The Rachel Maddow Show, Transcript 06/29/10 - new york times chinese restaurant review hot dish

Keith olbermann, host of "Countdown": Now, ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, we look forward to Sharron Angle's first mainstream interview with our friend John Ralston.
Good evening, Rachel.
Host: Good evening, Keith.
Thank you for saying good things about Sir.
The King of CNN.
He is not the one I have met, but through the world in which we coexist, he is always generous and sweet --
I am very friendly to me and I am also very friendly to everyone in the business.
So, I agree with you.
Your opinion of him is absolutely correct.
Yes, thank you. Thanks, Keith.
OLBERMANN: Thank you for staying with us at home.
Beginning tonight, there has been an unexpected development in American politics.
Republican leaders in Congress failed in public with a 101 approval rating, mostly on tape.
The whole game of this year's election is whether voters will see them as a referendum on the Obama administration, or whether they will see them as a choice between Democrats, the Obama administration, and Republicans.
If it's just a referendum on President Obama, then American voters are not happy with anything now, then oppose Obama and the Democratic Party.
Elect Republicans by defaultI‘m hot.
I'm poisonous Ivy.
I hate the BP oil spill.
Throw the tramp out.
You know, what this might be.
Of course, this is the driving force that Republicans want to reach the majority or at least get huge gains in November.
This is what Republicans want, the democratic referendum.
Democrats want the result of these elections to be that voters will not approach them as much as a referendum on a person or a party, but rather choose between the two parties.
The way the opposition is trying to make elections more like a referendum, rather than choosing is not to talk about them, the opposition, what is offered in policy.
It sounds cynical, but it's tried and true when you're in opposition --
You don't need to throw your policy ideas out to be picked out, you don't need to do that.
Opposition is a great thing.
You just hope that when another person is booed, you will be invited to replace him no matter what crazy thing you believe.
This is Politics 101.
I realize it sounds cynical, but it's really how politics works.
That's why the Republican Senate candidate, like Sharron Angle in Nevada, is competing with Democrat Harry Reid, and that's why Sharron Angle, because she made all the political mistakes, all the amazing things about her as a candidate, that's why Sharron Angle would say that when she was asked about her position on these issues. (
Start Video Editing)
Cape Sharon®Senate candidate in Nevada: he tried to make this a campaign about me, but where is Harry? Go ask Harry.
Reporter: But your own website
Angle: please ask Harry about the EPA and why they failed.
Reporter: Why did you destroy it?
Angle: why don't they do what they need to do. (END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Don't ask my position on EPA's completely undefensible, I don't want to talk about it, it's about another person, ask the current person.
It's not my business, it's Harry Reid.
That's what you did.
You don't want to talk about your status quo, you want to talk about the current president you want to be eliminated.
What that means as an opposition politician.
Good job, corner Sharon.
Textbook work there.
There's a lot to be said about the Sharron corner on tonight's show.
Republicans in the Senate also did a good job of completing opposition Politics 101.
If you notice, they're nothing.
They made no real amendments.
They put forward symbolic, gimmicky amendments to Viagra and pornography.
I mean, Republicans in the Senate think it's science.
You focus your attention on those in power.
You don't get the attention of others.
When people don't like the situation in the country for any reason, they will eventually vote against the ruling party and the opposition will be voted.
Just head down.
Don't fire.
That's what they did.
Republicans in the Senate are very good at this.
House Republicans under John Boehner do seem to understand this fundamental principle.
It's really just basic politics.
But on this side of the house, they often fall off the wagon.
It is difficult for them to stick to this.
You may remember when President Obama's budget came out last year.
Not just bashing President Obama's budget.
It's also the cheapest political advisor in the world that will tell you what you should do when you object --
For some reason, House Republicans decided to introduce their own alternative budget.
But they hedge their bets and maybe feel what they are doing wrong.
They refuse to enter any numbers in the budget.
A clever compromise that allows them to lose twice.
They publish their own policy ideas, they hurt themselves politically, and they still don't seem to have any real policy ideas. Amazing.
Then try to score a second goal of their own in the same game, with House Republicans asking their budget staff to present what their so-called House Republicans would do if they returned to the majority.
Now, to be honest, Republicans have largely saved the political consequences of this inexplicable mistake, because no one has ever heard of members of Congress who put it together.
Is there anyone in Wisconsin, Paul Ryan?
The most compelling news coverage that Paul Ryan of Wisconsin has received over the past year is not from his budget, blueprint, but from his exercise program.
To be honest, "Politico" did a front page feature on Paul Ryan's amazing workout program. He is ripped.
Thank you, "Politico.
"But if someone is able to pay attention to Paul Ryan for more than the time to say his name, than an awesome P-
90 times the exercise, they will see his blueprint for abolishing health insurance benefits and privatizing Social Security.
Every Democrat running for Congress in this country can stick to the blueprint and oppose it if they want.
This is a political gift for Democrats.
But Democrats can't live up to that promise because Paul Ryan is completely anonymous because he's not a Republican leader and he doesn't know.
He's more of a Republican backbencher.
Despite these early mistakes, House Republicans are still not clear.
Now it seems that they may have finally stepped on rake and knocked themselves out.
They have announced the candidate for Republican House Speaker John Boehner.
The most prominent Republican in Congress is not John McCain, who asked John Boehner to talk about policy in detail, and so on.
Again, I don't know what the Democrats are going to do with this.
Who knows if they will take this opportunity?
But while talking to the editorial board of the Pittsburgh Tribune Review, John Boehner basically just offered to abandon this year's midterm elections.
Where do we start? OK.
When asked about the Wall Street reform legislation that is currently being passed by Congress,
Boehner told the newspaper that the reform had gone too far.
Quote "This is killing an ant with a nuclear weapon.
He is talking about the financial crisis.
It is clear here that this is a small, harmless ant, and the thing we should not worry about trying to do anything is --
I mean, please choose, here are some of our favorite visual summaries about what John Boehner says is just a little ant.
The New York Post headline of October 2008 summed up the mood of the country well.
"The economic crisis: the only thing we need to worry about is fear itself.
Then the front page of the San Jose Mercury News, the biggest point drop in the Dow Jones index's history.
Or there is a chart showing millions of people who are out of work.
Look at the green one over there.
Millions of jobs have been lost due to the financial crisis.
What's the big deal?
Why are everyone freaking out?
We don't need to react to this.
Maybe John Boehner is no longer concerned about the financial crisis.
You know, I mean, we did have a more pressing crisis in the United States, the BP oil disaster in the Gulf region, for example, the policy issue on how to deal with this.
This is what he thought:
Start Video Editing)
Reporter: Have you been there? REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH)
MINORITY Party Leader: No, but I'm going to go.
Reporter: Six.
A good idea?
Boehner: I don't think so.
They will cause real damage there.
Deep water drilling, maybe there's a reason to stop before we know what's going on. (END VIDEO CLIP)
I mean, deep water drilling, maybe there's a reason to stop before we know what's going on.
This is actually the reason for the suspension.
Before we know what's going on, this is the suspension of deep water drilling.
This is indeed the policy he was asked about.
Sir, are you in favor of this?
You just said you opposed the suspension and then explained how you were in favor of the suspension. Do you—
Do you know what you were asked about here? (
Start Video Editing)
Boehner: deep water drilling, maybe there's a reason to stop before we know what's going on, and we can make sure we can stop it again. (END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: make sure we can stop it again.
I don't know the one I don't know. Sorry. (
Start Video Editing)
Boehner: But there's no reason to suspend all the other drilling in the lighter waters. (END VIDEO CLIP)
Do you know what the suspension is, sir?
Did you know that, as you said, shallow drilling is not actually affected by the suspension? Not affected.
What is the pause, is actually just deep-water drilling—
While explaining how opposed you are, you also say that you are supportive.
You don't seem to know what this policy is, and if you're a random defender, it's fine, except for the awesome workout routine you 've shown in Politico, which no one remembers. com.
But when you're one of the country's most well-known Republicans, and if the Republicans win the election, you're going to be the speaker of the House, that's great.
You were asked about the most controversial agenda policy issue in the country at the moment, and you don't know what that is.
You don't know what you're talking about.
This is amazing.
In the interview, John Boehner also said he wanted to raise the age of social security. (
Start Video Editing)
Boehner: We live a lot longer than anyone else.
I think it is a step that needs to be taken to raise the retirement age, go out for 20 years and not affect approaching retirement and eventually raise the retirement age to 70. (END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: follow all 60-year-
Attention of all 50-year-olds
John Boehner wants you to know that Republicans will raise their retirement age on Social Security.
How are you?
Don't forget to vote on November, you always vote, every election, every election.
You know you can sign up now. Just amazing.
I mean, whether it's policy, the basic understanding of the problems the country is facing right now, or the basic politics, I mean, john Boehner was a bit vague about the political implications of what he clearly said.
He was very ignorant of what he said was the basic policy.
Considering the last point, he showed his temperament in this interview.
Everyone is politically exaggerated, right?
Everyone talked about it a little.
I like exaggeration.
I used it all the time.
I'm talking about it.
I admit it, and I like it.
But given that this is the person who wants to be the speaker of the house.
Today, this is just another gem of John Boehner.
The Tribune Review did not post a video of this review --
I don't know why, but they did quote him.
Quote, "Democrats are snubbing the United States where I grew up.
Now, we have more Americans in their government than ever before.
The political insurgency is brewing and I don't think we have seen anything similar since 1776.
Remember the civil war?
Nothing.
What is happening now is even bigger.
In this interview, he talked about the revolution that dwarfs the civil war that is now taking place, reporting that --
He said, quoting him, "Congressman Boehner has not predicted that Republicans will get the 39 seats needed to regain control of Congress.
So this is a world.
A change in 234 dwarfs the enthusiasm of the civil war, which will not lead to 39 Republican seats. Amazing. Behold.
It turns out that the mid-term exam will be interesting. (
Start Video Editing)
Reporter: Have you ever thought about running for president or vice president?
Boehner: No, no.
Look, I don't have a lot of life, but I have a little.
The little life I have, I like to cut grass, wash my shirt and iron, drink some red wine and smoke a few cigarettes from time to time. (END VIDEO CLIP)(
Business break)
MADDOW: So far, this is an interview with Sharron Angle in the warm comfort of conservative media.
Changed tonight.
To be exact, about 15 minutes from now, we have the first real interview with Sharron Angle with a real journalist --
From Reno.
There will be popcorn. (END VIDEO CLIP)(
Business break)
MADDOW: President Obama's first term is not over half yet. as a president, he is lucky to have two chances to nominate a new Supreme Court judge.
For his first nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, all Democrats were lucky when the Republicans chose to attack her nomination because she used the "smart Latin"”(
Start Video Editing)SEN.
Jon Kiir®Arizona, United States: many public statements by Judge Sotomayor suggest that she may indeed allow or even accept the decision --
Based on her prejudice and prejudice. SEN.
Tom cowborne®There has been prejudice against one of the parties. SEN.
Chuck Grassley®Iowa: allow bias and personal preferences.
The clever Latin woman quoted this sentence. SEN.
Jeff Sessions. ®Alabama: smart Latin.
Grasley: comments from your clever Latina.
SESSIONS: Judge Sotomayor said that her acceptance of her views, sympathy and prejudice would affect her decision. (End Video Clip)
MADDOW: when they tried to turn the phrase "smart Latina" into a nickname, it strongly reminded Republicans --
Deep problems of minority voters.
Now, with President Obama's second Supreme Court nomination, Republicans have decided to hunt her down by attacking the first African, Thurgood Marshall.
S. Supreme Court judges, and civil rights heroes of most Americans who are not Republican senators of the Judicial Council.
Democrats cannot believe their luck.
They are now eagerly awaiting the next political action of the Republican Supreme Court, hoping to wage war on baseball, beer and Betty White. (
Business break)
Mado: a boring and empty guessing game.
The lady is now sitting before the Judicial Council to see if she will be the next Supreme Court judge in her early 90 s, who is a staff member of the same judicial council.
In 1995, she wrote a well-known book review, mocking the confirmation process as a "tedious and empty charade game ".
She believes that the Supreme Court nominees should stop pretending that they don't believe anything and that they don't think about anything.
At the hearing, she said, they should talk openly about who they are.
Well, now on the day after her own Supreme Court confirmed the hearing, Elena Kagan was as nervous as the nominee.
She did not have her own opinion.
She said she had changed her mind about this.
But this question has not been answered until today.
15 years later-15 years later, she wrote a boring and empty guessing article, does she still think that the confirmation hearing of the National Supreme Court is boring and empty?
Does she still think that the confirmation process she is going through now is a stupid one? Watch this:(
Start Video Editing)SEN.
Lindsey Graham®South Carolina: So far, is the hearing as you think?
Elena kagan, Supreme Court nominee: I'm not sure I have-
I'm not sure what I think. So—
Graham: Let's try to get back to the past and say you're looking at these hearings and you're critical of the way the Senate is going to do these hearings. (LAUGHTER)
Are we making progress or are we going backwards? (LAUGHTER)
Are you doing your part?
Kagan: I think you have done a good job of fulfilling the duties that the constitution has given you. (LAUGHTER)
Kagan: everyone else sucks, not us, right? (LAUGHTER)(END VIDEO CLIP)
He said, "it's too bad.
Because South Carolina Senator Graham said the word "bad" in a formal Senate lawsuit, this is perhaps the most exciting moment since Elena Kagan's Supreme Court confirmed the hearing the next day.
But whether the Kagan hearings are tedious or empty and whether they are --
Quote the senator.
The bad thing is that the parties continue to use these hearings, not so much a referendum on Elena Kagan as a teachable moment --
There was an opportunity to bring a wider range of cases to the country in relation to the court.
As we talked about on the show yesterday, Democrats are really desperately trying to get these hearings to show how conservative the current Roberts court is.
How Republicans are trying to make liberals terrible.
In doing so, they seem to have given up trying to make Elena Kagan look like a terrible and huge threat of Freedom to democracy.
Instead, they decided to attack the judge she had previously defended.
You may have heard of him. (
Start Video Editing)
Conversation: in her career, Madam
Kagan tied himself to the well.
Well-known rights judge
She served as clergy for Justice micawa and Justice Marshall. Well-known activists
However, Judge Marshall's philosophy of Justice is not the mainstream I think. SEN.
John coning®Texas: Thurgood Marshall is a well-known lawyer who won a landmark civil rights case, Brown v. Board of Education.
But I'm more concerned about his idea of justice.
He may be a microcosm of the result. oriented judge.
CORNYN: there is no apology for the fact that he thinks he is a judicial activist. (End Video Clip)
MADDOW: now join us in discussing the Republican boycott of Thurgood Marshall's joining the Supreme Court, 17 years after Thurgood Marshall left Earth, he is a senior editor and legal reporter for our friend Dalia Leigh Slate magazine.
Thank you for coming.
Lili LITHWICK, senior editor of Slate: Thank you.
Mado: What are the Republicans unhappy about civil rights idol and legal legend Thurgood Marshall?
Not clear.
I mean, you hear a lot in those clips.
He seems to represent someone who looks cheesy, make up as you go, sit in the seat of your pants, pot --
They want to advise all liberal judges to smoke.
I mean, in a sense, it's even worse today.
Jon Kiir has always said that, you know, Marshall's whole philosophy of Justice is characterized by the fact that you quote "do what you think is right and let the law catch up ".
"It sounds so free and scary, you know.
So, I think, because they don't know what's wrong with Kagan, they 've been talking about Marshall as if she's the same hippie fool --smoking—she‘s not.
She's nothing but that.
But I think they might confuse the two.
What's amazing, though, is that it does --
I mean, even for those who don't pay attention to judicial matters --
I mean, they named Baltimore Washington International Airport after Thurgood Marshall.
He is a legal civil rights icon in the Pantheon, a very small civil rights icon in the country.
I mean, I know you're not doing political analysis, but it seems strange that people would expect us to do this --
Republicans want us to think.
Smoking hippie, not someone named after the airport, right?
No, it was a very, very mysterious attack.
Rachel, it's worth mentioning that it's really down today, and you had a lot of references about it yesterday.
I mean, Thurgood Marshall is mentioned more than Obama.
The weather is much more mild today.
I think you might not want to fight every African in a sense --
You know, an American nominated for white women
There is no reason to go the "smart Latin" route with her because she is a white woman.
So, I think there may be some kind of feeling that this is a serious, serious mistake.
MADDOW: But do you think the question about Marshall reflects the real discontent that Senate Republicans have over Elena Kagan's lack?
LITHWICK: I mean, she was asked about her relationship with Marshall and she was asked about a judge, an Israeli judge, Aharon Barak, who used-
In his presentation, she said he was one of my heroes.
Then she said I often said that.
But, you know, she was asked about almost all the people she said nice things about.
I think you're right, and I think it's an agent who can question her own point of view.
You turn around and say, well, we'll make a list of anyone she likes and find out what's wrong with them.
MADDOW: at these hearings, Democrats tried to get them to know the Democratic philosophy of Justice, at least to get them to know the Democratic criticism of Roberts Court --Is it valid?
LITHWICK: Well, it's-
I would say they are more coherent than last year.
You will remember that at the Sotomayor hearing, it was difficult for Democrats to agree on what they thought the liberal justice program was.
This year, I think they have heard the same message, at least from Leahy all the way to Al Franken, that is: Roberts Court, disjointed, supportingCompany,
Little Guy, hate the environment and mess up your drinking water.
It's not clear at the moment whether this has anything to do with Elena Kagan, but certainly to the extent that they're trying to convey a coherent liberal message, that is, hey, when other government departments that are more grateful do not do so, the court needs to stand up for this little guy.
I think they sent the message, or at least they must have been doing it as a team --
This is much more effective than this dispersion last year.
MADDOW: So far, as the nominee, how do you think Kagan is doing?
It is clear that today is the first day of her question.
Obviously, from what I saw at the hearing today, she seemed very relaxed.
Relax and have fun.
She put the room to a standstill, you know, just intuition.
Laughter of pain
At some point Lindsay Graham asked her what were you doing when the Christmas bomber was caught at Christmas?
Like almost all Jews, I may be in a Chinese restaurant, she said.
I mean, everybody is clapping.
Rachel, she's funny.
She is very relaxed.
But at the same time, I think she's saying, look, I'm serious about the law.
On one occasion, she was asked about her passion and she had no passion for anything but the law.
So, she did a good job of balancing seriousness, rashness and humor, and I think that's the real charm.
What I really enjoy this time is that sometimes it feels like these hearings will narrow down the nominees to a smaller version of who they are.
This is actually to make a person who looks good on paper, but is hard to love on paper, very human, warm and bright smile.
So I don't know if this works for everyone, but it's clear that the senators find her armed, charming and flattering.
Lovely liberals.
I know, dear.
She won't call herself a liberal, but it's hard for the media to understand how to report it.
Dahlia Lithwick, senior editor and legal reporter for Slate magazine, I have always been very grateful for your insight into such a day.
Thank you very much, Dahlia.
Thank you for inviting me.
MADDOW: Sharron point in Nevada is the nominee for my mascot election this year, mainly because she said this to issues such as unemployment. (
Start Video Editing)
Cape Sharon®Republican Senator candidate for Nevada: that's what happened to us, we put so much power into our government that we really spoiled our citizens and said, "You don't want an existing job. ”(END VIDEO CLIP)
A spoiled, unemployed person. Yes.
But Sharron Angle didn't answer any real reporter's real questions about her amazing views until tonight.
It is now the time of performance in the world's largest small city, Sharon corner.
Tonight, for the first time, we'll let you see her sitting with a real journalist, John Laston.
Don't miss this. (
Business break)
The Senate military committee voted today to confirm Gen.
David Petraeus is the new top commander in Afghanistan. Gen.
Petraeus now needs approval from the US government. S.
The Senate and NATO are expected to approve in a few days, if not earlier.
The new commander should arrive in Afghanistan this weekend.
No one was surprised today, and the man who will be the new supreme military commander of the war in Afghanistan resolutely rejected any suggestion he did not agree with the White House about what to do in Afghanistan, and by the evening, describe in some precise words of the president how and when the president of the United StatesS.
Troops will leave. (
Start Video Editing)GEN.
David Petraeus, commander of the US Central Command: it is important to note the president's reminder in recent days that July 2011 will mark the beginning of a process, not the date of the US ArmyS.
Go to the exit and turn off the lights. (END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: given that many Afghans have only a few hours of electricity a day, turning off the lights may not be the best metaphor, but this has been adopted.
The strategy of war has not changed.
The deadline for leaving is as tense and controversial as ever.
What's new is that the experience of "Rolling Stone" Michael Hastings has led to Gen's rapid departure and retirement.
Stanley McChrystal highlighted the strategic weaknesses of the president and general.
Petraeus insists on the end.
For example, the training of Afghan forces and police.
We should not defeat the Afghan army.
You will remember that we should have them stand up, recruit, arm and train them so that they can address the security needs of their own country without us.
A new report released today by the Office of the special inspector general for reconstruction of Afghanistan said, "even the highest --
The rating of Afghan forces cannot operate independently, and many security forces have exaggerated their actual capabilities.
The report also said, "It is reported that some areas of the country are very dangerous and the assessment team is simply unable to rate the security forces in those areas.
"If, in our current strategy, we need those forces to stand up before we leave, doesn't that mean that our strategy might not work in the ninth year of war? Gen.
Petraeus explained that his answer was that the report was out of date.
However, the situation of Afghan forces has improved in recent months. Honest. (
Start Video Editing)
Petraeus: I recognize that lasting success in Afghanistan requires the development of a sufficient number and quality of Afghan national security forces.
Over the past year, our efforts in this important area have been thoroughly reformed, and these efforts are now basically on track. (END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: We all know what will happen to Gen from now until when.
Petraeus will travel to Afghanistan to execute a new order.
There will be no day in policy between him and the government.
There will be no surprises.
What we don't know is what happens once Gen.
Petraeus is here.
Did he change the rules of engagement for the troops?
Is there any magic bullet for him to support Afghanistan?
Because it's something that bullets can't really do.
Does he know why the Taliban might consider a negotiated political solution to this conflict, and everyone has been saying this is the only way we can really leave?
Now joining us is Noah shattman, editor of Wired.
The Danger Room and a fellow at the Brookings Institution.
In last September, he spent about a month in Afghanistan.
Noah, thank you very much for coming.
Noah shattman, editor of dangerous room: Thank you for inviting me.
MADDOW: in terms of political engagement with the Taliban, it's clear that everyone is starting to realize, yes, that's something that the public needs to talk about, not just the military, but not just the strategic thinkers behind this --
Behind the big picture of what we are doing in Afghanistan.
Is it possible to engage politically with the Taliban?
Is this the only way out?
First, there is no Taliban here.
There are actually a lot of different Taliban.
There are many different rebel groups.
Some people just object to local rebellion that they consider to be foreigners.
Some people work harder.
The core type of Islam.
There are all kinds of competitive interests there.
So I think there may be an opportunity to pick small groups here and there.
But Petraeus is already very clear that this will not start with the negotiations, which, as he said, will start with the crackdown on them.
We will then have a little negotiation or two at the same time.
MADDOW: if there is-
As they say, if there is a new big growth
Well, if there's a new big rise in contact, if there's more fighting
Obviously, there was a massive offensive on the Afghan border today. Pakistan border.
We are looking forward to some kind of initiative in Kandahar, although we do not know what will happen to Connecticut from a military perspective.
If there is more fighting, is it possible, in any case, to reduce the possibility of a political settlement?
SHACHTMAN: I'm not sure.
Petraeus saw at least anti-rebellion, not like the anti-rebellion here --
Nothing to do with war.
It's kind of like what happens at the same time in different places.
You can have a really positive battle in one place and more negotiated political settlement in another place.
You can build a school here and you can have a real positive fight in another place.
MADDOW: about the rules of engagement, the rules of engagement in the United StatesS.
The troops were allowed to shoot, call for air support, etc, and one of the things Hastings highlighted in his Rolling Stone article was that the troops were right-
It feels like they can't protect themselves, they can't finish the crossfire, and they can't fully protect their safety once the crossfire starts.
Do you think these rules may change? How important is this?
Whiteman: Petraeus said at the hearing today that he will at least reconsider the application of some rules.
My gut feeling, you know, is that they're going to change.
You know, we're not going all of a sudden-
Crazy World War II
Style conflict in Afghanistan
This will not happen.
But, I guess, there may be more flexibility in the number of air strikes allowed to enter.
Take this data point.
In Iraq, once Petraeus took over, when he took over Iraq, the number of air strikes increased from 229 in 2006 to more than 1,400.
So the anti-rebel master of David Petraeus has no objection to blowing things up.
On the contrary.
Noah shattman of Wired.
Com's "Danger Room" is also a fellow at the Brookings Institution. thank you.
I feel that the national dialogue on Afghanistan is starting again in a tense way.
I look forward to having more conversations with you. Thanks, Noah.
Thanks, Rachel.
Thank you.
A few days later, when we were there for the show, I would have a direct idea of the situation on the ground in Afghanistan.
Before airing our own show, we will be traveling to several places in the country with NBC's Richard Engel, live from Kabul, next Tuesday and Wednesday at 9: 00m. Eastern.
We really hope you can listen.
Tonight is about to enter the "Countdown" and forget all the rules BP could violate before the exploding well starts destroying the Gulf of Mexico.
In its efforts to spend millions of dollars on political influence, BP seems to have violated its rules. Imagine that. Keith‘s on it.
On the next show, Sharron corner of Nevada finally agreed to be interviewed outside the right wing cocoon.
She is comfortable with wing media.
It's happening now.
We will bring you John Laston.
Renault is expected to sit
For a moment, "Let's give up social security and look for a Second Amendment remedy for our problems" candidate.
Please stay tuned. (
Business break)
MADDOW: The most interesting candidate this year, Sharron Angle, the Republican Senate candidate in Nevada, has been working hard to engage with most media since she was nominated.
No, seriously, it's really hard for her to get. (
Start Video Editing)
Unidentified men: why do you destroy the EPA when we have the worst environmental disaster in this country?
Where do you get these questions from? (END VIDEO CLIP)
Tonight, Sharon Angel is no longer running away.
In fact, she took a seat opposite the Nevada political journalist John lallston and faced his problems.
We have that long.
Waiting for the exchange heat on the satellite machine from Renault. (
Business break)
MADDOW: things are not going the way they should be in Nevada this year.
Republicans want to create a huge national problem by winning Harry Reid's Senate seat, a huge national story that leads political news throughout the year, and Democratic majority leaders lose seats at home.
Then, Sue Lowden, the Republican frontrunner, became the lady who "paid your doctor's salary with chicken.
Her campaign failed, and Republicans in Nevada ended up in the Sharen corner.
Sharon has been a Republican candidate for three weeks.
So far, she has taken an amazing campaign strategy of talking only to super right peoplewing media.
So far she has spoken to "Fox and Friends", "Human Events", "national reviews", Roger heckcock, and "Rush Limburg show"
Because the gentleman is with the guest owner.
Fort Lin was on vacation that day.
She spoke to Larsson and to local conservative radio. That‘s it.
She hasn't spoken to anyone other than the conservative bubble, anyone who might threaten to ask her a real question.
Not just at the national level.
Sharon Anle won't even talk to reporters in Nevada.
That's what voters in Nevada, the nation's audience, have seen so far the great Republican hopes for 2010 people.
It was Sharron Angle who met with the media and pretended that the Nevada reporter was not there and did not speak to her and crossed the parking lot.
If she is still in the middle of the Republican race, if she just wants to participate and inspire her foundation, Sharron Angle's media strategy may make sense.
But now is the election.
She is reluctant to talk to anyone outside the conservative echo room, which has become a national story about her.
This is not a national story that Republicans think they will quit the game.
So it's finally going to happen tonight.
Sharron Angle finally agreed to give a real interview to a real journalist, John Laston, dean of the Nevada school of political journalism, a regular visitor to the show, tonight is her first chance to question Sharron Angle after winning the Senate nomination.
Oh, please. Oh, please.
I mean think about what Sharron Angle has admitted, even just in an interview with someone who has agreed with her, just talking to someone who won't fight with her.
Remember the remedy for the Second Amendment? (
Start audio clips)
Angle: You know, if Congress continues to do that, people are really looking for remedies for the Second Amendment and saying, oh my God, what can we do to turn this country around. (END AUDIO CLIP)
That's not what she said because she was panicking because she was asked a question that was hard to answer.
She offered it.
If conservatives cannot get what they want from the political process, she said, they will move to the remedy of the Second Amendment.
They will use the right to retain and carry weapons to get what they want.
But some explanation is needed.
She said it at least three times on the record.
She then plans to abolish the Environmental Protection Agency and the Ministry of Education, and she wants to privatize Social Protection
Sorry, oh no, I was told that if you mean exactly the same, she wants to personalize Social Security, totally different.
This is something she admits when talking to a friendly interviewer.
What will she say to a real journalist?
Now, Nevadan Democrats are spreading the interview that Sharron Angle received back in January on the "Bill Manders radio show" about whether women can have an abortion in the case of rape or incest(
Start audio clips)
Bill Manders, who hosts the "Bill Manders radio show": I also agree
But I support life too. choice.
Do you understand what I said? Do you understand what I mean?
Angle: Well, I'm pro.
Responsible choice
MANDERS: Right.
Angle: You know, there are options to abstain, there are options to use contraception.
There are all kinds of choices.
Mendes: Is there any reason?
Is there any reason for abortion?
Angle: not in my book.
Manders: So is rape not the same thing as incest?
I'm a Christian, you know.
MANDERS: Right.
Angle: I believe that God has a plan and purpose for each of our lives, that he can mediate in various situations, and that we need to have a little bit of confidence in many things. (END AUDIO CLIP)
MADDOW: Let's make it clear.
Sharron Angle says that for women who are raped, they have no choice in abstinence or contraception --
It's all part of God's plan.
The government forces you to give birth to the child of the rapist as part of God's plan.
Oh, please. Can I ask? up question?
This is what Sharron Angle has been saying in conservative media among friends.
Tonight, for the first time since she won the nomination, she was asked practical questions about her actual point of view.
It's happening now.
The second amendment by Sharon remedied Anle and John Reston.
We will bring it to you next. I cannot wait. (
Business break)
MADDOW: Nevada's Senate Republican nominee Sharron Angle avoided interviews with conservative media until tonight.
Just as we spoke, senior political journalist John Laston was interviewed at Renault on his show "face to face with John Laston. ”(Start Video)
Host John Laston "face-to-face with John Laston": my purpose here tonight is to clarify some of the confusion that has taken place since the primary election.
So the first thing we have to talk about is Social Security because your opponent has written a lot of media and paid media.
First of all, let me show people what you think about social security in an interview with k before the election. (
Start audio clips)
Whenever I say "privatised", I am not referring to privatised government.
I mean the real free market privatization.
There is a place where you come up with your idea and you say we will be privatised for a while.
Help me.
What kind of years do you think we should have?
These are all things that can be caught.
Are we going to privatize?
This is not to be caught.
The idea of privatizing and withdrawing health insurance and Social Security has not been caught. (END AUDIO CLIP)
So that's what you said before the primary.
And then, just last Friday, on a radio show, you said that. (
Start audio clips)
Angle: I'm here to save Social Security, but we have to lock a person who understands saving Social Security, not let the government raid, and put some real money and silver in it. (END AUDIO CLIP)RALSTON: OK.
You have to explain.
It seems like a contradiction to me.
You want to phase it out.
You want to privatize it.
This is the only thing you will consider.
Suddenly you want to save it.
It's a contradiction, isn't it?
No, I don't think so.
You know, we have older people who rely on Social Security.
They put the money in a social security lock box in good faith, thinking that they would have the money to pay for retirement as they moved forward.
However, we know that the lock box has actually been raided and looted by Harry Reid and his cronies in Washington, D. C. C.
So the rest is the debt.
So what I want to do.
But this is not true.
At least there's a lot of money on social security.
I just read the trustee's report.
I'm sure you do. until 2037.
You want to take it out of the lock box and throw it into the free market with no government involvement at all.
No, I didn't say that.
You said the government was not involved.
I'm talking about money.
The money in the lock box needs to be left in the lock box of the elderly citizen.
I have to disagree with you.
I think these are IOUs, not cash in that lock box.
But looking forward to the future, we know there will be no such situation for young workers and we need to personalize them.
It's just a way to expand, saying that sometimes you can do it by privatizing it.
Or sometimes you can do as they do through the federal government.
You know, all the staff at Harry Reid have a Gerda (ph)
This is a personalized account that does not allow the government to enter and raid the lock box.
This is what all of us should have and what we can rely on.
Reston: You mean there are more lockboxes than Gore.
But the point is, you want to put it into the private sector.
You want the private sector to rule.
Now, if this plan is implemented, if the Sharron point plan is implemented a few years ago, millions of seniors will lose all their money.
No, that's not true, because-
Of course.
Angle: No, no, because once we start personalizing these accounts --
I'm not the only one who feels that way.
Paul Ryan has his road map and he feels that way.
Congressman Wisconsin? ANGLE: Yes.
Somehow, we need to provide some no-
In fact, everyone admits that this will not happen in 27 years.
Let's talk about work.
Let's clarify, because, you know, it's controversial.
This is probably the biggest issue in the campaign.
This is what you said at the campaign.
Now, this is the ad for the Harry Reid campaign.
Look at this. OK.
That's what you said.
We don't have a tape on this, "People ask me, 'How are you going to develop your job in your state?
Well, this is not my job in America. S.
Senator, bring industry to the country.
That's the job of the deputy governor.
This is the job of your state senator and member.
This is your secretary of state's job of creating climate in this state. You all come. ” All right.
I can understand the argument.
However, that's why you accused Harry Reid of working on this project. (
Start Video Editing)
Angle: Harry Reid has been burning our economy with high unemployment and high foreclosure rates, even to the point where Obama agreed with Harry Reid.
If you come to Las Vegas, you will be a fan.
What really matters to the Nevada people is that they need to work.
They need to know that they can stay at home. (END VIDEO CLIP)
Okay, here, you think there are both ways.
You said it's not an American job. S.
Senators create jobs, and then you accuse Harry Reid of not creating jobs.
Perspective: of course, work in the United StatesS.
Senators will create an environment conducive to job creation, which means tax cuts and less government regulation.
But what Harry Reid has been doing is proposing policies that actually regulate more business. Obama-
First of all, care has put in place so many regulations that they have to choose and choose jobs that cannot provide jobs.
So what happened was that he was always the key.
Please keep in mind that the president can only make suggestions.
Harry Reid has abolished all of these legislation and if we continue to do so, these stimulus programs should keep the unemployment rate below 8%.
Okay, it's over now.
It's 14% now. (CROSS TALK)
Angle: That's right.
Our debt is deeper.
So seriously, I put it all under the feet of Harry Reid because he's been pushing --
Reston: You mean he didn't bring any work to the state, member.
Harry Reid has created a variety of jobs.
You can always see these press conferences.
Local government, state government.
Who brought those jobs?
Are you not going to praise him for that?
Angle: not much because the government does not really create jobs.
In a sense, part of it
Time is not work.
People want a job that's really good and has a future, and that's really something they can count on to pay for their mortgage. (END VIDEOTAPE)
John Reston ended Sharon Anle's political career at Renault tonight.
More tomorrow
The "Countdown to Keith albeman" is now on.
This is a report card in a hurry.
This copy may not be in final form and may be updated.
End Copyright 2010 roll call
All materials herein are protected by US copyright law and may not be copied, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of the roll call.
You may not change or delete any trademark, copyright or other notice in a copy of the content.