themselves. they make up words, make fun. words and apply them to somebody

else. i have never heard such an amazing statement about our american exceptionalism, if you will, a phrase i like;h!ecauset means somebody can make it in this country based on merit. that's my american exceptionalism. i will proudly salute it and be thrilled when it's spoken well. was he just too good? was it possible that he was so stirring in those rooms we saw up in new hampshire and iowa that you had to expect much more? >> it's a couple of things. number one, people forget how excited they were about presidents in the past. that's part of the cycle of disallusionment. you row -- romanticize the past. people were very excited about jimmy carter when he gave his acceptance speech in 1976. you know, kennedy, you can go back in time. democrats get excited by the idea of a different president. >> are we more romantic? >> i think democrats and liberals are romantic about the style of politics. >> let me go to joan on this.

do you want to accept anything in this self-criticism of the center left and the left? >> well, sure. and i'm kind of proud of it because actually reading jonathan's piece he says that there's really nothing very unusual about the situation for president obama. this is what we do, and we've done it going back to fdr, even though we think of him as a great hero, the left was somehow disappointed. you know what, we were right to be disappointed. it was unfortunate social security didn't mostly cover black people because he compromised with the dixiecrats. it was unfortunate he eased up on stimulus and we went back into the depression. if we look at jfk who we both love as irish catholics, he did try for a long time to balance the party and see if he could hold on to those southern democrats. he didn't move as fast as dr. king wanted. should we say dr. king should have said you know what, he's doing the best he can. no, we would never say that and the same with clinton andç

carter. we push for values and we push for inclusion. and we push for social justice, and that's our job. i'm not a politician. >> thank you. >> i don't work for the president. >> we believe government can do good things, the public working together. and liberalism by its nature means the market shouldn't rule. it can be perfected upon by public action. that's what it is to me, you can make choices. >> number one, i think that's good. that's an important role. number two, some of the criticisms are just flat right. like i say in the piece. the problem comes when liberals go from that, i'm disappointed with this, i'm disappointed with that, i want more here, to a general feeling of disappointed. oh, i'm let down, oh, this isn't what i expected because they're always let down. >> joan, abstain for a second here. i know what he's talking about which is basically in d.c. it's the -- we love to argue among ourselves. we love this. it's called ndc, november doesn't count. it's about us winning among ourselves. these arguments are why the

democratic party tends to be the most exciting party because all these great arguments occur within the party. the fight over the vietnam war was within the party. i get thrilled by the idea of arguing. i'm thrilled by this argument. okay. thank you, jonathan, great writing. i love "new york" magazine. you guys way underpaid for what you can do. >> thank you very much. up next, it's been 48 years -- you too, joan. 48 years since president kennedy was assassinated in dallas. now never-before-seen video to show how oswald acted alone. this is "hardball" on msnbc. ♪

♪ ♪ ...don't matter what you saying. ♪ ♪ don't matter what you do. ♪ my heart is yours for keeping. ♪ ♪ do with it what you choose. ♪ and you ooohoohooh... ♪ you are my heart... [ male announcer ] vera wang love. ♪ oh yes you do... the new diamond bridal collection from vera wang. exclusively at zales. let's once again check the "hardball" scoreboard. in new hampshire, no surprise mitt romney is well ahead of his republican rivals. a new poll has him nearly three times with three times the support of second place candidate newt gingrich and ron paul. but when you broaden it out nationally, it's newt gingrich in the lead. the new quinnipiac poll has

gingrich at 26 and romney stuck at 22 and herman cain sinking hard at 14. we'll be right back. ♪ silent night ♪ holy night ♪ sleep in heavenly peace ♪ sleep in heavenly peace ♪ sleep in heavenly peace ♪ sleep in heavenly peace since ameriprise financial was founded back in 1894,

they've been committed to putting clients first. helping generations through tough times. good times. never taking a bailout. there when you need them. helping millions of americans over the centuries. the strength of a global financial leader. the heart of a one-to-one relationship. together for your future. ♪

as the motorcade turns onto houston street, hugh's camera inadvertently trains on the texas school book depository building. after undergoing the ground-breaking process of scanning and restoration, does hugh's high-resolution film show the sniper taking aim from the sixth floor window. >> well, we're back. that was a clip from the new national geographic documentary,

"jfk, the loft bullet." it attempts to prove once and for all that president kennedy was killed by a lone gunman through oswald through never before seen coverage and footage of that fateful day in dallas 48 years ago today. mac holeland is the historian who worked on the documentary. it's his work and joins us now to talk about some of the new evidence he and his team were able to discover. so, i have -- i'm going to talk about this later when you're off about the reason why we can't live with the fact that a nobody killed a somebody. what -- what do you think you've been able to prove here, to establish with this new film? >> we're trying to hoe is the first account of all three shots and what happened to each one. >> and there was a longer period of time that he was able to shoot, 11 seconds. >> there's a proverbial six seconds in dallas, and we say it's more like 11 seconds. >> to get off three shots. >> right, which is all the time

in the world. >> cbs a number of years ago demonstrated with a guy actually with that kind of bold action rifle, showed how you could get >> >> a good enough shot as a marine. >> had a telescopic lens. >> yes. >> it wasn't a hard shot. >> no. >> how fast was the car going? >> 11 miles per hour. >> and it was an open car, and had you knew who he was shooting at. >> yes. >> more from the home video showing oswald missing the first shot at kennedy's motorcade. >> hughes stops filming just as the president's limousin makes the turn on to elm street. >> the president's car is now going by and it's now traveling at a high rate of speed. secret service standing up. armed with submachine guns.

>> if hughes had kept his camera on for just a few more seconds, we might have seen a rifle emerge to fire bullet "a." >> in all the study you did with the evidence and archival material and the firsthand accounts, did you ever come across any reason, hard reason to believe, that someone else was involved besides oswald? >> no, not in the shooting, not at all, but if this makes any sense he did it before, but with our explanation he did it even more. it was an easy thing for him to do. >> what was his motive? killing our president? >> i think he was a politicized sociopath, kind of like timothy mcveigh. >> had become disillusioned with the soviet union and had come back after trying communism over there and with russia and had become infat ated with castro. >> exactly. >> the day or so before he visited soviet and cuban embassies in mexico city. what do you think of that? looks to me like a trail of some sort ofç infatuated communist.

>> and i think he actually thought he'd be welcomed in cuba if he managed to get there. >> no evidence of castro involved in this. >> no, but we really won't know what the cubans knew about them until they open their archives. >> it's possible they knew it was coming? >> i'm not sure i'd go that far, but i think they might have known something about oswald, more than they have let on. >> held it against castro but then again we tried to get him. i do hold it against him anyway. >> i think oswald understood that. >> that we tried to get him. >> that we were trying. >> i was doing some work on this, and i came across the fact that at one point mrs. oswald tried to keep her husband from going after nixon and also stopped him from going after a right wing general. he had a pattern of being a hard lefty communist -- infatated communist person. is it possible that one of the reasons why the american liberals don't accept this, a lot of them over the years, like oliver stone, they just can't stand the idea that a hard lefty killed a guy they loved? >> that's exactly right. a lot of people said who would

want to kill walker and john f. kennedy, it doesn't make any sense, but from oswald's point of view they were a lot closer. >> nixon, anyone anti-castro was his enemy. >> absolutely. >> i think we've figured this out. >> you've done the work and i've been working thon for a while. thanks so much. "jfk, the lost bullet" airs again this coming sunday morning november 27th, by the way, on the national geographic channel. check listings for times. >> coming up, thoughts on what happened that fateful day 40 years ago in dallas. you're watching "hardball," only on msnbc. ttd# 1-800-345-2550 instead of trying to understand what you really need. ttd# 1-800-345-2550 ttd# 1-800-345-2550 at charles schwab, we provide ttd# 1-800-345-2550 a full range of financial products, ttd# 1-800-345-2550 even if they're not ours. ttd# 1-800-345-2550 and we listen before making our recommendations, ttd# 1-800-345-2550 so we can offer practical ideas that make sense for you. ttd# 1-800-345-2550 ttd# 1-800-345-2550 so talk to chuck, and see how we can help you, not sell you. ttd# 1-800-345-2550

premier of the packed bag. you know organization is key... and so is having a trusted assistant. and you...rent from national. because only national lets you choose any car in the aisle...and go. you can even take a full-size or above and still pay the mid-size price. here we are... [ male announcer ] and there you go, business pro. there you go. go national. go like a pro. [ knock on door ] cool. you found it. wow. nice place. yeah. [ chuckles ] the family thinks i'm out shipping these. smooth move. you used priority mail flat rate boxes. if it fits, it ships for a low, flat rate. paid for postage online and arranged a free pickup. and i'm gonna track them online, too. nice. between those boxes and this place, i'm totally staying sane this year. do i smell snickerdoodles? maybe. [ timer dings ] got to go. priority mail flat rate shipping at usps.com. a simpler way to ship.

your new progresso rich & hearty steak burger soup. [ dad ] i love this new soup. it's his two favorite things in one... burgers and soup. did you hear him honey? burgers and soup. love you. they're cute. [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup. i've tried it. but nothing helped me beat my back pain. then i tried salonpas. it's powerful relief that works at the site of pain and lasts up to 12 hours. salonpas.

let me finish tonight with this. i'm glad we could discuss tonight this new photographic evidence from the kennedy assassination. i think i understand why people are so open to the possibility that lee harvey oswald was not the president's lone killer. it's hard to imagine such a small personç being responsibl for the loss of such a beloved and important person. we've been taught through years of shakesperean lesser dramas to expect a serious villain as the match for our heros. othello with jag.o and sherlock holmes with dr. moreiaty and superman had lex luther. i could go on. the good guy has to have a bad guy with brains and some vision, a grand scheme to take over the world or whatever. he has to be a mastermind, a fiend worthy of our contempt. lee harvey oswald, back from and disillusioned with his belief in soviet russia, infatuated with castro doesn't live up to our grand notions of evil, so people look for some grand explanation,

grand being the key word. we want it know that we were right, that kennedy was a great and only a great force of evil could take him from us. a half century later the evidence turns to something small, something dull and banal, a little loser got himself a gun and saw his opportunity to become someone important, someone who killed a person so many people loved. i've always thought long before this new evidence came to us that the most impenetrable obstacle to all the conspiracy they're sis that oswald had that job at the texas book depository long before the president's travel route was set. he was in that spot before there was any reason to believe the president would be passing right there below him. it was, i believe, a crime of opportunity, a small man with a political hatred got himself a rifle and took the training he'd gotten in the military to shoot down the most beloved president of my lifetime. we remember, most of us, from that time where we were when we heard, and many of us at least in heart, mind and soul are still there.