Guest: Joe Courtney, Yehuda Levin, Terry O‘Neill, Maria Teresa Kumar,
Ernest Istook, Joe Madison, John Nichols, Ron Christie
ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC ANCHOR: Good evening, Americans, and welcome to THE ED SHOW tonight from New York.
These stories on the table and hitting “My Hot Buttons” at this hour.
Folks, you just can‘t make this stuff up. A Tea Party candidate out there in California wants to end the public school system in America?
Now, this is the choice in this election. Are you with these nut jobs or against them? This is what the Republican Party has become.
My commentary on that in just a moment.
In Vegas tonight, well, it‘s fight night. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will get his one and only chance to beat up on Sharron Angle in a heated debate. This is the event that could decide the election.
More on that. Plus, Angle‘s own mayor says she‘s wild. I‘ll show you the tape.
And the guy who shot—or was shot by Dick Cheney right in the face says, you know, he‘s never gotten an apology. I mean, it‘s only been five years. The guy‘s still loaded up with lead and he can‘t get an “I‘m sorry” out of the former vice president?
The shooting victim is spilling the beans. His unbelievable story in the “Playbook” tonight.
But this is the story that does have me fired up tonight. If you‘re an advocate and a believer and a product of public education, I think you should pay attention to this. I mean, I cannot believe how many Republicans openly are against and basically hate public education and are on a mission to destroy it.
First, it was our friend New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, across the river, cutting $800 million from public schools and then beating up on the teachers in a town hall. Then it was Tea Party godfather Jim DeMint objecting to gay people and single, sexually active women teaching the schools. If you‘re pregnant, you can‘t be there, but you guys are OK.
Now a Tea Party darling running for Congress in California wants to abolish—not advocate or eliminate—abolish, be done with public schools just all together. Now, the guy‘s name is David Harmer.
He‘s the Republican nominee for California‘s 11th District. He is trying to knock off two-term Democratic Congressman Jerry McNerney.
All right. Now, Harmer is trying to hide his radical past, but “Mother Jones” has uncovered an op-ed he wrote in “The San Francisco Chronicle” titled “Abolish the Public Schools.”
Harmer wrote, “The government should exit”—the word is “exit”—
“the business of running and funding schools.” That he wanted to go back to “the way things worked through the first century of American nationhood.”
Wow! I mean, out of their own material they want to take us back in time.
Harmer and other Tea Party faithful, well, you see, they want to roll the country back to the 1800s.
Folks, this is not the fringe of the Republican Party. This is now the Republican Party.
See, back in the ‘90s, Harmer worked on the education issues for the Heritage Foundation. How interesting. And just today, the Heritage Foundation proudly announced that they‘re united behind the Tea Party.
Well, the Heritage Foundation president, Ed Feulner, co-writer of a column with Senator Jim DeMint titled “The Tea Party is the Conscience of the Nation.” Well, Heritage Foundation, you know they‘re the right-wing think tank which every elected official on the right has to stop through and has stopped through since 1973.
Today‘s marriage of convenience must mean they officially endorse the Tea Party ideas. Better this—what do you say we abolish minimum wage? Let‘s eliminate unemployment benefits. Let‘s phase out Social Security and privatize it. Let‘s repeal this damn health care bill.
Undoing the 14th Amendment, not a problem. And, of course, now we‘ve got, let‘s abolish public education.
This is the Tea Party being adopted by the Heritage Foundation and a lot of righties out there.
Tea Party mouthpiece Glenn Beck has his own plan for America‘s 80 million schoolchildren.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GLENN BECK, FOX NEWS: I‘m asking the seniors, I‘m asking you if you‘re retired, what the hell are you doing on a golf course? What are you doing? Will you consider home-schooling your grandchildren, picking it up as a project? It will give you purpose and new life.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Yes! After 40 years of working and saving up for retirement, why don‘t you just do a little bit more and have some purpose in life? And by the way, if do you this, grandparents, I won‘t have to pay any more taxes in New Jersey, or Connecticut, or wherever that nut job lives, for public education.
Is it a deal?
Do you hear that, grandparents? Get off of the golf course. Quit being lazy and teach your grandkids advanced biology. Or maybe you could try calculus.
You see, conservatives, they flat-out don‘t give a damn if you‘re professionally trained because they like it as long as you‘re free. The only result of that would be social engineering of America‘s children.
Are you for that? Resulting in a less educated, overworked society.
Think about that—less educated, overworked society.
They want us to be just like the folks in Indonesia. They love the cheap flavor. They love the 40 cents an hour stuff. So the best thing we can do on the right is what they‘re say, let‘s just eliminate, let‘s abolish public education.
Hell, we don‘t have to pay any more taxes. We‘ll float that money right to the top two percent. We‘ll keep the working man down in America.
And you know what, the blacks in America, the Latinos, Hispanics in America, they‘re poor anyway, they‘re not going to be able to afford public schools because we‘re going to abolish them. And they‘re not going to be able to afford private schools with their income level. Hey, we‘ll have our own little China workforce right here in America.
That‘s what this election is about, which brings me back to the California congressional candidate, David Harmer. Now, if the Heritage—the former Heritage Foundation education expert has his way, the school you went to, well, is going to close its doors.
And I have to ask a town that I worked in for 30 years, Fargo, North Dakota. And I know there‘s a lot of Tea Partiers up there on the northern plains. Can I just ask you this one question? Do you want to close Lincoln Elementary School on the south side? Do you want Fargo North and Fargo South to shut her down?
Let‘s go across the river to Moorhead High School, one of the best hockey programs in the country. Let‘s get rid of that, too. Hell, let‘s get rid of everything that costs money.
The conservatives have turned into nothing but a bunch of nut jobs. They have no focus for the people, they have no plan for jobs. All they are is about the money.
And they will be so brash in this midterm because they‘ve got nothing to lose. If they pick up some seats great, great, they‘ll come back the party of no. But they really have nothing to lose, so let‘s take some real extreme positions and make sure that we really get our base out there, and let‘s just say, the hell with public education, let‘s abolish it.
Notice how it‘s all the Tea Partiers that are coming out and saying this? But then, of course, you get some Republicans in there saying, well, you know, really, maybe we should do that, it is about the money.
No, it‘s about America‘s future. And you see, in the last—ever since we‘ve invaded Iraq, no one has asked Americans to sacrifice. I‘m a top two percenter. Nobody‘s asked me to sacrifice anything.
It‘s all take, take, take. But now all of a sudden we‘re supposed to get public education to serve it up and sacrifice it. More of our infrastructure that would be lost in this country. This is the Republican Party.
And, Mr. President, I thought you were a little bit light today with these young voters, because these righties are getting in the minds of young voters right now thinking that this is really how America should be run, when it wasn‘t the way America was built. Yes, Mr. President, I agree. I think that you have to talk to young voters in this country, whether they vote or not, whether they‘re motivated or not, because the stuff that‘s filling into their ears from the right wing is dangerous to America.
Let‘s get to our telephone survey tonight. The number to dial is 1-877-ED-MSNBC.
My question tonight is: Are you in favor of abolishing the public school system? Are you in favor of abolishing the public school system? Because this is what the righties want to do.
Press 1 for yes, press 2 for no. And I‘ll bring you the results later on in the show.
Joining me now is Connecticut Congressman Joe Courtney. He sits on the House Education Committee.
Congressman, good to have you with us tonight.
REP. JOE COURTNEY (D), CONNECTICUT: Absolutely, Ed. Great to be on the show.
Do you really—am I over the top here?
COURTNEY: No. No.
SCHULTZ: Do the Republicans want to get rid of public education?
COURTNEY: No. You know, your point about this is about America‘s future. It was underscored in July when the National College Board issued its report for America‘s college completion rate. We were number one in the world in 1986. Today we are number 12 in the world.
This is literally, as you said, about America‘s future. And the causes of why we‘ve slid so badly is really not because of kids in their last year of high school, or even those kids who are in college. It starts at preschool through grade 12. And the abandonment in terms of the commitment of this country which really goes back to President Lincoln --
COURTNEY: -- you know, is really hurting.
SCHULTZ: But why—Congressman, why are the Republicans all of a sudden down the stretch in this election cycle so focused on public education and making it the bogeyman, as if it has no value whatsoever?
COURTNEY: It‘s astonishing to me, because, you know, there certainly were pro-education Republicans in the past. And I think that the business community certainly understands that our competitive ranking in the world will really depend on whether we have a workforce that‘s capable of facing the challenges of the future.
SCHULTZ: I mean, this is beyond attacking the New Deal. This is new territory, isn‘t it?
COURTNEY: It is. And as I said, I mean, you would sort of almost view it as outlandish. But if groups like Heritage, which definitely is a very powerful force in Washington, are staking out these kinds of positions, then, again, it is a real threat in terms of the ability of this country to move forward.
SCHULTZ: Well, that was my next question. Are you surprised that the Heritage Foundation has moved even further to the right, or have they been a wolf in sheep‘s clothing all along?
COURTNEY: You know, this really is, in my opinion, a new low. And we‘ve done hearings on education reform, which is an issue that will be front and center of the next Congress. So, frankly, there isn‘t, in my opinion, just a coincidence here, if this issue is coming up.
You know, the business community understands we have got to get a system that is ready to face the challenges. Are country is really slipping and falling behind, as the college board demonstrated in July.
SCHULTZ: Well, if you get rid of the public school system the way the Republicans want to do it—
COURTNEY: Can‘t do it.
SCHULTZ: -- you know—I know I‘m not qualified to do any home-schooling. Way back when—those days are past me. But the point is, is they‘re operating under the assumption that, hey, you just have to go to private school and you‘ve got to pay for it. That, of course, will give us a two-class society.
What are the minorities in this country, what are the economically challenged people in this country going to do if they have to pay to go to school? I mean, that‘s what the Republicans want. Isn‘t it?
COURTNEY: What will the middle class do? I mean, the fact is, is that that is a strategy for failure for America. And that really should be the bottom line here, is that, at a time when the baby boomers are going to be retiring in big numbers from, you know, high-skill essential jobs, I mean, we need to have a system that‘s ready to replace that change.
SCHULTZ: Yes. You know, and I don‘t want our viewers to think that I don‘t believe that there have to be some upgrades and we have to refine our education system. One of the reasons why we have problems in public education is because everybody‘s welcome. And every problem comes through the door, every asset comes through the door.
COURTNEY: That‘s right.
SCHULTZ: That is the bottom line. It‘s public. You‘re going to have all kinds of issues.
But it just seems to me that the conservatives, the Republicans, have put a target on the back of public education and vilified it to the max, thinking that it‘s going to be some popular position going into the midterms. And I appreciate you speaking up. But I can just imagine what Senator Ted Kennedy would be saying right now with this kind of garbage being pushed out there by some candidates.
COURTNEY: No, it‘s very distressing, because, you know, there really was some consensus even about 10 years ago about the fact that, you know, we‘ve got a real problem here in terms of our country‘s future. And there was, I think, real dialogue going on, you know, both in terms of business community, labor, teachers, and now it‘s just become, again, another one of these hyper-partisan, poisonous debates which, at the end of the day, is just going to hurt us as a country.
SCHULTZ: Congressman, good to have you with us tonight.
COURTNEY: OK, Ed. Always a pleasure.
SCHULTZ: Joe Courtney, thank you so much. You bet.
Coming up, my next guest is the Orthodox rabbi who endorsed Paladino‘s message that kids shouldn‘t be brainwashed into thinking being gay is OK. The rabbi says Carl‘s apology is a betrayal. We‘ll go head-to-head with him in just a moment.
And, being Dick Cheney means you just never have to say you‘re sorry. It‘s been five years since “Shooter” put 30 pieces of lead into that poor guy down there in Texas, and he still can‘t bring himself to cough up an apology. I mean, it‘s amazing.
That‘s going to be in the “Playbook” tonight.
And Christine O‘Donnell pulls a Palin. And Bill O‘Reilly spins himself right into the “Zone.” Not everybody wants to hear his stuff, as we saw today.
You‘re watching THE ED SHOW on MSNBC. Stay with us.
SCHULTZ: Welcome back to THE ED SHOW and thanks for watching tonight.
After apologizing for making homophobic remarks, Republican gubernatorial candidate in New York, Carl Paladino, has lost the endorsement of a Brooklyn rabbi who backed his statement that kids shouldn‘t be brainwashed into thinking being gay is OK. The rabbi said Paladino folded like a cheap camera when he apologized and decided to suspend their relationship. He says it won‘t be restored until Carl shows a little backbone.
Joining me now is Rabbi Yehuda Levin, who dropped his endorsement of Carl Paladino.
RABBI YEHUDA LEVIN, UN-ENDORSED CARL PALADINO: Ed, thank you so much for having me. And in the interest of full disclosure and transparency, you‘re not appearing with me in the same room where I could punch you in the nose, you have me in some set where I feel like I‘m under concentration camp conditions. I‘m juggling two or three things in my hands to control the loudness, and I have the light shining in my eyes.
So let everybody know I‘m arguing under affirmative action standards here. He‘s got all the advantages. And now let‘s see how I do. Go ahead, shoot.
SCHULTZ: Rabbi, I‘ll be the nicest guy you ever met on television.
LEVIN: You bet your boots.
SCHULTZ: All right.
Rabbi, let me ask you this. I think a lot of viewers want to know so there‘s no confusion. For Orthodox Jews, is there a formal position, religious position on homosexuality?
LEVIN: I have to elaborate not only from our perspective, for Orthodox Jews, but for all Jews, for all bible adherence, and we believe for all the nations of the world, that it is prohibited, homosexual activity, absolutely.
SCHULTZ: OK. So your position was faith-based, obviously—
SCHULTZ: -- with Carl Paladino.
SCHULTZ: Now, did you know what his position was before you supported him on this?
LEVIN: Absolutely. Here‘s how it worked.
Paladino was on TV programs weeks before where he said if he would be given a gay marriage bill, a homosexual marriage bill, he would veto—he would veto that legislation. So I said, here‘s a guy who‘s going places.
Now, when he came to visit me in the synagogue—because, you see, I‘m such a persuasive fellow—it took me a full six minutes to explain to him that Governor Linda Lingle, the Jewish governor of Hawaii, recently in the summer vetoed civil unions legislation because she said, hey, it‘s the same exact thing as marriage. So he changed his position—
SCHULTZ: So, basically, Mr. Paladino took too much public heat for his comment, reversed his position, and that‘s when you said the heck with this guy, we‘re moving on. Now—
LEVIN: I didn‘t say the heck with him. He‘s a very nice guy and I‘m calling for him to repent. I took the press conference to the cardinal‘s house.
LEVIN: I said he‘s the man. “Cardinal, I‘m calling on you and the Catholic Conference. Let‘s help call Carl Paladino realize what the Catholic position is.”
SCHULTZ: Rabbi, do you think that the kids are being brainwashed?
LEVIN: Well, it‘s—I‘ll tell you, you guys, you media guys --
SCHULTZ: I‘m just asking you.
LEVIN: Well, no, listen, you media guys get hung up on terminologies.
Let‘s call it indoctrinated.
Tell me, do you have any children? If your child was imprisoned in a public school where they have to raise their hand before they can go to the bathroom, where they can‘t opt out of sex ed, and some sex ed curricula that starts in kindergarten with “Heather Has Two Mommies” and ends up putting condoms on cucumbers when you‘re around 12 or 13, if you don‘t think that‘s indoctrinating and brainwashing, then I think you have to have your brainwashed.
SCHULTZ: OK. Well, I‘ll take that as a compliment.
LEVIN: Oh, of course. You‘re a good guy.
SCHULTZ: Let‘s see, I think we‘ve raised six kids and we‘ve got eight grandkids, and so the Schultz family is doing pretty damn good.
LEVIN: So how do you feel about having your kids told about sexuality and they can‘t opt out?
SCHULTZ: I think—I think, basically, you can‘t pick your parents.
And what day did you know you were straight?
LEVIN: Oh, I get it. So, in other words—
SCHULTZ: Well, I‘m just asking you.
LEVIN: No, no.
SCHULTZ: What day did you know you were straight?
LEVIN: What day did I know? My bar mitzvah. They said, “Son, you‘re a man, be straight.” So I said, “Oh, I‘m straight.”
Listen to me, Ed. In other words, you‘re saying that the imperial government as represented --
LEVIN: -- by the homosexual—
SCHULTZ: Rabbi, I‘m saying that gay people were born that way and they can‘t help it. Just like you can‘t help being straight.
LEVIN: OK. Well, here‘s a question I have for you. How come there are many cases now where people are married for 20 years and they‘re suddenly leaving their wife and kids and taking up with homosexual partners?
SCHULTZ: Because of the social pressure. Many people live the lie, Rabbi. The bottom line—
LEVIN: OK. Have you been in the bedroom with all of them or just some of them when you make these kinds of declarations?
SCHULTZ: You asked me a direct question and I gave you a direct answer.
LEVIN: Well, I‘m interviewing you, Ed. What do you want?
SCHULTZ: OK. You can interview.
LEVIN: I‘ll let you go. Go ahead.
SCHULTZ: I appreciate you wanting to turn the tables, and that‘s fine. I‘m very solid in my position on this, and I believe that there‘s discrimination in our society.
LEVIN: But does that mean my kids have to suffer in public school?
SCHULTZ: No one is making your kids suffer.
LEVIN: Well, they‘re being brainwashed.
SCHULTZ: No, they‘re not being brainwashed.
LEVIN: How do you know? You don‘t even know the curricula.
SCHULTZ: You‘re buying into the fear, Rabbi.
LEVIN: The fear?
SCHULTZ: Don‘t you believe that?
LEVIN: I‘ll tell you why I‘m not, because in Massachusetts, when they implemented gay marriage, they also instituted that the kids have to be taught this. And therefore, when the father tried to take his child out, he‘s facing fines and prison time. So it‘s the imperial government telling me I can‘t control my kids‘ education, and you don‘t have the facts, my dear friend.
SCHULTZ: No, I do have the fact.
Rabbi, I hope I haven‘t been too tough on you.
LEVIN: OK. No.
SCHULTZ: And you actually handled the lights pretty well. I‘m proud of you. We‘ll have to have you back.
LEVIN: That‘s the whole thing?
SCHULTZ: That‘s it.
LEVIN: Don‘t wimp out. Come on. Let‘s do some more.
SCHULTZ: You got 90 seconds more than most people got because you were pretty feisty.
Good to have you with us.
LEVIN: OK. Thank you so much.
SCHULTZ: Coming up, “Bubba” versus Bill. Clinton‘s calling it like he sees it when it comes to Fox News, and they‘ve got O‘Reilly all bent out of shape. I‘ll straighten him out in the “Zone” next.
Stay with us.
SCHULTZ: And in “Psycho Talk” tonight, Fox News water boy Bill O‘Reilly.
Mr. Sensitivity got himself all bent out of shape because former president Bill Clinton said that Fox News was on a disinformation campaign for the Republican Party. Amen to that.
This is how O‘Reilly returned fire on “Bubba.”
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BILL O‘REILLY, FOX NEWS: What he‘s trying to do is demonize Fox as carrying the water for the Republicans, and that‘s the new—not new—
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, not new. Are you kidding me?
O‘REILLY: But that‘s a theme that the Republicans—or the Democrats have been using—nobody outside of your crazy left-wing loons believes it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Left-wing loons. I know you guys across the street aren‘t big on research, but a quick Google search shows not only does Fox carry water for the Republicans, hell, they buy it.
Uncle Rupert cut the Republican Governors Association a check for a million bucks this summer and gave the ultra-right-wing Chamber of Commerce another million smackers to demonize the Democrats this fall.
Two million dollars buys a lot of water there, Bill. And if you want to mix right-wing Kool-Aid with what Fox serves up on a daily basis, they have got a heck of a machine, right?
So, Bill O‘Reilly, to claim that Fox News doesn‘t carry water for Republican party, well it‘s juicy “Psycho Talk.”
Coming up, Sharron Angle is a wild woman. I‘ll show you the tape in “The Battleground” story.
And I‘ve got a bone to pick with Ernie Istook. His Heritage Foundation just snuggled up to the Tea Party, and I think this is really bad for the country, Ernie. You won‘t be smiling in a minute.
Plus, a disgusting sign of the times. This billboard of President Obama covers, I guess, all of the basis of hate—Islamophobia, homophobia, racism. We‘ll get to the bottom of it in the “Playbook.”
And don‘t go anywhere, because we‘ve got a lot more coming up on THE ED SHOW on MSNBC.
Stay with us.
SCHULTZ: And in the “Battleground” story tonight. Great to have you back with us here on THE ED SHOW. It‘s fight night in Las Vegas. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Sharron Angle, the Tea Party queen will square off for their one and only debate in just a few hours. Tonight could be a critical game changer that Reid needs to save his seat and to ensure that the Democrats hold the majority in the Senate. The polls show the race is neck-and-neck. Today, Reid, his camp is stepping up its attacks on Angle, slamming her and framing her as wild in a tough new campaign commercial.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: Sharron Angle voted against background checks to identify sex predators. She‘s against enforcing restraining orders that protect victims of domestic violence. She says, rape victims should be forced to have the baby. Sharron Angle would wipe out Social Security, Medicare and she‘d privatize the VA.
MAYOR BOB CASHELL ®, RENO: She‘s wild, she‘s wild, I mean, and with the wild ideas she has, we would never get anything done.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: That is a republican mayor saying that she is wild.
Joining me now is Terry O‘Neill, president of the National Organization for Women. Terry, good to have you with us tonight.
TERRY O‘NEILL, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN: Hi, Ed.
SCHULTZ: Are these serious radical positions in your opinion, that if a woman is raped and pregnant, she has to have the baby? And also is she weak on domestic violence issues? What do you think?
O‘NEILL: Sharron Angle is one of the biggest disasters for women. Among all of the conservative women running for office, frankly. The notion that a rape victim could be forced to bear the child of rape understand that the most, most rape victims who become impregnated by their rapist, that‘s incest. These are incest victims, and the rapists would then have access, continuing access to the victim for the rest of that victim‘s life or for the rest of the rapist‘s life. Can you imagine?
SCHULTZ: Yes, how concerned are you about her position on domestic violence? Has she not been tough enough?
O‘NEILL: No, she‘s—look, anyone who says that we need—that we can‘t get protective orders, that does not, in fact, support, at least doubling the amount of money that we currently spend under the violence against women act. You know, I‘m a survivor of domestic violence myself. And I know that around the country, domestic—domestic violence shelters, there‘s a six-month wait in many communities for battered women shelters.
O‘NEILL: We don‘t have the resources, and Sharron Angle would adopt policies that would even reduce those resources further.
SCHULTZ: Have you seen candidates in the past take positions like this and how did they fare if they were around?
O‘NEILL: How did they fare in the election?
SCHULTZ: Well, like in other races. I mean, she‘s taking some radical positions when it comes to almost anti-woman, it seems to me. Have there been other candidates like this that have been successful?
O‘NEILL: And be so anti-woman? No, I‘m trying to think of any that are successful.
SCHULTZ: So, she‘s extreme.
O‘NEILL: Oh she‘s so extreme and I think that she‘ll be defeated. I really do hope that she‘ll be defeated. You know, this is a woman who—it‘s not just her beliefs about rape victims or domestic violence victims, this is a woman who would dismantle the Social Security system.
O‘NEILL: In a world in which women need Social Security more than ever to be able to stay in the middle class. We don‘t need women pursuing policies that would dismantle the program.
SCHULTZ: Yes. I think there‘s a lot of age discrimination going on in our society right now when it comes to people trying to recycle back into the economy and to have somebody who‘s advocating butchering Social Security, I don‘t know how she could stand that. I want to ask you quickly about the Tea Party candidates. You have Ken Buck in Colorado who told an alleged rape victim that she had buyer‘s remorse and Christine O‘Donnell, what about the kind of candidates that the Tea Partiers are putting out for women?
O‘NEILL: Honestly, these are all of the candidates that needs—desperately we need to defeat these candidates. Christine O‘Donnell is another disaster for women. Take a look at the kinds of positions that she takes. Women—we need more women who understand equality. More women in government who understand equality but we certainly don‘t need women like Christine O‘Donnell. We don‘t need women like Sharron Angle.
SCHULTZ: Terry O‘Neill.
O‘NEILL: We need women to understand that women need to make gains.
SCHULTZ: Terry, thanks so much for joining us tonight.
O‘NEILL: Thank you, Ed.
SCHULTZ: Harry Reid and the Democrats need to turn out their base if they‘re going to win in Nevada. And if they‘re going to turn the country around the way they want it. Latino voters are a big key.
For more, let‘s bring in Maria Teresa Kumar, the executive director of Voto Latino and an MSNBC contributor. Maria, I talked to political folks who are in the know in that state and they‘re saying that the Hispanic vote could win it for Harry Reid, is that true? What do you think?
MARIA TERESA KUMAR, DIRECTOR, VOTO LATINO: Well the Hispanic vote was critical in Nevada, Arizona, Colorado and California, and Texas, last election cycle in 2008. What‘s interesting though a lot better, a lot of the poll that demonstrates that, Angle and Reid are neck-and-neck, but what they fail to do is describe that the majority of folks that they‘re missing are folks that are on cell phones and who happen to be those people? Young voters who came out the record numbers in ‘08 and ‘06 and a lot of people with color, so there‘s definitely its neck-and-neck.
SCHULTZ: So these polls aren‘t accurate?
SCHULTZ: OK. Is the Latino community motivated? I mean you have got the Tea Partiers out there who are talking about getting rid of minimum wage, also abolishing public schools. The kind of rhetoric that‘s out there is as radical as it‘s ever been. How does the Latino vote play into that, if at all?
KUMAR: Well, in a big way. So, Nevada is one of the leading states when it comes to foreclosures. Latinos unfortunately have the forefront of losing their homes. They have the highest unemployment. They also have unfortunately one of the largest gaps when it comes to education. Yet when you poll them time after time, they are the most optimistic when it comes to the possibility of America among all voters. So what needs to happen right now is that they need do a lot of targeted messaging, they need folks to go door-to-door, talk to each other about the importance of participating because while Latinos are failing crunched, it‘s a matter of saying, you know what? If you don‘t go to the table, you‘re going to have continued—saying that everything right now is the Latino voter‘s fault. So it‘s a matter of making sure that you‘re galvanizing, having conversation, and promoting the importance of going out and voting.
SCHULTZ: Maria Teresa Kumar, thanks for your time tonight.
KUMAR: Thank you, Ed.
SCHULTZ: It‘s all about getting the vote out, no question about it.
Now, let‘s get some rapid-fire response from our panel on these stories tonight. Right wing think-tank, the Heritage Foundation is totally with the Tea Partiers claiming the movement represent happens the conscience of the nation?
President Obama tried to win over young voters at an MTV town hall meeting this afternoon.
And today the Justice Department got the ball rolling on appealing, “Don‘t Ask, Don‘t Tell,” that ruling. Why is the Obama administration trying to snatch, defeat from the jaws of victory on this one, I don‘t know.
Well, let‘s ask Joe Madison, XM radio talk show host, also on Sirius. And also Ernest Istook, former republican congressman and fellow at the Heritage Foundation. Ernie, what‘s happening? You guys just embracing the Tea Party across the board? You want to abolish public education now, what‘s happening here?
ERNEST ISTOOK, HERITAGE FOUNDATION: Well, that‘s neither what the heritage foundation says nor what the Tea Party movement stands for. Don‘t mistake what one individual may say and try to say that‘s the beliefs of a large number of people. You ought to have some of the Heritage Foundation education experts on to talk about the...
SCHULTZ: We had them on before and they didn‘t impress me, quite frankly. But I‘m...
ISTOOK: Well, maybe they impress your audience.
SCHULTZ: I‘m asking you, Ernie.
SCHULTZ: I‘m asking you, you can emphatically state tonight that the Republican Party and the Heritage Foundation will not eliminate public education in this country?
ISTOOK: Well, one, I‘m not a spokesman from the Republicans but I can tell you, the Heritage Foundation is not trying to eliminate public education. However, there are a lot of things that need to be done to fix it.
SCHULTZ: Nobody is arguing that.
ISTOOK: In public schools.
SCHULTZ: I‘m talking about—you‘ve got a candidate out there that the Tea Partier that is taking this radical position, Joe, your thoughts?
JOE MADISON, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: My thought is that this is going to be the beginning of the end of the Tea Party. This is similar to what Jerry Falwell did with the Moral Majority and that lasted a while. And this too will have the same cycle. What the Tea Partiers have always said they stood for is that they weren‘t part of any established political base. They weren‘t part of the Republican Party. They weren‘t part of the Democratic Party. They were independent. And we know the Heritage Foundation is a vehicle of the Republican Party. So quite honestly, I think this may very well be a conflict that just might be the beginning of the end.
SCHULTZ: Is it not, Joe, the position of the Tea Party to get rid of the minimum wage, correct?
SCHULTZ: And ...
MADISON: And minimum wage, health care, public education. You know when we were at the One Nation rally...
ISTOOK: I think, you‘ve got it mixed up.
MADISON: Well, when we were at the One Nation rally, I made it very clear, the same speech that A. Philip Randolph gave, they are enemies of minimum wage, public financing—public education, Social Security. These are all platforms that are spread across the country.
SCHULTZ: All right. President Obama going for the young vote, he held a town hall meeting with MTV today and the kids. Here it is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MAN: My question to you is, why should we still support you going forward with your monetary and economic policies and if the economy does not improve over the next two years, why should we vote you back in?
BARACK OBAMA (D), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, that was a—there‘s a lot of stuff in there, so let me try to unpack that. Most of the eight million jobs that we lost during this recession were lost before my economic policies were even put into place. That‘s point number one. Point number two is that as a consequence of the recovery act that we put into place, there is no doubt that three million folks are working now that would not otherwise be working. That‘s point number two. So it worked in terms of helping to cushion the fault.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Good answer by the president, but the numbers are showing among undergraduates, his job approval rating is slipping. Right now it‘s at 44 percent and May of 2009, it was at 60. Disapprove now it‘s a 27, it was at 15. Joe, what do you make of it?
MADISON: Well I make of it, the Democrats have had a terrible, terrible—having not being able to explain what they‘ve accomplished. I mean, this type of session really should had been ongoing in these last couple of years. For example, I just saw the piece and I thought he did an excellent job in addressing concerns like the Pell Grant that he increased. I mean he has pointed out the things that he has done. The problem, Ed, is and both of us know this, is that they just simply have not bragged about the legislative victories that they‘ve had in the last two years.
SCHULTZ: Ernie, be there for the Democrats, what do you think?
ISTOOK: Well, the young vote is having problems getting a job. They heard the president give long answers, big government-oriented answers to the questions. You know, if he would focus more on things which are the actual agenda, Ed, of the Tea Party movement, not what you‘re saying, but look at the—for example, the website of the Tea Party patriots, three prongs. Limited constitutional...
SCHULTZ: No, Ernie—they want to repeal health care, Ernie. They want to repeal health care.
ISTOOK: Obama care is part of fiscal responsibility.
SCHULTZ: No, it‘s not.
ISTOOK: You‘re not right about that.
SCHULTZ: All right. Well, don‘t say that I‘m not right on this because I am correct on it.
ISTOOK: Your other claims that I‘m talking about Ed, that you‘ve been saying.
SCHULTZ: Well, I don‘t trust the Republicans on public education
because they‘ve never funded no child left behind. They fought that after
after signing onto it, so the Republicans do not have a good track record. I want to get to this story quickly.
ISTOOK: I disagree but I understand.
SCHULTZ: The president taking a question on “Don‘t Ask, Don‘t Tell” today. Here it is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
OBAMA: This is not a question of whether the policy is in—will end. This policy will end and will end on my watch. But I do have an obligation to make sure that I‘m following some of the rules.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Ernie, is the president weak on this? Why not let the court ruling stand?
ISTOOK: Well, the president is right to appeal the court ruling. He has an obligation despite his personal opinion. I think it‘s good that the Obama administration asks the judge now to stay her order which is the prerequisite to appeal. But I think the problem is and Joe Scarborough of MSNBC made that clear in an op-ed that he wrote. The problem is that Obama is sending mixed messages that he doesn‘t have a cohesive message.
SCHULTZ: Well, he doesn‘t want to let this right—from the bench though, that‘s the whole thing. He wants the Congress to decide it and let it be that way.
MADISON: And I think that‘s what he said to those young people.
SCHULTZ: Yes, no doubt.
MADISON: I mean, that‘s exactly what he said to those young people.
SCHULTZ: Gentleman, good to have you with us tonight. Joe Madison, Ernest Istook. Great to have you with us.
ISTOOK: Thank you.
SCHULTZ: Coming up, next in my Playbook, imagine accidentally shooting someone with a spray of 200 lead pellets, bringing them to the brink of death, then never saying you‘re sorry. Shocking new details on how it all went down on Cheney‘s infamous quail hunt. I know, you can‘t make it up.
SCHULTZ: And it‘s not too late to let us know what you think. The number to dial tonight is 1-877-ed-msnbc. Tonight‘s telephone survey question is, are you in favor of abolishing the public school system? Press the number one for yes. Press the number two for no. Again, the number to dial is 1-877-ed-msnbc. We‘ll be right back.
SCHULTZ: And in my Playbook tonight, it‘s almost been five years since Dick Cheney, former vice president of the United States, shot Texas attorney, Harry Whittington in the face and chest. And he‘s refusing to apologize to this day. “The Washington Post” revealed some previously unknown details today about how serious the injuries were about. Whittington spent a week in the ICU and had a collapsed lung and 30 pieces of lead are still lodged in his face and chest. After the incident, the White House blamed Whittington for the accident saying he didn‘t follow hunting protocol because he didn‘t announce his presence to Cheney. Because of this, Whittington actually apologized the shooter as soon as he got out of the hospital. “The Post” asked Whittington if Cheney ever apologized to him? His response was, quote, “I‘m not going to go into that.” Wow. Five years later, still waiting for shooter to say he‘s sorry.
For more on this, let‘s bring in Washington correspondent “The Nation,” John Nichols who wrote a book on Dick Cheney. John, good to have you with us tonight. Do you think the former vice president will ever apologize?
JOHN NICHOLS, WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT, “THE NATION”: No. Come on, Ed. We all know Dick Cheney well enough to know that not only doesn‘t he apologize, he jokes about the incident. He actually joked about shooting a trial lawyer. Now, it is true that Mr. Whittington is a trial lawyer but he‘s also a pretty republican-friendly one, but that was for Dick Cheney, a good punch line. And this is the reality. Throughout his life, Dick Cheney hasn‘t just stepped on other people, he‘s punched them. And he never apologizes.
He didn‘t apologize to the five kids from Nebraska that had to serve in Vietnam when he took draft deferments. He didn‘t apologize to Nelson Mandela for voting to keep apart tight in South Africa. He didn‘t apologize for privatizing the military at the cost of hundreds of billions to U.S. taxpayers. He didn‘t apologize for setting up an energy policy that was based on Enron‘s demands and he didn‘t apologize for lying us into the war in Iraq. He sure isn‘t going to apologize to Mr. Whittington.
SCHULTZ: What does it tell us about the way they did business as if we didn‘t know that the injuries were far more serious than were originally reported?
NICHOLS: Well, what we know, Ed is that they extracted a, apology from Mr. Whittington while he was still at baseline recovery from an injury that his doctor said could very easily have killed him. It came within millimeters being a deadly shooting incident. And so, they, not only first thing to apologize, they clearly put tremendous pressure on him not to talk about it. And in Texas, a very republican state where this guy is a lawyer who does business in Austin, the state capital. I mean, clearly he decided that the better part of valor was not to mess with the Bush administration or Dick Cheney. The funny thing is that even now, it‘s something—Texans I know are saying, wow, what a gutsy guy. He actually said something that might scare or might disturb Dick Cheney. This is the thing to understand.
SCHULTZ: And it turns...
NICHOLS: Cheney goes after you even when he isn‘t vice president.
SCHULTZ: Yes, and it turns out that they weren‘t very good friends after all. John Nichols of “The Nation” great to have you with us tonight. Thanks so much.
Coming up, the Tea Party queen, Christine O‘Donnell did her best to sound just like Sarah Palin last night. Although she‘s probably—well, she‘s wishing she had written some of the notes on her hand because she was not prepared to answer some of the very basic questions. Ron Christie and I are going at it over her qualifications, next on THE ED SHOW.
SCHULTZ: Welcome back. And finally tonight on THE ED SHOW, Sarah Palin protege Christine O‘Donnell had a chance to show the people of Delaware that she‘s ready for the big league at last night‘s Senate debate in Delaware. But Palin should have given O‘Donnell her cliff notes along with her endorsement and told her to expect this question on the test.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KATIE COURIC, CBS ANCHOR: What other Supreme Court decisions do you disagree with?
SARAH PALIN ®, FORMER ALASKA GOVERNOR: Well, let‘s see. There‘s—of course in the great history of America, there have been rulings that there‘s never going to be absolute consensus by every American. Going through the history of America, there would be others. But...
COURIC: Can you think of any?
PALIN: Well, I would think of any, again, that could best be dealt with on more local level.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Christine, you should have looked at the game tape, you know? But O‘Donnell was caught totally off guard when she was asked the very same question last night.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: So what opinions of late that have come from our high court do you most object to?
CHRISTINE O‘DONNELL ®, DELAWARE SENATE NOMINEE: Oh, gosh. Give me a specific one. I‘m sorry.
UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: Actually, I can‘t because I need you to tell me which ones you object to.
O‘DONNELL: I‘m very sorry right off of the top of my head I know that there are a lot. But I‘ll put it up on my website.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: OK, joining us now is republican strategist Ron Christie.
Author of a new book “Acting White,” the curious history a racial slur. Provocative title, Ron. We‘ll bring you back to talk about your book, but let‘s talk about the debate last night. How did she do?
RON CHRISTIE, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: I think she did pretty well. Obviously that question dealing with the Supreme Court cases, I think she could had been a lot better prepared but overall she was feisty. She came across as being very engaging, and she went on the attack. She went after her opponent, hit him specifically on his raising taxes, hit him specifically on his taking away disability payments for senior citizens. Overall, I thought she did rather well.
SCHULTZ: But, Ron, is it asking too much to ask a Senate candidate to pay attention to what the Supreme Court‘s doing or do you consider that a trick question?
CHRISTIE: No, I don‘t. Frankly, Ed, while she‘s not a lawyer, I think she could very well be in the Senate Judiciary Committee if she was elected. That‘s just the sort of thing that you need to think about, prepared about. Obviously I‘m a lawyer and if I‘d been in that same situation, I would have thought about it, she should have. She should had been prepped for it and she wasn‘t.
SCHULTZ: But it also shows that maybe she‘s not qualified. Do you think she‘s qualified as a conservative, can you tell us tonight that she is qualified to win that seat and serve as 100 in the United States Senate?
CHRISTIE: Of course she is. She unseated...
CHRISTIE: ...a republican incumbent who‘s been in elected office as long as I‘ve been alive. She did it very well. She‘s raised millions of dollars. I think, Ed, there‘s a sexism that goes on in the media about strong conservative republican women. You see it with Meg Whitman out in California. You see with Christine O‘Donnell. You see it across this country. The fact that...
SCHULTZ: That‘s a pretty good narrative that you conservatives have come up with, like anti-women act, like your folks out there Sharron Angle who is going crazy on women.
CHRISTIE: Ed, it‘s true.
CHRISTIE: Look at Meg Whitman, the National Organization of Women, for goodness sakes, you have Jerry Brown, the former governor who is running for his old job back, or having someone on his staff call her a whore and yet they don‘t...
SCHULTZ: He didn‘t and he apologized for it.
SCHULTZ: But you think O‘Donnell‘s qualified for the Senate, OK.
CHRISTIE: Well, certainly better than the guy who was there before.
SCHULTZ: All right. Ron, we‘ll do it again.
CHRISTIE: We‘ll do it again, Ed.
SCHULTZ: Telephone survey, I asked, are you in favor of abolishing the public school system? Four percent of said, yes, 96 percent of you said no. That‘s THE ED SHOW. I‘m Ed Schultz. Chris Matthews is next on “HARDBALL.” We‘ll see you tomorrow night.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
Copyright 2010 CQ-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 CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>
Copyright 2010 CQ-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 CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>