will it last? good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. leading off tonight -- digging deeper. mitt romney now insist he's misspoke when he said he's not concerned about the very poor. if that's the case why did he defend this statement when he got challenged? to use a las vegas term, why did he double down? so maybe mitt said it precisely what he meant. he doesn't intend to think about the worst off in this country. and isn't that a bigger political problem. plus you can just imagine how republicans' hopes dropped when they heard this morning that

243,000 new jobs were created last month. 243,000. well, last month. and that the unemployment rate dropped down to 8.3%. the lowest in three years. it's good for american workers, the 8.3%, and for president obama. but the president still facing headwinds from europe perhaps, from a shutdown of mideast oil perhaps and also perhaps from a log jam in congress on the jobs front. also, another big news item today. the susan g. komen foundation decided to stop the bleeding fast. today the group reversed itself and decided not to cut off funding for planned parenthood. it's another big example of what a hot button issue abortion remains in this country. here's something that could have a huge effect on the election. an israeli air strike on iran's nucle nuclear bomb-making facilities. the whispers are getting louder that it could happen, a strike as early as this spring. john mccain lived through that 2008 election. how much does he want to relive it by seeing the movie "game change"? not so much. check out the side show.

we start with political white house reporter joe williams. gentlemen, quickly. you're first, joe. is this all good news? or is it quicksilver? is it too good, too soon, and it will get worse and we get in worse shape? >> the good news is -- >> i hate to be irish about it. the worst is going to happen, no matter how good the news is. >> it's not lost. >> it always turns out that way. >> certainly, there's a dark cloud around the silver lining. unemployment is down, sure things look good. lifetime between now and november, anything can happen. already we've seen signs in the middle east, the strait of hormuz situation -- >> that's what screwed carter. >> exactly. cbo report indicates it's going to be about 8.8% by the end of

the year. it looks like they may finish ahead of that. it may -- >> you're fearful of a second dip. >> second dip is inevitable and nobody can control whether that happens or not. >> before we go to you, david, the president -- let's help they don't muck it up. is he already laying down the predicate, if they don't pass jobs bill, if they don't pass something to put the guys coming back from the war, afghanistan or iraq, put them to work doing ccc kind of work, is he laying down the predicate for you guys saying, you blew it? >> he's trying to make sure congress is on notice. something needs to get done. something needs to shift this unemployment rate for the good of everybody. not necessarily just for the good of the president's prospects. it's a marker. he intends on -- >> this is clarity, isn't it? 8.3. if he can keep it down that low he probably gets re-elected. if it goes back up, he has to blame it on somebody else. the president, right? he can't take that hit. >> watch the fight coming up

the payroll tax holiday extension and unemployment extension -- >> is there a chance they'll deny that to him? >> the tea party wing of the republican party which has been whipping the leader, house speaker boehner, doesn't want to extend this stuff. they don't like it. they don't -- >> they want to screw the economy? >> they don't believe if you give tax breaks to the middle class it helps the economy. >> they only believe in tax cuts -- >> for the rich. for what they call the job creators. >> that sounds a little slanted. >> no, it's not slanted. >> how can they not believe in tax cuts for jobs? >> they have said this. they have said this. jon kyl in the senate. has said this. >> is this your reading? they really don't think -- maybe you are right. i'll leave it at that. they don't think helping the employer have a lower cost of labor, right, which is what we're really talking about. >> that's part of it. >> is healthy for hiring people. >> but so that's what the president is talking about. don't muck it up. this is the fight coming up. if you look at the cbo report, it did not -- it assumed that there was an extension of the payroll tax. so if you extend it, you bring the unemployment rate down.

>> a slope towards -- >> so we're still looking at 8.3% unemployment rate for january. the dow jones through the roof back to where it was before bush screwed things up. let's look at a reminder that obama inherited a troubled economy. take a look at this chart. from the bureau of labor statist statistics. it shows steep job losses under president george w. bush right there in the red. and shown here in the red. once barack obama became president, the chart turns blue. look at it. see it begins to show reverse and eventually job losses become job gains above that line there. we all learned to read those graphs in school. the stuff above means it's shooting up positive. underscoring the point the economy has steadily improved. the economy steadily improved under obama. a bloomberg report shows the economies of michigan, indiana, ohio and pennsylvania have improved faster than the rest of the country since the recession began in april of 2009 until the end of 2011. some of those, by the way, some of those are in what i call the scranton to oshkosh corridor.

the sensitive blue collar part of the country where people depend on the accordion industries. they go in and out. they hire and then lay off people. hire, lay off. everybody's very sensitive. where there are lay-offs, where people are hiring. >> two things come to mind. the first is, david is right. they are going to go toe-to-toe and try to get something passed for the payroll tax extension. what bothers me or what sort sufficient interesting politically about that graph is ohio, indiana certainly, right to work states now are certainly having fights with labor. wisconsin, same thing. what that fight is going to have and whether or not the governor wins and whether or not there's going to be a right to work legislation that will limit union bargaining and that will restrict the ability to get a wage that they believe is fair could have an impact on hiring as well. just depends -- >> which way does it go? ironically does a tougher better stronger situation for organized labor mean less hiring or more hiring? >> in theory a stronger situation for organized labor means more hiring in broad theory.

that is that you get organized people, manufacturing takes off. wages go up. everybody wins. but in a situation where you have restricted labor ability, manufacturers and producers tend to want to hire more, but the wage sort of tops out. >> also remember in wisconsin, there's the recall fight that will be going on over the next few months. and you see a lot of this is driven by steel, which pays good bucks -- >> everybody watching the show, despite all the conservative and right-wing argument that the government's hiring and hiring and hiring and there's more and more padding and feather bedding and jobs in the government, the fact is private sector jobs have been going up and up and up as we saw in that chart under president obama. the decline has been state and local, joe. >> that's right. >> because at the very time our business and everybody hopes business can create jobs. the local and state governments are so starved that they are laying people off. >> and that's a big problem because early on, the president had called for aid to states. the spending lax congress, the congress that did not want to do any spending, did not want to go

along with that. their states are hurting. their choices are cut or tax. cut usually wins. >> who are they cutting? a lot of states have to cut teachers. you cut teachers, what happens? you don't have kids learning as well and it hurts future prospects. >> it's the local and state that arfiring people, laying them off and that's what's causing this continued lag in the economy and the recovery. >> part of the jobs plan was to try to prevent that from happening and put money into the states and the republicans have said no. >> and that money has run out, the money they put into place, scranton and other localities back in '09. thank you joe williams and david corn. happy weekend. the susan g. comedical foundation reverses its decision. that's ahead. you're watching "hardball" only on msnbc. even after you take it off. neutrogena® healthy skin liquid makeup. 98% saw improved skin. does your makeup do that? neutrogena® cosmetics.

you walk into a conventional mattress store, it's really not about you. they say, "well, if you want a firm bed you can lie on one of those, if you want a soft bed you can lie on one of those." we provide the exact individualization that your body needs. wow. that feels really good. it's about support where you find it most comfortable. at the ultimate sleep number event, queen mattresses now start at just $599. and save an astonishing 50% on the final closeout of our innovative limited edition bed. only at the sleep number store. prego?! but i've been buying ragu for years. [ thinking ] i wonder what other questionable choices i've made? [ '80s dance music plays ] [ sighs ] [ male announcer ] choose taste. choose prego.

welcome back to "hardball." after a firestorm erupted this week, the susan g. komen foundation, the group behind race for the cure, has apologized and back observed their plans to drop funding for planned parenthood. actually, planned parenthood breast cancer screenings. in a statement komen foundation head said "we want to apologize to the american public for recent decisions that cast doubt upon our commitment to our mission of saving women's lives. our original desire was to fulfill our fiduciary duty to donors by not funding grant applications made to donors for companies under investigation. disqualifying investigations must be criminal and conclusive in nature and not political. we'll continue to fund existing grants including those of planned parenthood and preserve their eligibility to apply for future grants while maintaining

our ability to make funding decisions that meet needs of our communities." what was the motivation behind those words to drop the funding to begin with? andrea mitchell is on this story, has been, nbc's chief for correspondent and joining us senator barbara boxer who's a democrat from california. and very much involved in this dispute. let me start with andrea, my colleague. it seems to me that they were under some pressure, i don't know where it came from, to make this decision to no longer fund planned parenthood's screenings for breast cancer which are extremely popular for women, especially women with limited means. it's a very comfortable place to go to planned parenthood, it's a clinic, it's a real public service. for them to drop their support for that because some right-wing congressman is messing around with them with some kind of hearings was a thin read for them to build their case. >> they didn't make the case that this was a real

investigation. it seemed to be a sham, that's what critics said. there was some suggestion there were other state investigations. they never made that case either. and then when ambassador nancy brinker came and talked to me yesterday on the program, she came with another explanation which was that they wanted direct referrals. so they had a credibility problem with their constituency. and i think it's wise that they apologized and reversed themselves so quickly. >> nancy brinker told you yesterday she was upset by the questions of whether this was a political decision by them. let's listen to her. >> i am troubled that it's been labeled as political. this is not a political decision. we operate from one set of standards every day. and it is to our mission. and if we don't advance and revise and make grants that meet the mission and bring real care to vulnerable populations, we won't be doing our job. >> senator boxer, it's great to have you on as always. what were the pressures coming from the pro-choice people that really seemed to reverse this

decision lickety-split overnight. >> can i just say, pro-choice, not pro-choice, this is about screenings for breast cancer. there is no room for politics in this at all. and we all know we face attacks on a woman's right to choose. this is nothing to do with that. and i was -- i had the privilege of being on andrea's show yesterday and today, and i made the point, this is just the tip of the iceberg of the right wing going after women's health. they are even going after birth control. and i thought that all was resolved in the '60s. so we are very happy. we in the united states senate who sent a letter. there were about 25 or 26 of us, men and women, who said to the komen people, please reconsider this. and they did and i'm very pleased that they did. >> the question still, we don't really know what pressures or what politics or whatever played

a hand in it. but nancy brinker out of nowhere saying we're not going to do business anymore on these critical issues of breast cancer screening with planned parenthood. we don't know what -- nobody knows yet. >> i personally do not know. i do know that planned parenthood has had a target on their back -- >> we don't know, but we can -- >> oh. >> you want to guess? go ahead, senator. what do you think's behind the speculation that caused this uproar? >> well, i think we can surmise that there was far right pressure on komen to drop all support for planned parenthood and stop those grants. there's no other explanation. they did say that very first day, under investigation, and anyone who knows these quote/unquote investigations are quote-unquote investigations are really political in nature. we know that there are members

of the house and senate who tried very hard to destroy planned parenthood. in the last budget we were able to stop it in the senate. so i think we know that it is political. but the people out there who looked at this got really disturbed about it. they rose up on all the social media. men and women of good will. different political parties. and they just said stop it. you have to separate out your politics from the need to find a cure for breast cancer and prevent it. >> andrea, yesterday you interviewed michael bloomberg. that was earlier today. i love the way he handled this. he offered a matching donation up to $250,000 to planned parenthood to make up for what it looked like they were going to lose. he said politics should not be in play. let's watch mayor bloomberg here for a moment. >> i think health care is at the top of the list of things we have to worry about. i don't think politics should enter into it. i don't know what got the komen foundation to make their decision. i'm glad they reversed it. but the bottom line is planned parenthood is an organization

that was providing a great service in terms of screening for breast cancer and they do a lot of other things as well. i have no idea why the susan komen foundation did what they did or why they reversed it. i'm just glad that in the end they came to the right decision. they will continue to fund planned parenthood. i will continue to support both organizations, and i would urge everybody else to do it. >> well, race for the cure is one of the most dazzling things that goes on every year. you've been involved. i saw it down in florida. all these people. they painted one of the bridges down in palm beach pink to honor the day. tell us about -- is that going to revive and come back after all of this? >> i think there is some damage that has to be repaired, but i think that the institution, decades of participation by men, women, children, survivors and supporters alike just has to go on. this is a global organization now, and we've seen the first susan g. komen race for the cure around the old city of jerusalem with arab and israeli women running together in a cause and

the mayor of jerusalem running in the race and nancy brinker as well. so there is a vibrant community here, and the social network media certainly proved that that is instantaneous. it's passionate. and one of the reasons it's so passionate, as senator boxer could tell you, when you run in one of these races and thinking about people you've lost. now i'm thinking about myself but more about the community and about children and others that you see -- >> my friend, you've been through this. you are allowed to have emotion. your last thought on this, barbara boxer. is this going to be okay for the race for the cure, which we're watching a picture of right now? >> i think everyone is going to come together after this. it was a lesson for everyone, and we have to take politics and take it out of this. because, you know, republicans and democrats and independents, every one of us, whether we vote, we don't vote, whether

we're pro-choice or not, we know someone who's been touched deeply by this. i sit here and i think about andrea and i think about the wife of my friend harry reid who is going through this now and i can say, we have to work together, period. and i think what happened with this apology was a recognition that we won't find a cure if we start fighting over things. let's just work together. let's get this done. >> great strong words from senator barbara boxer of california. thank you senator, and thank you, my friend, andrea mitchell, who knows of what she speaks. up next, we're going to talk about "the game change, the movie. who doesn't want to watch this movie because he's already been through the change. his name's mccain.

back to "hardball." now for "the sideshow." marking the calendar? early this week we got a peek at the new hbo movie "game change" based on the book about the 2008 presidential election. it's no secret sarah palin is at the center of the story. but what do you thing real-life subjects think about the impending premiere? depends who you ask. let's get the lowdown from john mccain who was asked about the movie yesterday by cnbc's andrew ross sorkin. >> i was curious if you had an opportunity to see ed harris playing you and your views. >> it will be a cold day in gila bend, arizona, when i watch that movie. >> fair enough. >> thanks. >> i guess, well, was the joy with -- the joy ride with sarah palin was something he'd rather experience just once? next up, time to make a move? for many conservatives it would be a dream come true to have indiana governor mitch daniels jump in the republican presidential race. well, the ship sailed on that one.

but an endorsement from daniels could provide much-needed backing for any of the current candidates. think he's starting to lean towards one of the candidates? let's hear how he took on the question yesterday. >> who are you endorsing for president on the gop side? >> well, i'm for all of them. i'm rooting for them all to do a good job, spirited competition. i don't think anybody would care too much who i was for. >> are you kidding? everybody wanted you to run. they want your endorsement. >> now that donald trump has spoken, i guess it's over anyway, right? >> good point. >> there's one way to dodge the question. what do you think? would romney trade trump for mitch daniels at this point? you betcha. speaking of that, here's a no-brainer. who do you think was clapping the loudest when mitt romney and donald trump took to the podium? that's right. the obama campaign. here's a portion of an e-mail sent out to obama supporters earlier today. "yesterday, mitt romney said he was humbled to accept donald trump's endorsement. seriously. yes, donald trump, birth certificate conspiracy leader, has decided that mitt romney's

his guy and romney has embraced him without reservation. as if we need a reminder which topic it was that dominated trump's almost candidacy. and finally, game on. there are a few super bowl bets going on in congress. but here's one that involves the senators. this one is between new yorker chuck schumer and jeanne shaheen of new hampshire. what's at stake? a round of beer for the entire senate. it's just a question of what type. let's hear the two of them discussing the wager earlier today. >> we think we brew a lot of really wonderful beer in new hampshire. and so we're delighted with the idea that senator schumer is going to pay for that beer to treat all of the senators when the patriots win on sunday. >> we have brooklyn beer, blue point on long island. we have saranak. up in utica. when the giants beat the patriots, jeanne is going to be nice enough to serve those beers to all the senate and they'll start buying them and it will help jobs in new york.

>> i don't know who it was that thought up these cornball bets between politicians. but i think it's time to please retire them. that's "hardball" for now. thanes for being with us. up next, "your business." that's good morning, veggie style. hmmm. for half the calories plus veggie nutrition. could've had a v8. [ woman ] i was ready for my trip, but my smile wasn't. [ female announcer ] new crest 3d white intensive professional effects whitestrips. it goes below the enamel surface to whiten as well as a five-hundred dollar professional treatment for a transformation that's hard to believe. ♪ wow, that's you? [ female announcer ] new intensive professional effects whitestrips. and try 3d white toothpaste and rinse. from crest. life opens up when you do.