that's it for "hardball." thanks for being with us. "the ed show" with ed schultz starts right now. good evening, americans. welcome to "the ed show" tonight from new york. breaking news from the campaign trail. newt gingrich has lost his iowa director on the campaign trail and he apparently called mormonism a cult. that's not good. s breaking news in washington. the house just passed a bill to cut 40 weeks off unemployment insurance. newt gingrich has a plan to destroy the middle class. i'll tell you where the reagan democrats are tonight. this is "the ed show." let's get to work. gingrich might be the better candidate. he might be able to make a connection with what we call the reagan democrats. >> newt gingrich thinks he's a man of the people, but his policy just like ronald reagan's means further destruction of the middle class. ezra klein of the "washington post" is here. and mitt romney's team is dealing with the conservative version of the jeremiah wright tape.

>> i'm someone who is moderate and my views are progressive. >> salon's joan walsh has the latest. i don't want to waste a lot of newt's time or rick santorum's time or donald trump's time. >> the trump circus is over. professor michael eric dyson will tell us what the trump debacle says about the republican party. and for some reason, dick cheney thinks the world needs to hear his views on foreign policy. >> how close do you think iran is to a nuclear weapon? >> very close. i don't see anything that's been done by this administration that's going to stop that program. >> tonight, my commentary on why the former vice president needs to leave the stage. good to have you with us tonight, folks. thanks for watching. republicans want to return to the destructive economic policies of the past. but their own personal histories may knock them out first. today, a video from 2002 is being circulated by both republicans and democrats. it shows a side of mitt romney

he doesn't want republicans primary voters to see. >> i think people recognize that i'm not a partisan republican, that i'm someone who is moderate and my views are progressive and that i'm going to go to work for our senior citizens, for people who have been left behind by urban schools that are not doing the right job. they're going to vote for me regardless of the party label. >> did he say his views are progressive? well, the romney revelations are taking a toll in iowa. in a new poll by insider advantage, he falls to number four in the field behind newt gingrich, ron paul and rick perry. how do you fall behind rick perry? gingrich shouldn't celebrate. another new poll today shows ron paul trailing gingrich in iowa by only 1% within the poll's margin of error. ron paul we're told has an aggressive ground organization in iowa and his campaign has been so cocky to say they've got a strategy that could force a brokered convention. they're that confident. he poses a new threat to newt gingrich. especially when you look at the

new nbc news/"wall street journal" poll showing gingrich has a severe electability problem. he loses to president obama by 11 points in a head to head matchup. gingrich's presenting himself as a man of the people. the paycheck president. but like mitt romney, his past is catching up with him again. a true man of the people doesn't forget the $1.6 million he made as a lobbyist for freddie mac. >> we offer strategic advice. >> you didn't obtain -- >> sure, but i don't know the amounts. >> is it $1.6 million figure correct? >> i don't know. we're going back to check. >> a real middle class warrior doesn't brag about the $60,000 he makes giving speeches. >> i was charging $60,000 a speech, and the number of speeches was going up, not down. normally celebrities leave and they gradually sell fewer speeches every year. we were selling more. >> of course, a person who feels the pain of the working class americans doesn't try to dismiss a $500,000 personal account at

tiffany's. >> we had a revolving fund. >> what does that mean? >> it means that we had a revoling fund. it was an -- >> who buys a half million dollars worth of jewelry on credit? >> no, it's a -- go talk to tiffany's. >> for me, here's the clincher. i was stunned today when i heard rudy giuliani say this about newt gingrich. here's what giuliani thinks gingrich's appeal is all about. >> gingrich might be the better candidate. he might be able to make a connection with what we call the reagan democrats. you know, the democrats who moved over in '80 and '84 away from carter, away from mondale, because they found them to be too liberal and voted for a republican even though they're democrats. >> reagan democrats. i'm tired of hearing about reagan democrats in 2011, rolling into 2012. may i state that i would think most of the people who voted for

ronald reagan, i don't know this for sure because nobody's done the story, i'll throw it out there. not most, but a good number of people that voted for ronald reagan are freaking dead. let's talk about the people who are still alive. maybe they'll really help out the newtster, right? the 20 somethings are now 50 somethings. where are they? how has the reagan democratic era worked out for them? where were the reagan democrats? let's take a look at my favorite chart again. let's see, when was reagan elected? i think it was back in 19 -- 1981. that's when it was. well son of a gun, look at this. our chart started in 1979. here's 1981. this is when we were told that the reagan democrats, the working folk of america, were going to turn against the democrats and go vote for ronald reagan because he had the american flag behind him and he talked about how great america could be.

there wasn't a lot of substance. then they started drinking the kool-aid, you know? let's see. how did this whole thing work out for these reagan democrats, these hard working class americans who decided to turn against the democrats and go with reagan? looks to me like the working folks stayed on the blue line. in the meantime, the top 1% and 2%, their income has gone up over 300% over the last 30 years. let's fast forward to 2011 now, going to 2012. ask yourself the question, you reagan democrats, if you're still alive, how's that whole thing worked out for you when it comes to your kitchen table income? go ask the teachers in wisconsin or the firefighters in ohio if being a reagan democrat worked out for them. the only reagan democrats today, you know where they are, they're in a museum somewhere. i mean, it's a charade for the republicans to go around and say that reagan democrats, they still exist. i don't think they do. and if they do, they need their head examined because this is where their income has been under republican policies and

this is where the top 1% and 2% have gone over the last 30 years in income in this country. they say it so they can bring out the same old tired arguments that they used against former president jimmy carter. well, he's too liberal. well, he's weak on the military, has no good foreign policy, and, of course, he hasn't created jobs. where have we heard that before? we're hearing it today. this is what they're trying to do to president obama while paints newt gingrich as the second coming of ronald reagan. here's what the tax policy center says about newt gingrich's economic policy and what it's going to do for your taxes. this is the tax cut that he'll give every income bracket. take a look at how the top 1% makes out compared to everybody else. they'll save an average of nearly $2 million a year compared to an average of about $600 for everyone in the 99%.

hold it right there. wasn't that kind of a bush thing that $600 thing? gosh, they just never change, do they? it's trickle-down economics all over again. reagan democrats, how's it working out for you? president obama said it best about trickle-down economics just the other day. >> but here's the problem. it doesn't work. it has never worked. [ applause ] >> if you were a younger voter, if you're in your 20s or your 30s or your 40s, you didn't vote for ronald reagan, okay? and all this talk about reagan democrats, i think, is going to be an old, tired effort to gather the working folk of america. as if that they're just ready to turn on the democrats and the progressive movement and run to the republicans and now that newt, of course, is a new guy,

now that newt, of course, is a new man, we can trust what he says about economics? his policies stink for the blue liners that i show you on this program quite often. the red liners, hey, you know where they're going to go. they're not reagan democrats. they're country clubbers. they're going to get exactly what they want. if they can get newt gingrich or mitt romney in the white house. what's that saying? you can't get fooled again. get your cell phones out. i want to know what you think. tonight's question. who is more out of touch with the middle class? mitt romney or newt gingrich? text "a" for mitt, text "b" for newt and we have a "c" option tonight, text "c." for all of the above at 622639. our blog, ed.mns.com. get the results later on in the program tonight. let's turn now to ezra klein, msnbc policy analyst and "washington post" columnist.

and also joan walsh, editor at large of salon.com. joan, great to have you. we'll start with you first tonight. you know, maybe i'm wrong. do reagan democrats still exist? we're hearing rudy giuliani say that that's who newt can appeal to. what do you make of that? >> it's so preposterous. first of all, no, they don't exist anymore. you know, it's a tough thing to talk about, ed, but you and i both know a segment of the white working class did go over to ronald reagan, did abandon the democratic party. some of it was race and some of it was just believing that government was out of control and some people were getting something for nothing. and it was kind of a tragic thing that happened to the democrats. but what we've been seeing in the last couple of years is that some of that coalition, the younger people, i mean, you're right, the older people are maybe not with us anymore. some of that coalition has come to understand that they are the new republican welfare queens and welfare cheats because it's the public workers now. it's the cops and the

firefighters. it's the nurses and the teachers who are becoming the republican scapegoats now. it's really all of us. it's really anybody who makes a decent living and has any kind of reliance on government, public education. we are all welfare cheats as far as they're concerned. so that's one thing. the other thing, of course, is the ridiculousness of rudy giuliani saying that you can't use the charge of elitism against newt gingrich, that it's just not going to stick. i'm sorry, it's going to be really fun to have the argument with mr. tiffany and with mr. no child labor laws and with mr. $37 million from the health care industry. rudy really needs to go away. it's preposterous. it's just the dumbest thing i've heard. >> ezra, you wrote about the policies and where the money is going to go to the top 1%. he likes to align himself with ronald reagan. he's talking about it a lot.

first of all, who is that going to appeal to when you break out exactly where the advantage financially is going to go if we were to implement newt gingrich's idea of tax policy, would go all the way to the top 1%? would it not? >> yeah. the numbers look sort of bad for newt gingrich. of cain, perry and gingrich. if you take current policy, you assume we extend the bush tax cuts which are regressive tax cuts forever. newt gingrich would give the to 1% a $340 tax cut per year. the middle income, folks between 40% and 60% on the income distribution would get $1,000 per year. >> there's nothing there for the middle class. >> it's not paid for. i do want to say one thing. perry, cain, gingrich, all tax plans like that. mitt romney doesn't. mitt romney's plan is to extend the bush tax cuts. looking to the general election, he actually had something that was a tax cut for the middle class. he didn't give anything more to

the rich and said, middle class, you get a capital gains tax cut. not a great tax cut or great way to do that. also not paid for. he was looking for the general. the thing for gingrich, perry and cain. they were looking for the primary. if they get through the primary unexpectedly, they're going to have to unexpectedly defend the numbers for the country as a whole. >> the story tonight is newt gingrich's political director quit in iowa after calling mormonism a cult. how much trouble is this? >> he's saying what a lot of people believe about mormonism, sadly. if they can tie it to gingrich, it sounds like they can't. it's worse news for mitt romney. i don't think it hurts gingrich. it's a large part of what mitt romney is dealing with. i mean, it's not good for gingrich because he doesn't have much of an organization there. he really has been running, as our friend rachel has said over and over, kind of a book tour, not so much a campaign. he's tries to put it in place in iowa. it's not good for him to lose anybody.

i don't think that the religious part of this scandal is going to stick. >> this was a quote about gingrich from obama's strategist david axelrod this week. "just remember the higher a monkey climbs on a pole, the more you can see his butt." ezra, how much more are we going to see or need to know about newt gingrich? >> we're going to see a lot. one thing important when you handicap gingrich's chances. between the new hampshire primary and super tuesday, you have eight weeks. that's a long time. 2008 there were only three weeks. a momentum candidate like gingrich has eight weeks in which every other campaign is going to pick him apart. pick apart the fact he wanted to take lasers and use them against north korea. pick apart the mirrors he wanted to hang in space in order to light our highways. there's just an enormous amount in gingrich's background that's going to be difficult for him. that's the time when romney can mount a comeback or huntsman or perry could mount the new challenge. >> what about ron paul? he doesn't seem to be the media darling but he's closing the gap in iowa. joan, what do you think?

>> i think he could win iowa, actually. that's really possible. iowa often surprises us. and it's a really good place for a candidate with a really devout and passionate following. he's been there before. that's a possibility. he's, you know, he's talking about a brokered convention. we know how hard that is to do. i don't see him ultimately as the front-runner. he believes too many unorthodoxed things for better or worse. i like some of his foreign policy, but it's not popular with republicans. so i don't, you know, i don't want to not take him seriously at all. i think the media is guilty of that and we should let the voters decide. but he could do well in iowa, not so well ultimately. >> ezra klein, great to have you with us tonight. joan walsh, same for you. thank you so much for joining us on "the ed show." remember to answer tonight's question at the bottom of the screen. share your thoughts on twitter @edshow. thursday, we have an exclusive leader with nancy pelosi. we'll talk about the republican obstruction on jobs obviously.

and of course the democrats' chances of turning, taking back the house next year. of course a whole lot more. we're thrilled to have the democratic leader with us thursday night here on "the ed show." nancy pelosi. coming up, donald trump pulls the plug on his own debate. what happened? was so looking forward to it. michael eric dyson will join me on that. and whenever president obama dares to take credit for something especially when it comes to foreign policy, the cheneys always go on the attack. iraq war veteran john soltz joins me on that subject tonight. that will change your le because it whitens by removing up to 80% of surface stains. see how it can change your life. crest 3d white. life opens up when you do. [ male announcer ] know the feeling? try acuvue® oasys brand contact lenses with hydraclear® plus for exceptional comfort. it feels like it disappeared on my eye! [ male announcer ] discover why it's the brand eye doctors

trust most for comfort. acuvue® oasys brand.

coming up on "the ed show," donald trump pulls out of the gop debate with newsmax but refuses to step out of the spotlight. michael eric dyson joining me on the conversation and commentary. in "psycho talk" sean hannity criticizes people who are locked into an ideology and ignore the truth? no! republicans pass their payroll tax cut bill, but it won't do

too much for the middle class. leo gerard, united steelworkers international president, weighs in later in the show. let us know what you think on twitter using #edshow.

you know, it would have been so much fun to watch, but today donald trump killed yet another reality television project. a republican debate sponsored by newsmax. for days the spectacle was on life support. after all but two gop candidates, newt gingrich and rick santorum, declined to debate. yesterday, trump, himself, downgraded like a storm.

he downgraded the debate to a chat. >> are you going to show up to this debate? is it going to happen. >> i am going to show up. maybe we'll just have a chat. we might just discuss the world and discuss it with ourselves. maybe we'll just do a chat. newt and i will talk about what has to be done. >> you're going to ignore santorum? going to say, hey, you get out of here? >> no, no, he'll be there. >> today trump told america all the bad news. first he released a written statement squeezing the plug for, of course, "the final episode of "the apprentice" on may 20th" in the first sentence. then came the face saving self-promotional video message. >> now, i have a debate coming up, but only two people are showing up. rick santorum and newt going gingrich. i give them a lot of credit because they have the guts to come. a lot of them aren't coming because they think i'm going to run for political office. something i can't do now because of equal time.

i have a big show. you're not allowed to run. i won't agree not to run. if the wrong person's in there, somebody that's not going to beat obama, or if the economy continues to be bad, and we have the wrong person, i would seriously think about running. >> joining me now is michael eric dyson, msnbc political analyst, professor at georgetown university. and author of the book "can you hear me now?" the trump debate is not going to take place. how disappointed i am. this garbage about equal time. give me a break. he's trying to say, the other candidates were so concerned about equal time. what's your take on that, michael? >> this man is an unmitigated narcissist. i mean, how long can it go on? he wants to give santorum and newt gingrich credit. maybe it's not a debate, it's a rebate. the reality is is that this man has seized the spotlight. he's addicted to the limelight. he wants his name out in the bold print of the american media. and it seems, ed, he'll do

anything to keep perpetuating this lie that he's a serious candidate to be taken seriously because he has serious ideals. trump, trump, trump today. if we can put it that way. and as a result of that, he shows why he is incapable of being ready for primetime and it's a scary thought to believe that this man could actually fit into the oval office by aspiring to be president of the united states of america. it's a joke. >> do you think that the candidates might have been afraid to be in the same arena with trump because he's kind of an unguided missile. he has nothing to lose because he's not a journalist. he doesn't work for anybody other than himself. he doesn't have to answer to any standards and practices type volume that many of us in the industry have to answer to and follow for integrity and credibility purposes. what about that? do you think maybe they just didn't want to get into an arena that might have been too much of an ad lib? >> you know what, i absolutely agree with you, ed. that's saying a lot when you're

talking about rick perry and newt gingrich. you know, who fly off at the lip at a moment's notice. so if you're saying those people are afraid -- and throw in michele bachmann for good measure -- if those folk are afraid to step into an arena because they think they can never anticipate what trump will say, that says a lot about donald trump. >> one thing about rick perry, okay, so let's just say that rick perry misspeaks again. you run the risk of donald trump ripping you right there. don't you? i mean -- >> right on the spot. >> he doesn't have any standards. he's just going to have at it. at no time at all did he ever say he was going to follow any kind of journalistic guidelines and be fair. in fact, he got mad at michele bachmann because she wouldn't do it. then he played the loyalty card on her. this really was all a donald show. was it not? >> oh, it was. it was a donald duck show. he was twisting their arms. he was trying to browbeat them. he was trying to coerce them by any means necessary into this fabricated debate that pretended

to be something serious when all along we knew it was only to promote his show. what happens today? he announces the end of "the apprentice" or the next showing. this is crass commercialism at its worst. >> ron paul said it was beneath the office of the presidency. >> amen. >> jon huntsman called it a joke. >> amen. >> trump is saying they were concerned about equal time because i might come back and run if this happens, "a," "b," "c" or "d." i'm glad the man has never been on "the ed show." the man is a total loser, all-american zero. nobody should pay attention to him. he doesn't have the guts to run. he won't run because he doesn't have the guts to run. i don't think anybody of any kind of credible source would endorse him whatsoever. >> not at all, ed. he's afraid to come on here and go toe to toe with you because you'd deconstruct him in a moment's notice and he'd be sent on his way as an apprentice to followfy.

>> michael eric dyson, good to have you with us. >> always good to be here. sean hannity is accusing democrats of lying on television. this is an easy one. slant head's going to the "zone." fox news is at it again. this time misleading viewers about the unemployment rate. see what they're up to later. stay with us.

and in "psycho talk" tonight, sean hannity takes intellectual dishonesty to a new level. the unemployment rate has been going down.

private sector job growth has been in positive territory for 21 months. hannity willfully ignores all of it. on his radio show he ripped into democrats who have been accurately talking about the declining unemployment rate. >> this is what happens when people who worship at the altar of any political ideology have to face reality. they don't adjust to the reality. they simply deny it. i mean, i've talked about obama-mania. this is it. the facts, every fact shows you something contrary to what you're saying, but you're so locked into your ideology, you'll ignore the truth and go on television and repeat it as though somehow it's true. hoping that some percentage of the american people will buy into your lie and fairytale. >> sounds like hannity is a little mixed up. i think he's confusing democrats with someone else who worships at the altar of political ideology. >> they don't adjust to the reality, they simply deny it. >> give credit to bush.

if obama had his way, we wouldn't have gotten bin laden. you know that. >> the killing of bin laden, in fairness, that would have never happened but for president bush. >> you'll ignore the truth and go on television and repeat it as though somehow it's true. >> he's been president nearly two years, got everything he wanted passed and it's failed. $1 trillion in a stimulus that failed. >> the stimulus did not fail. we would be in double-digit -- >> the disastrous failure of his own administration's stimulus. >> hoping some percentage of the american people will buy into your lie and fairytale. >> people who watch fox news on a daily basis are 31% more likely than non-fox viewers so think president obama was not born in america. sean hannity is the king of pushing his ideology, no matter how wrong he is. so for him to say democrats are the ones telling lies on television is unbalanced "psycho talk." dick cheney and his daughter, liz, well, they just can't help themselves. they roll out a new attack whenever president obama is

looking strong on foreign policy. and house republicans pass a bill extending the payroll tax cut, but they're slashing unemployment at the same time. leo gerard, president of the united steelworkers international will join me to talk about the battle between the gop and the 99%. ask osama bin laden and the ç

ask osama bin laden and the 22 out of 30 top al qaeda leaders who've been taken off the field whether i engage in appeasement. or whoever's left out there. ask them about that. >> and in the white house press conference, he said ask osama bin laden if i'm an appeaser. >> right. he wants to talk about bin laden. it's terrific he got bin laden. we all give him credit for that. iraq and afghanistan are two places where this president is absolutely failing. >> welcome back to "the ed show." any time president obama dares to take some credit, particularly on foreign policy, here come the cheneys. it's a family thing. they can't help themselves.

liz cheney on fox news on sunday attacking the president. the next day her father, former vice president, he's out on cnn. but it still wasn't enough. so the former vice president went on to the early show on another network. three days and three appearances by a cheney in the attack mode. it would be hilarious if it weren't so infuriating. the man who played a huge role in getting us into the most ill conceived war since vietnam. the man who insisted saddam hussein had weapons of mass destruction. the man whose cronies profited from the iraq mess altogether. the man who will lie every single day about iraq. dares to go on tv and second guess president obama. here's cheney criticizing the troop withdrawal from iraq. >> we're now in a situation where we're pulling all of our troops out of iraq, period. no stay-behind force. >> no stay-behind force. well, cheney fails to mention the private contractors that you and i are paying for who provide

security to the americans still in iraq, doing diplomatic work after the troop withdrawal. so how serious is this? do you really think that president obama and the people on his cabinet would say, ah, let's just get out of iraq because we made an agreement to and don't worry about those 17,000 americans that are still there. they can fend for themselves in something happens. you really think that's the way they think in the white house, mr. cheney? what a cheap publicity stunt you are. joining me now is jon soltz, chairman of votevets.org. jon is also an iraq war veteran and served as major in the army on the field and recently returned from iraq in his final deployment to that country. thank you. i appreciate it. what do you make of the rhetoric? how unsafe are the americans left behind? >> i think the big point is there really aren't that many americans left in iraq.

you have the embassy staff then the contractors contract specifically support the foreign military sales. a large chunk of the force are not americans, they're people who work from southern asia and these types of countries. there are not that many americans left. that's the best thing this administration did. there was a tremendous amount of pressure in the summertime to extend u.s. forces. they did a good job of lowering our number to 157. that's all that's going to be left on the ground of u.s. military. there's going do be some other americans on the ground, but a chunk of the contractors are, you know, simply just force protection assets. to protect what's left. >> liz cheney says the president is failing in both afghanistan and iraq. the former vice president says that we are leaving people behind there who are going to be at risk. and it's dangerous. is he telling the truth? is she telling the truth? >> it's completely false the idea we're leaving, you know, the iraqis in some type of chaos in a sense that we're completel withdrawing.

there's 157 military in iraq. we're leaving components of our u.s. army in kuwait. we have a regional quick reaction force we call it. also, you're attacking the president who killed osama bin laden and ended the iraq war. the iraq war was a huge distraction. now they're opposing the plan that they supported when he was the vice president. so now he's sort of against himself. and essentially if we don't leave iraq when the iraqi government asks us, the entire point of the mission is useless. it's operation iraqi freedom. the iraqi democracy doesn't want us there anymore. >> when the former vice president comes out and says this garbage, why do you think the white house never seems to push back? >> well, i think they do push back. i happened to just be over there, you know, hearing some people talk about certain things that the white house is messaging this week. i do think that you're going to see this week them push back. look, it's important for this president to talk about the fact that he killed bin laden.

he's focused on a global strategy to kill al qaeda. then he ended the iraq war. i think what dick cheney, it just might be a case of the facts that he really doesn't matter anymore. >> he has nothing to politically lose. he can come out and run his mouth and create the doubt. >> he's grabbing straws. he's looking to get his name in the press. he says that completely outlandish things that are irrelevant. this isn't a winning message for republicans in 2012. do they want to talk about how they started an unnecessary war that 55% of the country thinks we never should have fought in the first place and much larger numbers think we should be out of? it's a terrible place for them to be when trying to be an incumbent president. >> here's cheney talking about the downed drone in iran. >> for us to go in and take out the drone that crashes would have been a simple operation and denied them the value, the intelligence they can collect by having that aircraft. but the administration basically limited itself to saying, please give it back. and yesterday the iranians said no. i was told that the president had three options on his desk. he rejected all of them. >> jon, what's your response to

that based on what you know? >> i'm still laughing. this guy -- this is the guy who wants to start a war for a robot. they don't have a downed u.s. pilot. they don't have a member of the american military hostage. they don't have people in their embassy that are american civilians. this is a robot that fell out of the sky and he wants to start a war over it. they could cause some problems. it's not worth starting a war over a robot when there's a pending nuclear issue we're facing with them. >> he keeps throwing out the idea that the iranians are so close to a nuclear weapon. the experts i've talked to are saying at least a decade away. why does he keep doing that? >> i think he's just saber rattling. he's trying to draw an argument that this administration is weak, when in reality the increase of strength that you've seen from the iranians happened under the bush administration. democratically the allies in iraq have won. they're los to the regime in syria. their allies in lebanon have gained strength politically. allies in the palestinian authority gained strength

politically. it was under the bush administration where the iranians gained a tremendous amount of political strength throughout the middle east. this is him trying to deflect the fact he's the biggest reason why we have an iranian problem. >> conservatives are out there pushing the idea now that our military forces are out and there's contractors back there, of course, that's going to cost the taxpayers billions of dollars, that we really have to worry about an iranian invasion of iraq. what about that? >> well, that's the stupidest thing i've ever heard. the fact is the iranians have a very close relationship with nuri al maliki. he's a nationalist, yes, he has a relationship with the united states. it was, you know, nuri al maliki and muqtada al sadr have a close relationship with tehran also. we're leaving u.s. forces in kuwait to prevent it. second, it can't happen because essentially that would undermine the iranian's influence. they would have less influence by invading and would fracture the current government and pull the kurds out. the best things they can do in iraq is support prime minister maliki.

that's their strategy. the prime minister of iraq who came to power under the bush administration. >> jon soltz of votevets.org. thank you for doing what you did, major. no longer a major, you're just back from iraq. >> i'm just a vet. >> a very important vet, no doubt. coming up, more dishonesty from the folks at fox news. wait until you see their latest chart. they have charts? yes, they do and they don't tell the truth. stay tuned for "the rachel maddow show" tonight with her interview with vice president joe biden. ♪ [ male announcer ] you never know when a moment might turn into something more. and when it does men with erectile dysfunction can be more confident in their ability to be ready with cialis for daily use. cialis for daily use is a clinically proven

low-dose tablet you take every day, so you can be ready anytime the moment's right. ♪ [ man ] tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. don't take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. [ man ] do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than 4 hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, stop taking cialis and call your doctor right away. [ male announcer ] ask your doctor if cialis for daily use is right for you. for a 30-tablet free trial offer, go to cialis.com. unemployment dropped to the lowest point in 2 1/2 years, but you'd never notice it if you watch fox news. their trouble -- this chart thing that's just never accurate. later, the gop pretends to stand up for the middle class by passing a payroll tax bill that

puts the burden on the middle class. don't forget to tweet us there using #edshow. do you think you might have the unemployment rate down to 8%

do you think you might have the unemployment rate down to 8% by the time the election rolls around? >> i think it's possible, but, you know, i'm not in the job of prognosticating on the economy. i'm in the job of putting in place the tools that allow the economy to thrive and americans to succeed. >> that was president obama on "60 minutes" giving a response that didn't go over too well with the folks at fox news. take a look. >> all right. the 8% prediction is so bold because the unemployment rate has been above 8%. every month of the obama white house except for the first 12 days the president took office. now, here's where we are right now. as mentioned earlier this year. the number took a slight dip in november after staying at or

above 9% for 6 straight months. >> what do you say we take a closer look at that chart, fox news just used? here it is with november unemployment at 8.6%. right in line with 9% unemployment in october. doesn't really make a lot of sense, does it? now take a look at november unemployment numbers rate compared to march. see it? march 8.8% is shown lower than november's 8.6%. how in heck could they screw that up? now here's how all the changes in the unemployment rate should look. there's just one problem with an accurate chart like this. it doesn't help the fox news narrative. as "media matters" points out, time and time again, fox has had on-screen erros with charts misleading viewers. here's one from last year. fox claimed in this chart that

15 million jobs were lost in a three-month period. in three months? 15 million jobs? there seems to be a pattern here, doesn't there? when fox had a series of similar miss stakes a few years make, fox news management sent out a memo citing a zero tolerance for on-screen errors. how's that working out? john boehner and his buddies in the house just voted to extend the payroll tax cut, but they did it at the expense of the folks struggling the most. the republican party just can't stop going after working class americans. united steelworkers international president leo gerard is here next. "the ed show" survey @ápápá"

"the ed show" survey tonight, i asked who is more out of touch with the middle class in america? 3% of you said mitt romney. 5% of you said newt gingrich. 92% of you said all of the above. leo gerard of the united steelworkers international on the gop versus the 99%.

timely tonight, this evening i'm good about washing my face.

but sometimes i wonder... what's left behind? [ female announcer ] purifying facial cleanser from neutrogena® naturals. removes 99% of dirt and toxins without dyes, parabens or harsh sulfates. so skin feels pure and healthy. [ female announcer ] from neutrogena® naturals. my feet and exactly where i needed more support. i had tired, achy feet. until i got my number. my dr. scholl's custom fit orthotics number. now i'm a believer. you'll be a believer, too. learn where to find your number at drscholls.com. timely tonight, this evening house republicans passed a bill extending the payroll tax cuts for another year. don't get fooled. they're not doing it to help the middle class. they're still protecting millionaires and billionaires, so they're paying for the tax cut by doing this. eliminating some of the funding for health care reform. extending a pay freeze on federal workers. and cutting federal jobs. they're also slashing the number

of weeks people can receive unemployment benefits from 99 weeks down to 59 weeks. earlier today, president obama announced that he would veto the republican bill saying "it seems to put the burden of paying for the bill on working families while giving a free pass to the wealthiest and big corporations by protecting their loopholes and subsidies." meanwhile, house majority leader eric cantor of virginia had the audacity to pretend republicans are looking out for the middle class. >> you can't be for the middle class, you can't be for keeping taxes low and be against our middle class tax relief and job creations act. the president also says that we can't wait. well, exactly, mr. president. we can't wait. that's why we're putting forth this bill to make sure that we are there for the middle class of this country. >> we asked the president to join us in finally putting himself behind the bill to help the middle class. >> the republicans never talk about the middle class.

joining me tonight, leo gerard, of the united steelworkers. tonight they're trying to hoodwink the american people as if they did something for the middle class. are republicans really looking out for the middle class, as cantor claims there? >> absolutely not. it's another one of their show games. you know, hide the pea and pulling the stick. what the real reality is is they're against slashing benefits and against cutting the amount of time to collect unemployment comp. they're looking to destroy more jobs. when you destroy a public sector job, that's a real job. when you give people a pay freeze, that takes money out of the economy. i've said on your show and a number of other shows, ed, one of the things we have in america that's a problem is we have a demand problem that we've got too many people that are unemployed, too many people that aren't making enough money. we saw recently an article that said there's 100 million

americans that are either living in poverty or near poverty. and what we need to do is put demand in the economy. get people back to work. quit playing these silly games. quit trying to pretend when you cut people's salary, when you cut their unemployment comp, when you lay them off that you're, in fact, creating jobs. >> the bill only got ten democratic votes and of course republican leaders used that claim to say it was a bipartisan compromise. here it is. >> we've passed a large bill that contains many of the prioriies of our caucus and the white house. we've worked to find common ground. >> we just had a strong bipartisan vote on the house floor. it's time for the other side, the harry reid, as well as the president, to compromise as well and let's get on about the business of the people. >> when the founding fathers sat down to craft a type of government that they wanted to see that was by the people and for the people, they looked at it that they're going to have to have compromise. >> do these jokers know what

compromise is? beyond that, what the hell are ten democrats doing voting with republicans at this point? >> those ten democrats need to be taken to the wood shed. the reality is, look, let's just quit playing games and recognize that the top 1% have done extremely well. that they've had huge bonuses. they've lined their pockets. they've taken a majority of the wealth that's been created in the last 20 years. and the people in the middle and the people at the bottom continue to be stepped on by these republicans and we ought to quit playing games, make sure we're going to have the kind of things to put people back to work, give a middle class tax cut that the president's been talking about. we're going to give people unemployment comp to get through this. for every dollar spent on unemployment comp, you get about $1.60 to $1.65 back in benefit because the economy multiplies that money. these guys, the bill was found on the floor. it ought to go back on the floor where they found it. >> mr. gerard, we're going to end up seeing a big discussion

in washington about the extension of the bush tax cuts. if the democrats are going to be able to get this payroll tax cut through. they did it that way, but of course, the president is going to certainly veto it. then they're going to have to go back and work on it again. we all know where they're going. let's talk about a line in the sand by the democrats. what should they, if anything, give up in negotiations to extend the payroll tax cut and also unemployment benefits? >> not a darn thing, ed. they ought to draw a line in the sand, make it clear who they stand for. they stand for ordinary folks. make it clear the republicans stand for the already rich. already ultra rich. they ought to draw the line in the sand. this is not just an economic argument, although the economics are proper and accurate. it's a moral argument. it's time we took the moral position of helping as the bible says, helping those that are least fortunate. these guys want to keep helping those that are the most fortunate. i think democrats have to draw a line in the sand and say,

america, this is who we're for. >> why wouldn't the democrats just say, okay, you don't want to extend the unemployment benefits, we'll see you in november, 2012, let's all go home. what's wrong with that strategy right there? >> i personally don't think there's anything wrong with that. one of our problems is that we've kept caving into these guys. as i said to some friends, when the wolf is at the door, you keep feeding the wolf, don't expect the wolf not to come back. we're going to be at a point where the wolf is going to eat all the chickens. they have to stand up. >> they always act as if they're going it be a nicer bunch the nice time around then throw more filibuster and more obstruction up there. you can't trust the republicans. i hope they figured that out. if the democrats stand with workers, they will roll in 2012. mr. gerard, great to have you with us tonight. that's "the ed show." reminder, democratic leader nancy pelosi will bey exclusive guest this thursday. from washington on "th