Guests: Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Rep. Phil Roe, Rep. Trent Franks, Michael
Reagan, Kerry Kennedy, George McGovern
LAWRENCE O‘DONNELL, HOST: Thank you, my sister, Rachel.
MADDOW: Thank you, bro.
O‘DONNELL: Thanks.
Sargent Shriver, who most of you would know as Maria‘s father and Arnold Schwarzenegger‘s father-in-law died today at the age of 95. He was, by all accounts, everything you would hope a father and grandfather would be. He was also a Democratic vice presidential candidate on the 1972 ticket with George McGovern, who will join us later.
Sargent Shriver was a good and decent public servant. No one ever had to tell him to be civil and respectful with members of the other party.
Both parties have been saying they want a restoration of Shriver-style civility in Washington in the aftermath of the Tucson massacre. But decency is not an easy post to hold if you don‘t really mean it.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
(MUSIC)
SAVANNAH GUTHRIE, NBC NEWS: Republicans have been waiting for it.
Today, they began their attempt to repeal health care reform.
CHUCK TODD, NBC NEWS: The type of heated political rhetoric that characterized last spring‘s health care fight is now under scrutiny.
O‘DONNELL (voice-over): After a week of promising a civil tone, Republicans in the House pick up where they left off.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It‘s a little chilly, isn‘t it?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I rise today in support of the repeal of the job-killing Obamacare legislation.
REP. STEVE KING ®, IOWA: It‘s a cancer, repeal it completely.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is largely symbolic. They know they‘re not going to get through the Senate.
O‘DONNELL: The Republican attack on health care reform sounds very familiar.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Obamacare was a huge mistake.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It‘s time to repeal this law.
O‘DONNELL: And the new minority leader‘s reaction?
MADDOW: Do you think that members of Congress who are voting to repeal health reform should be called on to also reject their own government provided health insurance?
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA), MINORITY LEADER: Yes.
MADDOW: The Republican support for repeal is dropping.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is exactly what we said we would do.
O‘DONNELL: Well, not exactly what they said they would do.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Repeal and replace.
O‘DONNELL: Today, we heard the repeal.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Repeal.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Repeal.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Repeal.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Repeal.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Repeal.
O‘DONNELL: But where was the replace?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This bill isn‘t repeal and replace. It‘s repeal and forget.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They talk about somehow that they‘ve got a magic potion.
CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC HOST: What are they gaining from all this effort to repeal?
REP. DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (D), FLORIDA: To name one area of health care, one, where there have been job losses? I would suspect that we would here crickets chirping.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
O‘DONNELL: Good evening from New York.
As the condition of Congresswoman Gabby Giffords continues to improve in Arizona, the House has begun debate on the bill to repeal the Democrats‘ health care bill and is expected to vote sometime tomorrow evening. In deference to events in Arizona, House Speaker John Boehner has stopped calling the health care legislation “job-killing” and now calls it the job-destroying health care bill.
And as for other Republicans?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS)
REP. TED POE ®, TEXAS: If you like the efficiency of the post office, the competent of FEMA and the compassion of the IRS, we will love the nationalized health care bill.
REP. MICHELE BACHMANN ®, MINNESOTA: The American people have said no to expansive of government. They‘ve said no to high costs associated with government taking over one private sector industry after another. We aren‘t going to just check the box off and say that we‘ve had one vote and we‘re going to move on to other topics. We‘re staying full-square behind the repeal of Obamacare and our commitment to defund it going forward.
(END VIDEO CLIPS)
O‘DONNELL: Joining me now: Congressman Dennis Kucinich, Democrat of Ohio, and Congressman Phil Roe, Republican of Tennessee, who is also a medical doctor.
Congressman Kucinich, how would you assist the tone as Congress gets back to work?
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH (D), OHIO: Somber. Members are certainly mindful that one of our colleagues is struggling for life in a Tucson hospital. They are aware that staffers were injured and one staffer lost his life, that other innocent people were killed in Tucson.
And, you know, members of Congress get the Congress because they have a connection with people. This is a national tragedy. We‘re going back to work still feeling that, and I think it‘s having an effect.
I see—I see members of Congress, Democrat and Republican, making an effort to go across the aisle and talk with each other. There really is a feeling that we need to—we may not close ranks on an issue, but we understand that we need to try to proceed in a way that is civil.
O‘DONNELL: And, Congressman Kucinich, are you going with the move for Democrats and Republicans to sit together at the State of Union address?
KUCINICH: Oh, I think that‘s a great idea. And I, you know, I certainly will have no problem doing that. I work both sides of the aisle. I‘ve been doing that ever since I‘ve been in Congress.
I think it‘s important for us to recognize that there are issues that are much bigger than whether a Democrat or a Republican. There‘s something about a core of what it means to be an American and how we really need to recognize the essential unity that binds us as Americans and especially at this time of grief.
O‘DONNELL: Congressman Phil Roe, you are a physician just like Bill Frist, who was the Republican leader of the United States Senate. I want you to listen to what Bill Frist said today about repealing health care reform.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DR. BILL FRIST ®, FORMER TN SENATOR: It is not the bill that they would have written. It‘s not the bill that I would have drafted. But it is the law of the land, and it is the platform, the fundamental platform upon which all future efforts to make this system better for that patient, for that family, for that community will be based. And that‘s a fact. There has many strong elements, and those elements, whatever happens, need to be preserved, need to be cuddled, need to be snuggled, need to be promoted and need to be implemented.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: Dr. Roe, how do you respond to that second opinion from Dr. Frist?
REP. PHIL ROE, M.D. ®, TENNESSEE: Well, I know Dr. Frist well and have great respect for him. I just respectfully disagree.
I think that we have had an experience in the state of Tennessee with managed care health, and it has been to say the least a failure.
Lawrence, we talked a couple of weeks ago when I was on the show about why I came to Congress, and I agree with what Representative Kucinich just said about the mood in the Congress right now. When I came here, I came about as nonpartisan as you could come. I‘ve never seen a Republican or Democrat heart attack. I‘ve never seen a Republican, never operated on a Republican or Democrat cancer. These are just people problems.
We have legitimate disagreements about how we solve these problems. And certainly, if we have time on the show today, I‘d like to go into those in Tennessee and why I‘d like to see us repeal this and have a better bill. It‘s not repeal and that‘s the only thing. We have a lot of great ideas about replacement.
Let me give you one of my frustrations. There are about 10 of us that
12 of us in our doctors caucus, and not any of us were consulted on this bill that was passed. That was very frustrating to me to bring 30 years of experience in health care and never be asked. We had 80 amendments. One of my amendments I‘m going to submit next week is a bill to repeal of IPAB, and we can talk about that later, wasn‘t even voted on. We couldn‘t even get a vote on the House floor in 80 amendments. And that was very, very frustrating for me.
O‘DONNELL: Congressman Kucinich, the Republicans made a great deal of the polling, a fact that keep coming up during last year‘s debate, that a majority, slightly over 50 percent were opposed to the Democratic bill, the Obama bill, however it was described, although there was much higher support for individual components of it, like the public option.
The overall bill was treated as—with a slight majority in most polls in opposition to it. Now, only 26 percent in an “A.P.” poll, only 26 percent want repeal. And so, we see now the Republicans mounting an effort that is counter to what polls are saying.
Do you hear Republicans citing polls now that they‘re operating legislatively in opposition to what the polls support?
KUCINICH: Well, you know, first of all, I want to say I trust the integrity of my good friend, Congressman Roe, Dr. Roe. We have a difference of opinion.
The polls that have come out would indicate that the public is starting to focus even more strongly on what the repeal of the health care legislation would mean. I mean, there‘s a report out today that said 129 million Americans have pre-existing conditions. So, if you repeal the pre-existing conditions and don‘t require insurance companies to cover people with pre-existing conditions, it‘s going to effects about, you know, almost a third—more than a third of the country.
In addition to that, you have to keep in mind that there are 50 million Americans without any health insurance at all. I mean, that‘s a number that we ought to pay attention to. We don‘t have to take a poll about that. That is a fact. Read the Kaiser Foundation‘s recent report in that regard.
O‘DONNELL: Congressman Roe, are Republicans worried about taking a legislative action and taking a vote in the House of Representatives that is opposed by, in the poll we just saw, it‘s opposed by 62 percent of the public?
ROE: But I would argue, Dennis, if we had a poll on—I mean, Dennis and Lawrence, that we had a poll the 2nd of November, which was an overwhelming rejection. Not anybody that I know, including the Democrats who ran, ran on the Obamacare plan. People ran to overturn this.
And just to correct a couple things that came out with this 129 million, remember that 61 percent of the people in this country get their health insurance through a private employer. It‘s against the law right now to discriminate for pre-existing conditions. That law is called HIPAA. You can‘t do that now.
The other part is if you currently have Medicaid or Medicare, that also prohibits the pre-existing condition. And it is a problem. There‘s no question.
Listen, I‘m not here to support insurance companies. I‘ve gone to battle with them over the last 30 years about providing care for my patients. But let‘s be clear about this pre-existing condition issue.
O‘DONNELL: Congressman Kucinich, it is hopeless for this Republican crusade to repeal Obamacare, as they call is now, because the Senate, even though the House will probably pass it, the Senate will not take it up. There will not be a vote. We, obviously, have a Democratic president who would veto anything that came to him in that way.
But with announcements that are coming out of the Senate now of Kent Conrad not running for re-election, Joe Lieberman not running for re-election, the Democratic hold on the Senate looks increasingly shaky. It looks like the Republicans have the momentum now going into the 2012 election to take the Senate, no matter who wins the White House.
And so, some of this activity that you‘re going to see in the Republican House this year may be a dress rehearsal for what we see in the next Congress, possibly controlling both the House and the Senate with Republicans. So, are Democrats taking this Republican legislative activity much more seriously now that it looks like the grip on the Senate may be loosening in the next election?
KUCINICH: Well, let‘s face it. American people voted for the Republicans to be in power. That‘s what Congressman Roe is referring to. That ought to be taken seriously. But it also ought to be challenged in a two-party system.
I think one of the things that‘s going to come out as a result of this effort to repeal the health care bill is that it will bring a renewed discussion of universal single-payer not-for-profit health care Medicare for all, because that‘s real reform. That‘s reform which says we don‘t want for-profit medicine. We want not-for-profit health care.
And the reform that we have now is only within the context of a for-profit system. You know, in a way, we‘re debating around the edges of a much deeper central question, and that is: why should we go to insurance companies to determine whether people have health care or not? Insurance companies make money not providing health care.
O‘DONNELL: Congressman Kucinich, that is the beginning of a great debate I would like you and Congressman Roe to have on this show at another time.
We‘re out of time for tonight. Congressman Phil Roe, Republican of Tennessee, and Congressman Dennis Kucinich, Democrat of Ohio—thank you both for your time and your tone tonight. Thank you both.
ROE: Thank you.
KUCINICH: Thank you.
O‘DONNELL: After the massacre in Tucson, one congressman says he wishes there would have been one more gun there that day. That congressman, Trent Franks, joins me next.
And this afternoon came the sad news of the passing of Sargent Shriver. President Obama remembered the Kennedy family-in-law as one of the brightest lights of the greatest generation. Kerry Kennedy and George McGovern will join us to pay tribute to Sargent Shriver.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: As the House returned to work today, Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy introduced her legislation to crack down on the kind of ammunition clip used in the Tucson shooting. Up next, we‘ll talk to one of McCarthy‘s colleagues who says the problem that day was not the ammunition.
And later, the growing public fight between the sons of Roland Reagan. Michael Reagan says Ron Reagan is embarrassing the family. We‘ll hear from Michael Reagan in tonight‘s “Spotlight.”
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: Captain Mark Kelly says he does not blame Jared Loughner‘s parents for the Tucson tragedy that left six dead and 14 wounded, including his wife, Gabby Giffords. He considers himself a forgiving person and would even be willing to meet with Loughner‘s parents.
“I‘m sure they love their son,” he told ABC News. “And they must be as distraught over this as all of us are.”
Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy‘s spouse was also shot by a deranged gunman in 1993. McCarthy‘s husband and five others did not survive that shooting. McCarthy has been battling for stricter gun laws ever since. And today, she formally introduced a bill in the House that would permanently ban ammunition clips with a capacity higher than 10 rounds.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. CAROLYN MCCARTHY (D), NEW YORK: They are not need for the average citizen. These are basically an addition to a gun, and I‘m saying “to a gun,” because we are not taking away the right of anyone owning a gun. That‘s already been settled by the Supreme Court. But it doesn‘t mean that we can‘t do something towards gun safety to save lives.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: Both Loughner and the gunman who killed McCarthy‘s husband were tackled and subdued while changing their high-capacity ammunition clips. If they had had standard capacity clips, their killing sprees would have been stopped sooner and their body counts would be lower. McCarthy‘s bill currently has 42 co-sponsors in the House. Not one is a Republican.
Joining me now, Republican congressman from Arizona, Trent Franks.
Thank you very much for joining me tonight, Congressman Franks.
REP. TRENT FRANKS ®, ARIZONA: Lawrence, thanks for having me on.
O‘DONNELL: Congressman, don‘t you wish Jared Loughner had a smaller capacity ammunition clip when he went to Gabby Giffords‘ event in Tucson?
FRANKS: Lawrence, I wish that Jared Loughner had the capacity to have a moral impulse towards fellow human beings and a commitment to protect them as children of God. That‘s the real issue here.
You know, from the very first hours of this tragedy, Lawrence, I have listened to the left try to politicize this while people are making funeral arrangements for lost loved ones. And I have to tell you, I think that when the left says, well, it‘s the rhetoric or, well, it‘s the Tea Party or, well, it‘s Sarah Palin—you know, I guess, first of all, I‘d like to say if every person on the earth had the respect for innocent human life that Sarah Palin does, we wouldn‘t have violence anywhere on any corner of the globe.
And I‘m just frustrated that in this tragedy, that people have tried to politicize this and have tried to make everything but a crazed killer the problem. The real problem here is that whatever statement this lunatic was trying to make, he was willing to kill innocent children of God to do it. He had no respect for innocent human life, and that is the great challenge of society. If we can‘t put that forward as the central focus here, then, I think we missed the boat on all counts.
O‘DONNELL: Congressman Franks, I‘ll try again. Do you wish that his gun held 10 bullets instead of 31 bullets?
FRANKS: I wish he had not had a gun and he shouldn‘t have a gun at all. He was, I think, mentally ill, and we have laws against that in many places. And I think to focus on the clip is like saying that, you know, we‘ll combat drunk driving by limiting the size of fuel tanks.
The bottom line is that the real focus here should be on the killer and not the gun. The gun was essentially the same type of gun that police officers use in across Europe and in many places here and perhaps, you know, you mentioned a quote that I made earlier. You didn‘t mention the context of the quote. If perhaps a police officer or someone there was responsible, maybe very few people would have had to die. Maybe the gunman would have been stopped before he started. We don‘t know.
But I do know this: it wasn‘t the gun that was the problem. It wasn‘t Sarah Palin that was a problem. And it wasn‘t the rhetoric that was the problem. It wasn‘t the Tea Party that was a problem.
It was a crazed lunatic without regard for innocent human life. That was the problem.
O‘DONNELL: Well, you did entertain the hypothetical that you wished there was someone else there with a gun who could have—
FRANKS: You left out the last—you left out the second part of the quote.
O‘DONNELL: Go ahead.
FRANKS: I was responding to when people were saying it was the gun, it was the gun, it was the gun. And I said, well, perhaps, if someone—an additional gun has been there in responsible hands, I said in responsible hands. We have the—you know, the truth is very few people would advocate taking guns out of the hands police officers. They think police officers should have guns to be able to stand against those who have no regard for innocent human life, and I agree with that.
But the real argument is then that it‘s not the gun, it‘s whose hands its in that‘s the issue. And my quote was in responsible hands, and again, it was in response in an effort by the left to say that the gun was the problem. That wasn‘t the focus of my comments here in the media here at all. I‘ve been trying to essentially make the case.
And again tonight, I make the case that the real challenge in our society is to see each other as children of God, as fellow human beings. And if we did that, the rhetoric would be transformed, the debate itself would have a whole new emphasis, and maybe we could se this last best hope of mankind extended for future generations a little longer.
O‘DONNELL: OK. Your actual quote was, “I wish there had been one more gun there that day in the hands of a responsible person.”
FRANKS: Yes, in response—in response to people who were saying that the gun was the problem.
O‘DONNELL: A responsible person—a responsible, Congressman, would have been a police officer, let‘s say a very well-trained in firearms New York City police officers. You are aware, aren‘t you, sir, that most of the bullets fired by American police officers miss their target. The overwhelming majority of bullets fired by police officers always miss their target.
So, what the hypothetical you‘re entertaining is an extremely reckless one in which bullets would be fired, very likely miss their target, according to law enforcement records on how handguns are used there.
I‘m asking you to entertain another hypothetical, and that hypothetical is, imagine this event occurred in 2003 when Jared Loughner, by federal law enacted by the Democrats, 10 years earlier, would not have been allowed to get his hands on a magazine that held 30 bullets. He only would have been able to fire 10. Then he would have had to reload, and those heroes who stopped him when he tried to reload would have stopped him after firing 10 and more citizens of Arizona would be alive today in your state if that magazine held only 10 bullets.
I‘ll ask you again—do you wish Jared Loughner‘s magazine only held 10 bullets instead of the 31 that he fired?
FRANKS: And I will tell you again, sir, that I wish he had not had a gun at all.
O‘DONNELL: So, you‘re not going to answer that question about the magazine? Will you answer the question about the magazine?
(CROSSTALK)
FRANKS: I will on one basis, on one basis. Will you answer the question—you said that the police officers miss all the time—will you say that you‘re glad there were no police officers there that day?
O‘DONNELL: No, I will not say that.
FRANKS: All right. And I will not say, I will not say that—
(CROSSTALK)
O‘DONNELL: -- entertain your hypothetical. Your hypothetical might have been helpful, might not have been not helpful. But now, consider my hypothetical, it‘s 2003. He can only fire 10 bullets. Arizona would have been better off, right? Your constituents in Arizona would have been better off if Jared Loughner, by law, could only fire 10 bullets?
FRANKS: See, I think that that presupposes he couldn‘t have changed clips or all kinds of things.
O‘DONNELL: He couldn‘t change clips because the colonel was there to stop him, because those heroes in that parking lot were there to stop him. We saw him try to change clips, and he couldn‘t do it. That‘s what stopped him.
FRANKS: Well, I give every credit to those who stopped him. But I will say to you again to blame the gun rather than the individual is why we continue to have these problems.
O‘DONNELL: I blame the individual for the first 10 bullets. I blame the law for the next 21 bullets that he fired.
FRANKS: Well, you know, you‘re suggesting that there wouldn‘t be other ways that he could have done that. What if he brought a bomb and all kinds of things?
O‘DONNELL: W know what happened, we know what stopped him. When he had to reload, it was over. We know the facts, Congressman. We know exactly how it ended.
Don‘t pretend that you don‘t know how it ended and who ended it. He couldn‘t reload, and the heroes there on the scene stopped him.
FRANKS: He shot—according to what you‘re saying, he shot 31 times, and there was no one there to stop him that could have. That was the basis of my comment. The fact is that we need to try our best to see each other as children of God and to point the finger at the lack of respect for innocent human life, which is essentially the biggest challenge in all of society. And we need to make sure that crazed lunatics don‘t get weapons and we need to make sure that if they do, that we can stop them if necessary.
O‘DONNELL: There was a lack of respect for human life in the federal government in 2004 when the ban on those magazines was allowed to expire.
FRANKS: Let‘s just take --
O‘DONNELL: Congressman Trent Franks, we got to cut it there. We‘re out of time.
FRANKS: Yes, let‘s take the guns away from everyone, our police officers, everyone. That will solve the problem, right?
O‘DONNELL: Don‘t be silly. Congressman Trent Franks, Republican of Arizona, thank you very much for joining us tonight.
When was President Reagan showing his first signs of Alzheimer‘s? That discussion point in a new book by one of his sons, Ron Reagan, has set off a firestorm of controversy led by his brother, Michael. Michael Reagan is in tonight‘s “Spotlight.”
And later, Republican Tim Pawlenty pretends he‘s opposed to raise the debt ceiling. The former Minnesota governor gets tonight‘s “Rewrite.”
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: On February 6th, the family of President Ronald Reagan, including all three of his surviving children, are expected to gather at the Reagan Presidential Library in California to celebrate the 100th anniversary of his birth. But like all family gatherings, it might not be tension-free.
Sons Ron Reagan and Michael Reagan have written new books about their father. Ron Reagan says that he saw what he later believed to be early signs of Alzheimer‘s Disease in President Reagan while his father was still in office, an assertion Michael Reagan is condemning, writing on Twitter that Ron was, quote, “an embarrassment to his father when he was alive and is an embarrassment to his mother, Nancy, now.”
Today on ABC‘s “Good Morning America,” Ron Reagan responded to Michael.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RON REAGAN, SON OF PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN: I hadn‘t really thought about what Mike might say. The bit about embarrassment to your mother, that‘s a little strange. I just spoke to my mother last night, and she didn‘t mention embarrassment.
Well, I asked her, because I knew she was worried about me. She was like are you all right? Yes, I‘m fine. They‘re going to ask me what you think of the book, so what should I say to them. You tell them that I‘ve read it. I loved it. It made me cry. And I‘m very proud of you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: With me now, Michael Reagan, the author of “The New Reagan Revolution, How Ronald Reagan‘s Principles Can Restore America‘s Greatness.” Michael, has Nancy read “The New Reagan Revolution” and does she love it? Did it make her cry?
MICHAEL REAGAN, SON OF PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN: I don‘t know. If my mother were alive, she probably would have read “The New Reagan Revolution.” My mother, of course, being Jane Wyman. I think it was just not too many hours ago that my brother did put out a statement that, in fact, he had gotten some of the facts wrong.
It‘s sad that he did get facts wrong on our father and Alzheimer‘s. I serve as a chairman—
O‘DONNELL: He just clarified what hospital he was taken to at a certain time.
REAGAN: But the reality of it was there‘s nothing to back up what he said. I served as the chairman of the John Douglass French Alzheimer‘s Foundation. I deal with this all the time. I don‘t play doctor as chairman of the foundation. I was offended, as many people across this country were offended.
O‘DONNELL: You never know when Alzheimer‘s starts, though, Michael. Isn‘t it fair—there is nothing more fun to watch than an Irish family fight. I‘ve been in plenty of them myself. Believe me.
Listen, we never know when Alzheimer‘s starts. And family member, after it‘s discovered, they kind of look back and they go, hey, remember that time when he couldn‘t find his keys? These little tiny things they start to suspect retroactively. Isn‘t it perfectly fair for your brother to look back at certain moments and say, I wonder if maybe it was then? I have a feeling that something was happening then?
REAGAN: Yes, you don‘t write about it when you really don‘t have the facts, and you have every doctor that has ever looked at Ronald Reagan, all the tests ever done on Ronald Reagan during that period that all come up absolutely negative. It‘s pretty easy to figure out what Alzheimer‘s is when you go in there and you see what‘s going on with the brain.
Ronald Reagan, in his actions and everything he did, did not show signs of Alzheimer‘s during his presidency, and what he accomplished as a president of the United States in his last four years. For Ron to bring this up—listen, I have, for years, being conservative, looked at people like Bill Maher and others try to say and tell the world that Ronald Reagan must have had Alzheimer‘s when he was president of the United States of America; that‘s why he was such a terrible president.
For one of the sons to write into a book that he thinks he might have seen it.
O‘DONNELL: Might have. He doesn‘t reach a medical conclusion.
REAGAN: All you have to do is write it, and look what‘s going on.
O‘DONNELL: Michael, why can‘t you just say I disagree with my brother. I never saw any evidence of it. There was no medical evidence of it and I disagree with him. Why do you have to say he was an embarrassment to his parents?
REAGAN: Because I made my statement to be a strong statement out of the box. Let me tell you something. Here‘s somebody we don‘t even think he voted for his father back 1984 and 1980. I don‘t know. All I know is he never campaigned for his father. Maureen and I campaigned all over the country for his—
(CROSS TALK)
O‘DONNELL: They never understand this in their family fights. When you throw this knockout punch on your brother, it does not add credibility to your side of the argument. It just makes you sound mean, Michael.
REAGAN: I may not have credibility here, but the reality of it is that when he goes out and makes statements like that into a book—and that‘s the excerpt that he puts out, and that‘s the lead story, and now everybody is questioning whether he had it or not—does a disservice to the family and a disservice to his father.
O‘DONNELL: Just say I disagree? Which one of you had more access to Ronald Reagan when he was president?
REAGAN: I couldn‘t tell you.
O‘DONNELL: Michael, you guys, come on. When you get together in February, shake hands. You both will be selling books by then. It will be OK, right?
REAGAN: It‘s OK with me. I work with this disease on a regular
basis. When you start saying that somebody has it when they don‘t have it
--
O‘DONNELL: He‘s not a doctor. You‘re not a doctor. Sons have a right to make their own observations. Michael Reagan, author of “The New Reagan Revolution,” thank you very much for joining us tonight. Calm down this family feud, OK?
Coming up, another family central to American politics, the Kennedys, has suffered another loss. Sargent Shriver, husband to the late Eunice Kennedy Shriver, died today. We‘ll remember him with George McGovern, who picked Shriver to be his running mate. And we‘ll also be joined by Kerry Kennedy.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: Time for tonight‘s Rewrite. Former Minnesota Governor Republican Tim Pawlenty has been running for president for the last two years. He‘s still a couple of months away from formally announcing his campaign, but he‘s making the talk show rounds. He has authored the mandatory campaign book entitled “Courage to Stand, an American Story.”
And he will head to the all important state of Iowa to meet with Republican primary voters next month. He‘s also staking out simple-minded positions on the critical issues of the day, like raising the debt ceiling. He, like 71 percent of America in a recent poll, said he is opposed to raising the debt ceiling.
We all know Tim Pawlenty is smart enough to know that not raising the debt ceiling would create a worldwide economic depression, the likes of which we have never seen. Hence Chuck Todd‘s question to Pawlenty on this network this morning on his position on the debt ceiling.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHUCK TODD, NBC NEWS POLITICAL DIRECTOR: Do you really think this is good for the American economy? Forget the politics of it a moment. It may be good politics. Is this good for the economy?
TIM PAWLENTY ®, FORMER GOVERNOR OF MINNESOTA: Well, I think it is, Chuck. I‘m against raising the debt ceiling, but I‘m also offering a reasonable third way, another idea that I think would help the debate. And it‘s this: President Obama is offering a false choice between more debt and defaulting on our obligations to the federal government‘s outside creditors.
So we take the default issue off the table. That‘s the point of my proposal. And then say to the Congress, we‘ll sequence the spending, pay those debt obligations with the interests as they‘re due, make sure the military gets paid and taken care of. And then let‘s have the debate on entitlement reform that everybody always gets on your show and shows like this, and say, Savannah, Chuck, it‘s time to make the tough decisions, and they never do.
The only way the politicians will make the tough decisions is to put their backs against the wall.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: What you just heard is idiotic and brilliant. Idiotic as a governing policy. But don‘t worry, if there is a President Pawlenty, he will have no problem following in the footsteps of every president before him by rewriting his position on the debt ceiling and raising it whatever necessary.
What is brilliant about this idiotic policy statement is it‘s exactly what Republican primary voters want to hear. Republican primary do not reward sober, conscientious, responsible policy proposals. Republican primary voters beg to be pandered to on all things, from evolution to public finance. And Pawlenty has now shown that he can pander with the best of them.
He knows raising the debt ceiling is the only responsible thing to do under the circumstances. And he knows that it will be done. But since he has absolutely no responsibility to get it done, he can lie about it and tell 71 percent of the public what they want to hear. Tim Pawlenty has been my pick for front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination for the last two years, because he‘s the only one in the field who has no prohibitive negative already built into his candidacy.
And now that we see how smooth he is at the necessary pandering to the primary electorate, the odds of him winning the nomination have improved. I can‘t wait to hear what he has to say about evolution.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: Robert Sargent Shriver Jr. left us today with a political and governing resume unlike any other. He was married to John F. Kennedy‘s sister, Eunice, for 56 years. Eunice passed away in 2009.
On Sunday, Sargent Shriver was admitted to a hospital in suburban Washington. Earlier today, the family announced that he died at age of 95 after suffering from Alzheimer‘s Disease.
He fought for economic opportunity for all Americans as the architect of President Lyndon Johnson‘s war on poverty. He was the founding director of the Peace Corps from 1961 to 1966. He became America‘s ambassador to France in 1968, developing a rapport with French President Charles De Gaulle, working through a time of strained relations over France‘s recognition of communist China.
Shriver also ran for vice president on the ticket with George McGovern in 1972. Sargent Shriver leaves a lasting and important legacy, a legacy of peace, promoting welfare and human dignity. Brian Williams of “NBC Nightly News” spoke with Sargent Shriver‘s niece, Caroline Kennedy, earlier today, before he passed away, about his accomplishments.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CAROLINE KENNEDY, NIECE OF SARGENT SHRIVER: Sarge Shriver is just a giant in our family and such a wonderful man and loving and devout. I think he really put his faith and his love for his wife, my aunt Eunice, into action every single day in an extraordinary way. Both he believed in the political process, as well as a life of service in so many other ways.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: Joining me now on the telephone, another of Sargent Shriver‘s nieces, Kerry Kennedy. Kerry, thank you very much for joining us tonight.
KERRY KENNEDY, NIECE OF SARGENT SHRIVER: It‘s great to be here.
O‘DONNELL: Kerry, what was it like for your cousin Maria when her father was diagnosed with Alzheimer‘s and dealing with him in what became his final years?
KENNEDY: I‘m remembering tonight at Eunice‘s—just before Eunice‘s funeral, the scene where Sarge said to Maria, who are you? She said, I‘m Maria, your daughter. And he said who are you? And she said I‘m Maria, your daughter. And he said it again, who are you. And she said, I‘m Maria, your my daughter?
And he said, you‘re my daughter. She said yes. And he said, I must be a very lucky man. I think, you know, that is so much about—personifies so much of what Sarge was about, this kind of incredible joy, this incredible enthusiasm, and this love that he shared with everyone, and his beliefs, his belief in everyone around him.
O‘DONNELL: And always knowing how lucky he was. Along with creating the Peace Corps, he led President Johnson‘s war on poverty. Their discussion about it was captured in a PBS documentary “American Idealist.” Let‘s listen to that for a moment.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LYNDON JOHNSON, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I‘m going to announce your appointment at the press conference.
SARGENT SHRIVER, FOUNDER OF THE PEACE CORP: What press conference?
JOHNSON: This afternoon.
SHRIVER: The problem is it will knock the crap out of the Peace Corps.
JOHNSON: I‘m not taking you away from that. I‘m just giving you a billion dollars more to work with. If you can‘t run a hundred million program in your left hand, and a billion with your right hand, you‘re not as smart as I think you are.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think he saw the perfect match between what Shriver had done on the Hill for the Peace Corp and what he could do with the war on poverty.
JOHNSON: I am going to make it clear that you‘re Mr. Poverty, at home and abroad. You ought to be. You got the responsibilities. You got the authority. You got the power. You got the money.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: Two very different men, Sarge Shriver and LBJ. Kerry Kennedy, does it surprise you to hear your uncle in that conversation with the president?
KENNEDY: You know, I think that he was so committed to the Peace Corps and then committed to the war on poverty, And his whole life was really devoted to helping—to helping people. It was through his great, deep faith, his extraordinary love.
He was completely in love with Eunice from the day they met until the day he died today. And his commitment to those who don‘t have a voice and who are in trouble, whether in the United States or around the world, is a great legacy of Sargent Shriver.
O‘DONNELL: What I love about his exchange with LBJ there, Kerry, is he has no concern about career advancement. His concern is entirely with what will this do to the Peace Corps.
KENNEDY: Absolutely. That is also so much about why so many people loved him and do love him. I thing you‘re going to see just—it‘s amazing how many Peace Corps volunteers come up to me all the time and say, I knew your uncle. I worked for your uncle. He was in the Peace Corps under your uncle.
Sometimes we immediately think they must be talking about President Kennedy. But so often they‘re talking about Sargent Shriver and how he transformed so many people‘s lives.
O‘DONNELL: Kerry Kennedy, thank you very much for joining us tonight.
And we are all sorry for your loss.
KENNEDY: Thank you very much.
O‘DONNELL: Now, in an MSNBC exclusive, I‘d like to bring in the man who shared the presidential ticket with Sargent Shriver in 1972, George McGovern. Senator McGovern, thank you very much for joining us tonight?
GEORGE MCGOVERN, FORMER SENATOR: It‘s my privilege.
O‘DONNELL: Senator, you new Sargent Shriver well before you put him on the ticket. But tell us what you learned about him after you put him on the presidential ticket. That‘s a real test of a person, isn‘t it?
MCGOVERN: It really is, and he filled the bill 100 percent. He was a marvelous running mate, as one would expect, from the best human being I think I ever was associated with in public life.
We all have moments we especially remember. I recall the day after the presidential campaign. We came back to Washington on separate airplanes, but we met again at the airport. Sarge walked over and put his arm around me. He said, George, we lost 49 states, but we didn‘t lose our souls. I never forgot that.
This was a man who had a remarkable soul, a great heart. He had the capacity to feel deeply about the problems of needy people, the poor, the sick, the hungry. Yet, to those around him, he was always smiling. As the Bible says, be of good cheer. Sarge was a man of good cheer, and I think he‘s unique in that respect.
O‘DONNELL: If he had been a member of any other clan, he would have been by far, in world accomplishment, the most important person in his family. But there he was living, to some extent, within the Kennedy clan, obviously under the shadow of president Jack Kennedy, Bobby Kennedy. Did you ever get the sense that this was someone who was uncomfortable being in the number two slot? Being a couple steps out of the center of the photograph?
MCGOVERN: You know, that‘s interesting. I never saw the slightest sign of that. As a matter of fact, if he had not been traveling in Russia and out of reach—this was in the days before cell phones—I was going to call him and ask him to be my vice presidential running mate before we had turned to anyone else. We couldn‘t find him. He was in Russia and just unreachable.
I wish now I had named him and we had just gone ahead on the assumption he wouldn‘t say no. But that was a situation that made me see from the beginning that this was a rare man.
He couldn‘t have been more cooperative during the campaign. He never once gave the slightest indication that he resented being in the number two spot. As far as I‘m concerned, he‘s in my number one spot.
O‘DONNELL: And when you had to pick him—your campaign had a problem and you had to replace your vice presidential nominee and calm the waters with that choice. It did have the instant effect of being an accepted choice of by all observers out there. He was exactly what you needed when you needed him, wasn‘t he?
MCGOVERN: Exactly. He moved through that campaign in a way that gave all of us a lift. The people campaigning with him got a big lift. The people campaigning with me picked up on that. He raised my morale.
Our campaign was in a real crisis when we had to replace my first running mate, Senator Eagleton, who incidentally was also a very good man. But when Sarge came aboard that campaign, the whole spirit of the campaign benefited from it.
O‘DONNELL: We‘re going to have to leave it there. It is an honor to have you here tonight, Senator McGovern. I‘m sorry that it‘s under these circumstances.
Former presidential candidate and Senator George McGovern, thank you for joining us.
That‘s tonight‘s LAST WORD. “COUNTDOWN” is up next.
END
Copyright 2011 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.>
PASTE THE TRANSCRIPT HERE, LEAVE THE LINK
