Guests: John Yang, Howard Fineman, Cory Mason, Peter Barca, Rick Badger, Chris Larson, Robert Reich, David Frum,, Kathy Griffin
LAWRENCE O‘DONNELL, HOST: There‘s breaking news from Wisconsin tonight—just as it appeared that the Republican governor was about to compromise with the 14 Senate Democrats who remain across state lines, state Republicans have just used a new legislative procedure to passion the governor‘s union-busting bill without any Democrats present. The vote was 18-1, with one Republican voting no, and all 14 Democrats recorded as not voting.
NBC‘s John Yang has been covering the story and is live in Chicago.
John, how did the Republicans vote on this without the Democrats being back in the state to have the quorum we thought they needed in order to vote on this?
JOHN YANG, NBC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lawrence, you said it. This is an interesting parliamentary tactic. I‘m not clear exactly how this fits into the rules of the Wisconsin legislature, because what they did—they all did this within the past hour, the Senate—the Senate Republicans created a conference committee, a House-Senate conference committee which usually as you know reconciles differing versions of bills, one passed by the House and one passed by the Senate. They created this conference committee without ever having passed the bill itself.
They took the legislation that the House passed, split it into two. One, a fiscal package, one, a non-fiscal package, even though they‘ve said this is all to do with the budget, and they put the collective bargaining language—the language stripping public service unions in Wisconsin of collective bargaining rights in the non-fiscal package, reported it to the Senate, and then voted on it in the Senate.
The state assembly—the statehouse, lower chamber of the house will be in session tomorrow in special session at which they‘re expected to pass it, and, of course, the Senate was able to pass this because for non-fiscal measures, they need a smaller quorum than they do for fiscal measures. For fiscal measures, they need at least one Democrat to be present.
But by declaring this non-fiscal, they were able to vote without any Democrats being present. Democrats are up in arms. They say this was illegal. They say this violated the rules of the chamber.
They are asking the attorney general to get involved, the attorney general, by the way, a Republican.
But we‘ll have to see where that goes because this is on track for it to pass the assembly, the House, the lower chamber tomorrow, and go to the governor‘s desk for his signature.
O‘DONNELL: John, how much did this take the Senate Democrats by surprise? They obviously had been in negotiations with the governor as we discovered through the governor‘s e-mails that had become public in the last 48 hours or so. It looked last night as you read the e-mails that they were actually very, very close to a possible negotiated settlement of this. And as they appeared to be closer than ever to negotiated settlement, suddenly, we have this breaking in exactly the other direction.
Were the Democrats completely taken by surprise by this? Or did they feel overnight some of this might be coming?
YANG: Well, they were taken by surprise. They were actually meeting as the Senate conference committee met, as the House Senate conference committee met and it went to the floor. They were meeting—trying to figure out what to do tonight.
They had had indications that the Senate Republicans when they were going to vote with a smaller quorum were going to let more vulnerable members vote no. And so, they were actually some of them, they were split. Some of them said, well, let‘s go back, let‘s force them to make more of their members—their politically vulnerable members vote yes. They were hoping it would make it an issue in the next election.
Others were saying, no, no, no, that‘s what they want us to do. They want us to go back, to create a quorum and say and then pass the whole bill, the fiscal and non-fiscal.
So, they were debating this as this was going on. There was a bit of a divide. They felt that there were had wavering members, members who wanted to go back. I think that there were some—there were some members who weren‘t—whose resolve was cracking as it were about staying out, staying—denying the quorum.
And I think that that crack really split wide open tonight. But as it turned out, they didn‘t need the Democrats, even the one or two who might have gone back, to go back at all.
O‘DONNELL: We have a statement issued by Senator Mark Miller, the Democrat, saying, “In 30 minutes, 18 senators undid 50 years of civil rights in Wisconsin. Their disrespect for the people of Wisconsin and their rights is an outrage that will never be forgotten. Tonight, 18 Senate Republicans conspired to take government away from the people. Tomorrow, we will join the people of Wisconsin in taking back their government.”
John, that sounds to me at the end like tomorrow we will return to Wisconsin. But it also sounds like the statement of a senator who believes this fight is now lost.
YANG: It seems to be. I mean, they‘re making legal arguments. They‘re saying the vote—the action tonight was illegal, it was counter to the rules of the legislature. But I don‘t know where that‘s going to take them. The vote, the assembly is poised to vote, give it final passage, send it to the governor.
I do think that they probably will now return. As that—the statement you just read really makes it sound like they‘re going to go back and join the fight, but it is the fight after the battle is over. The battle in the Senate is over, appears to be over, with this 18-1 vote tonight.
O‘DONNELL: John Yang, thank you for untangling this breaking news for us.
YANG: Thanks, Lawrence.
O‘DONNELL: Joining me now from Madison, Wisconsin, Democratic Representative Cory Mason.
Thank you for joining us, Representative Mason.
ST. REP. CORY MASON (D), WISCONSIN: Thanks for having me.
O‘DONNELL: Representative Mason, it seems that the Senate has taken this action. Now, that bill must come back to your body to be voted on tomorrow. We saw what happened when they moved this bill through your body last week. What are you expecting next?
MASON: Well, I mean, I‘m expecting complete loss of any sense of fair play or abiding by the rules or the rule of law. I mean, what they did tonight was really just shameful. They had a meeting notice less than 24 hours, didn‘t abide by the rules, took everybody off-guard with this conference committee before both houses had passed the bill, which is why you usually have a conference committee, to work out differences between both houses.
What they did here tonight was just really shameful. I mean, they are so desperate to destroy worker rights, they are willing to resort to any tactic. And I just—I‘m really upset with what they are doing to workers rights, and as upset if not more what they are doing to democracy and just giving people‘s right to have a voice, not just at the workplace but in their own democracy.
I mean, what they are doing here is just the most despicable way to go about trying to pass a bill. And it‘s proof that they‘re willing to do anything to get it done.
O‘DONNELL: Have you had any communication with your Democratic colleagues in the Senate? And do you know if they are returning to the capitol tomorrow?
MASON: I don‘t know if they‘re returning tomorrow. I know they‘re still going to be here to try to fight for workers however they can, wherever they are. I know that they are committed to that.
But, you know, given the illegal vote—I mean, I think we‘re going to need to question the legality of going to a conference committee with less than 24 hours notice. But I know that they‘re ready to fight it. I know that some of the Democrats are going to be ready to fight on that floor tomorrow.
O‘DONNELL: Representative Mason, I want to bring in the Democratic assembly leader, Peter Barca.
Representative Barca, did you have any hint this afternoon that this is where we would be tonight?
ST. REP. PETER BARCA (D), WISCONSIN (via telephone): No, we were totally shocked when they called for this conference committee. And let‘s be clear: this is not a violation of rules. This was a violation of Wisconsin law.
We have an Open Meetings Law that requires that they give 24 hours notice before a meeting. The attorney general, our current Republican Attorney General Van Hollen, wrote a memo in August of 2010 outlining that unless there‘s good cause, you must give 24 hours notice.
But actually, if there is good cause, you can give two hours notice. But they did not even give two hours notice. They posted it at 4:09 for a meeting that began at 6:00. There is absolutely no question this was a violation of our Open Meetings Law.
We do not believe there is any chance this can stand. And our first call tomorrow morning will be to the attorney general to act upon his own memo and enforce the law.
O‘DONNELL: Now, how would that law be enforced? Would you have to bring a lawsuit? Would you have to go to court? Can the attorney general take a union lateral action of some kind here?
BARCA: Well, we believe the attorney general is empowered to take certain actions. We‘re not clear about all of the legal maneuvers. Obviously, we—they pulled us on such short notice, Lawrence, that we had absolutely no time to do any research.
But I was on the conference committee. We came in. Typically, in a conference committee, they explain the bill. They refused to explain the bill.
But clearly, the charade is up. At this point, the fraud on the people of Wisconsin has been unveiled for everybody to see. They all along intended to take away the rights, the basic worker rights we‘ve enjoyed in this state for 50 years.
And tonight it was evident to everybody that they passed a non-fiscal bill that had nothing to do with balancing the budget, and in fact, they took out the key component of the bill which was to do bonding that the governor said was the most important thing to avoid layoffs.
So, the fraud has been exposed and it‘s now clear, I am sure, to every person in Wisconsin how far they will go.
O‘DONNELL: Representative Barca, in the Open Meetings Law, are you aware of whether there are any remedies specified in the Open Meetings Law for violations—dealing with violations of that law as this might appear to be?
BARCA: Well, I know there are remedies, although I am not clear on exactly all of the remedies that are available.
MASON: Yes, one possible remedy is—
O‘DONNELL: Representative Mason, go ahead.
MASON: Yes, my understanding is one possible remedy is they can be forced to take the action again with proper notice in the light of day, so the citizens can actually see this destructive legislation for what it is. But my understanding that one of the recourses available is to make the public body retake its action according to the Open Meetings Law. But we‘ll be pursuing that heavily, I am sure.
O‘DONNELL: And, Representative Mason, who orders that. Does that require you to go to a court to have a judge order that?
MASON: Well, I promise you, as soon as we‘re off here, we‘re going to be exploring every avenue that‘s available to make sure that the public‘s rights are recognized in this whole process.
O‘DONNELL: Now, the next legislative stage in the Senate would be to take up the actual so-called “budget repair bill” with this union provision of it severed from it.
What does the Senate need to do on that part of the bill and do they still need a quorum for that that would include Democrats?
BARCA: Yes, they clearly would need to have Senate Democrats present, because the requirement is you have to have three-fifths of those elected present to take that vote.
O‘DONNELL: Well, Representative Barca, does that indicate to you then that Senate Democrats may continue to stay out of the state?
BARCA: No. I think, Lawrence, that they are so outraged at this action that based on Senator Miller‘s comment and I talked to him briefly this evening, I think they now are going to come back to help to join us in leading this fight against this illegal, improper and unethical effort that was put forward tonight against the people of Wisconsin.
You know, Lawrence, I don‘t recognize Wisconsin any more. The Wisconsin I grew up, people got along. The Wisconsin way is you work together to reconcile your differences. The Wisconsin way is to bring people together, not divide people.
But this governor has divided this state like we have never been divided before.
Our state believes in clean and open government. That is no longer possible, I don‘t believe, under Governor Walker and his extreme and radical agenda.
O‘DONNELL: In Senator Miller‘s statement tonight, his last line is, “Tomorrow, we will join the people of Wisconsin in taking back their government.”
Representative Barca, are you telling us that Senator Miller told you that he will return to Wisconsin tomorrow?
BARCA: That is what was implied. We only talked for a few minutes because there was so little time in between the conference committee and when the Senate went in. But I‘ll be talking to him as soon as I‘m off the line, Lawrence.
O‘DONNELL: I really appreciate you joining me in this history making moment where having all the particulars of where we go from here legislatively may not be something anyone has command of. And I greatly appreciate you guiding us this far.
Joining me now: Rick Badger, executive director of AFSCME Council 40 Wisconsin.
Thanks for joining us tonight, Rick.
RICK BADGER, AFSCME COUNCIL 40 WISCONSIN: Great to be with you, Lawrence. I wish it was under different circumstances.
O‘DONNELL: Senator Miller‘s statement says, “In 30 minutes, 18 state senators undid 50 years of civil rights in Wisconsin.” He also said, “Tonight, 18 Senate Republicans conspired to take government away from the people.”
Where do you go from here?
BADGER: Well, first off, isn‘t it breathtaking? It is just so incredible. And again, you‘re talking to a real live Wisconsin badger, a product of public schools, product of a public university, and never thought I‘d see a day like this.
Clearly, the governor and Republican leadership felt that they could never get public support behind this, which is why they went to this, you know, kind of a sham of a process, procedure.
So, we will go forward as Senator Miller stated. We will continue to fight. I believe now the Wisconsin public—whether Republican, Democrat, independent, union or nonunion—see this for what it really is, taking away people‘s rights.
And I can tell you one thing about Wisconsin people. We understand fair play and have an innate sense of fairness. This is not right. This is not fair. And I don‘t think the Wisconsin people are going to put up with this.
O‘DONNELL: Rick Badger, according to the e-mails we saw released yesterday, it looked as if the governor was very, very close to a compromise plan with the Democrats. Did you people in the unions have any indication as today progressed that we were going to be here tonight with this story?
BADGER: Well, first off, I don‘t think we were that close. I mean, with the selective release of e-mails, we looked at them. Sure, there wasn‘t any really negotiations. But, clearly, nobody saw this coming.
And you‘ve heard from representatives to do this in darkness. I mean, we believe in clean government in Wisconsin. We believe if they are good ideas, they should be open and seen by all. The fact that this was done in this manner shows that there really was no desire to bargain in good faith on this issue.
O‘DONNELL: Rick Badger, is there any reason for the Democratic senators to continue to state out of the state at this point?
BADGER: Well, that is up to the Democratic senators, and, obviously, I have not been in contact with them on these issues.
Personally, I think—I would hope everyone takes a step back, looks at all of the options legal and as far as the court of public opinion. As I told the Senate majority leader three weeks ago, this is a bad idea, and once the public really sees what this is about, there‘s really no way they can win on the merits.
So, we‘re going to go forward and we‘re going to keep fighting.
O‘DONNELL: Rick Badger, executive director of AFSCME Council 40 -- thank you for joining us tonight. Also, thank you to Representative Barca and Representative Mason.
We have more on this ahead. Howard Fineman on the politics of this move, and former Labor Secretary Robert Reich on the impact to workers.
And later, Newt Gingrich goes on the Christian Broadcasting Network to address his repeated marital problems and his three marriages. Can Newt‘s serial adultery be forgiven by Republican presidential primary voters?
(COMNMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: There‘s more ahead on the breaking news from Wisconsin where Republicans in the Wisconsin Senate just voted to strip collective bargaining rights from public workers using a new legislative procedure. The assembly Democratic minority leader says it‘s against the chamber‘s rules and is calling the attorney general.
Howard Fineman and Robert Reich weigh in.
And later, Kathy Griffin versus Sarah Palin. The comedienne is here with an exclusive interview with news of an invitation she has now extended to Sarah Palin.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker has just issued this statement about what has just occurred in the Wisconsin Senate.
“The Senate Democrats have had three weeks to debate this bill and were offered repeated opportunities to come home which they refused, in order to move the state forward. I applaud the legislature‘s action today to stand up to the status quo and take a step in the right direction to balance the budget and reform government. The action today will help ensure Wisconsin has a business climate that allows the private sector to create 250,000 new jobs.”
Joining me now: Senator Chris Larson, by telephone, Wisconsin Democratic senator.
Senator Larson, did you have any warning that this was coming?
ST. SEN. CHRIS LARSON (D), WISCONSIN (via telephone): Absolutely not. Now, this was—this was something where the Republicans were in caucus, they were in a meeting all day yesterday. They had a very brief statement afterwards and had a meeting all day today.
When they got out of that, I was on my way to meet with my fellow Democrats and we heard what they were coming up with, and we couldn‘t believe it. I was in my car. I drove 80 miles an hour in order to try to get back to do something, anything, but it was obvious that the Republicans wanted to revert 50 years‘ worth of worker rights in less than 50 minutes, and that‘s exactly what they did tonight.
I think it‘s an affront to democracy. I think each of them just gave new energy to the recall efforts under way right now.
O‘DONNELL: So, Senator Larson, as soon as you heard about this plan, you actually started driving back to Wisconsin right away?
LARSON: I did. I did. I was trying to see if there was something we could do, anything, in order to try and stop this. But it was—it was pretty obvious that they didn‘t want to have anything to do with that. They didn‘t want the Democrats there.
We thought we were talking. We thought we were having good discussions. And we thought we were on our way to having a compromise that would preserve workers‘ rights, remove some of the bad things from this Trojan horse bill and actually get it through—something through that the people of Wisconsin could agree with and find a compromise with, in our favor.
That seemed to have been an affront. It seemed to have been a trick again by—on their part. If they wanted us back, they could have had us back. This was something where they intentionally deceived us.
O‘DONNELL: Senator Miller, the Democratic leader of the Senate, said tonight that tonight, 18 Senate Republicans conspired to take government away from the people. He then also said, “Tomorrow, we will join the people of Wisconsin in taking back their government.”
I read that to mean that Senator Miller is on his way back to Wisconsin like you are, and that the Democratic senators will be back in Wisconsin tomorrow. Is that true?
LARSON: We‘re going to be getting together. I‘m going back to meet with them to talk and see what legal action can be taken. We think that there was some notice they didn‘t do in trying to put this together. We think they may have been sloppy in their haze in trying to get this done.
So, we‘re going to be looking at those options and we‘ll be making an announcement after that‘s decided upon. But, you know, the story now isn‘t so much what we‘re going to do or where we stand—we stand with the workers as we always have. It‘s where the Republicans are.
And this watershed moment, the Republicans, 18 of them, showed that they‘d rather side with big corporate interest instead of the working people—people who are making and living off a low wage, and only have power by banding together into a union. Today, they decided to vote against that and against the middle class.
O‘DONNELL: Senator Larson, what now happens to what remains of the so-called “budget repair bill” which does require as I understand it the higher threshold for quorum in the Senate, which means it requires Democrats to actually be in the chamber in order to have a quorum big enough to vote on it.
LARSON: Right.
O‘DONNELL: Will you return to the chamber, therefore deliver that quorum that allows them to vote on the remainder of the bill?
LARSON: Well, that‘s why I‘m not going to be in Wisconsin much longer, Lawrence. This is something where they could still try and do that. They proved themselves to be deceptive. They‘d rather put special interest instead of people.
I mean, I mentioned just the other day on your show, talking about all the things they‘ve done—shutting down public debates, shutting down the debate in the assembly, shutting down the public hearings, shutting down the phone lines, closing out the capitol, taking over our offices, and now this. It‘s pretty obvious there‘s no low—there‘s no low that they will go to in order to try and pass this special interest stuff and kill workers‘ rights.
So, it‘s going to be tough to try and negotiate with people on the other side of table that are untrustworthy and can‘t keep their word. But we‘ll see what we can do. We‘ll get together tonight and figure out the best.
O‘DONNELL: Senator Larson, did you share the feeling many had that you were actually close as a result of the leaked e-mails that we all saw in the last 24 hours that it looked like Senate Democrats and the governor had actually inched very close to a deal?
LARSON: No. And if you remember when I was on your show talking about this, all they did was release information via a request under open records request. They never said that they approved of these things. They never said if they actually wanted to do these things. They just wanted to give the appearance that there was talks going on.
But it was obvious that this was just an affront. It was a trick to the public to make it seem they were interested in it. And they never actually were. Those were never negotiations.
He asked for negotiations, and they used that request—the letter they used as a prop in a press conference to say, look, (INAUDIBLE) they actually think we‘re going to talk to them. So, it shows where they. It shows where they‘re at. It‘s just straight bullying tactics, and things like we saw tonight where they‘re passing things without the public being aware of them.
I doubt that many people in Wisconsin know what happened still as it just happened tonight, and there—a lot of people are going to wake up, try to figure out what to do. And I think—like I said, I think the recall efforts just got a lot more powerful, and there are going to be a lot of people stepping out to the streets with clipboards to recall these folks this weekend.
O‘DONNELL: Democrat State Senator Chris Larson, thank you for joining us tonight on this historic night for Wisconsin.
LARSON: Thank you.
O‘DONNELL: Joining me now is Howard Fineman of “The Huffington Post” and MSNBC, and Robert Reich, former labor secretary in the Clinton administration, and author of “Aftershock: The Next Economy and America‘s Future.”
Robert Reich, fix for us this event‘s position in the history of the American labor movement.
ROBERT REICH, FORMER CLINTON LABOR SECRETARY: Well, Lawrence, this is another example, and we‘ve had actually relatively few examples over the last 50 years, but over the last 100 years, we‘ve had a number of examples of governors, of executives, of politicians basically trampling on the rights of people—making a mockery of democracy and making a mockery of the rule of law.
In Wisconsin, the governor has exposed himself. I mean, after all, his whole justification for getting rid of most of the bargaining rights of federal—of state workers was to save money. But in order to ram this particular piece of legislation through the state Senate, they had to characterize it as having nothing to do with the budget at all. I think that the governor is going to pay a huge political price for this.
O‘DONNELL: Howard Fineman, the governor has already paid a price in Wisconsin polling. Polling has turned against him, a majority of it. But did he just become a possible leading contender for the Republican presidential nomination since this Republican achievement in Wisconsin is something that was being cheered strongly by national Republicans?
HOWARD FINEMAN, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, this story is no longer, if it ever was, really about Wisconsin. It‘s about the power of unions and Republicans‘ effort to destroy them if they can, politically, for reasons I explained the other week, concerning treasury of unions and firepower that unions have in elections.
But now, it‘s beyond money and organization, Lawrence. What this is about are Republican strategists and Republicans leaders, whether it‘s Rick Perry, who‘s head of Republican Governors Association out of Texas, or Karl Rove in American Crossroads, or the Koch brothers, or Haley Barbour—anybody else is involved in national Republican strategy. What they want to do here is to try—number one—to goad the people in Wisconsin into overreacting.
The strategy for the Republicans in 2010 is to portray Barack Obama and his allies as a sort of ‘60s style -- ‘60s style bunch of radicals out to upset American values. And they‘re going to try to force the president to come out and defend the workers in Wisconsin. He‘s been very quiet. They want him out there on the front lines.
And they are in a college town of Madison, Wisconsin, where they want the students and the unions and the Democrats to take the bait of this provocation and over react in a way that will sell poorly in swing states in 2012.
In Virginia, in North Carolina, in Indiana, in Colorado, in Florida, all of them swing states, all of them with relatively low percentage of unionized public workers and unionized workers generally. That‘s what‘s going on. That‘s the big picture here.
And now the Democrats are the ones who have to be the grown ups, because the Republicans have been the ones to issue the provocation. This is very serious stakes, having everything to do with the 2012 election.
Scott Walker is almost immaterial. He will be a hero in the halls of Republican conservatism. He‘ll be a hero at the republican convention. I seriously doubt he‘ll be on the ticket.
But he is doing what the real leaders of the Republican party want done.
O‘DONNELL: Robert Reich, Senator Miller said in his statement tonight in 30 minutes, 18 state senators undid 50 years of civil rights in Wisconsin. Did this process provide something that is encouraging to other Republican governors? Or was it so messy, so chaotic, so politically risky that other Republican governors will now be wary of taking steps in this direction?
REICH: Lawrence, I think that in Ohio, John Kasich is probably encouraged by what Walker did or what Walker is doing. I wouldn‘t be surprised if governors in New Jersey, Christie, and also Indiana and other Midwestern states, where you have Republican governors who feel that they are in the ascendency, take some courage from all of this and feel that actually Governor Walker is going to make head way, at least among Republicans and conservatives.
But I do think that the American public does not like this kind of extremism. Republicans, both at the state level and also Republicans who are threatening a shut down of the federal government, risk turning the public off, not just Democrats but also many independents and many Republicans themselves who don‘t like these kinds of tactics.
O‘DONNELL: Howard Fineman of the “Huffington Post” and former Labor Secretary Robert Reich, thank you both for joining me tonight.
REICH: Thanks, Lawrence.
FINEMAN: Thank you.
O‘DONNELL: Coming up, Newt Gingrich explains why he is not a hypocrite for spearheading the impeachment of President Clinton while Gingrich was having his own extra-marital affair. David Frum will explain how Gingrich thinks he will never get the Republican nomination.
And later, an exclusive interview with Kathy Griffin on her public feud with Sarah Palin.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK0
O‘DONNELL: In tonight‘s Spotlight, Newt Gingrich‘s not yet officially announced presidential campaign has turned serious. So serious that he is now talking about the sanctity of marriage. I know. All Republican candidates talk about the sanctity of marriage. But Newt—Newt is talking about the sanctity of his marriage.
I should say his marriages, and how he violated the sanctity of some of those marriages. He is talking about this for the only reason any politician would ever talk about it, his adultery is already public information, and he has to find a way to deal with it early in the campaign, so that all of those anti-adultery Republican primary voters will forgive him for it, and not automatically vote for some other Republican candidate, just because that candidate is not yet a proven adulterer.
When a Republican politician needs forgiveness for sin in order to continue to pursue elective office, where better to ask for that forgiveness than Pat Robertson‘s Christian Broadcasting Network?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NEWT GINGRICH, FORMER HOUSE SPEAKER: There‘s no question that at times in my life, partially driven by how passionately I felt about this country, that I worked far too hard and that things happened in my life that were not appropriate. And what I can tell you is that when I did things that were wrong, I wasn‘t trapped in the situation of ethics. I was doing things that were wrong and I was doing it.
I found that I felt compelled to seek God‘s forgiveness, not God‘s understanding, but God‘s forgiveness, and that I do believe in a forgiving God. And I think most people deep in their hearts hope there‘s a forgiving God.
Somebody once said that when we are young, we seek justice. But as we get older, we seek mercy. There‘s something to that I think.
I feel that—I mean, now I am 67, and I am a grandfather. I have two wonderful grandchildren. I have two wonderful daughters and two great sons-in-law. Chris and I have a great marriage. And I think I have learned an immense amount.
And I do feel that God in that sense has blessed me with an opportunity as a person—forgetting all of the political stuff; as a person, I‘ve had the opportunity to have a wonderful life and to find myself now truly enjoying the depths of my life in ways I never dreamed was possible to have a life that was that nice.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: Joining me now, David Frum, former speech writer to President George W. Bush and the editor of FrumForum.com. David, thank you very much for joining us tonight.
DAVID FRUM, FRUMFORUM.COM: Thank you.
O‘DONNELL: Now, David, you and I have never had to advise a politician about how to handle a public discussion of his extramarital affairs. But given Newt‘s history and what is incumbent on him as a Republican primary candidate, how‘s he doing?
FRUM: His theory here is you take your biggest vulnerability and you turn it into your biggest strength. You run with it. If your problem is marriage, you then remind everyone of your marriages. If your problem is your third wife, you remind everyone of your third wife.
The more traditional way would be to be more defensive, and to say, I am not asking the voters to marry me. I am asking the voters to choose me to balance the budget and defend the country.
I don‘t know about this. I don‘t know that this is going to work, because I don‘t know how, especially women voters who are going to be very important in Iowa, are going to react to the reminder of the fact that Newt Gingrich‘s second wife is talking to the press, and she‘s got some hard things to say about him.
O‘DONNELL: Now, I‘m not very clear on the workings of the minds of the Christian Evangelical voters who appear in these Republican primary voting booths. But they seem to be pretty strongly anti-adultery. Certainly their religion demands that of them.
Mrs. Gingrich—the current Mrs. Gingrich became the current Mrs. Gingrich by starting in an illicit, extramarital affair in the office with Newt Gingrich while he was married to someone else. That‘s the current Mrs. Gingrich, who will be standing beside him presumably during campaign events.
Does the current Mrs. Gingrich have to ask for forgiveness from these same religiously conservative voters that will be appearing in Republican primaries?
FRUM: That would be an unprecedented and astonishing thing. I don‘t know. Americans actually, you know, give politicians a lot of leeway. There are a lot of things that the voters prefer not to know. There are a lot of things that voters prefer not to ask.
And often politicians give the voters more information than the voters are really asking for. I think Newt Gingrich could put all of this behind him if he were to focus on other kinds of issues. But if you are going to run as the values candidate, kindness is a value too.
I don‘t think he is hurt by the adultery so much. That would eliminate an awful lot of our political class. The thing that it is going to hurt is this idea that he was cruel to these two previous wives, both of whom got sick. If he looks callous towards them, then the question is how will he treat you.
Most of those caucus voters have no desire to marry Newt Gingrich and don‘t worry about how it would be to be his wife.
O‘DONNELL: Now let‘s listen to something else Newt Gingrich said to the Christian Broadcasting Network.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GINGRICH: In the end, the presidency is different than any other job. You‘re asking—you‘re looking for somebody who is going to lead the nation. You‘re looking for somebody who should be ideally the unifier of the nation. And you‘re looking to somebody to whom you are going to loan enormous power for four years.
You want to be able to look into them and understand do they share my values.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: Wouldn‘t what Newt just said be precisely the argument against Newt? He is talking about you want to vote for someone who can unify the country. Isn‘t this precisely what Newt could never do?
FRUM: Well, I think one of the things—and I really worry about this a lot—is when Republicans say the country, they don‘t always see the whole country, how very big it is, how many different kinds of people are in it. They have a kind of definition where they say these are the people who share my values, that certain Americans are more American than other Americans.
And then once you get into that way of thinking, it is then possible to revise your definition of what it means to have people make exactly the kind of assessments that Newt Gingrich said. But it is important to remember, you know, 330 million Americans. They are not all Evangelical. They‘re not all religious. They‘re not all straight. They‘re not all white.
And if you‘re going to unify all of them, you have to see all of them.
O‘DONNELL: David, assuming that the action taken in Wisconsin tonight holds and survives legal challenge that Democratic legislators want to bring to it because of violations to the open meetings rules and other possible procedural violations that may have occurred—is a win by Scott Walker on his union busting approach in Wisconsin something that rockets him into real contention in the Republican presidential campaign?
FRUM: He will be certainly a name to conjure with. But he may just come out of this too bullet riddled personally to survive. Look, you were talking before about unification. If there‘s one thing that unifies Republicans, me included, it is the belief that public sector unions have become too costly, too burdensome.
This is the fundamental issue, especially in state and local politics, for organizing Republicans. Walker will be a hero, whatever his personal fate.
And as one of the previous interviewer said, this is going to give inspiration to Republican governors everywhere. We are going into an age of austerity, where government is going to have to cost less. And this is going to be one of the ways that Republicans will say the government can cost less by changing work rules. It is not just about the money, it is about the way work is organized at the state and local level.
O‘DONNELL: But ultimately, it is about the money. And given that the unions conceded all of the money points, the chaos that erupted over what was left of the battle is what has made Governor Walker possibly, as you say, too battle scarred to go forward nationally.
FRUM: They haven‘t conceded all the money points. There are still going to be prisons with six employees for every one inmate, as happens in one of the rural counties of Wisconsin. That‘s the issue, staffing, management. How do you move people around. Can you close a facility without—even when there are people who are laid off in another facility?
O‘DONNELL: David Frum, former speech writer to President George W. Bush and the editor of FrumForum.com. Thanks for joining us tonight, David.
FRUM: Thanks, Lawrence.
O‘DONNELL: Last weekend, Sarah Palin called comedian Kathy Griffin a 50-year-old bully. Wow. Wow, what a shot. Coming up, Kathy Griffin will be here exclusively to respond to that attack.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: Tomorrow at 10:30 a.m., President Obama and the First Lady will host the White House Conference on Bullying Prevention. It will air live on the White House‘s website. And one person who should watch, if you believe Sarah Palin, is two-time Emmy winner comedian Kathy Griffin.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Now rumors are that Kathy Griffin is going to play a Sarah Palin Tea Party type on “Glee.” What do you make of that? She hasn‘t been kind to you or your family. What do you think?
SARAH PALIN, FORMER GOVERNOR OF ALASKA: You know, Kathy Griffin can do anything to me or say anything about me, because, you know, she‘s kind of a—she‘s a 50-year-old adult bully, really is what she is, kind of a has been comedienne. And she could do those things to me.
I would just ask for respect of my children, as she had stated on CNN that her New Year‘s resolution was to destroy my 16-year-old daughter. That takes it a little bit too far. Kathy, pick on me. Come up to Alaska and pick on me, but leave my kids alone.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: Joining me now, the star of the Broadway show “Kathy Griffin Wants A Tony,” premiering Friday, 50-year old bully Kathy Griffin. Thanks for joining us tonight.
KATHY GRIFFIN, COMEDIAN: How do you do, Lawrence? It‘s my pleasure.
O‘DONNELL: Hey, this 50-year-old thing --
GRIFFIN: That part is true. I am afraid that part is true.
O‘DONNELL: But that is cruel. I mean, how dare she? Just because you talk about it doesn‘t mean she should ever talk about it.
GRIFFIN: Are you accusing her of being a bully? That word is really bandied about at many dinner tables now.
O‘DONNELL: Before we get into the fun of being Kathy Griffin, and being in a fight with the entire Palin family --
GRIFFIN: A blast.
O‘DONNELL: The problem of bullying in this country that the president is going to address tomorrow, which Sarah Palin doesn‘t take seriously in any way, and is perfectly happy to just have other people take the serious burden of talking to this country about the serious things --
GRIFFIN: In her book “Going Rogue,” actually it describes how she kind of has disdain for equality. And of course I work a lot with the LGBT community and gotten—so grateful gotten lifetime achievements awards for the Trevor Project and all these great organizations who do real work with bullying.
Of course, when I do that work, that‘s a very serious thing. So it is very different from a comedian telling jokes.
O‘DONNELL: What is it that the people like Sarah Palin don‘t get about bullying, the real dangerous bullying that‘s out there for adolescent gay kids and what they come up against in their lives?
GRIFFIN: Well, I think there‘s this wave now of self-righteousness. And it seems like just any basement blogger to anybody running for an office, whether they—is she the governor or has she been the governor?
O‘DONNELL: She used to be.
GRIFFIN: So she was calling me a has been comedian . I would say she has been—has been the governor. I‘m just saying, that part—
O‘DONNELL: Have you ever quit halfway through a show?
GRIFFIN: No, I have not. I would not feel right about that, because people pay their hard earned money to come see me.
O‘DONNELL: And you kind of promise them ahead of time I‘m going to do a whole show.
GRIFFIN: They know I‘m going to do a full show. They know I will curse and be somewhat offensive. And I hope to make them laugh.
But no, the topic of real bullying is obviously a very different—we talk about the Rutgers case, and obviously other cases like that, it is just a completely different animal. So if you don‘t know the difference between a joke and real bullying, then are you going to call the ghost of Johnny Carson a bully? Are you going to call the entire cast of SNL a bully? The late night hosts?
I mean, that‘s what comedians do. We make jokes about people, places and things.
O‘DONNELL: Yeah. And the—so the sense of humor thing is Sarah—one of Sarah‘s big weaknesses is the whole sense of humor thing. But you are now in a fight with her 16-year-old daughter? How did that happen?
GRIFFIN: Well, this network reported as—
O‘DONNELL: Then it must be true.
GRIFFIN: When her daughter Willow posted on her Facebook wall—and I don‘t follow her on Facebook. I am not on Facebook. When I saw on all the news coverage about the daughter using the F word, the pejorative for gay people—I don‘t mean the fun four letter F-word that I‘m using.
O‘DONNELL: There it is up our screen right now. That‘s what Willow posted.
GRIFFIN: Yeah. So here‘s the deal: I think when you‘re 16, you know you‘re not supposed to use that word. That‘s a word that you really do kind of tie in with bullying, especially in the LGBT community, a community I think that she doesn‘t care about, you know. But that‘s completely obvious to me that‘s very, very different.
Because you can see if you look at that posting, that‘s not a joke, you know. So what I say is very clearly a joke. It is always a joke. I am on stage. I‘m at a comedy club or the Ballasco (ph) theater, but I have a microphone, all jokes.
O‘DONNELL: And you‘ve just come from Wisconsin.
GRIFFIN: I did a special there. It was—yes, just truly—I taped my last special in Milwaukee in the hub of all the protesting. Well, it is Madison. But—
O‘DONNELL: Did you just go there because there was a crowd? Like you heard there‘s a big crowd?
GRIFFIN: I would have gone for paparazzi, not a crowd. Please, I have integrity, or at least I mean to get there soon.
O‘DONNELL: Yeah.
GRIFFIN: No, I was just taping my special there because it is actually a great comedy town. I‘m a Midwesterner too. I just happened to be a member of two unions as well.
But in the middle of the show, I just sort of stopped for a second, and I said I want to applaud all of you that are in Madison protesting in support, those of you who do. And I don‘t mean to get too political, but I am in two unions myself. And, of course, you guys know they‘re essential.
And then I stopped, thinking that they would just be like OK, where‘s the next joke. And the whole audience stood up and just applauded. This wasn‘t an audience of protesters in Madison. This was just a theater audience for two shows in Milwaukee. So—
O‘DONNELL: Now Newt Gingrich made some news talking about the difficulty—the strain of being, you know, sexually exclusive within marriage. It has never been easy for him. Listen to what he had to say to the Christian Broadcasting Network.
GRIFFIN: OK.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NEWT GINGRICH, FORMER HOUSE SPEAKER: There‘s no question that at times in my life, partially driven by how passionately I felt about this country, that I worked far too hard and that things happened in my life that were not appropriate.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: Now you—
GRIFFIN: I love how it‘s all under the cloak of the passion of the country, by the way.
O‘DONNELL: You feel passionately about this country. You work far too hard, on occasion.
GRIFFIN: First of all—
O‘DONNELL: Has that driven you to anything that you regret that you would like to unburden yourself with here on MSNBC?
GRIFFIN: Any unburdening I will be doing will, of course, be in my
Broadway show “Kathy Griffin Wants a Tony,” opening Friday. However, can I
--
(CROSS TALK)
GRIFFIN: That would be at the Ballasco Theater on Broadway, where all the has-beens—
O‘DONNELL: It‘s not running forever. It‘s running for—
GRIFFIN: It is only running ten shows in eight days. But can I personally thank Sarah Palin? Because I did have to add two more shows because of her comments. And I really want to thank her because I appreciate it. I promise to go in depth in the shows.
That‘s what I consider doing the Lord‘s week, Sarah Palin driving more people to my live show.
O‘DONNELL: How many seats are you holding for the Palin family?
GRIFFIN: There‘s always at least four. They can have the whole row. You know, what was so funny is when she said that soundbite, come to Alaska; come on, Kathy. You know that I did a whole episode of “My Life on the D-List” in Wasilla, went to her house, knocked on the door, and left a note inviting her to my show in Anchorage.
So that‘s how—that‘s how studied her staff, Rebecca Mentz (ph), or whoever writes her stuff for her. That‘s—they didn‘t even like Wiki me.
O‘DONNELL: You‘ve tried to reach out. You‘ve done everything you can. Kathy Griffin—the show is “Kathy Griffin Wants a Tony.” Tickets are on sale at a variety of venues, including, of course, on KathyGriffin.com.
Thanks for joining us, Kathy. You can have THE LAST WORD at our blog, TheLast Word.MSNBC.com, and follow my Tweets @Lawrence. Rachel Maddow has more from the news—the breaking news from Wisconsin with her special guest tonight, Michael Moore.
Good evening, Rachel.
END
Copyright 2011 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.>
PASTE THE TRANSCRIPT HERE, LEAVE THE LINK