updated 12/16/2013 10:28:04 AM ET 2013-12-16T15:28:04

THE ED SHOW
December 13, 2013
Guest:


(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Please welcome.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: My back hurts, my leg aches, I`m only four.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We`ve worked all year, to get our economy going again
and help produce better jobs and more wages.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You know what a Lion taxer is?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC ANCHOR: Good to have you with us tonight folks thanks
for watching. So if you listen to Rand Paul, and you believe in what he
says, that means when you lose your job in 26 weeks your out on the street
that`s the ways it is. Better move in with somebody better have a nice
relative. You know in this business, we talk about what we think is
interesting, everybody has their show right in the media. Everybody has
their column, their Twitter account, we do things that we find interesting
or appealing. Or we try to do things that we think would get people`s
attention, I would like to get this country`s attention on a solution that
this number is the same number that Bush had when he left office.

And it was, well over double digits and now the President with his economic
plan has got it down to 7 percent. But with a minute, there are some
losers, University of Michigan Football Stadium holds a hundred thousand
people. Take that times 13, that`s a heck a lot of folks, all of those
people are going to be without unemployment benefits coming up on December
28th, three days after Christmas. What are they going to do? People that
live on fixed incomes, you mean to tell me that we have oil subsidies, that
we have tax rates for corporations, we have loopholes that close.

We give foreign aid like crazy, I could go on and on, we do things for
farmers to make sure that they stay on the land. But this is the cut off
line, right here, 26 weeks that`s where the Republicans are. And now they
won`t go beyond 99 weeks, they don`t understand special circumstances.
This is a high number, it`s a number that the Republican President the last
guy was in had to deal with. It got worse, now were back to this, what is
our plan?

Now we got this vote, how many people voted for this budget deal, it was
over what? 323 people, oh excuse me, 332 Republicans and Democrats have
decided that 1.3 million people you are SOL, too bad suck it up, go live
wherever you got to live and if you got kids well that`s too bad. Probably
you shouldn`t have those kids, right? You can come up with all kinds of
excuses as to why we can`t extend unemployment benefits in this country,
we`re wealthy but we`re not that wealthy, right?

That`s what the Republicans are saying, here`s what I think, I think that
we should have unlimited unemployment benefits for as long as it takes,
because we give tax rights to the corporations in fact one in four
corporations in country don`t pay any tax at all. What`s their limit?
Well if they can shake down the Congress it`s unlimited, I do believe that
if the number of unemployed people in this country is at 6.5 percent of
above it should be unlimited unemployment until they get back into the
economy. What`s that going to do? It`s going to wake some people up, the
people at the top to maybe it would be better to invest in workers and
invest in this country than they keep having people on social programs.

Maybe that would motivate them, you know, what it will really do? It would
keep the conversation going, you see, I don`t believe that 1.3 million
people are just sitting on the couch getting fat and happy watching TV or
playing with their Twitter account, because I get phone calls from people
who are in their 40s and 50s on my radio show, who are going back to
school. They`ve done the community college thing, they`ve reinvested in
their careers, they have dug into their savings and they`re at that point
right now where they keep getting denied and denied.

So the catch would be, if it`s unlimited, they would have to prove that
they have gone to school, they`ve taken some training, they`ve tried to
better themselves and we would show a great deal of compassion as a country
if we were to do that. Now I`m giving a solution, I haven`t heard any
solutions from anybody in Congress on what were going to do other than to
extend, it wouldn`t be a handout, you`d have to go make sure that you`re
trying better your self, and you could prove it through documentation,
through any county commissioner that`s elected in any county in this
country where you live.

It`s really not that hard to do, the easy thing to do is just vote and
protect your rear end, so you can go home and say I didn`t raise your
taxes, we didn`t close the loopholes and of course we`re never going to
have shutdown again for the next two years. So we`ve got the tea partiers
all in the corner now and all quite and this is the deal. Well here`s the
bottom line, what we need is a big move by the Senate, the Partisan Bill
that was passed was 332 to 94. Politicians on both sides they all think
that, this is a victory, they are dead wrong, this budget is a horrible
deal for over a million Americans.

Hey wait a minute, there`s going to be more, in June there`s going to be
another 1.9 million Americans, you know, it`s a bad deal when John Boehner
is out begging for votes on the house floor.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN BOEHNER, SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: My colleagues I
think it`s pretty simple, if you`re for reducing he budget deficit then you
should be voting for this bill, and if you`re for cutting the sides of
Government you should be supporting the budget. If you`re for preventing
tax increases, you should be voting for this budget. If you`re for
entitlement reform, you have to be voting for this budget, is it a perfect?
Doesn`t it go far enough? No, but this budget is a positive step in that
direction it`s progress.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: And if you`re for kicking the down trotting in the teeth you got
to voting for this budget. Republicans - you see they got a lot out of
this budget, they are cutting spending at the expense of unemployed
Americans, starting on December 28th as I said up 1.3 million Americans
could lose their unemployment benefits, the impact to these Americans lives
will be devastating and so all the consequences to our economy as a whole.
But the fight for the unemployment they claim, whoah it`s not over we`re
going to keep going.

The Democratically controlled Senate can still put a long term unemployment
extension into this Budget Bill and of course it is all up to this guy
Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Reid says that he stands up
to Republicans and that he`s going to put an unemployment extension on the
Bill, but he`s already making excuses. On Thursday, Reid said because of
congressional procedure he can`t put unemployment insurance back in to the
budget.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Democrats, so many time have really gone to the bat
on unemployment opposition. What was different this time?

SEN. HARRY REID, (D) NEVADA: When the House decided to post as they did,
night before last the, two Bills the budget and the (SGR) and stuck them
together. It left us procedurally no alternate - I`m about as disappointed
as anyone could be because Nevada leads the nation in unemployment.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: There must be a Senate Rule there that I don`t know about, Reid
went on to say that the Senate will work on an unemployment extension after
the budget passes, there is no way the House will vote for an unemployment
extension unless it`s tied to something. They want, with all due respect
Senator Reid, you are the Senate Majority Leader, and you could do whatever
you want, I think you can, you`re that tough guy from Nevada that used to
box all the time. I want to see some boxing going on, put the unemployment
insurance in the budget and send it right back the Paul Ryan and committee.

Let him deal with it, let him tell those 1.3 million people that they`re
not worth it. It`s the perfect time to do it, Paul Ryan knows the brand of
makers and takers politics isn`t popular right now. But here he is on Fox
News earlier this week.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. PAUL RYAN, WISCONSIN: Guess what? Sean (ph) elections have
consequences, we`re going to have to win a couple of elections, to actually
pass that kind of budget that you and I are in favor of.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Did I not tell you last night on this program that this is not
about a budget, this is about winning elections so they can get exactly
what they want. And if they can take Ted Cruz and put him in the corner
and shut him up for the next two election cycles it`s a grand bargain.
Because nobody likes the Government Shutdown, Paul Ryan basically what he`s
doing is retreating. He`s right, elections do have consequences, this is
why the Senate needs to fight back and help these unemployed Americans
immediately.

Let`s break it down for you with a famous Ed Show chart, here it is folks,
$1 trillion that`s the 2014 federal budget. The Ryan-Murray Plan,
allocates roughly $1 trillion to the federal spending. This little so
(inaudible) should I say, this little sliver right here. That little old
bitty bit right there, that right there, $25 billion gosh that`s 2.5
percent of the budget. The unemployment extension would be that, $25
billion is roughly 2.5 percent of the budget.

So, let`s take a look at defense spending, the budget has $500 billion for
Defense spending, heck that`s more that half the pie, it`s roughly half the
federal budget. There is no way that anyone can look at this chart and say
that taking unemployment insurance away from 1.3 million Americans is the
right thing to do. You mean to tell me we just couldn`t - just maybe
couldn`t trim back just a little bit there? You mean we just couldn`t find
it? We could find it, we find it for countries all over the world, we find
if for the oil companies, we find for the farmers, we find it for
everybody. But people who are fallen out of the economy we - you have 26
weeks that`s what the Republicans want and if it goes beyond that, the
Republicans thing that well, we`re really doing you this service, maybe,
you should turn in your citizenship.

Get your cellphones out. I want to know what you think. Tonight`s
question, should the Senate force the House to vote on unemployment
insurance. Text A for yes, text B for no to 67622. You can always go to
our blog at ed.msnbc.com. Leave a comment there. We appreciate it. We`ll
have the results graph it up for you later on in the show.

For more, let me bring in Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post. Eugene,
good to have you with us tonight.

EUGENE ROBINSON, WASHINGTON POST COLUMNIST: Great to be here, Ed.

SCHULTZ: Why is Harry Reid not fighting for unemployment in the budget?
What Senate rule would hold him back from putting it right back in there
and say, you guys over in the house got to rethink this thing?

ROBINSON: You know, the Senate rules are terribly are -- can I -- I
confess I`m not aware of what the Senate don`t put unemployment in the bill
rule if such a rule exist. I don`t know why.

SCHULTZ: It`s certainly it`s really strange.

ROBINSON: . because you can`t do it.

SCHULTZ: . to me.

ROBINSON: . but, you know.

SCHULTZ: You know, just sounds so strange to me. I mean, the Congress can
find a way to do whatever the heck they want to do.

ROBINSON: Well, yes. Of course, you know. But look -- step back for a
bit for a second. I think their decision has been made that it`s not going
to be far for it in this bill. I do take him at his word that Democrats
are going to fight to do it which as you said means attaching it to
something that Republicans want or feel like they can`t turn down but the
calculation seem to have been made in the House and in the Senate that this
is an advance -- that this is a -- it`s a lousy budget in many ways but
that this represents an advance beyond.

SCHULTZ: Yes.

ROBINSON: . the sort of Republican total resistance that we`ve seen in the
last few years.

SCHULTZ: You know, I think these guys wanted to go home and say, "You know
what? All this bad stuff you heard about the Congress -- heck, I can work
with the other side. I voted for this budget deal."

ROBINSON: Well, yes.

SCHULTZ: You know, I do think that that`s part of it but isn`t this a leap
of faith to say that John Boehner is going to bring an Unemployment
Extension Bill to the floor for passage? I mean the Democrats, they really
believe that a guy who was voted to take away health care for millions of
Americans over 40 times that he`s a guy you can really count on when it
comes to unemployment benefits?

ROBINSON: Well, I wouldn`t call him a guy you could really count on, Ed.
I don`t he can. I think you could argue and I`m not sure if this is
correct -- you could argue that Republicans can in fact be pressured into
doing the right thing on unemployment benefits that they have been in the
past but that requires some public mobilization. It requires people
speaking out like you`re doing now, it requires getting their constituents
involved -- every member of the House and every member of the Senate has
constituents who are affected by this, who are going to lose the what --
little income they have coming in their household because of this. And
that point I think has to be driven home.

SCHULTZ: The Democrats seemed to have voted for this. And if you`d
noticed the vote yesterday, they waited for the Republicans to vote because
they didn`t want to go home holding this thing -- holding all the eggs in
the basket. They wanted this to be real bipartisanship. So that tells me
that there was a real calculation on the part of the Democrats as to how
this was going to politically play out.

Well, how is it going to politically play out when they run around the
country saying that they support the middle class but when it comes down
to, you know, cut into the chase, they don`t have the vote. They would say
-- 94 of them said, "You know what, we`re looking out for Americans that
are having a hard time." The rest of them want the deal.

ROBINSON: Yes. Well, yes. It`s going to be a problem for some Democrats
and I think it`s also going to be a problem for some Republicans. At least
I hope it is because they -- remember those Republican members of Congress
have constituents who are going to be suffering as a result of this. And
those constituents have neighbors -- some of whom are Republican and who
are going to be questioning this. But how do we get from here to there?
And that`s -- nobody has drawn that path.

SCHULTZ: That`s right.

ROBINSON: . yet. You can say, "OK. Fine. This what happened yesterday."
This is what`s going to happen next week." We all know that that`s kind of
wrapping it up in a bulb but at least tell us how you`re going to get from
where we`re going to be when this thing is finally passed to where we need
to be which is making those 1.3 million household whole again or as whole
as our relatively meager unemployment benefits attempt to make them.

SCHULTZ: This erodes Democratic principles is what it does. It erodes
them from the stand point that they`re -- have -- the Democrats throw in
people on hard times under the bus and there`s no real commitment for any
jobs package that would bring that 7 percent unemployment down. There`s
protection, what I call election protection because there`s not going to be
a shutdown which the Republicans know is terribly unpopular.

So, I`m trying to figure out where`s the victory here for the Democrats? I
mean in a deal there`s always winners and losers. There is people that go
on the back room and start high fiving and want to know I just don`t think
the Democrats are high fiving and want to know the right now.

ROBINSON: Well, you know, maybe not a high five. Maybe at high one or
two, because there are sequester cuts that can`t spend our being.

SCHULTZ: Yes.

ROBINSON: . renewed. And so, you know, there`s some people who are not
going to get their unemployment benefits and that`s awful. There are some
kids who are going to be able to go head start, who weren`t able to go in
the past.

And so, some of them, you know, these programs and we`ve written and talked
about what was taken out of there is not all restored but some good was
done up there, done from this.

And I think they`re definitely - there`s a sense here in Washington that
just get in the part what we can say there`s not going to be shutdown,
there`s not going to be, you know, one of those terrible sort of ridiculous
episodes in this 21 months is a good thing.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

ROBINSON: . for the country. It`s at what cost I think you can ask.

SCHULTZ: Eugene Robinson you have done a great job in trying cool me off.

ROBINSON: Ed, I don`t know if that`s possible. But you have a good
weekend.

SCHULTZ: Good to have you with us tonight. Eugene Robinson Washington
Post.

Remember to answer tonight`s question there at the bottom of the screen,
share your thoughts on Twitter at Ed Show and on Facebook. We want to know
what you think.

Tweet out, should we have unlimited unemployment benefits if people prove
that they are trying to better themselves?

Coming up we`ll have an update on this afternoon shooting in Colorado at
that high school. Stay tuned you`re watching the Ed Show on MSNBC.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRAYSON ROBINSON, ARAPAHOE COUNTY SHERIFF: Our deputies found the suspect
dead inside the school. Currently right now it appears to us that shooter
is dead as a result of self afflicted gunshot wound. However, that
determination remains under investigation and we will continue to look at
those details.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: That was Sheriff Grayson Robinson just moments ago speaking about
a school shooting this afternoon in Centennial, Colorado. A student who
entered Arapahoe High School with the weapon is now dead after an apparent
self inflicted wound at about 12:30 PM Mountain Time.

The student went in to the west side of the school. The Arapahoe County
Sheriff says that he was looking for a specific teacher by name. Protocols
were followed and the school was evacuated. Two students were injured in
the shooting one is in critical condition.

Joining me now is Clint Van Zandt , NBC analyst and former FBI profiler.
Clint this is again another situation dealing with mental health and the
access to fire arms. I think that a lot of Americans are going to be
viewing it this way.

Your thoughts, again, we see this happening at a high school, a big high
school, 2,000 students and this kid was actually looking for and naming out
a teacher?

ZANDT: Yeah and Ed what were hearing from other students is that this was
in fact a troubled young man. As you know were nearing tomorrow the one
year anniversary of the terrible shooting at Sandy Hook. Again, someone
with mental health issues, again, someone with access to weapons.

And one of our challenge when we have to deal with the mental health
issues. But again we`ve got 280 million known guns for 315 million
Americans. If somebody wants a gun, unfortunately they`re going to get it.

And in this case, we have this mental health issues if we don`t identify
these people, even at the high school level and find some way to give them
conflict resolution skills other than in this case perhaps a shot gun,
these incidents are going to be repeated over and over.

This high school, Columbine, the Aurora movie theater, Sandy Hook, these
aren`t just anomalies, these are young men by in large scene how to act out
in a violent means and somehow level the playing surface of their life
while taking the lives of others.

SCHULTZ: Every teacher in America right now is thinking, gosh, is there a
student out there that might come after me and you mentioned conflict
resolution. Conflict resolution, that is a science today. There is no
question about it.

How do you identify what students need conflict resolution?

ZANDT: Well one of the things we need to do Ed, is we need to be
identifying these students when they`re in grade school. By the time
they`re in high school, they have developed, you know, whether they played
violent video games, whether they`ve had guns in their hands and haven`t
been talked to use them appropriately, whether their mental health
condition has been allowed to go on.

If we can start in the lower grade schools with counselors, young peer
counselors who are working with children and say, don`t pay any attention
to television where you see conflict being resolved violently, we can talk
about it, we can work with you. If we can bring children along like that
Ed we`re not going to be catching when they come the other end of the tube
like this young man.

And Lord knows how many he could have killed, had he not been stopped.
Then again, you have to give law enforcement credit because in the way they
respond to a situation like this. The teacher who is targeted, know enough
to get out of the building and remove that target. But here we have a man
with a gun, a young man with a gun and he was going to do something with
that weapon.

We know that he wounded one if not two and then committed suicide Ed.

SCHULTZ: Really sad no question about it. But this is becoming an all too
familiar site on our evening news across America, periodically this is what
we see.

Clearly the school had a protocol in place on what to do, how to evacuate.
It`s a school of 2,000 this is now like a fire drill, isn`t it? I mean
schools have to practice this or is that out of the question?

ZANDT: No, it is so, what they have to do. And remember Ed this is on the
hills. You know, Columbine was a 1999, the first time we say a significant
terrible school shooting where law enforcement learned a horrible lesson.

We don`t wait to go in. You go in after the active shooter, what some
would call the active killer. When somebody`s got a gun, the first officer
on the scene has to go in, has to confront that person. Otherwise, men,
women and children are going to die.

But Ed, these children who were in the school at the time, whereas in 1999,
many of them weren`t even born. They only have a distant memory from what
their parent said or from news reports. Now they have their own memory of
having gone through a terrible situation like this.

SCHULTZ: And how sad is that Clint Van Zandt, thank you for your time
tonight. I appreciate it so much. FBI profiler NBC Analyst Clint Van
Zandt with us tonight here on the Ed Show reporting on this terrible
situation in Colorado.

Let`s turn now Leanne Gregg who is at Arapahoe High School at in Centennial
Colorado. Leanne what is the latest? What can you tell us about the
deceased?

LEANNE GREGG, MSNBC ANCHOR: Hi Ed. I don`t know about the deceased yet.
I don`t know his name. Earlier today they had not revealed it. All we
know is that when the police entered, they found him. It was self
inflicted gun shut wound.

A news conference ended a few minutes ago. You can see the high school
behind me. This is where it happened and of course not far from Columbine
High School that everyone has come to know so well.

SCHULTZ: How quickly did police get there? Tell us the timing about how
long this was and how quickly it unfolded?

GREGG: Well, the first calls came in during the lunch hour, a little after
12:30 local time, and the SWAT team was there within the hour and within
minutes. They didn`t hesitate to go inside to try and secure the building
and make sure that all of the students who are accounted for. And the time
right after that they discovered that there was another student who had
been shot and injured in addition to the boy who confronted the gunman and
was seriously injured.

They found that the gunman had inflicted gun shot wound to himself -- had
killed himself. And then they methodically took the students out of the
building, bust them to another location, a nearby church and that`s where
they parents were reunited with them.

SCHULTZ: Are any of the students talking about the deceased? Are we
getting any information on any background on this person?

GREGG: Not at this time.

SCHULTZ: OK. Leanne Gregg thank you for that report from Centennial
Colorado.

We`ve got a lot more coming up on the Ed Show, stay tuned we`ll right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Thanks for staying with us tonight, Ask Ed Live. I love this
segment. First question comes from Fred Christian, "Why does the GOP hate
the unemployed so much?"

I don`t know if they hate them. They just don`t want them around, so they
don`t want to help them. And the thing that bothers me about this whole
situation is that the Republicans have done nothing on a jobs package.
They fought President Obama, tooth and nail every inch of the way.

They`re not willing to be honest brokers when it comes to creating jobs.
And then, on the other hand they don`t want to help the unemployed. I
don`t know if hate is the right word, but I think it`s an interesting
question because I think there`s a lot of Americans out there asking that
question. What is it with these guys? They think they`re just better
social engineers than anybody else.

Our next question is from Steve Wallace, he wants to know "Why are
Democrats always giving in to Republican demands?

Well, that is the $64 question again. There`s no doubt. There are some
good things in this budget bill. But I think that there were enough bad
things for the Democrats to stake a big fight over it. And now, for the
Democrats to say that they`re going to come back and fight really hard, you
know, what that is that`s trusting John Boehner.

John Boehner doesn`t do anything for anybody unless it`s going to benefit
him and his ideology. He`s not about the people. This is a real leap of
faith in my opinion for the Democrats to think that they`re going to be
able to come back and do a deal on unemployment benefits with John Boehner.
I don`t buy it.

Stick around Rapid Response Panel coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. Six months ago the deeply divided
conservative Supreme Court struck down the heart of the Voting Rights Act.

Chief Justice John Roberts explained that our country has changed for the
better. Robert is right about one thing, our country has changed, but the
supreme court decision only unleashed a new wave of Republican attacks on
voting rights on this country.

Take a look at the map, this track state voting laws before the case of
Shelby versus Holder. This is what the map looks like now. It`s only
getting worse. Take the state of Ohio for example. In January, Ohio law
makers are expected to pass measures that could cut early voting, same day
registration and put restraints on absentee balloting and absentee voting.

While on Wednesday, the Ohio House of Representatives clear the Republican
back measure already approved by the senate. Critics say the measure will
make it easier for Ohio state secretary of suppression known as Jon Husted
to purge a large number of voters. The bill also reduces the minimum
number of election machines counties are required to have. It now heads to
the desk of Republican Governor John Kasich who is expected to sign it.

Now grab that folks, Kasich is going to sign a bill that is going to limit
the number of voting machines.

Let`s look at how things have changed in the state of North Carolina. In
August Republican Governor Pat McCrory signed what`s been called the
nations most restrictive voting measures including stricter voter ID
requirements and significant cuts in early voting.

The state also wants to end same day registration and pre-registration for
high school students. On Thursday, a federal judge set the schedule for a
trial challenging the state`s new sweeping regulations. The timing means
the plaintiffs challenging the law could still block the worst provisions
before the 2014 election.

Folks, if things have changed, no doubt about that. We need to fight
harder now that some of these protections are gone. The tactics Republican
use to suppress the vote may have changed but the struggle remains the
same.

Joining me now on our rapid response panel, Annette Taddeo, chair of the
Miami Dade county Democratic party who has done a wonderful job down there
of fighting back suppression and also registering voters. And Michael Eric
Dyson, Georgetown University professor and MSNBC political analyst.

Doctor, you first, how clear cut is it that this, I believe that this is
race based. This is going after minorities, this is going after low income
families, this is going after folks in the city. Your thoughts?

MICHAEL ERIC DYSON, GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR AND MSNBC POLITICAL
ANALYST: There is no question Everyday. It is targeted and specific and
perniciously so. Because when you`re under mining public financing for
judicial elections, when you`re undermining the capacity of same day
registration, when you`re challenging the IDs of people have used in the
past to vote and now all of a sudden you want to introduce more strenuous
laws, there`s little doubt that there is a targeting of African American
and other people of color and other poor people and in some cases older
people.

So this is a vicious repudiation of the very principle of Democracy which
is an open election. Here we are complaining about people during the
Mandela festivities that oh, my god, he embraced communist. But here we
are in this country refusing to acknowledge that what were doing is the
very anti thesis of Democracy itself. But there`s little question that is
a racially charged kind of event.

SCHULTZ: Annette is this say to young people and do young people
understand what`s going on? The people that you are registering, the fight
that you`ve had in Florida, is the public on top of this?

ANNETTE TADDEO, CHAIR OF THE MIAMI DADE COUNTY DEMOCRATIC PARTY: Very much
so. I think we`re trying to do our best as you said to try to relay this
message about -- especially down here. We have a governor that did this
the last time and he tried and it didn`t work. I mean they didn`t win the
vote in any of the categories and yet they continue to try to suppress.
And by the way, he has actually decided that he`s going to do all this
kinds of new rules and just tell the supervisors of elections to do it.

Do you think he called even one of them to ask him what they thought about
it? Not one. He`s just doing this on his own.

SCHULTZ: So the only way to counter this in the backyard is to make sure
that there is just a really ramped up voter registration and a voter
education seminar as well through out the entire area. Or is that -- how
do you combat this?

TADDEO: Well, honestly, I think it backfired on them the last time, it
will back fire on them again. Remember we are especially in my community,
Miami Dade county we -- most of us come from places where they don`t let us
vote. People 90 miles away and Cuba come here so they can vote and they
can be free.

And then when you tell them that you`re cut the hours, you`re going to cut
Sunday voting, you`re going to sold to the polls. I mean all this, it just
makes people want to go vote more and stand inline for hours if it takes.
We`ve had people from Haiti , you know, that have been here forever and
they stood in line and some elderly people. We have to pass chairs so they
could have a place to sit. I mean this is America and we shouldn`t have to
do that.

I say, "Que lastima." It`s so sad that in America we`re having to fight
the right to vote.

SCHULTZ: Michael, this is really -- I think some explaining needs to be
done on the part of the Republicans. There`s no way this is going to lead
to shorter lines. There`s no way that this is going to enhance the turn
out. I mean this is just a big social engineering project that is targeted
on Democratic voters. And but of course, it`s -- and so, where`s -- do you
think the Justice Department has an avenue here?

DYSON: Absolutely. Look. Attorney General Holder has been quite
aggressive about ensuring that these laws will not be nearly forced upon
the American people. Just because the Supreme Court judge as it did and
acted as it did doesn`t mean that he`s hands are completely tied. And he`s
showing the kind of creativity by looking at section two to compensate for
some of the losses of four and five.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

DYSON: So this attorney general has been quite creative and I think in
this case, he will again see this as a direct slap in the face of the
American voter and he knows that this is something that will undermine
especially African-American and Latino voters. And I think that they will
be on the case and ready to move forward. If need be to reject this.

SCHULTZ: Michael, how important is this in playing the faction down in
North Carolina? I mean if they lose that, this is only.

DYSON: Great.

SCHULTZ: . going to involve in the right wing.

DYSON: You`re absolutely right. But the good thing about it of course,
Ed, is that it preserves at least for the time being the ability for the
present laws that have -- that are -- were in place before this new
legislation would forward because they`ve been handed that opportunity.
But you`re absolutely right. If in the long run, they are successful down
in North Carolina. That will be a bellwether from so many other states.
And others will be Johnny-come-lately and imitators of this. And I think
in that sense it will be extraordinarily corrosive.

So we have to be vigorous about making sure that this is a test case that
comes out in the right -- in the favor of those who are Democrats -- small
D -- those cherish the precious ability to vote in America.

SCHULTZ: No doubt. Annette Taddeo and Michael Eric Dyson, thank you for
joining us on the Ed Show tonight. Appreciate it. Coming up,
Conservatives continue their war on Christmas and Santa is the newest
target.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: And in Pretenders tonight, bad liar, PolitiFact. PolitiFact
announced their lie of the year. And they`re saying President Obama`s
pants are on fire.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This news came just a short time again from the
PolitiFact website. This was hands down the winner for what they call the
lie of the year.

OBAMA: First of all if you got health insurance. Do you like your doctor?
You like your plan, you can keep your doctor. You can keep your plan.
Nobody is talking about taking that away from you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: I`m calling this PolitiFraud. PolitiFact. Well, I think they
were a flip at the wheel. President Obama was not lying. He was throwing
out the junk insurance industry. Now, here`s big Eddie`s (ph) real lie of
the year. Unedited and unadulterated.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MICHELE BACHMANN, (R) MINNESOTA: The American people, especially
vulnerable women, vulnerable children, vulnerable senior citizens, now get
to pay more and they get less. That`s why we`re here because we`re saying
let`s repeal this failure before it literally kills women, kills children,
kills senior citizens. Let`s not do that. Let`s love people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Holy smokes. There`s a lot of killing going on, I don`t know
about. We`re still looking for the bodies by the way. If PolitiFraud
believes the President needs to get his facts straight. They can keep on
pretending.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Time now for the Trenders. Social media action. This is where
you can find this facebook.com/edshow, tweeter.com/edshow, and
ed.msnbc.com. On the radio, always lively, Monday through Friday, noon to
3:00 Sirius XM 127, you can check out about our Ed Tour in 2014 at
wegoted.com. At least social media nation has decided. We are reporting
this evening. Here are today`s top Trenders voted on by you.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The number three Trender, white Christmas.

MEGYN KELLY, FOX NEWS HOST: And by the way, for all of you kids watching
at home, Santa just is white.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It just got real.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Critics, slay Megyn Kelly`s description of Santa Claus.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Fox News Elf Megyn Kelly was there to put things in
black and white but mostly white.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There is no way this could be Santa. The moment
white folks are black men when a big old bag coming down the chimney. If
he`s trying to grab a gun then stand your ground.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: My guess is there`d be no Christmas if he look like
that dude because he`s probably still on the no fly list.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Santa can`t just change colors. Look, his magic or
anything.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. West Virginia, there is a Santa Claus.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The number two Trender, war on Christmas.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Over the years we`ve taken on the role of protecting
the federal holiday of Christmas.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It`s that time of year, eggnog, Christmas carols and
of course, the office holiday party.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Have you guys went to any work holiday parties, or
any holiday party?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Fox is in the holiday spirit.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is the season for holiday parties.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You can`t even say Merry Christmas anymore.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why are we allowing anti-Christmas madness?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you for holiday party.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, ACTOR: Where is your Christmas spirit?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And today`s top Trender, 10 years later.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We got him.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Saddam Hussein, the brutal tyrant who ruled Iraq with a
bloody hand. His life as a fugitive, came to an end the last night when he
was rooted out of a hiding place by American forces.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Howard Dean refused to play it safe on Saddam`s
capture.

HOWARD DEAN, FMR. GOVERNOR OF VERMONT: Saddam`s capture offers the people
of Iraq, the United States, and the international community a new
opportunity to move ahead but only an opportunity not a guarantee.

The difficulties and the tragedies which we have face in Iraq show that the
administration launch the war in a wrong way at the wrong time with an
inadequate planning, insufficient health. The capture of Saddam is a good
thing, and the capture of Saddam has not made American safer.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: And joining us 10 years later, Howard Dean Former Governor of
Vermont and Former Chair of the DMC and founder of Democracy for America.
Mr. Dean good to have you with us governor, thank you.

DEAN: Thanks for having me, Ed.

SCHULTZ: You took a lot of heat even from Democrats for saying that
Saddam`s capture didn`t make us any safer, and you also said that you
didn`t think it changed much. Looking back 10 years after the fact, do you
have the same opinion? I`m anxious to hear .

DEAN: I do.

SCHULTZ: . as you view this now, your thoughts on that new cycle?

DEAN: Well you know what the Washington people always say a gap is when
you tell the truth in Washington and they don`t think you should have. The
truth is Iraq is now essentially a satellite stated Iran which is a really
dangerous country for us for the west.

That Maliki has become essentially a pawn of the Iraqi -- the Iranian
(inaudible) that he is slaughtering thousands of Suni`s around the country
that. And also that the Kurds are I think about to become independent,
they`re already building their own pipeline in Turkey, they`ve cut their
own oil deals with the Turkey.

So, no, I think the Iraq war was a very foolish thing to do and we caught
Saddam it`s great day for the arm forces of the United States, but it
didn`t not make us safer.

SCHULTZ: Well, there was a whole lot of war after his capture. And .

DEAN: Right.

SCHULTZ: . I -- don`t you find it amazing looking back on that were so
many Americans who mad at you for that? There were some who is the -- they
new that we have a long way to go yet but the capture of one man, some
thought was really going to change the dynamic.

DEAN: Well, I don`t really think there. I think there was mostly my
opponent running for the Presidency and the Democratic Party they were
mostly playing the game.

I think most people realized at that point which is why my candidacy took
off that we`ve made a mistake going into Iraq that our own government and
not been truthful with us.

And today, we`re unfortunately paying a big prize for it. You know, our
foreign policy has not -- has there has been some things that are been
fantastic like the martial plan and certainly obviously defending Europe
against Hitler.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

DEAN: But in many ways, we reap what we sow, in 1953 the United States and
Britain assassinated the democratically elected President of Iran, Prime
Minister of Iran. We`ve been paying a price for that ever since.

SCHULTZ: I want to switch gears, switch subjects now the Bipartisan budget
deal that was passed. Democrats are saying that this was a very tough
vote. How would you have voted and how do you see this budget moving
forward?

DEAN: Well, you know, and it`s always easy to quarter back after the
facts. So, I don`t take big issue with the Democrats have voted for it. I
am deeply traveled by the refusal to extend employment benefits. This
notion that the Republicans seemed to have that ordinary working people who
are over 55 for the most part in this age group, this group of unemployed
people can suddenly just snap their fingers and go get a job. It`s just
other there, and out of touch in reality.

And I think that was really -- and there`s a lot of other things in there
that maybe I would have done differently, but the one that might have
stopped me for voting for this deal is the failure to extend unemployment
benefits.

SCHULTZ: Well, what is the solution for the long term unemployed? I mean
we`re sitting in unusual circumstances in the country. We`re still at 7
percent, 1.3 million people are going to be affected by this. In June,
it`s going to be up to 1.9 more million people going to be affected by
this.

People are going back, they`re going to community college. I hear it all
the time on the radio, they`re trying to better themselves and then they
run out of unemployment benefits, they`ve dug into their savings. What`s
the solution governor?

DEAN: I think the real solution has been -- I actually think the
President`s got some solutions that make a lot of sense investing in
infrastructure which the Republicans, Congress refuse to do. I think that
would have done a lot to bring people with skills back on the job there are
older workers.

So, you know, I hate investing in education which he has done I think is
important but it`s really tough when you`re over 55 and you can hire
somebody at three quarters of the price as 25 and that`s a lot of what`s
going on.

SCHULTZ: Well, we`ve had no job investment cooperation in the Congress
from the Republicans.

DEAN: Right.

SCHULTZ: Now they`re socially engineering people into poverty and beyond
and taking away their lifeline. I mean I think it`s pretty ruthless. I
wish the Democrats personally had fought a little harder for it which takes
me to the next question. Do you think that Boehner will bring it up for a
vote in the house? Can he be trusted to do that?

DEAN: No. I don`t think he will but because he doesn`t what his members
taking that kind of a tough vote.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

DEAN: If people -- I think you`re going to see in the fall next fall when
the 2014 Congressional Elections come up. The Democrats will pin the
failure of the Republicans to vote .

SCHULTZ: Sure.

DEAN: To extend unemployment benefits. It`s very a little sympathy for
the Republicans in this stuff.

SCHULTZ: All right. Howard Dean, still right, after all these years. The
proper call. Good to have you with us tonight. Thanks so much.

DEAN: Thanks Ed.

SCHULTZ: You bet. That`s the Ed Show. I`m Ed Schultz. Politics Nation
with Revered Al Sharpton starts right now. Good evening Rev.

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

Copyright 2013 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 Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>