updated 2/13/2012 11:15:53 AM ET 2012-02-13T16:15:53

Guests: Melissa Harris-Perry, Howard Fineman, Jan Schakowsky, Tom Barrett, Lena Taylor, Goldie Taylor, Mike
Papantonio, Joe Hudy

ED SCHULTZ, HOST: Good evening, Americans. And welcome to THE ED
SHOW, from New York.

The president made a move today that really should end the Republicans
war against women when it comes to health care. But we know better. It
won`t.

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

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Religious liberty will
be protected.

SCHULTZ (voice-over): The president is keeping everyone happy on the
contraception mandate.

OBAMA: And a law that requires free preventative care will not
discriminate against women.

SCHULTZ: Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky of Illinois and MSNBC`s Melissa
Harris-Perry are here.

RICK SANTORUM (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: President Obama has tried
to control your lives.

SCHULTZ: The Republican candidates get their chance to distort the
truth at CPAC.

MITT ROMNEY (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Barack Obama is the poster
child for the arrogance of government.

SCHULTZ: Howard Fineman has the latest from CPAC.

Scott Walker has reached another all-time low. He`s using Wisconsin`s
mortgage settlement to plug his budget shortfall instead of helping
homeowners. Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett and State Senator Lena Taylor are
outraged. They`re here to respond.

An 8th grade science whiz, Joey Hudy, is bringing his marshmallow
cannon from the White House to THE ED SHOW.

OBAMA: It came out great. It looks safe.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

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

The Republicans are moving forward with their war on women`s health
care despite the compromise offered today by President Obama. The
president announced a revision to his administration`s contraceptive
policy. Women will still get free access to birth control, regardless of
their employer, and religious institutions will not have to provide
coverage.

This is what the Catholics want. Instead, the rule shifts the
responsibility on insurers, not employers.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: Religious organizations won`t have to pay for these services.
And no religious institution will have to provide these services directly.
Whether you`re a teacher, or small business woman, or a nurse, or a
janitor, no woman`s health should depend on who she is, or what she works,
or how much money she makes.

Every woman should be in control of the decisions that affect her own
health.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: After days of right wing conservative backlash, the
president recognized a workable solution needed to be drafted quickly.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: After the many genuine concerns that have been raised over the
last few weeks, as well as frankly the more cynical desire on the part of
some to make this in a political football, it became clear spending months
hammering out a solution was not going to be an option.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: And women`s groups, they see this outcome as a victory.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CECILE RICHARDS, PLANNED PARENTHOOD: I think he made very clear that
this is a woman`s health issue. I like the fact he talked about that women
use birth control for a lot of reasons, it`s the most -- frankly, it`s the
most common prescription medicine that women use. This is huge news for
women.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: And Catholic groups are backing the president as well. The
administration won the support of the Catholic Health Association and its
president, Sister Carol Keehan who says she is pleased with the decision.
The United States Conference of Bishops called the plan a good first step
toward addressing concerns of religious liberty.

Bottom line: just about everybody is on board, very satisfied with the
president`s decision, except for the guys trying to take his job.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SANTORUM: We`re not talking about a $10,000 procedure here. We`re
talking about something that is inexpensive, you know, medical drug. And
the idea that some how the government has to insure this period, the
government has to force people to even cover this for the first place is a
complete -- makes a mockery out of the issue of insurance.

This is a president trying to impose his values. He thinks he knows
best. What people should have and shouldn`t have, and that should outrage
everybody of faith and no faith.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: That, of course, is the out of touch Rick Santorum, where 67
percent of the American women are in favor of what the president did today,
61 percent of Americans across the board are in favor of what the president
did today.

Mitt Romney did not fight a contraception mandate in Massachusetts
when he was governor. Yet here`s what he said about the president`s
decision earlier.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROMNEY: Today, he did the classic Obama retreat, all right? And what
I mean by that is it wasn`t a retreat at all. It`s another deception, when
the president says deceptively, oh, now the Catholic Church won`t have to
buy policies that include these things. The insurance companies will just
throw them in for free. It`s just disingenuous and deceptive. And the
American people have to see through it. There`s been a launch, an attack
launch on religion in this country ands on conscience in this country. And
if I`m president, that will end.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: The economy is slipping away as an issue for the Republicans
after 23 months of private sector job growth. So, I guess you could say
they need a controversy. And they`re pretty good at it.

The problem is, the majority of American people are siding with the
president on this issues as I stated the numbers earlier.

But Republicans are just moving forward with the plan that would put
women`s health care needs in jeopardy. Here we go, from the Republican
side, Senator Roy Blunt of Missouri is introducing legislation that would
allow any employer or health plan the power to deny a woman birth control
coverage.

And this breaking news just in, it is 2012. Are we talking about
this? Yes, we are.

This is one of these head fakes that the Republicans love to do. I
find it hilarious that today, the three Republican candidates are speaking
at CPAC, and the president puts out a plan today that makes everybody happy
-- the Catholic Church, the bishops, everybody is on board, Planned
Parenthood, majority of the Americans, and now, where does this leave the
Republicans to rip on the president for doing the right thing for the
American people?

Well, it leaves them in the wilderness just one more time.

The fact is the social issue is just a head fake. It`s about health
care for women. The president did the right thing.

Get your cell phones out I want to know what you think. Tonight`s
question: will the Republicans continue to pretend that President Obama is
waging a war on religion?

Text A for yes, B for no to 622639. And you always can go to our blog
at Ed.MSNBC.com, We`ll bring you results later in the show.

Joining me tonight is Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky of Illinois.

Congresswoman, great do have you with us. I think it`s the perfect
irony that they are talking about social issues at CPAC, and they`re
talking about religious freedom and the president gave them all the freedom
they wanted to day.

Are you satisfied with the president`s decision?

REP. JAN SCHAKOWSKY (D), ILLINOIS: Well, I think it`s actually
brilliant. We have the women`s organizations, the health care
organizations, saying that now women can be guaranteed, regardless of where
they work, that they will get access for free to the birth control that
they need. You know, Rick Santorum scoffing at the amount of money birth
control costs really does show how out of touch he is.

It can be -- it`s between $600 and $1,200 a year what many of the
modern birth control methods can cost. That`s a lot of money. And
actually, 50 percent of women from 18 to 34 years old have expressed
concern about being able to afford that.

But remember that old game "the farmer and the dell," it`s the cheese
stands alone. Well, the cheese stands alone, the Republicans are by
themselves.

SCHULTZ: Yes.

SCHAKOWSKY: And I felt like Romney was really saying to the Catholic
hospital association, oh, you`ve been duped, you don`t know what you`re
doing. How condescending is that?

SCHULTZ: Congresswoman, what`s the next heavy lift? Here is Roy
Blunt. He is introducing a measure that would give insurers the right to
deny women contraceptive coverage. Now, I understand that abortions are as
low as they have been in decades. A lot of that has to do with
contraception, I understand.

But how much of a fight is this going to be? Can you see the
insurance lobby going to work on this?

SCHAKOWSKY: Well, first of all, you understand that the insurance
companies prefer to insure contraceptive care, because pregnancy is much
more expensive. So, it`s really actually good for employers and certainly
good for insurance companies.

But, you know, if I were texting you right now, I would say the
Republicans are likely to continue to move ahead, that`s how out of touch
they are.

I`m on the Energy and Commerce Committee, I fully expect to see this
bill there, supported by the chairman, supported by the chairman of the
subcommittee on health. And just -- they will just plow ahead despite the
American people, especially American women being on the other side.

SCHULTZ: Today`s decision got a lukewarm response from health
insurance industry. They put out a statement saying we are concerned about
the precedent this proposed rule would set.

A lot of people think this is a good step towards universal health
care, which, of course, I know you and I would be very much in favor of. I
like the idea that poor women in this country are going to get an
opportunity to move forward in life because obviously, it`s hard for them
economically, especially when they get pregnant and have children at an
early age.

Everybody is in favor of this. But when you see that the insurance
company is saying that this is -- this sets a tough precedent, the
precedent the proposed rule would set -- doesn`t that mean they are ready
to fight this?

SCHAKOWSKY: Well, I don`t know. But once again, if the Republicans
and insurance industry is on one side, and women and the Catholic health
association and all the health care experts are on the other side, I think
that is a pretty good team. I`d rather be on that team.

SCHULTZ: Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky, great to have you with us
tonight. Thanks so much.

SCHAKOWSKY: Thank you.

SCHULTZ: Let`s turn to MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry, whose new
show starts Saturday, February 18th, at 10:00 a.m. I`ll be watching.

Great to have you with us.

MELISSA HARRIS-PERRY, MSNBC HOST: Thanks.

SCHULTZ: Did the president do the right thing?

HARRIS-PERRY: Absolutely. In fact, it was a really classic sort of
presidential moment, in that he listened to a very real issue, this issue
about infringing on religious freedom. It`s not irrelevant. It`s not
unimportant. It`s part of sort of our understanding of who we are as an
American people.

He listened and he found a solution and he offered it.

SCHULTZ: I don`t see any losers in this. Everybody wins. The
Catholic Church gets what they want.

HARRIS-PERRY: Yes.

SCHULTZ: They don`t get the mandate. It doesn`t go against their
doctrine -- even though most Catholic women go ahead and practice
contraception anyway.

So, politically, why would the Republicans fight this?

HARRIS-PERRY: Well, because right now, anything the president does
has got to be bad. And as you pointed out earlier the economy is slipping
away.

Look, this is in part an economic decision. Not only is it cheaper
for insurance companies to provide coverage for contraception than
pregnancies or pregnancy terminations -- both of which are far more
expensive. But because birth control pills also manage things like
irregular menstrual cycles, excessive bleeding, all kind of things that
keep workers from going to work, like we keep talking about women like they
are something other than the primary driving economic engine in this
country.

SCHULTZ: Well, let me ask you about that. How offended are you about
this conversation taking place this week? Fifty-eight percent of women
use, you know, the pill for other medical purposes.

HARRIS-PERRY: It`s a pretty disgusting conversation because all of it
is talking about women, and what women do. And it`s just not recognizing
women are all of these things. Most women using contraception already have
children. They are managing of size of their family to provide
economically for the kids that they have.

By the way, many, many men benefit from contraception and prefer for
their wives and their girlfriends to be able to provide contraception for
themselves.

SCHULTZ: Here`s the president earlier on the politics of it all.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: I understand some folks in Washington may want to treat this
as another political wedge issue. But it shouldn`t be. I certainly never
saw it that way.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: And as Greg Sargent points out, this could be a wedge issue
in the Democrats favor. Why are the Republicans fighting it? Who knows
why they do this?

But is this something that the Democrats are going to be able to put
off to the side and really -- because they`ve done the right thing,
majority of people are with them, that it won`t be an issue down the road?

HARRIS-PERRY: Yes, I don`t think -- this is not going to have staying
power. And again, to the extent that it`s a wedge issue, it`s one that
cuts across generationally and brings some of those young voters right back
to President Obama, because when you look at this decision, it has more to
do with age than even gender. Young men are also highly supportive of the
availability of contraception broadly to women.

SCHULTZ: Melissa Harris-Perry, are you excited for your show?

HARRIS-PERRY: I`m a little beside myself, yes.

SCHULTZ: It`s kind of cool.

HARRIS-PERRY: Kind of cool, yes.

(LAUGHTER)

SCHULTZ: It all starts on February 18th.

HARRIS-PERRY: February 18th.

SCHULTZ: All right. We look forward to it. Thanks for your time.

HARRIS-PERRY: Thanks, Ed.

SCHULTZ: Remember to answer tonight`s question there at the bottom of
the screen. Share your thoughts on Twitter @EdShow. We want to know what
you think.

Republican nominees were fighting for the nomination at CPAC today.
But most Republican voters -- well, they want to throw in the towel on the
current field. Howard Fineman joins me next.

And Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is taking money that was meant to
help out struggling homeowners and using it to balance his state`s budget.
Senator Lena Taylor and also the mayor of Milwaukee, Tom Barrett, will join
me later in the show, and they`ll tell you how it`s hurting Wisconsinites.

We`re right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Coming up: Mitt Romney told the crowd at CPAC today that he
was a severely conservative governor of Massachusetts. They weren`t buying
it. Howard Fineman on day two of CPAC is next.

And doggone it, that all-American Sean Hannity who throws the football
in the studio because he never threw it on the field still has no evidence
to back up his claim that President Obama didn`t want to kill Osama bin
Laden. Oh, I`m not letting him off the hook. It`s day three, no tapes.

Scott Walker has hit a low, taking money set aside for mortgage relief
and using it to close the budget deficit that he created. We`ll have more
on that later.

And Joe Hudy wowed the president with his marshmallow cannon at the
White House science fair. He`ll be here later to show us and give us a
demonstration.

Share your thoughts on Twitter using #EdShow.

We`re right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to THE ED SHOW.

It`s day two of CPAC, the annual gathering for conservatives in
Washington, D.C. Mitt Romney got his big chance to prove himself to a
hard-core conservative crowd today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROMNEY: We conservatives believe in freedom and free people and free
enterprises. I know conservatism because I have lived conservatism. On my
watch, we fought hard and prevented Massachusetts from becoming the Las
Vegas of gay marriage. I was a severely conservative Republican governor.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Romney talked the talk but Rick Santorum says he is the real
conservative in the race.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SANTORUM: We always talk about, how we`re going to get the moderates.
Why would an undecided voter vote for a candidate of a party who the party
is not excited about? We need conservatives now to rally for a
conservative to go in November to excite the conservative base, to pull
with that excitement moderate voters and to defeat Barack Obama in the
fall.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: So, which one is the true conservative? Almost half of all
the Republican voters, well, they don`t seem to care.

A FOX News poll asked Republicans if they want a different candidate
to get the nomination. Forty-nine percent said yes.

I`m joined tonight by Howard Fineman, NBC News political analyst and
editor and editorial director of "The Huffington Post" Media Group.

Well, Howard, I learned a new one tonight, it`s called severely
conservative. Was that -- does he get A for effort on trying to turn their
minds around whether he`s conservative or not, Mitt Romney?

HOWARD FINEMAN, HUFFINGTON POST: Well, he gets A for chutzpah. It
didn`t go over too well in the hall.

But I actually thought the entire speech itself was his best effort to
sell himself to this crowd. But, of course, the way I`m putting it, sell
himself to this crowd, summarizes his problem. Newt Gingrich and
especially Rick Santorum are the kind of people who you know as kids would
have been at CPAC when they were in college, they would have been there
through their formative years and their growing up.

Mitt Romney said in his speech and I give him credit for saying it --
he said, look, when I was a kid I didn`t know who Edmund Burke or Hayek,
the Austrian economist that all the conservatives worship. Romney said, I
would have thought they were playing for the Detroit Tigers. That line
didn`t go over well, either.

SCHULTZ: Yes.

FINEMAN: So, he`s selling to a crowd that doesn`t believe in him.
Whereas, Newt Gingrich and especially Rick Santorum -- the body language,
the spirit in the room was different. It was more a conversation among
friends than was the Mitt Romney speech, even though they worked on it for
days and days and days.

SCHULTZ: How impressive is this and how politically smart is that
picture that Rick Santorum has his family up on stage with him? I mean,
this crowd is all about social values and social issues. They have been
talking about them all week long.

Was this a good move and is this going to give Santorum the momentum,
the boost he needs to go to Michigan and Arizona on February 28th?

FINEMAN: Well, he understands the symbolism and the kind of mood
music of CPAC. And yes, CPAC, which wasn`t always so focused on social
issues, the way it is right now. This was perfect symbolism for the crowd.
Yes, having the wife and the kids up there, throughout the whole speech,
and having them nodding and listening and sounding like they were listening
to it for the first time and agreeing with their dad.

SCHULTZ: Yes.

FINEMAN: You know, that was -- that looks corny but believe me, in
the hall, it went over big.

SCHULTZ: "The Washington Examiner" reported on a closed door meeting
between Mitt Romney and conservative leaders yesterday and Romney was told
to layoff of Santorum, what can you tell us about this? What are you
hearing?

FINEMAN: Well, I think right now that what everybody is saying, and
it`s really summarized in a way by that amazing FOX poll you showed the
results of there, is that conservatives, especially don`t like the tone of
the campaign. They don`t like the nastiness, they don`t like the attack
politics, they don`t like the tone that in fact, Romney and Newt Gingrich
set in Florida.

And whether they are supporting Santorum or not, and a lot of them
are, they also like the fact that Santorum, by and large, has tried to run
tonally a more positive campaign.

SCHULTZ: Yes.

FINEMAN: That`s what they like.

SCHULTZ: So, Howard, do you think Romney will go after Santorum now
that he`s polling better nationally right now? Is he going to go after
Santorum the way he went after Newt down in Florida? Is that coming?

FINEMAN: Personally, in his own speeches, he won`t, but the so-called
independent PACs are going to tear in him big time. They have no choice --
the people who are supporting Romney have no choice. That`s the way he`s
campaign and that`s the way they`ll have to continue to campaign because
Mitt Romney has yet, he did a better job today than he had, but he still
hasn`t explained why he`s the conservative Republican choice.

SCHULTZ: Yes.

FINEMAN: He has a hard time making the case, he just does, even
though some of the numbers he cited about his time in Massachusetts are,
you know, if not convincing, are pretty plausible. He did cut spending, et
cetera, et cetera. But it sounds like a little too little too late in his
career and in his thinking to convince people like the people at CPAC.

SCHULTZ: Howard Fineman, great to have you with us on this Friday
evening. Thanks so much.

FINEMAN: Sure. Thank you.

SCHULTZ: It`s been three days since Hannity said he had tapes proving
President Obama didn`t want to get bin Laden. I still haven`t seen any
tapes.

And later, three Republican presidential candidates attended an event
where white nationalists was an invited guest. I mean, why was he there?
Not a great way to grow the party, is it?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Well, Mr. Intellectual Honesty Sean Hannity has failed to
produce any evidence to support his claim that President Obama did not want
to get bin Laden. Hannity said he had tapes proving if President Obama had
his way, we wouldn`t have gotten bin Laden.

This is day three I`m very concerned now. And he has not produced the
tapes or admitted he misspoke.

I thought Hannity worked for a network claiming to be fair and
balanced.

Sean, if what you said is true, why is the president sitting there
watching SEAL Team 6 carry out the raid on bin Laden`s compound? I mean,
why didn`t he just call off the mission right there and go, I don`t know,
go shoot some hoops or something?

And why did candidate Obama say this in 2008?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: If we have Osama bin Laden in our sights, and the Pakistani
government is unable or unwilling to take them out, then I think that we
have to act and we will take them out. We will kill bin Laden, we will
crush al Qaeda -- that has to be our biggest national security priority.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: He said, we will kill bin Laden. Now, Sean, if you`re
honest -- intellectually, that is -- you`ll play the tape on your show.

You see, Barack Obama as the candidate, he was not lying. He was
determined to do what the last president failed to do, bring the world`s
number one terrorist to justice.

So far, Hannity only -- his only evidence really is Obama didn`t want
to get bin Laden is an interview with Brian Williams and Leon Panetta.
Panetta says enhanced interrogation was used at some point during the years
the CIA wasn`t hunting bin Laden. But John McCain made it clear, the key
pieces of evidence leading to bin Laden were not a result of torture.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: I asked the Director of Central
Intelligence Leon Panetta for the facts. And I received the following
information. The trail to bin Laden did not begin with a disclosure from
Khalid Sheikh Mohamed, who was waterboarded 183 times. It was not torture
or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of detainees that got us the
major leads that ultimately enabled our intelligence community to find
Osama bin Laden.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: You can play that tape, too. This isn`t about rendition.
It isn`t about enhanced interrogation. This is about Sean Hannity not
wanting to admit President Obama succeeded where President Bush failed.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: You know, I
just don`t spend that much time on him, to be honest with you. I repeat
what I said, I truly am not that concerned about him.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Sean, you can`t be a great American if you don`t tell the
truth. And I`m still waiting for you to release your tapes. This is day
three. How long is this going to go on? But we could go on maybe a
million days. And you still wouldn`t have the tapes because they don`t
exist.

And Sean Hannity doesn`t have the guts or the character to admit that
he misspoke.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. SCOTT WALKER (R), WISCONSIN: Twenty five point six million out
of 140 million is a very small component of that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Scott Walker is using Wisconsin`s chunk of the foreclosure
relief settlement to balance the budget. Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett and
Lena Taylor, state senator, are not happy. They are here with reaction.

CPAC has a white nationalist problem. Goldie Taylor and Mike
Papantonio have the latest.

And hail to the fluff. An 8th grade science whiz is bringing his
marshmallow cannon from the White House to THE ED SHOW.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Let`s go --
marshmallows. See what happens.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker keeps giving voters more
reasons to boot him out of office. Walker has announced he`s using
millions of dollars meant for victims of foreclosure abuses to help balance
his state`s budget. Honest broker, what do you think?

Wisconsin`s total share of the recent 26 billion dollar national
settlement with the banks is 140 million dollars; 31.6 million of it goes
directly to the state government. Walker is putting 25.6 million dollars
of that money towards fixing his budget shortfall.

What Scott Walker is doing, I think, is outrageous. Last year, he
gave businesses a 117 million dollar tax break while forcing teachers to
give up their collective bargaining rights. Walker said it was the only
way to balance the budget.

Well, it`s not working. Recent estimates project Wisconsin`s budget
deficit will be 143 million dollars in 2013. So Walker is trying to bail
himself out of trouble by using settlement money to balance the books,
which is something he was against just last year.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WALKER: We need the savings in the budget repair bill because
Wisconsin faces a 3.6 billion dollar deficit. This deficit did not appear
overnight. Wisconsin got here through a reliance on one time fixes,
accounting gimmicks and tax increases.

Previous governors and legislators from both political parties took
money from our tobacco settlement. They relied on one time federal
stimulus dollars as if the money would be there forever. But it`s already
gone.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: So after Governor Walker announced that he was raiding the
foreclosure settlement funds, he high tailed it out of state. And at this
hour, he is in Washington, D.C., preparing to spew his hypocritical anti-
union ideas in a keynote address -- where else -- at CPAC.

I`m joined tonight by Milwaukee, Wisconsin Mayor Tom Barrett and also
Wisconsin State Senator Lena Taylor. Great to have both of you with us.

MAYOR TOM BARRETT (D), MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN: Great to be with you.

SCHULTZ: You bet. Mayor, your city has had the most foreclosures in
the state. How do you explain Governor Walker`s decision to balance the
budget with these funds?

BARRETT: Well, it`s unconscionable. In our city, we have 4,800 homes
that have been abandoned. And it costs us about 10,000 dollars per home
either to renovate them or to demolish them. That is 48 million dollars.

So even if all of this money were to come to us, we would not be able
to deal with the scope of the problem we have. That is what makes this so
unconscionable, that this is money that clearly, clearly was intended to
help victims of foreclosure abuse, people who were victims of crimes.

And he`s chosen instead to take this money and put it into the general
fund, a fund that just two days ago he was claiming is fully balanced. So
now, in the span of 48 hours, he says it`s no longer in balance; we have
these funds; I`m taking them away from people in communities that have been
just devastated through this foreclosure crisis.

SCHULTZ: Senator Taylor, Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen
says his office has the authority to do this. How do you see it?

LENA TAYLOR (D), WISCONSIN STATE SENATOR: I personally believe that
the legislature should be able to vote on this matter. I put out a bill
today and asked for a deadline of 5:00 or earlier today for legislators to
sign on to say that there should not be a unilateral decision by the
governor and the attorney general to do this.

These funds had specific use that they should be for, as the mayor has
stated, for individuals who have been victims of foreclosure, for
neighborhoods that frankly need to have us do something about foreclosures,
because it affects all of us who are in various neighborhoods.

So I think the attorney general is off on this. And it really goes to
hurt all of the constituents that helped to vote him in and those that
didn`t vote for him.

SCHULTZ: Do I have this right, Senator Taylor, that Governor Walker
turned down stimulus money that would have created jobs. Yet he`s taking
this foreclosure money that is coming from the federal government to shore
up his budget, which of course has gaping holes in it.

L. TAYLOR: That is correct. Over and over, the governor continues to
show that he`s a hypocrite. He continues to show that he`s a liar. And he
sent back money before that could have created jobs, that would have
continued to help our community, whether it was the trains or several
dollars that he has sent back over and over again.

But on this one, he wants to fix his budget that he lied and said was
balanced, when he knew it wasn`t balanced in the first place.

(CROSS TALK)

SCHULTZ: Go ahead, mayor.

BARRETT: What`s more disturbing is that he was critical of the raids
on the tobacco fund, raids on the patient compensation fund, raids on the
highway transportation funds. And then he turns around and does the exact
same thing.

The only difference is that these people in these neighborhoods, they
don`t have highly paid lobbyists. That is the difference. These are
people who have been victimized by a bait and switch in the foreclosure
crisis. And now they are hit with a second bait and switch by their own
state government, with the governor and attorney general working hand-in-
hand.

All you had to do is look at Ohio, which has had similar problems to
Wisconsin over the last several months, in terms of contentiousness. There
the attorney general has got it. He has learned that people do not like
this divisive governing. And what he has done in Ohio is he has taken all
the 97 million dollars that are discretionary in Ohio and he`s put them
exactly where they need to be, in the neighborhoods of Cleveland and Toledo
and Columbus, to deal with the foreclosure crisis.

Here in Wisconsin, we have a governor and attorney general who
continue to ignore the plight of these people. What I would like to do is
I would like to see the attorney general and the governor of the state of
Wisconsin do exactly what the attorney general in Ohio did today. That is
come to these neighborhoods. Come to Senator Taylor`s neighborhoods. Come
to the neighborhoods in Milwaukee that have been devastated by
foreclosures, and tell these people, as the governor said in your clip
there, oh, this isn`t a lot of money; we`re just going to take it.

SCHULTZ: Mayor Tom Barrett, you ran against Scott Walker. Are you
thinking about running against him in the recall?

BARRETT: Well, the focus I have on right now is purely a mayoral
focus. But it`s not just for the city of Milwaukee. Beloit, Racine,
Kenosha, all these communities have been hit hard by this. They all
deserve to have a piece of this as well.

(CROSS TALK)

SCHULTZ: I`m asking about you running for governor. Are you
considering doing that in the recall?

BARRETT: Of course I`m considering doing that. But right now, on
this show, at this time, I`m focusing on what I consider to be a
unconscionable act by our governor and attorney general.

SCHULTZ: I totally agree with you. And when you announce, we`d love
to visit with you.

Senator Lena Taylor and Mayor Tom Barrett, great to have you with us
tonight. I appreciate your time. Keep up the fight.

If Republicans want to grow their party, why do they invite a white
nationalist to one of their biggest get together of the year? Goldie
Taylor and Mike Papantonio join me next. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to THE ED SHOW. We`ve come to expect CPAC to
bring together the far righties. But even CPAC should draw the line
somewhere. This year, CPAC welcomed a white nationalist, Peter Brimelow.
He is the founder of VDare, a website devoted to limiting immigration to
mostly white people. It`s been described as "a white nationalist hate
website" by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Mr. Brimelow was one of the panelists at CPAC`s panel on "The Failure
of Multiculturalism." Congressman Steve King of Iowa was also on that
panel. He said multiculturalism is a tool of the left to subdivide our
civilization.

At that point, Mr. Brimelow said "Democrats have given up on winning
the white working class vote, so they use bilingualism to build up a client
constituency. It`s treason. We hear about racism, but the real issue is
treason."

But there`s the real question, in my opinion: what is a white
nationalist doing there at that conference at all? These three guys were
also at CPAC today. I wonder if these presidential candidates think that
they can grow the party with a gathering like CPAC when they invite known
racists?

Let`s turn to Goldie Taylor, managing editor of "The Goldie Taylor
Project," and Mike Papantonio, host of the "Ring of Fire" radio show,
nationally heard on weekends on progressive talk stations across the
country.

Mike, let me ask you first, why is someone like this invited to a
panel discussion at CPAC?

MIKE PAPANTONIO, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Because it`s what the
Republican -- it`s what they have become, Ed. You can`t judge them any
other way. Look, they know who this guy is. This is the new David Duke.

He makes David Duke look like a race-baiting light weight. He`s the
guy who said Jews are killing America. Brimelow on his website, Ed, said
that African Americans died in the Katrina hurricane because they had low
IQ`s and they didn`t know what to do to save themselves.

CPAC is the heart and the brain of the Republican party. And when
Americans follow CPAC, they follow what this man stands for. If you vote
Republican, understand CPAC is the heart of the Republican party. When an
American votes Republican, they vote for a neo-nut like Brimelow. They
vote for presidential candidates, Ed, who don`t have the courage to say
that this man is a nut and I don`t want to have anything to do with him.

They appear on the same stage with Brimelow as if he`s a normal --
just a normal Republican. And the truth is he is a normal Republican.

SCHULTZ: Goldie, I`ve said for some time that I think the Republican
party has an identity crisis. How could they allow somebody like this? If
this gets proper coverage, I mean, people are going to draw some pretty
tough conclusions on here. What are your thoughts on it?

GOLDIE TAYLOR, "THE GOLDIE TAYLOR PROJECT": I don`t think they have
an identity crisis at all. I think they know exactly who they are. This
is the same strain of populism that we saw around the turn of the century,
the same straining of racialized populism that caused lynchings throughout
the Jim Crow Era. It`s the same strain of racialized populism that we saw
through the early `80s, and the turn back of the civil rights -- more civil
rights than we`ve seen in 50 years.

It`s the same strain of racialized populism that we saw with the rise
of the Tea Party Movement and its wholesale embracing of, you know, the
GOP. The Republican party has been unable, unwilling to release itself
from this strain of the party, thus becoming identified with it.

They have to wonder -- it`s little wonder why they are not able to
successfully reach out to African Americans when they continue to embrace
individuals like this.

SCHULTZ: Goldie, listening to the detail of your answer there, your
response, how do you feel about the fact that the three major candidates
that spoke there today, did not denounce nor did they distance themselves
from this?

G. TAYLOR: I think it`s shameful. I think in the same way that Rick
Santorum was unable to denounce the person who asked him about President
Barack Obama`s birth certificate, they are unable to denounce people like
Peter Brimelow. I think Steve King sitting on that panel with Brimelow is
also just an a abomination. There comes a point where just have to stand
up and call wrong for what it is, on its face.

SCHULTZ: They didn`t do that, Mike. Of course, the dog whistle
politics continues. Here is Newt Gingrich.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NEWT GINGRICH (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I want to run this fall as
the jobs and paycheck president versus Barack Obama, who is the most
effective Food Stamp president in American history.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Candidates like Rick Santorum are speaking to working class
white folks across America, but they must avoid trying to tap into bigotry.
Mike, how are they going to do that?

PAPANTONIO: Well, they can never do that when you have more than a
dozen Republican congressmen sitting there. You have presidential
candidates, people who want to be leaders of the world sitting there, not
saying a word about the fact that this man is a known racist, who says
basically that Jews are destroying America.

Look, the message is clear, if you were at CPAC, the message -- here
is the clear message: we have removed our pointed white sheet dunce caps.
We`re out in the open now. You can see who we are. Minorities and Jews
are no longer welcome.

You can dress it up, Ed, anyway you want. You can hide behind it any
way you want. This is what the Republican party has become. And if you`re
carrying a card in your pocket with an R on it, this what is you stand for
today.

SCHULTZ: Goldie Taylor, Mike Papantonio, great to have you with us
tonight. Thanks so much.

When we come back, we`re going to switch gears to something really fun
on a Friday night. The young star of the White House Science Fair will
join me here on THE ED SHOW with his marshmallow cannon.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: ED SHOW survey tonight, I asked will the Republicans
continue to pretend that President Obama is waging a war on religion?
Ninety nine percent of you said yes; one percent of you said no.

Coming up the 14-year-old science whiz who impressed the president of
the United States with his marshmallow cannon, tests it out right here on
THE ED SHOW. How far can he launch that marshmallow? We`re going to find
out in the Big Finish. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: In the Big Finish tonight, the young star of the White House
Science Fair is here on THE ED SHOW tonight. This is what everybody was
talking about all week long, a 14-year-old Joe Hudy was at the White House
demonstrating his marshmallow cannon for the president of the United
States. It was all part of the administration`s plan to support math and
science.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: This is great. What pressure do we want to get it up to?

JOE HUDY, WHITE HOUSE SCIENCE FAIR PARTICIPANT: Thirty.

OBAMA: Oh! Let`s go look at the marshmallow, see what happened?

It came out pretty fast, no? It looks safe.

HUDY: Yeah.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: In case you didn`t quite catch the president`s reaction to
the marshmallow cannon, here he is, looking pretty impressed, don`t you
think? Joining me tonight is Joe Hudy. Joe, Ed Schultz, nice to meet you,
buddy. Welcome to THE ED SHOW.

HUDY: Nice to meet you, too.

SCHULTZ: You bet. How did you get invited to the White House? How
did this all happen?

HUDY: Originally, I have been in contact with this company named
Macon. They had a list of people that they were going to take to the White
House. But then another company named Cognizant, which they worked
together for this thing called Making the Future, sponsored me to go there.

SCHULTZ: Tell our audience how did this work? How did you put that
together? What is all in this machine?

HUDY: So basically everything that is orange, except for the Altoids
box and the wires, is PVC pipe. It`s -- that holds all the pressure. And
the sprinkler valve is what will release the pressure. And it`s
electronically opened by two nine volt batteries in here and a safety
switch right here and a trigger switch.

SCHULTZ: OK. How did you feel -- obviously the president was pretty
impressed with your invention there. How did you feel when you saw his
reaction?

HUDY: I really didn`t get to see his reaction until later on when I
saw the picture. So I was pretty shocked. It was funny.

SCHULTZ: He sure seemed to pay more attention to yours than anybody
else, didn`t he?

HUDY: Yes. One of the other news reporters said that it was like
five minutes. And I was like -- I was really surprised.

SCHULTZ: He was impressed with it, wasn`t he?

HUDY: Yeah.

SCHULTZ: What did he tell you about it?

HUDY: I don`t quite remember. It seems like a blur to me.

SCHULTZ: Yes. It`s kind of cool meeting the president, isn`t it? I
mean, you`re right there in the White House. That had to be kind of a neat
thing, huh?

HUDY: Yeah.

SCHULTZ: OK. Can we test this? I`d like to see how it works? What
do you think?

HUDY: OK.

SCHULTZ: All right, let`s go. Go to work there, Joe. Get after it.
Show us how this works.

HUDY: So first you have to pump it up to get to the pressure.

SCHULTZ: All right.

How much do you have to do, what, about ten times or something?

HUDY: I`m doing ten PSI right now.

SCHULTZ: All right. How far does it normally shoot?

HUDY: At 30 psi, it normally shoots 176 feet.

SCHULTZ: Hundred and seventy six feet, OK. Let`s see how far it
goes.

HUDY: Three, two, one.

SCHULTZ: Boy, that sucker goes a long way. That`s pretty good. What
are you going to use this for?

HUDY: Just for fun. I normally use it for fun.

SCHULTZ: All right, load that thing up again. We got to take a real
good look at how this operates. All right, here we go. Here is the
replay, just moments ago. There it goes. Good shot, buddy.

HUDY: Thank you.

SCHULTZ: What is your next project? Do you have an idea what the
next project will be?

HUDY: I`m currently working on something called an EO Wire Ardwino
Shield (ph). And Ardwino is an open source micro controller that you can
program. And a shield just plugs directly on top of that. And EO wire is
just wire that lights up. So it will -- I will be able to program the
Ardwino to light up the wire.

SCHULTZ: All right. Good luck to you, Joe Hudy. I`m sure you got an
A for your project. Congratulations. Great to have you on THE ED SHOW.
We`ll look for you as one of the great scientists of all time. Fire that
thing one more time. Let`s take a look at it.

HUDY: All right, three, two, one.

SCHULTZ: There it goes. Travels across the country. It`s pretty dog
gone good. See you, Joe.

HUDY: See you.

SCHULTZ: That`s THE ED SHOW. I`m Ed Schultz, "THE RACHEL MADDOW
SHOW" starts right now. Good evening, Rachel.

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

Copyright 2012 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.>