Skip navigation

The Ed Show for Monday, March 30th, 2015

Read the transcript to the Monday show

  Most Popular
Most viewed

Date: March 30, 2015
Guest: Mike Rogers, Jim McDermott, Kate Fagan, Joe Cirincione, Laicie
Heeley, Shmuley Boteach, Ruth Coniff, Caroline Heldman, Kim Frederick, Adam
Green and William Pierce

ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC HOST: Good evening Americans and welcome to the Ed show
live from Detroit Lakes, Minnesota. Let`s get to work.


SCHULTZ: Tonight, fallout for Indiana.

GOV. MIKE PENCE, (R) INDIANA: Look, we`re not going to change the law, OK?

SCHULTZ: Plus, mission critical on the Iran deal.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The end of March is a real deadline and that the
choice of the Iranians has to make don`t get any easier.

SCHULTZ: Later, the debate over "coded sexism".

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Why is the group targeting journalist for being too
mean to Hillary Clinton?

SCHULTZ: Plus, President Obama and the liberal lion.

FRM. SEN. EDWARD KENNEDY, (D) Massachusetts, Health, Education: What is
the price that you bought from this working men and women?


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

We`re not going to change the law says the Governor of Indiana.

We start tonight with the outrage over Indiana so called Religious Freedom
Law. Indiana Governor Mike Pence is defiant and he`s come under heavy
criticism on all of fronts. On Sunday, he came out on defense.


this law?

PENCE: Absolutely not. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act was signed
into federal law by President Bill Clinton more than 20 years ago. And it
lays out a framework for ensuring that a very high level of scrutiny is
given anytime government action impinges on the religious liberty of any
American. After that, some 19 states follow that, adopted that statue, I
understand that there`s been a tremendous amount of misinformation and
misunderstanding around this bill.


SCHULTZ: Misunderstanding, misinformation -- let`s dissect all of this for
a moment.

There`s one major difference between other religious freedom laws and the
one in Indiana. Every other law applies to disputes between a person or
entity and the government. The law in Indiana is the only law that applies
to disputes between private citizens. The major problem is this, in
Section 9 of the law under Indiana`s law in. In Section 9, the person is
explained to mean any organization, partnership, LLC, corporation, company
firm, church, religious society or other entity.

Do you feel like one of those folks? This is -- really is very a literal
misunderstanding about this law. It`s an interesting spin but pretty good
for right-wing talker.

Now, the law opens the way for business to turn away gay and lesbian
couples on religious crowns. Mark Pence could not answer one very simple


STEPHANOPOULOS: This is a yes or no question. Is Advance America right
when they say a florist in Indiana can now refuse to serve a gay couple
without fear of punishment?

PENCE: Well, let me explain to you. The purpose of this bill is to
empower enhancement for more than 20 years, George. This is not

STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes or no? If a florist in Indiana refuses to serve a gay
couple at their wedding, is that legal now in Indiana?

PENCE: George, this is where this debate has gone.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That was one of your supporters who was talking about
the bill right there. It said it would protect a Christian florist who --
against any kind of punishment. Is that true or not?

PENCE: George, look the issue here is...

STEPHANOPOULOS: People of any other faith who want to refuse service to
gays and lesbians that is now legal in the state of Indiana that`s a simple
yes or no question.

PENCE: George, the question here is.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Final, yes or no question, Governor. Do you think it
should be legal in the state of Indiana to discriminate against gays or

PENCE: George, what...

STEPHANOPOULOS: It`s a yes or no question.

PENCE: Come on, Hoosiers don`t believe in discrimination.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes or no, should it be legal to discriminate against gays
and lesbians?

PENCE: George, you`re following the mantra of the last week online.


SCHULTZ: Well, it is a simple yes or no question which Pence could not
answer six times.

Another problem is Indiana`s current anti-discrimination laws. They do not
apply to sexual orientation. It`s a possible fix but Pence, not having
anything of it.


STEPHANOPOULOS: One fix the people have talked about is simply adding
sexual orientation as a protective class under the states civil rights
laws, will you push for that?

PENCE: I will not push for that. That`s not on my agenda and that`s not
been an objective of the people of the state of Indiana. And it doesn`t
have anything to do with this law.


SCHULTZ: Finally Pence said the Religious Freedom Law is here to stay.


PENCE: We`re not going to change this law. It has been tested in courts
for more than two decades on the federal level.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me just ask you a final...

PENCE: ... and in some 30 states and it represents a foundational
protection for individuals.


SCHULTZ: If Governor Pence stands by his law, it`s going to cause the
state big time. Many business leaders have threatened to leave Indiana,
some are taking action already.

Last week, Salesforce canceled all company events in the state of Indiana.
On Sunday, Angie`s list announced that they are canceling a $40 million
headquarters expansion in the city of Indianapolis. What Governor would
say, that`s good news.

The propose expansion was expected to add roughly 1,000 good paying jobs to
the city. Earlier today, Connecticut Governor Dan Malloy signed an
executive order barring (ph) state funded travel to the state of Indiana.
And today, AFSCME announced that they are moving their October 2015 Women`s
Conference out of Indianapolis, Indiana, all bad news. President Lee
Sanders called it a direct result of the discriminatory law.

And Apple CEO Tim Cook is blasting the law. He called it very dangerous
saying Religious Freedom Laws go against the very principles our nation was
founded on. And they have the potential to undue decades of progress to a
greater equality.

Governor Pence, what you doing?

Later this week, Indiana will host the Final Four in Indianapolis. The
NCAA is involved. They said that they are concerned about Indiana`s law.

NBA great Charles Barkley, a commentator every weekend. He is slamming the
Religious Freedom Law. In a statement, he called discrimination in any
form unacceptable and it he would onto say, "As long as anti-gay
legislation exists in any state, I strongly believe big events such as the
Final Four and Super Bowl should not be held in those state`s cities".

Now, outrage over this law has gotten to the attention of other states.
Georgia, well, you see they were working on passing -- something very
similar, working on their Religious Freedom Bill, but they, of course,
because of this controversy have had to table the legislation. Just today
Indiana legislatures have step forward and said that they will work to
clarify the law.

My question on all of this (ph), what the hell is that mean?

Lawmakers said that they are drafting legislation to address concerns. The
law could result in discrimination.

All the pressure is on Mike Pence. We have to understand who this guy is.
He comes from a culture of right-wing radio in America, that`s where he`s
been for a longtime. They can say whatever they want, they can think
whatever they want, and they can do whatever they want with no
ramifications whatsoever. And that`s the kind of Governor he is right now.

But this time Pence has crossed the line. You see when you`re Governor you
suppose to be representing all the people. He`s put his states economy at
risk and start of a national conversation about similar laws that`s going
to cause problems for the national Republican Party.

This is will no doubt play a role in the 2016 GOP primaries. I mean it`s a
softball question now, reporter should be asking every single Republican
presidential hopeful where they stand on this. Do you think the law in
Indiana is discriminatory and do you support it?

Thank you, Governor Pence. This is what right-wing radio culture of the
mind will do for you in the political arena. It`s easy to get on the radio
and spew this kind of hate but try the legislative without back bush. The
bottom line here is this that businesses are responding. Go ask Limbaugh
if he knows anything about that.

Get your cellphones out, I want to know what you think.

Tonight`s question, "Should every Republican presidential candidate be
forced to disavow the Indiana law?" Text A for yes text B for no to
676622, we`ll bring to you the results later in the show.

Now, I`m just -- to click the memory a little bit. I remember back in
2002, `03 and `04 when Michael Moore was big putting out all of these films
and the Republican narrative was, ask the Democrats if they disavow
themselves from Michael Moore. Well, where are we in 2015? Serve it up
Governor Pence.

Let me bring in the Congressman Jim McDermott of Washington is with us
tonight, also Kate Fagan who is a Columnist for ESPN, Mike Rogers of, great to have all of you with us.

Mike, I`ll start with you first tonight. Is Governor Pence -- is he
spreading lies with these interviews? He constantly goes back and puts it
in correlation with what Bill Clinton did, what Ted Kennedy supported and
what they have done in Indiana, clarify it for us.

MIKE ROGERS, RAWSTORY.COM: Well, as you had said earlier what Mike Pence
and the legislature in Indiana did was take a law and instead of it
applying to the individual rights of individuals to practice their religion
has elevated it to a whole new level including corporations and
organization who now can claim religious reasons. And also between --
their -- have greatly increase who may file claims (ph), whether it`s with
the state action or individuals against individuals. And he is maintaining
that this is the same as the federal law when that it`s patently untrue.
And when ask if that was true by George Stephanopoulos in the real needy-
greedy of it, he couldn`t answer.

SCHULTZ: Kate, you`re a journalist and a former athlete, you know the
business of sports. We`ve heard the NCAA, their concern, do you think
they`ll take action. And you look at where this is all unfolding, Indiana
in basketball have got a culture that go back generations. I mean they are
connected at the hip, assess the damage for us, what has Mike Pence done?

KATE FAGAN, ESPNW COLUMNIST: They key thing here is that this law was
passed right a week before the Men`s Final Four, which is one of the
biggest events on the sports calendar in the NCAA. Very quickly came out
with a statement which said they`re going to keep an eye on this, and I
think that matters and I think that the NCAA has shown a history of moving
sporting events or keeping sporting events out of spaces that they feel are
not diverse and inclusive.

I mean, certainly places that while the confederate flag, the NCAA has
taken a strong stand and won`t place free-determined hopes there in the
NCAA basketball tournament. So there is a history for the NCAA to take a
look at this.

Obviously, this weekend Men`s Final Four is too quick of a turnaround to
doing it. I mean, there`s no way they can move that event but certainly
next year, the Women`s Final Four is supposed to be held in Indiana. I
think they`ll take a good long hard look at Indiana does not change this
language or also pass some sort of sweeping statewide anti-discrimination
protection and make LGBT (inaudible) protected class.

So the NCAA certainly, I would think, even more so than the NFL or the NBA
has a history and quite possibly could move events out of Indi as well as I
don`t think they`ll move their headquarters but there are headquarter
there. So this is very close to home for them.

SCHULTZ: Yeah. So Mike Rogers, what do you think Indiana has to do here?
They are talking about clarification. I mean this is an absolute. It`s
either discrimination or it isn`t. What do they have to do?

ROGERS: Clarification reminds me of the Bush signing statement where he
would sign laws and then basically say I`m going to ignore them now that
they are -- that is the law.

What he needs to do is change law clarifying we know what the law, it`s
very clear. In fact, it`s so clear he won`t even answer the questions
about the law when they opposed to him on television.

So what has to happen as the law needs to change? There should be an
increase in protections by adding sexual orientation and gender identity to
the statewide protections in Indiana.

But basically the real money question with him is, will this allow people
to discriminate, and it will, and he needs to change the law. I don`t need
a clarification how he wants to discriminate or why it`s acceptable. The
law needs to be changed, and that`s that.

SCHULTZ: Congressman, what`s the biggest danger of Indiana`s law? I mean,
we`re seeing other states that are talking about it. Of course, George has
put it on hold but this can get a life of its own, can`t it? And where --
is the federal government come in on something like this as you see it?

REP. JIM MCDERMOTT, (D) WASHINGTON: Well, what you see here is Mike Pence
getting ready to run for the presidency or the vice presidency and he
thought he would do this and get away with it. And he`s gotten nailed by
the LGBT community and by the business community, and he has started a fire
and this going to have awful a hard time putting out.

They`re talking about it in Georgia, they`re talking about it in Arkansas.
All these states where he thought he was going to get a good jump-in in
some kind of race for the presidency. He just got nailed.

And it will have impact if -- doesn`t get repelled then we`ll have some
action in Washington D.C. because the Republicans in the Congress are going
to have a very hard time walking away from Mike Pence in this kind of
thing. If they don`t, you`ll see what happened in Arizona some years ago,
that same sort of thing is going to happen here in Indiana. People just
simply aren`t going to take programs there, the big money programs...


McDermott: ... like the NCAA.

SCHULTZ: Kate, what about college presidents. College presidents call the
shots. I mean, they tell the NCAA what they think on key issues. How can
a college president, you know, have his or her teams compete in a state
where there`s discrimination and call themselves a leader of an educational
institution? Isn`t that going to be a big root to all of this for change?
Your thoughts.

FAGAN: Yeah. That`s absolutely is one of the key factors here. The NCAA
is not its own entity in college sport. The NCAA is made up of college
presidents, and athletic directors, and coaches who serve on committees.

They are one in the same and so the NCAA which is already said publicly
that it stands for diversity and inclusion can absolutely had some leverage
on this issue because of all of the Final Fours that have been held there
and will be held there as well as Big Ten Championships as well as the

So I think that Mike Pence obviously did not see this coming, did not know
that there will be this kind of backlash.

And in addition, you saw the NBA, the Pacers as well as the Indiana Fever,
at least put out a statement saying that people -- that all are welcome at
their arena to come support and you`ve seen also local businesses have
taken this as an opportunity to say, "We serve everyone".

So the -- message that the businesses have offered up is that they are an
inclusive state and now is just a question of whether the leaders of that
state are going to change this bill.

SCHULTZ: Yeah. And Mike Rogers, I`d like you to respond to what
Congressman McDermott said, wouldn`t Mike Pence be the perfect national
candidate for the Republicans?

ROGERS: Well, I think he will. You know, I hope he is planning on running
nationally because he seems to be ticking-off and off a lot of people in
Indiana and it should be noted. He only won with 49 percent of the vote.
It`s not like he is in the most stable seat in the country in terms of the
percentage of winning.

So I think that Congressman who`s absolutely right and here we see him
showing his true colors and what he is believing.

I think that he got blind sided, Ed, by folks in the business and in the
sports world and that`s where so much of societal change happened whether
it`s corporations giving rights and as well in the sports world.

SCHULTZ: Yeah. No doubt. Well, I didn`t think anybody could out do Mitch
Daniels but I guess the Mike Pence has certainly done it.

Jim McDermott, Kate Fagan and also Mike Rogers, great to have with us on
the Ed Show, I appreciate the conversation.

Remember to answer tonight`s question there at the bottom of the screen.
Share your thoughts with us on Tweeter @edshow and on Facebook. You could
get my video podcast and it`s about this subject as well today at

Coming up, nuclear talks as Switzerland moving to the 11t-hour, can they be
salvaged? And later, the coded sexism debate surrounding the Clinton
campaign, what can we say and not say according to some factor?

We`ll be right back.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show.

Nuclear talks with Iran have reached the critical point with negotiators
raising to meet Tuesday self-imposed deadline for a deal.

On Sunday, there were reports the talks had a major stumbling block.

NBC`s Steve Handelsman has the latest.



STEVE HANDELSMAN, NBC CORRESPONDENT: The mood at the talks was not good
looms said one negotiator (ph), but President Obama told Secretary of the
State Kerry to keep trying.

In Boston, he quoted Ted and Jack Kennedy.

of fear but let us never fear to negotiate.

HANDELSMAN: One hang up is how long any deal would last, 10 years or more.
Another is what Iran does with its fuel for potential bombs.

Years of purifying has gotten Iran 22,000 pounds of uranium that`s partway
to bomb grade (ph).

Vladimir Putin is offering to take Iran`s stash to Russia and dilute it but
suddenly Iran`s leader say that would bruise their national pride.

They`re promising to dilute their own uranium but demeaning they keep it.

you have to assume the worse, that here`s an attempt to either to weaken
the U.S. position or to preserve a capability that certainly not in the
interest of United States.

HANDELSMAN: If President Obama buys a plan that leaves Iran`s uranium in
Iran, it might be even harder to sell, a lawmakers who charged he is giving
up too much.

least 64 Senators possibly more that are willing to condition, reject or
otherwise take issue with the agreement.

HANDELSMAN: Also worries Iran`s Supreme leader who warned today a board he
called the Deceptive Tactics of Iran`s Enemies.


SCHULTZ: Joining me tonight Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, founder of the This
World: The Value Network, Joe Cirincione with us tonight, President of the
Ploughshares Fund and Laicie Heeley of the Center for Arms Control and Non-
Proliferation, great to have all of you with us tonight.

We`re now in the 11th-hour, no doubt, and it seems that Vladimir Putin
could be a solution to this. Joe Cirincione, where is this deal right now?
Or, how critical is this based on the news that you hear? And the other
part of the question is, is Putin an option to a solution as you see it?

JOE CIRINCIONE, PLOUGHSHARE FUND: Yeah. Yeah. Well, this is down to the
11th-hour. You know, they want to get a deal by midnight tomorrow. This
is not unsimilar to what happened back in November 2013 when just hours
before they reached that breakthrough in the interim agreement. Things
were very pessimistic.

You`re seeing a little hardball being played, some brinkmanship, a little,
you know, hard bargaining.

We hope that nobody miscalculates. But what we do know is that, they`re
very, very close on almost all of the major issues. On this one sticking
point, should the uranium gas be kept in Iran or shipped out?

Yes. Russia can play a very positive rule. Russia has the capability of
taking that gas converting it into fuel rods and then, shipping it back to
Iran. That is how preferred course but there are more than -- one way to
scan a fuel rod in this case. You can take that and converted, and
diluted, and keep it in Iran making it sure that it`s not in a form that
could be quickly use to make a bomb.

SCHULTZ: Yeah. Well, Laicie Heeley, it sounds to me like the Iranians
just don`t want their ego bruise here. I mean, wouldn`t the Russian
involvement be some part of a verification system and if it works, why not
do it?

the negotiators have made very clear that in negotiations, there is never
an agreement to ship the uranium out of Iran and to Russia. So that is
just simply one of the possibilities that been kept around. Obviously, it
is a preferable possibility.

However, anything that puts Iran`s nuclear material under locking key,
keeps it under locking key, and makes it not possible for them to use that
material to build a nuclear weapon, that`s really -- it`s really the
concern here and ultimately ego, you know, that come second.

SCHULTZ: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was in Israel over the
weekend and would visit obviously with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
and he said the emerging agreement is fulfilling Israel`s deepest fears.

Here it is.


countries see Iran progressing with its aggression to conquer Yemen and the
Bab el-Mandeb straits, talks continue as usual and go on, on a deal that
from everything that we hear paves Iran`s way to the bomb.


SCHULTZ: Rabbi Shmuley, how does this situation in Yemen change things?

it. Here you have an Iranian regime that is supporting Shia Militias that
are being bombed by the Saudis.

Now, in the Saudi`s consider a country to be a threat. And Saudi`s have
one of the worse human rights records anywhere in the world.

You can imagine just how wicked and evil this Iranian regime is. And I
find that we`re -- we`ve reached the level of the theater of the absurd.

Iran is saying that they will not shift their enrich uranium to Russia
because it will embarrass their national pride. I`ll tell you say what
embarrass your national pride. Throwing wax at woman`s head that
embarrasses your national pride, hanging a gay man from crane that
embarrasses your national pride, shooting woman`s through the heart for
protesting a stolen election that is what embarrasses your national pride,
but shipping uranium outside your country has nothing to do with national

The logic here is so absurd. I`m wondering if we`re still all thinking
just a little bit with some sense of logic.

SCHULTZ: Well, I don`t think that this deal is going to change society in
Iran but if we can keep on from nuking somebody, that probably would be a
good thing.

I mean, we`re now down to -- it sounds like stockpiles, storage and
verification, Joe Cirincione.


SCHULTZ: I mean, we`re not going to changed society within Iran but can we
get those three things done before midnight tomorrow night?

CIRINCIONE: I think we can. Rabbi, I love your passion but this is a
brutal region.

You know, Saudi Arabia doesn`t recognize Israel`s right to exist either.
They also stone women to death. Two weeks ago, they beheaded a woman in a
public square. So, these are some pretty grim regimes we`re talking about.

In Ed`s point, is well taken what you want, is to at least remove this most
dangerous option, this nuclear option. We can then work on whether we can
reform or constrain some of their activities by midnight tomorrow. We can
work a framework out that can constrain and roll back Iran`s program, put
in place some vigorous inspections so we can catch them if they sneak out
or break out or keep out...

BOTEACH: Can I say respectfully...

CIRINCIONE: And, I think we can make sure that our allies are all united
on this so we have that global commitment necessary to snap sanctions back

SCHULTZ: Rabbi, go ahead.

BOTEACH: Well, the point of Prime Minister Netanyahu`s dialogue with
Senator McConnell was if you reward aggression then you strengthen the
regime. Of course, the two are connected. If you do in Iranian -- if you
do a deal, a nuclear deal, you then release all of these frozen assets.

Now, the government has billions of dollars by which to oppress their
people further. So, the two are absolutely interrelated. They are a
pariah state right now. They are crumbling because of international

By tomorrow night, we might see the lifting of many of those sanctions so
that people of Iran can be brutalized.

Now, Joe, let me ask you one simple question.


BOTEACH: If Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was calling for the murder of every
black men and women throughout the Middle East, if he said that there are
some passage that says a black people are off the devil or satanic, would
you still allow our government to do a deal with him calling for the
annihilation of every black -- or is it just a Jews who are allowed to be
spoken up and...

CIRINCIONE: Hold the bus here, Jack. Don`t try to pull that card on me.

BOTEACH: Well, I`m after your question. I`m asking you a question.

CIRINCIONE: ... We don`t make deal with people because we like them.

BOTEACH: Do you not think -- do you not think...

CIRINCIONE: We make deal with people that`s in our national...

BOTEACH: Do you not think that they have to stop the annihilatory right
against the Jews first? Why are we allowed to be spoken up in...


BOTEACH: ... to be exterminated with all due respect.

CIRINCIONE: Man, you just -- you`re going beyond the path here. Look,
Richard Nixon negotiated with the Chinese in 1972 20 years after the
Chinese had killed thousands of American soldiers...

BOTEACH: Well, they`re calling for the extermination of...

CIRINCIONE: ... in Korea, when there was still kept American soldiers in


CIRINCIONE: Look, we negotiate with people because it`s in our national
security and just to stop them from doing absolutely terrible things. You
don`t have to agree with the nature of that regime that`s why we

BOTEACH: You can say them stop the annihilatory...


HEELEY: Rabbi, just to add onto that.

SCHULTZ: Richard Nixon did have the "Live and Let Live" philosophy. He
wanted to get a protection deal for the globe is what he`s trying to do. I
want to...

BOTEACH: Well, Richard Nixon`s going to become a standard of our ethics
and morality so be it. But let met be absolutely clear that the United
States government...

SCHULTZ: But Rabbi, Rabbi, you know, you`re not going to change society --
on a deal inside any country. But if you can come to some verification
where they`re not going to be nuking neighbors or the United States, then I
think that that would be a positive step to the next deal down the road.

BOTEACH: What verification...

SCHULTZ: And that`s I think we got to look at it.

Laicie Heeley, I want to ask you finally. What options is John Kerry have
right now? I mean, if you could come to the conclusion that the Iranians
are boxing (ph) and the Americans are not going to agree to anything.

HEELEY: Sure, absolutely. First of all, Rabbi, all of your points are
arguments for why we need a deal. I would say this is not just a situation
in which we don`t trust Iran. Of course, we don`t trust Iran that`s why we
need a deal, that`s why we need verification, that`s why we need the
inspectors on the ground.

Our other option which the U.S. Congress has argued for and Netanyahu has
argued for is to place sanctions on Iran.

Well, Iran built its current program under sanction. So what do you think
Iran`s going to do if we put those sanction in place again?

BOTEACH: We`re negotiating because of sanctions, Laicie. The only


SCHULTZ: All right. Enjoy the conversation, very passionate. We will --
we got to run. We`ll follow the story, thanks to all of you. Rabbi
Shmuley Boteach, Joe Cirincione and Laicie Heeley, thank you for joining us

Still to come, a warning for journalist from some allies of Hillary Clinton
but first, President Obama honors the liberal alliance.

Stay tuned, lots more coming up on the Ed show. We are right back.



KENNEDY: What is the price, we ask the other side. What is the price that
you bought from this working men and women? What cost, how much more do we
have to give to the private sector of the business, how many billion
dollars more are you asking, are you requiring, when those agreed stop?


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed show.

The man known as the liberal lion of the Senate who spend his time in
Congress standing up for the working folk of America is being honored

Lawmakers are gathering in Boston for the opening of the new Edward M.
Kennedy Institute for the United State Senate. Just a short time ago,
President Obama remembers Senator Ted Kennedy at the dedication.


OBAMA: And no one made the Senate come alive like Ted Kennedy. He was one
of the great pledges of my life to hear, Ted Kennedy, deliver one of his
steam winders on the floor.


SCHULTZ: Senator Kennedy is being honored for his legacy of reaching
across the isle. The institute will be open to the public tomorrow.

Stick around a message to journalist from Hillary Clinton super volunteers
next to our Rapid Response Panel response, we`ll be right back.

Market Wrap.

Stocks begin the week with a rally. The Dow jumps 263 points, the S&P
climbs 25 and NASDAQ up 56 points.

One big winner today, TESLA Motors which finished 3 percent higher, CEO
Elon Musk since the company will unveil a new product next month but it`s
not a car. Shares are also up by about 2 percent after hours.

And cold weather and heavy snow fail to put a freeze on home buying in
February, pending home sales wrap more than 3 percent last month.

That`s it from CNBC. We`re first in business worldwide.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed show.

Here is over sexism.

RUSH LIMBAUGH, RADIO HOST: The Clinton campaign has issued a list of words
and terms to the drive-by media in the form of a threatening e-mail to a
New York Times infobabe telling them, these are the words you cannot use to
describe Mrs. Clinton. One word is not on the list is "canckles", I guess
everybody in the media is free to use the word "canckles".

SCHULTZ: A new e-mail warning journalist about their coverage of Hillary
Clinton has sparked a heated debate.

John West, a member in a group of Hillary Clinton`s supporters contacted
several media outlets about what he saw is unfair language in the
reporting. Then an e-mail titled, "Your Obsession and Loads Some
Coverage". West highlighted the coded language of sexism in a new endow
(ph). His e-mails slams commentary on Clinton`s age and looks.

West listed words like secretive, polarizing, calculating and ambitious as
coded attacks. He concludes by writing, "You are on notice that we will be
watching, reading, listening and protesting coded sexism".

A New York Times reporter shared section of the e-mail on her Twitter feed
and the story broke wide open. The e-mail has received sharp criticism for
walking the line between watchdog and thoughtful

--coded sexism. The New York Times reported -- reporter shared sections of
the e-mail on her tweeter feed and the story broke wide open. The e-mail
has received sharp criticism for walking the line between watchdog and
thought police.

John West is a member of the HRC Super Volunteers which congregates to a
private Facebook and a Tweeter group. The Super Volunteers are not
affiliated with Clinton or her team. West is not the spokesperson for the
group. But folks are talking, what are the guidelines here?

Joining me tonight, our Rapid Response Panel, Kim Frederick, a Hillary
Clinton supporter and is also a member of that group. Also with us
tonight, Ruth Coniff, Editor-in-Chief of the Progressive Magazine, and Dr.
Caroline Heldman, Professor of Politics at Occidental College.

Professor, let`s start with you first tonight if we can. Are we seeing
some guidelines that we haven`t seen or heard in other campaigns because
this is Hillary second time around? Your take on what is being put out
there by Clinton supporters?

they are preemptively addressing this because we`ve known it`s a problem
since Elizabeth Dole`s bid in 2000. She have the same coded sexist
coverage, I found it again with Vice President -- Presidential candidate
Sarah Palin and of course during the 2008 primary Clinton faced a lot of

So I am happy to see that there is a group raising awareness about this
issue before we had into the election.

SCHULTZ: Kim Frederick, what is the mission here?


SCHULTZ: Do you agree with John West`s e-mail? What he`s mission (ph)

FREDERICK: I agree with the intents of his e-mail. I think that when we
see articles such as New York Time showing a picture of a mobile phones
squashing her, depicting her as the wicked witch of the west or, you know,
even Orrin or Donald (ph) saying about the e-mail situation that, you know,
she may leave the situation room and come out, and ask through e-mail her
husband advice. I mean I think that`s quoted and veiled as sexism.

So, you know, we definitely want to pay attention and were glad to be
paying attention...

SCHULTZ: How was that coded because she might do that? I got to ask you,
Kim, how that be coded?

FREDERICK: Well, would you ask Colin Powell...


SCHULTZ: Because, I mean, with my colleague Lorenzo Donald (ph) offered us
-- wait a minute. Wait a minute. I mean, let`s face it. Every president
has advisers and in times of pressure situations, I don`t think that
Hillary Clinton should be apologizing for being married to a former
president who was a global figure.


SCHULTZ: Why not use that resource. That`s how I view it but how would
that be coded in some way?

FREDERICK: Well, I mean, that`s one thing to use our resource but I mean
to say that she`s in a situation roaming (ph), she is not qualified as
Secretary Of State to handle herself that she would then need to ask the
opinion of her husband. Maybe if she said the opinion of the former
President Bill Clinton, maybe that would be different.

But we wouldn`t see, you know, Colin Powell coming out and people asking if
he`s asks his wife so that`s how it`s different.

SCHULTZ: All right. Ruth Coniff, do these messages to the media helped or
hurt the Clinton campaign even thought they said they`re not connected to
it? Your thoughts.

connected and I think if they were connected, they wouldn`t have done this
because I think it hurts the campaign.

You know, I mean Hillary Clinton and anybody who`s in communications know
that the last thing you want to do is tell about the journalist what words
they can and cannot use. So in fact, I think this has a lot of damaged
both to Hillary and also to the cause of doing something about sexism which
is real in coverage of female candidates. But you don`t do that by giving
journalist a list of words that they can and can`t use particularly such an
expansive list that label as sexism some things that are the kinds of terms
that are commonly used for political candidates of both genders.

So I think it was bush league. I think it was done by this guy who`s you
know, runs a landscaping business in Chicago and has a Facebook page and
that`s not the campaign and I think it`s a big disaster frankly for

SCHULTZ: Professor, respond to that.

HELDMAN: Well, I would agree that its bush league and I agree that there
are definitely words on that list that I do not think are coded sexism. I
think they are sued for both genders.

However, we are talking about it right now. And this is different than any
other previous campaign where all of these female candidates, the closer
they got to the White House, the more sexism they face in coverage. I
think it`s great that we`re having this conversation at least they put it
on the agenda.

SCHULTZ: Well, media police, I mean, let me go forward, is this a way it`s
going to be, Kim, if Hillary Clinton is elected president? I mean, I don`t
see how this helps the Clinton campaign at all but it should -- go ahead.

FREDERICK: Yeah. I don`t consider myself part of -- I`m a consumer of
news and I think that the average American citizen is a little bit smarter
and wiser today to understand what is happening in the media in general. I
think what you call John Stewart part of the media police.

I mean, it`s, you know, I think there are ways to report on this but don`t
have to have, you know, sexism. And I`m not saying this that even
intentional. You know, sexism has been a part of our dynamic for many
decades and centuries if not, and I think that a lot of times it`s
unintentional. I mean, if a woman do it -- so we`re just trying to...

SCHULTZ: Let me ask all three of you...


FREDERICK: ... we don`t have this problem looking around.

SCHULTZ: I`m going to finish this segment by asking all three of you the
same question, if Hillary Clinton does more for women`s rights and it`s
pointed out by the media, is that sexist reporting?

I mean, we do not have the equal pay. Women`s rights are under attack and
if she makes this a focal point of her campaign, and believe me, we don`t
know where she stands on trade, we don`t know how far she`s going to go on
the environment and we really don`t know what her economic package is since

So there is going to be a lot of passionate debates, but if she puts
women`s issues front and forward, is that sexist of the media presents
that, Professor, what about that?

HELDMAN: No, absolutely not. Talking about her issues position that she
is putting out there is not sexist. Sexism is talking about focusing on
dress or appearance, negative coverage that is gendered or going after her
confidence, those are -- or talking about ambition, that`s sexism not
talking about her policy positions.

SCHULTZ: So if I were to say that Hillary Clinton has a very ambitious
agenda when it comes to women`s rights that would be sexist? I mean, I
would champion that?

HELDMAN: No. No. Discussing her ambition in a negative sense which we
tend to do with candidates, female candidates, right, because women aren`t
supposed to be ambitious. They did this throughout our 2008 election and I
assume they`ll do it throughout this election as well.

SCHULTZ: Ruth, quickly give us a thought on that.

CONIFF: You know, I just think that the best approach to this is a
positive approach. I think to be inspiring to women and man to show that
women`s leadership is a great thing and a positive thing and not trying to
be the thought police but just dig it out there and promote a positive
message. I think it`s really the only answer.


CONIFF: You know, I think it`s reasonable that women should write letters
and drove, if they see sexist coverage but this is not the way to go.

SCHULTZ: All right, Kim Frederick, Ruth Coniff, Caroline Heldman, great to
have you with us.

HELDMAN: Thank you.

SCHULTZ: Coming up, the candidate who wants to challenge the American
political royalty. Keep it here. We`ll be right back.


SCHULTZ: Coming up, the Dark Horse Democrat and the race for 2016.

Stay with us, here on the Ed Show.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show.

Finally tonight, two names have dominated the political world for more than
three decades.

A Bush or a Clinton has appeared on every presidential ticket from 1980
until 2008.

And we could see both names on the ballot for 2016 as Hillary Clinton and
Jeb Bush lead the pack. But not everyone is rodding (ph) for a Bush-
Clinton face off.

Former Maryland Governor Martin O`Malley says the presidency shouldn`t be a
family affair.


MARTIN O`MALLEY, (D) MARYLAND: I think that our country always benefit
from new leadership and new perspective. So then, let`s be honest here.
The presidency of the Unite States is not some crown to be passed between
two families.

STEPHANOPOULOS: These two families, Bush and Clinton?

O`MALLEY: Well, right now, George, you know, the -- any two families.


SCHULTZ: O`Malley is thinking about running for the Democratic nominations
as he`ll make a decision this spring. The two-term Governor has been in
key primary states letting his positions known.

He is very pretty vocal about Wall Street regulations as he would take an
economic approach to climate change which I`m anxious to hear. But so far
the Governor is pretty silent on trade issues, which of course is a big
issue when it comes to jobs in America.

Let`s turn out to Adam Green, Co-Founder of the Progressive Change
Campaign, also with us tonight is William Pierce, Executive Director of Run
Biden Run. Mr. Pierce, let me ask you first -- great to have both of you
with us.

By the way, when is Joe Biden going to announced he`s going to run?
Silence out of the Biden camp, what`s going on?

WILLIAM PIERCE, EXEC. DIR. RUN BIDEN RUN: Well, Ed, you know, based since
we are super pack (ph), we can`t coordinate but all the media reports have
said that the Vice President is going to be making up an announcement
sometime this summer.

SCHULTZ: Sometime this summer. Why so late? Why are all the Democrats
possible challengers such as Martin O`Malley and maybe Bernie Sanders, why
are they taking so much time, Mr. Pierce, what do you make of that?

PIERCE: Well, as you see he`s a Vice President. He is a man who is right
now is polling 15 percent to 20 percent right now in recent polls.

He is doing nothing but he`s focusing on base so we just continue in the
President`s great agenda. And basically, we just believe, Ed, that Joe
Biden that he is a perfect candidate.

And Governor O`Malley and the Secretary -- I`m sorry, Senator Warren,
they`ll make great running mates to Joe Biden if he does decide to run.

SCHULTZ: Is the left concerned about a dynasty here? Adam Green, your
thoughts on this?

Biden. You know, John Stewart only has still many more months left on TV.
So I think, Biden should decide sooner and later if he`s going to make this
decision at all.

You know, the left, you know, once pretty much (ph) with the center of the
country once, which is bold economic populism. When somebody who is out
there willing to take on power for interest like Wall Street is the one who
is not going to cuts Social Security benefits but expand them.

And to Martin O`Malley`s credit, he`s actually been talking about these
economic-populist esteems.

You know, my thought is that at this point, Hillary Clinton has a choice.
She could see that ground to people like Martin O`Malley or she could take
that ground and also come out for things like Wall Street reform and
accountability. Also come out for things like this things in Social
Security benefits, and we hope that she does.

SCHULTZ: It seems like there`s no doubt that if liberals found out that
Elizabeth Warren was running, they`d be ecstatic, who`s closer to Elizabeth
Warren, Martin O`Malley or Hillary Clinton as you see it?

GREEN: Well, let`s say it this way.

Martin O`Malley is, again, certainly coming out with bold economic-populist
positions like -- we can state in glass eagle (ph) actually having
accountability for (inaudible) bankers and expanding Social Security

Senator Clinton -- Secretary Clinton hasn`t launched yet and a big
unchecked box for her is where does she stand on economic populism issues.

You know, I don`t think her embracing this position will be a change of
position at this point, we just don`t know. So I`m really looking forward
to seeing how she launches her campaign whether she sounds the economic-
populist trumpet and there`s a lot of people (inaudible) for her to do so.

SCHULTZ: Mr. Pierce, how do you think Joe Biden would respond to a
question such as Martin O`Malley did about a dynasty either a Bush or a

PIERCE: Well, personally, I`m 26 years old. Every election, presidential
election for my whole entire life, I`ll be to either Bush or a Clinton on a

Secretary Clinton done a lot a great and good for our country, the
Clinton`s I love them 100 percent. But basically, (inaudible) we`re just
focused on electing the Vice President because we know he`s a perfect

Myself, I`m a veteran. I`ve deployed over to Iraq and Afghanistan. And I
want someone in the White House who will understand what it`s like to sent
troops over there. And the Vice President, he`s a perfect candidate for
that because he sent his son overseas.

SCHULTZ: Adam, why hasn`t Martin O`Malley jumped out? Why is he waiting?
And can he raise the money and can he move Hillary to the left? What do
you think?

GREEN: Can he raise the money, possibly. You know, we saw Howard Dean go
from 1 percent or 2 percent in the polls almost winning Iowa. But it takes
time. It takes a number of debates, it takes voters to pay attention to
the raise, and can he move her to the left, well, again, I think, she has a

Is she going to see the economic-populist grounds on Martin O`Malley or
will she take it for herself?

And again, we hope that there`s a (inaudible)...

SCHULTZ: All right.

GREEN: ... when it comes to economic populism.

SCHULTZ: And we`ll leave it there. Adam Green and William Pierce, great
to have you with us tonight.

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

PoliticsNation with Reverend Al Sharpton starts right now.

Good evening, Rev.


<Copy: Content and programming copyright 2015 MSNBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Copyright 2015 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