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

The Ed Show for Thursday, January 10th, 2013

Read the transcript to the Thursday show

January 10, 2013

Guests: Rhonda Bromley, Bill McGee, Sandy Phillips, Lonnie Phillips

ED SCHULTZ, HOST: Good evening, Americans. And welcome to THE ED
SHOW from New York.

We live in a country where a teacher can have a gun in a classroom and
not tell the parents about it? We`re going to do something about that.

This is THE ED SHOW -- let`s get to work.


CAROLYN CAIN, TEACHER: Teachers can carry a firearm. A parent
doesn`t have to know about it.

SCHULTZ (voice-over): Armed teachers. It`s already legal in some
states. And the numbers could start growing. Tonight, we`re getting the
parents` perspective on guns in the classroom.

The NRA refuses any discussion on gun laws.

it`s the end of the discussion. But the public wants us to act.

SCHULTZ: The family of a Colorado shooting victim stands up for

And MC Rove drops some truth.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Doing the dance, the Karl Rove dance. The dancing
and talking, the dancing and talking --

SCHULTZ: Karl Rove blows up the Republican debt ceiling ruse.

Americans living in poverty is at an all-time high. Senator Bernie
Sanders is here with the outrage on inequality.

SCHULTZ: Junior Seau`s test results may finally push the NFL to
address head injuries. We`re taking a look into the findings.

Oscar nominations were released today. But how heavy will politics
weigh with the academy?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They stay here, they will be taken, probably not

SCHULTZ: David Edelstein gives us the scoop.


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

Another group of parents received the terrifying news today when a
shooting erupted at their children`s school. At the exact time, Vice
President Joe Biden was meeting with groups on solutions to gun violence a
gunman opened fire at a high school in Bakersfield, California, about 120
miles northwest of Los Angeles. Police say a 16-year-old shooter was armed
with a shotgun. At least two people were shot, including one student who
was in critical condition.

There is usually an armed police officer at the school. But he was
not there today. The gunman was stopped by a teacher and another adult,
who talked him into giving up his weapon. The shooter is in police

The storm of gun violence in our schools across the country has opened
up a Pandora`s Box. One of the most controversial proposals is to put more
guns in schools. And put them in the hands of teachers. It`s not a
popular idea nationwide, 64 percent of Americans oppose arming our school
teachers. But those who support the idea of making their voices heard.

Last night we spoke with Carolyn Cain, a special education teacher
from Utah who was training to use a firearm, which she plans to carry into
her classroom.


CAIN: It`s not so much I want to carry a gun. I want to have options
for that situation. I think the world is changing. It`s not safe. And we
see these kinds of situations happen over and over.


SCHULTZ: Carolyn Cain lives in a state with the most permissive laws
about guns in schools. In the state of Utah, a person way firearm permit
can carry a gun in a grade school and public colleges. Utah`s firearm laws
prohibit public schools from enforcing any rules about guns.

This means Utah is the only state in the nation requiring schools to
allow firearms. Other states want to follow Utah`s lead. Tennessee
lawmakers plan to introduce a bill to allow secretly armed teachers in

Ohio leaves the decision up to guns -- of guns up to individual school
boards to make that decision. The state`s attorney says schools should
consider arming their staffers.

Texas gun laws allow weapons in public schools if they are approved by
the school district. A small district in Harrold, Texas, has an
undisclosed number of staff members carrying concealed guns.

I asked Carolyn Cain about the concerns people might have when you
start arming teachers.


SCHULTZ: What if you had a parent who objected to it? What position
would that put you in?

CAIN: Well, in the -- in the state of Utah, a parent doesn`t have to
know about it. Teachers can carry a firearm and nobody ever -- they`ve
been doing it for 12 years. I`ve found out more and more about teachers
that do.


SCHULTZ: Teachers in Carolyn Cain`s school who currently carry a
weapon are under no obligation to inform parents.

I asked Carolyn if this could pose a problem.


SCHULTZ: And the parents are dropping their little kids off to a
school, and they don`t know that there is a firearm in the classroom. Do
you think they have a right to know?

CAIN: Not necessarily. Not necessarily.


CAIN: Because I think that firearms are -- what we -- what we do know
is that the bad guys come into schools. What we don`t know -- I mean,
we`re making lots of guesses about what could happen if. And those things
haven`t happened. Like I said, we`ve been able to carry them for 12 years
here in Utah. And I haven`t -- I have not heard them. And they would be
on the news if those things happened.


SCHULTZ: She is torn by the culture of guns in this country. She
wants to do the right thing.

I don`t believe Carolyn Cain is an unreasonable person. And I`m glad
she spoke her mind on this program.

But it is also reasonable to be concerned if your child`s teacher is
carrying a loaded gun and if you don`t know about it.

There is a major disconnect in America between the two sides of the
discussion. We can`t achieve solutions until we figure out how to bridge
the gap.

Get your cell phones out. I want to know what you think.

Tonight`s question was tweeted to us earlier this week by Tommy
Christopher at Mediaite. The question is: would you send your kids to
school with armed teachers? Text A for yes, text B for no, to 622639.

You can always go to our blog at and leave a comment. We
encourage you to do that. We`ll bring you the results later on in the

I am joined tonight by Rhonda Bromley, a spokesperson for the Alpine
School District in Utah. And Bill McGee, he is a parent of four children
in the Alpine School District.

Great to have both of you with us tonight. I appreciate you
contributing in the discussion, which is so very intense in this country
right now.

Rhonda, does your school district stand by the decision of teachers to
carry concealed weapons in the classroom in Utah?

Alpine School District, we follow the state law which states if someone
does have a concealed firearm permit, they are allowed to have a weapon
with them and that does include in their classroom and in the schools.

SCHULTZ: Do a lot of teachers carry, to your knowledge?

BROMLEY: You know, we don`t know because as part of the law they do
need to keep that concealed. And that includes not letting people know at
the school that they have that. It`s not something that administrators
require employees to share that information. It`s not something that the
teachers or the employees should be talking with their students about.

It`s supposed to be concealed. And that includes being physically not
seen by the students, but also, they shouldn`t be talking about it with
people and letting people know they have one.


Bill, as a parent with children in the schools in that district,
what`s your reaction to that?

it. I think that, you know, we`ve really got two approaches here. We can
either arm all of our teachers and bring guns closer to our children, or we
can make laws that remove guns and pull guns further away from kids.

And if a teacher has access to a gun, then children have access to
that gun. And if the children don`t have access to the gun, then what
point is it if the teacher can`t get to it quickly? I mean, it doesn`t
make much sense.

SCHULTZ: How do you -- Bill, how do you feel about not knowing
whether one of your teachers of your kids is packing?

MCGEE: Well, that bothers me a lot. The big challenge I have is that
as much as there is -- I believe probably their heart`s in the right place
and there`s a lot of enthusiasm about solving a problem. They simply don`t
have the training needed to respond to a high-pressure situation in any
kind of meaningful way. And I think if a scenario came up, they`re just
going to compound the problem.

And I would rather my children had a teacher that was focused on
teaching instead of being an armed vigilante.

SCHULTZ: Rhonda, as you stated, the state allows teachers to carry
guns in the school. But from a moral perspective, do you think parents
have a right to know if their children are in a classroom where there is a
gun present?

BROMLEY: Well, obviously, there are different opinions, as you`ve
heard on that. It`s not something that as district officials we`re
promoting and we`re encouraging people to do, but we`re certainly
supporting the state law.

The superintendent in the state of Utah today met with all of the
superintendents in every single district, and this was one of the things
they talked about. And he reminded them of what the law is and what the
expectation is of employees if they do have firearm permits and if they do
have weapons in the schools.

So, it`s something that certainly is being talked about, not just
because of what happened last month or even what happened today in
California. This is something that`s an ongoing conversation in our

SCHULTZ: No doubt.

I want to play another clip with my interview with Carolyn Cain from
last night. Here it is.


SCHULTZ: The polls show that only 27 percent of the people think that
teachers should be armed. That`s a rather low number.

Do you get a sense from your community that that number doesn`t mean
anything, that people are going to go along with this?

CAIN: In my community, yes. And that is one of the reasons I don`t
think it should be a federal issue. That`s why I think it should be up to
local -- local governments and state governments to decide.



SCHULTZ: Bill, I`d like your reaction to that. Do you agree that the
community is OK with this?

MCGEE: No, I don`t. There`s certainly people on all sides of the
issue. But I mean, we`ve had I think a trend toward electing people who
are more extreme in their positions on this and I don`t think they
represent necessarily the average parent who I think would prefer an
environment where their child wasn`t exposed to that kind of risk.

SCHULTZ: Vice President Biden, of course, is working really hard at
this and is meeting with a lot of groups. And speaking of federal law,
would you be more comfortable if this was a federal law that would make it
so that public schools could not have teachers who were armed or do you
believe that should be up to the local districts?

MCGEE: I think this needs to be a national consensus. I think we
need a federal law on that. I don`t -- I don`t believe that -- if you
create anomalous environments where those things are available, you have
too much bleed through. I think we need to have consistency across this.
Parents should feel comfortable regardless of where they live.

SCHULTZ: Rhonda, has there been any student reaction to this? What
is their takeaway, knowing that the teachers in their schools may be
secretly armed?

BROMLEY: Well, I mean, you used the word "secretly." But we do have,
as was mentioned, the law in the entire state of Utah. And the bottom line
is we all have the same goal. We want our kids to be safe in schools. And
we need to work together on that.

As district officials and teachers we do need to work with parents.
We need to work with our local law enforcement officials to -- just to make
sure we`re doing everything that we can to keep our kids safe in schools.

You know, the teacher mentioned that she`s doing this because she
wants to keep her kids safe. There are many, many things that all of us
can do to make sure our kids are safe in schools.

SCHULTZ: But isn`t it you think maybe the responsibility of the
school district to keep the teachers safe as well as the kids?

BROMLEY: Certainly. And like I said, it takes all of us working
together to make sure that happens. We meet with law enforcement officers
every single month to review our procedures, things that prevent things
from happening, but also making sure that if something were to happen not
just with intruder with a gun but, you know, any kind of safety thing --


BROMLEY: That can happen to our students, that we`re prepared to
handle that. But again, working together.

SCHULTZ: And God forbid anything to happen, but what is the
liability? Has this been, you know, played out legally? I mean, has this
been well thought out?

Bill, how do you feel about the liability aspect of this?

MCGEE: I think that`s clearly a big problem. You`ve got a -- let`s
say, God forbid, there`s a scenario where a teacher feels compelled to
defend herself or the children and you`ve got that high pressure
environment, tunnel vision, inability to really use your peripheral vision,
all those things that happen in those kinds of scenarios. And you get
children between that teacher and whatever the perceived threat is.

And I think you`ve got -- you`ve got a huge mess on your hands. The
teachers aren`t prepared. And there`s a huge liability. I mean, and I
don`t want that liability to be like one of my children.

SCHULTZ: Rhonda, what about that? What about teachers not being
prepared? Not being professionally trained to handle a situation that was
just described?

BROMLEY: Before anyone is allowed to have a concealed firearms
permit, they do need to go through training. But Bill is right. Somebody
that isn`t using that expertise every single day like maybe a law
enforcement officer is, that is a concern, and that`s why that`s something
that we`re continually talking about --


BROMLEY: -- with our employees and what the examination is if they do
have a permit.

SCHULTZ: All right. Rhonda Bromley and Bill McGee, I appreciate you
being on THE ED SHOW tonight and contributing to the discussion. I think
it`s discussions like this that we`ve got to have if we`re going to make
any progress in this country.

We need to do the right thing. I think everybody is undoubtedly
tasked with really the responsibility to step forward and lead on this.
And I think that Utah is leading in a different way as far as the
discussion is concerned.

Remember to answer tonight`s question there at the bottom of the
screen. Share your thoughts with us on Twitter @EdShow and on Facebook.
We always want to know what you think.

And coming up, the National Rifle Association promised us a meaningful
conversation about gun laws. Tonight, they`re promising to block any new
legislation. I`ll give you an update on the national debate over guns when
we come back and so much more.

Stay with us.


SCHULTZ: Old friends Karl Rove and Tim Pawlenty want Republicans to
stop playing chicken with the economy by trying to use the debt ceiling as
leverage. I`ll have the details ahead.

And "Zero Dark Thirty" had members of Congress calling for an
investigation. Did the controversy keep the film from receiving more Oscar
nominations? Film critic David Edelstein will weigh in.

Don`t forget, you can listen to my radio show on Sirius XM Radio
channel 127, Monday through Friday, noon to 3:00 p.m.

Share your thoughts with us on Facebook and on Twitter using #EdShow.

We`re coming right back.


SCHULTZ: In all my years involved in these issues, there`s nothing
that has gone to the heart of the matter more than the visual image people
have of little 6-year-old kids riddled, not shot with a stray bullet,
riddled, riddled with bullet holes in their classroom.


SCHULTZ: Thanks for staying with us tonight here on THE ED SHOW.

Vice President Joe Biden wrapped up a series of meetings with dozens
of advocacy groups in the wake of the Newtown school shooting. Biden says
he`ll deliver his report to the president Tuesday. He`s talked with
religious leaders and people in the entertainment industry, including our
parent company, Comcast.

He`s talked to domestic violence experts and children`s health
advocates. He`s met with families and law enforcement and clubs like Ducks
Unlimited. Out of all of those clubs, only one refused to bring any ideas
to the table. Only one is accusing the administration of attack the Second
Amendment. It`s the NRA.


DAVID KEENE, NRA: The administration was able to check the box and
say they talked to the representatives of firearms owners and the groups
that support the Second Amendment, and now, they were going to try to
proceed with what they wanted to do.


SCHULTZ: The NRA is promising to lobby Congress to block any
legislation on guns. They`re offering no compromise. But here are some of
the recommendations the rest of the organizations could agree on in the

Vice President Joe Biden says we could clarify the responsibilities of
gun ownership. We should reconsider restrictions on high-capacity clips
and magazines. We should have universal background checks. That means
every transaction involving a firearm requires a background check.

A lot of Americans aren`t happy with that. People can also buy and
sell guns over the internet without background checks. In fact, only two
states out of 50 require background checks on every firearm transaction.

Bill Clinton was the last president to take on the gun lobby and win.
He got the assault weapons ban passed in 1994. Yesterday, he restated his


BILL CLINTON, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: I grew crew up in the hunting
culture, but this is nuts.


SCHULTZ: This is nuts. We can`t let the NRA block meaningful gun

I`m joined tonight by two parents who are advocating for change.
Sandy and Lonnie Phillips lost their daughter, Jessica Ghawi, in a mass
shooting in Aurora seven months ago.

Jessica was just 24 years old. She wanted to be a sportscaster. So
she moved to Colorado in 2010 to go to metro state, metropolitan state
university in Denver. She survived a mass shooting at a food court in

But she was among the 12 people murdered in the shooting at the movie
theater in Aurora this past July.

Sandy and Lonnie, I want to thank you so much for joining us here this
evening and being a part of the discussion. Lonnie, you met with the
president, with Vice President Biden recently. What did you tell him?

23 groups at that meeting, and I was sitting directly to his left, and he
started to his right. Each member of all the groups that were there, there
were a lot of very astute people, and he listened to each one of them very
carefully and wrote -- made notes. It went around the table. Probably 22
people representing a lot of pro -- they were -- actually, the only person
in that room that got to say anything -- I was the very last one.

And everything was said before it got to me, so I didn`t have a whole
lot to say. So, the only thing I said was in summation, you have a lot of
people here to help you, and they`re willing to help you, and I`m willing
to help you. And what I want to do is keep the American people up front,
interested, passionate about this issue of assault weapons. And I think
that from that meeting that he had with that group of people that it`s
probably going to happen.

SCHULTZ: Sandy, do you feel like something`s going to happen, that
the country is headed for change?

after Newtown. Any country that allows 20 innocent children to be murdered
and does nothing, not the society that I choose to live in.

So we`ve had assurances from the president. We`ve had assurances from
Vice President Biden. We have seen cooperation on the other side of people
who have traditionally not agreed with the exception of the NRA, of course.

SCHULTZ: Do you think that what happened in aurora seven months ago
could have been prevented and your daughter could be alive tonight, Lonnie?

L. PHILLIPS: What happened in Aurora, the same thing happened in the
last three massacres, was done by a person that was mentally challenged and
planned it carefully. He chose a weapon that could do the most damage in
the shortest period of time. He had a clip in that gun which prevented any
reloading, which would prevent anyone from stopping him. So he had -- he
was a very methodical, intelligent person.

And after that happened I don`t think -- nothing could have prevented
that because he bought the weapons with the laws that are in place now. He
legally got the weapon. If we could stop someone like him from purchasing
an assault weapon with a 100-round clip, yes, it could have been prevented.

SCHULTZ: The NRA says the administration isn`t being open-minded.
Sandy, what`s your reaction to that?

S. PHILLIPS: I think the administration is being extremely open-
minded. This is a topic that when you look at NRA`s membership, that 74
percent of their membership wants gun reform, 84 percent of gun owners want
reform. So, I think --

SCHULTZ: Let me ask you that, Sandy. With those numbers what would
you say to lawmakers who are rigid in old-way thinking?

S. PHILLIPS: Well, I think they`re not educating themselves. They`re
not finding out the statistics. They`re not digging deep enough. They`re
not going out to their constituency and asking.

And it is going to take a groundswell of Americans to come forward and
write to their congressmen and their senators and even the president and
say, we`re ready for reform.

Nobody is challenging the Second Amendment. No one. No one. And yet
that`s constantly thrown out there. And I think it`s thrown out there to
scare Americans who are gun owners, like ourselves, to thinking that could
happen or that`s what`s going to happen.

SCHULTZ: So, you don`t want to see anybody lose their firearms?

S. PHILLIPS: Of course not.


S. PHILLIPS: Of course not. I`m a hunter. Or at least I used to be.
Don`t hunt anymore. I`m a former hunter.

We own guns. There are people that use target practice. But there is
no reason to not come to the table and have a discussion that is sensible
and logical and come to an agreement that works for the American public`s

SCHULTZ: And, Sandy, do you think your daughter would be alive
tonight if we`d had different laws on the books? Do you think that could
have been prevented?

S. PHILLIPS: I do. You know, anytime somebody can go on the Internet
and order 6,000 rounds of ammunition and that doesn`t get flagged or
questioned or looked at, yet I can`t go through the airport without
removing my shoes and having body scans and -- you know, it`s almost

SCHULTZ: Sandy and Lonnie Phillips, I appreciate your time tonight.
Thank you for participating in the discussion. Thank you so much.

S. PHILLIPS: Thank you for having us.

SCHULTZ: You bet.

L. PHILLIPS: Thank you.

SCHULTZ: Coming up, Republicans have threatened to hold the debt
ceiling hostage, but as they start to lose the support of some big allies,
I`m calling their bluff.

And later, the battle for the soul of America. Senator Bernie Sanders
is her to talk about income inequality. Will our leaders stand for the
working families in this debt ceiling debate?

You won`t want to miss this. Stay tuned.


SCHULTZ: Since a fiscal cliff deal was reached, Republicans claim to
have leverage in the debt ceiling debate based entirely on their threat of
default. But as the clock counts down, there are calls for the GOP to fall
in line. And the calls are coming from their own side.

For instance, Financial Services Roundtable, which is headed by failed
GOP presidential candidate and former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, and
represents nearly 100 of the largest financial service firms in the country
-- the Roundtable is set to increase pressure on Congress to raise the debt
limit, warning that failure to do so will make the markets go haywire.

Because 2011`s debt ceiling showdown was an expensive game of chicken.
It`s estimated borrowing costs increased by about $1.3 billion in that year
alone, and a total of $19 billion over the next decade. Keep in mind, in
2011 we didn`t even breach the debt ceiling.

Big business, Wall Street, the job creators can`t afford another
round. These reliable Republican allies are saying basically, enough is

Even Karl Rove seems to have recognized Republicans are in a desperate
situation. In his latest "Wall Street Journal" column, he rewrites history
again, claiming Republican leaders never said that they were willing to put
the country into default.

We`re seeing what`s behind the curtain. The debt ceiling does not
give Republicans the leverage they claim to have. In fact, even claiming
leverage seems to have put them in a worse position and made the division
within their own party clearer than ever.

The Tea Party extremists seem willing to commit economic sabotage.
And the more practical business-minded Republicans are doing their very
best to talk them right off the ledge.

There`s a lot more coming up in the next half hour of THE ED SHOW.
Stay with us.

McConnell says revenue is off the table.


issue now. It`s over. It`s behind us.


SCHULTZ: But Bernie Sanders says we`re just getting started. He`s
here on the inequality outrage.

Head injuries plagued Junior Seau`s celebrated football career. Will
the NFL finally act to protect their players?

Oscar season is in full swing. But will controversy rule the awards?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I`m going to break you.


SCHULTZ: David Edelstein gives us the politics.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to THE ED SHOW. 2013, the rich are getting
richer. Nothing changed. The poor are getting poorer. That`s really what
we have talked about on this program and tried to illustrate here on THE ED
SHOW for years. And that is what is really driving the conversation on
Capitol Hill.

And we must challenge our leaders to do something about it. Hold it
right there. There`s this ideological grab that`s taking place in America
right now. And we`re hearing about fiscal cliff and debt ceiling and money
here and there and cuts and what not.

It is about what the Republicans want to take from the lower-income
Americans. That is the issue. And our next guest, Bernie Sanders, wants
action. And so do the American people. I was struck by his essay in the
"Huffington Post." It was titled "the Soul of America." So well put.
Because folks, this is, as I said, an ideological battle. And the deck is
basically stacked against you, if you`re in the middle class or below that.

We`re experiencing more income inequality now than we have during any
time in -- the period of history since 1928. The top one percent owns 42
percent of the country`s financial wealth; one percent of Americans own 42
percent of the country`s wealth. As for the bottom 80 percent, they own
only five percent of the wealth.

Yet despite those kinds of statistics, the Republicans and the big
money donors who back them are aiming for more. We`ve heard all the
rhetoric. We don`t have enough revenue. Well, wait a minute. We`ve got
too much revenue going in. It`s a spending problem. But we all know the
reality of it.

Republican policies have grown our deficit. The deregulation of Wall
Street, the tax breaks for the rich, the wars not being paid for. And now
with a Democrat in the White House, the Republicans have suddenly turned
into what? Hey, they`re deficit hawks and they want to go after the
poorest Americans. They want to attack the very programs that working
families have depended on for generations in this country.

They want to go after the big three. They want to cut food
assistance. They want to cut veterans` programs. They want to cut
anything that helps the folks stay above water, so to speak.

And you know what? As we head into a second administration with
President Obama, our country is at a crossroads. We need I think our
leaders to hold people accountable and to stick up for working families,
the poor and the elderly. They have given enough. We can get more
revenue. We just have to have the guts to do it.

We don`t need our leaders to stand in front of big donors and not have
the guts to make the decisions of what`s right for America. The folks that
have to pay more are the Bush era tax cuts, those recipients, in my
opinion. We can get more out of them. And of course it`s all about the
loopholes, isn`t it?

Well, how are we going to change tax policy in Washington if we can`t
get anything passed in the Senate? The entire lynchpin to the 113th is
going to be what Harry Reid does with changing the rules for the
filibuster. Then we can move to get to these tax loopholes that has helped
the wealthiest Americans in this country. It`s all about ideology. What
do you believe in?

Do you believe that the lower 80 percent of Americans should actually
serve up a little bit more to make this thing right? Because we never paid
for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. We never accounted for the Bush tax
cuts. The recovery measures that were made and the recession that we went
through account for a third of what our financial problems are all about,
which were caused by deregulation on Wall Street.

Can I have two shows tonight?

Joining me now is Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Senator, good to
have you with us tonight. You hit the nail on the head, as you always do.
And I encourage our viewers to go to "Huffington Post" and see what you
have written, see how you have capsulized this.

Are you confident? Are you optimistic that income inequality will be
addressed in a meaningful way during a second term with the Obama

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I), VERMONT: Am I confident? No. Do I believe
that is the moral issue of our time? Yes. Do I believe that that is what
the American people overwhelmingly want? I do. The statistics that you
have brought forth, where you have a handful of people on the top owning
tremendous amounts of wealth, and the vast majority of the American people
owning very little -- and that`s true not only in wealth, it`s true in
terms of income distribution -- is not only morally wrong, Ed. It is very,
very bad economics, because the people at the bottom don`t have money to

We`re not going to create the kinds of jobs this country desperately

Mitch McConnell recently said that revenue is not the issue. He is
absolutely wrong. Revenue is exactly the issue. What the Republicans and,
I have to add, some Democrats want to do is balance the budget by cutting
Social Security, which has nothing to do with deficit reduction. They want
to cut Medicare, Medicaid, nutrition programs. That is their idea of
moving toward deficit reduction.

Meanwhile, one out of four major corporations in this country pays
zero in taxes. We lose 100 billion dollars every single year because
corporate America and wealthy individuals stash their money in the Cayman
Islands and in other tax havens. Corporations today are paying 12 percent
of their profits in taxes, which is the lowest since 1972. In terms of
corporate tax per GDP, we are lower than any other country in the OECD.

SCHULTZ: That is just amazing. That is amazing when you throw these
numbers out. And I think it brings us back to one word, Americans, focus.
You can hear a lot of talk about debt ceiling and deficit reduction. Focus
on the ideology of what has brought us to where we are right now, and an
ideology that has brought us here is not going to fix it in any way, shape,
or form.

Senator, the filibuster. Doesn`t it really start with that? We`ve
really got to get that fixed first.

SANDERS: It is enormously important. We grew up as kids believing
that in America, majority rules. Well, we`ve got 100 senators. You would
think that is that 51 votes would rule, would allow us to pass laws. Since
Obama has been president, the Republicans have used in an unprecedented way
the filibuster to obstruct and to block legislation.

And your point is exactly right. We`re not going to have fairness in
our policies. We`re not going to have progressive tax reform. We`re not
going to have campaign finance reform unless majority rules in the Senate.
And that takes us to filibuster reform. And we have got to pass that.

SCHULTZ: And there`s no sense for the Republicans -- I`m imagining
what they`re talking about in their caucus. Why in the world should they
start identifying loopholes? Because we`re going to filibuster the thing
anyway. We`re never going to be forced to show what we think loopholes
ought to be closed as far as getting more tax revenue into the system.

So they are doing a real classic move here of protecting the
corporations and protecting the wealthy.

Now, another subject I want to bring up with you, senator, tonight --
today you came up against the president`s nominee for Treasury secretary,
Jack Lew. Why did you do that?

SANDERS: Well, Jack is a decent guy. He`s a smart guy. He`s been in
public service for a long time. But frankly, I am really tired of the
president -- and I support the president -- continuing to appoint folks who
come from Wall Street. We need people at the -- in the Treasury
Department, secretary of Treasury, who are going to have the guts to stand
up to Wall Street, to ask why we are not, for example, breaking up the six
largest financial institutions, Ed, that have assets equivalent to two
thirds of the GDP of the United States, to ask questions about how we got
into this recession in the first place, which has everything to do with the
greed and recklessness and illegal behavior on Wall Street.

To ask why it is there are people watching the show paying 25 percent
interest rates on their credit cards. Those are my concerns. We need
somebody at the Department of Treasury who`s going to have the guts to take
on Wall Street and not simply come from Wall Street.

SCHULTZ: Senator, great to have you with us tonight. Obviously,
we`ll do it again. I appreciate it so much. Senator Bernie Sanders with
us here on THE ED SHOW.

Coming up, new details in the death of legendary NFL linebacker Junior
Seau. The NFL has a major problem on its hands. There is no question
about that. We`ll bring you the details. Stay with us.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to THE ED SHOW. Earlier today James Yeager, a
Tennessee firearms instructor, posted a video on Youtube in response to
reports that President Obama might use executive orders to change gun laws
in America. In the video, Mr. Yeager said that he is prepared to start
killing people if that happens.

He also advised others to get armed and be prepared. After that video
drew attention on the Internet, he posted another one, walking back some of
those statements. Here`s part of what he had to say.


committing any kind of felonies up to and including aggravated assaults or
murders, unless it`s necessary. Right now, it is not necessary.


SCHULTZ: The rhetoric is hot, and the conversation is hot across
America. And during our show tonight, Mr. Yeager contacted us and agreed
to come on this program tomorrow night to share his views.

Still to come, "Lincoln" leads the pack in Oscar nominations while
some other major movies were snubbed. I`ll ask film critic David Edelstein
if politics played a role in the nomination process. Stay with us.


SCHULTZ: Some football fans were upset with Washington Redskins head
coach Mike Shanahan this week. He decided to leave his star quarterback
Robert Griffin III in Sunday`s game following a knee injury. Griffin re-
injured his knee later in the game and was forced to have surgery on
Wednesday. He will heal. Knee injuries can be devastating to any NFL
player, but traumatic brain injury can be life-threatening.

Tonight there are new details in the death of legendary NFL linebacker
Junior Seau. When Seau ended his life last year, he was suffering from a
brain condition known as CTE. Seau`s family donated his brain to the
National Institute of Health, which released a blind study earlier today.
CTE is a brain disease associated with athletes who take frequent hits to
the head.

Over time, these hits cause the brain to build up abnormal proteins.
Symptoms of CTE include memory loss, impaired judgment, aggression,
depression, and eventually dementia. Junior Seau was known for his hard-
hitting style during his 19-year career in the National Football League.
And there`s very little doubt it played a direct role in his condition.

Researchers at Boston University pioneered the study of CTE. They
found the disease in 18 out of 19 brains of former NFL players they
examined. Currently, there is no study linking CTE to suicide. But
unfortunately, six NFL players have ended their lives in the last two years

The facts are clear. CTE is a dangerous disease affecting NFL
players. Every year, players get bigger. They get faster. They hit
harder and their equipment -- their technology and equipment is hard to
keep pace with the game.

The NFL needs to take meaningful action to prevent CTE in its players.
Junior Seau had a terrific career and will go down as one of the greatest
linebackers of all time. It`s important we learn from his death to prevent
further tragedies in the future.

Tonight in our survey, I asked you would you send your kids to school
with armed teachers? Twelve percent of you say yes; 88 percent of you say

Coming up, the Oscar nominations are out, and controversy is abound.
Film critic David Edelstein joins me. Stay with us.


SCHULTZ: And in the Big Finish tonight, the Oscars recognize some of
the biggest political movies to come out in a long time, but also snubbed a
few of them as well. "Lincoln" took the most nominations, including best
picture, best director, and multiple acting nominations. The Steven
Spielberg film was a fascinating look into the political deal making that
took place to abolish slavery in this country.

"Zero Dark Thirty," a film about the 10-year manhunt for Osama bin
Laden, got a mixed message from the Academy. It was nominated for best
picture but not best director. The movie`s portrayal of torture generated
controversy. Documents released last year show top CIA officials,
including acting CIA Chief Michael Morel, helped the filmmakers.

Now the Senate Intelligence Committee, led by Senator Dianne Feinstein
of California and backed by John McCain of Arizona, wants to know if there
was inappropriate access to classified information. The committee also
wants to know if CIA personnel are responsible for the film`s portrayal of

It`s not every day a film sparks a Senate investigation.

Joining me tonight to talk about it all is David Edelstein, chief film
critic for the "New York Magazine." Great to have you with us.


SCHULTZ: I want to talk about "Lincoln" first because I went to it
twice, because I love history. But I knew I had missed a lot. It is --
every word, every sentence is so meaningful. I was so impacted by the
second time I saw it. Does controversy affect whether films are recognized
politically -- political controversy, social change --

EDELSTEIN: Absolutely. It`s more satisfying to talk about the Oscars
in terms of their politics and the politics of the voters than it is to
talk about them artistically, because often it`s not a measure of artistry.
Sometimes it is. It`s a measure of what will represent the Academy best,
noblest, if you will.

And "Lincoln" really hit the sweet spot, because not only is it a
celebration of arguably our greatest president, but it`s also at the same
time kind of an exhortation to President Obama, who`s very popular out in
Hollywood, to get down off his pedestal and mix it up with a violently
divided Congress. In other words, it said, listen, if Lincoln could
cajole, could bribe, could threaten, then you sure as heck could get in
there and do the same thing if you want to move that legislation.

SCHULTZ: Ironic timing. Congress can`t get along here, but they
found a way to move back in the days of tremendous controversy. How good
is "Lincoln" the movie as opposed to some epic movies that have been out
there? I mean, I feel like I really saw one for the archives.

EDELSTEIN: Well, it`s an extraordinarily tight focused movie. You
don`t often see a film basically about a piece of legislation passing from
level to level. It`s very beautifully worked out. It opens with Lincoln,
as I said, almost like I said like the Lincoln Memorial. But then he
realizes he has a job to do. Blacks are not equal under the law.

I never knew -- I thought I was a great student of American history.
I didn`t know that the Emancipation Proclamation didn`t end slavery, that
it was an executive order during a time of war. And so the movie takes you
through that process in a way that`s very finely tuned, very unusual for an

SCHULTZ: What about "Zero Dark Thirty"? The director was not --
there`s a controversy surrounding that. Does it have an effect on --

EDELSTEIN: Absolutely, it does. Absolutely. The criticisms from
pundits, from politicians, from people like me -- I thought it was an
exceptionally made movie, phenomenally made. At the same time, there is no
ambiguity in the film that it says that enhanced or extreme interrogation,
AKA torture, led to the name of the courier who would lead down the road to
Osama bin Laden.

It said torture worked. And Katherine Bigelow, the director, has
said, well, depiction is not endorsement, to which I say yes and no.
Because the context of that depiction matters. And in the context of the
film, there is no question.

SCHULTZ: Any of the nominations surprise you? Maybe something that
was left out.

EDELSTEIN: Well, I was gob smacked. I was flummoxed that Ben Affleck
wasn`t nominated. He`s such a golden boy for "Argo," a movie that almost
everyone likes, though maybe nobody loves. "Silver Linings Playbook" got a
lot of -- the non-political movie got a lot of nominations, I think
probably because everybody in Hollywood -- every other person has either
been hospitalized for depression, addiction, or bipolar illness. So they
find it very easy -- the shocks of recognition in that case may literally
be electric shocks.

SCHULTZ: OK. David Edelstein, great to have you with us.

EDELSTEIN: Thank you so much.

SCHULTZ: Thank you so much. And that is THE ED SHOW. I`m Ed
Schultz. "THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW" starts now.


Copyright 2013 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.>