updated 2/19/2014 11:52:22 AM ET 2014-02-19T16:52:22

THE ED SHOW
February 18, 2014

Guests: Lee Fang, Bernard Sanders, Scott Paul, Holland Cooke, Joy Reid, Joe
Romm


(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TOM PERKINS, VENTURE CAPITALIST: I`m not a billionaire.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And not a billionaire.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: . I`m a multibillionaire. I`ve.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: . I said multimillion.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A minority who live a lifestyle was a 99 percent could
not imagine. The 1 percent.

PERKINS: The 1 percent are not causing the inequality. They are the job
creators.

REP. JOHN BOEHNER, (R-OH) HOUSE SPEAKER: Job creators of America.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let`s listen to the job creators.

BOEHNER: The solution here isn`t more government.

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL, (R-KY) MINORITY LEADER: The government itself is the
problem.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Government is the problem.

PERKINS: The rich knew what the rich do.

You have the private sector on opportunities to do what it does best.

Rich do what the rich do which is get richer, but along the way, they bring
everybody else with them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

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

You know, we`ve talked about trust. Tonight, I want to use a different
word -- arrogance. You know, if you`re going to be arrogant, don`t go
halfway, let them have it. Be arrogant.

Sometimes, charts show us arrogance. I want to begin tonight with a few
charts because we`ve got some new information out there. This chart should
be very familiar to you. It`s the vulture chart. We`ve made it famous.

Since the early 1980s, income for that (ph) 1 percent, where is it gone?
Bingo, through the roof. They agree. They`re shaking their head.

Everyone else`s wages have absolutely flat lined. That`s a fact. Just
little bit of class is (ph) in below.

Now, tonight, we have a new vulture`s chart and it ain`t pretty. I`ve been
waiting for this for a long time because I knew this is what it was going
to be all about.

These two lines at the bottom are the old vulture charts. The bottom line
is the middle class wages and the middle line is the top 1 percent. But
wait a minute. The green line is the top 0.01 percent. Holy smokes. The
ultra rich in this country, they are really doing better. Better than ever
in fact. Actions, I believe, need to be taken against the wealthiest
Americans and I mean tax and even more to get our treasury in place.
Believe me, they`ll make it.

And we need to stop the Trans-Pacific Partnership because if this happens,
this chart right here, it`s only going to get worse. No one`s going to be
hurt at the top 1 percent if we make a revenue adjustment. Now, if the TPP
passes, it`s going to send good American jobs to places like Vietnam and
other countries.

Now, the facts on trade deals, there`s no question about it. They are
crystal clear. This is what the TPP is going to do. These are the
countries involved. Every time one of this trade deal passes, you can use
NAFTA as an example, we lose jobs. NAFTA alone causes country 700,000
American jobs and not a single trade deal that has ever taken place has
benefited us into the positive for American jobs, but it`s almost as if
politicians and elected officials, they are afraid to say that because then
they might be targeted.

Meanwhile, the TPP would be great, and I mean, great for the top 1 percent.
Big banks and corporations could maximize profits by producing cheaper
goods overseas where there are no labor standards or environmental
standards for that matter.

Today, a new report shows a disturbing connection between U.S. Trade
Representatives, the people that are doing the deals and the big banks.
Lee Fang of the Republic Report reported U.S. Trade Representatives have
received a massive pay outs from banks -- the big banks.

Michael Froman is probably a good guy, but he took the check. He is the
current U.S. Trade Representative working on the TPP. Froman is a former
managing director at Citigroup. When the media partied for the federal
government, he received over $4 million in exit payments from Citigroup.

Stefan Selig is currently the nominee to become the undersecretary for
International Trade of the Department of Commerce. He`s a former Bank of
America investment banker. Good job if you can get it. He received a $9
million payment when he was nominated last year. He`s yet to be confirmed.
These pay outs could be interpreted as big banks just trying to get
influence on public policy. That hurts, doesn`t it? The shady tactic is
nothing new and it`s in writing.

Citigroup provides an executive contract clause that awards pay for taking
a full time position when you go work for the federal government or some
regulatory body. Are you kidding me? Man, that is fine print. You just
can`t get enough off, is it?

Big banks and big corporations want the TPP to happen. And don`t be
fooled. This is influence. The table you could argue is easily being set
for the big banks -- by the big banks over the middle class just like the
rest of the ultra rich in this country.

Just listen to billionaire venture capitalist, Tom Perkins.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ADAM LASHINSKY: What is your 60-second idea to change the world?

PERKINS: The term Perkins system is you don`t get to vote and once you pay
a dollar of taxes. But what I really think is it should be like a
corporation to pay a million dollars in taxes, you should get a million
votes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Wouldn`t that be just fair to everybody? Perkins along with the
rest of the ultra rich in this country, well, they live on the moon with
thinking like that.

A new report in the New York magazine today shows just how out of touch
these folks are -- the special society. Wealthy Wall Streeters have
created their own fraternity that`s not much different than the one they
were probably in college. Kappa Beta Phi is a fraternity of Wall Street
bankers and executives who get together for the annual shindig banquet.
Lots of backslapping going on. This is part of their culture. It has been
going on since 1929. They talk about their money and they haze new members
known as neophytes. Here is a part of the introduction speech.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WILBUR ROSS, KAPPA BETA PHI, "GRAND SWIPE": Good evening, exalted high
council former Grand Swipes, Grand Swipes-in-waiting, fellow Wall Street
Kappas, Kappas from the Spring Street and Montgomery Street chapters, and
worthless neophytes."

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Now, as hazing, the neophytes are required to dress up in drag.
Now, we wouldn`t go over the castle to north to go to gun club, but
whatever, that`s what they do. They perform variety shows that include
jokes that of course we couldn`t share with you here on the Ed Show.

Let`s see. There was a sexes joke about Hillary Clinton and a homophobic
joke made about Former Congressman Barney Frank. And we should point out a
member of the executives in the room were bailed out by the American
taxpayers. That`s right. If you happen to be in there as taxpayer, who
knows where this party it have been. If it wasn`t for the federal
government, they wouldn`t be having their offensive party.

These Wall Street executives are making fun of you, the taxpayers. You`ve
been gained. They clearly belt (ph) live in a world of reality as most
Americans. They only care about their money and their lifestyle and they
are determined to keep it that way. These guys, they`re not the job
creators, they`re the paper shufflers. They don`t advocate for the middle
class, they don`t advocate for the workers, they make money off money,
shuffling paper, and they resent the middle class Americans who are out
there struggling everyday and you will never hear this crowd talk about the
long term unemployed.

And oh, there`s one more thing I wanted to point out to you. This crowd,
they think they`re taxed too much. And I can`t say for sure, but I`m just
guessing they got some money offshore not paying any tax.

Get your cellphones out. I want to know what you think tonight`s question.
Do you think that Justice Department went soft on Wall Street? 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 bring you
the results later on in this show.

For more, let me bring in Lee Fang. He is the co-founder of the
investigative blog republicreport.org. Lee, good to have you with us
tonight.

LEE FANG, REPUBLICREPORT.ORG: Thanks for having me Ed.

SCHULTZ: You bet. Are these payments to trade representatives just big
banks trying to buy influence, but, you know, influence of public policy
when they`ve got it written right in the deal if you go get a government
job, this is the number you`re going to be taking with you? What`s that
all about?

FANG: Well, that appears to me the case. As you mentioned, many of these
banks actually have it in their employment contract for their top level
bankers if they received jobs in the federal government or with regulators,
they receive a special bonuses. Other firms do this as well, Northrop
Grumman being one, but again, these payments are legal, however, they do
post conflicts of interest because these trade deals particularly the TPP
certainly influence the big banks they stand in profit significantly.

SCHULTZ: It just underscores, they got money just lying around and they
want them have friends that leave the firm. They want to have friends that
leave the bank because if they`re ever in the position to make a decision,
they`ll remember their old friends of where they used to work. How well
it`s going to be interpreted?

FANG: I think that`s fair. If you look at all over the federal
government, not just the Obama administration, many different bank
officials, defense contractors, they receive these big bonuses that go into
government to do certain deeds that benefit their former employers then
they go back into the private sectors and receive yet another bonus for
doing those types of actions.

SCHULTZ: Would the TPP give big banks incorporations more power? I know
the answer to that. I want to hear you`re take on it after this reporting.

FANG: Well, in addition to what you mentioned earlier in the show, the TPP
summit argued is a Trojan horse for corporate deregulation. As Senator
Elizabeth Warren and others have noted, the TPP provides certain rules that
allow corporations including banks to challenge entire governments and
knock down certain regulations. So this would undo certain Dodd-Frank
regulations. This would also repeal or block new regulations on
derivatives and many of the countries that are involved in TPP
negotiations.

SCHULTZ: That is something that is going to be hard to unwind. There`s no
question about it. Lee Fang, great reporting, thank you for your time
tonight. Let`s bring in Senator Bernie Sanders, Independent from Vermont.

Senator, how do you unwind this? This is almost like a special society
that runs America power and influence at its best.

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS, (I) VERMONT: Well, Ed, let me talk about power and
influence and tell you that there was a recent study that just came out
that show that network television does not talk about the TPP. This is the
largest trade agreement in the history of the United States. It is not
talked about on corporate television. So thank you for discussing it.

Second of all and very importantly, you know, extensively, we have a two-
party system, Democrats and Republicans, but historically, on trade
agreements whether it`s NAFTA, CAFTA, permanent normal trade relations with
China, TPP, you have both leaderships of the Democrats, Republicans coming
together, strongly supported by corporate America to come up with trade
agreements that have been devastating to the working class of this country.

Trade agreements have resulted in the laws of millions of decent paying
jobs. What the TPP would do is essentially sanctify the right of
corporations to make profits at the expense of workers rights, decent
wages, environmental protection, and the ability of people to get
affordable prescription drugs.

SCHULTZ: You know, senator, I`ve often thought that "Gosh. It`s
disposable income that really runs our economy." What I`m starting to
believe, it`s what kind of rate can you get? Who can pay the rate? And if
they can pay the rate, that`s what we`re going to set it at (ph), doesn`t
matter how many customers are out there. It just matters whether we got
the right product and whether they`re paying the rate.

What kind of rate can you get? What`s out there? What`s the potential of
getting the kind of rate you can get? So it`s almost as if the middle
class -- that doesn`t matter if they have discretionary income. And I
think when you look at the chart, you look at the market, the stock market,
I am a stock market guy. I believe in all of the capitalistic things, but
greed has now entered in at an unprecedented level and patriotism.
Economic patriotism has left the building as I see it.

Senator, this new chart.

SANDERS: Let me give you two.

SCHULTZ: Go ahead sir.

SANDERS: Let me just give you two examples, Ed. Number one, in Vietnam,
part -- one of the country`s part of the TPP, the minimum wage there, Ed,
is $0.28 an hour, $0.28 an hour.

So American workers could be forced to compete against people, productive
people, hardworking people will make $0.28 an hour. Where do you think
American companies are going to go?

SCHULTZ: Yeah, exactly.

SANDERS: Second point, in terms of prescription drugs, what the
pharmaceutical industry, which by the way, charges us in America, the
highest prices in the world for prescription drugs, what they want to do is
to tell poor countries around the world that they can`t get low cost
generic drugs. They have to pay top price for brand name drugs. And
they`re going to impose restrictions on poor countries that they have to
pay high prices for drugs. Just two out of many examples.

Third example, in America, many states and the federal government have buy
American pipe legislation.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

SANDERS: When we want, obviously, to create jobs in this country that can
be overruled by the TPP, federal government itself will have to allow
competition for Vietnam and other countries for products that they wish to
-- products and services they wish to buy.

SCHULTZ: And senator, what`s your reaction to the outrageous video and
story and party that was on Wall Street and apparently, it`s just part of
the culture? I mean, these are the folks that were bailed out by the
American taxpayer and prompt up to go consolidate in buying more banks.

SANDERS: I mean, Ed, these guys are living in a separate world. They are
making unbelievable sums of money. They have contempt for the American
people who, as you indicated, bailed them out when their greed and
recklessness and illegal behavior drove this economy into a major
recession.

They are only concerned about making as much money as they possibly can.
And then what they do is they use some of that money to get involved in
elections to help elect extreme Right Wing candidate. So they use that
power and their money in the election process to give them more power and
money.

SCHULTZ: Senator, great to have you with us tonight. I appreciate you`re
always speaking up to this issue. It`s a culture of corruption, a culture
of greed, and it`s in the fast track in this country. I don`t know what`s
going to reverse it. I don`t know who can reverse it.

Remember to answer tonight`s question there at the bottom of the screen.
And of course, share your thoughts with us on Twitter @EdShow. Hope you`ll
tweet out about this story. And of course, make comment on Facebook.
Thanks so much. We want to know what you think.

Still ahead, Republicans have reduced their two-word culture down to one.
We`ll talk about the Right Wing buzz word in our Rapid Response Panel
coming up.

And coming up next in Trenders, conservatives are excited to bring Mexican
labor standards to America.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Time now for the Trenders social media action. Thanks so much
for twitting the program. We appreciate it. This is where you can find
us, Facebook.com/edshow, Twitter.com/edshow, love the Ed team out there,
and of course, ed.msnbc.com. On the radio, Monday through Friday, noon to
3:00 PM, SiriusXM, Channel 127. You can get my radio podcast @wegoted.

Lots of comments because we do a lot of interviews in the third hour.
People get on the treadmill listen to that. Thanks so much.

The Ed Show social media nation has decided and we are reporting. Here our
today`s top Trenders across the web voted on by you.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let`s kick some ice.

SCHULTZ: The number three trender, solid gold.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: History gave Monday night the American ice dancing
couple of Meryl Davis and Charlie White, wins gold.

CHARLIE WHITE, OLYMPIC GOLD MEDALIST: As little kids, we have no idea what
we were getting ourselves into.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let`s capture the dream.

SCHULTZ: After "Dancing with the Stars".

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Derek Hough, the Dancing with the Stars "Golden Boy"
has the lightest touch.

MERYL DAVIS, OLYMPIC GOLD MEDALIST: He is just an incredible talent.

DEREK HOUGH, DANCING WITH THE STARS: Like (inaudible) and they said "we
want to go all the way."

SCHULTZ: Meryl Davis and Charlie White take the ice dancing gold.

DAVIS: If I hear Olympic champion, it just kind of sense (inaudible).

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: First gold ever for the United States in ice dancing.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I never thought I`d see with my own eyes.

WHITE: We`re really proud to -- to be able to represent our country.

SCHULTZ: The number two trender, career change.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Am I to call you Joe or Sam.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There`s blue color, hard working, straight talking
American

SAMUEL JOSEPH WURZELBACHER, "JOE THE PLUMBER": My name is Samuel Joseph
Wurzelbacher.

SCHULTZ: Joe the Plumber is now Joe the Union worker.

WURZELBACHER: It amazes me that that`s such a difficult concept to grasp.

The unions have made America strong for years and years and years, bottom
line.

SCHULTZ: And today`s top trender, overdrive.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There`s a big vote on that spoke for many down in the
South.

SCHULTZ: The Right Wing propaganda machine worked.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The Volkswagen factory rejecting the United Auto
Workers union.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If the people took a look at what they would get in
their union membership they realize, "wait a minute, we actually get a
better deal from Volkswagen and we don`t have to pay those great big dues."

SCHULTZ: Conservatives rev up their anti-union rhetoric.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When a lot of people look at Detroit, they the see UAW.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Why not talk about how these unions are actually
driving companies like GM and Chrysler which is -- their loans and their
bail out and send jobs to Mexico.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They like their company and they voted their pocket
board (ph).

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Wasn`t that a great misinformation package.

Joining me now is Scott Paul, President of the Alliance for American
Manufacturing. Just for a correction of what was just seen there so our
audience isn`t confused. The vote down in Chattanooga, Tennessee, how did
the United Auto Workers union been voted in?

It was optional for the workers to join the union. It was just so whether
the union was going to represent some of the workers when it came to
certain issues in the workplace. They didn`t have to join, just kind of a
minor point there that I think Fox sought to straighten out.

Great to have you with us tonight Scott. I appreciate your time.

SCOTT PAUL, ALLIANCE FOR AMERICAN MANUFACTURING: It`s good to be with you.

SCHULTZ: And so -- you bet. So the -- you know, conversation is that
unions and workers are the problem. Do unions hinter or enhance
manufacturing jobs in this country?

SCOTT: No they don`t. Some of the most profitable companies in the United
States that make things are union companies and do they have disagreements
with management from time to time? Sure they do. But you look at the
icons of U.S. industry from GE and Boeing to GM, Ford, and Chrysler and
they`re represented by proud union workers. They make great products.
They make cars like Motor Trend Car of the Year. They make the top selling
pick ups in the United States.

And there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that unions in the UAW in
particular are now part of the challenge that face the American Auto
Industry. If they do face challenges, the auto industry does. Healthcare
costs, currency manipulation from Japan, and the lack of a manufacturing
strategy. But none of that has to do with the hardworking men and women
who put those cars together.

SCHULTZ: I think we need to remind the country that when the automobile
loan was dished out, the unions had to go back, take a haircut, redo the
entire game plan as far as wages, pension, benefits, healthcare, everything
was redone. And now they`re getting bonus checks. The workers are getting
bonus checks because they have redone the industry because of outside
foreign pressure. No question about it. But it is always been a real
source of soreness for a lot of people that unions cause outsourcing. It`s
simply isn`t the case, is it?

PAUL: No. It`s not. There`s really no evidence that unions cause that.
Part of it is the lack of a good manufacturing policy. And let`s take a
look at Germany. In Germany, SIC (ph) unions as we know, worker councils,
all throughout manufacturing, Germany has $48 an hour average wages in
manufacturing. But fully 23 percent of the German economy is in
manufacturing.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

PAUL: U.S. average wage is $32 an hour. We have about half of the economy
that Germany has. And manufacturing has nothing to do with wage rates. It
has nothing to do with unionization rates. It has everything to do with
trade policy and currency, healthcare cost, and a lot of other factors that
are certainly out of the control of the men and women who put those great
vehicles together.

SCHULTZ: So, how do we maintain wages in the manufacturing sector if
there`s such an anti-union push?

PAUL: It`s not easy. There`s no doubt about it. And as you saw from some
of the Tennessee politicians, they still engage in the state to state labor
arbitrage or the raise to the bottom. But there is a way. You have seen
the Detroit Three make significant investments in their factories. North
of the Mason-Dixon Line, they`re making great cars, they`re turning out
profits.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

PAUL: The outlook for the North American industry is good. What they need
better policies from Washington and less of this damaging, misinformation,
and rhetoric that`s aimed at the hardworking men and women.

SCHULTZ: I had a state legislator from Tennessee tell me today on the
radio that -- he just flat out said, "We`re a poor state. And fewer work
on these folks and that`s just how it all turned out." So, are these
manufacturing jobs now facing a new political wall that has to be climbed
because of Senator Corker, the governor down there, Haslam, and some
legislators have started threatening retribution on tax policy and such
stuff as that. I mean, they thing that that turned the boat. Is this the
new wave?

PAUL: Yeah. I hope it`s not. And there are examples of governors who
have high road strategies to try to attract investment and who are doing it
successfully. Governor Cuomo in New York is a great example of that.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

PAUL: But I`ll tell you what, these politicians like the governor and the
senator, when the Chinese government comes knocking on the door says, we`re
going to build a factory in Tennessee, they`re happy to have that communist
money from an authoritarian regime. Yet, if their worker want to chose
representation, they think that`s a horrible thing for their economy.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

PAUL: I don`t think they have their priorities right at all.

SCHULTZ: It`s what`s in it for me, not what`s in it for America. That`s
the unfortunate equation that`s unfold. Scott Paul, Alliance for American.

PAUL: You got it.

PAUL: . Manufacturing, great to have you with us tonight.

Still ahead, President Obama`s running an all out offensive on
environmental standards. What could it mean for approval of the Keystone
XL Pipeline?

Coming up, our Rapid Response Panel will weigh in on the new Republican
buzz word. But next, I`m taking your questions. Ask Ed Live is next to
the Ed Show on MSNBC. We`ll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. Love the questions, love hearing
from the viewers, thank you so much.

Tonight in our Ask Ed Live segment, our first question comes from Cordell.
"What would be a winning issue that will help us . " I would assume the
Liberals, the Democrats, ". keep the Senate and turn the House blue?"

A winning issue? I don`t know if there is a winning issue out there. But
I do believe that the TPP, the trade agreement is going to be very
important. I also think that you have to stand with workers and you stand
with working families, they`ll be in a lot better position if there is no
gray area in that regard.

Next week on this program, we`re going to talk a lot about the XL Pipeline,
how I think that that is going to have an influence in the midterms. I`ll
explain next week.

Our next question comes from Mimi. She wants to know, "How will we ever
get Congress to stop being bought off by corporate lobbyists?"

That may never happen, but it`s the power of the vote. You have to make
sure you`re going to hire someone who is unspoiled and you have to get rid
of the ones who are spoiled. They know that, that`s why they`re attacking
voting rights.

Stick around, Rapid Response Panel coming up.

JOSH LIPTON, CNBC CORRESPONDENT: I`m Josh Lipton with your CNBC Market
Wrap.

Stocks and mixed, the DOW falls 23, the S and P is up two, and the NASDAQ
gained 28.

It`s been a tough month for homebuilders. An index of homebuilder
companies posted its biggest monthly drop ever as cold weather put a freeze
on buying.

And shares of Coca-Cola fell nearly four percent. The chapters (ph) latest
burnings reports, profits were in lined with estimates but revenue fell
short. The company has been struggling with sinking soda sales as
consumers opt for healthier products.

That`s it from CNBC, first in business worldwide.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We lost trust in this president.

REP. PAUL RYAN, (R) WISCONSIN: We don`t trust the president to enforce the
law.

BOEHNER: He`s feeling more distressed.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The president has to demonstrate frankly the country
and the Congress can trust him.

RYAN: We don`t trust.

BOEHNER: We don`t trust.

RYAN: This is not a trust-but-verify, this a verify-then -trust approach.

SEN. TED CRUZ, (R) TEXAS: And I don`t trust the Democrats.

BOEHNER: And frankly one of the biggest obstacles we face is the one of
trust.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show.

What a coincidence? Now, for years I have been talking about Republican`s
two-word culture. Think about it. We have seen the two-word Republican
tag lines pop up every election year. Let`s see. Tax cuts, that`s a hard
one to figure out, job creators, entitlement reform. Well this year,
Republicans have really simplified it for 2014. They have boiled it down
to one word. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Trust, the economy doesn`t work without trust. When
there is trust, confidence and reliability the economy grows. To fix the
economy, we have to restore trust especially trust in government.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But how can we trust the government when the IRS
targets political opponents for harassment? How can we trust the
government when they spy on journalists and regular citizens? 75 percent
of Americans don`t trust Obama`s government to do the right thing.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: True. If you can`t trust the government to do what
is right how can you have any faith in the economy?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We can`t trust the Democrat politicians here in
Illinois with the economy they just keep burying us deeper in debt.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The way to restore trust government is to stop the
out of control growth of government.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Republicans understand small government is a
government you can trust. A small government doesn`t dig as deeper in
debt. Republicans know it takes trust to create jobs but Democrats just
create more government.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Paid for by America`s PAC because to fix the economy,
we must select politicians we trust with the economy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Joining me tonight on our Rapid Response Panel Joy Reid, host of
the Reid Report which premieres here on MSNBC Monday the 24th and also with
us tonight Talk Radio and Media Consultant Holland Cooke. Great to have
both of you with us tonight.

Holland, you first, you put us on to this word "trust" you said, "Wait
until they start playing the commercials." So apparently it went from .

HOLLAND COOKE, TALK RADIO CONSULTANT: And there it is.

SCHULTZ: Yeah, it went from D.C. to Illinois awful fast, you know.

This is the playbook.

COOKE: I was going to lose count there for a second, every four seconds
the word trust came up.

And in addition to that list of other homogenized catch phrases you recited
a second ago, this is garden-variety sloganeering. I guarantee you that if
you call the DMV, you`ll find out Reince Priebus has applied for the vanity
plate "trust". This is the big mantra right now.

And this joins a litany of other catch phrases. You will never hear a
Republican candidate talk about immigration reform, it`s amnesty. You will
never hear a Republican candidate allude to the Affordable Care Act, it`s
government takeover of healthcare.

Today is the anniversary of the stimulus and we`re hearing them all parrot
the stimulus that didn`t stimulate like things would have been just fine
without it. Garden-variety focused group driven sloganeering.

SCHULTZ: That`s what it is.

Joy, what can the people trust about the Republican Party? And how do the
Democrats reverse this? I mean, it`s a stupid little word game that`s
being done but doggone it works in some part of the country.

JOY REID, MSNBC HOST, "THE REID REPORT": Yeah, I mean, and this is where
you see sort of the Frank Luntz effect on the Republican Party. They`re
very good at this and they`re very good at framing issues and making them
simple. And if you look at the base that they`re talking to which is
generally older voters especially in the midterm election, the people who
tend to come out are people who frankly don`t really like or don`t trust
President Obama. And so transferring that idea you can`t trust government
and making it really simple is actually, you know, from a standpoint of
branding and advertising they`re good at.

What Republicans don`t feel to be so successful at is policy. When they
try and put forward policy, their policies tend to be very unpopular, they
don`t poll well. So when you do things like we would like to privatize
social security and putting that out, no, that is not popular. Or when
they put out sort of tenuously their ideas for healthcare reform, those
ideas are not popular.

So if your ideas really don`t go over well with the broad public, the best
thing to do is to use the slogan and do that. So that is a smart branding
approach for the Republican Party and that`s what they`re doing.

The problem with it is that if you also look at the polls, the American
people really generally don`t trust the Republican Party either, the
government shutdown beats into that, they are seen in the latest peep
holing is more negative as being more ideologically hard mind as not being
willing to work with others et cetera.

So Democrats actually win on a lot of the personal traits .

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

REID: . in the poll. So that`s where the problem comes in.

SCHULTZ: So they think this year, they`re going to get through 2014 by
just attacking something they don`t trust which is the president of the
United States and they`re not going to come to the table with any kind of
plan .

REID: Right.

SCHULTZ: . for immigration, for minimum wage, for working families, you
name it across the board, the healthcare, they`ve got nothing on the table.

REID: Yeah, and the .

SCHULTZ: Isn`t this rather unprecedented?

REID: It is and it isn`t. I mean part of the art of politics is trying to
get through an election by saying as little as possible about your own
plans so they don`t get attack by the other side.

And again, Republicans I think at this point have figured that a lot of
their specific policy prescriptions which would cut aid to a lot of the
very people who vote for them which would cut back on a lot of the
programs, the New Deal era (ph) programs, that a lot of senior citizens
depend on.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

REID: The idea of either partly privatizing Medicare hugely unpopular, it
is what Paul Ryan and the other members want to do. So you`ve just got to
be very, very vague. It`s the way that you market an unpopular product.

SCHULTZ: Holland Cooke, it`s the KISS philosophy, Keep It Simple Stupid
and then throw us through a boatload of money at it and watch it work, is
that it?

COOKE: Amen. And that`s where Talk Radio takes over. It`s what insiders
like you and I call "reach in frequency" said in another way "repetition".
This stuff gets recited over and over and over and frankly it`s the power
of radio.

What 2014 is going to test is that old maxim about we disapprove of
Congress but we like our guy, let`s see if they like their guy in 2014
because another catch phrase we`re already hearing in the primary season
political advertising is if you`re running against any incumbent you call
him or her a "career politician" .

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

COOKE: . problem is that door swings both ways. You could say that about
Mitch McConnell.

SCHULTZ: But I got a word and I want to test it on you, "Spoiled versus
unspoiled." You take the money from the big donors, from all these PACs
that have nothing to do with your backyard other than to drive an ideology,
you`re spoiled.

If you`re unspoiled "Hey. I only take the grass roots money." I mean,
what I`m saying here, Holland, is that Democrats have got to come up with
some kind of a strategy because obviously right wing radio reaches 98
percent of Americans everyday, you know, I mean .

COOKE: And as you were mentioning last night, this UAW vote in the
Tennessee plant wasn`t won, it was lost based on messaging. The message is
what elections like that and like the 2014 midterms hinge on now.

SCHULTZ: So, Joy, what would you tell to the Democrats to do at this
point? What -- if you`re running a campaign and it`s neck and neck and you
hear the word trust, how do you counter punch it?

REID: If I would -- I think I would look to Mary Landrieu. Mary Landrieu
I think is running a very smart reelection campaign. You have to get it as
specific as possible. You have to name the people that you are running
against.

Mary Landrieu was essentially running against the Governor of Louisiana
even though she`s running for reelection in the United States Senate and
she`s doing something really smart. She`s saying, "You, the taxpayer, paid
your federal taxes and now Governor Jindal and the Republicans are refusing
to take the Medicare -- the Medicaid expansion."

That means you`re not getting your tax money`s worth. That means indigent
people who are going to Louisiana hospitals that are on your dime, you`re
paying for their ER care because the Republicans won`t take the tax money
you paid in. You paid in and you should get it back. You`ve got to be
specific if you`re the Democrat because the Republicans are trying to win
by being vague.

SCHULTZ: Talk about .

COOKE: That`s what cuts through the clutter. Yeah.

SCHULTZ: . messaging. Let`s go back to Holland Cooke in the early days.
You taught me the most important words on Talk Radio. It`s you and you`re.
What`s it mean to you and what`s mean to you`re family. That`s where it
is.

COOKE: That`s what Joy said. That`s what it takes to cut through the
clutter.

SCHULTZ: All right. Holland Cooke, Joy Reid great to have you with us
tonight. Thank you so much.

Coming up, he`s not blowing smoke. President Obama is taking strong stance
on the environment. What could it mean for his decision, coming up, with
the Keystone XL Pipeline? That`s next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: And the Pretenders tonight, water down Marco Rubio the Senator
from Florida. He`s trying to throw water on the success of the President
Obama`s stimulus package but the Senator of course is coming up all
confused.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MARCO RUBIO, (R) FLORIDA: Today is the 5th anniversary of the failed
stimulus program. If you recall 5 years ago, the notion was that if the
government spent all this money -- that, by the way, was borrowed -- that
somehow the economy would begin to grow and create jobs. Well, of course,
it clearly failed. Proof that massive government spending particularly
debt spending is not the solution to our economic growth problems.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: 47 months of private sector job growth don`t mean anything does
it?

Rubio`s message has no facts but I got a few for him. The stimulus package
put 1.6 million people back to work each year through 2012. 95 percent of
Americans got a tax cut or a tax credit. And Rubio is going to love this.

693 drinking water systems were delivered to 48 million Americans all under
the stimulus package. Rubio would have to use hypnosis to get us to
believe his twisted pitch. But if the Senator thinks his message does
anything more than make us very, very sleepy he can keep on pretending.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. This is the story for the folks who
take a shower after work.

President Obama out working today to solidify his Democratic base by taking
a strong stance on the environment.

Earlier today, he appeared at a safe way distribution center in Maryland to
talk about the new fuel efficiency standards for medium and heavy duty
trucks.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, 44TH AND CURRENT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
Improving gas mileage for these trucks are going to drive down our oil
imports even further that reduces carbon pollution even more, cuts down on
businesses fuel costs which should pay off in lower prices for consumers.
So it`s not just to win, win it`s a win, win, win. You have three wins.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Well, tomorrow, President Obama is heading to Mexico to meet with
the countries president there and also the Prime Minister of Canada.
Canadian President there and of course Obama the President of the United
States should expect some pressure from Prime Minister Stephen Harper over
the approval of the controversial Keystone XL Pipeline.

Harper recently called the extension of the pipeline quote inevitable.

The Canadian Government has been a vocal advocate of the $5.4 billion
construction project. The debate in the United States has intensified
since the state department`s environmental analysis said the pipeline would
not significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions.

Despite the report, environmentalists and some people in the Democratic
base are strongly opposed to the pipeline. I will be in Nebraska on Friday
talking to the folks on the ground who will clearly be affected by the
pipeline if something where to go wrong.

There are two side of the story Joe Romm Founding Editor of
ClimateProgress.org joins us tonight.

Joe, good to have you back with us. What the President did today was good
wasn`t not?

JOE ROMM, CLIMATEPROGRESS.ORG: Absolutely there`s nothing like fuel
efficiency lowering oil consumption, reducing pollution, and saving people
money.

SCHULTZ: Is there a chance he could be setting the table to come back and
say, "You know, what we saved over here, it`s going to be kind of a wash so
we could go along with the pipeline." I mean, do you think that there is a
case that is building to give the president an opportunity to do this?

ROMM: Well, you know, I hear what you`re saying but on the other hand the
Secretary of State just a few days ago, I think you played it on the show
said that climate change was the most fearsome weapon of mass destruction,
a very strong speech about the dangers of climate change.

And if climate change is a WMD then the Canadian tar sands, one of the
dirtiest pools of carbon, is a hydrogen bomb and, you know, the Keystone XL
Pipeline would be a delivery system and I don`t -- I just -- it`s so
inconsistent with the way John Kerry has been talking about climate. It`s
sort of hard to understand how he could recommend to the president opening
it up.

SCHULTZ: Well, that`s the point. I mean he went so far on that speech
that I mean there was nobody left on the beach on that one. I mean, he was
very clear. I don`t how he walks back a recommendation to the president
saying, "Yeah, I think you should build the pipeline, Mr. President."

President Obama`s climate action has helped this country take some steps to
seriously cut greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 by the action that he did
today. If he approves the Keystone XL Pipeline would it overshadow all the
work he`s done in the eyes of environmental groups?

ROMM: I think absolutely. You know, this is a decision for him and John
Kerry to make. You know, I think the thing to bear in mind is that we`re
talking about a million barrels of oil a day of the dirtiest crude that you
can imagine and to sign off on that when he could just say no obviously
will be sending a message that all of his talk about climate is just talk.

SCHULTZ: The public comment ends on March 7th. What happens between now
and then that would change the president`s mind? I mean you`ve got the
Canadian prime minister, you know he`s going to be putting heat on the
president down in Mexico when he says that`s inevitable, what does that
mean? How does that receive your ears?

ROMM: Well, exactly, I mean I think the point is it`s not inevitable. The
whole premise of the State Department report and some of the premise of
your argument has been that the oil is going to get here no matter what so
you might as well build Keystone.

Well, you know, the premise of the State Department report is also that the
planet is going to warm, it`s just going to keep unleashing carbon
pollution until the planet warms 10 degrees Fahrenheit. I mean that is a
weapon of mass destruction.

So I don`t think it`s inevitable. I think that people are coming around to
the reality that this doesn`t make a lot of sense. Right now, there`s only
very little amount of Canadian tar sands that goes by rail, maybe 120th of
what would go to the pipeline. And, you know, activists have been able to
make the case against the Keystone Pipeline given the chance once we`ve
stopped the pipeline to see what we can do about stopping the trainloads of
oil that supposedly would inevitably come into this country because I don`t
think it`s inevitable.

SCHULTZ: I heard Senator Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota who is a Democrat
go on the Senate floor and say that this was a security issue. What`s your
response to that?

ROMM: Yeah, that`s kind of an old-style argument. The whole security
notion came up during the 1973 oil embargo when OPEC actually withheld oil
from us, but now there`s a global market, it`s not possible to withhold oil
from us.

So even if we were completely self-sufficient in oil, a world crisis would
still jack the price of oil up and it would still hit our economy. The way
that you make us more secure, more economically secure from oil is to be
more efficient in the use of oil which was the president`s announcement
today. If you reduce the oil consume per GDP then if there`s a price
shock, it has less impact on your GDP. But simply getting more oil from
Canada rather than let`s say Saudi Arabia is going to do nothing for your
economic security.

SCHULTZ: Well, I appreciate you being with us tonight Joe Romm and I
appreciate you being on the program telling us what you think on
everything.

I find it interesting in preparation for my trip to Nebraska on Friday that
we`re going to talk to both sides but they don`t want together. So I got
to talk to one group over here and then I got to go and attempt to talk to
another group somewhere else. That`s really I think illustrates the
intensity and the passion that is behind this issue.

And I do think and I`ll talk more about this next week when I come back
from Nebraska that this is going to have an impact on the midterms if the
decision comes before the midterms.

Joe Romm, thanks for your time tonight.

That`s the Ed Show. I`m Ed Schultz.

Politics Nation with Reverend 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 2014 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.>