IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.

The Ed Show for Monday, September 13th, 2010

Read the transcript to the Monday show

Guests: Rep. Chris Van Hollen, David Frum, Sen. Debbie Stabenow, James

ED SCHULTZ, HOST:  Good evening Americans, and welcome to THE ED SHOW.  Tonight, from New York, these stories are hitting my hot buttons at this is hour. 

Newt Gingrich, I think, has hit a new low, playing to the birther fringe of the Republican Party, accusing the president of the United States of having a Kenyan world view.  You wouldn‘t believe how low this guy has gone.  I‘ve got commentary on that. 

This kind of radical thinking has infuriated our schools across the country.  Educators are trying to keep your kids away from President Obama.  Parents are being warned about indoctrination during his back-to-school speech. 

My commentary on all of that, coming up in just a moment.  

And the Tan Man‘s act, well, he‘s - he‘s got to find a new act.  He wants to - you to believe that he really cares about the middle class and middle-class tax cuts.  Democratic House Majority Whip, Jim Clyburn, will be here to blow his cover in the “Battleground Story” tonight.  It‘s all coming up. 

But this, of course, is the story that has me fired up first tonight.  Newt Gingrich has officially taken Dick Cheney‘s place as the crazy old uncle of the Republican Party.  He‘ll say just about anything.  The morally corrupt, twice-divorced hypocrite and former speaker of the House is doing his very best to convince America that President Obama‘s not an American. 

The Newtster told “The National Review” that President Obama has, quote, “a Kenyan anti-colonial world view.”  How many of you even know what that is?  Newt said, quote, “What if Obama is so outside our comprehension that only if you understand Kenyan anti-colonial behavior can you begin to piece together his actions? 

He went on to say, “This is a person who is fundamentally out of touch with how the world works, who happen to have played a wonderful con, and, as a result, which he is now president.” 

Well, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs shot back at the Newtster on “Good Morning America”. 


ROBERT GIBBS, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY:  I don‘t even have, quite frankly, George, the slightest idea what he‘s talking about. 

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, ABC ANCHOR:  No idea of what he‘s talking about?  Do you feel it‘s appropriate.  

GIBBS:  I - you know, I think that Newt Gingrich knows that he‘s - he‘s trying to - he‘s trying to appeal to the fringe of people that don‘t believe the president was born in this country. 


SCHULTZ:  Well, he‘s trying to out-Palin Palin.  He‘s going hard right is what he‘s doing.  Newt is pandering to the birthers.  And if you don‘t believe me, call your local school district tomorrow because, really, this is the kind of stuff that has planted the seed across this country. 

For the second straight year, crazy parents, teachers and superintendents are trying to prevent America‘s schoolchildren from watching President Obama‘s back-to-school speech tomorrow at noon from Philadelphia. 

This is the kind of damage that the people like Newt Gingrich have done to this country.  I think it‘s absolutely absurd and outrageous that we are at a point in our country where public educators are questioning whether children should hear what the president of the United States has to talk about.  You know, he might ask them to stay in school, study harder, follow your dreams. 

God forbid that the president of the United States were to inspire some youth in our nation, asking them to live up to their potential.  This is psycho talk.  It‘s unbelievable this is happening in public schools across America. 

Newt has been damaging our nation for decades.  He loves this stuff.  He has never had the shame when it comes to framing the political opponents in the worst possible way.  This is what he‘s all about. 

Let‘s put it into context for just a moment.  THE ED SHOW has obtained a how-to guide Gingrich put out some 20 years ago.  Newt‘s playbook was a 1990 GOPAC memo titled “Language: A Key Mechanism of Control.” 

Now, the memo was distributed to Republican candidates all across America to provide words for framing their Democratic opponents.  Newt told conservatives to use contrasting words like liberal, traitors, corruption, welfare, mandate, shame, disgrace, cheat, steal and taxes.  Well, the Newtster also informed Republicans to frame their own campaigns with optimistic, positive words like share, control, moral courage, crusade, freedom, liberty. 

You know, this is kind of the same garbage we‘re hearing today, isn‘t it? 

Now, Gingrich is an unguided missile, in my opinion, who has always wanted to destroy anyone that stands in his way to get to the White House.  The way he thinks and the way he and his disciples speak has done, I think, irreversible damage to a lot of low-information voters in this great nation. 

And I can‘t believe it‘s 2010, and we have a black president in power in this country, in the White House, in the Oval Office, there are Americans who feel so threatened by our commander in chief that they don‘t want to - their kids to hear a welcome back-to-school speech? 

Think about that.  This is what—what happened in maybe some other country, isn‘t it?  No.  It‘s right here in America. 

Any superintendent who doesn‘t have the guts to stand up and realize that the president of the United States is not going to go off message on some political rant tomorrow.  He is going to talk about education, just like he did last year.  But the fear merchants out there who pay attention to the Newt Gingriches of the world have given us this type of product in this country. 

Get your cell phones out, folks.  I want to know what you think about all of this.  Tonight‘s text survey question is, do you think Newt Gingrich actually believes the things he says?

Text “A” for yes, text “B” for no to 622-639.  We‘ll bring you the results later on in the show. 

Joining me now is Maryland Congressman Chris Van Hollen, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.  Chris, good to have you with us tonight.  

REP. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN (D), DCCC CHAIRMAN:  Good to be with you, Ed.

SCHULTZ:  Is Gingrich the threat in all of this or - or is this just where Republicans are?  This is about as right-wing a stuff as we‘ve ever heard, talking about a Kenyan worldview, and of course the trickle down is the fear that we see in our public school system.  What do you think? 

VAN HOLLEN:  Well, that‘s right, Ed.  Look, the only silver lining here is that Newt Gingrich is reminding the American people about what kind of Congressional leadership they got last time they put the Republicans in control. 

After all, it was Newt Gingrich that tried to shut down the government, which meant that we couldn‘t sent out the social security checks.  People were scared they weren‘t going to get their Medicare payments.  And Newt Gingrich was the guy in charge. 

Well, this will hopefully focus American‘s attention on exactly what will happen if you put the Washington Republican leadership back in charge.  You‘re going to get more the same.  You‘re going to get the same old economic policies that we got for eight years under the Bush administration, and you‘ll get the same kind of rhetoric and constant investigations that you got under Gingrich instead of focusing on the country‘s problems. 

SCHULTZ:  What about their strategy on the right?  Early 2009, the first guy to come out and take a swipe at President Obama was Dick Cheney, and that went on for about four, five months.  And then it was kind of transferred over to the Senator from South Carolina, who gave us the Waterloo comment.  And then of course it was “No” agenda to everything that the Democrats and the majority has proposed, and you know, led by President Obama. 

So now we have got - Cheney‘s pretty much out the mix.  Here comes Newt with some of the most radical stuff we‘ve ever heard.  Is this a reflection of the Republican Party?  

VAN HOLLEN:  Oh, I - I think that it is.  I mean, look, we all know that they‘ve moved very far to the right.  I mean, the strange thing is that they said to the American people, they‘re trying to say to the American people, look, we learn from their mistakes, but what we‘re hearing is that they‘re even farther out of touch, they‘re even farther out of mainstream than they were before. 

I mean, this is really some wacky stuff, as you pointed out.  And they plan to translate that stuff into policies that are going to affect the lives of the American people.  And, look, when it comes to jobs, we‘ve been fighting very hard to shut down these perverse loopholes that reward American companies that ship jobs overseas. 

They‘re saying, no, let‘s keep those jobs on, and they‘ve got these third party groups like Americans for Prosperity who only care about their own prosperity, their own special interests, who are fighting this. 

People need to understand, there is a reason these third-party groups are spending millions and millions of dollars to try and defeat Democratic candidates.  It‘s because they liked the economic agenda they got under George Bush.  They liked what they got under Newt Gingrich. 

So beware, this is an early indication, what Newt‘s telling us, of - of where they would take the country.  

SCHULTZ:  Do you think the president should respond to this comment of a Kenyan world view? 

VAN HOLLEN:  Well, I agree with Robert Gibbs.  It is just so far out

there -

SCHULTZ:  It‘s kind of psycho talk, isn‘t it? 

VAN HOLLEN:  It‘s psychobabble, and, you know, I think that if you just let it sit out there, the American people will see it as such.  And so I don‘t think it is useful to get into a debate with Gingrich when he - when he throws that kind of stuff out there.  I really think that people will see if for what it is, and, again, remind them of what they got the last time they had the Republicans in charge of Congress.

They got Newt Gingrich, and then they got eight years of policies that -

working with George Bush gave us an economy that ended up losing over

600,000 jobs after eight years, having absolutely no -


VAN HOLLEN:  -- well, flat incomes and a big effort to privatize social security, which is what they intend to try to do again. 

SCHULTZ:  There‘s no doubt. 

VAN HOLLEN:  So, look, this is - this is all a flashback, and, again, the only good news in this is that it‘s a clear reminder to people, beware what you do, and beware because these guys are telling you exactly what they‘re planning to do, and it‘s not a pretty picture.  

SCHULTZ:  Congressman, good to have you with us tonight.  Thanks so much. 

VAN HOLLEN:  Good to be with you.  Thanks, Ed. 

SCHULTZ:  For more on this subject of Newt Gingrich, let‘s bring in David Frum, a former Bush economic speechwriter and founder of 

David, I guess - maybe I haven‘t paid enough attention to Newt Gingrich.  This is as right wing as he‘s ever been, and it‘s - and it‘s almost race-baiting.  Your thoughts on this.  

DAVID FRUM, FORMER BUSH SPEECHWRITER:  Well, I‘m very disturbed by it.  Look, there are - for Republicans, there are a lot of reasons to vote Republican in November, a lot of reasons to vote against this administration and this Congressional majority.  They spend too much, they regulate too much, and soon they‘ll tax too much. 

And that is a message that should be available to, accepted by every community in America - black and brown, people of - of color of every kind, to gay people, to young people.  That is - there‘s a powerful constituency for economic freedom.  

SCHULTZ:  Why is Newt so radical? 

FRUM:  And what we are getting instead is a message that is racially coated. 


FRUM:  Newt has—Newt Gingrich - Newt Gingrich has not been through

his career a radical person.  In the 1990s, he was a consensus-builder.  In

2000 - in the 2000s, he was an environmentalist.  He worked with Hillary

Clinton on health care.  He worked with Al Sharpton -

SCHULTZ:  So where‘s this coming from? 

FRUM:  -- of all people, on education.  Well, he—

SCHULTZ:  So where is this coming from? 

FRUM:  This is coming from the climactic shift within the Republican Party that has made it—Newt Gingrich is running for president in 2010, so is Mitt Romney, so is Sarah Palin, so are others. 

Mitt Romney will speak for the business community, for traditional

Republicans.  Newt Gingrich wants to make sure that he is the standard

bearer for the most conservative people in the party.  And so this -

SCHULTZ:  So is he out - so is he trying to out-Palin Palin? 

FRUM:  He has already succeeded in out-Palining Palin, and it is a shame because Newt Gingrich could be a candidate of ideas.  He has - his thoughts on health care are very powerful, and he could talk about that.  

SCHULTZ:  Well, you know, the Bush administration, the Bush years, they, you know, did the freedom thing, did the security thing.  I think did their share of fear mongering, of course, pushed for the tax cuts and conservatives on the Supreme Court, but I don‘t remember the Republican Party going down this road. 

And - and you wrote this.  Rush Limbaugh has been claiming for almost two years that President Obama is bent upon “redistribution” and “reparations.”  Gingrich has now stepped up to suggest that this redistribution is motivate by anti-white radical revenge.  

FRUM:  Racial revenge. 

Well the point of the story in “Forbes” magazine that Newt Gingrich was citing said that President Obama was motivated by the ideology of a Luo tribesman.  Now, Walter Mondale, who is impeccably Northern European, was a big believer in government, and Ted Kennedy, who is impeccably Northern European, was a big believer in government.  And that‘s not my view, but I don‘t see a lot of the difference in the way that Barack Obama thinks and the way that Walter Mondale thinks. 

So we don‘t have to bring Kenya into it.  We don‘t have to bring the Luo tribe, whoever they are, into this.  We don‘t have to bring a father who abandoned Barack Obama and who he wrote a very eloquent book about wrestling with his very unhappy feeling about into this, in order to say we‘re for liberty and they‘re for regulation. 

And liberty is a message that appeals to people of all races.  

SCHULTZ:  So this - so this is a dangerous path, in your opinion, that the Republican Party is taking right now? 

FRUM:  In the short term, it‘s maybe a profitable path, because the electorate that comes out November will be older.  It will be whiter than the country as a whole.  


FRUM:  But there will be other elections in which more people take part, and there‘s a long future, and we want a Republican Party that can appeal to the future majority, not just the old majority.  

SCHULTZ:  And 31 percent of Republicans believe that President Obama is Muslim.  These are - this was from a Pew poll from August.  Just amazing. 

Well it‘s a new Newt Gingrich.  Very radical.  And I - I sense that, you know, he knows he‘s not going to get the nomination so he‘ll just take this wing in the party and do the best that he can.  What do you think? 

FRUM:  I don‘t think that he believes that. 


FRUM:  I think he believes that he will get the nomination and this is part of - of the strategy.  And I don‘t know why we can‘t attack the president as a spender, a taxer and a regulator.  

SCHULTZ:  All right.  David, good to have you with us.   Thanks so much.  

FRUM:  Thank you. 

SCHULTZ:  Coming up, the Tan Man is peeling.  Boehner‘s feeling the heat, so he has decided to care about the middle class all of a sudden.  I‘m not buying it. 

House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn isn‘t either.  He‘ll lump him up, coming up in “The Battleground” segment tonight.  

And the Beckster stretches fear mongering to the limit.  The false prophet says violence is coming from the left.  What a load of garbage this guy is selling now. 

All that, plus the imam slams Caribou Barbie, and one of the kids from “FOX & Friends” lands on “The Zone” tonight. 

You‘re watching THE ED SHOW on MSNBC.  Stay with us. 


SCHULTZ:   Up next, President Obama‘s brand new economic honcho has been quick to paint an ugly picture on jobs.  He says that the unemployment rate isn‘t going down anytime soon.  My message to him is, buddy, stop talking and start acting. 

Senator Debbie Stabenow is on a mission to bring jobs back.  She‘s got good and bad news when we come back on THE ED SHOW.  Stay with us. 


SCHULTZ:  Welcome back to THE ED SHOW and thanks for watching tonight. 

There‘s a shocking number out there today that shows just what the stakes are in November.  One in seven people in America is living in poverty.  That‘s what the census workers found out when they went and took the pulse of the country.  The White House is already bracing for a bad fall. 

Here is Austan Goolsbee, the president‘s new selection to head up the Council of Economic Advisers talking about unemployment.  


AUSTAN GOOLSBEE, CHAIR OF COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS:  It‘s going to stay high.  This recession is the deepest in our lifetimes, the deepest since 1929.

More than eight million people lost their jobs.  It‘s going to take a significant push on our part and time before that comes down.  I don‘t anticipate it coming down rapidly.  


SCHULTZ:  Bottom line, Americans are hurting.  They need help.  We can‘t put this country in the hands of the lunatic fringe on the Right. 

Today the AFL-CIO launched a campaign calling out Sarah Palin and the Tea Partiers like Ron Paul and also - Rand Paul, should I say, and also Sharron Angle for thumbing their noses at American workers by attacking unemployment benefits and unions. 

For more, let‘s bring in Michigan Senator Debbie Stabenow.  Well, the war of words is definitely on, senator. 


SCHULTZ:  You know, the union is being aggressive.  They have sent out a mailer of some two million, and basically they‘re attacking Sharron Angle and some of these other Right wingers, tea partiers. 

How do you know Sharron Angle will be bad for Nevada workers?  Let her

tell you yourself, as your U.S. senator, she was quoted as saying, “I‘m not

in the business of creating jobs.”  She said that back on May 14th -

STABENOW:  Right. 

SCHULTZ:  -- of this year.  What‘s your take on -

STABENOW:  Right.  

SCHULTZ:  -- all of this, and will it be effective? 

STABENOW:  Well, I think the most important thing, Ed, is that we tell the story about who these candidates are and what they believe and then when we talk about the Republican economic policies, it‘s not just the past, it‘s the president - the present.  It‘s what we fight every day on the Senate floor and it‘s the future.  It‘s where they want to go. 

You know, we spent eight years digging this huge hole.  We‘ve had 18 months to begin to climb out of it.  But these guys are now saying, for instance, oh, we should continue tax cuts for the wealthy.  Where are the jobs?  We had - we had 10 years of tax cuts for the wealthy.  Where are the jobs? 

And now we hear from people like Sharron Angle saying that it‘s not her job to focus on jobs.  Well, I can tell you what, Senator Harry Reid believes that it‘s his job.  I just came from a meeting with him where all we‘re doing is talking about jobs.  

SCHULTZ:  Well, let‘s talks about that.  If you just met with him, tell us about the Small Business Bill and getting money to small businesses.  What‘s going to happen? 

Mr. Voinovich from Ohio is saying that he will come over and vote with the Democrats on this.  Will this give you the 60 for this bill this week? 

STABENOW:  It will.  Ed, this is good news.  You know, the Republicans have been blocking a bill that‘s been endorsed by over a hundred business organizations.  They‘ve been blocking if now for months. 

And we have Senator Voinovich who‘s joining with us, every Democrat

tomorrow, plus Senator Voinovich will be voting to overcome a filibuster to

help small businesses get loans.  You talk about this all the time.  We

have small businesses hurting.  Most of the jobs that have been lost are

the small business.  This will give them up to $300 billion in loan

capability working with -

SCHULTZ:  Will this turn the numbers around, Senator? 

STABENOW:  -- community. 

SCHULTZ:  I mean, when Christina Roamer was in, she said that unemployment wouldn‘t go below eight percent.  And now Austan Goolsbee comes in, he‘s heading up the team.  He lowers the bar dramatically saying it‘s going to be around for a long time. 

Does that mean that you‘re not going to get Republican help?  What do you think? 

STABENOW:  Well, first of all, the small business bill will help. 

It‘s going to cut small business taxes.  It‘s going to create capital for

loans which are very important.  But, you know what, if they hadn‘t blocked

this and we could have done it -


STABENOW:  -- in June or July or maybe last March, it would have had a lot more affect than in the short run than it‘s going to have. 

SCHULTZ:  But isn‘t the White House moving the goal post a little bit here on unemployment.  

STABENOW:  Well, I think what we‘re finding is that not only given what‘s occurred in the - the policies that we‘re trying to dig our way out of. 


STABENOW:  But the fact that we‘ve had absolutely no support on the other side to be able to move quickly.  I mean, everything is moving so slowly, because everything takes overcoming a filibuster and weeks and weeks and weeks for things that should take days. 

I think because of that it slowed (ph). 

SCHULTZ:  Do your - do your constituents in - Senator, do your constituents in Michigan have the patience? 

STABENOW:  Well, it‘s tough.  You know, it‘s - it‘s very tough.  We‘ve

been hit harder, longer, deeper than any other -


STABENOW:  -- state in Michigan.  But I can tell you this, because of the recovery act today in Michigan, we helped open the first all-American advanced battery manufacturing plant that‘s going to compete with Asia. 

It‘s going to compete with those around the world.  We‘re going to go from

two percent -


STABENOW:  -- of the batteries made in the world to 40 percent in the next five years.  And - and most of those are going to be made in Michigan because of what we have been doing to turn the economy around. 

Is it fast enough? 


STABENOW:  Ed, of course not.  But it is turning around.  

SCHULTZ:  Senator, don‘t forget, the 99-ers.  They‘re still out there. 

STABENOW:  Absolutely not.  

SCHULTZ:  They‘re - they‘re going to be a political force, and they‘re counting on the majority to do something to get the conversation going and moving again in this fall. 

STABENOW:  Absolutely.  

SCHULTZ:  Appreciate - appreciate your time, Senator.  Thank you.  

STABENOW:  Thank you. 

SCHULTZ:  Coming up, one of the wacky “FOX & Friends” across the street says making $250,000 doesn‘t mean that you‘re rich?   Wow, and kill me.  It‘s pay back time.  You‘re in the zone next, big guy. 


SCHULTZ:  And in “Psycho Talk” tonight, Steve Doocy side kick, Brian Kilmeade.  Oh, this morning the kids on “FOX & Friends” were talking about a poll that shows most Americans want to see the Bush tax cuts for the rich expire.  And they were having trouble making it fit into their GOP-approved talking points. 

But Kilmeade - well, he gave it a pretty good shot. 


BRIAN KILMEADE, FOX HOST, FOX & FRIENDS:  The majority of the country, including most independents don‘t mind seeing those tax cuts evaporate for the so-called very rich.  If you make over $250,000 you‘re not very rich. 


SCHULTZ:  Really?  This is another example of how widely out of touch FOX News is with the rest of the country.  They want you to think they‘re speaking for real America, but they have no concept of the regular wage earners in this country. 

You see, only two percent of households make more than $250,000 a year, less than two percent.  The median household income in the United States in 2008, I think that was a Bush year, was a little more than $52,000 a year.  For Kilmeade to say that $250,000 year isn‘t rich, well that is just elitist “Psycho Talk”.  

SCHULTZ:  Coming up, the tan man takes a mulligan on tax cuts and he‘s got the party fuming about it.  House Majority Whip, Jim Clyburn, will be here to tee off on all of that in the battleground. 

And I‘m not done with speaker - the former speaker, the Newtster, Mr.  Immoral, just stooped to a new low.  We‘ll get rapid-fire response on this fraud.  

Plus, the Beckster sees lefty violence in the future.  I wonder if he‘s getting any Intel reports. 

And Republican parents around the country are hiding their kids from the president because he‘s going to speak to them tomorrow in the classroom. 

And the NFL, I think they need to get some new refs. 

You‘re watching THE ED SHOW on MSNBC.  Stay with us. 


SCHULTZ:  Welcome back to THE ED SHOW.  The Battleground story tonight, well the tan man, Mr. Boehner is getting it from all sides after his apparent flip-flop on tax cuts.  After beating the drum about not letting tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans expire, Boehner went on the Sunday shows and said that, well, he would be willing to compromise.  Yes, right. 


REP. JOHN A. BOEHNER ®, OHIO:  At the only option I have, I used to vote for—some of those tax reductions, I‘ll vote for them.  But I‘d been making the point now for months that we need to extend all the current rates for all Americans.  


SCHULTZ:  Uh-oh, Boehner‘s out of family.  Boehner‘s possible compromise on tax cuts, isn‘t sitting very well with republicans.  Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell says, every republican senator will oppose any plan that didn‘t extend the tax cuts for the top two percent, the rich.  That‘s also the view of Boehner‘s number two, Eric Cantor in the house.  The republicans are really back into a corner here.  They have six weeks to get ready for the midterms, threatening to throw the middle class under the bus in defense of tax cuts for the rich.  Does it make sense?  The democrats are looking to expose the republicans‘ true loyalties with this new DNC commercial hitting Boehner. 


ANNOUNCER:  Do you think republicans have no plan for the economy?  It‘s not true.  John Boehner opposes funding for government jobs, jobs for teaches, for cops, for firefighters.  Boehner has a different plan.  Tax cuts for businesses.  Those that shift jobs and profits overseas, saving multinational corporations $10 billion.  So did china, and India and Mexico, Boehner has a message, you‘re welcome.  The Democratic National Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising. 


SCHULTZ:  Joining me now is South Carolina Congressman, Jim Clyburn, the house majority whip.  Congressman, good to you have back with us tonight.  

JAMES CLYBURN (D), HOUSE MAJORITY WHIP:  Well, thank you so much for having me, Ed.  

SCHULTZ:  You bet.  What do you think of Mr. Boehner‘s opening of the door about tax cuts?  That he would actually vote with democrats on this.  

CLYBURN:  Well, I think these are just words.  I learned a long time ago, not to pay a whole lot of attention to what people say.  Watch what they do.  And that is the real test here.  I think that what we‘ve heard from Mr. Boehner for a long, long time now is that they‘ve got a plan for America.  I call it the three hours, they want to repeat, they want to reject, and they want to repeal.  They want to repeal those laws that we‘ve already put into place to close these loopholes so we can create jobs here in America.  They want to reject President Obama‘s middle-class tax cuts.  And they want to repeat the blowing up of deficit which is what we‘re to do if we entries or extend President Bush‘s tax cuts.  Seven hundred billion dollar deficit increase.  That‘s not what the American people want. 

SCHULTZ:  Yes.  

CYBURN:  And so I think, we are not going to let Mr. Boehner hide behind his words.  We‘re going to sign on his actions.  

SCHULTZ:  OK.  Well, the president was in Cleveland just last week. 

Made a strong pitch for tax cuts for middle the middle class.  

CLYBURN:  Absolutely.  

SCHULTZ:  And I kind of sense that maybe the republicans went home and got an earful on this vacation, this working vacation, did some polling and found out that they‘re on the wrong side of the issue.  Maybe they have to give a little bit.  Is this a soft underbelly for them, what do you think?

CLYBURN:  That‘s exactly right.  In fact, I went to Cleveland the day after the president was there.  Went over to Canton, Ohio, Youngstown, Cincinnati, and I can tell you that the president‘s proposals are resonating throughout Ohio, and I really believe that Mr. Boehner, being a representative from Ohio, got an earful and that‘s why we heard what he said on Sunday.  But, still, he is not given up on extending, this tax cut to the upper two percent.  Rather than adopting the president‘s tax cut, which will be for 98 percent of the American people, 97 percent of small businesses, and that‘s the way to go.  Because Moody‘s report—has reported about Bloomberg this morning.  It just told us what happened the last time we did this.  Joe Cirincione (ph) told us that we failed to learn the lessons of our history, we‘re bound to repeat them.  And we seem as if Mr. Boehner has not learned anything from what happened to our economy when we adopted the Bush plan.  

SCHULTZ:  Yes.  

CLYBURN:  The economy went into the ditch.  The deficit blew wide open.  People lost jobs, 8 million jobs were lost.  We are trying to do something to create jobs in this country, put people back to work so they can buy homes, buy automobiles, and help turn the economy which is what we want to do.  Rather than adding to people‘s savings, we want people of the middle income to get back into the business of purchasing.  

SCHULTZ:  Congressman, you say it so well.  I just think the republicans have finally found out, they never had been prioritizing anything for the middle class.  They‘ve gone home.  They‘ve gotten an earful.  And now they‘ve got to jump on the bandwagon in the 11th hour.  The key now I think is going to be for the democrats to make sure that Americans voters aren‘t hood winked by this because they‘re going to turn right around and give the tax breaks to the corporations to outsource the jobs.  Jim, good to have you back with us.  Thanks for joining us. 

CYBURN:  Thank you so much for having me. 

SCHULTZ:  You bet.  

Now let‘s get some rapid-fire response from a panel on these stories. 

Newt Gingrich is feeding the worst of the republican fringe.  The birthers and Beck followers and he slams the president as playing a con to become president. 

The republican running against Nancy Pelosi has a new web video, which casts the speaker as the wicked witch of the west who needs a bucket of freedom thrown on her. 

And the Imam behind the Muslim community center near Ground Zero says that if he had do it all over again, he wouldn‘t.  He blames politics for all of this controversy. 

With us tonight Jack Rice, criminal defense attorney.  And also Ron Christie, republican strategist.  Gentlemen, good to have you with us tonight.  Ron, I‘ll ask you first, what is the mission of Newt Gingrich?  Isn‘t some of this rhetoric over the top?

RON CHRISTIE, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST:  Well I think that Newt Gingrich is a brilliant visionary, he‘s a brilliant idea‘s guy but I don‘t like it when he sees people out there.  Ed, you can laugh all you want but he led the republican ticket over the House for the first time in 50 years.  Look, the most important thing is I think we can all agree that President Obama was born in the United States.  President Obama is American citizen.  I don‘t like those that question the citizenship of this president.  You can disagree with him on policy but he‘s an American and I don‘t like what he had to say this weekend.  

SCHULTZ:  With you saying that, does he have a Kenyan world view?

CHRISTIE:  No, I think that he has a Keynesian world view that you can spin your way out of recession but a Kenyan world view, no, I don‘t think that he does.  

SCHULTZ:  So Newt is wrong on your opinion on that.  

CHRISTIE:  I think the speaker should—his disagreement so the president base on policy and not look at his ethnicity or his oration, he‘s an American citizen my dear. 

SCHULTZ:  This is pretty radical stuff, Ron.  I mean this is going in a new direction.  Jack, your thoughts. 

JACK RICE, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY:  Well, I have to agree with you, Ed.  I mean, apparently Gingrich wants to be disparately the panderer in-chief.  I mean why does he just come out and straight away and say it, Obama is black and I‘m a white man.  Vote for me. 

CHRISTIE:  No.  Jack, I have a lot of respect for you. 

RICE:  Oh, please come on, what point do you think here?

CHRISTIE:  Look I have a lot of respect for you but let me say this, I get sick and tired of those on the left, those who say any disagreement with the president you‘re racist.  We know he‘s a black man.  The Americans people vote for—the American people vote for the president, Jack.  

RICE:  Hold on.  Here‘s the difference.  The difference is if we think about people who disagree with Obama, I get that.  You don‘t have to be a racist and disagree with this president, but when you start bringing up the question of him being born in Mombassa, Kenya, again and again and again, when all of the facts are clear, it seems to me, there‘s only one reason that you would do that, it‘s synonymous with racism, it just is.  

CHRISTIE:  I totally disagree with you.  Look, I‘ve known Speaker Gingrich for almost 20 years now.  I know him to be a man of character and principle.  I disagreed with what he say this past weekend but to suggest that the former speaker of the house is trying to say, oh the president of the United States  is black and white, I think is so far out of bounds and so untrue.  This has to stop.  You could disagree with the man on policy. 


SCHULTZ:  I‘m curious.  

CHRISTIE:  But has to stop.  

SCHULTZ:  Gentlemen, I‘m curious, Newt Gingrich calls President Obama a conman in an interview with “The National Review.”  He says, “This is a person who is fundamentally out of touch with how the world works, who happened to have played a wonderful con, as a result, which he is now president.”  What con?  What are we talking about—what‘s he talking about here, Ron?

CHRISTIE:  Well, the president of the United States said that he was going to change the tone of Washington and he was going to bring civility back where the most polarized I think that we‘ve been in the country.  The president said that his stimulus package. 

SCHULTZ:  That‘s his fault?  That‘s president Obama‘s fault.  

CHRISTIE:  Yes, actually, I do think that it‘s President Obama‘s fault.  

SCHULTZ:  Is that before or after the health care meeting?  Come on now, Ron, you‘re being a little tough on the president.  He has reached out time and time again.  

CHRISTIE:  Let me answer you question, Ed.  

SCHULTZ:  All right, all right.  

CHRISTIE:  The fact of the matter is the president of the United States can change the tone, the way that leaders on both sides of the aisle deal with civic disagreements.  I think if you look at President Bush and what we did with No Child Left Behind, he brought Ted Kennedy a very liberal former senator.  He brought George Miller, a former liberal congressman.   


SCHULTZ:  I got what you‘re saying.  So, how should President Obama have responded to Senator DeMint‘s comment over a year ago that if this is his waterloo, if we could break him?  How was the president supposed to—he should have cut off all of the olive branches right there and he didn‘t, you know.  

CHRISTIE:  I would have ignored it.  

SCHULTZ:  You would have ignored it but it was said on the right, Ron. 

It was said on the right, no doubt about it.  

CHRISTIE:  So what, Ed?  So, what?  

SCHULTZ:  Are you talking about a dialogue in Washington?  I want to know, where is the con?  Where was the con?  What was the big con that was committed by President Obama?  And you‘re saying.

CHRISTIE:  The big con was perpetuated—Jack, let me say one thing. 

RICE:  Yes.

CHRISTIE:  The big con that was perpetuated was this president and his economic team, unemployment when he came on office was 6.7 percent.  He said, if he spent nearly a trillion dollars, he‘ll keep it at eight percent, now it‘s at 9.6 percent.  That is a con that‘s disingenuous. 

SCHULTZ:  That‘s not a con.  That‘s a mis-projection.  And the Bush people did it all of the time and you know it.  Jack, you got final comment.

RICE:  Yes, you‘re absolutely right.  At the end of the day, you turned around and blame President Obama for this.  Was his fault too that people were marching up and down in Washington with pictures of President Obama, with mustaches?  That was his problem too, that was his fault?  

CHRISTIE:  They did it to Bush.  

RICE:  Yes, he is the one who changed all this.

CHRISTIE:  Well, all I have to say is both sides need to cut it out.  He‘s an American citizen.  Let‘s finally get to work for the American people.  That‘s what we elected these people to do.  

SCHULTZ:  All right.  Let‘s talk about the Pelosi ad.  Here it is, this is her opponent putting up an ad claiming that she‘s a wicked witch.  Here it is. 


ANNOUNCER:  I wish there was a political party they could vote for with a.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN:  More courage.  

UNIDENTIFIED GIRL:  I don‘t care about political parties.  I just want a home that isn‘t blown away by debt. 

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN:  Hello, my pretty.  I will say you from those evil republicans.  But first, pay $18,000 for my downtown office and go into massive debt.  The Wall Street bailouts and here are my monkeys to make you pay for it all.  

UNIDENTIFIED MAN:  Step back, everyone. 

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN:  Oh, I‘m melting.  

UNIDENTIFIED GIRL:  Thank you for saving us, who are you?  

UNIDENTIFIED MAN:  I‘m John Dennis, I‘m running for Congress.  


SCHULTZ:  Jack Rice, your thoughts on that.  

RICE:  Thank you for saving us.  Yes that‘s right, it was President Obama‘s fault that he didn‘t change the tone in Washington.  Yes, this is reminiscent of what we have seen in the past.  Again, this is that standard personality attack, a character attack that we‘ve seen, rather than saying OK, let‘s dig down to the facts.  Now if that‘s what we‘re talking about, notice that this ad does none of that.  Instead, it goes back to the things we heard before and I guess they‘re pulling them out again because the midterms are here and that‘s what they do.  

SCHULTZ:  Ron is that ad demeaning to women?

CHRISTIE:  Oh, I don‘t think that ad is demeaning to women.  I just think it‘s kind of dumb.  I mean, it‘s funny but I think that you should be campaigning for what you are for rather for what you‘re against.  You should be laying out a positive vision.  

SCHULTZ:  Wait a second.  That‘s what the republicans have been doing for the last three years is basically saying no.  

CHRISTIE:  Give me a break.  I‘m so tired of all the effigies that President Bush that were burned.  That we never heard about anything from the left.  They did it to Dick Cheney, they did it to Dr. Condoleezza Rice.  I‘m saying, the president of the United States needs to lead by example.  His going around in Ohio and saying, people threat him like a dog.  That‘s not presidential.  People want to hear the president talk in very confident tones and he sounds like a very thin-skinned individual.  

SCHULTZ:  Ron, you‘re amazing, sir.  

CHRISTIE:  I‘m sorry.  He is.  


SCHULTZ:  You definitely got it down, Ron.  I‘ll give you credit.  Ron Christie and Jack Rice.  

RICE:  Say it like you mean it.  

SCHULTZ:  Good to you have with us, fellows.  

Coming up, I can‘t believe that there Americans who don‘t want their kids to hear President Obama‘s back-to-school tomorrow speech.  Some conservative nut jobs are raising hell that he‘s going to indoctrinate their kids, my message to them, next in the Playbook.  Stay with us. 


SCHULTZ:  And it‘s not too late to let us know what you think.  Tonight‘s text survey question is, do you think Newt Gingrich actually believes the things he says?  Text A for yes, text B for no to 622-639, results coming up.  Stay with us.


SCHULTZ:  And in my Playbook tonight, President Obama‘s back-to-school speech is coming up tomorrow at noon in Philadelphia.  And I‘m sorry to say, folks across America are still suffering from the effects of righty fear mongering after the president and so concerned about the president indoctrinating students. 

Now in flyover country, let‘s take, for instance in West Fargo, North Dakota.  Parents have to be notified if their kids will be watching the speech and they have to have the option to remove their child from class during the address.  Down in Texas, students, well, they‘ve got to get their parents to sign permission slips to watch President of the United States.  This is absolutely outrageous and ridiculous.  Last year, we saw the same kind of garbage that was thrown out there by the righties that infiltrated into the public schools.  But all the president did was urge students back then to stay in school and work hard. 

There was no pushing of his agenda, no socialist indoctrination, the president of the United States is a prime example of how far you can go if you‘re willing to work hard.  Treating it as a controversial event with an opt out for right-wing wackos, I think is appalling.  I think that the president‘s speech should be mandatory for all students. 

For more, let‘s bring in Jonathan Alter.  MSNBC political analyst, “Newsweek” national affairs columnist.  Jonathan, is this a product of a lot of fear mongering that is taking place surrounding the Obama presidency.  What do you think?  

JONATHAN ALTER, “NEWSWEEK” NATIONAL AFFAIRS COLUMNIST:  No, absolutely.  Look, you could barely understand it last year, I mean, even though it was outrageous then, too.  Because you could argue, OK, maybe some of the far right, you know, believed some of the right-wing propaganda that he would use the occasion to indoctrinate but then as you said, he gave the speech.  It was, stay in school, work hard, follow your dreams.  So they know what the message is, so for them to ban kids from—prevent kids from seeing it this year is triply ridiculous.  Because we know what he‘s going to say.  

SCHULTZ:  We have gutless administrators in my opinion, who don‘t have the guts to stand up, and some school districts across the country, they‘re saying, we‘ll leave it up to the teachers.  Meaning the teachers will make a decision in the classroom whether the presidents going to be seen or not.  The administration gives him no cover whatsoever, no leadership whatsoever.  This is the president talking to kids about bettering themselves and it‘s being—you know.

ALTER:  And a question for every one of those teachers and administrators, did you do the same when George H. W. Bush and Ronald Reagan gave their speeches?  If you‘ve been in the schools long enough.  Did you do the same?  If not, if not—if you didn‘t give parents a chance to opt out, you should be completely ashamed of yourself that you couldn‘t do it in this case.  It‘s basically saying that this president isn‘t legitimate.  That‘s the subtext of this.  That he‘s not really the president.  He‘s the other.  He‘s an alien.  He‘s not our president.  That‘s not the way things are supposed to work in America.  Elections are supposed to have consequences.  People should support their results of the election.  

SCHULTZ:  No doubt.  Jonathan Alter, great to have you with us tonight.  Thanks so much.  

ALTER:  Thanks, Ed.  

SCHULTZ:  Final page on my Playbook tonight.  Yesterday was the NFL‘s kickoff Sunday and there was a few calls that were just—well, they were really bad.  Wrong.  First off, the holding call that cost the cowboys the game last night in my opinion was a bad call, if you know anything about offensive and defensive line technique.  That was a great play by the defensive lineman.  And then the Detroit lions, they got jobbed in the final seconds in Chicago, Calvin Johnson clearly caught this pass, he got both feet—he was palming the  ball, but because of a ridiculous rule, official said that it was not a catch. 

Finally, this is the one that caught my attention.  Michael Vick looked like his old self yesterday.  The Eagles started quarterback went down with an injury.  So Vick played the entire second half against the Packers.  He almost brought the team back.  The team scored 17 points behind him and he had a touchdown, even though the Eagles lost, I think that he should be the start of the rest of the way.  

Up next, Palin and Beck, we‘re warning of danger ahead for America, the biggest danger I see is these two jokers opening up their mouth.  Eric Boehlert of Media Matters blasts off.  This psycho pair next on THE ED SHOW.  Stay with us.


SCHULTZ:  And finally tonight on THE ED SHOW.  Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin have teamed up to instill fear in the hearts of Americans.  After a rally in Alaska on Saturday, they told the crowd that the United States has become complacent since the September 11th attacks.  And on his radio show today, the Beckster kept the fear mongering going.  Listen to this.  


GLENN BECK, FOX NEWS ANCHOR:  Violence will come from the left.  Violence is part of the plan.  There are those people that really want this to collapse and they are planning on violence.  They‘re planning on it.  We‘ve already shown you.  We‘ve already seen it with SEIU. 


SCHULTZ:  This guy is a total meat head, let me tell you.  Let me bring in Eric Boehlert, senior fellow at the Media Matters for America.  I can not believe what this guy is saying. 


SCHULTZ:  This is really over the top in my opinion for a broadcaster to have the privilege and few of us in country do, to go on television, and have a microphone in front of us in an audience and to say that kind of garbage.  This is really a hard turn for Beck, is it not?  

BOEHLERT:  It‘s hard to keep track at this point.  I mean, he‘s been wallowing in this stuff for so long, but you know, he talks about violence is coming from the left.  He might want to check in with the chairman of the Delaware Republican Party who had to leave his house because he received a death threat because someone threatened to put a bullet in his head because he wasn‘t supporting the right wing Tea Party candidate.  You know, we‘ve seen people arrested for these anti-government crusades.  Byron Williams was arrested in California.  He had plans to open fire on this innocuous, progressive institution called the Tides Foundation that Glenn Beck has been demonizing for two years.  So, Byron Williams has decided, he‘s going to put Glenn Beck‘s plan and go kill some people.  You know, in a cop killer in Pittsburgh who ambushed three cops and killed them, his friends told the reporters that he was afraid of Obama was going to take his guns away.  The violence is here and it‘s coming from the right.  

SCHULTZ:  This is Beck again on his radio show today talking about what he told the Alaskans on Saturday. 


BECK:  I said to the Alaskan audience, on Saturday, you are at state rich with natural resources, and of course we‘re not going to exploit them.  But here‘s the bad thing.  If the economy collapses and the United States of America has no money to defend anything, make sure you grab your guns and your knives and your forks and your spoons because the Russians, the Chinese, everyone is coming to Alaska and that‘s not begging for World War III, that‘s called giving you the facts. 


SCHULTZ:  Eric Boehlert on this show, we would call that psycho talk.  

BOEHLERT:  Yes, fear mongering on September 11th.  September 11th is not a day for partisan rallies, and it‘s certainly not a day for paid partisan rallies, Beck and Palin charge people $100, $200.  It‘s a day for national unity and just between Palin and Beck who are now, you know, the face of FOX News, it‘s hard to find a threat of common decency between them.  

SCHULTZ:  Eric, good to have you with us tonight.  I appreciate your time.  Thanks so much.  

BOEHLERT:  Thank you.

SCHULTZ:  Tonight in our telephone survey text question, I asked, do you think Newt Gingrich actually believes the things that he says.  Forty three percent of you said yes, 57 percent of you said no. 

That‘s THE ED SHOW.  I‘m Ed Schultz.  “HARDBALL” with Chris Matthews starts right now in the place for politics, MSNBC.  We‘ll see you back here tomorrow night for THE ED SHOW on MSNBC.



Copyright 2010 CQ-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 CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,

copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>