updated 3/25/2010 1:37:54 PM ET 2010-03-25T17:37:54

Guests: Kent Conrad, Katrina vanden Heuvel, Barbara Mikulski, Rep. John

Dingell, Roy Sekoff, Ernest Istook, Laura Flanders, Mark Shurtleff, Scott

Paul.

HOST:  Good evening, Americans, and welcome to THE ED SHOW

tonight from New York.

These stories are hitting my hot buttons tonight. 

Democrats who voted for health care reform, believe it or not, are

getting death threats.  And elected Republicans are practically silent on

the issue. 

I‘ve got a lot to say about this coming up in just a moment. 

Republicans are hoping the courts will kill health care reform in this

country.  I‘ll go head-to-head with an attorney general who‘s suing the

federal government.  That‘s coming up. 

Plus, shocking numbers on just how many American jobs have been

shipped to China and how every state has been hit by outsourcing.  That‘s

coming up on the program.

But, of course, the story that‘s got me fired up tonight, I can‘t

believe it‘s come to this point.  Hate is shaking the halls of the

Congress. 

Is this why they wanted to get elected?  Give me a break.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said today that members of his

caucus are being threatened.  Today, Capitol Police and the FBI briefed

Democrats about the incidents of violence. 

The FBI has started a preliminary investigation after fuel lines were

cut at the brother of Virginia Congressman Tom Perriello‘s home.  Lynchburg

Tea Party member Mike Proxell (ph) was trying to post the congressman‘s

address, but posted his brother‘s by mistake.  One of those bright ones out

there.

On Monday, he posted this online: “Just in case any of his friends and

neighbors want to drop by and say hi and express their thanks regarding his

vote for health care, nothing quite does that like a good face-to-face

chat.  It has a much more personal touch to it.”

Now, just think about what‘s happening here.  Would you like it if

someone did that to you?  Would you like it if you were the boss of a

company, or if you were a supervisor, and somebody posted that and said why

don‘t you go over to their house?‘

What is going on here? 

Tea Partiers, is this your mission?

Dick Armey, where‘s your voice tonight?

Now, we don‘t know if this was an act of political terrorism.  At this

hour, elected members of the Congress are nervous, and they should be.

Hoyer wants Republicans to stand up and condemn these threats.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. STENY HOYER (D), MAJORITY LEADER:  I would hope that we would

join together, jointly, and make it very clear that none of us condone this

kind of activity.  And that when we see it, that we speak out strongly in

opposition to it.  And I would hope that we would do that going forward.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ:  So, here‘s the number.  Steny Hoyer said more than 10 House

Democrats have reported incidents of threats or other forms of harassment

because they supported a health care bill.

Now, this is as serious as it gets, folks.  You know, we haven‘t seen

this kind of stuff happen in this country since the days of civil rights

back in the ‘60s, where elected leaders are encouraging this stuff today. 

What‘s going on?

Listen to Majority Whip Jim Clyburn.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JAMES CLYBURN (D), SOUTH CAROLINA:  I think all of us learned

some great lessons from the ‘60s and ‘70s, and there‘s some lessons that

none of us want to repeat.  But one thing we know, as Steny Hoyer just

said, silence gives consent.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ:  And, of course, some are not so silent.  Sarah Palin loves

to get involved, doesn‘t she?  She posted a list of 20 members of Congress

that conservatives should target in 2010.

On her Facebook page, she writes, “We‘ll aim for these races.”  I

mean, this is crazy.  “And many others.  This is just the first salvo in a

fight to elect people across the nation who will bring common sense to

Washington.”

Just take a look at this map and how she put it out.  She actually put

crosshairs on a map and is talking about elected members of the Congress.

Hoyer made this comment about that today—

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HOYER:  When people start talking in the rhetoric of putting people on

firing lines, that if they don‘t do something they will have physical harm

done to them, other rhetoric of that type, or they put a target on their

faces with crosshairs, that activity ought to been unacceptable in our

democracy. 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ:  Congresswoman Louise Slaughter of New York and Bart Stupak

of Michigan, oh, I guess the Tea Partiers are happy about this.  Those two

representatives have received death threats. 

Right-wing media and members of the Congress on the right bear, I

think, major responsibility for this.  For the past year they have spent so

much time whipping up their base about socialism, death panels and a

government takeover. 

A Harris poll shows 24 percent of Republicans think President Obama is

the antichrist.  What are we dealing with here? 

These threats are the culmination of the misinformation campaign that

the Republicans have engaged in.  Now, they‘ve been lying from the start

about health care reform and they‘ve whipped everybody up about it, and

they just aren‘t attacking the Democrats.  Oh, no, anybody who‘s associated

with it. 

They‘re on a crusade to smear, professionally smear, the Congressional

Budget Office after the CBO numbers showed that health care, this bill,

will actually save money.  It will save $138 billion over the first 10

years and it will cut the deficit by $1.2 trillion over the second 10

years. 

Folks, numbers don‘t lie.  The Republicans do.

The CBO is not some left-wing think tank.  It‘s a nonpartisan

government agency that provides economic data for both Democrats and

Republicans in the Congress, ,and they‘ve been doing it for years.  And the

Republicans can‘t argue with the facts. 

So, what do they do?  They decide to attack the messenger, calling it

a joke, it‘s no good, these numbers are phony.  These, I thought, were

professional people at the CBO. 

Joining me now is North Dakota Senator Kent Conrad.  He is the

chairman of the Senate Budget Committee and, of course, is very involved in

the process of selecting the director of the Congressional Budget Office. 

Kent, great to have you with us tonight.  I appreciate your time. 

SEN. KENT CONRAD (D), NORTH DAKOTA:  Good to be with you. 

SCHULTZ:  I wanted to give somebody in the Congress an opportunity to

speak to how professional the CBO is and just how they operate. 

Are these 250 people that work at the CBO, are they political hacks? 

Who are they?  What are they? 

CONRAD:  These are professionals.  They‘re hired on a nonpartisan

basis.  They are very much respected by members of Congress on both sides

of the aisle. 

Look, I disagree with them from time to time, but I respect their

independence and their need to be independent.  If we‘re going to have an

objective scorekeeper—let me just say this—it‘s fascinating that some

Republicans now are accusing the CBO of having a political bias when,

earlier this year, the director of CBO, Director Elmendorf, testified

before my committee that some of the earlier versions of health care reform

did not reduce the deficit, did not bend the cost curve in the right way. 

They didn‘t complain then because he was finding what they wanted to have

found. 

Now that the legislation has been changed so that it does reduce the

deficit, and the CBO has found precisely that, they claim bias.  So they

are clearly talking out of both sides of their mouth. 

They were praising him when they—when he agreed with them earlier

in the area on different drafts of the bill.  They criticize him now when

the legislation has been changed to, in fact, reduce the deficit in both

the short term and the long term.  And as you said, over the next decade to

reduce the deficit by over a trillion dollars. 

Not a million.  Not a billion.  A trillion dollars. 

SCHULTZ:  Senator, you believe the numbers? 

CONRAD:  Look, I think all of us know that making these forecasts is

an imperfect business.  Do I believe the objectivity and the

professionalism of the people at CBO?  I absolutely do.  Look, I‘m the

chairman—

SCHULTZ:  I mean, I think the point here—you are the chairman of

the Budget Committee, no doubt.  And you‘ve spent your whole career in

Washington on finance and budget.  So—but the righties are out there

presenting the case that, hey, the CBO is cooking the books so we can pass

health care in this country. 

CONRAD:  Let me just say this to you.  You remember I advanced a

proposal called the Cooperative Proposal for Nonprofit Insurance. 

SCHULTZ:  I do. 

CONRAD:  I am the chairman of the Budget Committee, and CBO criticized

my proposal.  So I think that says a lot about their independence. 

I didn‘t agree with them, but they criticized the proposal by the

chairman of the committee that oversees them.  I think that tells you

something about their professionalism.  And while I may have disagreed with

them on that, I absolutely respect their integrity. 

SCHULTZ:  How are we doing in the Senate, Senator?  How is this

reconciliation coming along?  Do you expect it to go pretty smooth from

here on out? 

CONRAD:  I do.  I think there will probably be a hiccup along the way,

but I think we‘re in very strong shape to finish this legislation in the

next 24 hours or so. 

SCHULTZ:  OK. 

Senator, good to have you with us. 

CONRAD:  You bet. 

SCHULTZ:  And thanks for all your hard work on health care reform. 

And you the numbers guy.  I think you‘re the most credible guy in

Washington when it comes to knowing the numbers, and I think somebody needs

to stand up for the CBO. 

I appreciate your time. 

CONRAD:  Glad to do it. 

SCHULTZ:  Senator Conrad from North Dakota, chairman of Budget

Committee. 

I want to get back to the topic of hate and threats the Democrats are

facing right now. 

Get your cell phones out.  I want to know what you think about this. 

Tonight‘s text survey is: Do you think the Republicans should do more

to condemn the threats of violence against Democrats?  Text “A” for yes and

“B” for no to 622639.  We‘ll bring you the results later on in the show. 

Joining me now is Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor of “The Nation.”

Katrina, this is serious stuff.  I mean, when you‘ve got fuel lines

being cut to people‘s homes, put a match to that and see where it ends up. 

When you have got the N-word being thrown out, bricks being thrown through

windows, I mean, this is the kindling of something greater. 

What should the congressional leaders do and say to the country? 

KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL, EDITOR, “THE NATION”:  This is accountability

time.  I mean, we have, for the last year or more, seen a party march in

lockstep in resistance to President Obama‘s reforms, talking about

crippling or killing his reforms.  I think we have seen a party of

incoherent rage fused with this right-wing subculture alien to logic and

fact, ,if not to compassion. 

So I think this is a moment where responsible conservatives in the

tradition—because there‘s a history here, Ed.  Think of the good

congresswoman from Maine, Margaret Chase Smith, who in 1950, in a

declaration of conscience, spoke to her country and her party and said

enough about the smears during the McCarthy period, enough.  Because we are

seeing the fanning and the fueling of an ugliness and viciousness that is

not alien to this country, but it is at a perilous moment. 

And I remember being on this station with Michele Bachmann before the

election of President Obama, and I said I fear for the republic, because

she spoke of rooting out those who are un-American.  What does that suggest

to a nation which has much better work to do than talk about who is un-

American? 

So we need, I think, Ed, for those good citizens of all parties to

stand strong and not let this intimidation do anything but stiffen our

spine and resolve to fight for reform in this nation because we are better

than this. 

SCHULTZ:  I can‘t remember the last time 10 members of the Congress

asked for security.  And I—and this does take us back to the ‘60s, some

of the antics.  But now we‘ve got the new information age and all the

different ways to communicate.  This can boil into something pretty

dangerous, pretty past. 

What do you think the responsibility of the media is? 

VANDEN HEUVEL:  Well, I just want to say Representatives Clyburn and

Lewis, veterans, heroes of the civil rights struggle, spoke in interesting

ways, because it is different now.  Because the power of the states

protection is on their side.  It is different than when hoses were aimed at

African-Americans fighting for their civil rights. 

I think the responsibility of the media is to expose those who would

purvey and peddle fear and disinformation.  Hold accountable Mr. Boehner,

who says that we should channel this anger into positive change and not

allow violence to mar the American republic. 

I think we have to hold them accountable and we need to expose, Ed,

this language to show—not to censor speech, but to say we don‘t talk

like that in America about racial slurs at this time.  The civilizing

advances in one of them, though there‘s more to do on the health care

front, one of the civilizing advances was just passed.  And I think when

the status quo reactionary forces see change they fear it, and in fear

there‘s violence.  And that we have to tamp down, and the media can play a

good role. 

Thank you.

SCHULTZ:  Katrina vanden Heuvel of “The Nation.”

Thanks for joining us tonight, Katrina.

Coming up, if you were offended when George W. Bush told Brownie he

was doing a heck of a job after Hurricane Katrina, just wait until you see

what he did in Haiti.  You truly have to see this to believe it. 

Plus Utah‘s Republican attorney general is suing the federal

government in an attempt to undo health care reform.  He has met his match. 

I‘m going head to head with him in the “Playbook.”

All that, plus G. Gordon Liddy lands in the zone.  You won‘t believe

this one.  He wants to eliminate a religion. 

You‘re watching THE ED SHOW on MSNBC.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ:  I just couldn‘t wait, folks.  In “Psycho Talk” tonight, this

is a dandy.  Former convicted felon, righty talker G. Gordon Liddy let his

bigoted colors just fly high on his radio show today by threatening an

entire religion. 

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

G. GORDON LIDDY, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST:  Oh, I‘m not casual at all

about Islam.  I want to go over there and take them out. 

(END AUDIO CLIP)

SCHULTZ:  He says he‘s not casual about Islam and he‘s dead serious

about wanting to take them out. 

Folks, this is exactly what I was talking about earlier tonight and

last night.  These righty wing nuts go out and spew hateful rhetoric and

they rile up the crackpots of America to go to dangerous stuff like cut

people‘s gas lines. 

A nonstop diet of hate from right-wingers is why a recent poll found

that almost a quarter of Republicans think that President Obama could be

the Antichrist.  In that same poll, 57 percent of Republicans thought that

the president was Muslim. 

So, for G. Gordon Liddy to say that he‘s serious about taking out

Islam, that‘s dangerous “Psycho Talk.”  

Coming up, the Tea Party sure has done a lot to embarrass the

Republican Party.  Some new numbers show just what kind of damage they

could do in the midterms, and it ain‘t pretty. 

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. BARBARA MIKULSKI (D), MARYLAND:  I listened to the other side who

says that they listen to the people.  Well, you know, you heard the old

saying, men are from Mars, women are from Venus?  I think that party is

from Mars and we‘re from planet Earth. 

I think they‘ve been out in orbit.  The planet Earth that I‘m on tells

me to pass health insurance. 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ:  Well, I‘m glad somebody finally asked what planet the

Republicans are on, because they sure aren‘t working for progress on this

one.  The president‘s already signed the health care reform bill into law,

but Republicans are doing everything they possibly can to obstruct the

final reconciliation process in the Senate. 

They‘re offering bogus amendments on gay marriage, ACORN, Viagra,

which have absolutely nothing to do with health care.  Despite that,

Democrats may be able to get a final vote by the end of the week. 

Joining me now is Maryland Senator Barbara Mikulski, a member of the

Senate HELP Committee. 

Senator, way to call them on it, but outside the Capitol it has become

a lot more serious.  And the rhetoric is turning into acts of vandalism. 

And I‘d like you to tell the country tonight how you feel about all

the stuff that‘s going on surrounding this. 

MIKULSKI:  Well, first of all, I‘m so pleased that we have passed

health insurance reform.  The president has signed it into law, and that we

are really bringing to an end the dilly-dallying and dithering of the other

party. 

I find all of the violent words and abusive tactics outside of this

Capitol to be absolutely un-American.  You know, in the United States of

America you‘re supposed to be able to resolve your differences, have votes

straight up or down, and then move on with it. 

The ugly epithets against distinguished African-Americans like

Congressman Lewis, throwing bricks through the window of Congresswoman

Slaughter, I just think, you know, words have consequences and so do deeds. 

If we really want to put America first, then let‘s get back to a sensible

way of acting and a sensible way of voting. 

SCHULTZ:  Senator, is there anything that leadership in either house

could do to message to the country and to the media that this has gone too

far and this is kindling for something that could be much greater? 

MIKULSKI:  Well, first, I think that the way we‘re conducting

ourselves today, you can see that the Democrats have done it with great

dignity and great decorum.  If you were at the White House yesterday and

saw President Obama signing that bill, and that little boy Marcelas, who

spoke up for his mom who had passed away because she didn‘t have health

insurance, that has got to be a message that this is serious business and

we have to have serious behavior. 

The other is, is I think it is up to political leadership, but I also

think it‘s up to community leadership and church leadership to say we have

got to begin to—in this country, begin to settle our differences with

civility and common sense, even where we differ. 

But, you know, I think it‘s a great distraction from what really has

been this great victory.  Today, through our amendments, as we come to the

end, we‘re ending these ugly punitive practices of the insurance companies. 

You know, Ed, for women, they treat being a woman as a pre-existing

condition.  We had to pay more.  They didn‘t want to give us insurance,

threw up all kinds of hurdles.  Like, domestic violence was considered a

pre-existing condition. 

And then even our own CBO and leadership almost said that getting our

prevention was too expensive.  And I wouldn‘t let them take our mammograms

away from us. 

SCHULTZ:  Senator, great to have you with us.  Way to speak up and way

to get after it.  I appreciate your time tonight. 

Barbara Mikulski from Maryland with us here on THE ED SHOW.

Come up, today the right-wing media had a hay day with my next guest. 

They took something he said—so unlike them—spun it, distorted it and

attacked it. 

A true patriot, Congressman John Dingell, will be here to tell Drudge

what he can do with his report. 

Plus, I‘ll tell you what I make of the new NFL overtime rule in my

“Playbook.”

You‘re watching THE ED SHOW on MSNBC.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ:  And welcome back to THE ED SHOW tonight.  Thanks for

watching.  The right wing attack machine up in arms today over something

Democratic Congressman John Dingell of Michigan said on a conservative talk

radio show.  Dingell was asked why the changes in the health care reform

bill have to be implemented over time, gradually, over the next four years. 

Here‘s what he said. 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JOHN DINGELL (D), MICHIGAN:  The harsh fact of the matter is when

you‘re going to pass legislation that will cover 300 American people in

different ways, it takes a long time to do the necessary administrative

steps that have to be taken to put the legislation together, to control the

people. 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ:  Oh, that set off a frenzy of comments on the right wing

blogs about how Democrats are fascist and they want to enslave you. 

Congressman Dingell will set the record straight in just a moment. 

First, I‘d just like to remind our audience, give you a little history

the man the righties are attacking.  John Dingell is a dean of the House. 

He‘s been a public servant for 55 years.  He started as a House Page at the

age of 16.  He took over his dad‘s seat in Congress in 1955, and has been

re-elected by the voters in his district in Michigan more than two dozen

times. 

His father voted to pass Social Security.  He has cast votes to pass

Medicare, the Civil Rights Act, and now the historic health care reform

bill.  I think after this kind of service to his country, the man deserves

the benefit of the doubt when maybe he says something that he really didn‘t

mean. 

I‘ll let the congressman from Michigan—the distinguished

congressman from Michigan, speak for himself on THE ED SHOW.  Congressman

Dingell, good to have you with us tonight. 

DINGELL:  Thank you, Ed.  Glad to be here. 

SCHULTZ:  What did you mean when you said control the people? 

DINGELL:  Well, I goofed.  What I said—what I meant to say was

control the agencies that are writing the legislation, so that it will deal

fairly with the people‘s concerns.  Frankly, I goofed. 

SCHULTZ:  Well, do you understand how—the way the rhetoric has been

going hot and heavy around the country, they‘re looking for any kind of

opening?  And this would fuel them and how they think.  How do you respond

to that? 

DINGELL:  Ed, you‘ve been absolutely right.  You‘ve been doing a great

job.  You‘ve been making it very, very clear that this is not the way these

issues should be fought out, that we ought to have a fair, honest, frank,

open and honorable debate.  That way, the public will be best served. 

SCHULTZ:  Have you ever been attacked like this in your 55-year

career? 

DINGELL:  I‘ve had a few attacks and an occasional death threat.  I‘ve

got to tell you, it‘s never been quite this bad. 

SCHULTZ:  How do you respond to it? 

DINGELL:  Well, I just tell the truth.  I have got 54 years of service

to the people.  I‘m one of the authors of Medicare.  I‘m one of the authors

of this legislation.  I‘ve authored scores of pieces of legislation on

civil rights and on conservation and protecting the environment.  And I

would never practice this kind of behavior toward the American people. 

So I don‘t have any trouble in saying that it‘s wrong, that I‘ve done

what is right.  And I did goof and misspeak, myself, but then so does

everybody. 

SCHULTZ:  OK.  I‘ve only done that once before, but—so you‘re not -

we want to be very clear.  You‘re not trying to, you know, control the

people, make us a socialist country?  Control the people, that‘s not John

Dingell. 

DINGELL:  Absolutely not.  This legislation, my dear friend, Ed, is

calculated to do one thing.  And that is to enhance the rights of the

American people, especially those who have insurance for health or who

don‘t have insurance for health.  It‘s going to see to it that those people

have something very precious.  First of all, the rights that they really

need, fair treatment. 

No more pre-existing conditions can be used to ban their having

insurance.  No more will the insurance companies be able to cancel their

insurance.  No more will the insurance companies be able to deny people

care or to see to it that they get these funny Mickey Mouse policies that

nobody but a lawyer can understand. 

SCHULTZ:  It‘s going to take four years to implement because it‘s just

so big and so detailed and covers so much.  You just can‘t do it all at

once.  Or am I wrong? 

DINGELL:  No, you‘re absolutely right.  And as a matter of fact, my

friend, Ed, the situation is this: you have 300 million people, all of whom

are going to be affected.  You have businesses.  You have all kinds of

things of that kind.  We have to get in place a subsidy for the small

businessmen, who are going, for the first time, to receive that kind of

help. 

We have to see to it that the rules and regulations for proper

behavior by the insurance companies to protect the American are put in

place.  We have to see to it that arrangements for financing and the other

things that are necessary to make this work are in place. 

SCHULTZ:  Congressman, great to have you with us tonight.  Keep

fighting. 

DINGELL:  Thank you, my friend, Ed.  Pleasure to be with you. 

SCHULTZ:  John Dingell from Michigan with us tonight, the dean of the

House. 

For more, let‘s bring in Roy Sekoff, founding editor of the

“Huffington Post.”  I‘ll tell you what, I‘ve never seen the righties, so to

speak, on patrol for material to knock down what has been a victory for

millions of Americans, Roy. 

ROY SEKOFF, “THE HUFFINGTON POST”:  Ed, it‘s clear that the right has

decided to double down on the crazy.  We saw from the very beginning their

playbook on health care has been two things.  It‘s been fear mongering and

untruths.  This attack on Representative Dingell is the perfect blend of

both of those things.  It‘s this crazy fear mongering that they want to

take over your health, want to take over your government.  It‘s the

socialism.  And it‘s just filled with untruths. 

That said, they‘re just starting to scratch the surface, Ed.  They

have not learned the lesson of their defeat and course corrected.  Instead,

they‘re going all in.  We see this right down the line, from them canceling

the Senate committees, using some arcane law to shut down the senate at

2:00, and the crazy, really incendiary language that we see Sarah Palin

bringing out.  You know, Twittering her followers to reload, and having her

Facebook site with a hit list with actually gun sites over the states of

the people she‘s targeting, you know, for the 2010 election. 

I mean, that‘s scary stuff, Ed, especially, you know, in the

atmosphere that we have now in Washington with the vandalism and the

incendiary language. 

SCHULTZ:  Roy, is there enough progressive media out there?  I guess

from your perspective and mine, there‘s never enough.  But do the Democrats

need to go on right wing radio?  Do they need to go on Fox?  I mean, the

way the country is divided right now, you‘re not going to change anybody‘s

mind on any of this stuff.  Would it be feasible for the Democrats to just

consider staying away from partisan media? 

SEKOFF:  I hate the idea of just going into our little corners and

preaching to our choirs.  I know you like it on the show, Ed, when you get

somebody who doesn‘t agree with you.  You can go back and forth.  You can

have the marketplace of ideas and let the best ideas win.  You know, I

wouldn‘t want to have this kind of thing where we just go to our corners

and don‘t come out fighting.  I think it‘s a good exercise to really

exchange ideas and be open to them. 

But not this kind of crazy bomb-throwing, you know, with the imagery

of Nancy Pelosi standing in front of a fire, and this gun imagery, and all

this kind of crazy stuff. 

SCHULTZ:  Roy, do you think the president should address all of the

antics that are taking place? 

SEKOFF:  Well, I don‘t think he has to go down into the weeds and take

Tea Bagger by Tea Bagger and take those each things.  I think we can have a

larger discussion.  I think what Obama did, he learned the lesson of

Massachusetts and he came out and said, OK, I‘m going to put away this

obsession with bipartisanship, and I‘m going to, you know, pin my ears back

and go for it.  I think that‘s what he needs to keep doing. 

If he keeps doing that, I think the Republican party is going to be

revealed for what they are, which is a party of no ideas, no solutions, at

a time when we need them desperately. 

SCHULTZ:  And mean and nasty.  You‘re exactly right. 

SEKOFF:  Ugly as can be.  Yeah. 

SCHULTZ:  I want to get some rapid fire response from our panel

tonight on these stories.  Some democrats who voted for health care reform

are now getting death threats and having their property vandalized.  That‘s

not protesting.  It‘s political terrorism. 

A new poll shows the Tea Partiers will help the Republicans in tight

races this fall, unless they run a candidate of their own. 

With us tonight, Laura Flanders, who is the author of “Blue Grit” and

host of “Grit TV,” and Ernest Istook, former Republican congressman and now

a distinguished fellow at the Heritage Foundation. 

Ernie, what‘s happening with the right wing in this country, the

conservatives in this country?  The over the top rhetoric, the acts of

vandalism, how do you address that? 

ERNEST ISTOOK, HERITAGE FOUNDATION:  First of all, I condemn any sort

of vandalism or violent rhetoric.  But let‘s remember that it happens on

both sides.  Was it just last month, Ed, that you said that they ought to

rip out the heart of Dick Cheney? 

SCHULTZ:  And getting the best health care in the country, he should

become the—wait a minute.  No, no—

ISTOOK:  It‘s that kind of rhetoric.  It comes from both sides. 

SCHULTZ:  No, that‘s not rhetoric.  The fact is that was said on a

radio talk show—and that doesn‘t excuse it.  But the fact is I said, we

want a successful conclusion for the vice president, because we want him to

become the poster child.  Everybody in the country should have the same

health care as Dick Cheney, because most—

ISTOOK:  Rip his heart out, Ed? 

SCHULTZ:  Wait a minute.  And stuff it back in him, and make sure that

he survives and has the best health care.  You know, this is what happens

in America.  Making a joke and then—

ISTOOK:  My point is it happens on both sides. 

SCHULTZ:  No, it doesn‘t happen on both sides, because I haven‘t cut

anybody‘s fuel line, Ernest.  You know that. 

ISTOOK:  Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber murdered people.  He was an

environmental extremist.  It does happen on both sides. 

SCHULTZ:  It‘s not happening on both sides at this level.  You know

it‘s not. 

ISTOOK:  I received death threats.  I had a man go to prison for

threatening to kill me and dismember me. 

SCHULTZ:  OK.  All right.  So the Tea Partiers, it‘s just normal

operation procedure, correct, Ernie?  Is that what your answer is? 

ISTOOK:  No.

SCHULTZ:  You‘re the problem, Ernest.  Ernest, you are the problem. 

You can‘t—Ernest, you can‘t point the finger at the culprit in any of

this.  That‘s the problem, right there. 

ISTOOK:  Those were the first words out of my mouth, to condemn that. 

SCHULTZ:  Oh, yeah, then, of course, saying it happens on both sides

when it doesn‘t.  It‘s not happening on both sides.  Democrats are not—

Ernest—tell me—

ISTOOK:  I didn‘t get threats from the right.  I got them from the

left.  

SCHULTZ:  Tell me a Democrat who‘s thrown a brick through a window,

who has also recently threatened families, and also left messages about how

you‘re going to die.  Tell me who those people are on the left right now. 

ISTOOK:  Like I said, Ed, a man went to prison for threatening to kill

me because I would not vote to legalize marijuana.  That wasn‘t coming from

the right.  That was coming from the left. 

SCHULTZ:  So I guess you‘re condoning it then.  Laura, your thoughts

on what—

ISTOOK:  Condemn it on both sides. 

SCHULTZ:  It doesn‘t mean anything, Ernest.  You lose your credibility

when you say it‘s both sides, for not condemning it the way it is right

now.  You will not tell Boehner to come out and absolutely condemn this. 

ISTOOK:  Read “Politico.”  Boehner already condemned that. 

SCHULTZ:  I don‘t have to read it.  I have my own show.  I have to

apologize to my audience tonight.  This was not the way this interview was

supposed to go.  This is how the righties operate.  They can‘t even give

good commentary without attacking.

Laura, I‘ll give you an opportunity, since Ernest has taken up most of

the time.  Your thoughts on what the Congress should do to address the

rhetoric going on in this country. 

LAURA FLANDERS, “GRIT TV”:  I‘m amazed that Ernie from Oklahoma isn‘t

ashamed in himself for talking in the way he has.  Let‘s face it, we have

got a situation—you said, is it too personal?  It‘s institutional. 

There‘s no question that there‘s an institutional imbalance in the way that

people respond to hate speech. 

Let‘s just look at this week and talk about imbalance.  On Sunday—

or rather Saturday, I think it was—you had five or so people arrested

for putting coffins up there against the White House fence, on

commemoration of the invasion of Iraq.  The next day, you have the Capitol

Police doing nothing while the Tea Partiers spat on Congress-people going

into Congress and called them the “N” word.  You have a situation that

reminds me, Ed, of that whole—

SCHULTZ:  They said they were sorry, Laura. 

FLANDERS:  Yeah.  Let‘s look at history a little bit. 

SCHULTZ:  Ernest says it happens on both sides. 

FLANDERS:  We don‘t have doctors dead on the right.  We don‘t have

feminists under attack on the right.  We don‘t have racial minorities under

attack by organized left wing groups.  They said, first, they came for the

communist.  Now they‘re coming for legislators. 

It‘s time we all woke up and called this stuff out.  You mentioned

Gordon Liddy.  In the ‘90s, he was out there saying shoot for the head,

shoot for the head on his talk show.  You know, hosts like that shouldn‘t

continue to be on the air a decade later.  We‘ve got to get bigger than

this stuff. 

SCHULTZ:  Ernest, I‘ll give you one more chance here.  Do you condone

what Sarah Palin is doing, putting cross-hair bull‘s-eyes on where they

have to target to get Democrats out of office? 

ISTOOK:  I think it‘s a bad choice of imagery.  I‘ve seen—you know,

the term hit list is a common term.  It‘s not unique—

SCHULTZ:  Common term.  Hit list has no connotation to it at all? 

Wow.  I have to run. 

ISTOOK:  The point is, I agree, it‘s a bad choice of images she made. 

SCHULTZ:  I appreciate both of you being on the program tonight. 

Thanks so much.  We‘ll have a little bit more later on. 

I want to say one thing about the former vice president.  I‘m glad

that he had a successful conclusion.  And I hope he doesn‘t have anymore

heart attacks.  And certainly anybody who has five heart attacks and

survives is a pretty tough cookie.  I hope every American in this country

who has that kind of heart trouble will be able to keep their insurance. 

Coming up, George W. Bush sure knows how to take the word “human” out

of a humanitarian.  I‘ll show you that in a moment.  That was caught on

tape.  That‘s next in the playbook.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ:  In my playbook tonight, less than ten minutes after

President Obama signed the health care bill yesterday, 14 states filed

lawsuits against the government.  Thirteen States attorneys general banned

together to file a single lawsuit in a Florida federal court.  Those states

include Washington, Idaho, Utah, Colorado, South Dakota, Nebraska,

Michigan, Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and

Florida.  Virginia‘s attorney general is filing a separate suit against the

health care bill. 

Their main objections to the bill are that the requirement that most

Americans purchase insurance and the expansion of Medicaid.  For more, let

me bring in Attorney General Mark Shurtleff of Utah, one of the states that

has filed a suit against the health care bill. 

What‘s the issue here?  What do you really take issue with?  Is it the

mandate? 

MARK SHURTLEFF, UTAH ATTORNEY GENERAL:  Well, it is.  It‘s that

individual mandate that requires every American to, for the first time in

the history of America, to actually buy a product or face a penalty for it. 

I‘ve been listening to your program.  I‘ll be one elected official who

absolutely condemns hate speech and vandalism and all the rhetoric.  What

we‘re doing going to court is really the antithesis of that.  We have a

legal disagreement, and the courts are set up to resolve it.  That‘s what

we‘re doing, Ed.

SCHULTZ:  You know, I have no problem with that.  That is—you being

the number one law enforcement official in the judiciary—in the justice

system in Utah, I commend you for saying that.  We‘ve lost sight of how we

have, you know, rules, regulations and laws that guide things in this

country.  And my purpose for having you on here, tonight, is that—is

there really legal merit for states to challenge a federal law?  I mean,

doesn‘t federal law supersede state law?  What do you think? 

SHURTLEFF:  Ed, it does.  They can‘t just pass any law and just say,

because we‘re the feds, then we supersede any state law.  They can only

pass laws granted to them within the jurisdiction granted to them in the

Constitution.  Argument in this case is that there‘s no specific grant in

the Constitution to do that individual mandate. 

Now, I know they will argue—the feds will argue vigorously that

this expansion of the Commerce Clause somehow gives them this authority. 

We don‘t believe so.  We believe, therefore, under the Tenth Amendment,

those rights are reserved to the states, and insurance, in particular, just

like auto insurance.  Health care, medical insurance has been left to the

states.  Traditionally speaking, this is the first time the federal

government is taking over. 

That will be the specific kind of constitutional challenge to it,

whether they actually have this authority. 

SCHULTZ:  Mr. Shurtleff, do you think you can win this?  Do you think

these states can win this against the federal government? 

SHURTLEFF:  Ed, I‘m a realist.  Any time you go to federal court and

ask the federal court to limit federal power and authority, it‘s an uphill

battle.  There‘s no doubt about that.  I do think we have a reasonable

opportunity.  I‘m not going to file something for purposes of delay.  I

mean, it needs to be resolved. 

I think because of a couple of decisions in the last ten years, Lopez,

Morrison—I won‘t get into the details of the cases.  The courts have now

started to say that the Commerce Clause isn‘t unlimited, that you actually

have to show specifically that it applies and that the states haven‘t

regulated it.  With the current makeup of the Supreme Court, I think

there‘s a reasonable likelihood that possibly on a five to four, when we

get there, that we might be able to have them determine that this just went

too far. 

There‘s much to be praising in this health care reform, but it‘s the

process we‘re concerned about.  And they just need to follow the law in

this country. 

SCHULTZ:  Attorney General Mark Shurtleff from Utah, good to have you

with us tonight.  Thank you so much.

SHURTLEFF:  Thanks, Ed.

SCHULTZ:  A couple more pages in our playbook tonight.  Former

President Bill Clinton and George W. Bush took their first joint trip to

Haiti on Monday to promote continuing relief efforts in the earthquake

shattered country.  President Bush managed to overshadow the good works

with one swipe of his hands.  The former presidents were glad handing with

a crowd of Haitians when cameras caught President Bush wiping his hands off

on Clinton‘ shirt. 

He didn‘t even try to disguise it.  He went straight from a handshake

to a blatant hand wipe.  When it comes to disaster zones, George is better

off sticking to flyovers, isn‘t he?

All right, one more page in my playbook tonight; less than two months

after my Minnesota Vikings were shafted in the playoffs by an overtime

field goal, the NFL is changing the rules.  Starting next season, the team

that wins the overtime coin toss won‘t be able to win the game with just a

field goal.  Sudden death will still apply, if that team scores a

touchdown.  Otherwise, the opposing team will get a chance to score.  If

the game is tied after the first OT, play will continue under the old

sudden death rules. 

Coming up, you may not know this yet, but we are at economic war with

China; 2.4 million jobs were lost less than—in less than one decade.  My

next guest tells us exactly who‘s really getting hit on this.  That‘s

coming up next on THE ED SHOW.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ:  Finally tonight on THE ED SHOW, there was a new report out

telling us just how many jobs this country is losing to China.  The

Economic Policy Institute found that, between 2001 and 2008, the United

States lost 2.4 million jobs as a result of a growing trade deficit with

China.  The losses are distributed across the country.  Every single

Congressional district has lost jobs.  More than 1.6 million of them were

in the manufacturing sector.  But high-tech jobs, like those in computer

and electronic industries, also took a huge hit, making up a quarter of the

total jobs lost. 

The hardest-hit states, based on percent of jobs lost to China, are

New Hampshire, North Carolina, Massachusetts, California, Oregon, and

Minnesota.  Joining me now to talk about it is Scott Paul, executive

director of the Alliance for American Manufacturing. 

Mr. Paul, good to have you back with us tonight.  Is this the first

time that we‘ve ever really taken a close look at where the jobs are being

lost? 

SCOTT PAUL, AMERICAN ALLIANCE FOR MANUFACTURING:  Absolutely, it is. 

I think it‘s very illuminating.  The results even surprised me.  We were

able to drill down with this Economic Policy Institute data, and find, from

California to Maine, just how many jobs were lost and by industry as well. 

And I think the challenge for Washington is going to be jobs are the

number-one issue.  Voters are angry.  China‘s clearly eating our lunch.  I

think they‘re going to expect answers.  So far, all they‘ve seen is more

outsourcing to China. 

SCHULTZ:  Now, the hardest hit areas, as far as districts are

concerned, there‘s eight in California, four in North Carolina, three in

Texas, two in Massachusetts and one each in Oregon, Georgia and Alabama. 

These are the top 20 hardest hit districts, losing more than 8,600 jobs. 

Now, is this just by chance that these parts of the country are getting hit

so hard?  Or is it just industry targeted? 

PAUL:  There‘s a common thread.  It is the industry that‘s competing

with China, Ed.  Frankly, they‘re competing unfairly because of a currency

advantage China has and some other subsidies, lax labor and environmental

standards.  These are districts that have a high concentration of either

manufacturing or high-tech goods.  They‘ve been clobbered. 

I don‘t think it surprises people, Ed, that we‘ve lost jobs from the

Midwest and we‘ve lost jobs from manufacturing.  I think one of the

illuminating things about this report is that we‘re losing these high-tech

jobs, these high-wage jobs, and that the job losses are not only in the

Midwest, but they‘re in Texas and California, places like that. 

SCHULTZ:  Quickly, Senator Schumer is talking about currency

manipulation.  Do we have to do this?  How paramount is it? 

PAUL:  We have to do two things.  The Obama administration needs to

designate China as a currency manipulator.  They‘ll have the opportunity to

do that by April 15th.  Congress needs to pass a bill to sanction China if

they don‘t re-evaluate the currency.  That will boost U.S. jobs by the

hundreds of thousands, if not millions.  Senator Schumer says he wants a

vote on that legislation by May.

SCHULTZ:  Scott Paul, great to have you with us tonight.  Thanks so

much for the update. 

Tonight in our text survey, I asked do you think Republicans should do

more to condemn the threats of violence against Democrats?  Ninety six

percent of you said yes; four percent said no. 

That‘s THE ED SHOW.  I‘m Ed Schultz.  “HARDBALL” with Chris Matthews

starts right now.  We‘re back tomorrow night, looking forward to it, right

here on THE ED SHOW, 6:00 eastern, on your place for politics, MSNBC.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY

BE UPDATED.

END   

Copy:     Content and programming copyright 2010 NBC.  ALL RIGHTS  RESERVED.

                Copyright 2010 Roll Call, Inc.  All materials herein are protected by

                United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,

                transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written

                permission of Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,

                copyright or other notice from copies of the content.

Discuss:

Discussion comments

,