updated 4/15/2010 9:34:07 AM ET 2010-04-15T13:34:07

Guests: George Miller, Cecil Roberts, Roy Sekoff, Tom Tancredo, Chris

Newman, Laura Flanders, Michael Medved, Errol Louis, Stephanie Miller.

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

from New York tonight.

These stories are hitting my hot buttons tonight.

Congress is investigating the mine disaster in West Virginia.  Well,

what does that mean?  What kind of investigation are we talking about—

criminal?  I want to know.

More on that in just a moment.

And the Republicans say that they want to make 2010 a referendum on

health care reform.  I‘m smiling.  They did it in a special election in

Florida, in a district with a lot of grandmas that were worried about

getting the plug pulled on them.  And guess who won?  The Democrat cleaned

House on the Republicans. 

All right.  Plus, there‘s—things got a little heated when Bill

O‘Reilly and I spoke over at Al Sharpton‘s forum on race relations today. 

I‘ll show you the highlights.  You won‘t want to miss them, believe me. 

It‘s coming up in the “Playbook.”

But this is a story that has me fired up tonight.  It is

responsibility time.  And we‘re going to find out just how serious the

United States Congress is about the fact that 29 hard-working Americans are

dead because they showed up for work. 

Here‘s the latest. 

Massey Energy shareholders are calling on the company to seek the

immediate resignation of Chairman and CEO Don Blankenship.  New York State

Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli controls about $14.1 million of Massey stock as

the trustee of the New York State Common Retirement Fund.  He blasted away

at Massey‘s operation. 

“Cavalier attitude toward risk and callous disregard for the safety of

its employees.” DiNapoli pins the blame directly on Massey‘s CEO, Don

Blankenship.  “Blankenship,” he says, “must step down and make room for

more responsible leadership at Massey.”

The Change to Win Investment Group—this is a big one—a union

pension fund group with over $200 billion in assets, believes the Upper Big

Branch mine explosion sits on Blankenship‘s doorstep.  They blame the

tragedy on this—“Tragic consequence of the board‘s failure to challenge

Chairman and CEO Blankenship‘s confrontational approach to regulatory

compliance.”

Blankenship is a right-wing anti-government nut job, in my opinion. 

Of course he‘s a millionaire who‘s all about the bottom line and not about

the safety of the workers.  And the record shows that. 

He has never seen a regulation that he likes.  And he was at a Tea

Party rally—he‘s one of those guys—just last Labor Day. 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DON BLANKENSHIP, CHAIRMAN & CEO, MASSEY ENERGY:  I also know that

Washington and state politicians have no idea how to improve miner safety. 

The very idea that they care more about coal miners‘ safety than we do is

as silly as global warming. 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ:  Oh, lots of silliness at those funerals, huh? 

Now, here‘s the back-story in all of this. 

In 2006, Congress passed new mining regulations, but some Democrats

said they didn‘t go far enough.  So Congressman George Miller did the

responsible thing.  He introduced a bill known as the S-Miner Act, which

passed the House but, of course, was killed by coal state senators like

West Virginia‘s Jay Rockefeller over on the Senate side.  Now, if Miller‘s

bill would have passed, we can only imagine, speculate.  But there is

strong speculation that these 29 miners might be alive today. 

The S-Miner Act would have done this: hiked the penalties for safety

violations; strengthen the requirements for sealing mined-out chambers to

prevent methane from leaking into active sections; and, of course, require

studies into the effectiveness of efforts to curb the combustible of coal

dust; and, most importantly, empower the Mining Safety and Health

Administration to close problem mines more easily when patterns of safety

violations are found.  And, of course, that was the case with Massey at

this mine. 

Massey Energy‘s Upper Big Branch Mine was written up more than 50

times for safety violations just last month.  Twelve of the citations

involved problems with ventilation, and, of course, ventilating and

preventing the mine from building up a deadly methane situation. 

The place, folks, it should have been shut down.  These miners should

have been alive today.  And Don Blankenship, it‘s at his doorstep, and he

should be in the unemployment line.  Don‘t you think?  Isn‘t that fair

enough? 

I really want to know about this investigation that Congress is going

to do. 

Now, we had an investigation called the 9/11 Commission.  How much of

that has been implemented to this day, so many years after the fact? 

Is it in the news now?  No.  Are people pushing for implementation of

fully following to a T what the 9/11 Commission said about protecting this

country?  What do you think is going to happen with these workers? 

Now, as soon as the CEO is kicked out, it‘s going to be off the front

page.  And everybody will say, well, we really took care about that. 

No.  This is about the workers.  And this is a golden opportunity for

the Congress, which has low ratings, to step up and say, you know, we can

do something when people die and we can prevent this. 

And I also think that this is a very defining moment for labor in this

country.  If labor can‘t mount the legal charge after 29 funerals, I want

to know when they‘re going to do it. 

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

folks. 

Tonight‘s text survey question is: Do you believe the CEO of Massey

Energy should face criminal charges?  Text “A” for yes, text “B” for no to

622639.  And we‘ll bring you the results later on in the show.  And you can

also join the conversation online by following me on Twitter at WeGotEd. 

Joining me now is Congressman George Miller, chairman of the House

Education and Labor Committee. 

Congressman, good to have you with us.

REP. GEORGE MILLER (D), CHAIRMAN, HOUSE EDUCATION AND LABOR COMMITTEE: 

Thank you, Ed.

SCHULTZ:  I know you‘ve been out of the country doing some other work,

and I‘m glad that you‘ve got time for us tonight.  We‘ve been trying to get

you on, but I know you had other things going on. 

You, I think at this point, are a real important part of this story to

keep it alive.  Can you tell us tonight, if the Senate had passed your

bill, would this have been averted?  Would these 29 people still be alive

today? 

What do you think? 

MILLER:  Well, I know that when—in the reaction to the last series

of mining accidents that we had with the Sago Mine and the Darby Mine and

others, we passed legislation.  I voted against that legislation because I

thought it was—it had been too watered down. 

We gave the Senate and the House a second chance with the S-Miner

bill, we passed it in the House and the Senate refused to take it up and

couldn‘t—wouldn‘t take it up.  I don‘t know whether that would have

prevented this accident from taking place, but that legislation directly

addressed the issues that are involved in this disaster. 

We‘ll have to wait and see where the investigation came out.  But we

did address the buildup of coal dust.  We did address ventilation.  We did

address the safety of these miners.  And they refused to do it. 

I suspect many people would now like to have that vote back.  We‘ll

give them another opportunity, but it‘s very clear that we have got to go

beyond even what was in the S-Miner Act. 

SCHULTZ:  All right. 

Now, I want to know about this congressional investigation.  What does

it mean—what does it mean, what are your expectations, and how‘s this

working? 

MILLER:  I made a pledge to the families of the victims of the

previous mine disasters that I would take this to wherever it went, and

I‘ve been involved in these investigations over the last several years.  We

have no problem making criminal referrals for prosecution. 

We use the full power of the subpoena.  We go after all of the

individuals, all of the data, and we make an independent judgment. 

I‘m not part of the administration.  I‘m not part of the state system. 

We will represent the Congress and our committee, which is charged with the

oversight of the Mine Safety Act in this country.  And the fact of the

matter is, I made that pledge.  I‘ve kept that pledge.  And I made the same

pledge to these families, to these miners, on the floor of the Congress

today. 

I think my record speaks for itself. 

SCHULTZ:  It does.  It does.  But the American people know that we‘ve

had investigations before, commission reports, and then things don‘t get

implemented. 

And if labor can‘t push this to the legal limit with 29 dead workers,

when are they going to do it? 

MILLER:  This isn‘t just about labor.  I agree with you there.  This

is about whether the Congress of the United States will finally stop

letting the mining companies manipulate this legislation. 

SCHULTZ:  Amen.

MILLER:  Manipulate as we consider the legislation, and water it down,

then manipulation the implementation and manipulate the enforcement.  We

see a pattern and a practice here that is very disturbing.  And it looks to

me like a conscious corporate decision to run these mines at the edge, in

the margin of safety.

That margin was subsidized by the safety of the miners.  And in the

case of this mine, the Upper Branch mine, those miners paid for their life

because of the way this mine has been running for many years, with hundreds

and hundreds of citations.  When do those citations transfer and translate

into a safer mining environment for these workers?  That‘s the question. 

SCHULTZ:  Congressman, you‘re on it.  I appreciate your time tonight. 

And we‘re going to stay on this story.  This is—it‘s a huge story,

workers‘ safety in this country. 

Congressman George Miller, thanks for joining us tonight. 

MILLER:  Thank you.  Thank you for your interest. 

SCHULTZ:  You bet.

For more, let‘s bring in Cecil Roberts, president of the United Mine

Workers of America. 

Mr. Roberts, what did you make of what the congressman just said? 

CECIL ROBERTS, PRESIDENT, UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA:  Congressman

Miller is my friend, and he‘s a real champion of working class people.  He

was a real leader back in 2006 to protect the workers of this country, and

we thank him for his efforts.  And he‘s a dear friend of all working class

people. 

SCHULTZ:  Are you convinced that Congress is serious as a heart attack

on this and they‘re going to get after it—and he did say criminal—and

so this is serious as it gets, it sounds like. 

What‘s your role in making sure that they follow through on this? 

ROBERTS:  Let me just make a point if I might. 

I spoke yesterday at the AFL-CIO convention in the state of

Pennsylvania.  A large delegation there, and this is what I said: “Don

Blankenship should be handcuffed, put in leg irons and led off to jail,

along with that full board at Massey Energy.”  They‘re nothing but cronies

and “yes” men for him to allow him to do what he has been doing.

I fully support the congressman‘s efforts, and I believe the entire

labor movement is going to rally behind this.  And I want to thank my

brothers and sisters in the labor movement who have been so generous in

their support to us.

SCHULTZ:  Well, if labor can‘t follow through on this, what are they

going to follow through on?  I don‘t mean to sound too provocative here,

but is this not a defining moment for workers‘ rights in the workplace and

safety regulations after dozens of violations have been dished to a

company?  I mean, if they can‘t do it now, when can you do it?

ROBERTS:  Let me say this to you, also.  Yesterday, also, I said this

is not just a coal field issue here.

If a company can do this to coal miners, no one is safe, because

they‘re setting an example here that others will follow from the East to

the North to the South.  We need to stand up, not just organized labor, but

every working class person in the United States of America needs to stand

up right now and say no more of this.  We‘re not going to take it anymore.

SCHULTZ:  Mr. Roberts, does it—of course you said to the AFL-CIO

that you want Blankenship in handcuffs.  Does it warm your heart that there

are people who have financial interests in the company that want to get rid

of the board, that want to get rid of Blankenship?  I mean, that is heading

in the right direction, isn‘t it?

ROBERTS:  Absolutely.  And I also called on my brothers and sisters in

the labor movement yesterday to review all of their financial investments,

including their pension plans.  And I also say that every state in the

United States should look at their investments.  If they have money in this

company, they should exercise their financial power and wealth to deal with

this situation. 

SCHULTZ:  What do you say to Jay Rockefeller, who voted against, and,

you know, coal state senators?  They protected the industry the last time

that bill passed the House, and it died in the Senate. 

What do you say about that? 

ROBERTS:  Well, let me tell you, I had a conversation with Senator

Rockefeller at the time.  The truth is over the years he‘s been a real

champion for mine health and safety, both as a governor and as a senator. 

He did not believe that this legislation could get out of the HELP

Committee at the time, and he also believed that if it did get out of the

HELP Committee, it wouldn‘t pass the Senate, and he also believed George

Bush was going to veto it. 

Those were the rational reasons that he gave me at the time. 

SCHULTZ:  Do you think we‘ll see Blankenship in handcuffs? 

ROBERTS:  If we do, I will follow him to jail and rejoice. 

SCHULTZ:  Cecil Roberts, United Mine Workers of America. 

Great to have you with us tonight.

ROBERTS:  Thank you.  Keep up the good fight, Ed. 

SCHULTZ:  We will do it. 

Coming up—I just want to make sure that we have a great

investigation. 

Coming up, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer is blasting Michele

Bachmann for denying that a protester shouted a racial slur to civil rights

icon John Lewis.  The Huffington Post‘s Roy Sekoff is going to be here to

set her straight next. 

And Bill O‘Reilly wasted his time at Al Sharpton‘s National Action

Network by defending, let‘s see, the Tea Party and ripping into MSNBC.  Too

bad he ran out of the room so fast, because he missed what I had to say. 

But I‘ll show you later in the show. 

And Stephanie Miller and Tom Tancredo are here.  How‘s that for fair

and balanced? 

You‘re watching THE ED SHOW on MSNBC.  Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MICHELE BACHMANN ®, MINNESOTA:  A Democrat says that they were

called the “N-word,” which, of course, would be wrong and inappropriate,

but no one has any record of it.  No witness saw it.  It‘s not on camera. 

It‘s not on audio. 

They were told—they said that they were spat upon.  No one saw it. 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ:  Again, “Psycho Talker” Michele Bachmann, at a conservative

rally in Duluth, Minnesota, which is not her district, she was accusing

civil rights hero John Lewis and other black lawmakers basically of flat-

out lying, lying about being called the “N-word” and lying about being spit

on by the Tea Party protesters in Washington several weeks ago. 

Now, even House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer is taking Bachmann to task

for that.  Hoyer told reporters, “I don‘t think there‘s any doubt that what

John Lewis said happened and what others saw and heard happen did, in fact,

happen.  There are obviously clearly differences of opinion, but the debate

ought to be civil, it ought to be constructive, it ought to be designed to

educate the public, not to incite the public.” 

I‘m glad the House majority leader is finally using the word “incite,”

because that is exactly what it is. 

For more, let me bring in Roy Sekoff, founding editor of The

Huffington Post.

She gets posted a lot on your Web site for stuff that she can‘t

substantiate.   She just throws it out there, and I think you do a great

service of doing that, because she is America‘s right-wing “Psycho Talker.” 

ROY SEKOFF, FOUNDING EDITOR, “THE HUFFINGTON POST”:  And Ed—

SCHULTZ:  But now—go ahead. 

SEKOFF:  I mean, Michele Bachmann saying idiotic things has become,

like, an immutable law of nature.  You know, the sky is blue, water is wet,

Michele Bachmann says stupid things. 

I mean, but the thing that really makes this example particularly

loathsome, Ed, is that she‘s impugning the integrity of John Lewis, an icon

of the civil rights movement, and she‘s doing it on a question of race.  I

mean, that‘s the amazing thing. 

I mean, John Lewis does not have to play the race card, Ed.  He lived

the race card. 

SCHULTZ:  Yes.  Here‘s my—

SEKOFF:  I mean, he was there in Selma. 

SCHULTZ:  Here‘s my issue with Bachmann.  If she‘s going to go to a

rally and throw that out, why wouldn‘t she have the courtesy of calling a

colleague in the Congress and ask Mr. Lewis personally what happened to

resource her comment and research her comment?  She doesn‘t do that because

she‘s just out there wanting to fan the flames.  And the word—

SEKOFF:  Oh, Ed, you expect the person who‘s throwing the molotov

cocktail to call up the person in the office and say we‘re about to throw

it?  She‘s not about, you know, a accommodating (ph) or helping her

colleague out.  She‘s about throwing bombs and she‘s about attacking, and

they don‘t need facts. 

I mean, we‘ve seen this, especially in this case, Ed.  There is

documented evidence of all these reporters who were there writing about it

at the time. 

You know, they‘re trying to turn this into some kind of vast left-wing

conspiracy, and it‘s absolutely ridiculous.  But that‘s the talking point

that the lunatic fringe of the right is trying to—it‘s the old thing,

attack the messenger.  Right?  Accuse the accuser. 

Why would John Lewis—listen to this, Ed.  Why would John Lewis, a

guy who led the march on Bloody Sunday in Selma, who got his head bashed

in, his skull fractured fighting for civil rights, use the accusation of

having used the N-word as some kind of political football?  I just can‘t

see that happening. 

SCHULTZ:  Those things you just said, Roy, I would venture to say that

Michele Bachmann has no clue he went through that.  And I think she is

playing on the ignorance of the Tea Partiers. 

There‘s a lot of them that are low-information voters, that are all

ginned up on emotion and hate and fear.  And she‘s playing into that.  And

I‘m surprised that Republican leadership actually endorses what she says. 

Your thoughts? 

SEKOFF:  Ed, it‘s really a tricky thing.  You see, what they‘re trying

to do is they‘re trying to embrace that energy that the Tea Party has.  But

that‘s going to blow up in your face.  And we see this happening.  They‘re

starting to distance themselves; right?

You saw Scott Brown wouldn‘t show up at Sarah Palin‘s little event

today.  And here in California, a number of Republican candidates, you

know, backed out of an event when they found out that Orly Taitz was going

to be on the panel.  If she‘s there, we‘re not coming.  So this is the real

push/pull that they‘re trying to face there in the Republican Party. 

SCHULTZ:  Bachmann says she wants Minnesotans armed and dangerous. 

She also says we‘re not going to pay taxes for this health care bill.  And

all this sea change that she and Sarah Palin keep talking about, I think we

need to point out that a Democrat won in a special election last night down

in Florida. 

Roy Sekoff—

SEKOFF:  Quite handily. 

SCHULTZ:  That‘s right.  Good to have you with us, buddy. 

SEKOFF:  OK, Ed.  We‘ll talk to you.

SCHULTZ:  All right.

Coming up, Bill O‘Reilly, he just must be too busy taking shots at

MSNBC to watch his own network. 

Buckle up, Bill.  I got a Fox flashback for you, next, in “Psycho

Talk.”  I‘m looking forward to it.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ:  Oh, in “Psycho Talk” tonight, it‘s Bill O‘Reilly.  He went

after Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn on his show for his recent criticism of

Fox News.  Well, old Bill, he got so worked up defending his network, he

threw out a bald-faced lie and claimed it was well researched. 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL O‘REILLY, FOX NEWS:  You don‘t know anybody on Fox News, because

there hasn‘t been anyone that said people go to jail if they don‘t buy

mandatory insurance.  It doesn‘t happen here, and we researched to find out

if anybody on Fox News had ever said you‘re going to jail if you don‘t buy

health insurance.  Nobody‘s ever said it. 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ:  Bill, you hire some bad people.  You may want to hire some

new researchers, because our friends over at Media Matters did some

investigating of their own.  Not only have the people on Fox News said that

you could go to jail for not buying health insurance, they‘ve even done it

on your show. 

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

GLENN BECK, FOX NEWS:  I don‘t have universal health care. 

O‘REILLY:  No, let‘s get—well, you will soon. 

BECK:  Or I‘ll go to jail. 

SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS:  Penalties for people who don‘t get

government-mandated health insurance, jail time, possibility? 

BECK:  If you don‘t get into their government health care, there will

be jail time. 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  You actually can go to jail. 

RUSH LIMBAUGH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST:  This puts people in jail. 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Put you in jail. 

BECK:  You‘re going to be looking at a fun little stint in jail. 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Can you imagine your prison yard?  “What are you

in for?”  “Murder.”  “I‘m in for rape.”  “I didn‘t have health insurance.”

HANNITY:  Well, I don‘t mean to laugh, but this is the reality. 

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCHULTZ:  No, not on that network, because Bill O‘Reilly said so. 

I don‘t know what you‘re thinking, big guy.  Clearly, plenty of people

on Fox News pushed the lie, the flat-out lie that you‘ll go to jail if you

don‘t have health insurance, which makes you, Mr. O‘Reilly, guilty of

“Psycho Talk.”  

Coming up, the state of Arizona just passed a law that moves them

within an eyelash of becoming a police state.  The immigration battle, I

think, is spinning out of control down there. 

And former Congressman Tom Tancredo will tell us if he thinks this is

a government takeover. 

Plus, CBS golf commentator Jim Nantz, regarded as one of the best,

well, he had his feelings hurt when Tiger Woods said some salty language at

the Masters.  I‘ve got a few words for Jim in my “Playbook.”

All that, and Stephanie Miller is here to talk about “Caribou

Barbie‘s” leather jacket and her need for bendy straws and Learjets.  I

can‘t wait. 

You‘re watching THE ED SHOW on MSNBC.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ:  Welcome back to THE ED SHOW.  Thanks for watching tonight

here on MSNBC.  The Republican led House in Arizona has just passed the

country‘s toughest immigration bill.  This is the first step toward

legalized harassment, as I see it.  The law would allow police officers to

stop any person if there is, quote, “reasonable suspicion they are illegal

immigrants,” and arrest them if they can‘t produce an I.D. 

What would raise suspicion that a person is an illegal immigrant? 

Color of their skin?  Different language?  Maybe speaking Spanish? 

Immigration is the hot-button issue in Arizona.  I‘ll qualify it saying

that I don‘t live there.  But I fear that this will open the door for

intimidation and harassment for an entire immigrant community, not just the

legal folks that live there. 

Joining me now is former Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo, who has

really made illegal immigration his benchmark issue.  Tom, what to you

think of this?  Is this—is this the way to go for law enforcement, to

give them the wide-sweeping language of suspicion?  What do you think? 

TOM TANCREDO, FMR. CONGRESSMAN:  Ed, it is the way to go because the

federal government has abandoned them, has abandoned the border, has

abandoned the border communities.  Arizona and other states, but especially

Arizona, being on the front line of illegal immigration—and all that

means—and believe me, it means a lot.  As you probably know, a rancher

was just killed there two weeks ago by someone who had come on his land

illegally, coming to the country illegally, back to Mexico, can‘t catch

him, can‘t do anything about it. 

They are fed up with it.  They are fed up with being—with Phoenix

being the kidnap capital of the United States now because of the drug

activity that‘s spilling over the border.  So this is a reaction to a

federal government that has had abandoned them.  Not just this

administration, Ed.  Believe me, it‘s not just the Obama administration. 

It happened before. 

SCHULTZ:  All right, so reasonable suspicion.  Are you suggesting

tonight that—you know, Arizona‘s got to do it a heck of a lot tougher

than anybody else.  Is that what I‘m hearing? 

TANCREDO:  Yeah.  Because they are, as I say, on the front line there. 

SCHULTZ:  OK.  Well, reasonable suspicion, I mean, doesn‘t that allow

law enforcement to start racially profiling, which I think most Americans

are against?  Isn‘t this a slippery slope? 

TANCREDO:  Well, here‘s what I think this is going to be.  And I don‘t

know, to tell you the truth.  I mean, I can tell you what in the past, when

this kind of thing is discussed, what they‘re talking about.  It means

somebody gets stopped.  It doesn‘t mean you‘re walking down the street and

you think, huh, I think that guy looks like an illegal alien.  That‘s not

it. 

It is somebody gets stopped for something, red-light violation,

drunken driving, called in domestic dispute.  They get there and for—and

the reasonable expectation here is that their people would have some sort

of identification. 

SCHULTZ:  That‘s the next point I want to make with you, is that this

is—could this lead to a national I.D. system, which respectfully sure

sounds like a government takeover to me. 

TANCREDO:  Well, and it‘s something I think most conservatives don‘t

want either.  Only thing you have to do, Ed—all of this could be settled

so quickly, so easily, if you simply had mandated e-verify, so that every

employer in this country had to put a potential employee through a little

system.  You know, you go online, it takes about two minutes; it comes back

and tells you whether that Social Security number is a good one or bad one. 

It‘s a great system.  It won‘t catch everybody, but believe me it does a

great job at getting most of the people.  If you—

SCHULTZ:  You‘re not concerned that law enforcement will be heavy-

handed in this regard? 

TANCREDO:  Well, I think there‘s going to be an awful lot of people

watching to make sure that nothing happens as you are saying. 

SCHULTZ:  Tom, good to have you with us tonight. 

TANCREDO:  You bet. 

SCHULTZ:  Thanks so much.  Tom Tancredo with us tonight, former

congressman from Colorado. 

For the other side, let me turn to Chris Newman with the National Day

Laborer Organizing Network.  Mr. Newman, what do you make of this law in

Arizona?  Is it too far reaching? 

CHRIS NEWMAN, NATION DAY LABORER ORGANIZING NETWORK:  Well, the law is

breathtaking in its scope.  It‘s the most anti-immigrant legislation the

country has seen in a generation.  And we‘re very hopeful that the governor

will consult her legal counsel and spare Arizona the expense of defending

an unconstitutional law in federal courts. 

SCHULTZ:  Now, why is it unconstitutional?  I mean, the state can pass

a law, can get something like this.  Where is it unconstitutional here? 

NEWMAN:  Arizona is, essentially, trying to Balkanize immigration

policy.  The position of Arizona is that it can enforce and create its own

immigration laws.  In fact, immigration law is the purview of the federal

government.

SCHULTZ:  Tom Tancredo says the reason why they‘re doing this is

because the feds haven‘t done their job, not just the Obama administration,

but past administrations, that this has gone on for a long time, and now

the lawmakers are forced to do something about it. 

NEWMAN:  I mean, I think there is unanimity of belief that the federal

government should act, and it‘s the federal government‘s responsibility. 

But it is clearly out of bounds of the Constitution for a state to enact

its own immigration law. 

SCHULTZ:  Do you anticipate this is going to be tough on race

relations, racial profiling, color of the skin, type of language? 

NEWMAN:  I think the bill will absolutely result in almost mandated

racial profiling in the state of Arizona. 

SCHULTZ:  Well, what should they do?  I mean, I‘m just playing devil‘s

advocate here.  I think this is too far reaching.  I think there‘s going to

be a lot of innocent people that are going to get hurt on this deal.  I

also think—we just showed videotape on this network yesterday and today

about some cops beating up a kid and billy clubbing them.  You know where

this is going to go.  This could really spiral out of control to more

violence. 

So what should the state of Arizona do?  He lost the—he lost his

ear piece there.  OK.  We‘ll work on that.  Chris, good to have you with us

tonight. 

I‘ll answer the question.  I think they‘re going too far on this.  I

think protecting the border is a lot different than shaking down people on

the street the way they‘re going to do it.  I think it‘s going to lead to

some problems.

All right, now let‘s get some rapid fire response from our panel on

these stories.  Voters made their voices heard in the first House race

since the Democrats passed that God awful health care reform bill.  The

result?  Democratic win, 62 percent Of the vote.  So much for unplugging

grandma. 

Despite what the righties want you to think, President Obama is still

the most important and popular politician in the country.  He trounces

every major Republican political figure in a new poll. 

And traitor Joe Lieberman says thank God the political momentum is

with the Republicans. 

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

host of “Grit TV,” and Michael Medved, nationally syndicated talk show host

with us tonight.  Let‘s talk Joe Lieberman.  Where‘s the mojo on this one,

Laura?  What do you think? 

LAURA FLANDERS, “GRIT TV”:  I think he‘s got it completely wrong,

surprise, surprise.  It‘s not about momentum.  It‘s about manipulation. 

You talked about it at the top.  Sarah Palin is not speaking to people. 

She‘s manipulates people and she‘s inciting all this stuff that you

mentioned, and planning I think, sadly, to ride that wave of resentment all

the way to November.  I don‘t think it‘s good for democracy.  I don‘t think

it‘s really democracy at work.  But Lieberman‘s got it wrong. 

SCHULTZ:  Michael, where is the political roller here for the

Republicans?  I mean, you‘re only as good as your last election.  Last

night, they lost.

MICHAEL MEDVED, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST:  Well, they lost in a heavily-

Democratic district.  But a win is a win is a win.  This is going to be a

tough, closely fought election.  I think everybody knows Republicans are

going to gain seats.  The question is, are they going to gain the 38 seats

they need to gain to take the House of Representatives? 

I do think Joe Lieberman is right.  The momentum is with the

Republican party because people are worried about new taxes and they‘re

worried about debt, and they‘re worried about how we‘re going to pay off

this rising deficit that is rising with no end in sight. 

SCHULTZ:  You know, this is why Harry Reid is down in the polls in

Nevada, because he doesn‘t throw Joe Lieberman out of the caucus after

saying thank God that the political momentum is with the republicans.  All

right, let‘s talk about this race last night.  Where is this sea change

that everybody‘s talking about, Laura Flanders? 

FLANDERS:  Well, I‘m afraid what I was blinded by was the 1.5 million

dollars that was spent on this race that was clearly a kind of runaway for

the winner.  sure, there are victories and victories should be celebrated

by Democrats.  They turned Democrats out in a Democratic district.  It

showed the Tea Partiers could maybe incite people, but not excite people

enough to vote.  That 1.5 million dollars, do we have to spend this money

on races like this?  I want to see change. 

SCHULTZ:  Here are the numbers last night: Ted Deutsche in Florida

gets 62 percent of the vote.  Michael, you point out it‘s a heavily

Democratic district.  But apparently there are not enough Republicans down

there or disenfranchised Democrats or independents to do better than 35

percent.  Isn‘t this a poor showing? 

MEDVED:  No, it‘s not an encouraging showing.  I agree with you.  But

look, if the Democrats were to lose or to run close in this kind of

district—I think Laura is right.  The amazing thing is the Democrats

have to spend so much money.  Look, the reason the momentum is with

Republicans is because of opinions like the opinion Laura just gave, with

respect, suggesting Republicans are manipulating people.  The American

people are smart.  They‘re not cheap.  They can‘t be manipulated. 

SCHULTZ:  CNN/Opinion Research poll favorably viewed, President Obama

on top of the heap at 57 percent against the Republicans.  You got Huckabee

at 43, the Mittster at 40, Sarah Palin 39, and Newt still trying to get it

going at 38 percent.  How do you explain this?  If there‘s so much

momentum, Michael, what about this?  The president is doing well and the

people like the guy. 

MEDVED:  The momentum is for Republican ideas.  For the first time in

Gallup, the first time in several years, there was a higher approval rating

for the Republicans in Congress than for the Democrats in Congress.  That‘s

telling.  Of course, President Obama is more popular than his ideas.  He is

personally popular.  He‘s an impressive guy.  I think, by the way,

Republicans make a mistake when they attack him as some kind of alien

socialist weirdo. 

SCHULTZ:  Lot of that going on. 

MEDVED:  There is.  That‘s what‘s going to kill the Republican

momentum that we‘re talking about.  We have to take this guy on on his

ideas and his policies, not his personality.  His personality is likable. 

SCHULTZ:  Laura, the final word on this. 

FLANDERS:  Final word.  I‘m glad Barack Obama‘s doing well according

to the polls.  The problem is what are other Americans doing?  What are

those jobless Americans doing?  Not much.  It‘s not that they‘re not being

manipulated.  It‘s that there are genuine concern—rather, it‘s not that

they‘re not being manipulated or that they don‘t have genuine concerns. 

They do have genuine concerns that are being manipulated.  Did any of that

make sense? 

The point is there are people with real problems that are being riled

up to hate others and vote against their interests.  That‘s the problem

that Barack Obama has got to address.  It‘s not about him. 

MEDVED:  You say you know their interests better than they do.  I

trust the people, and I will trust the people for a big GOP victory in

November. 

SCHULTZ:  We‘re taping this Michael.  Look out, now.  Michael Medved,

Laura Flanders, good to have you with us tonight.  Thanks so much.

Coming up, Al Sharpton invited Bill O‘Reilly and me to speak at the

National Action Network today.  So the spinning stopped when I took the

stage and it got pretty heated there.  I‘ll show you how to straighten them

out, next on THE ED SHOW.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ:  In my playbook” tonight, gosh, I kind of hit the big leagues

today.  I want to tell you about a fantastic event I attended this

afternoon in New York.  Reverend Al Sharpton‘s National Action Network

kicked off its convention today.  I was honored to be asked to speak.  It

was actually an ideological diverse group.  Bill O‘Reilly was even there to

speak first. 

You would think that at a serious event to promote equality and civil

rights that Bill would reign in the psycho talk.  No such luck.  He showed

zero comprehension of the venue and came out swinging, defending the Tea

Partiers. 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL O‘REILLY, FOX NEWS ANCHOR:  The Tea Party is a largely white

phenomenon.  There‘s no doubt about that.  Because African-Americans,

overwhelmingly, support President Obama. 

It is an overwhelmingly white movement.  And now we are seeing that

it‘s being demonized as a racist thing, too.  And the best example was that

Capitol display, where the African-American Congress-people walked through

this gauntlet of protest, and there were charges the “N” word was used and

spitting happened and this that and the other thing. 

Even if the “N” word was used—and it absolutely could have been—

you don‘t demonize the whole group by the actions of one or two people. 

It‘s a much more interesting country, America, if we stop with the race

business, I think.  I‘m not black so I don‘t know your struggle.  And you

don‘t know my struggle.  All right?  Because you‘re not white. 

But after 9/11, we pretty much dropped that race stuff, did we not? 

We were pretty much were all Americans there, right?  All right.  I hear

yes.  I hear no.  But to me, from my perch, there were blacks killed in

that tower.  All right?  All right, look, if you don‘t think we dropped it,

I do. 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ:  Well, Bill had to cut and run after the speech, so he missed

hearing what I had to say. 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ:  That‘s a big act to follow, but it‘s not a very truthful

one.  I am sad today that we have to report that a 14-year-old girl grabbed

a microphone in a grocery store in northern New Jersey and decided to

announce all black people should leave the store. 

So I beg to differ with Mr. O‘Reilly.  He may have a bigger audience

but I know I have the truth.  It is about race. 

I do not think that the president of the United States deserved to

have an Adolf Hitler mustache put on his face.  Because I know if I was in

a group of people that were holding signs like that, I would have the

courage to go over and say, I think you should take that down because

that‘s not who we are.  I don‘t see any of the Tea Partiers doing that. 

We have precisely the perfect time in history, the perfect leader, the

perfect administration to push forward and talk about race relations, all

races, and how we have to come together be a stronger nation. 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ:  Joining me now is Errol Louis, radio talk show host and

columnist for “the New York Daily News.”  Errol, the mission here by Al

Sharpton is to do just that, bring people together and get a dialogue.  How

do you think Mr. O‘Reilly was received there? 

ERROL LOUIS, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST:  Oh, my goodness, I mean, you can

hear the howling.  Some of that I think was intended, frankly, just to sort

of maybe create some footage for his show or to sort of get the goat of the

people there.  I think he would have liked it, frankly, if he had been

booed more loudly.  I think he was looking for a little martyrdom moment,

so that he could go back to his shtick about well, I just tell it like it

is, regardless of how strange it was to say those thing. 

I mean, I don‘t even know if he believes that stuff.  He‘s from down

here in the New York area.  He grew up on Long Island.  This is somebody

who has dealt with and seen a lot of these issues played out. 

To say that after 9/11, for whatever reason—and who knows what

period of time he was talking about—all of a sudden racism vanished?  I

mean, I was there, and I don‘t remember it happening that way. 

SCHULTZ:  What do you make of his comments about the Tea Partiers, at

the National Action Network, where it is predominantly a white disgruntled

crowd.  And the racist signs that have been put up—you can‘t deny the

racist signs.  You can‘t deny the fact on his network there was a

broadcaster who said the president of the United States has a deep-seeded

hatred for white people.  How does that move the conversation forward in

this country? 

LOUIS:  There‘s an element of denial here.  We have a strange kind of

denial where it‘s disguised as a sort of see no evil approach where. 

Right, the comments of—one of the other Fox commentators, one of the

more popular ones, in fact, are never disavowed, never explored, never

referred to.  It‘s just something that happened and everybody just kind of

moves on. 

If that‘s how they want to play this, I think people are going to

remain divided, unfortunately.  And the truth tellers like your show and

others are going to have to explain to the broad middle, the people who

don‘t want any part of this divisiveness, exactly what‘s going on.  I think

it will have political implication down the line in the fall elections and

again in 2012. 

SCHULTZ:  I think you‘re right.  Errol Louis, great to have you with

us tonight.  Thanks so much.

Quick programming note tonight, be sure to tune in to MSNBC this

Sunday for a special event, “Debating the Black Agenda.”  I‘ll be co-

hosting the special event with Tamron Hall at noon Eastern here on MSNBC.

America‘s favorite hockey mom has turned into a celebrity diva.  You

won‘t believe what Sarah Palin demands just for showing up.  My good friend

Stephanie Miller is here to call her out on that, and explain what it means

about demanding a bendy straw, and also what‘s up with that leather jacket

all the time.  That‘s next on THE ED SHOW.  Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SARAH PALIN, FMR. GOVERNOR OF ALASKA:  Those of you who won‘t sit down

and shut up, you‘re sounding the warning bell, just like what happened in

that midnight run.  Just like with that original Tea Party back in 1773,

this is about the people.  This is the people‘s movement.  We‘ll keep

clinging to our Constitution and our guns and religion, and you can keep

the change. 

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ:  She‘s really hard in my ear piece.  It‘s that pitch. 

Welcome back to THE ED SHOW.  Finally tonight—that was Sarah Palin, of

course, today at a Tea Party rally in Boston, riling up all those real

Americans.  For someone who claims to be a woman of the people, Palin

demands some pretty serious celebrity treatment for the folks who pay her

to run her mouth for 15 minutes.  Not only has she raked in more than 12

million dollars—good for her—since she quit her job as governor of

Alaska, but it turns out that she has a hefty rider on her speaking

contract. 

Some students who didn‘t have anything else to do—this is

California State University.  Well, they were hanging around the trash bin. 

Dog gone it, Sarah, you know what you got to do?  You got to get a

shredder.  Anyway, they found a list of her demands in the trash can. 

Palin requires first-class airfare for two or else a private jet, a Leer 60

if she‘s headed to the West Coast, and a Hawker 800 if she‘s going to have

to mingle with the liberal elites on the East Coast. 

Once she arrives, she needs three rooms—I don‘t know what that‘s

about—at a luxury low hotel.  When she gives her speech, she‘s got to

have an unopened bottle of still water and bendable straws.  Don‘t forget,

the podium can‘t be thin or made of Plexiglas. 

Let me bring in nationally syndicated radio talk show host Stephanie

Miller, who does a lot of entertaining and public speaking.  You have got

to up your demands now that the cat is out of the bag. 

STEPHANIE MILLER, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST:  Where are the bendy straws,

Ed? 

SCHULTZ:  All right.  This is—this is just part of the show

business, isn‘t it? 

MILLER:  I understand that her friend, Michele Bachmann, demands crazy

straws, so it‘s not really that surprising.  I would love to be the one

that sneaks in and puts a non-bendable straw in there, replacing her coffee

with Folger‘s Crystals and watch her freak out. 

You know, Ed, what can you say about this?  Let me get this straight. 

She left for the people of Alaska.  She left to make 12 million dollars.  I

thought she was doing them some sort of favor. 

MILLER:  Uh, you can keep the change there, Stephanie.  It‘s

unbelievable.  I mean, her speeches are never of any type of substance. 

It‘s always attack President Obama, attack the liberals, attack the

Democrats, and of course tell everybody they‘re great Americans. 

MILLER:  Yeah. 

SCHULTZ:  What do you think? 

MILLER:  I love—my favorite part is she doesn‘t—she has to have

prescreened questions so there won‘t be any lag time.  I think she means

with the microphone.  I think she means while her brain searches for brain

cells and maybe sort of facts or something. 

SCHULTZ:  What do you make of the bendy straws?  Is that kind of a

nervous thing if you‘re talking and you have to pull on them?  What do you

think? 

MILLER:  I don‘t know.  Maybe water ought to splash on her notes on

her hand or something.  I will defend her on the Leer Jet.  As you know, I

demand one to do your show, Ed, and I only live like 20 blocks.  So I got

to defend her on that. 

SCHULTZ:  Safe landing tonight, Stephanie.  One more thing, on a

serious note, all this sea change that Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann are

talking about, what the heck is a Democrat doing winning down in Florida

last night? 

MILLER:  The hopey changey thing, I guess, is going pretty well for

us.  How‘s the twitty quitty thing going for you?

SCHULTZ:  Pretty good.  It‘s somewhat of a senior citizen district. 

So I guess grandmas down there didn‘t think the plug was going to get

pulled on them or anything like that.  Stephanie Miller, great to have you

with us here on “HE ED SHOW.  Thanks so much. 

Tonight in our text survey, I asked you, should the CEO of Massey

Energy face criminal charges?  Ninety six percent of you say yes; four

percent of you say no. 

That‘s THE ED SHOW.  I‘m Ed Schultz.  For more information on THE ED

SHOW, go to Ed.MSNBC.com or check out my radio website at WeGotEd.com. 

Next up, Chris Matthews, he‘s going to be talking with comedian Bill

Maher.  You won‘t want to miss it.  “HARDBALL” starts right now.  We‘ll see

you tomorrow night right here from 30 Rock on THE ED SHOW on MSNBC.  Have a

great one. 

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

,