updated 9/21/2011 9:58:53 AM ET 2011-09-21T13:58:53

Guests: Eric Burns, David Cay Johnston, Mike Papantonio, Sherrod Brown,
Maxine Waters, Jim Moore, Wendell Young, Mike Rogers

ED SCHULTZ, HOST: Good evening, Americans. And welcome to THE ED
SHOW, tonight live from Minneapolis.

All the right wing talkers -- they are jumping all over the
president`s plan to raise taxes on them and their rich buddies.

Bill O`Reilly says, you know, he might not be able to do more of his
show if he has to pay more in tax. Can we get that in writing, Bill?

This is THE ED SHOW -- let`s get to work.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BILL O`REILLY, FOX NEWS: If Barack Obama begins taxing me more than
50 percent -- which is very possible -- I don`t know how much longer I`m
going to do this.

SCHULTZ (voice-over): Rich righties are going nuts over President
Obama`s proposed tax hikes.

Tonight, Democratic strategist Eric Burns, "Reuters" columnist David
Cay Johnston, and "Ring of Fire" radio host Mike Papantonio are here.

Rick Perry is free to move around the country and the taxpayer foots
the bill. I`ll talk to Jim Moore about Perry`s extravagant use of state
funds.

In my playbook tonight, President Obama is set to make the trip to the
Boehner-McConnell bridge in Cincinnati. Wendell Young of the Cincinnati
City Council is my guest.

And while the rest of the country is worrying about jobs and the
economy, the right is flipping out over Chaz Bono`s participation in
"Dancing with the Stars."

KEITH ABLOW, PSYCHIATRIST: He`s on a campaign to mainstream
transgenderism.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCHULTZ: Great to have you with us tonight, folks. Thanks for
watching.

I think most of us in cable television do this because we love being
in the mix. In fact, I`ve often thought that this business is kind of a
disease. You do it and you just can`t get it out of your blood, out of
your system. But maybe that`s not the case for everybody.

You see, the king of cable television news, he`s threatening to pack
it in if President Obama raises his taxes and raises the taxes of his rich
buddies. Bill O`Reilly -- we all know he`s being looking out for you folks
for a long time. What he`s looking out for is the top 2 percent.

The self-proclaimed culture warrior is threatening to walk away from
his $10 million a year contract with FOX News because the president is
going to make an effort to get people like Bill-O to share in some
sacrifice. Got it?

Watch O`Reilly blow a gasket on the Monday episode of "The Factor"
over the taxes.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

O`REILLY: But if you tax achievement, some of the achievers are going
to pack it in. Again, let`s take me. My corporations employ scores of
people. They depend on me to do what I do, so they can make a nice salary.

If Barack Obama begins taxing me more than 50 percent -- which is very
possible -- I don`t know how much longer I`m going to do this. I like my
job, but there comes a point when taxation becomes oppressive.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: It sounds like Bill O`Reilly really cares about his
employees. He`d pack it in over a few more thousand dollars. Oh, what an
employer.

President Obama isn`t talking about raising O`Reilly`s tax rate over
50 percent. That is I guess what you call the spin zone.

Now, in the past, President Obama said that he wants the top 2 percent
to go back to the old Clinton tax rate of 39 percent. How did we ever
function at that rate? In fact, the last time, guys as rich as O`Reilly
gave up more than 50 percent in federal taxes -- federal taxes -- was
during the Gipper`s first term.

O`Reilly isn`t the only millionaire -- million-dollar-baby whining
about the president`s plan. The Drugster -- you know, he`s -- I don`t know
how he`s going to make it either. He`s almost done with this five-year
$400 million Clear Channel contract. And Rush, of course, slapped O`Reilly
on the back today for sticking up for him last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RUSH LIMBAUGH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: I think it`s an important thing
that Bill O`Reilly got it right, because everybody knows he has more power
than anybody other than the president. And he was great on this last
night. And frankly, it`s heart-warming to see. I don`t feel like a lone
wolf anymore. I don`t feel like a lone voice.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Oh, it`s so heart-warming, isn`t it? The right wing
fraternity brothers are scratching each other`s backs right now.

You`re not alone, Drugster. Sean Hannity, you see, he`s already
whining about paying more than 50 percent of his $100 million radio
contract and multimillion-dollar TV contract in taxes.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS: I pay New York state tax, county tax, sales
tax, property tax, federal income tax. I pay 55 percent of my income, and
here comes the president taking a baseball bat and hitting us all on the
head saying we`re not paying our fair share.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: If Hannity doesn`t like paying taxes on the local or state
level, I guess he could join his buddy O`Reilly and pack it in. He`d never
do it. Hannity wants, I guess, for nothing.

He could pay 90 percent in taxes and still live better than 98 percent
of great Americans who listen to his garbage that he cranks out on a daily
basis. If "slant head" was intellectually honest, he would admit President
Obama isn`t asking him to pay 50 percent. Hannity lives pretty good, in a
multimillion dollar, 16-room mansion on Long Island.

And you know what? That`s his choice. And he`s earned it.

But here`s the deal. Every primetime cable host is in the top 1
percent of income earners in this country. It`s a fact. It`s really easy
to go buy any house you want, depending on how you want to live, eat in the
finest restaurants and fly on private jets. And I guess you could say live
like a king.

It`s easy to lose touch with the folks in the flyover country.
O`Reilly, Limbaugh and Hannity wrap themselves in the flag after 9/11,
didn`t they?

But over the last year, they`ve been hammering firefighters and police
officers. You know, you guys have to take a pay cut to save these state
budgets. That`s their position. O`Reilly doesn`t have the guts to go to
Columbus to tell the firefighters, hey, I`m looking out for you.

None of these wealthy broadcasters went to Wisconsin to stand with
teachers who were forced to give up almost 20 percent of their income,
their middle-classers. Where were these rich righties with microphones?
Fourteen million Americans don`t have a job and millions more have fallen
into poverty. The numbers are staggering.

Limbaugh calls those people lazy and Hannity wants the government to
quit paying unemployment benefits. That`s their position.

You know, it`s kind of sickening to hear multimillion-dollar talking
heads complained how a small tax increase will change their life. I mean,
if you make less than $250,000 a year, let`s get to the facts. "The
Factor" Bill O`Reilly isn`t looking out for you. He`s looking out for
himself.

Defending the rich from a tax increase doesn`t make you a patriot. It
makes you a pinhead.

Now, over 1,000 great Americans have signed the petition that we`ve
asked you to sign on MSNBC.com, on Ed.MSNBC.com, to raise O`Reilly`s taxes,
OK? To see if he`ll really quit.

I find it selfish. I find it amazing. And I think that they`re on
display for every American to see, that maybe they really don`t have the
character to serve it up for America. In the midst of disaster, when it`s
a great media story and the firefighters are there or the police officers
are there and, of course, they vilify public educators all the time -- when
it comes to stepping up and doing something for them, it`s always
conditional. But when it`s time to step up for the wealthy, you can always
count on these rich broadcasters to be there.

Thirty-nine percent, is it that tough? It`s interesting how the right
wing talkers of America, they want the war, but they sure as hell don`t
want to pay for it, do they?

Get your cell phones out. I want to know what you think. Tonight`s
question is: would you be willing to pay more in taxes if it meant Bill
O`Reilly would retire? Text "A" for yes, text "B" for no, to 622639, and
you can always go to our blog at Ed.MSNBC.com. We`re bringing the results
later on in the show.

Now, joining me tonight is Eric Burns, Democratic strategist and
founder of Bullfight Strategies. David Cay Johnston is also with us
tonight, author of the book "Free Lunch" and columnist for "Reuters." And
Mike Papantonio, host of "The Ring of Fire" radio show.

Mike, I got to ask you right away. You`ve been successful in your
profession for a long time. How in the heck did you ever make it when you
were paying 39 percent? How in the heck did you ever survive when you were
paying 39 percent? It`s a good thing those tax cuts were there so you
could make it, right, buddy?

MIKE PAPANTONIO, "RING OF FIRE" RADIO SHOW HOST: It`s tough. I was
so startled, Ed, I was so startled by what O`Reilly said the other night.
I tried to do a quick analysis of why he`s so worried about money, why he`s
so worried about taxes.

The quick analysis is this: he must be worried about his net worth. I
remember O`Reilly paid Andrea Mackris, one of his producers, in an out-of-
court settlement so she would drop sexual harassment charges against him.
He paid her millions of dollars to hush up. But in the process, we learned
he was worth $50 million.

So, in my financial analysis, I thought -- well, surely, he wasn`t
worried about that. So, I thought maybe he was spending too much money
having the New York police follow around his wife and his wife`s boyfriend.
Maybe he was spending a ton of money there. But that wouldn`t make a dent
into his $50 million net worth.

So, maybe he`s only left with $20 million after a bad divorce. I
don`t know.

But I got to tell you this -- most people really don`t care whether
Bill O`Reilly shows up tomorrow night at all. They don`t care whether he
goes home or shows up. Forty-six million Americans now have to rely on
food stamps to eat. And Bill O`Reilly asks us to have some sympathy for
him. It`s an absurd position.

SCHULTZ: David Cay Johnston, give us the numbers. If it goes up 3.5
percent, 4 percent, what`s it mean to millionaires, whether they`re making
$1 million, $5 million or $10 million? I mean, what does it really mean?
What is the sacrifice?

DAVID CAY JOHNSTON, REUTERS COLUMNIST: Well, the Tax Policy Center
estimates when you work it all through, it`s a 1.2 percentage point
increase for people who make over $1 million a year.

Let`s give an idea of how much money that is. The median income
taxpayer in America has to work 97 years to make $1 million. The average
income of people over $1 million is $3 million. So you`d have to be around
for almost 300 years to make what the average person in this group makes in
a year.

SCHULTZ: That`s an amazing number.

Eric, what would it be like if Bill O`Reilly really packed it in?

ERIC BURNS, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, Ed, I think it would be one
of the greatest days for this country and certainly for a media debate that
I can recall. And I really hope he goes. I`d be happy to pay his
fictitious 50 percent in taxes of my considerably lower salary to see him
go.

I mean, you know --

(CROSSTALK)

BURNS: -- fact-based debate in this country.

SCHULTZ: It really shows their selfishness, no doubt. But, Eric, you
know, Bill O`Reilly says -- and Limbaugh says that, you know, he`s more
powerful than the president. What`s your response to that?

BURNS: Well, I laugh that. Maybe five years ago that was true. But
I think Glenn Beck last year showed us how not powerful Bill O`Reilly is.
He`s just kind of bloviating the usual stuff that he does.

But, you know, what`s really, really insidious about that is this
whole class warfare attack. I mean, Limbaugh made this reference to the
fact that he doesn`t want to go it alone. He`s not going it alone. Paul
Ryan on the Sunday shows invoked the class warfare argument five times
before Obama had even come out and gave his speech.

SCHULTZ: Yes.

BURNS: This is about dividing the country. And it`s -- frankly, it`s
a coded racial attack. You know, we`ve seen so many times from the right -
- it`s about dividing Obama and the Democrats from the middle class in this
country, all while these guys are advocating devouring the middle class and
destroying it.

SCHULTZ: Mike, how tough a sell is this going to be for the Obama
supporters to go out there and say that 98 percent of the American people
aren`t going to be affected by this? I mean, it was on the local news
tonight here in Minneapolis. I mean, it`s the millionaire`s tax.
Everybody`s talking about it. The president`s obviously got the country
talking about it.

But is this going to be a heavy lift, a hard sell -- what do you
think?

PAPANTONIO: I think -- I think it`s going to be something he has to
talk about. I think if you say it enough, people start hearing it. When
you say it one time, it goes over their head.

He`s smart enough to understand right now, this is the issue, Ed.
This is the issue. They want to call it class war. It`s class genocide is
what it is. It`s class genocide and the millionaires and the billionaires
around corporate America have won this war.

He has to remind America, this isn`t class war. It`s class genocide.
And the only way to correct it, the only way to correct it is to help
America dig its way out from underneath this war rubble that the
Republicans have left us with.

Look, he`s at his best right now. He`s on message. If he`ll do that
this next 13 months, he`ll have the presidency in his hands. Divide,
divide, divide from -- I don`t mean divide the country but divide these
cry-baby millionaires from the rest of the country and make us understand
really what they`re about.

SCHULTZ: And, David Cay Johnston, part of the platform of the
president moving forward with this new economic initiative is to reform to
tax code and get the corporations to pay more at a different rate. Would
the country be better off if we were to lower the corporate tax rate and
take away the write offs? Would thereby a gain? Would there be more money
coming from the treasury?

JOHNSTON: Well, it would be better off if we did this for
manufacturers, not for bankers and speculators who are big beneficiaries of
tax breaks. But for manufacturers who have to deal in the physical world,
yes.

And, Ed, you know, this plan the president has is a very clever trap
in it for the Republicans. The president`s plan would give everyone with a
job a tax cut next year, every employer in America would get a tax cut.
There would be a huge one-year write-off for any new capital equipment by
companies.

The Republicans vote against this. The very things they have said
they want, imagine how that`s going to be used against them in a campaign,
especially if they won`t even bring it up for a vote in the house because
they`re afraid of what will happen. So that`s the thing to watch is this
very clever trap the president has set out for the Republicans in the first
year of this bill 2012.

SCHULTZ: All right. Eric Burns, David Cay Johnston, Mike Papantonio
-- always a pleasure, great to have you with us tonight. Remember to
answer tonight`s question there at the bottom of the screen. You can see
it. We want to know what you think.

The president`s plan gives Democrats in the House and Senate a clear
opportunity to stand behind him to take it to the American people. When we
come back, Congresswoman Maxine Waters and Senator Sherrod Brown join me.

And later, funding family vacations with tax dollars, comparing gays
to alcoholics and meeting in private with Rupert Murdoch. It`s just
another week in Rick Perry`s America. Stay with us. We`re right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to THE ED SHOW.

You know, Democrats in the House and Senate should stand with
President Obama and the vast majority of the American people who support
raising taxes on the very wealthiest Americans. After all, those tax
increases would represent just one part of the shared sacrifice in the
president`s plan. The middle class workers who support these Democrats
have already been asked to sacrifice way too much for too long,
particularly by Republicans.

But some Democrats, believe it or not, are balking. Here we go,
Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson, who is up for reelection next year said,
quote, "There`s too much discussion about raising taxes right now, not
enough focus on cutting spending." How generic is that?

How about Mary Landrieu of Louisiana? She said that President Obama`s
plan which includes the elimination of oil subsidies was not going to fly.

And Senator Jim Webb, who I`m glad is not running for reelection in
Virginia, told "Politico" last week that the president`s ideas for how to
pay for his jobs plan were, "Terrible, we shouldn`t increase taxes on
ordinary people. There are other ways to get there."

Mr. Webb, I have a great deal of respect for you as a senator from
Virginia. But we`re not talking about ordinary people. We are talking
about 450,000 Americans who are millionaires that have had the breaks for
the last 10 years, that have had the breaks for the last 30 years if you
look at the income graph as to where the money`s going in our society.

Ordinary people? No. That would be extraordinary.

Coming up, we`ll talk to a Democrat from the House and from the Senate
and see where they stand on the president`s plan to put Americans back to
work. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to THE ED SHOW. And thanks for watching
tonight -- our broadcast tonight from the middle of the country,
Minneapolis, Minnesota.

It`s all over the local news, the millionaire`s tax. If the president
has done nothing else, he`s got the country talking and focusing on just
what has to happen with the treasury. Millionaires need to pay more,
that`s the message -- although Democrats have been slow to support the
president`s plan but others have expressed broad support for the plan.

Let`s go to Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio tonight and also joining us
is Congresswoman Maxine Waters of California.

Great to have both of you with us tonight.

Congresswoman, if -- I got to ask you. If 98 percent of the American
people -- and it`s actually a little bit more than that -- are not going to
get touched by this, how in the world can`t the Democrats get behind it?
There are some reservations coming out of some of the Senate and a few in
the House.

REP. MAXINE WATERS (D), CALIFORNIA: Well --

SCHULTZ: Isn`t this something easy for the Democrats to sell? What
do you think?

WATERS: Well, I think that many of the Democrats are looking for the
details of the overall proposal.

But on increasing taxes on the millionaires and billionaires, we have
to get behind that. I think it is fair. It makes good sense. The
American public supports that. They have been getting away with not paying
their fair share.

And I think that aspect of the proposal is going to get widespread
support among Democrats and I think Republicans are going to have to not do
what they`ve been doing in the past and protecting the richest 1 percent in
our country. They`re going to have to come on board on this. American
workers and people out of jobs are not going to stand for this unfairness
in the taxation situation.

SCHULTZ: And, Senator, is this going to be a hard sell for senators
who are going home? There`s 16 Democrats and one independent facing
reelection. It would seem to me that it would be an easy sell to say to 98
percent of your constituents that you`re not going to get touched by this
and it`s about time those who have had the tax breaks over the last 10
years have got to step to the plate? How can that be a hard sell? Why are
some Democrats in the Senate getting cold feet on this?

SEN. SHERROD BROWN (D), OHIO: Well, let them speak for themselves.
It`s easy for me.

I mean, I was on a conference call with a bunch of seniors today in
eastern Ohio. It`s pretty simple. Do you want to protect oil companies,
oil company subsidies and hedge fund operators on Wall Street? Or do you
want to protect Medicare? I mean, it really can`t be both ways.

I mean, the Republicans, if they want to protect their oil company
friends and they want to protect hedge fund operators and they want to
protect these tax breaks to send jobs overseas, then they`ve got to cut
Medicare to pay for it. And, you know, it`s real clear to me that we ought
to have some tax fairness here, people who have had a good last 10 years
ought to pay a little bit more. And then we can preserve Medicare and
Social Security, make some significant budget cut where is we have to,
protect Pell grants, Social Security, Medicare, the kinds of things --
invest in the future, community colleges and all that.

These are real simple, clear choices. Politics is about choices. And
Republicans, as Maxine just suggested, Republicans that stand in the way of
this are going to see a steamroller running over them because the public
clearly says, increase taxes on people who have had an easy ride and can
afford it, and don`t balance the budget on the backs of middle income and
senior citizens.

WATERS: Yes.

SCHULTZ: And, Congresswoman, the Congressional Black Caucus has
struggled with this president at times. But it seems now that he has
turned the corner.

Is this something that`s going to galvanize the Congressional Black
Caucus and really get them totally behind this president? Because if he`s
going to get reelected, I don`t know how he could do it with anybody in
your caucus that is not totally behind him. What do you make of that?

WATERS: Well, you know, he -- the Congressional Black Caucus really
does support the president. And we want him to work with us to do things
that will get him the votes that he deserves to have. We believe that
paying attention to the jobs crisis, doing those job fairs we did all over
the country, and helping people to connect with opportunities and keeping
this on the agenda, and then helping to try and target the resources toward
the worst places in this country will help him, not hurt him.

We support him. We want to see him reelected. And we want to make
sure that his base constituency understands that he`s on board on all of
these issues.

You know, one of the things that I think we have to do is this -- many
of the Republicans represent poor people and struggling people in the rural
areas and areas where they don`t get any representation here in Congress.
They don`t have anybody fighting for them. They are misled oftentimes on
issues that don`t have anything to do with their economic well being.

And I think we`re going to have to reach out beyond the urban areas,
beyond the suburban areas, into many of these rural areas, into these
mining areas, and talk to people about what their representatives are not
doing and how their economic interests are not being taken care of.

SCHULTZ: And, Senator Brown, are you concerned that President Obama
might backtrack? He has a habit over the last several years of making a
statement and then backing off a little bit and looking for the deal. Is
this it? How determined do you think he is and will this motivate some to
support him even more because they know he means business now?

BROWN: I think he does mean business. I think when all the talk
shows -- my wife and I were getting ready to watch the Cleveland Browns
football game on Sunday. Before that, we were watching some of these
shows.

And, you know, you heard all these conservative Republicans and
conservative politicians in Washington say the president`s committing class
warfare. And when the president didn`t back down when they accused him of
that -- because this is a group that`s committed class warfare for 20
years, going after Medicare, going after Social Security, giving tax breaks
to the wealthy, helping corporations outsource jobs. They`re committing
the class warfare.

The president is standing strong. He`s putting up with that. He`s
driving forward. He means it.

And Maxine is right, there are a lot of rural people in Appalachia,
Ohio, for instance, that are going to be welcomed what the president is
doing, because it`s not just the fair tax system, it`s the focus on jobs.
And the most important thing the president is doing is focusing on
infrastructure, going to Cincinnati Thursday to begin to put people to work
on that bridge, the Brent Spence bridge.

We`ve got that all over our state -- rural areas, urban areas, people
wanting to go to work. That`s what the president is fighting for. That`s
why I`m on board on this new proposal he has.

SCHULTZ: Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Congresswoman Maxine
Waters of California, great to have you both with us tonight, from the
House and the Senate, speaking strong for the president.

Coming up, House Speaker John Boehner compares federal spending to
snorting cocaine? The tan man`s in the zone tonight.

And watching "Dancing with the Stars" will confuse your kids. Well,
at least that`s what FOX News` medical expert, Dr. Keith Ablow says.

Later, the right wing hysterics over a game show.

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: And in Psycho Talk tonight, House Speaker John Boehner takes
a break from the golf course to rip President Obama`s jobs plan. During a
speech at the University of Cincinnati, the tan man sounded the class
warfare alarm, then came up with this comparison --

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R), HOUSE SPEAKER: At a time when it`s spending
that is out of control, giving the federal government more government would
be like giving a cocaine addict more cocaine.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: So by Boehner`s logic, government spending on things like
Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security and the military is like snorting
cocaine? But Boehner has a history of making bad comparisons.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BOEHNER: Dealing with the White House is like dealing with a bowl of
Jell-O.

This is killing an ant with a nuclear weapon.

I`m trying to catch my breath so I don`t refer to this maneuver going
on today as chicken crap.

Taking money away from politicians to spend is like taking cocaine
away from cocaine addicts.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: He`s into this drug thing, isn`t he? So this isn`t the
first time he`s compared the government to cocaine addicts. Mr. Boehner,
it`s time you stopped joking around with your cheap laugh lines and get
serious about creating jobs in this country. Comparing tax increases to
giving cocaine to an addict is irresponsible Psycho Talk.

Another week, another scratch in Rick Perry`s armor. This time, he`s
leaving taxpayers on the hook for his wife`s trips to Europe?

And President Obama has a plan to fix the nation`s crumpling
infrastructure and create jobs. At the same time, Republicans are already
against it. So the president is taking the fight to their turf. That
story next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Just over a month ago, Rick Perry became a national
candidate for office. And every week since then, we find more wrinkles in
his perfectly tailored suit, don`t we?

This weekend, "the Houston Chronicle" reported that despite massive
budget cuts in the state of Texas, taxpayers were still charged nearly
300,000 dollars for things like a Perry family vacation in the Bahamas.
Texans are seeing billions cut in public education, Medicaid and other
essential services.

But they are on the hook for Perry`s security detail while he relaxes
on the beach or while his wife takes solo trips to Amsterdam, Madrid and
New York. The Perry camp says any of Perry`s trips were to promote
economic development for the state of Texas. And Perry defends the cost to
taxpayers, saying that he`s promoting Texas no matter where he goes.

But yesterday, Perry was promoting himself to one of the Republican
party`s king makers. "The New York Times" reporting that Perry met with
News Corp head honcho Rupert Murdoch last night. Perry was in New York
raising money. And in a Citizens United world, he knows Rupert Murdoch`s
pockets are enormously deep and important.

Joining me tonight is "Huffington Post" contributor Jim Moore. He is
the author of the upcoming book "Adios Mofo, Why Rick Perry Will Make
America Miss George W. Bush."

Jim great to have you with us tonight. These expenses, first of all -
- what do you make of the meeting between Rupert Murdoch and the governor
of Texas? How important was this?

JIM MOORE, "THE HUFFINGTON POST": When I first heard about that, I
was thinking maybe he`s setting him up for a television program after he
loses the election. Who knows? But obviously this is a guy whose favor he
wants to curry. Because Murdoch`s reach in this country obviously with Fox
News, his network, his publications, is very wide and he wants to curry
favor with him.

Anything that the network -- the Fox network broadcasts, Perry wants
it to be good news. And he doesn`t want anything to be critical. So I
think it`s a combination of things. He`s got a lot of friends who can
raise a lot of money as well as exposing Rick Perry to a lot of positive
publicity.

SCHULTZ: Well, last week, it was Donald Trump in New York with
Governor Perry. And I think that was all about the governor saying, hey,
dude, don`t go on TV and bad-mouth me; I`m one of the good guys; I`m going
to lower your taxes. Now here he is meeting with Rupert Murdoch. It`s all
kind of part of the process.

But what about these vacation expenses? Is this something that could
come back to haunt Perry? And do you think that the other candidates in
the Republican field, especially in the debate coming up on Thursday night,
will they make hay of it?

SCHULTZ: If they don`t, they`re foolish, because Rick Perry, if
nothing else, Ed, is guilty of exceedingly bad form. When the state that
you are managing is in such deep financial trouble and you`re out running
around the country doing things that are strictly political, and you are
asking the taxpayers of Texas to pay for your security while you`re raising
tens of millions of dollars, it is profoundly hypocritical.

At a minimum, the guy could write a check for 300,000 dollars to pay
the taxpayers back, and it would make no dent in the amount of money he`s
making. It`s happened in Texas before. It happened with George Bush. The
state of Texas provides this security.

But it`s never been in a situation where people are traveling in the
way that he is, as political as he is, and he is benefiting from it
political. But the taxpayers of the state of Texas are getting nothing out
of this, nothing. And so he owes us. He ought to write us a check.

SCHULTZ: Yeah. He wrote in his first book that he believes that
homosexuality is the same as alcoholism. And now his campaign is not
responding to questions about that. Will the social issues in the
forefront of a general election come back to haunt this guy? Or will they
embolden his campaign?

MOORE: I think that they`ve got to go full-tilt fast-forward, and put
their blinders on, and stick with what he has said in this regard. In his
first book about the Boy Scouts, he was talking about how the Boy Scouts
were under attack from homosexual activists and atheists.

He`s going to continue to take these positions. They`ll probably hurt
him in the general election. But as you`ve seen in the polls, he continues
to do very well in the primary with people who believe like he does.

SCHULTZ: Yeah. Well, he hasn`t broken away. You have to look at
Mitt Romney still within striking distance. His inability to break away
from the pack in the past month, does that show some vulnerability?

MOORE: I think he took a hit in the last debate. I think he was not
very poised. He was a little bit off-balance. I think those numbers have
reflected in a slight drop. But I think what Rick has shown historically
is that he can take it and he doesn`t look back. He doesn`t look any other
direction.

He`s decisive. He gets out there and he tells people what he
believes. Eventually, people come back to him. I think his numbers will
continue to go up. And I think Romney`s will go back down.

SCHULTZ: "Huffington Post" contributor Jim Moore, always a pleasure.
Great to have you on THE ED SHOW.

Coming up in my Playbook, President Obama wants to fix the nation`s
roads and bridges. Republicans are still saying no. So the president is
taking the fight to Boehner`s district, Mitch McConnell`s district, their
home states. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Here`s another Bachmann dandy. Republican presidential
hopeful Michele Bachmann out of Minnesota says President Obama`s policies
are, quote, "continuing to dig us deeper into the hole toward another
recession." To prove it, she stopped at a traffic light company in
Waterloo, Iowa, where they manufacture traffic lights.

Bachmann says that the firm OMJC Signal Inc. would thrive off her
policies, less regulation and, of course, less government spending.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MICHELE BACHMANN (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We want you to
grow, grow, grow, grow, grow, grow. That`s my goal, to see you succeed
wildly.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: To make sure everyone was on the same page, Bachmann asked
the company`s chief executive, quote, "you don`t get a government grant to
do what you do?"

According to "The L.A. Times," Mr. Yost assured her he didn`t. But
it turns out that`s not exactly the case. Yost later acknowledged that his
company has profited from the infrastructure spending promoted by the
president of the United States. In fact, as much as 80 percent of OMJC`s
revenue comes from government.

Think about it, folks. It`s a traffic light company. Who are their
clients? Cities, municipalities, government. I mean, when was the last
time you bought a traffic light?

Light bulb on now, Michele? Next time, Bachmann might want to do a
little research beforehand. Just a thought.

Coming up, the GOP leadership says no to infrastructure improvements
that would help out their very own states. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: In my Playbook tonight, President Obama is fighting for his
jobs plan on the Republican leaders` home turf. Day after tomorrow,
Thursday, the president will visit the Brent Spence Bridge, which carries a
major trucking route across the Ohio River. Four percent gross domestic
product in this country goes across that bridge. And it is, my friends, in
need of dire repair.

One end of the bridge is in Senate Minority Leader District`s -- Mitch
McConnell, his home state of Kentucky. The other end is in Cincinnati,
just a few miles outside John Boehner`s Ohio district, the speaker. The
almost 50-year-old bridge is in such bad shape, the president has called it
functionally obsolete.

The plans for rebuilding it are under way. But the funding isn`t
there yet. It will cost an estimated 2.4 billion dollars. So far, they
have 51 million ready to go. The president`s plan would help fund the
project and create construction jobs at the same time.

Republicans claim they`re in favor of improving infrastructure, but
they have already come out against the president`s plan to actually get it
done.

Joining me now is Wendell Young. He is a member of the Cincinnati,
Ohio City Council and the chairman of the Brent Spence Safety Commission.

Mr. Young, great to have you with us tonight. I think when the
president shined a light on this bridge, every American was saying, OK, how
dangerous is this bridge? Tell us about it.

WENDELL YOUNG, CINCINNATI CITY COUNCIL: Well, thank you so much. I`m
actually glad to be here. I`m just thrilled that President Obama`s shining
a light on this particular bridge in our area.

You asked how dangerous is this bridge? This bridge was built to
carry 80,000 cars a year. It now carries double that many. It has no
breakdown lanes.

Just a while ago, we had part of the top deck fall on to the lower
deck. A few months ago, we had a man lose his life on that bridge because
there are no breakdown lanes on that bridge.

This bridge is very dangerous, very much in need of repair. And
President Obama is right on target by utilizing this bridge as an example
of what can be done to revitalize an economy.

The president`s bill will bring jobs to this area. It will help the
commerce. It will maintain this vital link that is a part of a chain that
stretches from Florida to Michigan. And you`re right. This bridge carries
nearly four percent of our gross domestic product every year.

This is a very important bridge. It needs to be replaced. It needs
to be replaced now.

SCHULTZ: I read that number last week, and I couldn`t believe it. It
seemed awfully high, but it is amazing. Is funding really the only thing
that`s holding this up? What is in the way? Why can`t we get this done in
this part of the country for this bridge?

YOUNG: I really wish I had a good answer to that. There are people
here who have been working for years to get this bridge replaced,
particularly our mayor, Mark Mallory, Senator Sherrod Brown, and
particularly our vice mayor, Roxanne Qualls (ph). They have all been
actively engaged in trying to get this bridge replaced.

The reality simply is that we are in an area where, thanks to the
president bringing attention to this, sending that wake-up call to
Congress, and now it`s just a matter of getting Boehner and McConnell to do
their job and find the money to fix this bridge.

We need to have the will to get it done. We just can`t wait another
20 years. I`m so pleased at what the president is doing because he`s right
on target.

SCHULTZ: Cincinnati`s kind of a conservative town. It`s ridden with
conservative talk and that way of thinking. What are the folks in that
part of the country saying about Boehner and McConnell? They`re standing
in the way of this. Why aren`t they standing with the president if the
need is as great as you say it is, and I believe it is?

YOUNG: The need is every bit as great as I say it is. And why
they`re standing in the president`s way is beyond me because not only are
we talking about commerce, we`re talking about jobs. We`re talking about
people being able to feed their families.

We`re talking about good-paying jobs, not only for Cincinnatians, all
over this area. All over this country, people are going to want to be
coming to work here. We need this job.

SCHULTZ: Mr. Young, good to have you with us tonight. Wendell Young,
member of the Cincinnati City Council with us here on THE ED SHOW tonight.
I hope you get it.

Coming up, the great danger that America faces. And, no, it`s not
Nancy Grayson, her tennis shoes, in a dance costume. I`ll let the folks at
Fox News explain. You`re watching THE ED SHOW on MSNBC.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: And finally tonight, last night on this program, I spoke
about the president`s call for shared sacrifice and the GOP`s ongoing war
on the middle class. Bill O`Reilly, on the other hand, whined about his
taxes and here`s what else was on his mind.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL O`REILLY, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: As you may know, the daughter of
Sonny and Cher, Chastity Bono, has undergone a sex change, is now a man,
Chaz Bono.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Good to know that O`Reilly is really focused on the kitchen
table issues of the country.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

O`REILLY: Mr. Bono is getting all kinds of publicity, even appearing
on a dance program.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: The program that O`Reilly is talking about is "Dancing With
the Stars." And the publicity that O`Reilly is referring to seems to be
coming from one source in particular, Fox News.

Fox`s go-to medical expert, Dr. Keith Ablow, believes that Chaz
performing the Cha-Cha on national TV is harmful to your kids. Ablow, a
psychiatrist and a member of Fox News` medical A team, has gone on several
Fox News programs and written online columns advising parents not to allow
their children to watch the show because Bono`s gender identity will
confuse them.

But Ablow is not basing his hysteria in medical fact. The American
Psychiatry Association states, quote, "there is no evidence that viewing a
television game show with a transgender contestant would induce gender
identity disorder in young people."

Well, Ablow quit the American Psychiatry Association and last night
pedaled his same old panic button on Fox again.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DR. KEITH ABLOW, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Well, Mr. Bono is doing more
than dancing. He`s on a campaign to mainstream transgenderism. We
wouldn`t invite people with anorexia to go on fashion shows and talk about
how wonderful they feel now that they`re thinner and how they want more
liposuction. This is an exact parallel.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Joining me now is Mike Rogers, managing editor -- managing
director of RawStory.com.

Mike, good to have you with us tonight. You want to answer to this
Ablow saying that parents should keep their kids away from the TV when Chaz
Bono is on the air? What do you make of it?

MIKE ROGERS, RAWSTORY.COM: I`m amazed at the influence these guys
always seem to give television, some of this nonsensical stuff that -- you
know, watching "Will & Grace" will make your kid gay; watching "Dancing
With the Stars" will now make your kids transgender.

You know, these guys are grasping at straws. They saw today the
repeal of Don`t ask, Don`t Tell take effect. And now that open gays can
serve in the military, they have to swing their cannons, I guess, now
toward reality game shows, of all things. So it`s just kind of silly.

SCHULTZ: Why are they doing it? You know, Mike, why are they going
down this road? Do they this is just some big -- big ratings thing or do
they actually believe this? What do you think?

ROGERS: I think that, you know, unfortunately for many of these guys,
they actually believe it. They wake up in the morning, the things they
obsess about, whether it`s keeping gay people from doing certain job or
keeping them out of the military or trying to keep people like Chaz Bono
off of television shows -- it`s kind of a sad statement on their lives that
that`s what they think is the most -- that`s their calling in the morning
when they wake up.

I do believe, in a lot of these cases, these guys actually believe the
insanity that they spew, which, of course, in the end, creates real harm
for all lesbian gay, bi and trans Americans.

SCHULTZ: Do you think it lead to gay bashing? Do you think it leads
to hate speech?

ROGERS: I think these guys definitely do contribute to it. Even
they`ll make fun of it or they`ll say things are seriously wrong or that
people shouldn`t be doing things. They basically want to strip their right
to full participation in society.

So it kind of validates the feelings of some of the people who do more
of the attacking, some of the violent attacks. It gives them the --
basically the kind of leeway, their permission to say, well, I`m not the
only one. There`s these guys on TV, in fact, who claim to be full-fledged,
legitimate psychiatrists, when, in fact, they`re spewing rhetoric from 30
years ago.

I do think that it contributes to that. Nothing happens in a vacuum.

SCHULTZ: So I have to ask you, who`s more dangerous, Chaz Bono or
Nancy Grace?

YOUNG: Well, that`s a hell of a combination to ask me about, Ed. I
think it depends. Some things you`re faced with a choice and it`s one of
those things that -- I don`t know. It`s hard to determine.

SCHULTZ: Mike Rogers, always a pleasure. Good to have you with us
tonight. Thanks so much.

That`s THE ED SHOW. I`m Ed Schultz. You bet. "THE LAST WORD" with
Lawrence O`Donnell starts right now. We`ll see you back here tomorrow
night. You can catch my radio show on 127 Sirius XM tomorrow.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY
BE UPDATED.
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.>