DOWNLOADS: (169)

PLAYS: (916)

Embed

Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder (R) is insisting that a so-called "right to work" law which restricts unions' ability to collect dues is not "anti-union" at all.

Speaking to MSNBC on Wednesday, Snyder said his move to sign the legislation into law and join the 23 other "right to work" states where workers make $1,500 less on average was actually "pro-worker."

But MSNBC's Richard Wolffe wondered how the governor could defend calling unions bad for business when the auto industry in Michigan had been very successful in recent years.

"I've never said unions are bad for business and I don't believe this is actually anti-union," Snyder asserted. "I believe this is pro-worker."

"Are you serious?" a stunned Wolffe replied. "Are you serious this is not anti-union? This, at its core, actually undermines the ability for unions to organize."

"This does not deal with organizing at all," Snyder declared. "This does not deal with collective bargaining at all. This is nothing to do with the relationship between an employer and a union. This is about the relationship between unions and workers. And this is about giving workers the freedom to choose, and unions have to be in a position to present a good value proposition."

"This should make unions more effective in terms of having to put a value proposition to workers," he added.

Scarborough explained that while he did not support requiring workers to pay union dues, he would "not go so far as to say what you’ve just said, which is that this helps unions."

"I mean, it undermines unions’ ability to stay vibrant, right?" the MSNBC host observed.

"It really leaves it up to the union to decide and innovate as to what their value proposition is," Snyder insisted.

DOWNLOADS: (196)

PLAYS: (1258)

Embed

Neoconservative Dan Senor is blaming everything and everyone but former nominee Mitt Romney for Republicans losing the White House in 2012.

In his first appearance on Morning Joe since the election, the former Romney adviser said that a "systemic crisis in the world of polling" gave the campaign bad data.

"I think particularly on right-of-center polling, the modeling was way off," he explained.

While Senor only cited Rasmussen and Gallup, the final Real Clear Politics aggregation of polls came very close on the election outcome and showed that every other major polling organization called the race correctly.

Senor refused to assign any significant blame to the substance Romney's campaign because "if we had picked up 400,000 in a handful of swing states, Mitt Romney would have been a genius."

"The Friday night before the election, we were in Cincinnati, we had this huge rally," he recalled. "You could feel the energy, a hundred top-tier Romney surrogates at the event. I'm backstage with some of them -- I won't mention their names -- but they're talking about Romney like he's [former President Ronald] Reagan. You know, the debate performance were the best debate performances of any Republican nominee in history. This guy's got -- he's iconic. They were talking about him because they believed he was going to win in four or five days. And in fact, some of them were already talking to our transition [team] to position themselves for Romney cabinet."

"And I won't say who they are, they know who they are, they were on television -- the body was buried -- five, six days later absolutely eviscerating him."

MSNBC's Richard Wolffe pressed Senor about "what the Republican Party needs to do on policy" to win in the future.

"Look, I'm no longer professionally spinning for Mitt Romney," Senor insisted. "I do think he got a couple of things right and they have been eclipsed by the pile on."

But the man who worked to spin the Iraq war for the Bush administration as the chief spokesman for the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) in Iraq did admit that the Republican Party in general needed to do a "better job at thinking trough about how to talk about middle-class economics."

DOWNLOADS: (262)

PLAYS: (550)

Embed

Conservative MSNBC host Joe Scarborough on Monday attempted to shut down any talk of voter suppression by shouting "Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi!" over and over again to change the subject to the September attacks on Americans in Libya, a topic that Republicans believe hurts President Barack Obama.

During a discussion about the tight presidential race in Florida, co-host Mika Brzezinski attempted to point out that Republicans had restricted early voting, creating long lines and chaos for voters in some counties.

"You just feel like you have to finish with a story, Republicans bad, [Florida Gov.] Rick Scott bad, voting suppression," Scarborough complained, throwing up his arms. "I have three words: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi. I'm wandering around my ranch house muttering the words, 'Benghazi.' I mean, seriously, are we going here? Are we really going here?"

"But you know what?" Brzezinski attempted to continue. "We've had a..."

"Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi!" Scarborough interrupted.

"It's absolutely a story," NBC's David Gregory said of the long voter lines.

"Benghazi's a story," Scarborough quipped.

"It's something we have to watch very carefully," Gregory added. "And by the way, I think the Benghazi issue, I think there are real questions about Benghazi. There are serious questions... well, he brought it up!"

"Why do you want to cover up Benghazi?" Scarborough shouted, pointing at MSNBC.com executive editor Richard Wolffe. "Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi!"

"Is the voter story I just read a story?" Brzezinski asked Republican strategist Steve Schmidt.

"Benghazi, Benghazi," Scarborough muttered as Schmidt tried to answer.

"I mean, kind of," the Republican strategist admitted. "Is it possible a local elections officials in Florida screwed up the early voting? Yes. Is it part of some big, giant Republican conspiracy out there? Absolutely not."

"So what happened in Benghazi?" Scarborough said.

"I think we can all agree, Republicans and Democrats -- whatever your preference -- they all should be able to vote," Wolffe explained. "Those lines are offensive wherever they are, whoever's responsible. Lines should not happen for several hours just to allow people to do that."

"I agree," Scarborough replied. "Just like I agree that we really need to get to the bottom of what happened in Benghazi."

(h/t: Media Matters)

DOWNLOADS: (233)

PLAYS: (1011)

Embed

As Think Progress noted, after complaining and fearmongering about the mandate that will require insurance companies to cover the cost of contraceptives at no cost, and lying and calling emergency contraception "an abortion pill," which it's not, now he going to be fundraising with the drug manufacturer's chairman.

Romney To Fundraise With Plan B Maker Despite Denouncing Emergency Contraception As ‘Abortive Pills’:

In particular, Romney denounced the fact that insurance plans would now be required to cover Plan B, a form of emergency contraception that he falsely referred to on numerous occasions as “abortive pills.” This is what Romney said in Colorado on February 6, 2012:

ROMNEY: This same administration said that the churches and the institutions they run, such as schools and let’s say adoption agencies, hospitals, that they have to provide for their employees free of charge, contraceptives, morning after pills, in other words abortive pills, and the like at no cost. Think what that does to people in faiths that do not share those views. This is a violation of conscience.

(Plan B works just like regular birth control pills and is not, in fact, an abortifacient.)

The Miami Herald’s Marc Caputo reports that next week the Romney campaign will be doing a major fundraising blitz across Florida, including an event “at the Star Island manse of pharmaceutical magnate Phil and Pat Frost where dinner costs $50,000.”

As they also noted in their post, this is not the first time he's done this. Go read the post for the rest of the list. And as they reported, here's more on the campaign's response:

Bloomberg News reports that the Romney campaign refused to comment on this story:

Romney’s campaign spokeswoman, Andrea Saul, didn’t respond to a request for comment on how the candidate, who opposes abortion rights, could accept support from the maker of “abortive pills.”

The list of Mitt Romney's lies, contradictions, flip flops and obfuscations just grows longer and longer each day. I'm happy to see that Al Sharpton covered this topic on his show this Tuesday since it hasn't gotten a lot of airplay anywhere else that I've seen, but he should have noted that Romney was lying about Plan B being an "abortion pill." He failed to point that out in the segment above.

DOWNLOADS: (108)

PLAYS: (872)

Embed

Lawrence O'Donnell and his guest Richard Wolffe had a bit of fun with GOP presidential primary contenders Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul and their past encounters with actor and comedian Sacha Baron Cohen. As O'Donnell reminded the viewers of The Last Word, Gingrich's interview with Nancy Pelosi is not the most foolish thing he's done in recent years.

Cut to Gingrich appearing with Cohen on HBO's Ali G which you can watch the entire clip of below. O'Donnell also showed a portion of the movie Bruno, where Ron Paul was fooled by Cohen into believing he was doing an interview for a German news show, only to find himself in a hotel room with Cohen dropping his pants. As O'Donnell and Wolffe noted, this just confirms what one of Paul's former staffers said about him and his discomfort being around gay men.

Scarce has a longer clip of Paul's appearance in Bruno here -- Ron Paul's Uncomfortable Gay Moment With Sacha Baron Cohen.

Here's the Ali G segment with Newt:

DOWNLOADS: (115)

PLAYS: (320)

Embed

DOWNLOADS: (523)

PLAYS: (5017)

Embed

While arguing about whether the Republicans and their astroturf "tea party" base should be accepting any new tax increases during this negotiation over raising the debt ceiling, which is by the way pissing me off to no end because this whole argument that's going on now should be part of budget negotiations and not whether we're going to pay for bills we've already run up under the Bush administration, Pat Buchanan suggested that his hero, Ronald Reagan did not raise taxes while he was President.

Buchanan tried trotting out the tired line that I've heard him use before, but was not called out for before and that is Ronald Reagan did raise taxes, but he regretted it.

BUCHANAN: I was with Ronald Reagan Al in the White House, he cut taxes twenty five percent across the board... (crosstalk)

SHARPTON: He raised taxes eleven times. Where you at work that day Pat?

BUCHANAN: I told you I came into the White House and he came up and he explained to me the terrible mistake he had made and he said they gave me three dollars in spending increases or three dollars in spending increases for every dollar in tax cuts, I was robbed, and that's not going to happen again. And that's why the Republicans are holding their ground.

SHARPTON: Pat, he did it, eleven times. Eleven times.

All Buchanan could resort to is asking if Reagan was a tax cutter or a tax hiker, with nothing to substantiate that claim one way or the other.

If MSNBC doesn't want to hire Al Sharpton, maybe Current TV will. I think they offered Chris Hayes a contract so Current would not have the chance to do so. Even if you've got some issues with Sharpton as I do, I think he's not someone conservatives want to go up against in a debate and he's done a really good job filling in for Cenk Uygur. He filled in for Ed Schultz before Cenk went on vacation and his performance on that show was pretty rough and he looked a little nervous. I think he's found his stride while filling in for Cenk over the last couple of weeks.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (529)

PLAYS: (3954)

Embed

Rachel Maddow talked to Democratic pollster Celinda Lake about the Democrats' strategy for the mid-term elections: using the emerging scandal around anonymous corporate donors pouring money into Republican coffers as a campaign issue. Lake explained to Maddow why -- contrary to Beltway conventional wisdom -- this is a good issue for Democrats to run on.

LAKE: This is an issue that is a good October surprise for the Democrats and the progressives. It’s a way of really raising the fundamental question about whose side you're on. It ties into an economic narrative. We’ve had a hard time getting off the ground. In twenty-two congressional districts where the Chamber is running its ads with foreign money, 184,000 jobs have been outsourced to many of these very same foreign corporations.

These people aren’t putting up their money for nothing. What are they buying? And this isn’t free speech, it’s bought speech and the public has a right to know who’s trying to buy their candidates.

As they both noted, this message is going to resonate in blue-collar districts where the Democrats are having the most trouble, and it keeps the message simple: Whose side are you on?

Naturally, Mark Halperin doesn't think the Democrats should be running on this issue. From Hardball earlier the same evening, here's Chris Matthews, Mark Halperin and Richard Wolffe discussing why everything is doom and gloom for Democrats in the midterm elections. Halperin of course thinks the Democrats should not be "engaging in strictly assassination of Republicans" or going after the Chamber of Commerce and their foreign donors and instead President Obama should be telling the country what he wants to do next.

Why that's some winning issue when he knows full well the Republicans will just obstruct anything he tries to get passed and then claim Democrats are incapable of governing is beyond me. I think the last thing the Democrats should be doing is taking any political advice from Mark Halperin.

Here's a prime example of the inside the Beltway common wisdom Rachel was talking about from Matthews and company.

DOWNLOADS: (392)

PLAYS: (1403)

Embed

Chris Matthews talks to former McCain advisor Mark McKinnon and Richard Wolffe about Sister Sarah's flame throwing speech at the National Tea Party Convention this past weekend and her performance there is finally enough to scare the crap out of even Chris Matthews. He blasts her for war mongering on Iran.

MATTHEWS: I don`t know what to make of it. It gets worse, Richard. Let`s look at this. Here she -- asked her about what -- well, should Obama would be -- would it take to defeat Obama in 2012? And here`s what Palin said. This is getting truly scary. This isn`t just not knowing what you`re talking about, or pretending you know what you`re talking about. Here is scary thinking you know what you`re talking about. Let`s listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PALIN: Say he played the war card. Say he decided to declare war on Iran or decided really come out and do whatever he could to support Israel, which I would like him to do. But that changes the dynamics in what we can assume is going to happen between now and three years because I think if the election were today, I do not think Obama would be reelected.

CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS: You`re not suggesting that he would cynically play the war card?

MATTHEWS: I`m not suggesting that. I`m saying if he did, things would dramatically change, if decided to toughen up and do all that he can to secure our nation and our allies.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTHEWS: Is she a balloon head? I mean, Richard, listen to this. I`m asking the question. She said it would be popular in this country to go to war, to declare war on yet another country with 77 million people and a pretty darn modern air force to fight with. To declare war on Iran would be popular in this country. What world does she -- and then she puts the oath up, like to Israel. What was that putting the hand up, kind of an oath there, and bringing in Israel into this? What did that have to do with anything that`s reasonable?

WOLFFE: Well, number one, I think she suffers from living in a pre- Iraq war mentality, which is that, you know, you can go out and prove you`re tough by invading another country. Two problems with that. First of all, it ignores the fact...

MATTHEWS: Declaring war on Iran, she`s talking about.

WOLFFE: First of all -- right. First of all, it ignores the experience that we had in Iraq. Secondly, her brand is that she`s an authentic politician, that she is somehow bringing a sense of reality to the Washington dynamic. And here in this question, she`s engaging in some nakedly political scenario, role playing, as if it`s acceptable. It isn`t! It isn`t to regular voters. It`s not acceptable to foreign policy folks. I -- I -- you know, what can you say except she`s ripping off Pat Buchanan`s column, apparently.

MATTHEWS: Mark, I don`t get it, declaring war on Iran. I mean, everyone knows that Iran is a hell of a lot more sophisticated country than Iraq, a hell of a lot more fierce a war to take on. To go into a ground war of any kind, even -- I would think the most far-right hawk in the country would say drop a few bombs on them, knock out their plant, their nuclear plant. But the idea of declaring war and going to all-out war with -- well, I don`t know what to make of why she`s doing it and saying that would be popular in this country. Where?

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (920)

PLAYS: (1913)

Embed

Chris Matthews' wants to discuss Harry Reid's slavery remark and who better to bring in than flaming racist Pat Buchanan.

DOWNLOADS: (142)

PLAYS: (434)

Embed

Richard Wolffe talks to Markos Moulitsas about the recent poll from Research 2000 for Daily Kos showing that the Republicans have a real problem with their southern base.

Wolffe: We're going to get to your poll in a minute, but I wanted to ask what you think the political calculation is for Cantor as he distances himself from the birthers, and then bashes those who challenge the birthers.

Moulistas: Well I think most people would recognize, even Republicans, that there's a certain percentage of the Republican base that's a little off, that's a little crazy. I just think they didn't want anybody to know it's half of them. I mean, you know, that's crazy, so it's a problem for them because what they're realizing is that they are a southern regional rump party, that their leadership is heavily based in the south, and the rest of the country is sort of looking at them and wondering "What the heck is going on down there?".

Wolffe: So do you think now we're at a point where Cantor or maybe a certain segment of the GOP want the whole birther thing to go away now? Is that what's happening?

Moulistas: Oh, absolutely. I mean for a while it, you know, as long as nobody knows about it, then they could sort of feed it. They could introduce legislation in the Congress quietly to sort of appease this rabid, radical right. But suddenly now this is a national story because it's getting credence. You have Lou Dobbs on CNN making it his personal crusade. You have Fox News obviously pushing this very heavily, talk radio. And you're starting to realize that you have Republicans are going on campaign swings and they're going on television and they're doing interviews, and they're being asked about Obama's birth certificate. And it's really not the kind of thing they want to be asked about. It's not the kind of thing they want to encourage.

They go on to discuss the racial element behind the birther movement and the lack of moderate Republicans left in the party and how being forced to cater to their crazy base is going to hurt them nationally.