Skip navigation

The Ed Show for Wednesday, June 18th, 2014

Read the transcript to the Wednesday show

  Most Popular
Most viewed

June 18, 2014

Guest: Jan Schakowsky, Bob Shrum, Henry Cuellar, Gyasi Ross, Terrence
Moore, Jen Gunter

ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC HOST: Good evening Americans and welcome to the Ed Show
live from New York. I`m ready to go. Let`s get to work.


elected to end wars.

we`re in a position where our enemies no longer fear us and our allies no
longer trust us.

SCHULTZ: Dick Cheney is the man who took us into war with Iraq on false

CHENEY: My belief is we will in fact, be greeted as liberators.

JON STEWART, THE DAILY SHOW HOST: This guy was wrong every time.

CHENEY: Simply stated, there is no doubt.

people are prepared for a long, costly, and bloody battle within
significant American casualties?

CHENEY: Well, I don`t think it`s likely to unfold that way.

SEN. HARRY REID, (D) NEVADA: If there`s one thing that this country does
not need is that we should be taking advice from Dick Cheney on wars.

CHENEY: Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has
weapons of mass destruction.

STEWART: That`s funny, not only were there no doubts .

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There were no weapons.

CHENEY: And we had a lot of evidence they indicated that in fact Al Qaeda
was trying to get their hands on weapons of mass destruction.

REID: Being on the wrong side of Dick Cheney is being on the right side of

CHENEY: Simply stated, there is no doubt.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you think that the Obama administrations want it out
of there and to hell with it?

CHENEY: Exactly.


SCHULTZ: Good to have you with us tonight. Folks thanks for watching.
There is no doubt that this man Dick Cheney loves to go fishing. He`s
fishing right now -- oh, he`s trolling big time. You see, he is trolling
for those millenniums. That`s what he`s doing.

The younger generation of 20 some things right now that 10 years ago might
not have been paying a whole lot of attention to all the lives that were
being thrown on the American people. So tonight we begin with this guy,
Dick Cheney, former Vice President of the United States. And there
certainly is no doubt that if anyone deserves any kind of blame or
whatsoever for the war in Iraq, it`s this guy. Cheney was without a doubt
involved in the campaign of deception that led us to war in 2003.

His push for war cost for over 4,000 American troops lost. That`s what it
cost us. And to this day, Cheney thinks it was the right thing to do.
Since we invaded Iraq in 2003, the country had been an absolute mess. It
was a mess before U.S. troops left the country. Now that things have
gotten even worse, Cheney is doing a little Monday morning quarterbacking
and he`s out running his mouth again which of course he does a pretty good
job at.

So, here we go with an op-ed of the Wall Street Journal. Cheney trying to
pin this mess on President Obama.


CHENEY: Mr. Obama had only to negotiate an agreement to leave behind some
residual American forces, training in intelligence capabilities to help
secure the peace. Instead, he abandoned Iraq and we are launching American
defeat snatched from the jaws of victory.


SCHULTZ: Not bad, huh? It was. The Bush administration, who negotiated
the terms of withdrawal from Iraq. This picture shows George W. Bush and
Maliki on the shake, on the deal with Maliki in 2008.

President Obama tried to negotiate to stay behind force with the Iraqis,
but of course they refused because this man right here would not give
immunity to American soldiers, God forbid if they get caught in a crossfire
and an Iraqi civilian gets killed and then they could bring American
soldiers up on trial to Iraqi courts. If your kid was in Iraq, would you
want that to have happen if he or she was serving in uniform? Hell, no.
And what about the contractors? Dick Cheney is out again deceiving the
American people with all of these remarks in the Wall Street Journal.

Well next, let`s look at Cheney`s idea of victory. This chart right here
shows Iraqi civilian deaths since 2008. Thousands of civilian were killed
each year when the United States was in Iraq. If Dick Cheney thinks this
is victory and what it looks like, he`s got a very strange definition of

Next, Cheney called President Obama willfully blind.


CHENEY: The President is willfully blind to the impact of his policies
despite the threat to America unfolding across the Middle East aided by his
abandonment of Iraq. He had announced he intends to follow the same policy
in Afghanistan.


SCHULTZ: Now, don`t you remember when Bush and Cheney were going at it and
some of the liberals will have to say, "No, this is the wrong thing to

We were told that we were emboldening the enemy. We were told that we were
being disloyal to the United States. What are the conservatives doing
right now if they go by their own playbook? President Obama is far from
blind on foreign policy. Look at the record.

The President campaigned, he ran on getting us out of Iraq and Afghanistan
and basically he has a spectacular record on living up to what he said he
was going to do in foreign policy. Said that if the Pakistanis were not
willing or unable that he would go in and get Osama bin Laden in Pakistan
and that`s exactly what happened. Gaddafi is not around to give any
commentary in Libya right now. Have you noticed that? He just captured
the suspect in the Benghazi attack and of course the conservatives they
think that`s a big a cover up now.

The President of United States took troops out of Iraq. He is winding down
the war in Afghanistan. This man is doing exactly what he campaigned on.
He didn`t come up with any Obama doctrine of preemptive strikes if we don`t
like what`s going on in somebody else`s country. He didn`t start another
war in Syria. He didn`t inject American troops into a Civil War. He
didn`t get involved in a conflict in the Ukraine, but we`ve got this
testosterone fight going on worldwide between Putty and President Obama.
Who cares?

President Obama ran on ending American blood shed oversees, that`s what the
American people want and oh by the way who`s paying for it? He had a
vision to protect American lives. He is following through on the promise
and he is keeping America safe. Someone should remind Dick Cheney and it`s
interesting how President Bush has been rather silent on all of this, maybe
he knows better. But someone should remind this man. We got hit on your
watch. Where were you August 6, 2001 when the presidential daily briefings
were being cost around down to the cabin in corporate Texas? Cheney, where
you even around? And now, you`re supposed to be the expert?

Finally, Cheney wrote this ridiculous line in his op-ed.


CHENEY: Rarely has a U.S. president been so wrong about so much at the
expense of so many.


SCHULTZ: Trying to sound like Winston Churchill ain`t going to cut it.
Let`s take and look at that one just one more time. "Rarely has a U.S.
president been so wrong about so much at the expense of so many." Really?
You`ve got to be kidding me. Wrong? I`ll show you what wrong is.


has trained Al-Qaeda members in bomb making, and poisons, and deadly
gasses. Iraq has made several attempts to buy high strength aluminum tubes
used to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon.

CHENEY: He has been seeking to acquire and we have been able to intercept
and prevent him from acquiring through this particular channel, the kinds
of tubes that are necessary to build a centrifuge.

And simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of
mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use
against our friends, against our allies, and against us.


SCHULTZ: Mr. Cheney, can you tell us, was any of that true, any of it?

Cheney was wrong and his lies were at the expense of many Americans. Over
4,000 Americans killed and well over a 100,000 Iraqi civilians lost their
lives. How is that for being wrong at the expense of many?

Democrats are correct to make sure that the American people don`t have
history revisionism taking place in front of them. And don`t let the
American people forget how wrong Dick Cheney was on foreign policy.


REID: If there`s one thing that this country does not need is that we
should be taking advice from Dick Cheney on wars. Being on the wrong side
of Dick Cheney is to be on the right side of history.


SCHULTZ: Amen to that. What could possibly be the motivation for Dick
Cheney to come out and say that what they did was right and what President
Obama is doing now is wrong? What would be his motivation?

This experiment in democracy, well, it didn`t work. Maybe the Iraqi people
had been just under a dictator too long. The purple thumbs were kind of
neat but in the end, it just didn`t hold up. The Iraqi people just don`t
seem to be able to defend themselves or have the will to defend themselves.
How do you instill that heart and desire for democracy if you`ve never
known it culturally? We forgot to ask that question before we went in.

But you know what Cheney and his crowd wants the project for a new American
Century? Oh, that fraternity is still around. What they want is
occupation. They don`t want democracy. All they care about is turf and
making sure that they got their mitts on that oil, making sure that the
American economy will run on energy the way they wanted to run on, and all
of this talk about counter terrorism, well it`s totally wrong. Obama has
no clue on what he`s doing. We got to get in there with troops on the
ground. These guys were on the Senate floor again today saying the same

I refuse. I will do this story every single night. I refuse to allow some
Americans out there to be hoodwinked by these people who lied us into war
and are back trying to make the case that we ought to be doing to the same
damn thing again. It`s nuts, totally nuts. And there are 20 some things
out there 10 years ago who weren`t paying a lot of attention to all the
lies that were out in the media. And now the sell job is back on again.
We have an obligation to make sure that the people, they got it wrong,
don`t have the platform and when they start spouting off about it, they are

This president deserves the benefit of the doubt. It was the right call in
Libya. It was the right call in Egypt. It was the right call in Syria.
We have not been hit and counter tourism measures are working to protect
this country. And the fact is is that their way didn`t work. President
Obama`s way is working. But I wonder if they really support him. And I
wonder if they are demanding support for the president the way they
demanded support for Bush. Remember the criticism on Bush, well, that`s
emboldening the enemy and it`s endangering our troops in the field. What
are these conservatives doing now with the way they`re treating this

President Obama is going to be gone from office in a few years. And it`s
going to be somebody else, who knows. Is it going to be counter terrorism
or is it going to be new technology to stop terrorism, or is it going to be
another invasion? We have an obligation to make sure that we don`t fight
the next war the way we thought the last one.

Get your cell phones out. I want to know what you think. Tonight`s
question, "Has anyone ever been more wrong on National Security than
Richard B. Cheney?" Text A for yes or text B for no to 67622, leave a
comment at our blog And you can get my podcast at We`ll bring you the results of the poll later on in the show.

For more, let me bring in Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky of Illinois.
Congresswoman, good to have with you us tonight.


SCHULTZ: Your response to this constant drumbeat that seems to be taking
place on the right by the conservatives who say we need a replay?

SCHAKOWSKY: The only words that I ever want to hear again from Dick Cheney
and all those neocons is an apology, that`s what I want to hear, for
getting us into the most consequential and far reaching foreign policy
debacle perhaps in the history of this country.

But, Ed, I want to you to know there`s good news in a poll that was taken
that most people support the Obama approach rather than the Cheney
approach. Only 20 percent of Americans believe that we should have left
our troops in Iraq. And 67 percent of Americans think it`s because this
historic battle that`s been going on, sectarian battle. But also, the Iraq
war that exacerbated everything and made it worse, and as you said was
based on really two lies; that Saddam Hussein had anything to do with Al
Qaeda; and two, that there were weapons of map distraction.


SCHAKOWSKY: Two things we hear over and over again.

SCHULTZ: Congresswoman, Iraq belonged to the leadership of Maliki. He
wanted us out. Correct me if I`m wrong. He came to Washington and he told
members of Congress, "You signed it, you`re getting out." President Obama
was saying, "Wait a minute. Let`s make sure we do this right." and they
could not come up to a forces agreement because of the immunity to protect
American soldiers in a conflict. Is that right or is that wrong? Because
it seems like the conservatives are leaving that out.

SCHAKOWSKY: No, that is absolutely correct. Barack Obama was negotiating
with Maliki. And let`s remember, there`s a lot of bad guys in Iraq and
Maliki is a problem that we have right now. But it was really a problem
started under George Bush and Dick Cheney when they absolutely decimated
the hornet`s nest and opened up sectarian violence in Iraq, they got rid of
all of the Sunnis that -- and any power that they had. And Maliki now
wants to continue that and not have a unity government. And certainly did
not want the United States of America to be there.


SCHAKOWSKY: Plain and simple.

SCHULTZ: And Congresswoman, finally, I know that Congressional leaders met
with the president this afternoon to talk about the situation in Iraq. Are
Congressional members supporting the president and his move to put 300
troops over there, which really is a move for protection in case we have to
totally exit out of there. The support on Capitol Hill, characterize it
for us.

SCHAKOWSKY: Well, I really can`t characterize it yet until we have a
caucus and we talk about what the options are. But as I said, I think the
American people and the Democrats want to see what the President is saying
and to do the sensible thing. The kinds of options that Dick Cheney would
have us do would be putting us back into Iraq .


SCHAKOWSKY: . making more troops in Afghanistan, and creating more dead
Americans and Iraqis and Afghans as well.

SCHULTZ: Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky in Chicago here on the EdShow. I
appreciate your time tonight. Thank you so much.

SCHAKOWSKY: Thank you, Ed.

SCHULTZ: Let me bring in Democratic Strategist Bob Shrum. Bob, good to
have you on.

How is this going to politically play out and maybe affect the midterms?
Because if the American people are against any kind of future intervention
in Iraq to correct what`s going on over there, how can Republicans go home
and not be asked the question, "Are you ready to send troops back to Iraq?"
What about that?

BOB SHRUM, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, look, I think they will be. And I
think Dick Cheney being attacked by Dick Cheney is a boon for Barack Obama
and a boon for Democrats who actually want to make this case. Cheney is
the Darth Vader of American foreign policy, expect Darth Vader actually
fought in Star Wars.

This is a guy who sits in air-conditioned conference rooms and wants to
send other people off to fight and die in endless wars. His Wall Street
Journal op-ed today is a tissue of lies, obviously not as monstrous or
consequential as the lies he told to get into Iraq, but it`s one lie after

As you point out, Maliki wouldn`t sign a status of forces agreement. You
know why he wouldn`t sign it? The Iranians didn`t want him to. Why did
the Iranians have that kind of influence? Because George Bush and Dick
Cheney took us into a war that removed one of the counter weights to the
Iranians and actually made Iraq an ally of the Iranians.

SCHULTZ: So what does Cheney have to gain by taking this position and
being so critical with the president? What`s his mission here?

SHRUM: I guess it`s an exercise in the endless rhetoric of redemption. He
wants to somehow rather redeem the terrible mistake he made. I don`t think
he believes it was a mistake. I think he may even believe the lies that he
told, although how anyone could believe there were weapons of mass
destruction at this point is beyond me.


SHRUM: He probably has some rationalization that attempts to make that
case. Look, he said in that op-ed that Al-Qaeda was largely defeated by
2009. He left out two facts. Number one, Al-Qaeda was never in Iraq at
all until we invaded in 2003. Bush and Cheney are the people who got Al-
Qaeda into Iraq.

Number two, they were largely defeated because of a Sunni awakening where
these tribes have come together, fought on our side which was then
destroyed by Maliki who`s run as Shiat on the government and because we had
70, 80, 100,000 troops there. What he wants, and you`re right about this,
is a permanent series of American occupations of these places. He and John
McCain would have a war in Syria, a war in Nigeria, a war in Iraq.

The president faces some very tough choices here. But one thing I think he
is absolutely not going to do is send back American ground troops.

SCHULTZ: Well, what the president, I think, needs to do right now is tell
the Congress, "Your voice better be heard on this." I mean, I don`t see
how the president could do anything without a move for the Congress at this

SHRUM: I think he could use some air power and may not want to go to
Congress before he does it, because there`s and element of surprise


SHRUM: But I hope that before he does it, there`s some real pressure on
the Maliki government to say you`ve got to be more inclusive because the
real reason you have so many Sunnis joining this uprising after they had
actually gone in the opposite direction in the last part of the last decade
is because Maliki has so marginalize them, so repress them .


SHRUM: . so ignored them. I think we have to press him for a more
inclusive government before we get involved.

SCHULTZ: It`s Saddam of a different story, no question about it. It
really is.

SHRUM: Yeah.

SCHULTZ: And looking back on what happened back in 2003, I remember
Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia on the Senate floor telling this
country that we need to be aware of a second war and that would be the war
for the peace and I believe .

SHRUM: Yeah.

SCHULTZ: . that we are there right now. Bob Shrum, great to have you with
us tonight. Thank you so much.

SHRUM: Thank you, Ed.

SCHULTZ: Remember to answer tonight`s question there at the bottom of the
screen. Share your thoughts with us on Twitter at EdShow and at wegoted,
like us on Facebook. We always want to know what you think and we respond
to it.

Coming up, a historic trademark ruling today could have big implications
for the NFL. The Rapid Response Panel weighs in on whether a name change
is in store for the Washington Redskins.

But first, an exclusive look inside the humanitarian crisis on the U.S.-
Mexico border. Texas Congressman Henry Cuellar joins me next.


SCHULTZ: Hey what`s happening out there? Time now for the Trender Social
Media, join the Ed team, get after it at,, and You can get my podcast, just like
the radio show, at and on and this will grow.

The EdShow Social Media Nation has decided and we are reporting. Here are
today`s top Trenders voted on by you.



SCHULTZ: The number three Trender, red squirrel.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The Republican National Committee apparently has a
new mascot.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Courtesy of the RNC. There`s a giant, orange squirrel
hailing Clinton hooked to it.

SCHULTZ: The GOP has a nutty new way to take on Hillary Clinton.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: An intern dressed as a squirrel will follow Clinton
around the country.



CLINTON: How are you? I wanted you to get a copy of my book.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: If this is the GOP`s way of trying to make Hillary
look ridiculous, it may have back-fired.

CLINTON: Thank you Mr. Squirrel.

SCHULTZ: The number two Trender, dos and don`ts.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are used to seeing plenty mudslinging politics but
the mayor of one California town went a little bit further.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That the mayor of San Marino was caught on camera
throwing dog feces into his neighbor`s yard.

SCHULTZ: The turd tossing mayor steps in it, then steps down.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The mayor of San Marino has just resigned following
the fallout over his admission, he tossed a bag of dog poop into a
neighbor`s yard.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He calls it poop.

MAYOR DENNIS KNEIER, SAN MARINO: Has caused embarrassment to this city and
as a result that affects my ability to lead the council.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For the time being, the Vice Mayor Eugene Sun will
assume the mayor`s role.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Number two, your timing is impeccable.

SCHULTZ: And today`s top Trender, borderline.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A surge in Central American immigration that began a
few years ago.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It is in a crisis level at this point. The Rio Grande
Valley is one of the hotspots for illegal border crossing.

SCHULTZ: Congressman Cuellar gets a closer look at the crisis on the

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are visited with mothers and their children to find
out why so many are making the dangerous trip to South Texas.

REP. HENRY CUELLAR, (D) TEXAS: There is that threat, the violence, no

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They are putting a law enforcement agency in-charge
of children.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What I`m told, these sounds, with women and children
roam in wrapped in foiled blankets. blankets.

CUELLAR: It`s bearable.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Federal officials say they are scrambling to improve

CUELLAR: No matter how strong as a person you are, this has to pull you.


SCHULTZ: Joining us tonight, Congressman Henry Cuellar of Texas.
Congressman, thanks for your time tonight.

Tell us about your visit to the facilities. What did you see and what
impression was it -- may left upon you about what we should do? Tell us
what these people are going through.

CUELLAR: Well, first of all you got young kids with no parents, low (ph)
girls, low boys. They are just coming across the river in South Texas with
no parents. They traveled thousand of miles. They traveled through very
difficult parts of Mexico to get over here.

And again, it`s heartbreaking to see those young kids to come across. And
right now, we`re getting about 1,500, 1,200 to 1,500 people that are
crossing just in that part of the country. And out of that, 300 to 400 of
them are kids with no parents. Just a sight that a wave of humanity that
we`re seeing right now.

SCHULTZ: So, what do these kids telling you about why they`re coming here?
I mean, I think we know the answer but I want to hear what they had to say
to you.

CUELLAR: Well, you know, I did have an opportunity to talk to a lot of
those kids. As they held to each other and their hands, sisters, low girls
just holding their hands. Basically, they said several reasons. One is
violence. You know, the violence of those countries has just been -- just
growing. Honduras is the number capital murder in this part of the world.

The economics, there`s nothing there and some of them are coming in to join
their families or their parents. They`re already here in the United
States. And quite honestly, I think the other thing is, they didn`t say
this, but I think we know what`s going on.

They know that if you are somebody from Central America, if you step here,
you`re going to be given this notice to appear and you pretty much are
going to stay here for quite a while.

SCHULTZ: You met with the Honduran and Ambassador today. What did you
discuss? What`s the solution here?

CUELLAR: Well, we certainly talked about setting up a stronger protocol
between the Central American countries like Honduras and the United States.
How do we return those folks faster? He wants to get some of those kids
returned back. He wants to unite them back, back with their families if
they`re back there in Honduras. So we got to set up those protocols,
number one.

Number two, he wants to go after those smuggling drug organizations that
are really carrying out this and they want to start a campaign in their

SCHULTZ: But what -- do they have any responsibility to those kids that
are the cells right now?

CUELLAR: Absolutely. Absolutely. They have a responsibility just like
we`re taking care of those kids. We`ll provide them food, medical care .


CUELLAR: . shelter. We`re doing that, but those countries have a
responsibility to make sure that, you know, those kids are not coming over
here because you just can`t say as a country -- imagine if we did this as a
country. We led our nine year old, 10 year olds to go and travel thousand
of miles without parents. They have to show their responsibility also.

SCHULTZ: OK. Let`s go back to that picture that we just show just a
moment ago. The little kid on the left and the little girl on the right,
how do they get here? I mean, obviously someone brought them here. Are
some of these kids with parents? I mean I can see a teenager coming along
by his or herself, but what about these young kids?

CUELLAR: Well, you know, they gave different stories in the sense that
some of them said, "Listen, we heard or I heard that there was a group of
people coming, so I just went with them to go find a family member in the
United States." But certainly the smuggling organizations are really doing
this because think about this like today, how do we have in South Texas and
a border patrol agent just told me that 280 people through my Congressional
district in South Texas just crossed the river and said, "Here we are."
These were mothers and kids.


CUELLAR: So, there`s an organization to these chaos that we`re seeing down
their on the border.

SCHULTZ: Now you`ve said that the administration and the state department
are not on the same page with Central America. It`s not the radar screen,
I believe, was the comment.


SCHULTZ: Expand on that a little bit. What do you mean?

CUELLAR: Well, you know, again there has to be a sense of urgency because
anytime those kids are coming over besides the danger that they`re put in,
it does cost this about $250 a day to take care of those kids and .


CUELLAR: . we got to do it. I mean, we have to share the compassion and
share of those kids.

SCHULTZ: So we`re not doing enough, right?

CUELLAR: Well we got to talk to those countries, those Central American
countries and say, "Hey, we got to get those campaigns moving down there.
We got to get the word out. Not to allow those kids to come over here,
because that`s a danger to those kids."

SCHULTZ: OK. Congressman Henry Cuellar, great to have you with us

CUELLAR: Thank you.

SCHULTZ: Thanks you so much.

Still ahead, a victory today for the Native American community. Rapid
Response Panel weighs in on the fight of the Washington Redskins team name.
Plus confronting George Wills dismissive and harmful views on rape.
OB/GYN, Jen Gunter joins me to discuss the realities of surviving sexual
assault. But next, I`m taking your questions Ask Ed Live coming up on the
Ed Show on MSNBC. We are right back.


SCHULTZ: And we are back with Ask Ed. Love the questions, appreciate it.
Tonight in our first question Ask Ed Live, our questions comes from -- oh
let`s see, Doubtingtomfm, OK, "Why are people writing Obama`s political
obituary today?"

Well, you`re asking me and I`m going to give you my opinion. Because
that`s the depth of their insight and they got nothing better to say.

Stick around, Rapid Response Panel is next.

HAMPTON PEARSON: And yes -- and I -- thank you.

I`m Hampton Pearson with your CNBC Market Wrap, fed (ph) inspired rally on
Wall Street. The Dow gains almost a 100 points, the S&P adds 15, also
close to a new record, the NASDAQ rising by 25 points.

The Federal Reserve again cut its monthly bond (ph) buying program by $10
billion as expected. The left interest rates unchanged but slashed its`
full year outlook for economic growth and earning from shipping giant FedEx
beat estimates. The news and Shares up more than 6 percent today to a new

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


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. A victory for the Native American
community today, the U.S. patent and trademark office canceled six federal
trademarks on the Washington Redskins` name. The NFL team name was found
to be disparaging to Native Americans. And if you look up the word red
skin in a dictionary, the term is widely identified as offensive slang.

Five Native Americans filed the request for the interfiled football team to
have its trademark protection revoke back into 2006. Today`s decision does
not mean the name has to be change. The decision can still be reviewed by
a Federal court.

Earlier today, Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid made a statement about
Redskins` owner Daniel Snyder opinion.


SEN. HARRY REID [D] NEVADA: Daniel Snyder says it`s about tradition. I
asked, "What tradition? Tradition on racism?" It`s all that that name
leads (inaudible). The writings on the wall, it`s on the wall in giant
plinking neon lights.


SCHULTZ: Back in May, 50 senators, 48 Democrats and 2 independents wrote a
letter to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, urging him to change the team`s
name. The league shutdown the request later on the very same day. An
article on the Redskin`s website from last year, points out teams at 70
different high schools across the country are called the Redskins, which I
think is just another reason why the team should change the name.

Redskins, they are a professional football franchise. Their games are
broadcast across the country. They are the ones setting the example for
those kids and those schools to give them license, I think in permission
socially to do what they`re doing, and it`s wrong. It will take pressure
from fans, consumers, congress and Federal Courts to get the name change.

But the question is, was today`s decision, have he hand it? Is this the
government telling private business, this is what you have to do?

For discussion, our rapid response panel Gyasi Ross, a member the Blackfeet
Indian National, also comes from the Squamish nation. And also Terence
Moore, National Sports Colonist with us tonight. Gyasi, you first today`s
decision, what do you think it means to the Native American community?

think it means that everybody should go on eBay and purchases as much
Redskin, officially license Redskin gear is possible because soon those are
going to be collector items.

I think it`s a death knell. It means that this name pretty soon -- the
financial pressure is just going to continue to escalate because Dan
Snyder, RG3 from a full perspective, are just going to continue to be
bombarded to the extent that their team continues to not be competitive,
it`s a terrible team. They`re going to have to ask these questions that
are outside the parameters of football and that simply not where they want
to be expending their bandwidth.

So for native people, this should be an incredibly emboldening decision.
And it`s the right decision ultimately because the standard, the legal
standard that they came up with today and was previously use in previously
opinions was a substantial composite. They didn`t say that Gyasi Ross,
this one individual, native person and lives on the Squamish reservation.
Did he -- Is he offended subjectively by this? But they said, "Enough
native people are offended by this name that we`re going to take action."
And that`s absolutely the right position Ed.

SCHULTZ: Terrence your take along this. And I think this is interesting
point that the Gyasi brings up. What about the players? I mean this kind
of put them in an intangible position with this constant social pressure
that`s going to out there. And what could force team under Dan Snyder at
this point are really do anything, would today`s decision mean anything?
Your take.

TERRENCE MOORE, NATIONAL SPORT COLONIST: Well, for the first point, its
interest that Champ Bailey, who used to play for them for years was going
to be a hall of fame defense of back. Came out and plead out, said, that
this is a racist thing that should be change. On the other hand, you have
Santana Moss, who was a wide receiver with the team right now. Says that,
he`s perfectly fine with it and tells you the perspective if you are in the
team right now. I guess you have to say what you got to say. But when
you`re away from the team, you got a very -- in a different perspective.

And Ed I want to tell you something very interesting. I am Cincinnati
right now, I`m heading to Oxford, Ohio, where I`m on the Miami University
Alumni Board of Directors. We got alumni weekend coming up. And the
reason I`m saying that is because the rest should learn from the Alma
Matter. For years, Miami University, we were called the redskins from 1920
until 1997, we`re talking about the school with a lot of tradition. Some
of the great college coaches and NFL coaches came from Miami of Ohio, Paul
Brown, Weeb Ewbank, Bo Schembechler, right on down the line.

But then remember now the University is named Miami because of the Miami
Indian tribe there was on Southern Ohio at the time. When that tribes
decided in 1996 that that name was a offensive. The tribe is -- this is
moved to Oklahoma. The university within months changes the name and that
was way back when. It was a offensive to on person, you`ve got the change

SCHULTZ: Well, the congress what is their role at this point. Gyasi,
Nancy Pelosi release a statement today. She says, well we respect the
right to free speech, slurs have no right to trademark protections. The


SCHULTZ: .that represents our nation`s capital should be a source of pride
to all Americans. It`s long past time for the Washington football team to
choose a new name. Is just going to have any impact?

ROSS: Yes, definitely all these things, I`m trial lawyer by trade. And
ultimately this would be what I categorize as a pride of horrors. Dan
Snyder has a terrible case, you have on one hand Obama taking on a
position, an opinion, you know, on the name. You have 50 senators, you
have constant bombardment of questions, you have this trademark protection
issue that his going to have fend off and spend resources.

So, ultimately all of the stuff files on. And once again, he`s using
bandwidth when we start talking about native people, tribes. There`s 562
tribes. And some of our tribes have very, very substantial economic needs.
And a lot of us don`t?


ROSS: But that doesn`t matter. All of use certain things and one of those
things that all of us use is financing. One of the major sponsors of the
Washington Redskins is the Bank of America.


ROSS: All of us use postal services. And one of the major sponsors of the
Redskins is Federal Express. Once we start talking about putting a very,
very concentrated divestment campaign to say, "Look, Federal Express and
Bank of America." So long as you choose to continue to sponsor this team,
that it has a racial slur as it`s logo, then the real economic pressure
begins. So all of this is part of..


ROSS: .large and narrative that ultimately ends with Dan Snyder in
completely respectfully changing the name because of economic pressure.

SCHULTZ: I think the NBA had gone lesson on economic on that not too long

ROSS: Absolutely.

SCHULTZ: And Terrence, finally do you think that this will push Roger
Goodell away from protecting the redskins?

MOORE: Oh no questions about it, because one thing that this league and
team understand is money. And now that this trademark is taking away that
means it anybody can sell -- you and I, can sell a redskin merchandize,
which means is going to effect NFL properties. People don`t realize this
but NFL properties makes a bundle for the NFL.


MOORE: And that money is split equally we`ve between all the various
teams. This is going to cut on to that. Once you start missing with that
money then that when they start to react.

SCHULTZ: No doubt. Gyasi Ross, Terrence Moore, great to have both of you
with us tonight on the Ed Show. Thank you so much.

ROSS: Thank you.

SCHULTZ: Coming up. Glenn Beck takes a left turn on Iraq. But we can`t
let them off to hook that easy. Pretenders is next.


SCHULTZ: And it Pretenders tonight, Mr. Mistake, Glenn back. The right-
wing talker is doing what? 180 on Iraq? Beck says, the antiwar liberals
were right all along.


GLENN BECK: May we come together now on this nightmare in Iraq. From the
beginning most people on the left were against going into Iraq. I wasn`t
now. In spite of the things that I felt at the time when we went to war,
liberal said, we shouldn`t get involve, they said we shouldn`t get mired in
other foreign mess, we shouldn`t nation build. Let me leave with my
mistakes. You`re right, liberals, you were right. We shouldn`t have.


SCHULTZ: Wait a minute Glenn, it`s all about principle, conservative
principles, freedom on the march, freedom from a dictator, the free market.
We were going to change the Middle East. Come on. This is a real gut
change dude. Glenn Beck would love a pardon for his mistakes but he won`t
come clean on all of them. Beck support of the war in Iraq and slammed one
woman who disagree, Cindy Sheehan, protested the war and for her son died
in act of duty. Glenn back called the mother of died soldier a tragedy


BECK: Cindy Sheehan, that`s of pretty big prostitute there, you know what
I mean? I mean, the more of a STU, what did we call her when she was in
the news? Not a prostitute.

STU BURGUIERE: Yes, we eventually got to "tragedy pimp" because we believe
she`s actually pimping the prostitute out.

BECK: Correct.

BURGUIERE: Which I think is actually the most accurate description.

BECK: Pretty hard to beat prostituting your son`s death. Don`t you think?


SCHULTZ: Wow. That kid admit he was dead wrong about going into Iraq but
he can`t bother to take responsibility for his words. If Glenn Beck things
he deserves an requital without an apology. He can keep on pretending.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. At a June 7th column publish to The
Washington Post, Fox News Contributor and Syndicate Economist George Will
sparked outrage by saying colleges are the victims of progressivism in the
recent debate over sexual assault.

George Will said the way the college campuses are forced to address this so
called rape epidemic makes victimhood a coveted status that confers
privileges. And as result, victims proliferate.

George Will wanted to dismiss the statistics and trivialize the trauma of
sexual assault. Will apparently doesn`t think unwanted touching should
count as sexual assault in a letter. Senator Richard Blumenthal, Dianne
Feinstein, Tammy Baldwin and Bob Casey accused George Will of trivializing
the issue writing to him, "Your words contribute to the exact culture that
discourages reporting and forces victims into hiding away from much needed

Will`s response, "I think I take sexual assault much more seriously than
you do."

For more on this, I want to turn to our guest tonight Dr. Jen Gunter, you
can find her article George Will`s Problem with Rape Statistics on

Doctor, good to have you with us tonight. Breakdown the numbers for us.
How can George Will flat out deny statistics that one in five women will be
a victim of sexual assault during their college years?

DR. JEN GUNTER, OB/GYN: Well, you know, I think his column is just an
example of the culture hostility that some people have towards rape victim
than this denialism that there could be some women out there.

Study after study tells us that there is a significant problem with sexual
assault in this country, starting in high school. We know that 14 percent
of girls in high school report being a victim of sexual assault. And so
it`s no surprise that would continue in the college years. So, how he
could ignore that is just really beyond me.

SCHULTZ: Why is that hard to get data on sexual assault and rape?

GUNTER: Well, first of all you have to get over the suicidal, you know,
the fact that rape victims are made to feel that it is their fault somehow
as supposed to other victims of crime.

There`s the difficulty in reporting that many times these crimes are push
aside by the police. We know that a lot of times also police don`t follow
through with prosecuting or attempting to prosecute rape. We know that 22
percent of police departments, they have problems with rape reporting
statistics. Rape kids don`t get processed.

So, really the whole system is stocked against the woman who wants to
report a rape, from being afraid of her attacker to the judicial system.

SCHULTZ: Your response when Will says, the way college campuses are forced
to address this so called rape epidemic. Isn`t that rather offensive,
beyond offensive, isn`t it?

GUNTER: Well, it`s really beyond offensive because it gets back to the
whole, you know, you must have been lying, this didn`t happen. This whole
sort of just disbelieving the person who is reporting that they had a crime
committed against them. And that`s really what prompted me to speak out.
Because I thought, you know, gosh if he`s going to write that, what is that
going to make a person who`s going to that feel? And so I just felt that I
need to just speak and say, you know, this happens. And it`s just stocked
against women in ways that are so unbelievable.

And obviously they`re so unbelievable that Mr. Will choose to not...

SCHULTZ: And quickly Doctor, what changes this culture? What has to be

GUNTER: Well, you know, I actually -- I`m really glad that column
appeared. Because you know what? We wouldn`t be having this discussion if
it hadn`t. And this is how we start these discussions. We say, "Look,
that was wrong and so now we have to actually talk about it and keep the
conversation going." I mean, I think the fact that we`re still talking
about it. You know, a week after means that maybe a society were all ready
to say, "Hey.

SCHULTZ: It`s important.

GUNTER: .we need to take this more seriously."

SCHULTZ: Jen Gunter, doctor, thank you so much for joining us.

That`s the Ed Show, I`m Ed Schultz. Politics Nation with Reverend Al
Sharpton starts right now.

Good evening Rev.


<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.>

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

Sponsored links

Resource guide