The Ed Show for Tuesday, June 3rd, 2014
Read the transcript to the Tuesday show
THE ED SHOW
June 3, 2014
Guest: Lawrence Wilkerson, Jane Kleeb, Holland Cooke, Michael Hiltzik,
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, 44TH AND CURRENT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
... at the end of wars. That at some point, you make sure that you try to
get your folks back.
DICK CHENEY, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT: I think they have in fact negotiated
CHUCK HAGEL, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: We didn`t negotiate with terrorists.
GEORGE W. BUSH, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We must stop the
CHENEY: This so-called trade and I don`t think they got a very good deal.
OBAMA: We still get an American soldier back if he is held in captivity.
Period. Full stopped. We don`t condition that.
BUSH: I call upon all nations, do everything they can to stop these
terrorist killers. Thank you. Now watch this drive.
CHENEY: I don`t know the whole story. I`m just following the news reports
to this point.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC HOST: Good to have you with us tonight folks. Thanks
for watching. And of course, always remember, it`s good to know the whole
story before you start running your mouth, isn`t it?
Republicans are still extremely upset that the United States prisoner of
war was traded for five Gitmo detainees. These guys, as I said before,
they have no limits, none whatsoever. They can`t stand President Obama
making this deal. Every single thing President Obama does, Republicans
Now, the president saved the US soldier`s life and they`re outraged. Why?
It doesn`t match up with the history of what they`ve said at the past.
We`ll show you why.
Republicans, I guess, would`ve left Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl back in
Afghanistan because of speculation that he didn`t do the right thing. Ted
Cruz, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, who says we negotiated away A team. And
of course, Mike Rogers who thinks he`s going to be a talk radio star, have
already made it clear that they think that this is a horrible deal.
On Monday, former Vice President Dick Cheney, not to be outdone, decided to
crawl out of his banker. The guy who brought us war in Iraq on false
pretenses thinks that President Obama made a horrible deal on Bergdahl.
Cheney said President Obama made a huge mistake negotiating with terrorist.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHENEY: I think they have in fact negotiated with terrorists and I don`t
think they got a very good deal. As we look at it, Megyn, what`s
transpired here, is sort of part and parcel of a larger policy that were in
the midst of what withdrawal from Iraq without leaving and stay behind
forces there, there are no U.S. forces there today. We`re getting ready to
withdraw completely from Afghanistan. We`re retreating from the area, and
this so-called trade with -- for Bergdahl with five of the top Taliban
terrorists that strikes me as part and parcel of that same unwise policy.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Well as the guy who never turns down a good war, Cheney should
know better even after all we`ve been through. Of course, the Taliban is
dangerous and they`re horrible organization but they have harbored Al
Qaeda, no doubt, but the Taliban and Al Qaeda are two completely different
organizations. The Taliban is not on the state department list of
This isn`t the first time we have spoken to the Taliban. Just last year,
it was announced we started peace negotiations. Now, if you recall, there
was no conservative outrage back then. Where was it?
This negotiating with terrorist line is just a lie to slam the president of
the United States. Next, Cheney questioned Sergeant Bergdahl`s character.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHENEY: Well, apparently, I don`t know the whole story. I`m just
following the news reports to this point. That he left voluntarily, that
is he left his post, he was AWOL in effect that there were lives of
American troops put at risk in their search for him after he was taken and
now we`re in a situation where we have released five of the top terrorists
that we held at Guantanamo in order to bring him home. Now I`m glad for
his family. Everybody is obviously pleased that`s transpired in here.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: You know, it`s very interesting that Dick Cheney says that there
were lives had put at risk by going to look for the sky and rescue the
sergeant. Since when do military personnel get to pick and choose what
mission they`re going to go on? They`re told to do something because
that`s what they signed up for and then the bravely go do it. Someone`s
responsible for that. Just like Cheney should be responsible.
Cheney admits he doesn`t know the full story but he`s willing to talk about
it and feel the speculation that maybe this guy was a coward, a traitor,
He`s not a hero. We don`t know. Then he goes on to trash the guy.
Reports of him going AWOL, we need to make sure everyone knows that is
unconfirmed, it is total speculation. The military will find out.
Cheney should wait to get all the facts to be confirmed before running his
mouth but that of course is not his MO. If Bergdahl did do something
wrong, the military will take action. You can count it. They`re well-
suited to do so. Regardless of all of that as an American soldier,
Bergdahl deserves to come home. Cheney didn`t stop there. He`s` not happy
with the Gitmo Detainees being released. The former vice president made
clear that the thought it was a bad deal.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHENEY: I think if we analyze the situation very carefully, we violated
basic tenant, first of all in negotiating with terrorists, but secondly, in
releasing five of the most deadly terrorists that we had at Guantanamo.
I think there is a distinct possibility that these five will in fact go
back into the battle. When you have people this highly motivated, the
deputy Taliban commander for defense, the deputy and their Intelligence,
their Bureau, these are people that are most likely to go back and once
again launch strikes or attacks against Americans, against our friends and
allies in the region.
SCHULTZ: Dick Cheney is living in a fantasy land. He keeps talking about
the five are going to back into the fight. Did any of the 500 Gitmo
detainees, who were released from Guantanamo under Cheney`s watch, did they
get back in the fight? Can he give us a guarantee they didn`t? Many of
these releases were done without congressional approval. Must have been
some executive authority thing that they`re against now.
Meanwhile, if Cheney and Bush had done their job correctly back in 2002, we
wouldn`t be dealing with this mess today.
Here`s what Bush thought of Osama bin Laden, just six months after 9/11.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mr. President, your speeches now, you rarely talked
or mention Osama bin Laden. Why is that?
BUSH: Deep in my heart I know the man is on the run, if he`s alive at all.
And I, you know, who knows if he`s hiding in some cave or not. We haven`t
heard from him in a long time. And the idea of focusing on one person is -
- really indicates to me people don`t understand the scope of the mission.
So I don`t know where he is nor, you know, I just don`t spend on much on
him, let me be honest to be honest with you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Yeah. Let`s go back to the days where people just don`t
understand anything, right?
Let`s get this straight. Dick Cheney is outraged that five members of the
Taliban were traded for an American POW. But six months after 9/11, the
Bush administration`s position, they could care less about the whereabouts
of Osama bin Laden and Cheney is outraged? No, he`s outrageous is what he
It`s clear. Cheney`s comments are out of hate for the president of the
United States. He wants him to fail. In fact, it was back in 2009, right
after the inauguration, just weeks after that, it was Dick Cheney who came
out, the first Republican to come out and criticize a very popular
president saying that he didn`t have this country on a war footing. Oh, I
Meanwhile, this barrage of Republican outrage has President Obama, of
course, defending his position.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
OBAMA: Regardless of the circumstances, whatever those circumstances may
turn out to be, we still get an American soldier back if he is held in
captivity. Period. Full stopped. We don`t condition that. And that`s
what every mom and dad who sees a son or daughter sent over in the war
theater should expect from, not just their commander and chief but United
States of America.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Very interesting sound by President Obama, exactly right. We
don`t get to pick and choose what troops we rescue. That`s not the
American way. If you were an American serving overseas and you get
captured, you deserve to come home regardless of the circumstances. In
other words, the president is willing to allow the inquiry, the president
wants to know exactly what happened. But that man signed up military
service in uniform and he`s coming home. That`s the commander in chief`s
job. That`s his call.
Here`s one thing for sure. If that were Dick Cheney`s kid over there, we
could probably bet that that kid would be been home years ago. The other
thing about Dick Cheney that I find so interesting that he has always been
famous for talking about we don`t want to leave any soldiers out on the
field, in fact, he was willing to make sure that Scooter Libby didn`t have
to fall on his sword.
You remember Scooter Libby, don`t you? The guy that was the convicted
felon because of obstruction of justice and also perjury who was later
disbarred. You know, the guy that lied to investigators about Valerie
Plame and the outing of a CIA agent.
You see back then Dick Cheney thought that George W. Bush should not have
left Scooter Libby hanging out there like a soldier in the field. Here`s
the interview with President Bush.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BUSH: I let the jury verdict stand after some serious deliberation and
vice president was angry.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yeah, when he went to him and you told him, he said he
was furious and he said, "I can`t believe you`re going to leave a soldier
on the battle field."
BUSH: Yeah, he did.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: So President Bush confirms that Dick Cheney is famous for saying
that we shouldn`t leave a soldier out on the field. So he was willing to
do something for Scooter Libby but he calls this deal for Sergeant
Bergdahl, who was in a combat situation, who did serve and didn`t get five
deferments, nah, we can`t do a deal for him.
Get your cellphones out, I want to know what you think. Tonight`s
question, "Who do you trust on national security, Dick Cheney or President
Obama?" Text A for Dick Cheney, text B for President Obama to 67622. You
can always go to our blog @ed.msnbc.com and leave a comment there. We`ll
bring you the results later on in the show.
For more, let me bring in Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, former Chief of
Staff, Secretary of State Colin Powell.
Colonel, good to have you back with us again tonight. I guess, I`m
personally outraged that they are picking and choosing whose life is
valuable here. Colonel, does Dick Cheney have the right to criticize this
deal when we really don`t have all the facts? Your reaction to do this.
COL. LAWRENCE WILKERSON, FMR.POWELL CHIEF OF STAFF: My reaction Ed is that
I`m really amazed that anybody will give Dick Cheney airtime anymore. I
know it was Fox News, the only channel probably, that will give him airtime
and that he will go on. But it is rather amazing that this man who, before
the VFW guaranteed us with ironclad language, language incidentally that
George Bush had not seen before he gave his speech that Saddam Hussein had
weapons of mass destruction including nuclear weapons.
This man who was you carefully pointed out orchestrated the downfall of
Valerie Plame and had his chief of staff invited for obstruction of justice
because of it. This man who got five deferments himself and then I`ll say
very frankly, he`s a drop dodger, you still listen to. Even on Fox News,
I`d find it amazing that he gets airtime.
SCHULTZ: Your reaction to Cheney saying that Scooter Libby shouldn`t have
been left on the battlefield. And obviously, we`re talking about the legal
processes has took place, but the vice president wanted to see Scooter
Libby pardon by the president.
WILKERSON: I think that was one of the moments including the - really it
was November 2006, released or firing of Donald Rumsfeld. But showed me --
excuse me, that at least President Bush had finally awaken to the fact that
much of his administration mostly national security and foreign policy had
been usurped by the vice president. And that in this usurpation of the
foreign and security policy training had perpetrated a lot of dastardly
deeds if you will.
One of which was the outing of Valerie Plame, the attempt to get her
husband, Ambassador Joe Wilson and the mixing in that of some of his staff.
The comment that he made about leaving soldiers on the battlefield, I find
almost reasonable because Cheney`s never been on a battlefield. Cheney`s
never been a soldier. He went out of his way not to be a soldier, five
deferments as you pointed out.
And in my view, shouldn`t even be speaking about things military because he
has absolutely zero knowledge of things military. And I say that even
though I`ve served with General Powell when he was chairman and Cheney was
Secretary of Defense. The beauty of that administration was not Dick
Cheney. The beauty was George H.W. Bush and Colin Powell.
SCHULTZ: Colonel, what about Dick Cheney`s thoughts on staying in Iraq and
Afghanistan? And I also want to ask you about, do you think that he is the
attack dog for the conservatives in this country when it comes to foreign
policy because he has nothing to lose? And I cited all the way back to the
Spring of 2009 when President Obama was enjoying some tremendous ratings,
the country was moving forward, trying to, because the economy was bad, the
president was in high popularity and Republicans really did know how to
handle this, so they ended up doing a bunch of obstruction. But the fact
is, it was Dick Cheney that came out and made the first case against this
president saying that we`re not on a war footing. I mean, this has been a
pattern of criticism no matter what this president does, Cheney is there.
Is he been chosen attack dog in all of this scheme?
WILKERSON: I think there`s some of that but I`ll tell you my real opinion
on this is that even people like Lindsey Graham and John McCain and Ted
Cruz and others who are in the lam life for as you well know political
reasons, political opportunism more than anything else and their opposition
of President Obama come hell or high water, I think they even have trouble,
sometimes with Dick Cheney coming out. And what I`m saying ultimately is
Dick Cheney comes out for Dick Cheney. He`s Dick Cheney`s attack dog.
Dick Cheney comes out because Dick Cheney thinks he should come out.
And I think it`s time the American people figure this out and quit
listening to the man. Very frankly, he is not an expert on anything
anymore and most of the time when he speaks out, he`s speaking up from some
visceral dislike for the way he was treated when he left office, which is
in my view, not as badly as he should`ve been treated. But he`s trying to
regain some ground each time he comes out.
SCHULTZ: And colonel, what about the 500 detainees that were released
under the Bush and Cheney administration on their watch? Does he think
nobody`s paying attention and did any of these 500 who were released, how
can he be so outrage over five, yet not, yet willing to allow 500 to be
WILKERSON: To what we know through military sources and intelligence
sources that some of that 500 did, indeed, return to the battlefield. So
it`s a very egregious statement for him to make after having presided over
that. And furthermore having presided over some 200 or 300 or 400, we
don`t know, I don`t think we`ll ever know, the records will never show us,
they were actually innocent that were imprisoned in places like Bagram in
Afghanistan and also at Guantanamo and elsewhere.
Here`s the essence of what Cheney is obscuring here and all the Republicans
who`ve commented on so far that I`ve heard obscure, and that is what I
talked about yesterday in -- this is a possible first move and is a first
move in a negotiation that might be taking place, hopefully will take
place, to bring about some kind of reconciliation in Afghanistan where that
reconciliation is sorely needed if we`re going to leave troops there and
they`re going to be reasonably safe and the new government in Kabul is
going to be reasonably successful. This could be the beginning of that.
Look at who they turn loose, Ed. They did not turn loose people who were
on the battlefield killing American troops. They turn loose people...
WILKERSON: ... who we recognize as a government of Afghanistan before
October 2001. They turn loose people who might be those kind who could
back and speak with the current leadership of the Taliban and through
Cutter and other good offices, perhaps, effect some kind of reconciliation.
They`ll give the new president in Afghanistan a better chance for the
SCHULTZ: Certainly understandable but apparently over Dick Cheney said on
that one. Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, great to have you with us tonight.
WILKERSON: Well, he doesn`t want that to happen.
SCHULTZ: We appreciate your time. Yeah.
WILKERSON: Thanks for having me.
SCHULTZ: I can see that. You bet Colonel. Thank you. Remember to answer
tonight`s question, there at the bottom of the screen. Share your thoughts
with us on Twitter at Ed Show and on Facebook, like us there. We
appreciate that and @wegotEd. We want to know what you think.
Coming up, the power of persuasion through pig castration. The Rapid
Response Panel weighs in nutty political ads influencing today`s primaries.
But first, mainstream media misses the point on carbon emissions. Jane
Kleeb joins me to discuss the real impact of EPA`s new rules. Stay with
SCHULTZ: What`s hot what`s not? Time now for the Trenders on social
media. You can check us out on Twitter at Ed Show and @wegotEd and at
wegotEd, you`d get my podcast everyday at noon. It`s there for you.
Thanks for doing that. ED Show social media nation has decided, we are
reporting. Here are today`s top Trenders voter on by you.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The number three trender, moving the needles.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Seattle`s greatest social and economic experiment is
about to begin.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The nation`s highest minimum wage is coming to
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Seattle makes the big move on minimum wage.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The Seattle City council passed an ordinance that
bumps the minimum wage up to 15 dollars an hour.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It is incumbent on Seattle`s leadership to vote for
the interest of workers.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Companies with more than 500 employees have three
years to gradually increase pay.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We`re about to turn back 34 years of failed economic
policies that have decimated the middle class in this nation.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Dollar, dollar bill, you all.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The number two Trender, (inaudible).
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: One of the only canine to ever base-jump in the
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The owners are professional base-jumper, rock
climbers so the dog would be in good hand.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A base-jumper brings his best friend along for the
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Here in the backpack he`s got his goggles on.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You know, I want to bring my best friend with me
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And the dog doesn`t look to upset at all.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Whisper (ph) knew exactly what`s going on.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Here`s what he`s thinking, "When do I get the
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And today`s top Trender, smoke screen
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Environmental protection agency is proposing national
limits on how much carbon pollution coal burning power plant can create.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is about protecting our health and it is about
protecting our homes.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The president EPA plan has reporters focusing on
election instead of the environment.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Could there be a political price for a Democrats in
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You have Connecticut, Wyoming, West Virginia,
Indiana, and North Dakota all at risk of losing (inaudible) because of
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And I know lot of people have concerns about these
candidates distancing themselves from the president.
BRET BAIER AUTHOR OF "SPECIAL HEART: Name one Democrat in this selection
cycle that this will help.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There`s nothing that`s going to condemn more senate
races to democratic doom than this kind of stupidity.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Joining us tonight, Jane Kleeb, Executive Director of Bold
Nebraska. Jane, good to have you with us tonight. I want your thoughts on
these EPA regulations because within 24 hours there was a political
calculus being made that those who are running for office in Kentucky and
Indian and West Virginia where the coal industry is very strong, it`s
connect to the jobs, no doubt and of course the Democrats want to run on
jobs. How`s this all going to play out? What are these new regulations
going to mean for the environment and for the politics of it all?
JANE KLEEB, EXEC. DIR. BOLD NEBRASKA: Yes. You know what? Obviously make
sense that senator mentions to the world are standing up for industry in
their sates. That make sense. But the equal amount of time he needs to
also standing up for is moms and kids have asthma. You know, if our
doctors are telling us carbon pollution is causing asthma, if our scientist
are telling us carbon pollution`s causing the planet to warm.
And if our generals are saying that because of climate change it`s going to
mean sending our sons and daughters overseas or wars, that means we should
be doing something about carbon pollution and that`s exactly what the
And so while like the chicken littles are coming out, we actually need more
less chicken littles and more Inspector Gadgets coming up with solutions
that will actually help us get the cleaner energy.
SCHULTZ: So are these Democrats wrong to run away from President Obama`s
environmental protection agency new standards. It`s going to cut carbon
emissions by 30 percent by the year 2030?
KLEEB: Democrats and Republicans are absolutely wrong who are trying to
say that, you know, this is going to be a job killer or this somehow is
going to -- this is going to mean losing elections.
The majority of Americans not only support decreasing carbon pollution.
They also realize that the threat that utility companies and Republican say
that our utility bills are going to go up if we start to use less coal are
just wrong. The fact to the matter is energy bills are going up now in
reusing record levels of coal and oil.
And when you actually read the report.
KLEBB: .you actually realize that the EPA is talking about going from 39
percent coal emission wide to 30 percent coal by 2030. That doesn`t mean
zero coal. It means the last coal which opens up the market for
diversified energy portfolio.
SCHULTZ: Now, these new regulations, they`re really not one size, fits
all. I mean, each state is going to have the opportunity to reduce its
emissions the way they want to do it with the number of options. I think
that leaves the door open for a lot of Republican abstraction that maybe
there should be a stronger federal hand here. How do you think that`s
going to play out? Do you think Republican governors are going to go along
KLEEB: You know here`s the beautiful thing. Now, if we look at Obamacare,
we actually, you know, you saw a lot of Republican governors who are filing
law suites in doing all sort of really stupid things in order to protect,
you know, they should be protecting the health of folks in their state.
But this is what -- this is why I`m excited Ed. I actually think that this
means that there`s going to be 50 experiments in 50 states. You know,
Nebraska may do something very different than state in the North East and
we should. Right now Nebraska is 85 percent coal, that`s not a very smart
energy portfolio. We should be using more wind and more solar.
In the North East is actually doing great things already and we could be
learning from them because they have a regional carbon trade program going
on. So, I`m excited. Because you know what this does? It gives a shot in
the arm to local democracy. It means that citizens like me, moms and dads,
farmers and ranchers can go to our states senators and our state
representatives and demands that we have clean in local energy.
Before, we didn`t have an opportunity to do that. Now our states actually
have a plan.
SCHULTZ: Well, it`s interesting. There`s so much to play here like for
instance in Iowa where there`s primaries going on tonight. You know, the
lights are turned on because coal-fired plants -- I mean 18 states in the
Midwest were affected by the coal-fired plants into Dakota (ph). You know,
but this is an issue as you mentioned recent in Washington post, ABC News
Polls says that 70 percent of Americans, 70 percent of Americans, including
Republicans support limits on greenhouse gases.
So, I don`t know why the Democrats would have a hard time standing up
saying, you got to with the masses, but in Kentucky, this is a hard sell --
I mean, the Democrat, they`re running for Senate. Grimms, I mean, she is
really running against this. It`s almost like there`s no way they could
even warm up to this EPA regulations and win. So, I just go - I mean,
interesting see how it plays out. I mean, jobs seriously are going to be
in jeopardy with this and you can`t get around that. But we`re only using
5 percent of wind and solar as a nation. There is so much room for us to
Jane Kleeb, great to have you with us tonight. I appreciate your time. We
of course will continue to stay on the story with the Keystone. Thank you
Still ahead, political ad palace (ph), how cookie commercials are giving
primary candidates, the what? The upper hand. Plus Republicans want to
appear compassionate to the under privileged. Conservative policies show
where their values really set. But next, I`m taking your questions Ask at
Live, just ahead of the Ed Show in MSNBC. We are right back.
SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show, love hearing from our viewers on
these questions, thank you so much for doing it on our Ask Ed Live segment.
Our first question comes from Susan. "Why do you think Congress has
forgotten about renewing unemployment benefits?"
Well, my answer to that is with a question "Where is the March?" There is
no public pressure out there that I can see that people are screaming and
clamoring to have the unemployment benefits extended. And if the public is
not going to do it, I don`t think that the Democrats are going to feel
pressure to do it also and with falls by the wayside. You could call this
a Republican win.
Our next question is from Richard. He wants to know, "Will the Republicans
try to impeach President Obama before or after the November elections?"
It would be after. If they hang on to the House and they win the Senate, I
predictable it`ll be one of the first things they talk about and that is
impeaching the president and how sad that is.
Stick around, Rapid Response Panel coming up here on the Ed Show. We`ll be
SUE HERERA, CNBC CORRESPONDENT: I`m Sue Herera with your CNBC Market Wrap.
Slight declines for stocks today, the Dow she 21 points, the S&P off just a
fraction, the Nasdaq fell three.
U.S automakers posting better than expected sales, Ford sales rose three
percent last month, GM sales jumps 13 percent, its best May in seven years.
April Factory orders came in stronger than estimates, increasing for a
third straight month.
And finally, home prices. They rose more than 10 percent in April. That`s
according to the latest figures from CoreLogic.
And that`s it from CNBC, we`re first in business worldwide. Ed is back
after a quick break.
ED SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. Thanks for watching tonight.
Well, tonight is the largest primary night of 2014, that`s right, with
voters in eight states heading to the polls. It`s a big night for Iowa
Republicans looking for the chance to grab Tom Harkin a Senate seat. He`s
According to a Des Moines Register poll taken just days ago, Iowa State
Senator Joni Ernst is a double-digit leader and is poised to become the
next Republican nominee. Ernst has been backed by Tea Party, The Tea
Party, Mitt Romney and half-term Governor Sarah Palin.
This commercial might be why Palin is such a big fan.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SARAH PALIN, FORMER GOVERNOR, ALASKA: On an Iowa farm. So when I get to
Washington, I`ll know how to cut pork. I approve this message because
Washington`s full of big spenders. Let`s make them squeal.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Ernst isn`t the only Tea Party approved candidate relying on
political stunts like this one. When Michigan Senate hopeful Terri Lynn
Land came under fire for opposing equal rights, she responded with this
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TERRI LYNN LAND: I`m Terry Lynn Land, Congressman Gary Peters and his
buddies want you to believe I`m waging a war on women, really? Think about
that for a moment.
I`m Terri Lynn Land and I approve this message because as a woman I might
know a little bit more about women than Gary Peters.
(END VIDWO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Land didn`t make a genuine effort to counter the claims, her
policies are anti woman. She mocked the issue altogether. The commercial
made national news.
The latest poll has Land trailing, Michigan Congressman Gary Peters by just
a few percentage points. Election gimmicks are nothing are nothing new,
but commercials like these have certainly lowered the bar. The question
is, are they going to work?
Joining me tonight on our Rapid Response Panel, Brad Woodhouse, President
of The American Bridge 21st century and Former Democratic Party
Communications Director and also Talk Radio and Media Consultant Holland
Cooke, gentlemen, great to have you with us tonight.
The Land to the wacky -- I`ll tell you what, these advertising agencies are
having a lot of fun these days, putting the wackiest commercial they can
Holland, what`s going on here? What`s the root of this strategy when it -
of course running against Washington but there was really a heartland
connection there that maybe the folks might be attracted to, what`s your
take on it?
HOLLAND COOKE, TALK RADIO CONSULTANT: Until now, it`s been about cutting
through the clutter with a catchy slogan because you only have 30 seconds.
Fast forward to present day and our YouTube culture and we`ll see if this
still works because the new digital platform can do a few things that
expensive local TV stations cannot do. Number one, it`s free, when you put
something on YouTube. So the message can go cheaper. And number two, it
can go viral and your peeps can pass it around and you have more time to
develop your story.
And if you want to see a clinic and effective messaging and I bet this will
be studied in the future, Alison Lundergan Grimes opposing Mitch McConnell
in Kentucky go to school on the videos on her website. She is utterly on
message, very home spun, very endearing, very engaging and turned out as
I found on YouTube today the old Mitch McConnell commercial from 1984 which
itself was much copied. They sent bloodhounds out and said, "Where is Dee
Huddleston?" because they claim the senator had missed a bunch of votes and
they invited you to switch to Mitch.
Now, he has become the incumbent and Alison`s campaign is saying, "Switch
Mitch". So the shoes on the other foot and I predict, this campaign is
going to be much studied and will probably work better than the old school
SCHULTZ: And so, Holland, the wackier you are and the more clever you are,
the more it`s going to get passed around and the free media is going to
start? I mean that really is the wave of it, isn`t it?
COOKE: Yeah. Attention is currency now. And in addition to putting your
commercial on TV if you can afford to, it can spin around on the internet
and everybody who forwards your commercial to their friends is in effect
recommending it there an evangelist for you.
COOKE: So it comes with a .
COOKE: . bit of a personal endorsement.
SCHULTZ: Brad Woodhouse, are we seeing a transformation of campaigns
because of this? I mean these commercials they don`t get much into policy.
SCHULTZ: And, you know, for some reason, they seemed to be working
particularly with Tea Party candidates. What about it?
BRAD WOODHOUSE, AMERICAN BRIDGE 21st CENTURY: Well, look, I think Holland
is right, I mean candidates and advertisers in general have to figure out a
way to breakthrough the clutter. But we`ve seen ads like this, Ed, that it
broke into the clutter before. I mean Ms. O`Donnell in Delaware saying
that, "I`m not a witch or the demons sheep." the demon sheep ad.
Like Judy Erickson in Iowa is going to have -- to have more in a general
election than clipping the testicles of pigs. She`s going to have to have
an agenda to run on. I mean that ad got a lot of attention. It probably
helped her breakaway from the pack and a primary.
But in, you know, in a general election she`s going to have to account for
the fact that she is Koch Crony Joni. I mean she is literally in the
pocket of the Koch brothers and is running on their agenda.
SCHULTZ: Well, don`t people like candidates who say stuff and for her to
come up with that castration of pigs certainly .
SCHULTZ: . innovative maybe a little gross in some respects.
SCHULTZ: You know, there`s going to be people who are going to be
attracted to that and going to want to see it again that she actually say
that which might lead them to investigate what her policies are all about.
I mean is that in around about the way how it works?
WOODHOUSE: Well, look, Ed, in her chase I hope they do. I mean I hope
that they will look at her clipping the testicles of pigs, Ed, and then go
and look at her policies which is in a state where Tom Harkin is revered.
She wants to get rid of the federal minimum wage, doesn`t want to race it
in the state of Iowa, she wants to dismantle Social Security, vaporize (ph)
Medicare. I hope the result is .
WOODHOUSE: . that people will take a look at her policies. I don`t think
these attention getting things are a silver bullet for someone winning a
race. But look I`ll give her some credit. I think it separated her from
the pack in this primary.
SCHULTZ: Holland, what about the female vote coming up in 2014? This
stunt that was pulled by candidate Land in Michigan apparently has not won
her much favor with women voters and .
SCHULTZ: . Gary Peters who`s been a real traditional kind of guy and he
supported the automobile loan and has been there with the president on
health care as well. I mean, you know, that hard ball politics still
COOKE: Yeah. As a guy, I winced at the castrating pigs thing and it`s
time for me to evaluate that .
WOODHOUSE: Me too.
COOKE: . other commercial as a woman would see it. But to me, it just
seemed to be condescending and in this 30-second sound bite mode impact
takes president over awareness. And nobody knows that better than the
people here in Massachusetts because the ultimate example was the infamous
Willie Horton ad that tried to pin the tail on Mike Dukakis for a prison
COOKE: . program that he actually discontinued after he inherited it from
his predecessor Gov. Frank Sargent. So impact is much more at a premium
over accuracy when all you have is 30 seconds.
WOODHOUSE: I`ll tell you Ed, I agree with Holland .
SCHULTZ: Brad Woodhouse -- Brad, Brad, I got to -- before we go .
SCHULTZ: . here. Brad, I got to ask you about Mississippi.
SCHULTZ: What about Sen. Cochran being attacked for his age?
WOODHOUSE: Well, look I think it`s despicable. That entire race has
turned out to be one of the most disgusting primaries particularly if you
look at the side of the Tea Party candidate McDaniel and his supporters
there. Some supporters of his who have been arrested for breaking into a
nursing home and taking video of his wife who`s been in dementia for 10
years. The fact that Thad Cochran might lose tonight tells you that all
this talk that the establishment in the GOP wants to have that they`ve
tamed the Tea Party or the Tea Party is in decline or whatever. It just
goes out the window .
WOODHOUSE: .in that race. Even if Cochran barely holds on, the Tea Party
has taken over the Republican Party that`s why people like Joni Ernst are
being successful in these primaries in Iowa.
SCHUTLZ: All right. Brad Woodhouse, Holland Cooke great to have both of
you gentlemen with us tonight. Thank you so much for joining us.
WOODHOUSE: Thanks Ed.
SCHUTLZ: Coming up, a crash course in guinea pig love. Pretenders is
next. We`ll be right back.
SCHUTLZ: And in Pretenders tonight, pignorant, Marjorie Holsten.
The right wing is fuming over Common Core. In fact, Marjorie Holsten is a
conservative activist who calls the educational program Obama-Core.
Holsten says a Common Core curriculum is a democrat recruiting tool. She
is going after sexual education.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARJORIE HOLSTEN, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW ATTORNEY: Wake up for what your
children are being taught and I want to add too. People say to me. Why
would they teach such awful things to our children? If you go deep down
and you connect those dots, you see that when children are desensitized to
sexual things, that affects their ability at a later date to bond with a
spouse, and so if you have somebody who can`t bond, they`re not going to
have stable marriage. When you have unstable, broken household, how do
they vote? Democrat. So this has a very evil underlying intent.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHUTLZ: Holsten explained her preferred method of sexual education during
an interview on the daily show in 2012.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HOLSTEN: Teenagers have hormones going and it`s not appropriate that they
see these websites.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That`s why teenagers shouldn`t be watching people
have sex on the internet. They should learn it the way I did by watching
animals do it on the street.
HOLSTEN: Actually, that was how I taught my children we started with a boy
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What? You taught your kids sex ed with guinea pigs?
HOLSTEN: Well, we had a boy and a girl guinea pig that clearly liked each
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHUTLZ: Holsten is a prime example of why a comprehensive education is
just so important.
If Marjorie Holsten thinks the birds and the bees can be taught by guinea
pigs, she can keep on pretending.
SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. This is the story for the folks who
take a shower after work.
Do you wonder if the Republicans have anything for the folks who take a
shower after work? You see, the Republican Party is trying to look more
compassionate. A star contrast of what they`ve said and done in the past,
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. ERIC CANTOR, (R-VA) MAJORITY LEADER: If you look at the math, the
numbers involved with a $10 dollar and $0.10 minimum wage compared to the
existing one. It`s about a $2 per pay check difference if you just were to
appeal that rule under ObamaCare.
SEN. TED CRUZ, (R) TEXAS: I think women face a very difficult circumstance
in the workplace. I`ve certainly seen that. I`ve been blessed to work
with a lot of strong women. But the answer is not to pass a trial lawyer
JOHN BOEHNER, (R-ON) HOUSE SPEAKER: What I`ve long said is that raising
the minimum wage destroys jobs.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Republicans unveiled a new proposal, they`re calling "Room to
Grow". It`s 121 page policy manifesto suggesting reforms in social and
Michael Hiltzik of the Los Angeles Times broke the plan down in his column.
He joins us tonight. Michael, good to have you back with us.
What am I going to find in there if I read this 121 page manifesto about
what they say about workers? What they say about women`s rights? What
they say about race relations in America and their plan? What about it?
MICHAEL HILTZIK, BUSINESS COLUMNIST, L.A. TIMES: Well, you`re going to
find a lot of what you`ve been hearing for several years now.
Look, I think we need to be a little sympathetic about the authors of this
plan because they are seriously trying to get the Republican Party away
from the grip of the Tea Party. But what you end up with are the same no
streams (ph) we`ve been hearing for years and years here talking about
cutting taxes, they`re talking about privatizing relief programs, they`re
talking about dismantling Social Security, privatizing Social Security,
they demonize the poor, they demonize the disabled and even disabled
children. And I think that`s a sort of thing that that`s really disturbing
about some of the elements of this program.
SCHULTZ: So the social insurance and the anti poverty programs in "Room to
Grow", it`s just different wording, it`s the same stuff. How would you
parallel it to the Ryan budget?
HILTZIK: Well, a lot of it is similar to the Ryan budget. For example,
they talk about a voucher program in which poor people, under privileged
people, will get a voucher and they`ll be able to use it to purchase relief
from some sort of privatized agency, you know, have privatized providers of
relief programs, competing with one another. And of course we`ll be
rigorously overseeing that to the regulation. Well, we know how that
works. We know what happens when an industry gets regulated by the federal
government and then capture .
HILTZIK: . those that are regulated. There`s going to be no relief for
these people and it`s really all about cutting the cost of these programs
but doing it on the backs of the beneficiaries.
SCHULTZ: So I should ask you, where`s the beef, but wait a minute, where`s
the compassion? Where`s all the compassion in this? We`re getting around
about, you know, this is almost like an end run. Let`s see if they don`t
figure out what we`re really all about. That`s how I take it.
HILTZIK: Well, the compassion is all in the rhetoric but when you really
look at the details there`s no compassion there. It`s really about talking
about how disabled people they have it easy. It`s not hard to get under
the disabled program and there`s no incentive to get off. This is simply
not the truth. It`s hard.
HILTZIK: This is a rigorous program. It`s hard to get a disabled benefit
and it`s not a lot of money, it`s designed to get people off disability and
move them back into work. Well, the Republicans -- this plan doesn`t
really recognize that.
SCHULTZ: And for the first time, a majority of members of Congress are
millionaires according to data by the Center for Responsive Politics. So
the question begs, what do they know about poverty?
HILTZIKL: Well, that`s a good question and the fact is you can be a
millionaire and still have empathy for the people at the far end of the
income -- of the income spectrum.
So I think this plan really shows a real lack of empathy. They`ve been
trying to dismantle the new deal since the 1930s. They are still at it.
This plan is just the same thing dressed up in a form.
SCHULTZ: And of course if the Republican Leadership Conference they had to
bring in the family patriarch of Duck Dynasty Mr. Robertson to tell them
how to be guided spiritually throughout all of this. So a lot of things
simply have not changed.
Michael Hiltzik of the L.A. Times, great to have you with us on the Ed Show
tonight, thank you so much for joining us. It`s a 121 pages of they think
they`re redoing their policies. No, no they`re not.
That`s the Ed Show. I`m Ed Schultz.
Politics Station with Rev. Al Sharpton starts right now. Good evening,
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY
<Copy: Content and programming copyright 2014 MSNBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
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.>