will newt become the first republican to self-destruct, or the first one to put a real scare into mitt? he scares me. also, the spooky 1978 television interview with penn state's jerry sandusky talking about how much he loves children. we've got the ghastly video and the latest on this story. and how about the law on reporting crimes against children? does it need to be strengthened? plus, a new wrinkle in the herman cain alleged sexual predator story. sharon bialek's then-boyfriend backs her story that the two met cain in the late '90s and that she told him that cain grabbed her during an evening together. we'll ask the cain strategist whether cain can survive. and we'll ask p.j. o'roarke what he thinks of the republicans running. we start with the search for newt gingrich. john harris is editor in chief of politico and david corn is washington bureau chief for "mother jones" magazine and an msnbc political analyst. to greats on the show. thank you, david, thank you, john. a big day for polls today, and none more stunning than this new cnn opinion research poll that shows that newt gingrich has jumped from 8% to 22% in less than a month. he's now neck and neck at the top with mitt romney while herman cain has dropped more than ten points. so basically, a switcheroo, john harris. cain has lost his place to newt. what's happening? >> well, it shows that there is a group of shoppers in the republican party, who are shopping for anybody but mitt romney. that's been the case for the past six months. we've seen it, various people go up and down, as cain is now facing some trouble in polls. a politico/george washington poll found his support eroding, especially as people learn more about the sexual harassment allegations. we've seen them shopping for somebody else. newt is clearly the beneficiary of that. >> david corn, your thoughts on this? newt is generally considered to be persona non grata as far as somebody like the american president is concerned. it's unimaginable that he could be president of the united states, for those who know him. they all know he's smart, but not presidential. here's my question. is this what john's saying? it's not a question of picking a president. it's basically finding another way to say no to mitt romney? >> well, i'm still reeling from your image of newt in lincoln's bed. but we'll put that aside. >> he goets to sleep there if h gets the white house. >> i know. but i feel like we're in walmart, shoppers, we have a special on aisle 7. it's another non-mitt romney candidate. check it out. you know, listen, you know to win in politics, you still need money, organization, seriousness, and finally, to be able to survive scrutiny. newt gingrich cannot. he's as much as a flip-flopper as mitt romney is on cap and trade, climate change, on mandates and the paul ryan budget plan. a lot of evangelicals say that he has one ex-wife too many. i mean, he is getting the -- he's the beneficiary of this anti-romney sentiment that has been conveyed to one candidate after another, but as soon as those candidates come into the spot, and under the glare of scrutiny, they all wither. he seems to be next in line for this. >> john harris, i don't like to get too personal here, but as far as public officials go, basically, people look at newt gingrich and they wonder, i think, like you wonder, i wonder, is there a statute of limitations on being newt gingrich? i mean, basically, he gets rid of the earlier marriages, get rid of the early religions, which are fair game. but at some point, is your identity changeable? can you stop being newt gingrich? a guy who was basically a troll in this town for years, basically an attack agent against jim wright, so he could get the speakership. he called everybody corrupt but him. turns out now he's a lobbyist, a serial married guy. doesn't the religious right count anymore? doesn't the anti-washington fever count anymore? he's the ultimate washington insider, and now he's moving up in the polls. john? >> chris, a couple things i'd say about that. one, what david says might be true. and i happen to agree with it, they happen to be candidates looking for the flavor of the month or what have you. but you have to say, newt gingrich is a much more established, accomplished figure over a long period of time than these other people who have been the candidate of the month. that long history he has, as you point out, chris, has got pluses and a lot of minuses. i think what gingrich would need to do is put that long history in some kind of narrative of personal growth. you know, that's what nixon did in '68. there was a new nixon. a lot like the old nixon. maybe more extravagant comparison, but would be winston churchill, which had been on the scene for 40 years, seen as an erratic, unreliable figure, but somebody who the man met the moment. i think gingrich would need to say, you know me, you know my pluses, you know my minuses, but you've seen growth and i'm somebody that's ready for this moment. >> can you see it, john? >> well, that would be a stretch, because i see in gingrich's career more continuity than growth. the gingrich that you see now doesn't to my eye look much different than the gingrich that sprang upon the scene in the 1980s. very attack driven, prone to disorganization. always interesting. but more surprises than most people want in a presidential nominee. that's the case he would need to make if he wants to bottle this polling. he'd need to say, look, this isn't just something effervescent, this is real, and i'm here to make a serious case that i should be president of the united states. >> john, you've talked to people who have worked for newt gingrich over the last few decades. they all say that he is really not prone to changing his basic ways. he may change his family, may change his religion, but they always talk about how hard he is to handle, about his erratic streaks. he decide one point in his career, he's going to be statesman like, and the next point, he decides to be a mean, mad dog attack machine. he just can't really get into a consistent, steady place. and chris, you and i talked about this not too long ago. he has a very sharp mean streak that comes out again and again in politics. >> okay, but people aren't stupid, though. >> do americans want that in a president? >> people aren't stupid. i think they do try to find a reason, a safe way through this difficult time we're in. and that includes conservative republicans. they're trying to find a rational way away from obama. back to you, john. you said something really smart about growth. i do think that's what people look for. they look for it in president obama. most people who like obama, and i like him, are hoping that he will be able to demonstrate by next year growth. that there are things he may have done differently if he'd done them again, if he had a chance to do them again. the second term will be better than the first, because of his maturity. that politics is, as archur schlessinger once said, a learning profession. you have to keep learning it and getting better at it. i want to go back to that. the two candidates that are doing the best right now in the polling are experienced. . that's mitt romney and newt let's take a look at the new nbc/"wall street journal" poll. it went back and contacted over 100 republicans who were polled earlier this month to see how their views have changed. nah re-survey, as we're calling it, we're finding romney was up five among his group, cain was down just one point, but gingrich climbed five and perry dropped four. so, people are trying to gain experience on these candidates too, as well as looking for growth experience. so this is a learning process. what are the voters learning now that they're looking for? what do they want besides an alternative to mitt romney, at least? >> i think they're looking for somebody that can unite the conservative wing of the party and yet also be credible. michele bachmann was interesting because of her conservative rhetoric that caused a lot of conservative hearts to go aflutter, but ultimately she didn't pass the credibility test, the plausibility test. so they're looking for somebody whose ideology resonates, but who seems ready to carry the party's banner a year from now, who passes that credibility threshold. >> well, here's a rational statement by herman cain, david, and i want you to react to this, because i know you will have a strong reaction. i'm not that impressed, except it does have a certain inner consistency. he's learned to talk like a typical republican conservative, not in that sort of both-way, wrong-way he likes to talk. here's cain saying he didn't believe in torture, but that watergate -- watergate -- there's a slip, but waterboarding was okay with him. bachmann agreed that waterboarding should be used, while ron paul and jon huntsman called it torture. here's cain's explanation. let's listen. >> i believe that following the procedures that have been established by our military. i do not agree with torture, period. however, i will trust the judgment of our military leaders to determine what is torture and what is not torture. that is the critical consideration. >> mr. cain, of course you're familiar with the long-running debate we've had about whether waterboarding constitutes torture or is it an enhanced interrogation technique? >> i agree that it was an enhanced interrogation technique. >> and then you would support it as president? you would return to that policy? >> yes, i would return to that policy. i don't see it as torture. i see it as an enhanced interrogation technique. >> and taxes are enhanced revenue. anyway, president obama not surprisingly disagreed with cain. here he was responding to those waterboarding comments himself. >> waterboarding is torture. it's contrary to america's traditions. it's contrary to our ideals. that's not who we are. that's not how we operate. we don't need it in order to prosecute the war on terrorism. and we did the right thing by ending that practice. >> there we go, david. and i have to tell you that people like colin powell have different views than people like dick cheney. i'm telling you, this the turning it over to the generals doesn't solve your problem. you can get a psychiatrist to say anything, you can get a general to say anything. what a stupid comment. >> well, cain got it exactly wrong, when he said he would go with what the military says. actually, the military handbook doesn't include waterboarding. it was the cia and other intelligence services that used these so-called enhanced interrogation techniques. david petraeus and others in the military have never used it. so it just really shows that he's not -- >> good for you. >> -- ready for prime-time, but yet he throws the red meat out. i'll take issue with what you said a minute ago, chris. i don't think every republican voter is proceeding in a rational, let's find the guy who can win, procedure. i think a lot of them want to feel rage and they want to feel their candidates express their rage. i don't think that's all of them, but that's why they turned to herman cain, who clearly doesn't understand this issue, but they like what he says at the end of his little meandering speech. >> see what happens when i try to be generous. >> i'm sorry. i can't help you on that one. >> you just crush me. anyway, thank you. i think we're getting on to something. i think this guy doesn't know what he's talking about, generally, especially about his past behavior. thank you very much, john harris, what a pro. and thank you, david corn, you warm my heart when you tell me i'm too right-wing for you. anyway, coming up, penn state place its first football game without joe paterno on the sidelines. he's in the stands, actually. in over 60 years. and we've got a creepy video way back from 1987, in which jerry sandusky, him, talks about how much he likes children. hmm, the big question in state college and around the country, should the laws on reporting crimes, felonies against kids be straightened out and strengthened? you're watching "hardball," only onsomeness. vietnam, 1967. i got mine in iraq, 2003. u.s.a.a. auto insurance is often handed down from generation to generation, because it offers a superior level of protection and because u.s.a.a.'s commitment to serve the military, veterans, and their families is without equal. begin your legacy. get an auto insurance quote. u.s.a.a. we know what it means to serve. [ mom ] my husband -- he thinks it's a 3-sheeter. i say 1-sheeter. [ female announcer ] in this lab demo, 1 sheet of bounty leaves this surface as clean as 2 sheets of the bargain brand. super absorbent. super clean. bounty. ♪ [ gong ] strawberry banana! [ male announcer ] for a smoothie with real fruit plus veggie nutrition new v8 v-fusion smoothie. could've had a v8. that was jay paterno, turns out, who was at the game on saturday, not his father. joe paterno was at home. the united states supreme court has agreed to hear the legal channels to president obama's health care reform law. they're giving it cert. at issue, the so-called mandate that everyone in america have health insurance. oral arguments will likely take place in february or march, leaving plenty of time for a decision in late june, just four months before election day. what a powerful decision that's coming. we'll be right back. look, every day we're using more and more energy. the world needs more energy. where's it going to come from? ♪ that's why right here, in australia, chevron is building one of the biggest natural gas projects in the world. enough power for a city the size of singapore for 50 years. what's it going to do to the planet? natural gas is the cleanest conventional fuel there is. we've got to be smart about this. it's a smart way to go. ♪ back to "hardball." newly uncovered video of a 1987 interview nbc news conducted with penn state assistant coach jerry sandusky takes a different tone now that we know sandusky has been charged with 40 counts of child sex abuse. and that's using the term lightly. here's a portion of that interview where he describes how he started his charity, second mile, the organization where he would later meet his alleged victims. >> how did it all start? basically, because i'm a frustrated playground director, i guess. i enjoy being around children. i enjoy their enthusiasm. i just have a good time with them. >> ugh. anyway, one of the many controversial aspects of this case, of course, is the law protecting minors. when joe paterno heard that sandusky allegedly had anal sex with a boy, think about that, he told his bosses, but he never called the police. and apparently that satisfied his obligations under pennsylvania law, which begs the question -- are laws like pennsylvania's simply too lax when it comes to issues like this and reporting them to the police? now here the kathleen cain, a democratic candidate for attorney general in pennsylvania, the election is next year. she's prosecuted child sex abuse cases. and steven collins, an old friend of ours, a radio host based in philadelphia. let's start with kathleen. i want to get the law down here. if you're witnessing what looks like, by any broad definition, statutory rape, rape, or sex involved by an adult with someone underage, isn't that in itself a felony and reportable, with or required to be reported? why are child cases in this category get exempted from a requirement under pennsylvania law? >> actually, is it is no. i mean, you can make the argument that it's obstruction of justice, because that's exactly what it is. but under pennsylvania law, the reporting requirement is is that you need to have the care of the child in your -- basically, in your hands. so what we're doing now is with the law, we're saying that now employees, you get to make the decision, number one, whether this constitutes a child sexual abuse case, and number two, they get to just pass it off, as they do in a football term, pass it off to your superior. we do need to change the laws in pennsylvania. >> okay, this is "hardball," kathleen, and i'm going to be a little tough here. you mean to tell people in pennsylvania watching right now that if they see a guy having anal sex with a 8-year-old, an 8-year-old, in some gym, they aren't required by the law to report that, right now? they're not required by law to report that in pennsylvania? >> chris, as disgusting as it is, and as heinous as it is, you do not have an affirmative duty, unless you operate under the n mandated child reporting laws, you do not have a legal obligation to report that crime. now, obviously, almost every crime arises out of a moral obligation. i can't imagine any adult, any man, who would walk away from that child, witnessing an involuntary deviate sexual intercourse act -- >> of course it's involuntary, the kid's 8 years old, having sex -- i mean -- let's talk about this in terms of behavior. i said when you join an organization, you better join it with your own moral compass established, because otherwise you'll get your morals from the organization, whose morals are aimed at protecting that organization. all these people, including that young guy, mcqueary, should have known day one, second one, i just saw something deeply wrong. i'm going to report it to the cops. i don't want to know what the coach thinks, what paterno might think, what my dad might think. go ahead. >> you hit that on the head. chris, these guys were not adults that were consenting, that were making out in the park. as you put it, it was a 10-year-old or an 8-year-old, whatever, it was a child. who was being plummeted by a monster. how do we need a law? mcqueary couldn't just say this was wrong and try to break that up and then go get law enforcement? first of all, that's a basic problem, but secondarily, where was the attorney general? the attorney general's office, the now governor of the state of pennsylvania, investigated this in 2008, and didn't do anything! i don't understand that. i don't understand that. i, like most people in this country, respect penn state, think highly of their football program, the coach and all that. but we're not talking about that. we're talking about raping a child, and how they can kind of look the other way, all these years, 8, 10, 11 years has gone by, chris. >> yeah, you swell spoke. i love what you're saying. i completely agree. kathleen, you're up for attorney general. this is a moral issue as well. and you have a leadership position you're going for. let me ask you this. all those kids in pennsylvania, i was up there last year at the michigan game. i have to tell you, they're all working class kids. they're not rich kids. they're not snot-nosed ivy leaguers who had the world handed to them. they're regular kids with regular parents who probably had to borrow the money to have them go there. it was such a great thing, and now it's been tainted by people who somehow thought they were helping penn state by covering up. >> and i agree with you. what bothers me is we have put the choice whether to report in the hands of a bureaucracy or an institution rather than with the trained law enforcement professionals that are out there. we need to change the law to make the reporting concurrent. the eyewitness, meaning mcque y mcqueary, as well as the administration, need to both report, that way they have accountability with each other and accountability with the public too. we demand that of them. it needs to be changed just from a reasonable amount of time to as soon as you can get to a phone. because what's reasonable to a layperson may be a week. what's reasonable to a child abuse prosecutor is immediate. because you know that that abuse, it wasn't the first time, and it certainly isn't going to be the last time. and the thoughts that were running thro