Guests: Brent Coon, Billy Nungesser, David Chard, Jesse Jackson, Jack Rice,
Heidi Harris, Jonathan Alter, Lizz Winstead
ED SCHULTZ, HOST: Good evening, Americans, and welcome to THE ED SHOW
tonight from Minneapolis.
These stories are hitting my hot buttons at this hour.
This oil spill in the Gulf, oh, gosh, now it‘s gushing more than
50,000 barrels of oil a day. You know, BP has been lying about the amount
of oil spilled from day one. The arrogance and the incompetence of this
company is absolutely stunning.
Tea Party 101 now in session. If Texas Republicans have their way,
the final vote on making Texas school books more conservative, coming up
real soon.
Plus, Rand Paul. I mean, this guy‘s a piece of work, isn‘t he? He
just doubled down on to crazy. Now he‘s blaming Democratic talking points
for the media flameout, and he‘s trying to change the subject to President
Obama for sounding un-American.
Oh, I‘ve got commentary on that.
But this is the story that‘s got me fired up off the top tonight.
Oil has been pouring into the Gulf of Mexico for over a month. There
has been really no progress whatsoever to date. We‘ve been sitting here
for 30 days hearing filibuster after filibuster from BP.
They really have no idea how to fix this thing, folks. They‘ve told
us golf balls, mud balls, junk shots. None of these so-called fixes have
done anything so far.
First, let‘s remember, BP tried to act like it‘s really not that big a
deal, it‘s not all that bad. Then they bullied us into trusting them
because, you see, they‘re a big corporation and their people are just
experts.
Well, the proof is now in the pictures for all of us to see who are
pro-drillers. Right?
Democrats fought to get BP to release this real-time camera showing
the oil gushing out. These images flat-out don‘t lie.
BP has no idea what in the hell it‘s doing down there. They can‘t fix
this thing, and now there‘s 30 days worth of oil and toxic chemical
dispersants floating on our oceans and washing up on the coastline.
Is it changing attitudes? I think it is.
Companies reflect the values of their leaders. It‘s not a surprise
that BP‘s response has been incompetent and flat-out arrogant.
The head of BP, Tony Hayward, now, this guy is a bona fide “psycho
talker.” The guy absolutely gushes with arrogance. I mean, it just pours
off him.
Mr. Hayward‘s first response to the leak was—little lesson here—
“What the hell did we do to deserve this?”
I could answer that. It‘s not about you, my man.
Talk about tone deaf. Mr. Hayward doesn‘t care if the entire Gulf
gets destroyed. He‘s running a multinational. All he cares about is BP‘s
bottom line and how the stockholders are going to fare.
Three weeks after that comment, here comes another dandy on May 13th.
This is how Mr. Hayward characterized the escalating catastrophe. “We will
only win if we can win the hearts and minds of the local community. It‘s a
big challenge.”
No kidding. Mr. Hayward apparently sees this as a PR problem. The
problem is that BP dumps five millions of oil in the back yards of those
who live on the Gulf Coast.
Now what are you going to do? Forget their hearts and minds. Just go
out and figure out how to clean this mess up.
Tony Hayward says he‘s not having trouble sleeping at night. That‘s
good to know. Easy for him. Hell, he‘s living in London.
Congressman Ed Markey hit the nail on the head today at a hearing,
where he said you can‘t trust these people.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. ED MARKEY (D), ENERGY COMMITTEE: BP has been lying about much of
what has gone on over the last month. They said first it was 1,000 barrels
of oil, then 5,000 barrels of oil. It is now clear that it is at least
50,000, 60,000, 70,000 barrels of oil a day that is going into the Gulf.
It‘s time for us to stop listening to BP, to bring in real experts,
real scientists, to ensure that we are dealing with the facts as they
exist. And that includes the dispersants, which we‘re putting into this
ocean in a science experiment. We cannot rely upon BP to be making any of
these decisions at all.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: What this oil spill is showing us, as Americans, that, you
know, not only is BP and everybody who‘s involved in this, in my opinion,
at fault, but our government‘s not doing enough.
Now, think about this. We have how many millions of Americans that
are unemployed in this country? Would it make sense to maybe offer a job
to people who want to go down to the Gulf and get accommodations and get
meals, and just help with the cleanup? Could BP write that check?
Is there anything we can do to save our beaches? Is there anything we
can do to keep the oil off shore, to at least give us a chance to maybe go
swimming a little bit?
Now, this is a huge story right now, and it has been for 30 days.
Wait until it starts coming up the coast, near Atlanta. Wait until it
starts taking out the fishing in South Carolina and North Carolina. Wait
until it gets into the Chesapeake Bay and then right on up into the halls
of the Congress, and maybe they‘ll smell it right on the Potomac River, and
then maybe they‘ll say, damn, maybe we‘d better do something about this.
I‘m an Obama fan.
Mr. President, I‘m a huge fan. But this is now your oil spill. It‘s
on your watch. We need to come up with some kind of huge plan on what
we‘re going to do, because we‘ve spent 30 days waiting for BP, waiting for
Transocean, who‘s done a great job of just washing their hands of all of
this.
Let me just say this, Washington. It‘s time to get it on. It‘s time
to get real serious about this.
What are we going to do? And where are all the engineers who are
working on this? Where are the press conferences?
The environmentalists, they have come out talking. Some senators have
come out talking. We‘ve had some hearings. Media people are giving
commentary on it.
I want to hear some engineers. Are we just void of engineers in
America that have absolutely no idea? Maybe they‘re afraid of a lawsuit if
they say something.
I think the White House ought to just say, anybody got any ideas?
Because we sure as hell don‘t.
And it will be interesting to see the number of conservative
Republican senators that have all of those states in the southeastern
portion of the United States. I wonder if they‘re going to change their
mind on offshore drilling.
Folks, get your cell phones out tonight. I want to know what you
think about all of this.
Tonight‘s text survey question is: Do you believe BP has told the
whole truth about the oil disaster? Text “A” for yes, text “B” for no to
622639. We‘ll bring you the results later on in the show.
Joining me now is attorney Brent Coon. He sued BP back in 2005 after
a refinery explosion in Texas, and he is involved in current lawsuits
against the company.
Mr. Coon, good to have you with us tonight.
I want you to put into perspective these comments of almost denial
from Mr. Hayward. Where does that leave the company legally? How do you
see this as it is right now?
BRENT COON, SUED BP IN 2005 AFTER EXPLOSION: Well, Ed, you know and I
know, we all know it, it‘s a mess. I flew out over the Gulf again today to
look at it personally, and it is appalling, how bad the spill is out there.
And it‘s appalling that so little is being done by BP and by our
government.
I‘m like you. I‘m a big Obama fan. But they don‘t seem to be that
concerned about it at the White House. And they should be. This is a
crisis in the making, and it‘s a disaster that‘s going to impact the
economy and the coast, and maybe the Atlantic coast as well, for many
years.
SCHULTZ: Mr. Coon, I want to ask you this question. I‘ve talked to a
few other attorneys, and they‘re telling me that this multinational
corporation, BP, may be so big and so powerful, they may be legally
untouchable.
Do you agree with that?
COON: You know, in some ways, yes. In some ways, no.
Obviously, BP‘s got a problem, and the problem is they use our natural
resources to make their money. And we can stop that. We should have
stopped it after we had the Alaskan pipeline failures. We should have
stopped it after the Texas City refinery blew up, because we knew then that
they never took care of their business and we knew then that they cut
corners.
And so then you ask that question, why are we allowing them to drill
at all now? Why are they still running our Alaskan reserves? Why are they
in the Gulf of Mexico? Why do we keep doing this? And that‘s where money
does talk.
SCHULTZ: What about the fishermen? The stories that are coming up
now, that a lot of people along the coast are getting sick. And we should
point out benzene, not real good to smell.
COON: No, it‘s not.
SCHULTZ: What‘s that leave this whole situation?
COON: Well, you know, sadly, my firm‘s dealt with occupational
disease for many, many years, coming out of the refineries and producing
companies. And what happens with oil is that it releases lots of
carcinogens.
There‘s benzene, as you said. There are other hydrocarbons. They are
known to cause cancer. They cause blood cancers and leukemias, and that‘s
what‘s in our water now.
SCHULTZ: It‘s unbelievable.
Brent, good to have you with us tonight. Thanks so much.
COON: Yes, sir. Always a pleasure.
SCHULTZ: You bet.
For more, let me turn to Billy Nungesser. He is the president of
Plaquemines Parish in Louisiana.
This is just absolutely amazing, and it‘s gross. And, Mr. Nungesser,
I know that you have been out there with Governor Jindal.
What did you see? And what was it like?
BILLY NUNGESSER, PRESIDENT, PLAQUEMINES PARISH: Well, we saw the
marsh totally destroyed. Everything in the area where the oil has reached
is dead. And the marsh, within five days, will start turning brown, and
we‘ll lose about 24 square miles of coastal Louisiana from this one portion
of oil coming ashore. And there‘s much more to come ashore, and it will
just pick us apart across coastal Louisiana, and we‘re doing nothing about
it.
(CROSSTALK)
SCHULTZ: How do you feel about—let me ask you about that. You
said we‘re not doing anything about it.
Is this changing the mood and the attitude of the people of that
portion of the country right now? What about that?
NUNGESSER: Well, you know, 22 days ago, we asked for a special permit
for a dredge to build a berm like a beach across the barrier islands that
are under water that could catch most of this oil. We told BP, the Coast
Guard, they would not clean it up at the marsh. It‘s not a beach where we
can walk along and pick it up.
Well, now I‘m—and we were told it wouldn‘t come ashore. BP said it
will come ashore as tar balls, we‘ll pick it up.
But what we saw out there is not tar balls. It has destroyed that
area of Pass A Loutre, South Pass, North Pass, the outermost end of the
marsh.
It will continue to creep in until it destroys all of the marsh. And
we still don‘t have a permit to dredge. And that is absolutely
unbelievable to me and to all of the elected officials across coastal
Louisiana. It‘s totally unacceptable.
SCHULTZ: OK. Tell us, where do you want to dredge, and what would it
do? And maybe the White House is paying attention tonight. Maybe you can
get that permit real soon, and maybe they‘re not aware of the permit
process, because they sure as hell let the permit process to let those
folks drill out in the Gulf, that was pretty lax.
Tell us what you need.
NUNGESSER: Well, we need a permit to begin pumping the sediment that
is stored off of the—right outside of the islands there, to pump a berm
across coastal Louisiana, six foot high. It will catch the oil. We can
pick it up off the sand.
We can work the areas where the passes are to keep the oil out. This
will give us a fighting chance of keeping it out of these rich marshlands
of Louisiana.
Without this, every time a storm kicks up it blows the boom ashore.
That‘s a Band-Aid. It‘s not working. It hasn‘t worked.
It will contain a little bit of oil here and there, but the masses of
oil that is out there in the Gulf is coming ashore piece by piece,
destroying areas of the marsh. And it will continue to do so.
SCHULTZ: Mr. Nungesser, outside of prayers, it doesn‘t sound like a
whole lot is getting done. Thank you for joining us tonight. We‘ll stay
on the story. I appreciate your time.
Keep up the good fight.
NUNGESSER: Thank you for your help.
SCHULTZ: You bet.
I hope somebody who‘s in charge of something might be able to make a
phone call and get him a permit, or at least make an engineering statement
saying that that won‘t work. It‘s amazing.
Coming up, Kentucky fried nut job Rand Paul, I mean, this guy just
keeps digging himself deeper, doesn‘t he? He‘ll shovel his way right into
the “Zone.”
And the Tea Party mentality may rewrite history for our kids. I‘m
taking the Texas Board of Education to school.
Plus, there‘s a mole in the White House.
And “Daily Show” co-creator Lizz Winstead headlines “Club Ed,” because
it‘s Friday, thank God.
You‘re watching THE ED SHOW on MSNBC. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCHULTZ: Welcome back to THE ED SHOW, and thanks for watching
tonight.
The overwhelmingly conservative Board of Education in Texas has just
voted moments ago on a new social studies curriculum, and it sounds
something right out of the Tea Party talking points. Separation of church
and state is called into question. Joe McCarthy‘s communist witch hunts
are shown in a more positive light. Confederate leader Jefferson Davis is
put on par with former President Abraham Lincoln.
Meanwhile, Martin Luther King‘s letter from a Birmingham jail was
removed from the reading lists.
One board member wanted to use President Obama‘s full name, “Barack
Hussein Obama,” even though other president‘s middle names were not used.
The Democrats defeated that portion of the proposal. They also overcame a
push to leave the word “slave” when it was referring to slave trade.
Children in Texas, basically, folks, will be getting a right-wing
slant when it comes to education.
Joining me now is David Chard. He is the dean of education at SMU
University in Texas.
Dean Chard, good to have you with us tonight.
This has been a hot issue in your state of Texas, but it is also going
to have ramifications because many states follow Texas because of its size
and its scope in education.
Your thoughts on this story tonight? How damaging is this, and whey
is it damaging, if it is?
DAVID CHARD, DEAN, SOUTHERN METHODIST UNIVERSITY: I think it could
cause significant damages in a number of ways, Ed. I think in some ways,
what the state board has done has narrowed the way that we present
historical facts, and what that does is presents a picture that will likely
change the way generations perceive of how things have really taken place.
And that, of course, is built into textbooks, which can change people‘s
minds.
SCHULTZ: Well, conservative groups like the Heritage Foundation, the
Moral Majority, and the National Rifle Association are going to be given
more attention.
What do you think of that?
CHARD: Well, personally, I think it‘s a problem, but I think it‘s
important to look at this from a bigger—through a bigger lens. And the
fact that what they‘ve done is emphasized those groups over other groups is
the biggest problem. And, in fact, we live in a pluralistic state and a
pluralistic society. And what the board has done is essentially narrowed
that view so that children begin to think that, in some cases, their view
and perhaps their cultural view or individual view isn‘t respected.
SCHULTZ: Now, this curriculum is going to be on board for 10 years,
4.8 million public school kids are in Texas. But what kind of ripple
effect might this have in the classroom throughout the country?
CHARD: Well, Texas has always had a large effect on classrooms across
the country, because, one, it‘s such a large state, and that means that,
economically, they drive a lot of the market around textbooks sales. Some
of that has changed because the state of Texas is not following what are
called the common core standards that the Obama administration has
promoted. So, in many cases, textbooks won‘t be as easily marketed to a
broader audience as they used to be.
But I think perhaps bigger than that is the issue that many of these
things that are now being part of the standards for history and social
studies in the state of Texas, again, narrowing the view that is being
promoted, in essence makes the rest of the country sort of look at Texas as
a place that‘s really quite different from the rest of the United States.
I think that‘s a considerable problem.
SCHULTZ: How do you think this is going to go over with folks in
Texas that Martin Luther King‘s name has been taken off the reading list,
when he was in that Birmingham jail, the literature that he produced that
was very historic? And also the fact that the co-founder of the United
Farm Workers of America is out because of arguments broke out in the board
that she is a socialist.
What about the omissions here?
CHARD: Honestly, Ed, I think this is one more example of an instance
where voters have elected a fairly conservative school board. This is a
conservative state, by and large, but as I mentioned, it‘s also a very
multidimensional state in many ways—culturally, racially,
linguistically. And I think one of the concerns people are going to have
is, exactly who does the school board represent? And I think maybe one of
the best things that could happen is people will start voting differently,
people will start taking control over electing people that will really have
a big impact on the way children think and multiple generations think.
It reminds me a little bit of what happened in South Africa when there
was domination by a small white majority—minority, excuse me. And what
they ended up doing was changing history textbooks and standards there to
try to convince the entire population that, in fact, the history there was
that whites had arrived first and—I mean, they really tried to revisit
history, change history.
SCHULTZ: Yes. It‘s unbelievable.
Dean Chard, thank you for your time tonight. I appreciate it. Thanks
so much.
CHARD: My pleasure. Thank you for having me.
SCHULTZ: Coming up, this just in. Rand Paul has decided to back away
from TV cameras. After calling the president un-American this morning,
he‘s just decided to bail out on his commitment on a big Sunday morning
interview.
Well, that‘s why we put him in the “Zone,” next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCHULTZ: And in “Psycho Talk” tonight, a first. We‘re taking someone
out of the “Zone.”
You know, I have always been one to believe that if someone
apologizes, you have to recognize it. Fox sportscaster Chris Myers was our
“Psycho Talker” on Wednesday for his disparaging comments about Hurricane
Katrina‘s victims.
The mayor of New Orleans wrote a letter to the president of Fox Sports
demanding an apology. And Myers, he came through, saying, “I would very
much like to apologize to you and the people of New Orleans for the
inappropriate and insensitive remarks I made. Clearly, these remarks
demonstrated poor judgment, and I sincerely regret making them.”
You know, Chris, that‘s been a standup dude. Chris, that apology gets
you a ticket out—a ticket—this is a first. We‘re giving you a ticket
out of the “Zone” because you did the right thing. Now, don‘t come back in
the “Zone.”
Now, I didn‘t see the same thing happening for tonight‘s “Psycho
Talker,” though, in Kentucky‘s Republican Senate candidate, Rand Paul.
He‘s at it again. This guy just can‘t keep his mouth shut.
And I told you this last night, folks. This guy is an unguided
missile. And I knew his crazy talking was going to keep going more on the
Civil Rights Act. It just wouldn‘t be his last mistake.
Sure enough, I was right.
This morning, he was back on the tube running his mouth—an unguided
missile. He started off playing the victim, whining about the media.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RAND PAUL ®, KENTUCKY SENATORIAL CANDIDATE: When does my honeymoon
period start? I had a big victory. I thought I got a honeymoon period
from you guys in the media.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Well, you better check out with the right-wing network
across the street about that honeymoon, buddy. You wouldn‘t be getting it
anywhere else, especially after jumping to the defense of BP.
Listen to this, folks.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PAUL: What I don‘t like from the president‘s administration is this
sort of, you know, I‘ll put my boot heel on the throat of BP. I think that
sounds really un-American in his criticism of business.
I‘ve heard nothing from BP about not paying for the spill. And I
think it‘s part of this sort of blame game society in the sense that it‘s
always got to be someone‘s fault, instead of the fact that maybe sometimes
accidents happen.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: No, those accidents, you know, they just happen. Oh, glass
of spilled milk, that‘s kind of an accident. We‘re talking, my friend,
about millions of gallons of spilled oil threatening thousands of miles of
U.S. coastline. And saying it‘s un-American for the president to hold BP
accountable for a disaster that they caused, that‘s “Psycho Talk.” .
Coming up, tensions have been boiling over in Arizona about the
immigration law. Democratic lawmakers are flat-out blaming Rahm Emanuel
for the lack of action on reform. Rahm, now is the time. Reverend Jesse
Jackson sounds off about that in a moment.
Plus, there‘s another crasher at the White House. That‘s right, KFC
doubles down on its double down. I can‘t wait to hear what “Daily Show”
co-creator Lizz Winstead has to say about the new psycho talker, Rand Paul.
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. Our Battleground story tonight, there is a civil battle going on
right now in this country. States are fighting states over Arizona‘s anti-
immigration law. The White House, in a sense, you could make the case
they‘re sitting on the fence, although the president has been unusually
outspoken about this law. He doesn‘t like it. He doesn‘t like it at all.
He said it will lead to citizens being profiled.
The problem isn‘t the president of the United States. It‘s the chief
of staff, Rahm Emanuel, and exactly how much influence he has. The “L.A.
Times” reports Emanuel has argued privately that it‘s a bad time for
Democrats to push an immigration bill, a potential land mine in the midst
of the a crucial midterm election year.
Every midterm is crucial. Come on, remember that Rahm also didn‘t
want to do health care reform. And he tried to convince the president to
gut his reform platform, all right? Well, immigration reform could be a
political game changer, in my opinion. It could lock up the Latino vote
for Democrats for an entire generation.
But more than that, it‘s the right thing to do. A lot of liberals
can‘t understand why such a bold and visionary leader like President Obama
has such a timid attitude when it comes to dealing with his chief of staff,
which apparently swings a pretty big stick on this issue. Has members of
Congress reeling on it.
Joining me now is Reverend Jesse Jackson, president of the Rainbow
Push Coalition. Reverend good to have you with us tonight.
REV. JESSE JACKSON, RAINBOW PUSH COALITION: Thank you. Good to see
you, Ed.
SCHULTZ: You bet. What should President Obama do about this division
that is now starting to unfold in our country? States against states,
regions against regions. The numbers are starting to pile up. What do you
make of it? What‘s the play?
JACKSON: Well, time for a bold comprehensive statement. At some
point he, himself, has to take the reigns of the health care initiative and
not just the House, even the Senate, nor his staff. Because, at the end,
he takes the heat for it all.
We need a comprehensive immigration plan. There‘s one policy coming
down from Canada, another coming from Haiti, another from Mexico. The
president has the obligation and the capacity to articulate his vision and,
in fact, inspire America to do what is now moral and our political self-
interest as a nation.
SCHULTZ: You know, I write in my book coming up that there‘s no way
that the Republicans are going to help out President Obama on this, with
the Democrats, because they love cheap labor. They‘re addicted to it. And
big business certainly doesn‘t want to do anything about somebody coming
through the door who‘s willing to take money underneath the table. Now
with that climate, what should the Democrats do?
JACKSON: Well, you know, it‘s not just that the Mexicans has—Latin
Americans are coming across the border. They‘ve been sent for by—the
employers are helping to drive this. I remember working with Caesar
Caveres (ph) some years ago out in California. And the farm workers were
about to have a boat sale on Tuesday. The week before, they brought down,
like, 2,000 Mexicans across the board to undercut Mexican farm workers,
exporting cheap labor.
Even in the New Orleans situation, citizens in New Orleans could not
get a job, they were bringing in by the droves Mexicans across the border
to exploit those workers and to play one worker against another worker. So
no one can state quite as clearly as he can why that is illegal, why it‘s
morally wrong, and that 12 million undocumented workers in this country are
working and are generating revenue and paying taxes. There should be some
path to the citizenship by the president. And the Congress, House and
Senate, should join the president in such a leadership, because it‘s
morally right and politically sound.
SCHULTZ: These are a lists of the city that have joined in the
boycott against Arizona, and flat-out won‘t travel on official business and
are saying that they won‘t do business with the state of Arizona: San
Francisco, Los Angeles, St. Paul, Seattle, Boulder, Hartford, Connecticut,
San Diego, Austin, Texas, El Paso, Texas, and Boston. Even the commission
in Arizona has gone so far as to tell Los Angeles that they may rework the
contract and actually threaten to cut their power off because they get
electricity from Arizona. This is—this is really evolving into
something that we have never seen happen in this country. How do you
intercede on this?
JACKSON: Well, we saw it happen in the Civil War, where states rights
challenged the federal government and they lost. And, again, Arizona must
rejoin the union. So people around the country have a sense of
conscientious outrage. They want the borders fixed. They want a pathway.
They do not want the illegal process overrunning borders.
So the federal government must act. I mean, there‘s some anxiety and
fear that must be addressed. On the other hand, states should not usurp
federal authority.
I would hope that the one bully pulpit the president is that of his
own platform. And he‘s articulate. He‘s smart. And he cares. I think if
he takes the initiative, congress is going to join the president. It‘s
always the right time to do the right thing. To take people out of limbo,
out of anxiety, out of fear, to grant them their due citizenship rights—
I think about the Green Card, Ed, those who come from Mexico. They
come here and go to the frontline in the war, that they get the front of
the line, the citizenship. So we‘re using their workers, exploiting their
workers. We‘re using them in the war to exploit them. Let‘s be fair and
let‘s say that this is a human rights thing to do. It‘s politically
correct. And there‘s a sense of urgency about it. It‘s only going to get
more volatile between the states unless we deal with it. I think no one
has the authority and capacity to address this as meaningfully as the
president.
SCHULTZ: I totally agree. Reverend Jackson, good to have you with us
tonight. Thanks so much.
JACKSON: Thank you, sir.
SCHULTZ: Immigration is one of the topics that I dig into in my book
new book called “Killer Politics: How Big Money and Bad Politics are
Destroying the Great American Middle Class.” It will be released on June
1st through Hyperion, and we‘ll have a series of town hall meetings and
book signings. Go to my website, WeGotEd.com for the entire schedule. We
hope to see you along the road as we tour across America.
Now let‘s get some rapid fire response from our panel on these stories
tonight. Rand Paul is now avoiding the cameras. He just canceled on “Meet
the Press,” says he‘s too exhausted. The show‘s executive producer wants
him to reconsider and keep his commitment. You know, in the 62-year
history of this show, “Meet the Press,” only three major guests have ever
canceled. The other two are Lewis Farrakhan in 1996, and Saudi Arabia‘s
Prince Bandar in 2003. Maybe he‘ll reconsider. We hope he does.
Today, the Texas Board of Education voted for rewriting history to
reflect Tea Party values. How exciting? Some of the proposed changes
include Social Security is bad, McCarthy‘s communist witch hunt was good,
and never forget that the president‘s name is Hussein.
The House Armed Services slapped down the president‘s efforts to close
Guantanamo Bay. They just passed a bill that would prohibit sending Gitmo
detainees to a special prison in Illinois that costs 350 million dollars.
With us tonight, Jack Rice, former CIA officer and criminal defense
attorney, and also Heidi Harris, radio talk show host out of the great city
of Las Vegas.
Jack, start this off for us tonight. What do you make of Rand Paul?
I said last night that he‘s an unguided missile. He certainly is great
copy for those of us in talk radio. What do you make of this guy? Is he
legitimate?
JACK RICE, FMR. CIA AGENT: Of course he‘s not legitimate. I think
it‘s genius that he actually shut his mouth at this point. His PR guys are
saying, for god‘s sake, please, just stop talking. The fact that he
actually has to go down this path—we look at what he said about BP.
He‘s basically come out now saying, I guess what‘s most important is that
you protect corporations, even over individuals. I guess that‘s what
America is now? Really?
I‘m thrilled that people are stomping on this guy. I‘m curious to see
if Republicans are going to be willing to do the same thing, rather than
sort of cozy up to the Tea Party groups, because that‘s what they‘ve done
so far. We‘ll see.
SCHULTZ: Heidi, you got the floor. What about Rand Paul?
HEIDI HARRIS, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Well, I got to say, I understand
what he‘s saying from the concept of federal government getting involved in
business. You know, for example, here in Vegas a couple years ago, they
passed an anti-smoking ordinance, which meant that if you owned a bar, you
weren‘t allowed to have smokers in there, depending on how many slot
machines you had. I was opposed to that because it‘s government going
after business.
By the same token, when it comes to race, I can‘t get on that. You
cannot tell people they can discriminate here in America. What if you‘re
driving through a small southern town and it‘s all white and you‘re a black
family and you break down and you need gas or food and no one will serve
you? Can‘t have that in America, sorry.
SCHULTZ: Heidi, what do you make of the vote in Texas, where the
board of education is going to add the contributions of the Heritage
Foundation, the National Rifle Association, and omitting the speech, one of
the writings in that Birmingham Jail by Martin Luther King. What‘s
happening here?
HARRIS: Well, I think it‘s interesting because a lot of these books
are very, very tilted to the left, as you well know. You may not think
they‘re tilted to the left, because you are, but the books are. I think
people on the right are saying, hey, let‘s get a little more fairness.
Let‘s get a little more equitable. And let‘s talk about things that have
been purposefully left out.
I don‘t have a problem with it. I haven‘t seen one thing in there
that I would consider outrageous. Why not? They have the right to do that
if they choose to.
SCHULTZ: OK. They have the right to do it so we should rewrite
history and maybe we just throw Martin Luther King out of the book all
together? Jack, what do you think?
RICE: I completely disagree with Heidi on this. The real problem is
we‘re not seeing intellectual honesty here. Some of the things that are
being said are flat-out false. The idea that you are going to question a
sovereignty issue of the U.N., that they‘re trying to take U.S. sovereignty
that‘s a perfect example. It‘s one of the things they‘re fighting for.
And yet one of the P-5, the United States can veto anything that rolls
through the United Nations. It‘s simply incorrect. It‘s factually wrong.
We can disagree with subjective things, opinions. But you can‘t
disagree about facts. Apparently, this school board thinks you can.
SCHULTZ: Jack, what do you make of the House Armed—go ahead.
HARRIS: Sorry. I was just going to say, the U.N. is out to destroy
our sovereignty. Are you kidding? They‘re right about the U.N. The U.N.
is a terrible organization. Why don‘t they go somewhere else? Why are
they here in America? Why are we paying their bills? They‘re out to
destroy America. They‘re anti-America.
RICE: Heidi, here‘s the point, is that if you look at what the
Security Council is, anything of significance at the United Nations happens
in the Security Council. Anything that happens at the Security Council,
the United States can veto by themselves and stop it. So the ability for
sovereignty from the United Nations is completely ridiculous, because the
U.N. Can stop it unilaterally. everybody knows that, if you actually
follow what they say, because the United States was fundamentally involved
in setting it up.
SCHULTZ: Jack Rice, Heidi Harris, great to have you with us tonight.
Out of time. Let‘s keep moving.
Coming up, President Obama has been on a mission. Health care reform,
equal pay for women, nuclear arms reduction, and now he‘s brought us to the
brink, right to the edge, of real change on Wall Street. So why isn‘t he
getting any credit? Why aren‘t the polls responding favorably?
Jonathan Alter joins me next in the Playbook. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCHULTZ: In my playbook tonight, President Obama is nearing another
huge legislative victory. The Senate finally passed financial reform.
He‘s one step closer to changing the behavior on Wall Street. If President
Obama gets this done, he‘ll add one more big win to an already impressive
list.
In less than 18 months, the Obama administration has delivered on
equal pay for women, economic rescue measures, nuclear arms reduction, and
health care reform. First, the expansion of S-CHIP, then the most sweeping
social legislation in decades. Now it‘s a race to the midterms to convince
Americans that Obama and the Democrats are right on track. But I want to
know when does he start getting some real credit?
For more let‘s—I mean, what president has gotten this much done
this early on? I guess is the real question. Jonathan Alter, national
affairs columnist at “Newsweek” and, of course, author of the book “The
Promise: President Obama Year One.”
Jonathan, you had a lot of material to write about with this
president. You know? Now that Wall Street reform is—we‘re on the verge
of that, when‘s the credit start coming in for this guy?
JONATHAN ALTER, AUTHOR, “THE PROMISE”: You know, it‘s a great
question. I think the key is that he has somehow not fully established
that connection to the middle class that you talk about so much on this
program. We thought that he was going to ace communications, get an A in
that, and struggle in executive leadership, because he had no experience.
It turned out to be the reverse of that.
He was a star when it came to putting points on the board, getting
things done. But he‘s really struggled when it came to explaining things
and connecting with the American public. Part of it is it got too
congressional, Ed. The sausage factory on Capitol Hill, it stunk so bad
that it kind of spoiled people‘s appetite for the meal. And they just kind
of said, look, in Washington they‘re not doing anything, and it was hard to
pay attention to this Niagara of news, all the kinds of things that did get
done.
When they start showing more results, then he‘ll start getting more
credit. He already prevented a depression. We were losing 750,000 jobs a
month when he came into office. We‘re now gaining 250,000 jobs a month.
But it‘s hard to get the credit.
Let me just tell you a very quick story from Franklin Roosevelt that I
think tells you a little bit about what he needs to do. When Roosevelt
died in 1945, his funeral procession was moving through Washington, a man
fell to his knees in grief. Another gentleman helped him up and he said to
the grieving man, did you know the president? The grieving man said, no,
but he knew me. And that‘s the challenge for Barack Obama, is to get the
American people to feel that he really knows them and their problems.
SCHULTZ: Well, as this calendar plays out, let‘s say they get Wall
Street reform; there‘s no hitches from here on out. Then, of course,
there‘s going to be the confirmation of a Supreme Court nominee. And then
is there any better campaigner and fund-raiser and connector with people?
You‘re going to have July, August, September and October for the president
to turn and do the sell job on what exactly they‘ve done. Is that how it‘s
going to work out?
ALTER: Yes, he‘s going to go very political. He already indicated
last week—his new line that he‘s using is they, the Republicans, drove
the car into the ditch; now they want us to turn over the keys to them; I
don‘t think so. That‘s actually a pretty good line.
One of the things this I talk about in “The Promise” is that he did
not find in the past the right vocabulary. He has a kind of disdain for
sound bites. Even though there‘s been this great accomplishment, he‘s had
a lot more problem conveying it and getting people to really understand
what he‘s trying to do. I have a chapter called “Professor in Chief.”
That‘s a little bit of his problem right now.
SCHULTZ: Jonathan Alter, always a pleasure. The book called “The
Promise” by Jonathan Alter.
Couple pages in the playbook tonight, bad news for Republican Sue
Lowden. She‘ll have less chicken to barter with. Kentucky Fried Chicken
is extending sales of its new Double Down Sandwich. The sandwich has bacon
and cheese in the middle of two chicken fillets. The promotion was
supposed to end this week, but the fast food chain says as long as the
demand is high they‘ll just continue to sell it.
Finally, there‘s a mole in the White House. We have proof. Check
this out. A rodent ran out in front of the cameras before President Obama
spoke yesterday. The small furry creature made another appearance during
the speech. The president never noticed it. The big debate at the White
House today was what exactly was that critter?
Press Secretary Robert Gibbs thought it was something else.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERT GIBBS, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Judging the size of the
animal, based on the diameter of the seal, I got to tell you, that‘s a rat.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: A rat in Washington? How could that be possible?
Coming up, look out, California, if a righty wins the next
gubernatorial race, he‘s promising to open up pedophile island? “Daily
Show” co-creator Lizz Winstead will explain, and she‘ll have some comments
on Rand Paul. That‘s next in “Club Ed.” Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCHULTZ: Welcome back. If it‘s Friday, it‘s time for Club Ed, with
Lizz Winstead, co-creator of the “Daily Show.” You can follow her on
Twitter at Twitter.com/LizzWinstead. In fact, you can follow her all over
the world if you want, folks. She‘s amazing.
All right, Rand—all I have to ask you is Rand Paul, our new psycho
talker. You have the floor. What about this guy?
LIZZ WINSTEAD, CO-CREATOR, “THE DAILY SHOW”: OK, well, there‘s a lot
of things to start with. First of all, let‘s just start calling him Rand
Polin, because he‘s just like Sarah Palin. They seem related. I don‘t
understand how really he can be an ophthalmologist with absolutely no idea
about blind justice. That‘s the first part that completely freaks me out.
The second thing I hope is that whatever happens to Rand Paul, that is
he is never going to be in charge with anything that has to do with lunch
counter-intelligence.
Then you move on to this crazy blaming the president oil spill thing?
And I don‘t—first of all, defending a foreign oil company over the
American taxpayers is beyond crazy. Even libertarians should be putting
knives in their eyes right now. But what‘s really nuts to me is, if he
believes that then maybe we should just rename this whole gulf disaster
Pauly Shore. I‘ve been trying to figure out literally what‘s wrong with
Rand Paul. Here‘s what I decided—I have a lot of friends that lived in
a very toxic environment and they‘ve developed something called Bell‘s
Palsy, when your face just kind of dies for a little bit and numbs. I
think he might have Rand Paulsy, which means he grew up in a toxic
environment that deadened his brain, so he can‘t really tell the difference
between right and wrong.
SCHULTZ: Lizz Winstead, just keep it going. Good to have you with us
tonight. Thank you so much.
All right. You know, you‘re unbelievable. You‘re great. Great to
have you on. Tonight, our text question survey is—I asked you, do you
believe BP has told the whole truth about the oil disaster? Twenty seven
percent of you said yes; 73 percent of you said no. I‘m a 73 percenter
tonight.
That‘s THE ED SHOW. I‘m Ed Schultz. I‘m going north fishing. When I
come back on Monday, I am going to show you a fish, a northern pike that‘s
over 40 inches. And to prove that it‘s not a fish story, you‘ll have to
watch Monday night. “HARDBALL” with Chris Matthews starts right now on
MSNBC. Have a great weekend. We‘ll see you Monday.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY
BE UPDATED.
END
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.>
transcript