Skip to main content

tv   The Rachel Maddow Show  MSNBC  May 18, 2011 4:00am-5:00am EDT

4:00 am
>> attorney jeffrey shapiro thanks for joining us. >> thanks for having me. you can have the last word on our blog and you can follow our tweets. good evening, thank you. thanks to you at home for staying with us for the next hour. right after osama bin laden was killed by u.s. navy s.e.a.l.s in pakistan on may 1st, in the 72 hours that followed that mission, there was an immediate flurry of sometimes contradictory, often vaguely sourced supposed details about how that raid went down. once those details were exposed as sometimes contradictory and often vaguely sourced, the open spigot of bin laden raid details was turned off.ç the white house shut down in providing new details about the raid. no more step by step accounts of what's happened. that's how it's been until now. now 2002 weeks after the self-imposed cone of silence period, we are starting to get a
4:01 am
first round of fresh reporting about the raid for the first time in a couple of weeks. some of the details that are being provided today by unnamed officials who spoke to the associated press, some of these details if they're true, they materially change what had been our previous understanding of how the mission uneld {toled. the associates press reporting in remarkable detail about the exact confrontation between the navy s.e.a.l.s and bin laden personally. according to these official it was three navy s.e.a.l.s who reached the top floor of the bin laden compound. then they immediately spotted bin laden himself at the end of a hallway. when bin laden is all the s.e.a.l.s he ducked into his bedroom. those three s.e.a.l.s then chased bin lad sboon the bedroom. they found him there and found two women standing in front of him.
4:02 am
one of the s.e.a.l.s grabbed the two women and shoved them away from bin laden. one of the other two s.e.a.l.s in the room then opened fire and killed bin laden. shooting him once in the chest and once in the head. as they were clearing the room, the s.e.a.l.s then reportedly found two weapons an ak-47 and a russian-made pistol. they were reportedly sitting on a shelf next the door the s.e.a.l.s had gone through in there's been some confusion about the code word that was used in the mission geronimo. according to some early reports geronimo had been the code name for bin laden himself. according to other reports geronimo was the signal, the code word for the overall mission itself.
4:03 am
according to this new report out today, it was neither. the a.p. reporting it was not bin laden's code name, but rather a representation of the letter g. each step of the mission was labeled alphabetically. jerron me meant that the raiders reached step g, which was the killing or capture of bin laden. one of the things that has happened domestically since osama bin laden was killed is there's an effort on the political right in this country to try to blunt any political benefit that president obama might get from the death of bin laden. by instead trying to transfer credit for bin laden's death retroactively to george w. bush. specifically to achieve maximum leverage. the effort to credit bush administration policies that were ended by president obama. this effort on the right has been led by elected republicans particularly by congressman peter king of new york who has been proclaiming since essentially the first minute we knew anything about this raid that the form of torture known as water dgs boarding specifically brought us to osama bin laden. it is a charge that has been echoed enthusiastically by many conservative figures in the media.
4:04 am
>> without enhanced interrogation, without rendition, without black sites this date would not have been possible. if we want more successful days like this, we must argue that the obama policies were wrong and the bush policies were right. >> we must argue. that should blunt any political impact this might have for president obama. former bush administration attorney general has been banging this particular drum alongside fox news personalities like many hannity. he asserts in "the wall street journal" that there was a quoteç waterboarding trail to bin laden. in fact, lfs not. whatever he or any fox news personality or any former bush administration officials might have con injured what he is asserting about the waterboarding trail to bin laden is not true. we know that's not true from people who are actually you been like him no a position to know. the director of the cia leon panetta confirming in a letter that torture did not lead
4:05 am
directly to the killing of osama bin laden. mr. panetta telling senator john mccain in this letter quote, we first learned about the courier from a detainee not in cia custody in 2002. it's important to note that some detainees attempted to provide false or misleading information about the courier. senator john mccain again the recipient of this letter from the cia, senator john mccain who was tortured who had information extracted by him by torture when he was held as a prisoner of war in vietnam, senator john mccain has taken it upon himself to debunk right-wing claims about torture leading to osama bin laden's death. senator mccain giving an emoccupationed 20-minute speech on the senate floor attempts to correct the record. >> many advocates of this techniques have asserted their use on terrorists in our custody particularly khalid sheik mohammed led to bin laden.
4:06 am
that was not true. i hope former attorney general mu casey will correct his misstatement. >> for anybody interested in dealing with fact when it comes to this debate, this as a fact yal matter is settled. the question of torture specifically waterboarding was ç the thing that led to osama bin laden's death it's one of those things donald rumsfeld used to call a known known. whatever hypothetical debate you want to have about torture, about whether you like president bush or president obama better and their approach to prisoners and the law and interrogation, this is not a hypothetical. this is a knowable and known thing. torture didn't lead to bin laden. but with republican presidential
4:07 am
candidates starting to jockey for position desperate to press any advantage over president obama, the fact that the torture led to bin laden fox news hypothesis has been debunked is not stopping the assertion on the right for political gain. and that today has made something amazing happen. that has led one republican presidential contenders a former republican senator to do something that he -- i have to believe, i have to believe he must regret. it is not possible that he does not regret this. it is not possible that he will not apologize for having done this. as a "princess bride" fan, i use this world with reservation, but . >> i was very skeptical, i didn't want to be a part of anything i didn't beli mccain's views on torture as
4:08 am
they relate to osama bin laden. quote, he doesn't understand how enhanced interrogation works. i mean, you break somebody and after they're broken, they become cooperative. that's when we got this information. and one thing led to another and led to another and that's how we ended up with bin laden. a, not true. b, what? quoting again from this interview, hugh huet says, yourç former colleague john mccain said, look, there's no record. there's no evidence that these methods led to the capturing and killing of bin laden. rick santorum, i don't. he doesn't understand how enhanced interrogation works. rick santorum says john mccain does not understand torture the way that rick santorum does. we called rick stan tomorrow's campaign tonight mostly because i felt dumb. like i missed something. clearly the apology must have been posted somewhere and i just couldn't find it.
4:09 am
granted it is hard to google anything about rick santorum. particularly from your work come computer. we called rick santorum's campaign fully expecting to be directed to what must have been his apology for saying that john mccain doesn't understand torture the way he does. the way rick santorum does. we called his campaign fully expecting it to be faxed right over. we have not heard back from mr. santorum's campaign. as far as we can tell there has of yet been no apology. again for rick santorum saying that john mccain doesn't understand torture. rick santorum has not apologized for that. which i think is impossible. joining us now is michael is cough nbc's national investigative correspondent and a person who is much more level headed about everything than i am and i'm happy to talk to him. thanks for joining us. >> good to be with you, rachel. >> i do not know if rick santorum makes apologies. so who knows what happens to him here.
4:10 am
if torture is going to be back as a point of debate in presidential politics, how do you match rick santorum's argument about breaking someone with torture to what we know about the facts here? >> well, look, santorum's argument is sort of the secondary argument that's been made by defenders of waterboarding trying to use theç bin laden facts for political advantage here. the original contention in the first few days after the raid made by others was that the first information about the courier that led to bin laden came from khalid sheik mohammed after he was waterboarded. the u.s. intelligence community can't have been more explicit about is wrong. in fact, what happens is they got the information about the courier from others. and then when they confronted
4:11 am
khalid sheik mohammed after he was waterboarded 183 times in march of 2003, he provided false information. he misled the cia. he told them that this courier was retired. that he was insignificant. that he was in a different city than where he actually was. and all that sort of led the cia down the wrong path. now, it's almost become a sort of heads i win, tails you lose argument. in the initial contention is khalid sheik mohammed provided truthful information that led to the identification of the courier. now after it's clear that he provided false information, the defenders of waterboarding are saying, well, the false information allowed the cia to compare that with information from other sources and that led them on the trail to the courier. it really doesn't matter what the waterboarding produced. the argument is we waterboarded
4:12 am
and ere go and seven years later, eight years later we found bin laden, ere go there must be a connection. in fact what panetta and others are saying there really is a very small connection between the two events. >> in terms of the new details on the bin laden raid after a couple of weeks of nothing ç particularly from the white house on this, how much of a grain of salt are you taking these new details with, given how much contradictory information we've gotten. >> i think we're going to be getting lots more details and the story's going to evolve and change. it's already changed so many times in just the last two weeks. look at the events of 9/11 and it took a 9/11 commission before we got something like a settled story and that was, you know, three years after the event. so, we haven't heard from the
4:13 am
navy s.e.a.l.s directly. we haven't heard from the people who were there. we're getting filtered accounts through multiple secondary sources. you know, i'm going to reserve judgment until we can talk to the people who are actually there, if we ever get that chance. >> thanks very much for your time, mike. >> thank you. so do you remember the movie "war games." matthew broderick almost starts a nuclear war by playing a come computer game. the big final lesson was is the only winning move is not to play. remember that? >> the only winning move is not to play. >> turns out that was 1983's best metaphor for how republican politicians should answer when they're asked about the paul ryan kill medicare thing this year. that story's ahead.
4:14 am
ask me.
4:15 am
4:16 am
at a book signing in minneapolis tonight, republican presidential candidate newt gingrich was not, i repeat not hit in the face with a pie.ç he was hit in the face with confetti with glitter by a protester who reportedly said stop the hate before the glitter attack. physically we're told that everyone's fine. albeit more glittery than before. that's all we know so far. we'll let you know if we figure out more.
4:17 am
4:18 am
the chief of staff who knew the illegal lobbying was wrong but told investigators he felt he was in way over his head.ç chief of staff who testified about his boss only immunity from prosecution himself. that john ensign chief of staff who had to quit his job when the scandal first came to light in 2009, that chief of staff has just lost his new job with r and r partners a nevada communications and lobbying firm thanks to the ethics mvgs into his own job. quote, a source familiar with his departure says mr. lopez and company principles discussed the company report after it was released and agreed to part ways. john ensign's former chief of staff is just the latest casualty of the john ensign sex scandal. which also looms like a cloud now over one still sitting senator. one still sitting senator who's refusing all comment on the scandal at present. what's going on with this now is
4:19 am
this, on thursday the special counsel investigating the john ensign sex scandal released her report for the senate ethics committee. the day after on friday, senator tom coburn told reporters despite his starring role in that rather report, he would not be commenting on it at all. that night friday {night, the group that filed the complaint that sparked the investigation in the first place, raised the prospect on this show that senator tomko burn cooperated with ensign investigators in exchange for immunity from prosecution. over the weekend senator coburn kept up the no comment policy even to reporter from his home state newspapers in oklahoma. then yesterday we asked senator coburn's office directly, did the senator get immunity from prosecution when mr. coburn cooperated with the ensign investigators? again from coburn's office, no comment. now today "the hill" newspaper in washington is asking the same thing in an editorial that was published today.
4:20 am
coat, according to the report five witnesses invoked their fifth amendment rights and the ethics panel obtained immunity orders for certain witnesses. was senator coburn one of them? we asked senator coburn's office the same thing today.ç we got no response at all. not even a no comment as of today. we are pursuing some leads on this story. we will have more on tomorrow's show. i promise. we'll be right back. acts like
4:21 am
4:22 am
4:23 am
4:24 am
if we had any sort of system in which minor parties like green parties or independent parties or anything like that were nationally sustainable, then american politicians would develop the skill to guarantee the loyalty of their single-issue voters enough to keep those smaller parties relevant in national politics. you cultivate different skills depending on the system in which you operate and which sorts of skills are rewarded. we don't have a parliamentary system. what we have is a major party due oply. you've got a lot of independent voters, but no strong independent parties. we've got two major parties. they mostly pick their candidates by primary elections or some variation of that process like iowa caucuses. what that smm does to american politicians, what this system grows in american politicians,
4:25 am
what it depends of american politicians is one specific, strange and kind of depressing political skill. it is the skill to move your{ own party, your own primary voters to make them happy enough to pick you when it is just your own party picking candidates among themselves in the primaries. but then you need to be able to turn around in the general election and be of appeal to everyone. the more each party rewards and cultivates vicious attacks on the other side as the way to become popular and get picked in your own party, the more difficult it is to win your primary and then follow it up by marketing yourself to the whole country. this is a very strange and specific and depressing skill. our system requires a form of political nimbleness. the parties can help or hurt their own politicians with the the level of difficulty they establish here. the more rabid and radical you
4:26 am
have to be in order to win a primary in your party in order to get picked by your party, the worse off your party's candidates are going to do in general elections. trying to appeal to people who aren't like these guys.ç the people who make the early inside the party decisions. in the current race for the presidency, the democrats already know that their candidate is going to be president obama. the fight is on the republican side in. the republican primary season, the republican activists the people who make inside the party degreeses, the people who lead political opinion on the republican side from the conservative media, they have chosen their litmus test for this year. the thing that you have to do if you want to be taken seriously as a republican candidate. as nbc news's first read put it this morning, quote, if you criticize paul ryan's budget plan and more importantly its medicare overhaul, then you are not concerned a mainstream republican. paul ryan's budget plan is the ultimate conservative litmus test. who's happiest about this development? the folks in charge of the obama re-election.
4:27 am
newt gingrich has been this week all but thrown out of the republican party. let alone the list of credible presidential contenders. after he criticized the paul ryan kill medicare plan this weekend on "meet the press." ms. gingrich now says he was the victim of a gocha question and the liberal media is attacking him and taking his words out of context. if it were the liberal media criticizing mr. gingrich that would probably be good for his chance ms the republican primary. in fact, the criticism of him is coming from the right and it is an avalanche. "the wall street journal" editorial page saying quote, this reveals mr. gingrich's weakness as a candidate and especially as a potential question to wit his odd combination of partisan divisive and poll driven policy timidity. the national review online leaves some people wonder which party's nomination he is running for. there was the conservative talk
4:28 am
radio host rush limbaugh reaction. >> i am not going to justify this. i'm not going to explain this. the attack on paul ryan, the support for an individual mandate in health care? folks, don't ask me to explain this.ç there is no explanation. >> the reaction from conservative columnist charles crowdhammer was even worse than mr. limbaugh for mr. gingrich. >> he's down. he didn't have a big chance from the beginning, but now it's over. calling the republican plan which all but four republican members of the house have now endorsed and will be running on, calling it radical and right wing social engineering is deadly. >> republican senator roy blunt of missouri had this to say about mr. gingrich today to abc news.
4:29 am
>> the radical, right wing social engineering comment and i suspect he wishes he hadn't described it that way. >> beyond even that former congresswoman dick army and a handful of house republicans voiced their displeasure politico. mr. army says quote, it fits mr. gingrich's track record of being confused and conflicted on health care policy. a congressman from oklahoma says quote, typically you'll find people running against another party rather than his own party. congressman campbell from kale saying quote, i was not thrilled with those remarks. >> congressman cole saying i'm not inclined to support somebody who makes our job harder. nicky halle telling cnn saying the last thing we need is a presidential candidate cutting them off at the knees. eric canter saying newt gingrich is guilty of tremendous misspeak and paul ryan himself has
4:30 am
weighed in. >> with allies like that, who needs the left. >> in is not the left. this is the political right and the republican party rising up as one against newt gingrich with venom. mr. gingrich doing his best to try to walk this back semichange his position yesterday.ç sort of changing it back today. at the same time asserting how deep he feels his personal friendship is with paul ryan. it seems like it is over for newt gingrich. newt gingrich is the head on the pike at the gates of the city at this point. if you do not endorse the kill medicare paul ryan plan, the right is not going to let you be a credible candidate for president. the only seat of power the republicans have right now are the republicans controlling the house. do they really think they're going to beat barack obama in their re-election campaign? do they really think a republican has a chance to beat obama? i don't think they think they have that chance. they're not going to let somebody even try to beat obama for the white house by trashing the how's republicans, not when
4:31 am
that's all they have. the right and the republican party are insisting on this price. in order to be a real candidate, you've got to endorse the paul ryan kill medicare thing. which is a classic catch-22 for republican candidates. if you do endorse the paul ryan kill medicare thing, voters will likely have something to say about that. there's a special election going on right now in new york state, new york 26. fec filings show that the national republican congressional committee has spent more than $400,000 on that special election. in a district that's so red they shouldn't have to spend a single dollar. karl rove's pac say it's going to spend $600,000. they should not have to spend a dollar. this is a red district. even with all that spending why is that race described as a tossup/leans democratic. a district that red leaning democratic with that much republican spending on it? leading democratic, why is it even in play?
4:32 am
it's in play because of catch-22. the republican candidate said she would vote for the paul ryan kill medicare plan. you have to say that or the right and the republican party won't really let you run. they won't let you be taken seriously. seriouslhat in a a district that voted for george w. bush twice and even john mccain, republican candidates start losing voters and fast. with one week left in that campaign, the republicans are facing some devastating ads tying their candidate to the paul ryan kill medicare plan. >> while corwin's plan would essentially end medicare, it increases the debt by giving tax breaks to big oil and millionaires. >> republican candidate in new york 26 is being hit with ads like that. her and her party's best and only rejoinder, their closing argument in the last week of the campaign has been to run their own republican ads that say, no, no, the democrat wants to kill medicare, too.
4:33 am
whether they will convince anybody of that is an interesting and open question. it shows that even republicans, even the national republican campaign committee, even the house campaign committee for the republican party knows that the most potent political attack in america today is to say you want to kill medicare. you agree with paul ryan. you signed up for the official republican plan that we're holding everybody to. seeing their own candidate being blown away by that attack in what ought to have been a super red district, the only thing republicans can think to do in response now is say i'm rubber you're glue. paul ryan announced that he will not run for the u.s. senate seat that has opened up in his home state of wisconsin. he said he does not want to be junior senator. he's enjoying the influence he has in the house too much. it's true. it would be hard to overstate paul ryan's impact on national politics right now.
4:34 am
if you do not endorse the paul ryan medicare plan, the right will not even let you run in a major race. if you do endorse his plan, the country will not let you win. in a parking lotmenttary system something going on like this in a minor party somewhere might make sense for a coalition strategy.ç in our system, if our due oply all this is is great news for democrats. joining us now the chris hayes washington editor of "the nation" magazine. good to see you. >> good to see you, too. >> is there anybody of consequence standing up for newt gingrich here? is there a chance he survives this? could he end up winning the nomination by any stretch of the nomination? >> i would say that the crowdhammer's comment is apt. i don't think he had much of a chance to begin with. gingrich he hasn't held office in over a decade. the last time we elected someone from the house he was actually in the house to be president of the united states is over a century ago. this was always a slim run from the beginning. i think that this hurts him tremendously because right now
4:35 am
on top of what you've described, i think quite perfectly about this kind of catch-22, there's a temporal aspect to it as well. which is the earlier you are, the more the pull of the most extreme right is. that's because that's where the organizers are and that's where the money is in the early primary states. it actually will -- it will ease up a little bit as time goes on. but it's the hardest now and the pull is the most intense now and it's when the kind of real tea party folks within the coalition of the republican party have max mall power and leverage. >> did you just explain why so many of the supposedly serious republican presidential candidates are delaying their announcements? >> yes. the thing you want to do is just bide your time. ultimately i think it's plausible to say there's going to become some point where there's going to be a very fire breathing conservative who's
4:36 am
going to have a lot of taex and be doing very well. and there's going to be a collective freak out amongst the republican establishment that that person is not electable. that's the time when you can ç edge out a little bit and walk the plank and say maybe we shouldn't get rid of medicare. there's a lot of seniors out there. a lot of seniors in iowa and new hampshire who will be voting. i think it's possible that someone's going to try to circle that square at that point, aka mitt romney. right now, though, the strategy as they all have done is just keep your mouth shut because you will get pummelled as you see from newt gingrich if you come out and say that. >> in researching the segment we went through all of the statements made by the republican contenders on the kill medicare thing, the paul ryan thing. all of their statements other than newt gingrich saying it goes too far and he wouldn't support it. all the other statements are things like that paul ryan, what a guy. >> exactly. >> they're totally weezling. i also think what you saw in the
4:37 am
vee tree yolic response from house republicans was a bit of frustration and envy was this jerk who didn't have to take this horrible vote to i'm saddled with is going to turn on. how dare you. i had to take this. there are 61 republicans in obama districts. the house freshman are vulnerable as we are seeing in new york 26. this is the kind of thing that makes them vulnerable. they are extremely uneasy and behind closed doors not so happy. >> chris hayes, it's always great to have you here, my friend. thanks a lot. >> thanks, rachel. the best new thing in the world today is coming up at the end of the show tonight. it involves one of our staffers on this show and a congressional staffer for a really conservative member of congress. it involves a whole lot of complete ironic joy. it's the happy, clapping kind of crying. that's tonight's best new thing
4:38 am
of the world coming up right at tend of the show. we will be right back. uncer ] in 2011, at&t is at [ horn honks ] now we're hitting the road with the proglide challenge. my friend -- come on up. how do you like shaving? i don't like it. it makes my neck itch. [ male announcer ] shaving can cause irritating tug and pull. you think there's a better razor out there? i sure haven't found one. let's take the proglide challenge. [ male announcer ] fusion proglide is engineered with gillette's thinnest blades ever so it glides for less tug and pull. this thing is fantastic. i don't feel like i'm shaving. [ male announcer ] turn shaving into gliding with the fusion proglide. it was smooth. it was just so clean. [ male announcer ] gillette fusion proglide.
4:39 am
4:40 am
politicians who do not
4:41 am
demagogue about family values are as entitled as anybody is to privacy upon transgressing in their personal lives. politicians who do influence on their claims to superior family values, they're asking for scrutiny when they fall from the state of purported grace that they've been marketing about themselves all along. around schwarzenegger glass houses and the perils of stones throwing with my guest gail collins.
4:42 am
4:43 am
4:44 am
4:45 am
not the worst family values hypocrite in politics. not by a long shot. he is competing with some serious ringers for that title. even just out of the past couple of years there's the hooker guy, of course, recently re-elected louisiana republican senator daifr visitor who ran campaign ads touting his marriage and his child-rearing skills running for office on the basis of his own family values. he demanded that mr. clinton resign because of his extramarital affair. that was before he was forced to admit to his own extramarital excursions. the senator did not volunteer this information willingly. he had no choice after his name turned up on the phone list of the d.c. madam. john ensign also called on president clinton to resign. mr. ensign campaigned to amend the u.s. constitution to keep
4:46 am
gay people from marrying becausç of the moral superiority of his kind of marriage. while living at a house listed as a church for tax purposes run by the family, mr. ensign carried on his own extramarital affair with his staffers. his wife's best friend and she was married to his best friend. who also worked for him. the new report on that scandal from the ethics committee said the woman mr. ensign was sleeping with was not herself all that interested in having an affair with john ensign. but she had the misfortune of being nearly 100% financially dependent on the senator and so very sad story. i could go on and on here. shall i? newt gingrich led the impeachment of president clinton while at the same time cheating on his own wife. mark sanford and his campaign ads about his christian family values, he was not hiking that appalachian trail so much as he was attend ds to his own mistress in argentina. no, arnold schwarzeneggerer is not the worst family values
4:47 am
hypocrite our country has to offer. not even close. the news today that mr. schwarzeneggerer fathered a child ten years ago with a woman who worked for him and his family, who still worked for him and his family until earlier this year, that is very sad news for his family who did not know about all of this until now. that's mostly what it is. sad news for his family. but the schwarzeneggerer news today is more than just sad and private. it is also newsworthy. the degree to which it is newsworthy and not just gossip about mr. schwarzeneggerer's family life is determined exactly by the size of mr. schwarzenegger's political hypocrisy here. by the extent to which he used private lives and family values his own and other people's as political fodder. in an interview with in 2001 when he was testing the waters for his leap into politics, mr. schwarzeneggerer was asked what he thought was the most pressing problem in america's inner cities. their problem with having kids
4:48 am
outside of marriage, quote, a lot of minorities have such a problem with the single parent situation. the number of single parents in the u.s. has quadrupled since the 1960 east and there's been an increase in violence and school shootings all that stuff has ib creased because of a lack of parenting. we drive the schools together. we pick them up together. it takes a lot of effort. i think the situation with single parenting in minority groups is disastrous. to me family has always been the basic foundation of everything. single parenting is a danger and that's what we have to avoid. so vote for me. that interview was a little more than ten years ago. according to mr. schwarzenegger's own statement this affair that has just been exposed began more than a decade ago. which means that it's possible that mr. schwarzenegger knew he was having a child with someone else's wife while he was telling reporters that the real problem with america was those awful single mothers. they were the problem.
4:49 am
none of us know and it is none of our business to know why someone messes up like mr. schwarzenegger has done with his family. none of us can say why a particular person in a particular marriage chooses to build their particular glass house. by why throw the stone? today at least two of the presidential republican candidates one of them newt gingrich made the rounds at the minnesota family council today. it's the kind of group and political appearance dedicated to keeping people's private lives and family values front and center in republican politics for this election to make sure republican politicians keep throwing stones despite the glass houses stretching as far as the ie can see in republican politics. with new ones being built all the time. joining us now is gail collins "the new york times" columnist. gail, thanks very much for joining us tonight.ç >> thank you. why do you never invite me on when it's monetary policy?
4:50 am
do you think they should sell the ft. knox gold? i don't want to talk. >> schwarzenegger and the love child and the household being confronted with the glass houses and throwing stones problem. i understand why people have glass houses. people fail. but why is throwing stones still part of, a main stream part of republican politics? >> well, because there are people, a lot of people in the country who not only have very strong, you know, family values, but believe that somehow you can legislate them into other people's families and they're very powerful within the party so the poor republican candidates i must say do get kind of stuck on this one because they toe this very rigid line about personal behavior when like most human beings they're failing to live up to it. i think it's kind of educational for the country as a whole to be following these things.
4:51 am
it's better for people to know that many of the people who have these theories about how{ you can legislate other people's morality are not actually doing it in their own private lives, not behaving in the way they say they should. >> as an american, though, i want politicians to be held in higher esteem than they are in that i want public service to be a more attractive candidate -- more attractive candidate for a life choice to people who have strong ethics and who are ambitious about what they want to do in life. and while it is good to guess that every time somebody signs on as a cosponsor to an anti-gay marriage amendment they are probably sleeping with somebody who works for them, while it is funny, it -- and true it breeds such cynicism about what they're doing and i don't know how -- i don't know why the incentives don't lead toward less moralizing in republican politics. >> because the heart wants what it wants. ractical about this stuff. i have very seldom seen and i am
4:52 am
pathetically a real expert on these issues, a politician who gets punished by the voters for behaving badly in private. i mean, you have to be really out there. you have to be john edwards to be punished for this kind of stuff. the problem is that that -- the politicians don't trust voters with this kind of thing. they don't trust them to actually judge them on performance which is what they usually do. i mean, look at bill clinton. look how well bill clinton did. look how much everybody loves bill clinton now after -- i mean, they don't care as long as the performance is right. people are much more bitter at arnold schwarzenegger for having screwed up the entire california economy than they are because of this. but i still, rachel, why it took ten years to bring this subject up. we had a guy running for governor, the republican candidate in new york who had exactly the same thing. it took him ten years to tell his wife that there was a love child there. i mean, if there's three there's trend.
4:53 am
there's looking for the trifecta -- >> yes, yes. >> carl paladino is the guest on the ed schultz show tonight right after this. >> oh, my{ gosh. >> so we could maybe hang around and try to -- no -- we probably shouldn't. that would be wrong. >> that would be wrong. >> let me just ask you about this. are there republican politicians, modern conservative politicians who have tried to buck the moralizing thing, who have tried to say, you know what? we ought to really shut up about the family values thing since all of our houses are made of glass and we can see through them because they are all so cracked? >> not in that way. that would be a good way. mitch daniels did make that sort of much commented upon remark when he was talking to the conservative gathering in washington about how really we should be looking at the deficit and not worrying about all this other stuff. but then he went right back home and signed a bill to defund planned parenthood and to ç require that women be told all these totally inaccurate things before they get an abortion. so john mccain used to be very kind of, you know, nonenthusiastic about this stuff, about three campaigns
4:54 am
ago. i remember him being asked about whether he never allowed his daughter to have an abortion the first time he ran for president. he was very troubled by it. i mean, he did not come back with the obvious answer. but that was three campaigns ago and you see him now. this is a totally different guy gail collins, "new york times" columnist, author of "when everything changed the amazing journey of american women from 1960 to the present" thank you for being here. next time the feds. up next the best new thing in the world today now with extra happy crying and clapping. we'll be right back. i can't get [ alan ] admit it, brenda.
4:55 am
oh, c'mon, alan, i said it was great. you said i couldn't make it as easy to manage a claim online as it is on the phone, and i did. i programmed maps of local repair shops, schedule an inspection online. i win the bet, so say it. alan's a technical genius. mmm, what was that? [ alan ] my new ring tone. alan's a technical genius. yes! mm hmm, mm hmm... techies in the hooouse. raise the roof 1999. [ female announcer ] making car repairs easy. see for yourself at esurance. technology when you want it. people when you don't.
4:56 am
4:57 am
the best new thing in the world today involves the love of space. not space as in elbow room but space as in the final frontier. because one of our producers on this show tricia mckinney loves space so much she entered a nasa contest.
4:58 am
she did it on her own. we did not ask her to do it. she is just really into this stuff. she ended up winning the contest. she was selected via twitter to be one of 150 nasa enthusiasts who were invited to witness yesterday's space shuttle launch live in person and as close as you are allowed to get to it. they called it the nasa tweet up. this was one of the last space shuttle launches ever. this one piloted by mark kelly the husband of arizona congresswoman gabrielle giffords. and here the best new thing in the world today is our beloved tricia mckinney with the most emotionally meaningful reporting you are ever likely to see anywhere on this overwhelming awesomeness that is manned space flight to a person who feels really strongly about it. watch this. >> woo! oh, my gosh! oh, my god!
4:59 am
that is awesome! >> and the sweetest, most bipartisan revelation of the day, the person you can see on the left of tricia, her nasa tweet up buddy is a republican congressional staffer, someone who works for a very conservative republican member of congress. giant, incredible rocket ships have a way of rendering po


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on