Guests: Janet Napolitano, Tracy Weitz.
HOST: Good evening, Keith. Thank you very much. Say
hi to the guys for me.
OLBERMANN: Rachel says hi.
CROWD: Hi.
OLBERMANN: They said hi back. Did you hear them?
MADDOW: I did. I got that sense vaguely. Thanks, guys.
And thanks to you at home for tuning in.
Given everything going on in the country right now, I am very excited
for “The Interview” tonight. It is Homeland Security Secretary Janet
Napolitano.
Also, the all-you-can-eat buffet of political mistakes that is the
career so far of Virginia governor, Bob McDonnell, gets even worse today.
I cannot quite figure out why no one else is really covering this yet. But
this guy was supposed to be the Republican Party‘s great new hope for 2010
and beyond, and he‘s just imploding.
Plus, Mike Huckabee let his anti-gay flag fly and then he ripped the
reporter who published his remarks. Luckily for us, that reporter turns
out be a very spunky college kid who has not taking it lying down, and who
had a tape recorder running the whole time.
Lots to come this hour.
But, we begin with President Obama fresh off negotiating a new global
agreement on nuclear terrorism with 49 leaders from around the world,
pivoting now to a much-tougher crowd, and probably a much steeper
diplomatic challenge.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: All right. Hello,
everybody. I want to welcome congressional leaders to one of our periodic
meetings.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Meeting with world leaders to prevent nuclear terrorism—
child‘s play. Meeting with congressional leaders, here, to pass laws in
America, with giant Democratic majorities and the president‘s a Democrat?
Yes, good luck with that.
Today, President Obama welcomed Republicans to the White House today
for a big bipartisan talk on Wall Street reform. Wall Street reform, of
course, has already passed the House. It‘s already passed the first
committee in the Senate. It is on its way toward passing. The only
questions now are: when it‘s going to pass and with how much Republican
support.
Coming out of today‘s meeting at the White House: Mitch McConnell and
John Boehner, the top Republicans in Congress—they affirmed that on this
issue, they really meant that whole not just the “party of no” thing. I
think at this point, they are debuting the “party of hell no” thing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS)
REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH), MINORITY LEADER: The American people are
continuing to ask the question: where are the jobs. And when you look at
this financial services bill, my concern is that it‘s going to protect the
biggest banks in America and harm the smallest banks.
SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY), MINORITY LEADER: It‘s a bill that
actually guarantees future bailouts of Wall Street banks. In fact, if you
look at it carefully, it will lead to endless taxpayer bailouts of Wall
Street banks. That is clearly not the direction the American people would
like for us to go, and also not the direction Senate Republicans would like
to go.
(END VIDEO CLIPS)
MADDOW: So, according to Mitch McConnell there, this reform bill will
lead to endless taxpayer bailouts of Wall Street. That‘s what he said—
endless taxpayer bailouts of Wall Street.
What it really does is not that. If the Dodd bill becomes law, big
banks have to pay into a bailout insurance fund, essentially, so banks have
to pay for bailouts in the future, not taxpayers. The bill that passed the
House includes an even bigger pool that banks have to pay in to. But the
whole idea is that if banks need bailing out, banks themselves do the
bailing out now. Not us. That‘s the whole idea.
In the Senate bill, the FDIC actually dismantles banks that fail.
They sell off their various pieces instead of just propping up the giant
existing banks with taxpayer money, like we did last time.
Now, you may not like this bill. There may be all sorts of reasons to
object to it. But endless taxpayer bailouts?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MCCONNELL: Endless taxpayer bailout.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Yes, that‘s not true. That‘s not there.
It‘s not surprising that Republicans are opposed to Wall Street
reform. No Republicans voted for it all when it passed the House. The
Republican Party has pursued this unified strategy of saying no to
everything in Congress while they‘re in the minority. It is not surprising
they‘re against Wall Street reform.
It is interesting, though, that they‘re explaining why they‘re against
Wall Street reform by railing against something that‘s not at all
recognizable in the bill in any way. Where do they get this stuff?
Actually, we know where they‘re getting this stuff. You might
remember back in February, we reported on a memo obtained by Sam Stein at
“Huffington Post.” It was a 17-page memo of suggested talking points for
Republicans written by Republican pollster Frank Luntz. The memo advised
Republicans how to not only to kill Wall Street reform but to gain the
biggest political advantage from killing it.
For example, in a section that‘s titled “Words to Use,” Mr. Luntz
recommends that Republicans include “never again.” “Never again” in their
anti-Wall Street reform speechifying.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MCCONNELL: Never again—never again should taxpayers be expected to
bail out Wall Street from its own mistake.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Well done. Check. Mitch McConnell. Yes.
Back to the talking points here. Quote, “Frankly, the single best way
to kill any legislation is to link it to the big bank bailout.”
Over to you.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS)
MCCONNELL: We cannot allow endless taxpayer funded bailouts for big
Wall Street banks.
Will guarantee perpetual taxpayer bailouts of Wall Street banks.
It will lead to endless taxpayer bailouts of Wall Street bank.
It provides endless opportunity for bailouts of Wall Street banks.
And this bill, make no mistake about it, is a permanent taxpayer
bailout of Wall Street banks.
(END VIDEO CLIPS)
MADDOW: Go, man, go. You are so on points.
I don‘t know if you‘d call it at this point like a choir or a chorus,
it was never all that clear on the differences between, but altogether you
guys sound great.
Another talking point from the memo is this, quote, “Taxpayers should
not be held responsible for the failure of big business any longer. If a
business is going to fail, no matter how big, let it fail.”
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MCCONNELL: We won‘t solve this problem until the biggest banks are
allowed to fail.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Never mind that‘s precisely what the Democrats are proposing
to. Mitch McConnell makes some hay here. I know you can do it.
It does take a little bit of the suspense out of this. But if you
want to read for yourself the script that Republicans are reading from when
they say Wall Street shouldn‘t be reformed, the script was leaked two
months ago. And we have posted it on the Maddow blog today. You can
follow along in the day‘s news as long as this is going to be debated.
If you look at the client list of the author of that memo, I‘m sure
that the big Wall Street firms among those clients are delighted to see
that the script is being followed with such attention to detail. The
talking points are well-crafted. They sound great. They are totally
disconnected from the facts.
But, hey, in health reform, you know, you don‘t think the people who
invented the whole death panels idea thought that was real, do you?
Reality is not exactly how this stuff works.
Joining us now is Howard Fineman, MSNBC political analyst and
“Newsweek” senior Washington correspondent.
Hi, Howard. Thanks for joining us.
HOWARD FINEMAN, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Hi, Rachel.
MADDOW: Is Wall Street reform going to be something that takes a year
or longer like health care, or is there—is there a path to actually
finish this any time soon?
FINEMAN: I don‘t think it‘s going to take that long. It‘s another
big, complex piece of legislation that I think the politics of this are
sharper and clearer, and as—try as he might, Mitch McConnell, to make
himself out to be the populist concerned for the little guy here, the
reasons that the Republicans really oppose this bill are ones that are
going to be hard for them to defend. Because what they really don‘t like
is they don‘t want the tax on the banks, the fees on the banks.
And as you said, it‘s not a bailout bill, it‘s more like an orderly
burial bill, you know, than it is a bailout bill.
They don‘t like the new regulations on derivatives and other fancy
ways of raising credit. They don‘t like the idea of setting up a consumer
credit agency to monitor lending by banks and other institutions, and they
don‘t like the controls on small banks. That‘s what they don‘t like.
That‘s what we really don‘t like.
And unlike health care, where they were able to frame the issue and
also raise, I think, populist fears and resentment about government—this
is a situation, Rachel, where the government is actually trying to rein in
reform and control actors on the global scene that American voters like
even less than they like government, namely big banks and Wall Street.
MADDOW: I was thinking about the sort of the Republican challenges on
this when I saw Charlie Gasparino‘s reporting this week that Mitch
McConnell came to New York last week to meet with billionaire hedge fund
managers, to both ask them for Republican campaign donations and to pledge
that Republicans would kill reform.
Now, Charlie Gasparino works now for FOX Business. And it just got me
thinking, you know, is this something on which Republicans might really
potentially have trouble with for the more populist side of their base,
those folks out on the streets at the tea parties?
FINEMAN: Yes, I think—yes, I think so. I think so.
And you can—can you watch Mitch McConnell trying to get ahold of
this and really not being able to do it, because at the same time he‘s
pledging his support for the small bankers and his antagonism for the big
bankers and so on. As you say, he‘s up there promising the hedge fund
guys, “Don‘t worry, we‘re not going to let the people at the Commodity
Futures Trading Commission go crazy regulating derivatives”—which is
precisely what they think the CFTC wants to do right now.
And ironically, the guy running the CFTC, a guy named Gary Gensler, is
trying to make up for his own past mistakes in being too lenient on the
growth of derivatives and other fancy instruments by really proposing in
this bill some really tough measures.
McConnell and the Republicans don‘t want them. That‘s really one of
the main things they don‘t want in this. They‘re going to use that bailout
word because Luntz gave it to them, but that‘s not really what they‘re
about here and that will eventually show through. You know, it will then
eventually be revealed.
MADDOW: I‘ll do my best to keep revealing it.
(LAUGHTER)
FINEMAN: Yes.
MADDOW: Are Republicans sort of lining up rock solid behind McConnell
on this? Does he have a unified caucus in the Senate? Are there any
Republicans Democrats think they might be able to get to vote with them on
this?
FINEMAN: Well, I was talking to Republican source just a little while
ago, said they had a closed door meeting today. McConnell is trying to
line them all up. I‘m not sure he‘s going to be able to get them all
there. Because as I say, the politics are a little different from health
care. And the “party of no” or “hell no,” I‘m not sure it‘s totally going
to work here, because people want something done to rein in the banks.
They do.
So, they‘re not going to get Scott Brown, so I‘m told, at least
initially, the Democrats that is. He‘s going to stick with McConnell on
this, so far.
But I think the Democrats who only need one vote after all to break a
filibuster, if that‘s what they‘re going to try to do, have a good shot at
getting one or both of the senators from Maine, Collins or Snowe, and I‘m
told that the Democrats are aiming also at George Voinovich, who‘s leaving,
from Ohio—Republican from Ohio, but a real populist in some ways.
And also, oddly enough, and don‘t laugh, but Judd Gregg, who‘s also
leaving from New Hampshire. And don‘t forget that Judd Gregg had a brief
flirtation with joining the Obama administration. I don‘t think he‘s going
to do that now. But he wants some kind of orderly structure here.
What McConnell is arguing, Rachel, is akin to what you might argue in
the old days against having the Corps of Engineers build dams upstream
from, say, Louisville, Kentucky, where Mitch McConnell lives. Mitch is
saying, no, no, you don‘t want to build the dams because you‘re only going
to have a flood every 30 years. Well, Louisville will be flooded every 30
years.
MADDOW: Right.
FINEMAN: That‘s sort of what Barack Obama and the Democrats are
proposing here—what McConnell is going to trying to fight. I‘m not sure
he‘s going to be able to get it done this time.
MADDOW: And with your flood analogy, he would probably have a lot
more luck with that analogy had we not just all finished drying out our
basements, or maybe half of us finished drying out our basements from the
giant flood.
Howard Fineman of MSNBC and “Newsweek”—it‘s always great to have
you here, Howard. Thank you very much.
FINEMAN: Thank you. Thank you, Rachel.
MADDOW: So, “The Interview” tonight is our nation‘s homeland security
secretary, Janet Napolitano. I have been looking forward to this all week.
That is next. Please stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MADDOW: Senator Chuck Grassley was determined that any health reform
bill passed by Congress would apply to members of Congress and their staff.
None of this “It‘s OK for you but not for me” stuff. So, Senator Grassley,
last September, drafted a provision in the health reform bill that meant to
keep members of Congress and thousands of congressional staffers on
reformed health care. Ha! That will show them commies.
Only problem? What the provision actually did was ban members of
Congress and their staff members from having any health insurance at all.
Oops!
Senator Grassley admits to drafting the original language but he tells
“The New York Times” now that other people must have redrafted what he
wrote, and those unnamed re-drafters must have made this mistake.
The good news, Senator Grassley says he wants the problem fixed. We
wouldn‘t want anyone to go without health insurance now, would we? That
would be barbaric.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. BETTY MCCOLLUM (D), MINNESOTA: I don‘t want another Oklahoma
City to ever take place again. And just as we would not give aid and
comfort to al Qaeda, let us not allow the words of elected leaders to get
comfortable excuses to extremists bent on violence. When members of
Congress compare health care legislation to government tyranny, socialism
or totalitarianism in the hopes of scoring political points, it‘s like
pouring gas on the fire of extremism.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: That was Congresswoman Betty McCollum of Minnesota, speaking
on the House floor this week in support of a resolution honoring the
victims of the 1995 attack on the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in
Oklahoma City. The resolution passed. Monday, of course, is the 15th
anniversary of the bombing which killed 168 Americans.
On Friday, Bill Clinton will be the keynote speaker at a symposium
marking the anniversary. It‘s an event designed to be a forum for
discussing how the country reacted to the attack 15 years ago and what
lessons learned from the Oklahoma City bombing can be applied to today‘s
America.
On Monday, our next guest, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet
Napolitano will be in Oklahoma City itself for the official remembrance
ceremony.
Also that day, again, on the anniversary of the bombing of the federal
building in Oklahoma City by Timothy McVeigh, an anti-government extremist
with ties to the militia movement, there will be two marches on Washington.
One is being called the Second Amendment March, it‘s leading up to their—
in leading up to their march in Washington, this group has been holding
armed rallies at state capitols from Kentucky to Montana to Virginia—
anti-government marches and rallies at which participants are encouraged to
wear and display their guns.
Now, even though those folks have been armed at all the state capitols
leading up to the April 19th march, when they actually head to the grounds
of the Washington Monument on the actual anniversary of the Oklahoma City
bombing, they‘re not allowed to open-carry there. So that Second Amendment
March will be unarmed in D.C.
That said, right across the Potomac from that site, at Gravelly Point
Park in Virginia, that march on D.C., also on the occasion of the Oklahoma
City bombing anniversary, that march will be armed. Participants of that
one are being encouraged to bring guns.
The organizers are holding it in Virginia and bringing people right up
to the Gravelly Point on the Potomac because they say that‘s as close as
they think they can legally get to D.C. with loaded weapons.
One of the speakers at the event, the one with guns, is the ex-Alabama
militiaman who made news encouraging people to go to Democratic Party
offices and throw bricks through the windows.
One other high profile attendee of that armed march is backing out
now. He‘s the president of the Oath Keepers. They‘re a group of pro-gun
law enforcement and military personnel who say they plan to disobey orders
in order to—in their words—prevent possible future egregious
violations of the Bill of Rights, and to—again, in their words—stop a
dictatorship from taking root in America. The Oath Keepers has pulled out
of the armed march on almost Washington, citing published statements by
some participants in the upcoming rally that indicate that the event will
have a confrontational stance.
Joining us now for “The Interview”—I‘ve been very much looking
forward to this discussion—is secretary of homeland security, Janet
Napolitano.
Madam Secretary, thank you so much for joining us.
JANET NAPOLITANO, SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY: Well, thank you.
MADDOW: As a U.S. attorney in Arizona at the time, 15 years ago, I
know that you were part of the investigation into the Oklahoma City
bombing. You‘ll be participating in the commemoration on Monday.
Do you feel like we approach the threat of domestic terrorism
differently now as a country than we did before that incident?
NAPOLITANO: Well, yes—in part because every time there is an
incident—and it‘s hard to describe something as horrific as the bombing
of the Murrah Building as an incident, it was an outrageous criminal act.
But every time one of those things happens, we learn. We apply that in a
law enforcement way to the next set of events.
So, yes, experience does teach us some things. And, unfortunately,
the Murrah Building bombing taught us a lot.
MADDOW: And in terms of that—and I know that I‘m raising a report
for which there was a lot of political heat. Your department got some heat
last year when you put out a report that said the current economic and
political climate has some similarities to the ‘90s when right-wing
extremism experienced a resurgence.
In terms of that report, in terms of your government‘s advice and
support to local law enforcement, how do you advise them and how does the
country is dealing with the threat of domestic extremism now?
NAPOLITANO: Well, what we do is work with law enforcement to give
them information—information about threats that we are seeing,
information about trends that we are discerning, so that they are better
prepared to protect public safety on the ground. And we, in turn, receive
information back from local law enforcement.
And so, you know, we will provide information, for example—we had a
recent case where individuals were buying large amounts of hydrogen
peroxide to make explosives. It got into the news. And we advise local
law enforcement to watch for unusual purchases of hydrogen peroxide.
That‘s the kind of direct tactical information we want to get into the
hands of law enforcement.
MADDOW: What were some of the things that law enforcement did with
some of the more extremist militia groups and other domestic terrorist
organizations, as you defined them in a report last year, what were some of
the things that law enforcement did right to essentially stem the growth of
those groups after Oklahoma City?
NAPOLITANO: Well, I think in a way, Oklahoma City was such an
outrageous criminal act that in and of itself, it had an effect on the
growth of militia movements, of armed violent militia movements. And so,
we did see almost an immediate drop-off after 1995.
And you know, we‘ve had militia groups, armed militia groups, from
time to time throughout American history and indeed throughout the last
decades. They seem to kind of come in and come out as circumstances
change.
But prior to 1995, the Murrah Building bombing, they were really a
rapidly growing phenomenon throughout the United States, particularly in
some areas of the states like Arizona, where I was the United States
attorney. Then they seemed to have dissipated. And now, of course,
recently, recent events show us that we have some groups starting up again.
MADDOW: Considering the threat of terror from abroad and Department
of Homeland Security‘s role in international counterterrorism, I know that
you‘re just back from Nigeria, the home country of the attempted Christmas
Day bomber. I know you were there to meet with leaders of a whole host of
African countries about boosting the international side of airline
security.
What was accomplished there? What are leaders agreeing to to try to
fill some of those gaps?
NAPOLITANO: Really, it‘s an amazing global response to the attempted
bombing on Christmas Day, where region by region around the world we are
forging a consensus about information collection, information-sharing,
passenger vetting, and improved security at airports. I think people
already will have seen some of the things going into place in airports in
the United States. It‘s objectively better technology for discerning
someone who may be trying to bring explosives or other material on to an
airplane.
But we‘re seeing the same kind of response internationally, and it was
particularly encouraging to see it amongst the union of African nations
over this past weekend.
MADDOW: I was thinking about the—preparing for this interview,
this chance to talk to you today, and I was trying to narrow down all the
things that are in your purview as secretary of homeland security.
NAPOLITANO: Good luck with that.
MADDOW: Exactly. I mean, there‘s something like 200,000 employees in
this agency, 22 agencies all brought under one, everything from FEMA and
airline security and H1N1 and drugs and immigration and all of these
different things—I don‘t know that you can actually answer this and
still be politic, but does the Department of Homeland Security make sense
that it‘s one thing? I‘m not sure that—I‘m not sure what the advantage
is that all of these things are in one agency now.
NAPOLITANO: Look. It was borne out of 9/11 and I think it does make
sense. But you have to kind of take all those 22 agencies and boil them
down into what are—what are the major missions that we are focused upon
so that we can really sculpt a vision for the entire department.
And so, when you do that, you know, we‘re really focused on
counterterrorism. We‘re focusing on securing our borders, be they land,
air or sea. We‘re focused on immigration—immigration enforcement, even
as we advocate for reform of the immigration laws. We‘re focused on
protection of cyberspace, and I think we‘re the first U.S. department
that‘s really singled that out as, you know, kind of the next wave of
things that needs our focus. And then finally, the ability to respond—
prepare for and respond to natural disasters.
And when you boil it down to those five major functions, then you
could really see how far the department and all of its various components
make sense.
MADDOW: I could also see how if I had your job, I‘d want to clone
myself five times so I could have one person in charge of each of those
things, plus a spare to rest.
NAPOLITANO: Indeed.
(LAUGHTER)
MADDOW: On that issue of immigration, not in your Department of
Homeland Security purview because this is at the state level, but your home
state of Arizona this week has passed a very—a very, very strong anti-
immigration bill. I think of it as the “papers please” bill. It compels
police officers to demand papers from anyone they reasonably suspect of
being an illegal immigrant. It‘s now a misdemeanor to not carry your
immigration paper work with you at all times in Arizona.
Didn‘t you veto something like that when you were governor there?
NAPOLITANO: I think I vetoed things like that at least twice. And I
did because—first of all, immigration is primarily federal. Not
exclusively, but primarily federal. But secondly, it doesn‘t allow law
enforcement to focus on where law enforcement needs to focus, and to
prioritize the way law enforcement needs the ability to prioritize for the
protection of the public safety.
There are other reasons as well, but it was no surprise to me when I
was governor of Arizona that, by in large, law enforcement, the men and
women who are charged with protecting public safety, oppose legislation
like that.
MADDOW: One last question for you, Madam Secretary, and I‘m sure
you‘re going to dodge it, but I‘m going to ask it anyway. Are you ready?
NAPOLITANO: Go for it.
MADDOW: Wouldn‘t being on—wouldn‘t being on the Supreme Court be a
great job?
NAPOLITANO: Well, nice try, but I‘m flattered to be asked. But I‘m
focused on the job I have. And as you‘ve already described, it‘s a big
one.
MADDOW: Secretary of homeland security, Janet Napolitano, a very,
very busy person by definition—thank you so much for joining us tonight.
I appreciate your time.
NAPOLITANO: Thank you for having me.
MADDOW: OK. So, remember the brilliant idea to bring back the old
south de facto literacy test for people to get their voting rights in
Virginia? That brilliant idea is being abandoned now. Happy Confederate
History Month! That‘s next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MADDOW: Still ahead, Mike Huckabee picks a media feud with a college
journalist. And Mike Huckabee is losing. Wow, is he losing. That‘s
ahead.
But first a couple of holy mackerel stories in today‘s news.
Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell today took another step further down from
the mantle of moderate seeming Republican Party potential savior.
Mr. McDonnell doubled down today on his latest public relations
disaster backtrack. Last night, we reported Gov. McDonnell‘s indirect,
amorphous, somewhat feckless denial that he had instituted an essay
question, a sort of literacy test for ex-felons trying to get their voting
rights back in Virginia. The denial sounded like this.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
GOV. BOB MCDONNELL (R-VA): There‘s no essay. We‘ve asked for just a
simple statement of what the person has done in order to be reintegrated
into society. A little bit about their crime, what they‘ve done to get
back into society, any community activities.
And we‘re still in the draft stages. And I just ask people to
just give us a few months. We‘re going to - we haven‘t even announced the
final process.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
MADDOW: We‘re still in the draft stages. No final process. Give us
a few months. This walk-back ran into evidence of Gov. McDonnell‘s
actions, which totally gave lie to that denial. This wasn‘t a draft
policy. They have, in fact, already put it into place.
They‘ve already sent out hundreds of letters like this one to
people in Virginia. See right there under the state seal? The letters
demand that people who want a petition to get their voting rights back have
to write Bob McDonnell a personal statement, explaining among other things
that their church activities show that they should get the right to vote.
That letter explaining the new requirement has already gone out
to hundreds of people in Virginia. It wasn‘t just a draft, bad idea. It
was an enacted idea. Caught in the act.
So now naturally, cue throwing the staffer under the bus. Bob
McDonnell‘s spokesperson told “The Washington Post” today, quote, “The
letter was sent without approval by a well-meaning staffer attempting to
continue to process requests even while new procedures were being
considered.”
I wonder if this was the same well-meaning staffer who
accidentally proclaimed confederate history month without mentioning
slavery or who got stuck drafting the pitiful “I didn‘t really mean it”
proclamation after the governor rescinded nondiscrimination laws for state
workers.
Gov. Bob McDonnell has so far distinguished himself as Virginia
governor for having perfected the art of the far-right screw-up back flip
with a “double blame the staffer” finish. I wonder if they‘ll run him for
president in 2012.
Next up, when man first landed on the moon, Neil Armstrong
announced in words, both inspirational and aspirational, that the future
had arrived.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NEIL ARMSTRONG, ASTRONAUT: That‘s one small step for man, one giant
leap for mankind.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: On the other hand, when man first tweeted, it was an
announcement that he was setting up his account, please forgive the typos.
Oh, maybe we‘ve become jaded in the 21st century on matters of
technological breakthroughs. But that‘s not to say we don‘t appreciate
history in the making, which is why that first tweet and every other 140
character or less train of thoughts will be donated to and stored at the
oldest federal cultural institution we have in the United States. It‘s the
Library of Congress.
And yes, the Library of Congress does have a Twitter account too.
They‘re going to archive all of Twitter, back to the very beginning of the
service. Privacy-protected accounts will not be included in the electronic
donation, and it‘s only after a six-month delay that tweets will be made
public, I guess, at the library.
But that still leaves us with, you know, false reports of
celebrity deaths, almost instant reporting of major news stories as they
happened, everything Shaquille O‘Neal ever thought, everything Neil Patrick
Harris ever thought - thank god. And of course, heroic and heart breaking
political organizing and activism the world over.
Twitter will not tell us how many users it has, but according to
the Twitter blog, it receives more than 55 million tweets a day which
totals billions of tweets since the service was launched in 2006. And it‘s
all going to the Library of Congress.
And yes, that means that this Justin Bieber person I keep hearing
so much about may soon be the most-mentioned person in the Library of
Congress.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MADDOW: Dr. George Tiller was murdered by Scott Roeder in Kansas last
year. Scott Roeder made clearer than clear after his arrest and at his
trial that the goal of that murder was to stop the provision of legal
abortion in the United States.
There are very few doctors left in the U.S., only a handful, who
are willing to brave the violence and intimidation that it takes to work in
the specialized field of complicated and later abortions like George Tiller
did.
In the wake of the terrorism that took George Tiller‘s life,
there are a couple of ways elected officials could have reacted. One way
would be to recognize the real threat faced by these doctors who are
providing a legal service in the United States and take steps to support
them and protect them.
Another approach would be to join in the attack from the
legislative side. After Dr. Tiller was murdered, his friend and colleague,
Dr. LeRoy Carhart, who operates his own clinic in Bellevue, Nebraska,
started providing some services that Dr. Tiller did before his death, but
obviously could not anymore.
That decision prompted groups like Operation Rescue to shift
their focus. Operation Rescue, of course, had moved to Wichita, Kansas,
specifically to harass Dr. George Tiller years before his death.
Their new focus after Tiller was assassinated has been Dr.
Carhart‘s clinic, to specifically, quote, “encourage and train pro-lifers
who are working with us on this project to stop Carhart from becoming the
next George Tiller. So Carhart‘s days in Nebraska could be numbered.”
How did Nebraska‘s elected officials react to the targeting like
that of one of their constituents after another doctor who did the same
thing had been murdered in Kansas? How did they react to a doctor
regularly getting death threats for doing his job, a job that is legal
under American law?
Nebraska politicians changed the law. LB 1103 passed by a vote
of 44 to five in the Nebraska legislature, signed into law yesterday by the
Gov. Dave Heineman. It bans most abortions in Nebraska after 20 weeks on
the basis of this theory of fetal pain.
It‘s the nation‘s first law restricting abortions that relies on
that rationale. Sen. Mike Flood, speaker of the Nebraska legislature who
sponsored the measure said he did it as a direct attempt to stop the legal
medical services provided by Dr. Carhart.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JULIE SCHMIT-ALBIN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NEBRASKA RIGHT TO LIFE: He
had a burden when he heard LeRoy Carhart last summer upon the death of
George Tiller, when he heard LeRoy Carhart talk about how he wanted to make
Nebraska the late-term abortion capital of the Midwest.
And Speaker Flood took up that gauntlet and it has resulted in
the passage of LB 1103.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: That‘s the executive director of Nebraska Right to Life
talking about the motivation for this bill that just passed in the Nebraska
legislature. The new abortion ban in Nebraska will take effect on October
15th unless the courts stop it first.
Joining us now is Tracy Weitz. She is a director at the Bixby
Center for Global Reproductive Health. She‘s an associate professor at the
University of California in San Francisco. Professor Weitz, thanks very
much for coming back on the show. Appreciate your time.
TRACY WEITZ, DIRECTOR, BIXBY CENTER FOR GLOBAL REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH:
Thank you for having me back.
MADDOW: Do you expect that this new law will take effect? Do you
expect that it‘s likely to be stopped by the courts?
WEITZ: Well, it certainly is unconstitutional according to current
law which says that states may only ban abortion with the health exception
after the point of viability, which is after the - what the legislature is
saying is the point at which the fetus can feel pain.
MADDOW: Several pro-choice groups have focused in specifically on
this fetal pain rationale and said that they think that - codifying that
into law is essentially designed as a challenge to Roe versus Wade, that
this is legislation to get Roe versus Wade before the Supreme Court again
because they think that it would be overturned by the conservative majority
there. Do you think that‘s the case? Do you think that‘s what‘s going on?
WEITZ: Well, I definitely think this is a direct challenge to Roe
versus Wade. I think it‘s important, Rachel, to point out that the
scientific evidence does not support that the fetus can feel pain until
well into the third trimester.
I was very disappointed this morning to read the “New York Times”
suggests that there is sort of contested science around whether or not the
fetus can feel pain at the point at which the Nebraska legislature is
asserting that it can, when the published scientific literature does not
support that.
MADDOW: The other law that the Gov. Heineman signed into law
yesterday and did it at the same signing ceremony mandates that doctors
sort of extensively mentally screen women who come for abortion services.
I don‘t - I have to admit I don‘t understand it. As far as I
read it, I feel like their allegation here is that women have abortions
because they‘re crazy. Is that the implication that they‘re making here?
WEITZ: Well, I think there‘s two things. Like the fetal pain bill,
this is an extensive misuse of science. This bill says that doctors need
to inform women of any characteristic. That may have to be a demographic.
That may have to be a social characteristic. That may be a health
condition. That may be a mental health condition that has been shown to be
associated with a problem after abortion.
It‘s a long list of things. People don‘t know what it means.
But it‘s clearly meant to say to women, if you have any kind of health
condition, you need to know that you might suffer poorly after an abortion,
something that, again, science doesn‘t support.
MADDOW: Professor Traci Weitz, director at the Bixby Center for
Global Reproductive Health and associate professor at UCSF, University of
California in San Francisco, thanks very much for joining us tonight. I
have a feeling this is not going to be our last discussion on this Nebraska
bill. Thank you.
WEITZ: I hope we can keep talking about it.
MADDOW: Thanks. Coming up tonight on “COUNTDOWN,” Keith reports on
the Republican Party takeover of the tea party movement with some smoking
gun documents to prove his case.
And coming up on this show, Mike Huckabee attempts to take down a
student journalist. Keyword here, “attempts.” We‘ll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MADDOW: Big news from the war in Afghanistan today about an isolated
region in the eastern part of the country. On the map, it‘s known as the
Korengal Valley. It‘s frequently described in the news as “the valley of
death.”
In many months of reporting there, NBC‘s Richard Engel witnessed
ferocious combat in that region firsthand.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RICHARD ENGEL, NBC CHIEF FOREIGN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It‘s
just after 8:00 p.m. when suddenly - incoming. But the soldiers can‘t tell
where the Taliban are hiding.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Who is that?
ENGEL: There‘s no high-tech way to find the militants. American
military superiority doesn‘t mean much in these mountains.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: That‘s from Richard Engel‘s award-winning documentary “Tip of
the Spear” which was filmed in the Korengal Valley.
Today, the U.S. pulled its last troops out of the Korengal
valley, taking everything they could with them, including 500,000 pounds of
satellite equipment, lots of unused ammunition. And then they destroyed
much of the rest of what they brought in with them. Richard Engel was back
in the Korengal this week.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Fire in the hole!
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Fire in the hole!
ENGEL (voice-over): Just moments ago, there was a building here full
of munitions. Now, there‘s just a field of debris, some of it still
smoldering and hot. The U.S. military is blowing up this outpost piece by
piece. The soldiers don‘t want to leave anything useful behind for the
Taliban.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: In essence, the U.S. military has written the Korengal Valley
off at least for now saying it may never be a place with government as we
understand it. One veteran in the fighting there telling the “New York
Times” today, quote, “It is frustrating because we bled there and now we‘re
leaving. So you question, were those sacrifices worth it? But just
because you lost guys in a place, doesn‘t mean you need to stay there.”
In the half decade of fighting in the Korengal Valley, 42
American troops lost their lives there. Now, that geographic part of this
long, long war appears to be over.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MADDOW: Former Arkansas governor, minister and Republican
presidential candidate, Mike Huckabee, spoke last week to the Student
Government Association at the College of New Jersey for which he was
reportedly paid $25,000.
While he was there, Mr. Huckabee also gave an interview to
student reporter, Michael Tracy, who writes for the campus alternative news
magazine, “The Perspective.”
Now, in this interview, Mr. Huckabee talked about Republican
politics, his feelings about Michael Steele. He talked about his
opposition to repealing “Don‘t Ask, Don‘t Tell.”
He talked about his opposition to same-sex marriage. When he was
discussing same-sex marriage with this reporter, Mr. Huckabee explained his
views this way.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
FMR. GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE (R-AK): You don‘t go ahead and accommodate
every behavioral pattern that is against the ideal. That would be like
saying, well, there are a lot of people who like to use drugs, so let‘s go
ahead and accommodate those who want to use drugs.
There are some people who believe in incest, so we should
accommodate them. There are people who believe in polygamy, so we should
accommodate them.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
MADDOW: You know, being gay, just like being on drugs or doing incest
or having lots of husbands. Reporter Michael Tracy then asked about Mr.
Huckabee‘s position on same-sex couples adopting children.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
MICHAEL TRACY, STUDENT REPORTER: Arkansas passed a ban on gay
adoptions in ‘08, I believe. What was your take on that?
HUCKABEE: Children are not puppies. This is not a time to see if we
can experiment and find out, how does this work?
(END AUDIO CLIP)
MADDOW: After these comments to the student publication became
national news for obvious reasons, Mr. Huckabee struck back by attacking
the reporter, Michael Tracy.
In a statement posted on his Political Action Committee‘s Web
site, Mr. Huckabee got really classy and said, quote, “The young college
student hopefully will find a career other than journalism. I would ask
that he release the unedited tape of our conversation.”
“He attempted to sensationalize my well-known and hardly unusual
views of same-sex marriage. The young journalism student chose to focus on
the issue of same-sex marriage and grossly distort my views.”
So instead of addressing the substance of his puppies defense or
the state accommodating incest thing, Mike Huckabee blamed the college
reporter which was apparently the wrong thing to do since Mr. Tracy did not
crumple into a corner in the student center.
Instead, he did post the unedited tapes online along with this
blistering response, quote, “It is telling that nowhere in his statement
did Huckabee suggest he was misquoted in the article and rightfully so. We
have the audio and transcripts to prove that everything reported is
accurate. His words speak for themselves, and it is a shame that he is now
so quickly embarrassed of them.”
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
HUCKABEE: There are some people who believe in incest, so we should
accommodate them. There are people who believe in polygamy, so we should
accommodate them.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
MADDOW: “How dare you publish what I say?” If you are keeping score
at home, it is students at the College of New Jersey, one. Presidential
candidate Mike “Puppies” Huckabee, zero. So far, he has zero.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KENT JONES, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): If there‘s one thing
the right wing hates, it is President Obama‘s logos. Back in February, we
reported about the kerfuffle over the new U.S. Missile Defense Agency logo.
MADDOW (on camera): Here‘s a look at it. Some people think that the
circular red, white and blue design looks a lot like Obama‘s campaign logo.
Others are critical of the crescent and star look. They mean that it is a
similar symbol to Islam.
JONES: Oh, suspicious graphics. That firestorm died when everyone
figured out it was a Bush administration design. But still, that same
crypto crescent phobia is now hounding the logo for the Nuclear Security
Summit.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Why, because apparently you see that crescent in
those four flags there - Muslim countries, Turkey, Algeria, Tunisia and
Pakistan.
JONES: Connect the dots, people. Obama, crescent, Muslim, nuclear -
why aren‘t you more afraid? “New York Post” columnist Michael Goodwin goes
even deeper, saying, quote, “No, I am not suggesting President Obama is a
secret Muslim. But I am certain the crescent-like design of the logo is
not a coincidence especially at an event where Iran‘s nuclear ambition and
al-Qaeda‘s search for a bomb are prime topics.
Of course, liberals might tell you the logo is just a stylized
version of a hydrogen atom. Sure it is, but when you take a really close
look, Obama‘s Islamic crescent nuke terrorist icon also looks like this and
this and even this. Coincidence? Wake up, America.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MADDOW: The Piggly Wiggly - I knew it. Thank you, Kent. Appreciate
that.
JONES: Sure.
MADDOW: “COUNTDOWN” with Keith Olbermann starts right now. Have a
great night.
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 MSNBC. 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.
WATCH 'THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW' WEEKDAYS AT 9:00 P.M. ON MSNBC.