Skip navigation

The Ed Show for Tuesday, April 17, 2012

Read the transcript to the Tuesday show

  Most Popular
Most viewed

Guests: Eugene Robinson, Barney Frank, Rashad Robinson, Keith Ellison

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

As Mitt Romney hobnobs with Donald Trump, President Obama is laser
focused on number one kitchen table issue in America: gas prices.

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


situation where some speculators can reap millions while millions of
American families get the short end of the stick.

SCHULTZ (voice-over): The president is going to bat for the American
public on gas prices, as Republicans throw spit balls from the sidelines.
Tonight, Barney Frank on stopping the speculators in his recent comments
about Obamacare.

ALEC announces a retreat in the face of boycotts. The Color of Change
says they aren`t buying it. Their executive director joins me tonight.

The Secret Service is now investigating Mitt Romney`s favorite rocker.

TED NUGENT: If Barack Obama becomes the president in November again,
I will either be dead or in jail by this time next year.

SCHULTZ: The DNC wants Romney to denounce those comments and the
Romney campaign is whiffing. We`ll have all the latest.

NUGENT: We are patriots. We are brave heart. We need to ride into
that battlefield and chop their heads off in November.

SCHULTZ: And Republicans want to kill the United States Postal
Service. Tonight, my commentary on how to save it.


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

Republicans continue to hammer President Obama over gas prices. Well,
today, the president struck back. He announced a $52 million proposal to
confront the Wall Street speculators who are making every American pay more
at the pump.


OBAMA: I`ve asked Attorney General Holder to work with Chairman
Leibowitz of the Federal Trade Commission, Chairman Gensler of the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and other enforcement agencies to
make sure that acts of manipulation, fraud or other illegal activity or not
behind increases in the price that consumers pay at the pump.


SCHULTZ: The president`s proposal gives more oversight and resource
to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. This is the agency tasked
with policing the oil and gas markets. President Obama explained the
problem facing the CFTC in simple language.


OBAMA: Chairman Gensler actually had a good analogy, said imagine if
the NFL quadrupled the number of teams but didn`t increase the number of
refs. You`d end up having havoc on the field and it would diminish the
game. It wouldn`t be fair. That`s part of what`s going on in a lot of
these markets.


SCHULTZ: But here is where the president flipped the script on the
Republicans. He`s calling on Congress to do the right thing.


OBAMA: And I call on Congress to pass a package of measures to
crackdown on illegal activity and hold accountable those that manipulate
the market for private gain at the expense of working families.


SCHULTZ: Of course, the proposal calls on Congress to increase
surveillance and enforcement staff at the CFTC. More money will be spent
on technology to provide better oversight and surveillance of energy
markets. It makes sense.

Civil and criminal penalties against market manipulators would go from
$1 million to $10 million. The CFTC would also be given wider authority
over trade limits.

President Obama also made sure to highlight the way Republicans have
protected oil industry subsidies.


OBAMA: A few weeks ago, Congress had chance to stand up for families
already paying an extra premium at the pump. Congressional Republicans
voted to keep spending billions of Americans hard-earned tax dollars on
more unnecessary subsidies for big oil companies. So, here is a chance to
make amends.


SCHULTZ: With the president putting Republicans on notice, Mitt
Romney responded, as expected, in a statement. "President Obama`s
government by gimmick is reaching another new low today. The president`s
only solutions are to target oil and gas producers for higher taxes and now
to dramatically increase federal regulation."

House Speaker John Boehner, well, he must have read the same talking
point memo this morning.


another political gimmick, why doesn`t he put his administration to work to
get to the bottom of it?


SCHULTZ: Let`s be clear: the only gimmicks are the ones used by Wall
Street speculators to manipulate the oil markets. The biggest oil seller
in America confirmed it. On May 12th, 2011, the price of a gallon of crude
oil was $98.93.

On that very day, ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson spoke about the actual
price of oil during a Senate hearing.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What do you think the price would be today if it
was based on fundamentals of just supply and demand?

REX TILLERSON, EXXONMOBIL CEO: Well, again, if you were to use a pure
economic approach, the economists would say it`s set at the price to
develop the next marginal barrel.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What do you think that would be today?

TILLERSON: Well, it`s pretty hard to judge, but it would be, when we
look at it it`s going to be somewhere in the $60 to $70 range.


SCHULTZ: I mean, the guy who runs the biggest oil company admitted
the oil was $30 to $40 more than it should be. The reason is market


TILLERSON: The market decides again, as I said, based on their view.
It`s really a view of the future because it is a depleting resource --
what`s going to be the availability of oil sometime in the future. The
market tries to decide that based on a whole range of things it worries
about, and it translates that back to the price today. And that`s the
price we take.


SCHULTZ: This is not a gimmick of Rex Tillerson. This is his source
of profit. It wasn`t a gimmick to President George W. Bush either. He
also called for a crackdown on market manipulation.


GEORGE W. BUSH, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: Americans understand by and
large that the price of crude oil is going up and that the prices are going
up, but what they don`t want and will not accept is manipulation of the
market, and neither will I.

In other words, this administration is not going to tolerate
manipulation. We expect our consumers to be treated fairly.


SCHULTZ: Oh, we have been down this road before, haven`t we?

Actually, we go gown this road about every year. The world markets
are volatile and commodity speculators are virtually unregulated. This was
supposed to change with the Dodd-Frank bill. It`s not been enforced.

The president moved in the right direction today. Republicans have
only themselves to blame if they try and sink this proposal. It is the
right thing for America right now.

Will the Republicans get on board? Probably not.

Get your cell phones out. I want to know what you think. Tonight`s
question: Do Republicans want to protect oil companies or American

Text A for oil companies, text B for American consumers, to 622639.
You can leave a comment at our blog at and we`ll bring you the
results later on in the show.

I`m joined tonight by Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank.

Congressman, great to have you with us tonight. I appreciate your

This affects our economy and every family in this country. The
president`s trying to do the right thing. Is giving more resources to the
CFTC an answer? Your thoughts.

REP. BARNEY FRANK (D), MASSACHUSETTS: It`s part of the answer.
Understand that while George Bush, President George Bush said he didn`t
like manipulation, he was president of the Republican-controlled Congress.

The regulatory bodies had no power over that. It was only when we
passed the financial reform bill over the virtually unanimous opposition of
the Republicans that we gave the Commodities Future Trading Commission and
the Securities Exchange Commission the power to act here.

Now, one of the things that the CFTC did was to limit the amount of
oil you can buy.

And let`s be clear what we mean by speculators. We are talking about
be who buy oil that doesn`t touch it, who don`t come near. They buy it for
the sole purpose of market manipulation. They buy it to keep it off the
market until the price goes up and then they can sell them again. These
are people who wouldn`t know a can of oil from a can of beans.


FRANK: What we said was, I mean, the CFTC said, you got to stop
buying up this oil and driving up the price. Unfortunately, the securities
industry, to its great discredit, went to court and is trying to get that
thrown out. The second thing the Republicans did, we gave the Commodities
Futures Trading Commission power over derivatives in general, including
speculation and energy.

The Republicans in the House refuse to raise the amount of money they
get. So, they get something like $250 million to try to regulate this
multi-trillion dollar economy.

So, yes, what the president said is absolutely right. We gave them
the authority under the law. The Republicans are trying to keep them from
having the money to use it.

SCHULTZ: Well, Congressman, why aren`t the position limits being
enforced that are outlined in Dodd-Frank?

FRANK: Because in the first place, this is one reason why, by the
way, I wanted a single head of the Consumer Bureau. The Commodities Future
Trading Commission is a five-member body, three Democrats and two

When President Obama took office, one of the Democrats was a man who
unfortunately didn`t believe in speculation had any impact on oil. It`s a
tough thing to be believe but he was willing to do that.


FRANK: Finally, the president got a replacement. And so, with the
leadership of the chairman, Gary Gensler, the CFTC did adopt these rules.

But the problem is they have been taken to court. We had a couple of
cases where the industry goes to court and for all that complaints about
judicial activism the conservatives, they can try to use the court to block

As a matter of fact, today, they argued that Congress never intended
them to do this. I just got every Democrat who had been on our conference
committee who voted on the bill to file a brief saying, yes, we did.

So, the Commodities Futures Trading Commission did finally get the
votes to put this in. And they are in court fighting to defend it.

SCHULTZ: OK. Now the question is, is the president -- I think the
American people think he is doing the right thing, but is it too little too
late? Is this move today something -- it seems like a start. They`re
going to get more resources, but to control the speculators, you need these
five people on the CFTC to take action and do something.

FRANK: Well, they did. Again, of the five people, two are
Republican, three are Democrats. If we had been able to structure the CFTC
the way we structured the consumer bureau, and person was a chairman, it
would have been done a year ago.


FRANK: That`s one of the reasons why I resisted that terrible

Gary Gensler to his credit worked very hard. He didn`t have the third
vote. He got the third vote several months ago. They did adopt it. As I
said, they are now being challenged in court to do it.


FRANK: The other thing, Ed, is the president and the Democrats -- we
did push hard for more money for the CFTC. I went to the floor of the
House to try to do it.

Frankly, it`s kind of an obscure thing, the CFTC, what the hell is
that? It wasn`t until gas prices skyrocketed in part because of
speculation that this happened.

By the way, we should throw in one other thing about gas prices.


FRANK: When (ph) we talk about the future. We`ve got people in
Congress who want to go to war immediately in Syria. They want to go to
war in Iran.

Well, there maybe good -- it`s very good reason to be worried about
Iran and have tough sanctions. But that an impact on the price of oil.


FRANK: It`s totally hypocritical for people to talk about more
military action, more tough action in the Middle East, and then say, oh my
God, oil prices went up. How did that happen?

SCHULTZ: Congressman, I want to ask you about an interview that you
did with "The New York Magazine." You questioned the timing of the health
care bill, as I understand it.


SCHULTZ: That the National Republican Congressional Committee is
using that interview to say that Barney Frank thinks Obamacare is a

Explain how they are misrepresenting your opinion and what you really

FRANK: The technical thing they`re doing is lying. It`s not what I
really meant. It`s not what I really said.

What I said was we should have waited in my judgment. Look, the
problem was that we were doing health care in the midst of the worst
recession, which we inherited from the Republicans since the `30s. And so,
people were in an angry mood. It would have been better in my judgment to
have gone ahead with financial reform, to have pumped more and more into
the economy to try to get the recession down and then to do health care.

But I said very clearly in that segment, I`m for the health care bill
and I would have liked -- I think we had a better chance of having it done
in a way that was more popular.

So, my comments had nothing to do with the substance of health care
and the Republicans know it. It`s a simple case of them lying.

SCHULTZ: So, they`re lying about your position on this? That you --

FRANK: My position is very clear. We -- the time to do it, part of
the problem was I think people did not realize in 2009 how terribly deep
the recession was.


FRANK: It was not a good time with people in a bad mood and
unemployment is going up. People are worried about things to do something
like that.

And, by the way, I think Bill Clinton made the same judgment. Senator
Moynihan for example told Bill Clinton in `93, don`t start with health
care. Establish yourself. Do some other things and get to health care.


FRANK: And that`s what I said. That`s very clearly what I said, and
the notion that`s a criticism of the substance -- nobody believes including
the propaganda putting it out.

SCHULTZ: Congressman Barney Frank -- thanks for your time tonight.
Appreciate it.

FRANK: You`re welcome, Ed.

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

The conservative group ALEC says it won`t work on social issues
anymore. But, folks, don`t be fooled. There is a long, ugly list of
economic issues it is still pushing in states all across the country.
Color of Change executive director Rashad Robinson joins me.

And hundreds and thousands of jobs are at stake in the Republican
assault on the post office. The Senate took up a bill to postpone the
agony of cuts today, but it`s not a long term solution. I think Democrats
should take page out of Michele Bachmann`s playbook on this.

I`ll explain, coming up. Stay with us.


SCHULTZ: Coming up, conservative legislative group ALEC is raising
the white flag when it comes to pushing voter ID and "Stand Your Ground"
laws. One of the groups calling for a boycott of ALEC says they`re not
buying it. The executive director of Color of Change joins me next.

Allen West is doubling down on his charge about communists in
Congress. And Louie Gohmert, well, he gives the worst endorsement ever of
Mitt Romney. Congressman Keith Ellison weighs in on his colleagues, ahead.

And the DNC is calling for Mitt Romney to denounce his supporter Newt
Gingrich for his crazed rant against the president. Tonight, Ted Nugent
says Mitt Romney agrees with everything he said and we will play you the

Share your thoughts on Twitter using #EdShow.

We`re right back.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to THE ED SHOW.

In the fight against ALEC, progressives have won I think a big battle
but not the war. Today was a big day. The right wing group announced that
it is shutting down its work on social issues like voter suppression laws
and "Stand Your Ground" laws that it`s pushed throughout the country. ALEC
says it will focus only on economic issues.

But don`t be fooled. So-called economic issues include whoppers like
these, state union busting measures -- repealing minimum wage laws,
repealing paid sick day laws around the country, requiring a super majority
to raise taxes. How about repealing capital gains taxes?

Keep in mind, ALEC has already lost 10 corporate donors, including
Coca-Cola, Pepsi and Kraft because of pressure from groups like Color of

The progressive group said ALEC`s move is nothing more than a P.R.
stunt aimed at diverting attention from its agenda, which has done some
serious damage to our communities.

Let`s bring in Rashad Robinson, executive director of Color of Change.

Good to have you with us tonight.


SCHULTZ: When we first talked about this a little over a week ago,
you thought this was going to have an impact. Do you believe this group
ALEC that they`re going to change their focus when it comes to pushing

ROBINSON: Absolutely not. The voter ID laws and the "Stand Your
Ground" laws are part of the larger agenda of laws that you just showed the
viewers. These are all part of the same package intending to hurt our
communities, but also the laws they worked to pass all around the country
are still in place. People are still dealing with them.

So, essentially they have went out and basically spilt oil until the
water and said we`re not going to spill anymore oil, but we`re also going
to clean it up.

SCHULTZ: Well, is this any kind of a victory? Any kind -- maybe a
partial victory, a move in the right direction?

ROBINSON: Well, I think it`s a signal to the corporation that are
still with ALEC, that ALEC`s agenda was so outside of the mainstream. It
was so indefensible that they`re no longer going to defend it.

And for corporations that continue to stand with ALEC, for the AT&T`s
and State Farms and the Johnson & Johnson`s, that continue to stay with
ALEC, even after hundreds and thousands people have been speaking out
around the country, this is a signal to them that ALEC won`t even defend
their mission.

SCHULTZ: So, what`s the mission -- or how is the mission going to
play out by your group Color of Change to keep the pressure up, to follow
through, to make sure that they do not push forward the template, playbook
type of legislation on legislators where over 2,000 of them are associated
with them?

ROBINSON: Along with partners like the Center of Media and Democracy
and Common Cause and a number of organizations around the country that have
been engaged on this issue, we`re going to continue to keep the focus on
ALEC and watch state legislators, hold them accountable as well. So, when
they start introducing legislation that looks like ALEC legislation,
they`re going to have to answer to it, and also to continue the pressure on

There are still well over 100 corporations that are still part of
ALEC, that are still standing behind this organization even after now they
stepped away from some of their horrendous policies.

SCHULTZ: So, you`ve slowed them down. Have you damaged them?

ROBINSON: I think we absolutely have damaged them. Two weeks ago,
three weeks ago, no one knew who ALEC was, they were nameless, faceless

SCHULTZ: I think in the progressive community, I think everything
knew who ALEC was. There`s been quite a bit of reporting by "The Nation"
over the last year. John Nichols has done a lot of that.

But you`re right. I mean, the general public, you walk up to somebody
and say you hear what ALEC is doing, it wasn`t until the "Stand Your
Ground" law that got a great deal of publicity because of what unfolded
down in Florida was really an opportunity, was it not?

ROBINSON: It was -- I mean, it was an opportunity to make the
connection between our safety and our communities and the agenda that ALEC
has pushed. And then the larger agenda of bringing corporations and state
legislators behind closed doors to push laws that no one asked for and no
one wants.

SCHULTZ: All right. When you take a look at your future right now,
do you think that some of these corporations that have gone away from them,
and there`s a number of them, Coke, Pepsi, Kraft, you think they will go
back someday or maybe in a different form?

ROBINSON: We`re going to be watching. Color of Change is not going
away. You know, we were David in this David and Goliath struggle, and we
will continue to raise the voices of every day people.

So, for the Krafts and the Cokes and the Pepsis, we commended them
today for making the right decision. But that does not mean that we will
not be vigilant in monitoring their relationships with organizations like

SCHULTZ: So, it was the social media that did this?

ROBINSON: It was certainly the use of technology in giving people the
ability to not just get information but to use it in real time.

SCHULTZ: And you did the right thing morally?

ROBINSON: I absolutely believe it.

SCHULTZ: Do they have more legislation that you`re looking at that is
going to be very damaging?

ROBINSON: Yes. They are continuing to push laws around mandatory
minimums, around education. A number of laws that still impact our
communities and still sit beside these discriminatory voter ID laws.

SCHULTZ: Well, you got to stay on them, don`t you? I mean, you have
to stay on them, correct? Because they`re talking about economic issues.
Look at this law up in Michigan, the financial managers law which
disenfranchises everybody on a city commission or county commission that
was voted on if they don`t have the budget right. Here comes the financial
manager appointed by the governor, that`s an ALEC law.

ROBINSON: And their public relations have been all over the place,
Ed. Last week they were saying that the only thing they pushed was
economic issues. And the question that we instantly asked, the AT&T`s and
the Johnson & Johnson`s and State Farm was what about voter suppression and
about "Stand Your Ground" is in their economic interest. And so, this
week, they come out and say, no, we`re not going to push these laws
anymore. They`re simply all over the place.

And for American who is are watching this issue and staying tuned, we
cannot trust ALEC. We cannot trust the back room deals that they make with
state legislators, the way they move money in politics. This is about
putting sunlight around how democracy is done making sure all of our voices
are heard, not just the rich and powerful.

SCHULTZ: Rashad Robinson, thanks for joining us tonight. Thanks so

ROBINSON: Thank you.

SCHULTZ: A group of House conservatives was asked a simple question
today, are they excited about Mitt Romney as their nominee? Well, you
won`t believe how much they tripped all over themselves trying to answer
that question.

Why did Mitt Romney strap his dog to the roof of the car? Ann Romney
says it`s because the dog loved it. The Seamus Romney saga continues.
Stay tuned.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back.

A bunch of House conservatives got together for a meeting they called
Conversations with Conservatives. They streamed it online but couldn`t
seem to get the camera in focus or maybe the blurry picture was deliberate.
Who knows? Kind of like a witness protection program for conservatives,
don`t you think?

Here is the best part. A simple question was asked of the group. Are
any of you excited to have Mitt Romney as the nominee? Here are some of
the answers.


REP. JIM JORDAN (R), OHIO: I would say first we`re excited about the
opportunity to defeat Barack Obama more than anything.

REP. RAUL LABRADOR (R), IDAHO: I`m actually excited. I`ve not
endorsed any candidate. I`m excited that the process is over. I`m excited
that we have potentially a nominee who is going to be taking it to Obama.

REP. JOE WALSH (R), ILLINOIS: The excitement, the passion in this
race, as Jim Jordan said, will come from getting Barack Obama out of the
White House.


SCHULTZ: Well, Texas Congressman Louie Gohmert was even more blunt.


REP. LOUIE GOHMERT (R), TEXAS: If you`re not sure about wanting to
support Mitt Romney, whether you`re liberal, whether you`re very
conservative, you ought to be excited because he`s been on your side at one
time or another.



SCHULTZ: Then, after a couple of people stood up for Mitt Romney,
Congressman Gohmert said this.


GOHMERT: So that I`m not totally misunderstood. I`m not as excited
as I am desperate.


SCHULTZ: Joining me now is congressman from Minnesota, Keith Ellison.

Congressman, good to have you with us tonight.


SCHULTZ: It really doesn`t matter who the nominee is. The focus is
defeat President Obama and they`ll accept Romney at this point. What are
you hearing on the hill?

ELLISON: Well, I`m hearing pretty the same thing the quiet
conversations between people who know each other but won`t go on camera,
that`s the line. And that doesn`t surprise me at all that`s what those
gentlemen said. And Louis Goldberg, he God Bless him for his candor. That
was pretty funny. He`s been on your side at one time or another.

SCHULTZ: Is this a good sell point for Democrats to point out exactly
how determined they are to remove President Obama?

ELLISON: They are so determined to try to remove President Obama.
They have taken their eye off their core mission of Congress which is to
promote the general welfare. I mean, we`re not dealing with jobs. We`re
not dealing with anything. We`re not dealing with tax fairness. I mean,
we saw the Buffet Rule rejected yesterday in the senate. We`re just - you
know what we are doing? We are making it so that people can bring their
polar bear trophies from their hunting expeditions into the country.
That`s what we are doing. That`s what we did in Congress today.


ELLISON: Yes. They changed some parks. They proposed some park
changes that would allow for roads to be put through public and parklands
and that you could bring a polar bear trophy into the country. They`re
banned now because they`re endangered, but that`s kind of what we`re doing

SCHULTZ: So, we have millions of people out of work and this is what
the Republicans are focused on.


SCHULTZ: Some of them paint add doomsday scenario. Here is
congressman from Arizona David Schweikert.


REP. DAVID SCHWEIKERT (R), ARIZONA: We see this as truly the election
of, does this Republic survive.


SCHULTZ: Does this sort of thing unite conservatives against the
president, that kind of rhetoric?

ELLISON: I don`t think it does because the truth is if you`re
motivated by a negative emotion like hatred of the president, I don`t think
that gives you the kind of energy and zeal and enthusiasm that you need to
really get out there and park outside.

SCHULTZ: Well, speaking of --

ELLISON: People are excited about Obama. We`re going to be pushing
for our president who had such a great record of achievement in passing

SCHULTZ: Well, in the latest CNN poll enthusiasm for President Obama
is much higher than it is for Mitt Romney. That`s encouraging.

I want to ask you. I know you testified on Capitol Hill today about
racial profiling in America. Tell us about it.

ELLISON: Well, we had an excellent hearing. Senator Durbin and
Senator Graham convened the hearing. And they brought forth a
congressional panel which started with Ben Gardin. It went onto several
members including Luis Gutierrez, including John Conyers and Judy Chu and
all talked about racial p profiling in America.

And the general consensus was two points. One is that, when you pick
out somebody based on a profile and not criminal behavior, what you are
doing is you`re wasting law enforcement services. And also, it`s un-
American and outside the American way to pick on somebody just because
their race, religion or something like that.

SCHULTZ: How would you monitor that congressman, and how would you
enforce it?

ELLISON: Well, what we - first, we need to collect data. When police
officers make stops, they make all kind of data points in their reports.
One could be the race of the person you`re stopping. And without regard to
whether you make arrests or not. You can use that data over time to help
training and help show - look, are we selecting out one group more than
another. If so, is there a law enforcement basis for it? And if not,
that`s good news.

But, I think it starts with tracking what you`re doing so that you can
review your practices.

SCHULTZ: Congressman Keith Ellison, great to have you with us
tonight. Thank you.

ELLISON: Always. Thank you.

SCHULTZ: There`s a lot more coming up with the next half hour of "the
Ed Show." Stay with us.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Republicans, Democrats, have ruled post offices
although how important they are.

SCHULTZ (voice-over): The U.S. postal service is teetering on
bankruptcy and the senate is debating whether to save it. I know exactly
how to fix the problem. My commentary is ahead.

Mitt Romney is flip-flopping on making his dog ride on the top of his
car and you won`t believe why.

And Ted Nugent goes off the deep end while stomping for Mitt Romney.

TED NUGENT, ROCK AND ROLL STAR: Our president, attorney general, our
vice president, Hillary Clinton, they`re criminals.

SCHULTZ: Eugene Robinsons on Mitt Romney`s problem with the motor
city madman.

NUGENT: We are patriots. We are brave heart. We need to ride into
that battlefield and chop their heads off in November.



SCHULTZ: The destruction of the United States postal service is one
of the top priorities of the Republican to do list. They are doing all
they can to privatize it. They want to destroy jobs. This is a story I`ve
told you I will follow and I am going to continue to cover it. Because
hundreds of thousands of jobs are at stake that will affect this economy.

First of all, something I want you to keep in mind. Zero taxpayers
dollars go toward funding the post office. That means none of the taxes
that you paid yesterday or today will go to the post office. It funds
itself with revenue.

I`m going to say it again and again and again. The Republican assault
on the post office started in 2006 when a lame duck session rammed through
a bill requiring the post office to pre-fund 75 years of retiree benefits
in a ten-year window.

These overpayments have caused the post office to run substantially
short of money and into debt. How about if they did that to your business?
To solve the problem the postmaster general said here is what I`m going to

We`re going to close more than 200 mail processing centers, that will
help, which would of course put 35,000 jobs at stake immediately. He also
suggested stopping Saturday delivery. What good does that do? We`re doing
backwards and delaying delivery of first-class mail. That`s no good
either. This is on top of 3,700 post offices that could be closed down and
more than 200,000 jobs lost.

Today, finally, the Senate took up a bill that would really just
postpone this agony. It`s not going to reverse it the way I think it
should happen. It`s going to postpone the agony. The legislation would
save more than 100,000 processing, more than 100 processing facilities from
immediate closure allowing the areas to maintain overnight first class mail
for three years.

It would force the postal service to evaluate the special needs of
communities before these post offices are closed.

And of course, it would delay cutting Saturday delivery for at least
two years, and at that point the postal service could only move to a five-
day schedule if it was the only way to cut costs long term.

I mean. It`s a bunch of mumbo jumbo is what it is. They don`t have
to do this. This is unnecessary, but none of this gets to the real heart
of the problem.

Here is the problem. It was the day in Congress back in 2006 that was
run by the Republicans and the lame duck session. Now, this bill, what
it`s going to do, if it`s get through but it probably would, is only going
to delay it for few years.

There`s no need to shut down post offices or processing facilities and
lay any of these people off. Senator Bernie Sanders, it seems like we have
to rely on him for everything. He explained it on the Senate floor today.


SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I), VERMONT: The major crisis, major financial
crisis facing the postal service is the fact that they have a burden of
having to provide five and a half billion dollars every single year in
future retiree health benefits, $5.5 billion every year which is imposed
upon them in 2006, according to the inspector general of the postal

The $44 billion in that account right now is all that it needs because
when that $44 billion accrues interest over a 20 year or so period, it will
have enough money to pay out all of the future retiree health benefits that
it has to do.


SCHULTZ: So Americans, I ask you to grasp this story.

They already have enough money to take care of retirement for the next
75 years but they have a bill that they have to pay to the tune of $5.5
billion a year, which is on their expenses that they are going to need,
why, because the Congress forced them to go down the road. Why, because
they want to kill the unions, because they want to destroy this voting
black. They want to destroy any kind of infrastructure they can of union
workers and of course, working folks of America. And - but, most of all
that they want to privatize.

They want to privatize what the postal service has been doing. In
fact, the Republicans want to privatize everything. Here is what I want
the Democrats to do. I`m getting sick and tired of hearing Mitt Romney and
every other Republican out there saying if we get power the first thing
we`re going to do is repeal Obama care. Really?

I want to hear the Democrats pull a page out of Michelle Bachmann`s
play book and say that first thing that the Democrats are going to do if
they get power back in the house, they hold the Senate and keep the White
House, is that they`re going to turn this law around that is going to give
the post office an opportunity to innovate, to get current, to give them a
chance to compete and certainly take this $5.5 million bill off their books
every year that the Republicans put on them because they`re trying to
destroy the jobs.

Darrell Issa, he is the perfect dude for the Republicans to ramrod
this through.

Let me tell you something. This is a culture war in America. We
treat workers like a piece of furniture. We just move them around wherever
we want to put them and give them no say. They want to take away their
voice as well.

But to destroy the collective bargaining, destroying what these postal
workers have done over the years, is not an answer and is not better for
America. Rural America is going to pay a heavy price for this because
you`re not going to have that service.

Every radio stations among that industry, to every radio station has
in their budget, shipping and delivery service, shipping and delivery
expenses. Where do you think the expenses are going go for small
businesses in America if they gut the postal service?

Well, I thought Republicans were business friendly. The hell they
are. They`re not worker friendly. They`re not business friendly. And the
Democrats, you need to stand up on this and you need to tell the American
people that if you get power, you will turn this rotten law around and make
it in favor of the American economy and the American workers.

Coming up, Mitt and Ann Romney, well, they are defending strapping
their dog to the roof of the car once again. We have the video you don`t
want to miss. Stay with us.


SCHULTZ: Up next, Mitt and Ann Romney, well, they try to rewrite the
story of their dog, famous dog now, Seamus once gain. Don`t forget to
tweet us using the #edshow. We`re right back.





SCHULTZ: Well, it`s a story that just won`t go away for Mitt Romney.
The tale of after 1983 Romney family road trip to Canada has followed the
candidate now through two election cycles and it goes like something like

Mitt and Ann and the kids, well, they pile under the family`s station
wagon, dog, Seamus, got strapped to the roof for some reason. At one point
during the 12-hour journey, son, Tagg, notice a brown liquid dripping down
the back window. Seamus is of course wasn`t a fan of rooftop access.

Mitt Romney calmly pulled over beside of the road, hose off the dog
and the car then gets driving. Romney share that story with the boasting
load like in 2007, it was intended to show he was a problem solver, a
master at emotion free crisis management. Well, it had the opposite

Once again, Ann Romney has got to clean up Mitt`s mess. She was
giving the job of defending the decision.


ANN ROMNEY, MITT ROMNEY`S WIFE: The dog loved it. He dog --


ANN ROMNEY: Once. We traveled all the time and he ate the turkey on
the counter. I mean, he had the runs.



SCHULTZ: Romney says he now regrets the incident not because it was a
cruel thing to do but because it`s been a political headache.


SAWYER: We got two questions most often. First about shamus, which
is you know is out there forever. Would you do it again?

MITT ROMNEY: Certainly not with the attention it`s received.


SCHULTZ: This guy just doesn`t get it. He literally scared the crap
out of the dog and now he says he wouldn`t do it again because he`s tired
of hearing about it. He tells you all you need to know right there.
That`s all you need to know about Mitt Romney. He says he will do anything
to make a bad story go away.

Bottom line, the dog should get to ride inside next time if it does
happen, Mitt.

Mitt Romney`s surrogate, Ted Nugent, makes hateful remarks about
President Obama over the weekend. Now, Ted Nugent says, Mitt Romney agrees
with him. Eugene Robinson will weigh in on that, next.


SCHULTZ: "the Ed Show" survey tonight, I asked. Do Republicans want
to protect oil companies or American consumers, 98 percent of you say oil
companies. Two percent of you say American consumers.

Coming up. The right wing jumped on Hilary Rosen`s comments about Ann
Romney. So, where`s the outrage over Ted Nugent`s violent comments about
Democrats? I will ask you Gene Robinson, next. Don`t forget you can
listen to me on Sirius XM radio, channel 127, Monday through Friday, noon
to 3:00 p.m. and follow me on Twitter @edshow and like "the Ed Show" on
facebook. We`re right back.


SCHULTZ: And to the big finish tonight. Across the street they love
to talk about liberals and hate talk. How about this one?

Rocker Ted Nugent has a real way with horrors. That mean, he once
told the crowd Barack Obama could suck on his machine gun. He called
Hilary Clinton two-bit whore. He believes the Democrat party act as a
modern day slave master to the poor.

If those comments didn`t stop Mitt Romney from seeking Nugent`s
endorsement, according to the Texas Tribune, Romney even agreed to Nugent`s
demands on gun laws to get his blessing. Romney should not have been
surprised to hear what Ted Nugent had to say at the NRA convention over the


NUGENT: If you don`t know that our government is wiping its (bleep)
with the constitution, you`re living under a rock some place. Four Supreme
Court justices signed their name to a declaration that Americans have no
fundamental right to self-defense. That sounds like a stoned hippie.

And if you want more of those kinds of evil, anti-American people in
the Supreme Court, then don`t get involved and let Obama take office again.

Because I`ll tell you this right now, if Barack Obama becomes the
president in November again, I will either be dead or in jail by this time
next year. But if you can`t go home and get everybody in your lives to
clean house in this vile, evil American hated administration, I don`t know
what you`re made out of.

If you can`t galvanize and promote and recruit people to vote for Mitt
Romney, we`re done. We`ll be a suburb of Indonesia next year. Our
president and attorney general, our vice president, Hillary Clinton are

We`re patriots. We`re brave hearts. We need to ride into that
battlefield and chop their heads off in November. Am I -- any questions?


SCHULTZ: Yes. You want to chop my head off? That`s my question.

The secret service is reportedly reviewing Nugent`s comments. The
Romney campaign offered this lukewarm reaction to Nugent`s violent

"Divisive language is offensive no matter what side of the political
aisle it comes from. Mitt Romney believes everyone needs to be civil."

Hold it right there. Can somebody bring out some tape of some
Democrat that talks like that about chopping heads off? Ted Nugent is not
backing down. In fact, he believes Mitt Romney agrees with him.


NUGENT: Mitt Romney is a great American. Mitt Romney believes in the
first amendment. Mitt Romney knows what I`m saying is true. He puts it
into words for him. I put it into words for me.


SCHULTZ: I`m joined by Eugene Robinson, MSNBC political analyst and
associate editor and Pulitzer Prize winning columnist for the "Washington

Eugene, great to have you with us.

It`s about rhetoric at this point, no doubt. The Romney campaign
jumped over Hilary Rosen`s comments even though she`s not part of the Obama
campaign. Hilary Rosen was not infighting violence. Why hasn`t Mitt
Romney condemned these comments from Ted Nugent? And do you think he needs
to do that?

helped what Hilary Rosen said was in politics. This is no comparison
between that and this. This is different not just in degree but in kind
because there`s not just criticism, there`s not just political
incorrectness or whatever in what Nugent was saying, there`s actually
menace there.

It`s no surprise to me that the secret service has decided to at least
look into this because - and frankly, he sounds somewhat delusional and
it`s delusional people you need to watch out for historically. So, this is
completely different. Add to that the fact that Mitt Romney went out of
his way to try to get Ted Nugent`s endorsement.

SCHULTZ: That`s the story right there. I mean. This candidate went
out and sought his support because he knows he`s in the sack with these NRA
guys. He knows that you saw those guys standing around watching him and
agreeing with what he was saying. That`s who Mitt Romney needs to get. He
has to sure up that base. Romney sought this guy out to be an - as an
endorsement. Shouldn`t that be enough for the Romney campaign to be
connected at the hip to this guy?

ROBINSON: That should be more than enough and certainly more than
enough for a stronger statement at least. Like, you know, they ought to
cut the guy off, but at least a stronger statement than this sort of, you
know, both sides should be nice sort of thing that they like to do.

I mean, you know. The most chilling thing to me about the clips you
played, are the people who were just kind of nodding along as they listened
to this creed. You know, at an NRA convention.

SCHULTZ: And really, it is spooky. I mean. There`s a portion of our
society, those people are followers. They can`t think for themselves. And
for them to sit there and just nod their head when this guy is saying, what
we need to do on Election Day is chop their heads off, OK?


SCHULTZ: Well, let me lighting it up just a little bit here as we
move forward. What`s more problematic for Romney, Ted Nugent or birther
Donald Trump hosting a fundraiser for the Romney campaign tonight?

ROBINSON: Boy, you can`t -- I don`t know which one is.

SCHULTZ: That`s a pick six.

ROBINSON: We got do see what the Trumpster has in mind.

SCHULTZ: No doubt. Great to have you with us tonight, Eugene.

And the rhetoric just continues on but do we -- pointed it out tonight
that Mitt Romney gave a lame statement. He did not give a definitive
statement. I think, again, it`s a question of leadership.

Eugene Robinson, great to have you with us. Thank you.

ROBINSON: Good to be here, Ed.

SCHULTZ: That`s the "the Ed Show." I`m Ed Schultz. "The Rachel
Maddow Show" starts now.

Good evening, Rachel. Great to have you back. I understand your book
tour is a whirlwinds. Everybody is talking about it.


SCHULTZ: Is there anything you`re not number one at?

Ask my family.


<Copy: Content and programming copyright 2012 NBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
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.>

The Ed Show Section Front
Add The Ed Show headlines to your news reader:

Sponsored links

Resource guide