control the damage. >> obviously i stepped in it. but again, i go -- i have my moment of humor with it and press on. >> if perry can have his moment of hume, i guess maybe we can, too. i'm not sure if you're a monty python fan but i am. watching perry reminded me a lot of this -- >> he said he's not dead. >> yes, he is. >> i'm not. >> he isn't? >> he will be soon, he's very ill. >> i'm getting bet. >> no, you're not, you'll be stone dead in a moment. >> sorry, guys. my experience tell me voters sometimes have a different verdict than the pundits. bill clinton's circumstance ka early 1992 or clinton's lewinsk. be careful in listening to pundits. for perry a twitter verse and blogosphere rush to say the debacle would be the end of an already-struggling candidacy. >> it's three agencies of government when i get there that are gone. commerce, education and the -- what's the third one there? let's see. >> five. >> commerce, education -- >> epa. >> epa, there you go. no. >> seriously. >> is epa? >> no, sir. we're talking about the agencies of government -- epa need to be rebuilt. >> you can't name the third one? >> the third agency of government, i would do away with, education, the -- commerce and let's see. i can't. the third one i can't. sorry. oops. >> oops from governor perry. it took just seconds from ann coult coulter, poor rick perry forgot how to win an election. offscreen dr. paul is administering last rites to rick perry. more 0 and more of those. you get the idea. the perry campaign knew immediately it faced a major damage control challenge and the candidate himself would have to lead it. first in the post debate spin room. >> yeah, i stepped in it, man. it was embarrassing, of course it was. >> and then, a full-court press on the morning news shows and beyond. >> i'm kind of proof positive of it every day that people make mistakes. i had a brain freeze, as you said, and failed to remember an agency of government. i think i made a -- an error last night. i stepped in it. if electing a debater in chief, don't elect me. i don't mind saying clearly that i stepped in it last night. >> iowa votes in 54 days, and it's near impossible tonight to fine a republican who disagrees with this statement, if governor perry is to get back on his feet, he better fine a way to win the aucuses. that is doable? mary as the republican strategist in the room here, we all have bad moments, rick perry could not afford after several stumbles in earlier debates this one. is self-deprecating humor the path back or what does he have to prove this isn't the end? >> i'm with you on the monty python theory. we keep declaring these guys dead and they're lazarus-like, we have declared newt dead several times, declared cain dead, perry dead. and as not only monty python, you demonstrated the clinton comeback. they can and do come back. david gergen taught me this, it's how you respond to your mistakes and in each case each of these guys in their lazarus moments responded, went back to their strengths. of course he can do it. and any of these guys could come back until mitt romney breaks out and so far he's not doing that, despite his stellar debate performances. >> the question is, we'll get to governor romney, how many times can you fall down? life's not about falling down, it's how you get and up, two, don't believe the smart people in washington. voters decide the elections. if we look the polling, the "usa today" gallup poll, go back to middle of august, rick perry at 29%. he's dropped to 11%. i suspect after last night, he's not going up. does he reach a point at which it's not just he has a problem, he has people in front of him with 54 days, it's hard if you imagine a horse track to get around ron paul, newt gingrich, herman cain and get your shot at mitt romney. >> absolutely. this was a moment john cleese would have enjoyed new york question about that. and you know, i come in with the whole monty python tradition. i think he's helped himself with the good sportsmanship. he's treating it with humor and whatever else happens in the cap page i don't think he'll leave the campaign with his head down. but his problem is, this is a hit below the water line because it plays into the most important narrative that would be used against him, and that is good governor, created a lot of jobs, seems very strong but is he up to the job? is he smart enough to be president? this job, after all, is a complex job, as mary knows so well, you need smart people in there. and this just raises, once again, and i any in a way, because of the humor that others are inventing around it it's going to continue and linger in the public mind pipe have a very hard time seeing him catch fire now after this. and winning that iowa caucuses. i'll be amazed if he can. can he stay? yeah, he can stay in. can he raise money, i doubt it. can he win iowa? i doubt that. >> the national political corner for t"the new york times," i wa out in iowa recently, the roll in the race perry wanted was the conservative to romney. you know mitt romney is there and is going to be there and we're looking for who will emerge as the conservative challenger. one person many conservatives take a cue from is the conservative south carolina senator jim demint. listen to him on the morning after how he rated the debate. >> if you had to pick one that you would put up against president obama in a debate setting now, who would you choose? >> well, chris, there are several of them. i think i'd have to say last night newt gingrich, mitt romney, excelled in a lot of way. they had clarity of vision and policies. >> not -- onimplied in that jeff, is that rick perry did not have the clear vision and a strong debate performance. your assessment the day after? >> well, i don't think voters are directly looking for someone who can compete with barack obama on the debating stage. that's an underlying thing. one thing that governor perry has had going for him is that a lot of iowa republicans, i have talked to in recent weeks, want to like him. they want him to become a better candidate. they like many aspects of him but he's making it really hard to follow through on that. but several iowa republicanize talked to this morning and this afternoon who watched the debate said they're willing to give him the benefit of the doubt in most regard because they've seen him personally one-on-one. his burden now is to plant himself in iowa, first, and early voting states, advertise more, and try and present himself as different than the person you saw on the debating stage. in iowa that's possible because you don't need to see that many republicans to stand out in the caucuses. but it's very, very, very difficult to sort of change the image that he's created for himself. so his campaign realizes what trouble he's in and he does not control his own destiny, no question about it. >> mary, that in many ways, jeff hit on what i'll call the perry pair owe dock. i was in iowa last week. i interviewed him on camera. i spent 40 minute naz cs in a c ride, getting to know him. he remainds me of bob kerry. on paper a great candidate. now and then give a speech connecting his vietnam service that would knock your socks off and then get up on the stage and flat out blow it. what is it some conditions call taye brain freeze, whatever, they get locked when the big moment arrives? >>there's a huge, huge difference between perry and kerry, if you will, which is, and this is why iowan voter keep giving him the benefit of the doubt it is his record. it's the record they want to see. it's the record that no other candidate has. so all three thus iowa -- none of his debate performances were stellar, about new each and every case you get a parry press released, they lined up another county chairman or supporter that had been with a previous campaign. it's because of his record. and they're willing to take this gamble that his record is going to trump his rhetoric and sooner or later he'll be able to string a sentence together sufficiently. i thought his recovery effort, as david said, was spot on, funny, stay on message, and he did. >> see where this goes from here. five debates between now and the iowa caucuses, i believe the right number. appreciate your help. next, you won't want to miss this story. one inspector who helped uncover the horrendous abuses in the handling of the remains of u.s. car dead. a u.s. senator asking if our heros were abused, why hasn't anyone been fired? is this a chevy volt? [ stu ] yeah. it's electric. i don't think so. it's got a gas tank right here. electric tank, right over here. an electric tank? really, stu? is that what you pour the electricity in? it's actually both, guys. i can plug in and go 35 miles gas free, or i can fill up and go a whole lot farther. is that my burger? oh. i just got bun. i didn't even bite any burger. [ technician ] are you busy? management just sent over these new technical manuals. they need you to translate them into portuguese. by tomorrow. [ male announcer ] ducati knows it's better for xerox to manage their global publications. so they can focus on building amazing bikes. with xerox, you're ready for real business. ♪ that's good morning, veggie style. hmmm [ male announcer ] for half the calories -- plus veggie nutrition. could've had a v8. imagine the paper of losing one at iraq or afghanistan and then imagine someone's remains were lost because of incompetence or incinerated and then dumped without your knowledge at a landfill. a new report says top official as dover air force base knew about lost remains and major problem but was did nothing, nothing, to fix the mess. leon panetta made sure now those problems get fixed. >> all americans, including myself, are justifiably disturbs by the reports of mismanagement at dover port mortuary that came to light this week. >> joining us is carolyn learner with the office office u.s. special counsel, agency that investigated these abuses. when i read this, i get outraged. so i can only imagine how the families of the fallen must feel. it's clearly insensitive behavior, incompetent behavior. this is not a new problem. why? why is this so bad, and why have these heroes been so mistreated? >> i think therery accouple of issues. one the failure of the air force to notify the families. the air force could have notified the families the minute they found out there was a problem. they chose not to. our office, the office of special counsel, asked them repeatedly why haven't you notified families yet? and their response was, some of them have blogs, they have websites, they might go to the media. so they didn't trust the families with the news. >> they didn't trust to cover their own you know whats as a posed to giving families the information. general schwartz has a very different take on this. listen to his explanation of why some of the families weren't told. >> we waited until it was clear that the office of special counsel was going to render their report. we got 48 hours' notice. and we acted upon that notice. >> is that right? >> i believe this is a complete mischaracterization. we were hoping -- we assumed that the air force notified the families. a year or two ago. they -- >> notified them anyway, they shouldn't be waiting for some report that calls their conduct under the carpet. in anyone's view, as soon as they knew there was a problem they should have told them. >> they knew our report to the president and congress was eminent and they said to us, could you give us 48 hours so we can notify the families? again, we expresses our surprise that they hadn't yet informed the families. it turns out we think that they wanted 48 hours so they could inform the media and get to the media first before the families. >> when you go through some of the specifics here, remains lost, pieces, forgive the language, of fallen heroes lost. some incinerated and then dumped in a landfill. who thought that was a good idea? >> well, i do want to be reclear that the insinration and dumping of the body parts was not part of our report. that came out -- we just found out about that ourselves yesterday. but i can't imagine anyone thought that was a good idea. >> but it happened. >> apparently it did. >> what is the culture? if it's -- it's not a good idea, it's insensitive, horrific and worse. so then how does it happen? what is the culture? i mean, they are overwhelmed, this has been a very tough ten-year period, afghanistan, iraq. it done excuse gross insensitivity and gross incompetence. how does it happen fun no one thinks it's a good idea? >> lack of accountability unless the three whistle-blowers who came to our agency had come forward we never would have known about all of these problems. it takes someone there on the ground, who sees what's happening to actually report it and make it public. if the whistle-blowers hadn't come forward we never would have known about this. >> they were not celebrated, they have been punished. >> retaliated against. two individuals were fired after the news came to light. our agency was able to get them reinstated but three whistle-blowers who came forward to report this wrong doing have retaliation complaints pending. >> for a family, a military family, neighbor of a military family, somebody watching us now who is cringing at what has happened in the past, what is happening today? could this be happening still or are you convinced that the alarms have been appropriately sounded, attention has reached the right levels that it will not happen and that these heroes will be treated with respect and dignity? >> certainly that's the message that we're here hearing how from the air force and we should be very greatful to the whistle-blowers who came forward who brought this all to light because it's through the public disclosure of these types of misdeeds that we get accountability. >> you say that's what you're hearing from the air force but you disputed what the air force chief of staff said publicly about the chain of events. so i want to ask you again, do you trust what you're hearing it from the air force? do you trust it? do you think the secretary of defense gets this message? do you think the president of the united states needs to get this message so it doesn't happen again? >> i think they need to get the message and they'll be need to be held accountable going forward. we can't predict what's going to happen in the future but we can make sure they're held accountable so this kind of thing doesn't happen again. >> carolyn lernor appreciate your time. let's dig deeper with a u.s. senator who believes the air force is not moving quickly enough and forcefully enough to deal with the abuses. john tester raised this concern in a letter to the air force leadership. the supervisors who allowed these events to occur were not fired. if that is accurate, why were they not fired? senator, sound likes you have little doubt the air force is not taking this seriously enough and moving quickly and boldly enough? >> as you well know, taking care of remains of the folks who have given their lives for this country is a sacred duty, and the air force, as -- they have blown it. and the public trust is gone. i'm going to make the recommendation supervisors within that chain of command that oversaw this happening, they all need to be replaced. this is something that's totally unacceptable. >> if you read the report, it's hard not to get outraged. and you assume families are more outraged. remains lost, remains incinerated and dumped in a landful. your pushing for answers. sometimes at times like this big organizations circle the wagons, if you will, try to protect their own. listen to the new defense secretary, he's only been on the job a couple of months, says he was briefed on this and sounds convinced, listen here, senator that they understand the urgency. >> when i came into this office in july, one of the first meetings i had as secretary of defense i was briefed by secretary donely, general schwartz, on their investigation into dover. they were for coming with me. it was clear they took these allegations seriously and they were committed to strengthing the department's handling of the sacred and solemn task. >> do you buy it? do they take it seriously no one's been fires. >> they need to move, move quickly, and they need to move fairly on this. the truth is, the people who were responsible need -- i mean, look, there's no excuses here. so the people who are responsible, the supervisors responsible, cut them loose, move on, make sure that this never happens again. if anybody should get this, it's the folks that serve in the military. there's no if, ands or buts about that. i worked with secretary panetta, i think he's a good fellow but he needs to drop the hammer on this, move forward, move quickly. congress is watching. the american people is watching. and most importantly, the people who have been done wrong by these acts are watching. >> you believe these guys should be fired. i don't think there's anybody out there listening who will disagree with you. listen to general norton schwartz, the air force chief of staff, saying here in one of the cases the supervisor involved, this is the course he decided was propose. listen. >> the uniformed officer received a letter of reprimand, we established an unfavorable information file. we removed him from the command list and his anticipated job as a group commander at shaw air force base was red lined. this is not a trivial sanction. >> the janl sgeneral says not a trivial sanction. >> a reprimand letter or transfer in the organization, truly is not enough. if we're going to make sure that this never happens again. >> as we speak tonight, senator, the big question is for a family out there who has a son, a daughter, a husband a wife, serving overseas in iraq, afghanistan, or anywhere else, who risks the ultimate sacrifice, can it it happen again? could it happen again? are you confident the answer's no? >> depends how this is handled going into the future. the answer can be no. if it's handled quickly and seriously, and i think that we can assure folks it will never happen again. if we -- if we lollygag around about it, then we're going to have more problems and i don't think -- don't think -- i know that's not acceptble. senator john tester, appreciate your time. still to come tonight's number, isn't three but it is something rick perry can't afford to forget. and joe paterno's out of a job and a big national honor. the latest on the penn state child sex abuse scandal, next.pr n with aveeno daily moisturizing lotion. the natural oatmeal formula improves skin's health in one day, with significant improvement in 2 weeks. i found a moisturizer for life. [ female announcer ] only from aveeno. ♪ [ male announcer ] what is the future of fuel? the debate is over. ♪ lexus hybrid drive technology is designed to optimize any fuel source on the planet. even those we don't use yet. because when you pursue perfection, you don't just engineer a future-proof hybrid system. you engineer amazing. ♪ delivering mail, medicine and packages. yet they're closing thousands of offices, slashing service, and want to lay off over 100,000 workers. the postal service is recording financial losses, but not for reasons you might think. the problem ? a burden no other agency or company bears. a 2006 law that drains 5 billion a year from post-office revenue while the postal service is forced to overpay billions more into federal accounts. congress created this problem, and congress can fix it. and started earning loads of points. you got a weather balloon with points? yes, i did. [ man ] points i could use for just about anything. ♪ keep on going in this direction. take this bridge over here. there it is. [ man ] so i used mine to get a whole new perspective. ♪ [ male announcer ]