tv Countdown With Keith Olbermann MSNBC September 29, 2009 1:00am-2:00am EDT
out on health care. he wants to be inoculated to the best degree that he can, that he's doing everything he can and doing everything he can on health care for a public option and doing everything he can to get the olympics to his hometown. >> is this part of the frenetic presidency, susan? >> doing everything. but i guess i would disagree with my good friend tom in that i don't think you get points for trying to do something and failing. you know, if you're the president of the united states and you're trying to do something, people expect you to succeed. we've seen other foreign leaders go to the olympics and that seems to have been helpful in the past couple years. we know the leader of brazil and other contenders are going to be also in copenhagen. so, i guess i don't think this is damage control. i think that this is an effort to get it. i don't think it gets points for going, trying, and failing on either health care or the olympics. >> will this be seen as boosterism of the united states, an effort in one regional part of the country, chicago, to really sell the economy in this country? does it show he cares about
jobs? my concern about this president has been that he seems to be out of sync with most people. he wants to win that health care thing. most people want jobs. >> well, most people do want jobs. i think this is boosterism but it's boosterism for america and i think it's going to be positive. >> thank you so much. susan page, tom defrank. join us tomorrow for nor "hardball." michael moore the filmmaker and troublemaker will be on this set where tom defrank is. "countdown with keith olbermann" starts right now. which of these stories will you be talking about tomorrow? the health care crisis for americans, the clear and present need for reform as thousands stand in line in texas for the chance to see a doctor. the health care crisis for some democrats. progressives go after senator baucus for not backing the public option. >> senator baucus, i have to ask, whose side are you on?
>> and other groups are now telling blue-dog democrats if you won't help achieve reform then we'll find a different democrat who will. president obama's growing foreign policy problems. days after iran's secret nuclear facility is revealed, they start test firing missiles. in afghanistan as the commander in chief faces criticism for still working on the strategy, the commander on the ground hints just how badly the war was run under president bush. >> sounds like you're trying to deprogram eight years of bad habits. >> exactly. there's an awful lot of bad habits we've got to deprogram. >> bill clinton's conspiracy theory. the former president claims the vast right-wing conspiracy that led to his impeachment still exists today with one major difference. >> not as strong as it was. >> but hasn't the right-wing machine not only survived but thrived and expanded exponentially since bill clinton left office? big top gadhafi, "saturday night live's" take on the rambling address to the u.n.
his excuse, according to the snl writers -- >> on top of this mind-bending jetlag, i've also been having problems with my giant tent. >> and the sales pitch. >> surely it's in the purview of the president to root for america. >> president obama enters the fight to bring the 2016 olympics to chicago. with two wars, the economic crisis and the health care debate, why in the world is he tackling this, too? all that and more now on "countdown." good evening from new york. i'm lawrence o'donnell in for keith olbermann. tomorrow, the single most controversial real element of health care reform goes on the line as the senate finance committee finally debates whether to give americans an affordable, reliable alternative to profit-driven health insurance. and in our number five story tonight, now it is the left firing warning shots to democrats.
if you don't stand up for the public option, you'll have to stand up to us. last week, democratic senator jerry rockefeller said he will bring the public option up for debate and vote in the senate finance committee. in the meantime, several developments. among them, a health care fair held by tv's dr. mehmet oz offering checkups and care to those who need it. almost 1,800 turned up, a record, oz said, and not surprising, since it was held in texas, where a higher percentage of people lack health insurance than in any other state. but if the record-setting plight of their constituents fails to move texas republicans, several liberal groups are hoping home-state pressure will move democrats to support a public option. foremost among them, max baucus of montana, the finance chairman, who did not include a public option in his version of the bill, which is why senator rockefeller has to fight for it tomorrow.
two progressive groups will launch a new ad in montana and in d.c., hitting baucus from the left for failing to back a public option. >> my name is ben parent. i live here in billings, montana, with my beautiful wife and baby boy. last june i collapsed because of congenital heart problems. i need open-heart surgery but have no insurance and no company will insure me. my friends and family have been a blessing. with hearts as big as a montana sky, they've helped with bake sales and benefits. but my wife and i still owe over $100,000 in medical bills. none of this debt would have piled up if i'd had the option of buying into a health insurance plan. private insurance companies need competition. they profit by denying care to people like me. senator baucus, would you take millions of dollars from health and insurance interests that oppose reform and oppose giving families like mine the choice of a public option? i have to ask -- whose side are you on?
>> the progressive change campaign committee and democracy for america are responsible for the contents of this advertising. >> democratic congressman jim cooper, meanwhile, getting even tougher pushback for not backing a public option as a political action committee led by firedog lake are now recruiting candidates to challenge cooper in next year's primaries. robert perrin in "the new york times" today reports that the final senate bill, the version majority leader harry reid will cobble together from the health committee bill and the finance committee bill, will not include a public option according to unnamed senior democratic senate aides. responding to the story, a spokesman for senator reid said any such decision would prejudice tomorrow's outcome for the public option. okay. but will it be in the final senate version? reid's spokesman says, quote, we don't know.
let's bring in dr. howard dean, former governor of vermont and chairman of the democratic party, author of "howard dean's prescription for real health care reform." thanks for joining us tonight, doctor. >> thanks, lawrence. >> governor dean, is there any reason to think the public option really has a shot this week in the senate? you have unnamed senate sources saying it will not be in the final bill, and then the best senator reid's spokesman can come up with is "i don't know" as to whether it will be in the final bill. what's your guess here? >> look, this is a bill that george bush would love. it's a massive redistribution of government taxpayers' money to the insurance industry, exactly the same thing that was going on in the banking industry and other industries on wall street. it is a bad bill, this finance committee bill. it doesn't insure people, and it spends an awful lot of money and it gives it away to the insurance companies. so, i do think ultimately the
bill will have a public option in it because i don't think the democratic party is going to stand for this. >> what's your theory about how you get it? if jay rockefeller doesn't succeed tomorrow, if they go -- and if they then go to the senate floor without it, do you think it gets amended into the bill on the senate floor? how will they get it? >> well, first of all, there's no reason to go to the floor without it. you've already had one committee that's acted on this, chris dodd's committee, that has done the right thing and put in a public option. so, there's no reason you shouldn't have it in the public bill. there will be a vote, and we think that there are 51 or 52 senators, democratic senators, who will vote for some sort of public option. that is really essential. if you don't have a public option, you are wasting nearly a trillion dollars of government money and giving it to the health insurance industry. i think that is a terrible mistake. i know very well that is not what president obama planned on when he was campaigning. and we have just got to get the 51 votes in the senate in order to get this done, and i think we will. >> now, put on your hat as
former chairman of the dnc. how do you feel about seeing democrats attack democrats politically over this and some people trying to get primary challenges against congressmen like jim cooper in tennessee? is that something you would advise against as ultimately self-destructive, or is this a way to get what some might think of as stronger democrats in those seats? >> well, look, here's the problem. the problem is we have a very big majority. but if you don't use your majority, you lose your majority. and that's exactly what's happening right now in the democratic party. there is no reason -- 65% of the people, lawrence, 65% of the american people in a cbs poll that was put out a couple of days ago want a public option. a public option is simply allowing people to sign up for medicare if they're under 65. that's a very good public option. and there's no reason -- you know, i don't understand why these senators aren't voting for what 65% of their constituents want. that is what i don't understand. and of course people are going
to be upset if they ask you to do something, they're paying your salary and you're voting with the people who give you huge campaign contributions. of course people are going to get upset about that. as former dnc chair, i hate to see this happen to the democratic party, but i would just ask the senators, look, we've been through a tough time together, we've worked really hard together to get you a majority, please use your majority for the people of this country, not for the insurance industry. >> no one has better sources on this than robert perrin of the "new york times" and he is also reporting today that harry reid intends to defer to president obama on the tough calls about what should go in the senate bill that he brings out onto the senate floor. so, isn't the white house where all this energy should be focused right now? i mean, jim cooper in the house, you could pass a bill with or without him. he doesn't matter compared to what rahm emanuel and president obama are deciding in the white house should be in that senate bill in order to get to final passage. so, again, isn't that where the
attention should be now? >> the attention -- every democrat's going to sink or swim together on this. if we pass a bill that just is a big giveaway to the insurance industry, which is what the senate's working on right now, every democrat will suffer, from president obama right down to even democrats who vote for the right thing will suffer. we're all in this together as a democratic party, and we've got to do the right thing here. >> step me through a scenario in which a bill comes to the senate floor for the final vote on it, a bill that you oppose, it has no public option, no real cost controls, no ability to really subsidize insurance at the level it would need to be subsidized to make it affordable, and you end up recommending to vote against that. and let's say the vote against that carries on the senate floor. do you then expect that this whole thing could be picked up and started over again and maybe passed next year? >> no. what i would do if that were to happen is i would hope that people would strip out the money from the bill, because it's stupid to give $60 billion of taxpayers' money to the insurance industry every year, and pass the insurance reform.
there is good insurance reform in this bill, and all the five committees -- the finance committee, the health committee, the three committees in the house -- this is stuff we did 15 years ago when i was governor of vermont. it won't insure a lot more people, but it will stop insurance companies from kicking people off their roles as they do now. so, there is some good stuff in this bill. it's just not worth spending all that taxpayer money on. >> former governor howard dean, thanks for your time tonight. >> thanks for having me on. >> joining us now is nicole lamoreaux, executive director of the association of free clinics which sponsored the texas fair we told you about. thank you for joining us. >> thank you for having me. >> so, who shows up at a fair like yours before 5:00 a.m. on a saturday, trying to get free health care in texas? >> well, i think first and foremost we have to say that the lone star association of charitable clinics and the houston charitable clinics showed up and 700 volunteers
showed up first. and then second, the people who showed up there are working americans, people who have jobs but have no health care option. we saw teachers. we saw a former wnba player. these are people who are coming to these free clinics. >> now, one of the things people wonder about in the health care reform legislation is how much pent-up demand is there for people who currently are uninsured and actually need to get a physician's attention? and what is your experience that these clinics show us? >> sure. i think what these clinics are showing us and what free clinics around the united states are showing you is that our numbers have continued to grow. in 2008, we saw 4 million people. in 2009, we are going to see 8 million people. and we do this with little to no state or federal support. and the demand is just continuing to grow and grow. >> now, we've seen these clinics in other parts of the country -- los angeles and tennessee, for example. one of the clinics that you ran in tennessee actually provoked
an insider in the health insurance business to just say, "i can't take this anymore," and he became a whistleblower. these clinics do seem to show us exactly what the need is out there. how do you connect what's going on in these clinics to what's going on in washington? and how do you make that connect in the moment when senators are casting votes? >> well, i think the first thing we need to make sure that the senators understand is that free clinics are different than federally qualified health centers. federally qualified health centers have received money, and in the stimulus package and health reform bill and free clinics haven't received any funds at all. we mobilize thousands of volunteers to service the nation's uninsured. so, i think that's a very big difference. we do have a delivery model that works and we would love to help congress and the president in this discussion so we just continue to go up and explain what we do and who we are and the patients we're servicing every day. >> and how do you choose your locations? i mean, for example, was texas
chosen because it has the highest percentage of uninsured in the country? >> well, of course. i think that when this event came up and it was great that we had a partner with dr. oz, texas being the number-one state for uninsurance and harris county having one in three being uninsured, it seemed like a natural location for us to go. >> so, where do you go from here? do you have another one of these scheduled at this point? >> well, i think what texas showed us is what free clinics do every day. that's just an enormous scale of the patients that free clinics see every day and how we can move patients along. so, right now what we're doing is concentrating on the effort that free clinics have been doing since the 1960s. >> if the single-payer system were to go into effect, this would really put you out of business on free clinics as people have free access around the country. is that the day you're looking forward to? >> well, i think as long as the public option actually takes care of our patients, really what we need to make sure is
that any plan that goes into place gives people access to care and that's complete access to care. so, at this point in time, we're just going to continue servicing the patients who need the service and working with congress and see what we can do in the future. >> nicole lamoreaux, executive director of the national association of free clinics, thanks for your time tonight. >> thank you very much. coming up, the wrong message at the wrong time. iran test fires its most sophisticated missiles ever on the eve of international talks on its nuclear program. what is president obama's next move? and remember the vast right-wing conspiracy? president clinton says it still exists but it's just not so vast anymore. has the former president turned on the tv or listened to the radio lately or even ever been online? that and more ahead. (announcer) when you buy a car what are you really buying? a shiny coat of paint? a list of features? what about the strength of the steel, the integrity of it's desi?
coming up, president obama's foreign policy problems. iran test fires missiles in the middle of concerns over its secret nuclear sites. meantime, the president is gathering his entire national security team to figure out the way forward in afghanistan. [ queen ] want your longwear to give you more? well, get on out of that department store. and into covergirl outlast. no department store longwear gives you so many different ways to last through breakfast lunch and dinner. more choices, more shades, more outlast. ♪ covergirl
with a domestic agenda that would be more than enough for any leader, president obama now faces an expanding set of foreign policy problems that may well end up defining his presidency. in our fourth story on the "countdown," disagreement with in the administration over the war in afghanistan and a new
urgency over what to do about iran. over the past two days, iran successfully test fired medium-range missiles which can reach up to 1,200 miles. that's far enough to reach israel, u.s. military bases in the middle east, and parts of europe. a revolutionary guard commander said, quote, iranian missiles are able to target any place that threatens iran, this just days after the u.s. and its allies disclosed the existence of another uranium enrichment plant in iran. a geneva meeting between iran and the six major powers, including the u.s., is set for this thursday. and the obama administration is working to assemble a new package of far stricter sanctions unless iran agrees to immediate inspections of its nuclear facilities. simultaneously, the obama administration faces an undeniably tough choice on how to proceed in afghanistan. tomorrow the president will meet in the white house situation room to discuss afghanistan with
general david petraeus, general stanley mcchrystal, defense secretary robert gates and secretary of state hillary clinton. general mcchrystal, the u.s. commander in afghanistan, advocates another increase in troop levels for afghanistan. but general mcchrystal has also been frank about how the strategy in afghanistan must be significantly different than that of the past eight years. >> i think that in some areas the breadth of violence, the geographic spread of violence, places to the north and to the west, are a little more than i would have gathered. what i'm really telling people is the greatest risk we can accept is to lose the support of the people here. if the people are against us, we cannot be successful. if the people view us as occupiers and the enemy, we can't be successful, and our casualties will go up dramatically. i'm confident that i will have an absolute chance to provide my assessment and to make my recommendations.
>> former secretary of state colin powell was among those president obama consulted over the weekend as he considers afghanistan strategy. the president also reached out to his former rival senator john mccain for what was described as a brief chat. vice president joe biden reportedly supports a reduced but more focused u.s. presence in the region. the political components of president obama's decision is complicated, as well, since recent public opinion polls do not support a troop increase in afghanistan with many republicans eager to portray the president as weak on national security issues. let's bring in the senior national security and intelligence correspondent from mcclatchy newspapers, jonathan landay. thanks for your time tonight. >> my pleasure. >> what do the iranian missile tests add to the tension of thursday's meeting in geneva? >> well, let's put it in context. the fact is that these missile tests took place as part of a regular military exercise, so they were probably scheduled
anyway. the fact is that they went ahead and they went ahead several days before these very crucial talks in geneva, they went ahead several days after the disclosure that iran is, in fact, building an enhancement -- and has been building a second uraniuim enrichment plant. so, certainly they don't -- they don't do anything in terms of raising the prospect of any kind of agreement being reached this week in geneva. >> now, this is not a top-level meeting in geneva. it's foreign ministers and, in our case, undersecretary of state. hillary clinton says that the u.s. position in that meeting will be to simply say, prove it, when iran repeats its insistence that its nuclear program is only for energy and not for weapons. how will iran respond to that challenge? >> well, we've seen that question put to iran for years now, and we've seen iran respond by saying, well, you know, everything that we're doing is legal, and they're very likely to do that again. the fact is that the facility
that's being constructed, at least according to u.s. intelligence officials, does not have the centrifuges in place. those are the machines that enrich uranium. and, therefore, the question is what would u.n. inspectors be able to see and adduce once iran let them in, when iran lets them in. that's the question. iran has said it would let u.n. inspectors in, but when that is going to take place is the question going to be put to the iranians this week in geneva. the other question, of course, is will the iranians be able to count on china and russia to help them forestall any new sanctions that the united states, britain, and france want to put on iran. >> now, you just returned from afghanistan. do you think that the situation on the ground points to an obvious choice for the president on troop levels now? >> not at all. in fact, it's a very confused situation on the ground. it's one that i don't think anybody really has a firm grip on. i mean, when i went -- and i've
been going to this country for quite a few many years -- i was unaware that the fact, until i went up there, that the taliban has now made -- has now infiltrated into several northern provinces of afghanistan, and, therefore, the situation does not lend itself to an easy answer. if you want to put more troops, if they decide they want to put more troops in, the fact is there is downside to that. the current situation cannot be sustained, and, in fact, if the taliban is not stopped, the dimension of crisis that will take place in that region will be quite huge. and, therefore, it's not an easy thing for the president to decide. >> now, words like "commitment" and "leadership" come up a lot whenever there's an analysis of how the president should make his next move in afghanistan. but there seems to be a knee-jerk reaction to the notion that leadership and commitment can only be expressed by increasing troop levels.
how should the president deal with that if, for example, he chooses a different course, something other than a troop increase? >> we'll have to wait and see. but the fact is those who are advocating increased troop levels are for the most part people who supported the invasion of iraq. and it's because of the invasion of iraq that there haven't been enough troops in afghanistan to deal with the situation there, to have dealt with the situation when it was manageable four or five years ago. now these very same advocates are now saying we need to put more troops in afghanistan. well, the fact is there's still 130,000 american troops in iraq. the question is where are these extra troops going to come from. if you have more troops, that means more targets, which means more violence, which means more civilian deaths, which means more opposition to the u.s. and nato presence in afghanistan. and, therefore, it's not an easy prospect just to sit and advocate. >> and finally, if he does go for more troop increase in
afghanistan, how can president obama explain that to a -- to his country to get a majority support for that which currently is not there? >> it's going to be very difficult. and the fact is that a lot of people believe that the answer is not a military answer. the fact is that there's a lack of governance in afghanistan, there's a lack of justice that the people of afghanistan don't enjoy, and the members of that government are very powerful people, warlords in that country are able to get a level of justice that other people don't have. and that may be a way of dealing with the situation other than just pumping more military force into that country. >> jonathan landay of mcclatchy newspapers, thanks for joining us. >> my pleasure. if all of those waiting foreign policy issues weren't enough for president obama, over the weekend he decided to throw himself into the 2016 olympics
bid for chicago. we'll talk about the politics of the olympics and the instant right-wing attack on the president for trying to win the olympics for the usa. also ahead, no news story could adequately convey the utter absurdity of moammar gadhafi's trip to new york last week. that's why we have "saturday night live." ondering, how does cheez-it® do it? - i know! - three, two, one. ( beeping, whirring ) ♪ - baking complete! - ( bell dings ) cheez-it®! where do you come up with this stuff? hi, dad! lots and lots of cheese baked into little, little bites. cheez-it®. the big cheese.
says it's still around. it's just not as big as it was when he had to deal with it. chicago's push for the olympics. chicago's most prominent private citizen, oprah winfrey, will be in copenhagen to woo the international olympic committee. so will first lady michelle obama. now president obama has decided to make the trip, too. with everything he's working on right now, why is he adding chicago's olympic dreams to his schedule? and moammar mayhem hits "saturday night live." the show imagines what gadhafi's traveling circus would look like if he apologized to the u.n. for his rambling speech and tent problems. hey thanks for the window seat. oh please. you got the presentation? oh yeah right here. let me stow that for you, sir. thank you.
you know, just to be safe i used fedex office print online. oh you did? yeah -- they printed and bound 20 copies of the presentation, shipped it to portland, they're gonna be there waiting for us. that's a good idea. yeah. you have a nice flight. thank you. (announcer) print online...you upload your document -- we'll take care of the rest. so, at national, i go right past the counter... and you get to choose any car in the aisle. choose any car? you cannot be serious! okay. seriously, you choose. go national. go like a pro. vroom... vroom. okay, time's up.
here ya' go ! that's a nice one, i made that. that's a piece of junk. yeah. i want the red truck. well, you can't have the red truck. see, that was a limited-time offer only. it's, ah, right here in the fine print. even kids know it's wrong to hide behind fine print. why don't banks ? we're ally, a new bank who always gives you a great rate, with nothing burieine print. it's just the right thing to do. try it!! now, that's what i'm talking about!! [ female announcer ] sometimes you get so much out of so little. like charmin ultra soft. it's soft and more absorbent, so you can use 7 sheets versus 28. charmin ultra soft. america's softest bath tissue.
invokes the vast right-wing conspiracy, except according to mr. clinton it's not so vast anymore. former president bill clinton speaking on "meet the press" defending president obama and sounding off against right-wing attacks. all well and good except mr. clinton claims conservative ire is just as toxic as it was in the '90s, it's just not as strong. >> your wife famously talked about the vast right-wing conspiracy targeting you. as you look at this opposition on the right to president obama, is it still there? >> oh, you bet. sure it is. it's not as strong as it was because america has changed demographically, but it's as virulent as it was. i mean, they're saying things about him, you know, like when they accused me of murder and all that stuff they did. but it's not really good for the republicans of the country, what's going on now. i mean, they may be hurting president obama, they can take his numbers down, they can run his opposition up, but fundamentally, he and his team
have a positive agenda for america. their agenda seems to be wanting him to fail. and that's not a prescription for a good america. >> unfortunately for mr. obama, the right wing has not only survived, it has thrived and expanded. case in point, the story of two black students in illinois beating up a white student on a school bus. the drudge report trumpeted the story on its front page, "white student beaten on school bus, crowd cheers." rush limbaugh ran with that and said the incident was part of obama's america. and then fox news echoed the drudge limbaugh talking points throughout the day. and who can forget the mythical death panels? after gop fear monger betsy mccoy floated the concept of fake euthanasia? sarah palin warned of government death panels on facebook, senator chuck grassley fed into the fear, raising the specter of pulling the plug on grandma, with limbaugh, beck, and hannity
providing a constant echo on death panels. mr. clinton, we have some 21st century news for you here. the vast right-wing propaganda machine is not shrinking, it is growing. joining me now is managing editor for crooks and liars and author of "eliminationists -- how the right-wing hate radicalized the american right." dave neiwert, thanks for joining us. >> thanks for having me. >> for half the clinton presidency, fox news, which supplies most of these talking points and keeps them running all day, did not even exist. how can president clinton really try to claim that the right-wing propaganda machine has somehow gotten weaker when it's expanded exponentially? >> well, i think that maybe he is maybe thinking of the actual power that the american right holds in the country right now. i mean, obviously they're pretty much out of power right now. and from '94 on, that wasn't the
case for him. however, i think that what is really striking and actually really useful comparison/contrast sort of thing is to look at what was happening to him and compare it to obama at this early stage in his presidency, you know, the complete sort of wing nuttery that's coming out of the right right now, you know, the belief in that things that are proven untrue and all kinds of bizarre conspiracy theories, this was something that didn't really start happening to clinton until about '94 or '95. and it didn't -- certainly didn't happen on a massive basis until like '98 or '99. and we're seeing this already in the first year of obama's presidency, and it's happening on a much larger scale than it happened to clinton. so, i think that is kind of an inept comparison or at least an inept claim on his part. >> now, you could argue that bill clinton gave his attackers some openings by having to admit
to certain sex scandals and having so many rumors about other things like that. barack obama has given them no such opening in any way. and is that why they revert to things like imagining death panels and just pulling things out of thin air? >> yeah. they pretty much have to. i mean, it's obvious if they're going to try to sort of oppose him any way they can and undermine him and attack him any way they can. but, yeah, i mean, we started hearing right away that he was planning to take away our guns, which was, you know, one of the big things they brought up about clinton and it was a large part of what fueled the militia movement and the sort of paranoia black helicopter crowd that we saw so much of in the '90s. and a lot of what i sort of explain in my book is that a lot of the sort of hateful talk that we're seeing now had its origins in that movement. and the important thing to understand is that in the '90s,
people saying this stuff were, you know, marginal figures like john trochmann of the militia of montana and bo gritz. they were spreading the conspiracy theories and they were doing it to small crowds of people. now we have glenn beck repeating stuff i swear i heard linda thompson say back in the 1990s, and he's doing it to an audience of millions. >> and when president clinton started on the national stage, rush limbaugh was not anything like the national phenomenon he became during the clinton years. now barack obama has rush limbaugh to deal with on a daily basis as well as glenn beck. >> right. >> i mean, right there you've got double the burden that bill clinton ever faced, don't you? >> oh, absolutely. and, you know, limbaugh's audience wasn't anything the size in '93, '94 that it is now. so, yeah, it's significantly greater sort of -- we call it -- in the blogosphere we call it the wurlitzer, the right-wing wurlitzer, and it refers to sort
of the orchestrated talking point machine that the right wing has put up. and so much of this is just, like i say, primitively false stuff, everything from him, you know, talking about taking our guns away to the birthers to the death panels, as you say. it's -- it has an unhinging effect on the audience, and particularly when people, you know, start to believe this stuff. and it has really a toxic effect on the national discourse as a result. >> david neiwert, managing editor of crooksandliars.com, thanks for joining us. >> my pleasure. coming up, a presidential first. barack obama will intervene directly in the fight to host the 2016 olympics. can his worldwide popularity bring home a big get for his adopted hometown of chicago? first, gadhafi gets shot down trying to pitch his tent in
new york. and then "saturday night live" takes its shot at gadhafi. when rachel joins you at the top of the hour, former u.s. attorney david iglesias lost his job for not going after a.c.o.r.n. he talks to rachel about who is behind the attacks on a.c.o.r.n. now. been true since the day i made my first dollar. where is that dollar? i got it out to show you... uhh... was it rather old and wrinkly? yeah, you saw it? umm fancy a crisp? geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.
simply ageless stays suspended over lines and makes you look amazing. simply ageless from olay and easy, breezy, beautiful covergirl. ♪ and try new simply ageless sculpting blush to bring out your cheekbones. coming up, with no clear front runner the bid for the 2016 summer olympics, will president obama's last-minute appeal deliver a win for his adopted hometown of chicago? and the circus that surrounded gadhafi's trip to new york. "saturday night live" and its voice to the masses. taking its rightful place in a long line of amazing performance machines.
this is the new e-coupe. this is mercedes-benz. this is the new e-coupe. "what do you mean homeowners insurance doesn't cover floods?" "a few inches of water caused all this?" "but i don't even live near the water." what you don't know about flood insurance may shock you. including the fact that a preferred risk policy starts as low as $119 a year. for an agent, call the number on your screen.
while the united nations was treated last week to the arresting image of libyan leader moammar gadhafi, the nation was captured by repeated aerial shots of his tent, the one which he never actually managed to occupy. so, on our number-two story on the "countdown," "saturday night live" has stepped in, of course, to provide the necessary epilogue. a brand-new speech by the libyan dictator explaining why his first speech went on for 136 minutes and how difficult it is to be a man without a tent. >> hello. i'm here today to apologize for my speech on wednesday. it was just so long and so rambly, and it didn't make any sense.
i watched a tape of it, and i was, like, who is that guy? but allow me to explain. as i mentioned in my speech wednesday, i am suffering from extreme jetlag. just to explain the scope of this jetlag, my home in libya is six hours ahead of new york. six. can you imagine it? 9:00 a.m. here, it is 3:00 p.m. there. it is 1:00 p.m. here, it is 7:00 p.m. there. i could go on but i believe you get the picture. 4:00 p.m., 10:00 p.m. no man who is six hours away from where his natural body clock is telling him he is can be held to account for his words or actions. lunchtime here, i want dinner. this is no way to live. on top of this mind-bending
jetlag, i have also been having problems with my giant tent. for those who do not know, when i travel i have a large tent that i like to bring with me. for this i am scorned as some kind of weirdo. despite my high diplomatic station, my tent and i were turned away by central park, westchester county, and, worst of all, englewood, new jersey. imagine me, the world's longest-serving leader, agreeing to stay in englewood, new jersey, as a last resort, only to be told that englewood, new jersey, did not want me. englewood, new jersey. let's just say i will not be flying home to brag about that, both because it's embarrassing and also because of the time difference anyone i would call home to in libya would be sound asleep. try to wrap your head around that. so, i was dealing with both jetlag and a tense situation.
making matters worse, the computer with the speech crashed, so i had to write one at the last minute on loose-leaf paper. and that may be what saved me. this is crushing. if i had written my speech on the flight here instead of watching the in-flight movie starring liam neeson. everyone, and i mean everyone on the plane was watching "taken." imagine trying to write a speech while out of the corner of your eye the great liam neeson is running through paris trying to recover his daughter, stopping everyone who gets in his way with both his intellect and his strength. this was no fun for me. but i made the sacrifice and wrote my speech. then, boom, computer crash.
coming up, the presidential sales job. president obama decides at the last minute to go to copenhagen to help make the final push for chicago's olympic bid. will he have the golden touch with the international olympics committee? [ birds squawking ] [ moos ] [ man announcing ] if you think about it, this is what makes theladders different from other job search sites.
chicago has tried and failed to get the olympic games before. back in 1904, chicago was actually named the host of the olympics, but st. louis, already hosting the world's fair that year, pleaded to have the games moved there. organizers agreed, and st. louis essentially stole the olympics from chicago. in our number one story for the games in 2016, chicago is up against madrid, rio, and tokyo and the windy city's favorite son isn't taking any chances. the white house announced this morning that president obama
will travel to copenhagen for the international olympic committee's final vote on the 2016 host city. the president was set to skip the trip because of the ongoing health care debate but changed his mind this weekend. according to press secretary robert gibbs today, president obama believes that health care, quote, is in a better place. president obama will leave thursday evening. he will join the first lady, oprah winfrey, and others as part of chicago's final presentation to voters friday morning and then return home. the trip is unprecedented for an american president. however, brazil and spain are sending their leaders to copenhagen, and tony blair and vladimir putin helped secure olympic games for their countries in 2012 and 2014. still, there are those who sense something rotten in the state of denmark, like brent bozell of the conservative media research center, who managed to weave narcissism and wife beating into his criticism of the president's decision.
>> this is evidence that this man just cannot stay away from the lights. in a way it's a bit of a slap, certainly not intended, but it is a bit of a slap at michelle obama. >> joining me now is "chicago tribune" editorial board member and pulitzer prize-winning syndicated columnist clarence page. thanks for joining us, clarence. >> thank you for having me. >> now, there is more serious criticism out there than the crazy bozell stuff about president obama leaving thursday night. he will be back friday. you know, there are people saying doesn't he have enough to do already as president. do you think, clarence, that there's any chance that when we look back on health care reform in 2009 we'll be saying, gee, the president shouldn't have gone to copenhagen? >> i think there's very little chance of that, lawrence. i'm happy to hear bozell is so concerned about michelle obama's feelings. but, in fact, the trip is, like you say, about 24 hours. obama's going to sleep on air force one.
he is supposed to spend all of five hours on the ground, i suspect for the sake of a five-minute photo-op with the other competing world leaders who are going to be there. that's really what this is all about. >> clarence, why do i get the feeling that this thing is wired ahead of time? there's something about chicago politicians -- something about chicago politicians being involved? you know, tony blair started this by going to singapore in 2005 to make his pleading. >> right. >> vladimir putin went to guatemala city to make his pleading. i just can't imagine vladimir putin going to make that trip without knowing ahead of time that if he showed up he was going to get it. isn't that what we're looking at here? is that -- >> yeah. i find it hard to imagine that president obama would be making this trip without being pretty sure he's gotten some inside word that, hey, you know, the ioc, the olympic committee, is just right on the fence here and
if you show up in person you can seal the deal. you know, other world leaders are going to be there, and michelle obama, as charming and effective as she is, what kind of a photo-op would that be with the other, you know, chief executives and the first lady there? it's hard to present the flotus when everybody's looking for the potus. that's what you've got here. the olympic committee is a fickle bunch. they like to be -- kind of like tv talk show hosts, present company excepted, of course, lawrence, but those who don't show up as guests can wind up being targets of commentary, and that's the way the olympic committee tends to operate. so, i think obama, on behalf of his country and his hometown, is pretty smart to make this trip. >> well, if all the chicago politicians involved here do not have this thing wired and if the president somehow loses, if he's flying home having lost to the president of brazil how is that going to look this weekend? that could look pretty