text:
McCutchen embodies Pirates' fighting spirit
PITTSBURGH -- Earlier in the day, Russell Martin had issued his public provocation to Milwaukee's Martin Maldonado -- an offseason sparring session in the ring, mano a mano (with all proceeds going to charity, of course, because we want to keep this thing classy).
Across the locker room, Travis Snider sported a shiner, the lone literal bruise born out of the figurative weekend battle with the Brewers in which Carlos Gomez's slow trot on a triple wasn't nearly as offensive as the Pirates' inability to secure two late weekend leads.View Full Game Coverage
PITTSBURGH -- Earlier in the day, Russell Martin had issued his public provocation to Milwaukee's Martin Maldonado -- an offseason sparring session in the ring, mano a mano (with all proceeds going to charity, of course, because we want to keep this thing classy).
Across the locker room, Travis Snider sported a shiner, the lone literal bruise born out of the figurative weekend battle with the Brewers in which Carlos Gomez's slow trot on a triple wasn't nearly as offensive as the Pirates' inability to secure two late weekend leads.View Full Game Coverage
Beyond the black eye, though, was the bottom line: Pittsburgh entered Monday just three games under .500, yet six back in the National League Central, a division that's already deeper than we had assumed. It's proving to be an unforgiving place to reside, and the proposed Martin-Maldonado brouhaha is nothing compared to the Brewers-Cardinals-Pirates-Reds battle royale at large.
"We can't control what other teams do," Andrew McCutchen said. "All we can control is what we do as a whole."
Monday's hard-earned 6-5 triumph over the visiting Reds, therefore, felt more significant than your usual April affair, if only because this was the first night this season in which McCutchen, the reigning NL Most Valuable Player Award winner, looked to be in control. It was his leadoff single that started the bases-loading process that ended with newly-imported Ike Davis' fourth-inning grand slam.
It was McCutchen's leadoff shot four innings later that erased the sting of yet another blown late-inning lead. And it was McCutchen's walk in the ninth that extended an inning capped by Neil Walker's game-winning bloop single.
Amid a fitful start for his team, McCutchen has endured a frustrating lack of pitches to hit from the opposition -- his two walks Monday night extended his NL lead to 17. So a night in which he supported the walks with a couple of singles and a heroic homer was a welcomed development, indeed, especially on the heels of his 0-for-6 Sunday.
"The longer he doesn't get hot, the closer he's coming to getting hot," manager Clint Hurdle said. "He's just one day closer to getting hot. He was on base five times tonight. That's got to bode well."
If Davis' broken-bat grand slam -- his second slam against the Reds in this young season -- is any indication, his addition bodes well for the necessary lengthening of the Pirates' lineup.
Same goes for the single and double the struggling Pedro Alvarez ripped in his first two at-bats off Mike Leake. And Walker seemed due for the game-winning bloop, given his .217 batting average on balls in play coming into the night -- a number due for an upswing in good ol' fashioned luck.
All of these elements could go down as mere mementos of a night in which the Bucs and Penguins, who rallied late against the Columbus Blue Jackets in the NHL playoffs, combined to rip the hearts out of Ohio sports fans twice in the span of an hour.
To the Pirates, though, they need to be seeds that start the bigger story. McCutchen has been as disciplined as you could possibly expect in the early going. His 20.9 percent swing percentage on pitches outside the zone is seven points lower than it was last season, per FanGraphs.com, and Hurdle, for one, applauds that effort.
"This is the most significant change I've seen since I've been here, seeing the way [opposing pitchers] are going about it," Hurdle said. "He hasn't done a lot of chasing outside the strike zone."
At some point, though, a Pittsburgh team that leaned heavily on McCutchen in last year's Wild Card run is simply going to need more support. Given that the bullpen is not the consistent force it was in 2013 and the starting staff has taken a significant statistical step back in the early going, the Bucs simply can't afford to be the lean offensive unit they were a year ago.
To put it plainly, then, they're going to need McCutchen to see some strikes.
"I'm just waiting on my pitches," McCutchen said. "When I get it, I'm just trying to drive it."
When the Reds made the curious decision to bring in the left-handed Manny Parra to face McCutchen to start the eighth, it opened the door to the drive. McCutchen took a called first strike, then smacked an 85-mph splitter to the opposite field in right-center.
"When [right-center] starts playing for him," Hurdle said, "that means his timing and his rhythm is in a good place."
McCutchen said it was a simple matter of being "on time." And the truth is, his on-time performance probably bought him more time in "pitched-around" purgatory.
"It's going to happen," McCutchen said. "But oh well. You've got to make the best of it. Take what they give to you, and if they don't give it to you, just know the guy behind you is going to pick you up."
On this night, McCutchen had plenty of pick-me-up and pitches to hit. It was but one night in the long slog of the season. But given the abnormally early demands of the division, it was an important night, all the same.
Anthony Castrovince is a reporter for MLB.com. Read his columns and follow him on Twitter at @Castrovince.


text:
Opinion Columns & Blogs
Sebastian Mallaby: End of the hedge fund?
For sheer toe-curling embarrassment, it may be a while before Wall Street does better than the Bernard Madoff scandal.
Here was a rogue who practically telegraphed his unreliability by hiring a tiny, no-name audit firm, by reporting monthly investment results that never fluctuated and by claiming a trading strategy that could not possibly have been implemented given the billions of dollars he managed.
And yet, despite these warnings, the rich, the famous and the supposedly sophisticated entrusted their money to Madoff, who defrauded them with the most laughably crude of methods -- an old-fashioned Ponzi scam.
The question this prompts is not really about regulation, though some argue otherwise. Even if you define Madoff's investment outfit as a hedge fund, which for various reasons is debatable, there's nothing in this saga that supports clamping down on the industry.
Those who favor regulation of hedge funds start by insisting that they must register with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Well, Madoff had registered with the SEC voluntarily, and a fat lot of good it did.
Those who support regulation also say that hedge funds should disclose more of what they do.
Well, Madoff did make some disclosures; it's just that they weren't true.
As SEC Chairman Chris Cox has all but admitted, the scandal doesn't show that his agency lacked the power to regulate; it shows that it failed to exercise it.
Responding to this scandal with more regulation would be like thrusting more pills on a patient who refuses medication.
The real question posed by this episode concerns the market's response. Madoff illustrates a problem with investment outfits that claim to have some special sauce that is too valuable to discuss.
People who entrusted their money to Madoff thought he had a clever options trading strategy; they were wrong.
Worse, people who entrusted their money to respected banks and investment advisers had no idea that their savings were being passed out the back door to Madoff.
On Monday, I happened to be visiting one of the most famous traders in Manhattan. He had invested with a hedge fund that had in turn invested with Madoff, hot-potato style.
The good news is that Madoff's fraud was so brazen that any future imitators may be spotted.
A newly chastened wealth management industry will be warier of people who hire bucket-shop auditors; the "fund of funds" industry, which gets paid to do due diligence on hedge funds, will feel appropriate pressure to redouble its efforts.
Even though hedge fund managers may legitimately refuse to disclose their trading strategies, there are some things they can be open about. Do they trade through a respected external broker? (Madoff apparently didn't.)
If their returns clock in at 1 percent per month with eerie consistency, can they explain why? (Madoff could not have.)
But the bad news is that less-brazen fraudsters may be impossible to detect. As the economists Dean Foster and H. Peyton Young have elegantly demonstrated, hedge funds can fake brilliance by taking a small risk of implosion, and since implosion would hurt them less than their customers, some will rationally decide that faking is the way to go.
A fund can take in $100, stick it in the S&P 500 index, then earn, say, $5 by selling options to people who want to insure themselves against a market collapse.
If the collapse occurs, the hedge fund's value will go to zero. But, over a five- or even 10-year time frame, the odds are good that a collapse won't happen. So each year the fund manager will beat the S&P 500 index by 5 percentage points. He will be hailed as a genius.
Foster and Young suggest that this Achilles' heel could eventually kill hedge funds.
Because it is possible to commit undetected fraud, the industry will attract fraudsters; eventually, investors will realize that they can't tell the good guys from the bad and yank their money out.
If this is going to happen, the Madoff scandal could be the catalyst, especially because it has hit at a time when hedge funds are in trouble for other reasons.
Hedge fund strategies depend on borrowing, or "leverage," which is hard to come by now. They often depend on "shorting" stocks -- that is, betting that they'll fall in value -- but regulators have restricted that practice.
Even before the Madoff scandal, there were estimates that hedge fund assets might shrink from just under $2 trillion a few months ago to perhaps $1.4 trillion.
But it would be wrong to count the hedge funds out.
Perhaps half of all funds use strategies about which there is no great secret, so disclosure is possible: The Foster-Young argument does not cut so sharply here.
The other half can find ways to signal their honesty without disclosing their tactics: The most obvious is for managers to keep a serious amount of their own money in their funds. Good hedge funds really do know how to make money out of market inefficiencies.
After the past 18 months of mayhem, it should be painfully obvious that there is plenty of inefficiency around.
Sebastian Mallaby is a fellow for International Economics with the Council on Foreign Relations. He wrote this for The Washington Post.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Retired Judge John Phillips, 70, has suddenly emerged as a formidable candidate to replace incumbent Lou Calcagno as District 2 supervisor.
District 2 includes Castroville, Prunedale, Pajaro, north Salinas, Aromas, Boronda, Las Lomas, Moss Landing and Royal Oaks.
Phillips acknowledged this week that he has been approached by supporters who asked him to run for the office, which will be on the November 2014 ballot, and that he was seriously considering such a move. The longtime local jurist and community leader said he wouldn"t make a formal announcement about his intentions until the end of the year, in deference to Calcagno and to his current service on the state"s assigned judge program.
"It"s a little sensitive because Louie hasn"t (officially) said he won"t run and I don"t want to be disrespectful," Phillips said. And, he said, when he officially declares his candidacy, he can no longer serve as a judge. Phillips, who retired in 2004 after 20 years on the bench, has been serving as an assigned judge in Monterey County Superior Court this summer and indicated he plans to continue that service into the fall.
While Calcagno, serving his fourth term on the Board of Supervisors, has not formally announced whether he intends to run again, has privately indicated he will not do so if an acceptable candidate emerges. Insiders believe the only way Calcagno would decide to run is if no viable candidate steps up that he believes can beat political rival Ed Mitchell, who challenged Calcagno in 2010 and is widely expected to run again.
Mitchell did not return a phone call from The Herald on Thursday.
Calcagno said this week he would not yet endorse any candidate, but the political veteran is clearly enthused by the possibility that Phillips would run, calling him a "tremendous candidate" who could "provide outstanding leadership for the county of Monterey."
Phillips, a 42-year Prunedale resident and Republican — like Calcagno — has spent his retirement focused on the much-praised Rancho Cielo Youth Campus program and other community causes, and only emerged as a potential candidate recently, after a series of Calcagno-backed prospects chose not to run.
North County Fire Chief Chris Orman, Granite Rock CFO Steve Snodgrass, county Planning Commissioner Cosme Padilla, and North County community leader Ron Stefani all decided against running, sources said.
Others who have been mentioned as potential candidates include County Office of Education trustee and community activist David Serena, Salinas City Councilwoman Kimbley Craig, North County activist Diana Jimenez, Salinas Union High School District board member Kathryn Ramirez, and even former State Assemblywoman and Salinas mayor Anna Caballero, now secretary of the State and Consumer Services Agency for the Brown administration.
But observers believe most, if not all, potential candidates would likely be reluctant to take on Phillips, who would likely garner support from major donors such as North County developer Don Chapin and the agricultural industry. Phillips would have a presumed advantage over any Salinas-area candidate with North County voters, who represent about two-thirds of the District 2 population.
Phillips said his family told him he was "crazy" to run for supervisor, and that he was only being asked because other preferred candidates had bowed out.
The notoriously plain-spoken Phillips said he believes there needed to be more representatives from the local business sector in elected office, rather than the public sector, which he acknowledged included himself.


text:
SPS Working Papers
Copyright belongs to the authors.
This text may be downloaded for personal research purposes only. Any additional reproduction for other purposes, whether in hard copy or electronically, requires the consent of the author(s), editor(s). If cited or quoted, reference should be made to the full name of the author(s), editor(s), the title, the working paper or other series, the year, and the publisher.


text:
Tuesday, 13 May 2008
And Now Something Totally Different
Posted by Menic at 13:07
Labels: 25mm, LOTR, Mordor Orcs, Warhammer
No comments:
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
This blog is dedicated to ancient and medieval miniature wargaming. I'd like to share pictures of my painted armies and models, self made terrain-pieces and sketches of projects still residing in my head or on a piece of paper.
My main interest at the moment is creating armies and accessories, researching for historical or made-up scenarios and campaigns for the fast-play wargaming rules from "De bellis Antiquitatis" (DBA) with 25mm and 15mm figurines.
I use the blog-format rather unconventionaly. It is more like a scrapbook. And I update the older posts so keep checking. I recommend utilizing the labels to the left. So if your just interested in miniatures click the "Miniatures"-label and you will be presented with posts concerning painting, figurines etc. And don't forget to click on "older posts" at the bottom of the page for more. And many thanks for commenting!
Photographs showing painted toy soldiers, terrain pieces, scratch-built things and drawings © Menic Rüttimann 2.Nov.2006. Please notify me if you wish to use these.
Let your fancy flow...


text: Top 50 Diet Recipes for Fall Top 50 Diet Recipes for Fall With changing weather comes a fresh start for healthier eating and losing weight. Our top 50 recipes for weight loss feature the best flavors of the season. Enjoy satisfying soups, chili, casseroles and other comfort food classics that are lighter and healthier than traditional recipes. Download a FREE Cookbook of Fall Recipes Watch Video See Recipes ADVERTISEMENT Recipes in slideshow ADVERTISEMENT


text:
LOS ANGELES--The Sports Club Co. Inc. has delayed reporting of its first quarter 2005 results. The delay stems from issues relating to the recording of leasehold improvements. Most of the work required to prepare the company's consolidated financial statements has been completed. However, the complexities associated with accounting for and reporting of landlord incentives under operating leases and assets held for sale have held up completion of the final financial statements. As a result, the company has not filed its required financial reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The company had recorded its leasehold improvements differently than required, which will result in several reclassifications of the company's reported results for the first quarter of 2004.
A new methodology will be applied to both the 2004 and 2005 financial statements and will require the company to increase its depreciation expense and reduce rent expense. Since the amount of these adjustments will be the same, there will be no change to the company's income (loss) from operations.
In February, the company announced that it had entered into a letter of intent to sell six of its nine sports and fitness complexes for $65 million. In accordance with regulations, these assets will be classified as held for sale and the 2004 and 2005 operating statements will include the results of these clubs as discontinued operations.


text:
When you might find yourself in a bind, this flashlight can help you to the rescue. The Zippo Auto Safe Flashlight is slim and slender and it includes a seat belt cutter and car window hammer. It's water and shock resistant. This is the perfect flashlight to have in any emergency situation. Laser Etching is available for logo imprinting. Help your customers stay safe in any situation, order your lights today.
Ordering Information
The minimum order for bulk personalization and customization of this item is 12 pieces. A free order proof with your logo or design on the product will be emailed before production begins.
Product Information
*Most orders are charged a production set-up fee.
**Purchased samples may include random imprint to evaluate imprint quality and location.
***Some logos, designs, and imprint methods may require additional charges. This may include additional run charges, set-up fees for extra colors, stitch counts and/or locations.
Why am I charged a set-up fee on most orders?
Imprinting and customization require special screens and plates for the imprinting and personalization process.
Do I get a proof before my order?
Yes, all orders recieve a FREE art proof in a PDF format for you to approve prior to production that comes from our art team.
What art formats do you accept?
We prefer high quality vector artwork in .eps, .ai (adobe illustrator), with fonts converted to outlines. We may also accept high resolution .jpg, .gif, .psd, or .pdf files. We can fix your art for free!
Are there extra charges for additional imprint colors?
Yes, in most cases unless it is digital and 4-color process printing, there are additional run charges and set-up charges.


text:
Quick Tips
too much on your plate?
we've collected the best tips and tricks from our members to help save you time, money & your sanity!
Search Quick Tips
Showing 1-9 of 64 Quick Tips
- Top 10 Educational Websites for Kids
- 12 Popular Direct Sales Companies
- Frugal Living: 10 Online Resources to Help You Save Money
- Banish Working Mom Guilt: 10 Tried and True Tips from Fellow Working Moms
- Back-to-school: Packing a healthy lunch
- 10 Tips to Help Busy Working Moms Reduce Stress
- Kids Birthday Parties on a Budget
- Seven tips for saving money
- Quick and Easy Recipes for Busy Moms


text:
Just when you thought short course racing had reached its zenith, 2011 begins with several new entries in the 4WD short course racing class. When the rumors began to spread that Team Durango, a company known for its outside-the-box thinking, quality design and pure racing focus, was developing a 4WD short course racer—anticipation grew. Durango has been on a tear recently, with a wildly successful 4WD buggy, the DEX410, that has been dominating 1/10-scale tracks across the country and the new nitro 1/8-scale buggy, the DNX408, that's being piloted by some of the fastest guys in 1/8-scale racing. Durango is a company that is "serious about racing" and the new DESC410R promises to continue that tradition. With all four tires clawing for traction, the new DESC410R just may be the quickest way around the track, let's see if it has what it takes to dominate the hottest class in short course RC racing.
[kaltura-playlist-widget entryid=0_96hflf4i size=regular sort=preset /]


text:
On the look out for more...
Our more...
Superior Pent Shed 7' x 5'
A durable superior pent shed ideal for use as a workshop or simply for storage. This superior pent has been manufactured from tongue and grooved 12mm shiplap red wood pine cladding and quality mineral roofing felt. There are many excellent features included in these sheds, however there are also many options available to adapt the shed to your needs. This shed benefits from having 10 different window and door positions available to suit every customers needs. Full layout options can be found at the bottom of this page.
Please note that tanalisation is only available on 15mm cladding. 18mm does not have the tanalisation option.
Features include:
Superior Eaves Height: 1937mm
Superior Ridge Height: 2153mm
Options include:
Please contact us should you require any of the above options
Delivery notice: Delivery is FREE to the areas highlighted in green on
the map below. Delivery charges apply to zones highlighted in red, yellow and
purple. Grey zone is delivery only. Please select your delivery zone from the drop down menu
below. Delivery to offshore PO postcodes will take place once a month and will also
incur an additional charge. Please enquire before ordering if this might apply
to you.


text:
Tina DiLascio calls it "being in the right place at the right time."
The New Jersey resident was picking up documents Tuesday from a New York City office building, had gotten lost earlier in the day, paid too much for parking and was having an all around rough afternoon.
Then the "man of the hour," as she calls Justin Timberlake, came walking into this very same New York City building as part of a press tour.
"I started screaming like a teenager," she said.
Timberlake was on a tight schedule and turning down all requests from fans for pictures or autographs until DiLascio told Timberlake her daughter, Giana, had survived brain surgery and was a Make-a-Wish kid.
"He stopped, turned around, came over to me and said, 'Where is she?"" she said.
Related: Justin Timberlake Joined by *NSYNC at the VMAs
DiLascio quickly ran outside where her 13-year-old daughter, who's a huge Timberlake fan, was waiting.
"I thought it was a joke," Giana said. "I couldn't believe it. I'm still in shock. We talked about the VMAs, which I thought he was great in."
Giana DiLascio, who had to have surgery last year to fix a blockage in her brain, said what happened next was the biggest surprise of all.
"Security was saying no pics," the straight-A student said. "He looked at them and then my phone and said, "I'm going to take a photo.""
Giana made the picture her phone's screen saver.
Read: JC Chasez: Justin Timberlake Reunited *NSYNC
For Tina DiLascio, who said Tuesday marked the one-year anniversary of the family's return from its Make-a-Wish trip, said she was especially surprised at the humbleness of a man who had just received a Michael Jackson Vanguard Award at the MTV VMAs for a lifetime of groundbreaking music.
"It's just about paying it forward," the ecstatic mother said. "It may sound cheesy, but we thought her condition was a death sentence, and it ended up being a life sentence."
Giana is doing fine, her mother said. Now, after meeting her idol, all the girl wants is to give someone that same amazing feeling she experienced herself.
"I just want to change someone's life too, like [Justin] did mine," she said.


text:
Topic: Bring out the Bands and Champayne
Why !! because ..SO ..has relented and I'm getting Broadband,,of course he let a a little whine
telling me HE HAS NO TOYS,,but there is more in life than just sitting all day ,whinning about life
as I told him ''Life needs to be lived''
So watch out World Bats will be on the loose,,so glad to be off Dail-Up,two things I'll be doing first
Use this Cam-Camera,my Re-Clyed Yuppie Son gave me and all the Bowie 's videos first one
I want to see is the clip with Bowie and Moby singing together


text:
Lydia Hutchinson
Shawn Colvin's right hand hits the strings on her Martin
D-28 with a precise aim and rhythmic force that seems to cause
every sinewy muscle in her forearm to vibrate in sympathy.
With her head thrown back, eyes closed, and right foot tirelessly
tapping out perfect time, the rhythm and mood of the moment
seem to have taken over. Then she leans forward, leaves the
melody behind, and carries the listener away with her on a
vocal journey of unexpected highs and lows. Always personal
and never predictable, Shawn has just welcomed you inside
her world.
Growing up in Carbondale, Illinois, Shawn formed her first
band at age twenty. After that, her musical journey took her
to Austin, Texas in the late 1970s as the lead singer for
The Dixie Diesels, and eventually on to San Francisco where
she gigged regularly at a small Berkeley club called LaVal's
Subterranean. Then in 1980 she made the move to New York,
met multi-instrumentalist/producer/writer John Leventhal and
was in a pop band with him until 1983 when she decided to
go solo again. It was during that time that Colvin began to
find her own style of writing. She won a 1991 Grammy in the
Contemporary Folk Category for her debut release, "Steady
On," and on the strength of her 1992 album, "Fat City," she
has been garnering rave reviews, sold-out concerts, and an
even broader following.
Shawn's solo performances have been described by fans and
fellow musicians as the quintessential study in dynamics.
Armed with a voice filled with colors and shades, Colvin takes
the listener on a free-wheeling ride in and around a melody
while she hammers, slides, bends and pulls on the guitar.
That symbiotic relationship between her vocals and her instrumentthe
blending together of two elements going in different directionsis
what makes a Shawn Colvin concert worthy of experiencing over
and over again.
In addition to her compelling performances, Colvin's lyrics
are also worthy of spending time with. Much like reading the
intimate, self-analytical poems of Emily Dickinson or Sylvia
Plaththeir rhythmic words invite you to share in a diary
of private thoughts and personal visions. Colorful descriptions
and metaphors of joy, despair, dreams, and the past let the
listener become part of the experience, and put her writing
in a class of its own.
For all this, Shawn seems to have absolutely no idea that
her unique style has become so widely emulated by the new
wave of songwriters and acoustic performers. Nor does she
seem to realize that there are hundreds of "Shawn Wanna-Be's"
that hit the open-mic stages each night, especially in the
New England area where she built her musical reputation. To
her, her music seems to be more of a feeling than an art to
be studied or imitated. It's just a natural outpouring of
emotions, rhythms and melodies.
Did you always want to write, or were you more comfortable
playing other people's music?
No, I think I always wanted to write. I wrote a lot when I
was a teenager and was learning the guitar. And I've always
been a good chameleonI can really cop another person's vocal
thing. I learned a lot of people's guitar stylesobviously,
cause that's a good way to learn. But I wasn't endowed with
the kind of creative gift in my opinion. And the music that
I wrote then wasn't really good, it was derivative. Maybe
some good melodies here and there. But I did write. I mean
as soon as I picked up the instrument I wrote ten or twenty
songs during the first year I was beginning to play. Then
I just put up the writing. I don't know why, but I did.
When did you pick it up again?
I didn't really write again until I moved to California in
1979 and was in a quandary about what to do with my life.
I was playing music, but to pass the time I would write snippets
of things, they never came to anything, I never finished anything.
Then I moved to New York in 1981 and met John Leventhal who
had a band that was doing really sophisticated Steely Dan-esque
kind of pop music. I loved the way they sounded and I began
to write with him. He gave me music and I started to write
the lyrics. And again I would be loathe to play any of those
songs for anyone. They were not very genuine. But the relationship
with him kept me at it because where I would falter he would
push and vice versa.
When did you start writing on your own?
There was a breakthrough after four or five years of this
where he gave me a track of music and instead of just writing
the words over his production, I took his production and transposed
it to the guitar. I dropped my E strings to D, a la Richard
Thompson who is my second wave influenceJoni Mitchell being
my firstand made this song into kind of a droney folk groove
and I wrote "Diamond in the Rough."
Did that open the door to your own writing style?
Yeah. That seemed like something I could really stick with.
It was the first song of that style. And from that came everything
else that's on my first album. From that door opening and
that stumbling upon my voice, if you will, came a system,
a security, a net, that I could fall into and go and do something
that I really did think was unique to me. And it definitely
had to do with being confessional and personal.
Do you feel somewhat exposed by the personal nature of
your songs?
They are personal. I sometimes feel as though I should apologize
for that, but I'm too quick to negate myself as a songwriter...that's
part of what's taken so long (laughs). I'd like to push myself
and challenge myself beyond it, but it's been enormously gratifying
for me to write this stuff and my motto is stick with what
you know. I didn't have it in me to paint fictional pictures.
I think that when you do that you're going with things that
have to do with you anyway. But I didn't have the skill to
make an interesting story, and I don't know that I do now.
But what I did have was a strong feeling of where I came from
and where I was at. And it had been a struggle. Part of me
wanted to document that. I also just needed to express it,
and I had really gone through some things and come out the
other side. I was just moved to shed light on that.
Are you comfortable singing those songs to such a large
I think the thing that has made it possible for me to write
personal songs and sing them year after year is the sensibility
for good writing. In that just opening your veins all over
the paper is not necessarily going to be interesting. I wanted
to speak to people. I was interested in being good and in
moving people, not just "I'm going to say what I want to say."
So there's a poetic aspect to them. Some songs I would just
go way overboard on the emotion and then I'd have to rein
it back in to make it accessible. You have to watch for a
twist that you can put in or a way that you can make the point
in a more unexpected way. So it's not hard for me to play
the songs. There's an artistic content to them that satisfied
me to the point that...they're nice pieces. You don't have
to know they're about me, you know. I wanted people to be
able to sing them themselves.
Is there any song that is uncomfortable for you to sing?
There's only one song that I still feel funny about playing.
I feel like it's maybe taking it a little too far, and that's
"Monopoly." I did wrote it in ten minutes and said exactly
what I wanted to say. I don't do it every night. I've had
it on the set list for the past two months, but there's a
lot of times where I'd just turn around and say "skip it,"
you know, because it just makes me feel vulnerable. That's
the only one I have trouble with.
Do you feel good about it as a song?
Well, it was an experiment and yes I do. I think you've got
to be brave in this business or in anything where you become
somewhat public because you're not allowed to really experiment
or fail in public. Well, let's put it this waynot gracefully.
No one supports it. And it's art. I mean who's to say that
the thing that this person did is not getting them to the
next absolutely brilliant place. It's a process.
love the "Hearts of Darkness" documentary on Francis Ford
Coppola's making Apocalypse Now. He talks about his dismay
and despair about what a disaster he felt he was creating.
And it was so comforting because it was a wonderful movie
that was embraced, won many awards, and made a lot of money.
But in the midst of it he was sure that he was doing the worst
thing he had ever done in his life. Every artist can relate
to that.
"Monopoly," I don't know. If anybody came and accused me of
taking advantage of my position and opportunity to put anything
I want on an album, I'd have to give 'em an ear, but I'm not
sorry I wrote it. It said exactly what I wanted to say. And
I liked turning it on itself and saying that I really didn't
want to write this song. That's the basis of it. It's really
how you feel when you can't get somebody off your mind and
you wish they were off your mind. You feel like you've just
been kind of screwed around by the powers that be. Plus I
know every songwriter has felt, when they've written a song
about a relationship that's broken up and people console them
by saying "At least you got a song out of it," you just feel
like going "Oh, shut up" (laughs). That's not why you fall
in love.
Are there specific places that tend to inspire your writing?
I have found that airplanesor any form of transportation
where I am not the driverhave been a good time for things
to come out or for problems to be solved. Like if there's
a section to a song that I can't seem to finish, I've had
solutions come up when my mind's been suspended.
Do you write daily?
No. I've never written daily unless I've been under complete
pressure to do so. I'm a very reluctant writer (laughs). I
keep vowing to change that, but I don't and I'm in such admiration
of people who do. I ran into Lucinda Williamsand I think
her stuff is just fabulousand asked her if she writes all
the time, and she said "No, I write when I have to and I do
it under pressure, and I think it's going to be a disaster,"
and I just said "Praise the Lord," you know (laughs). Finally
somebody who does it the way I do. When I write it's more
like a spurt of writing and put it away. Or a spurt of writing,
put it away and get it out the next day, and if I'm totally
dry on it I'll put it back away again because I don't want
to force it.
Were you under more pressure, deadline wise, during the
making of Fat City?
Yes! I was pressed for time and I had a lot of songs one-half
and three-quarters finishednot just one but a lotand I
was forced to become disciplined. It was really a great experience
because I was terrified and had kind of made peace with the
fact that I was just going to do bad work. And I found that
I can set times and go into a room and it still can happen.
Do you keep some kind of journal?
I do keep a journal and a songwriting notebook. I'll get a
verse, a rhyme or a title I'll just try to keep notes of things
because 90% of the time I'll end up using things that I just
jotted down absent mindedly.
Do you use rhythm a lot to get an idea for a song?
Yeah. If you get a groove going and you kind of say nonsense
over the groove then some words come out that you couldn't
have predicted. Some you keep, some you don't. "Cry Like An
Angel" was written like that. I would go down to this pond
in North Carolina every day just bopping along to the rhythm
of the song and I would do it over and over in my head. I
had tons of words and most were thrown out, like I had the
word mortician in that song (laughs).
it's a matter of just flooding the rhythm with more lyrics
than you could ever use and then weeding them out and making
a story out of it. Because when you just start free-associating
like that over some rhythm you end up not realling talking
about nonsense, but talking about yourself. It's wierd, it's
cool, it's scary, you know. This stuff comes out and you go
"I haven't thought about that in years," but it's you. So
it's kind of a cool way to write. You end up having a perspective
maybe that's not so forced. There's room for things to creep
in that you couldn't have thought of.
Have you had much success with co-writing since developing
such a definitive style?
"Set The Prairie On Fire," which I wrote with Elly Brown (a
New Yorker who used to be in a band called Grace Pool) is
the exception to the rulewith the rule being that I have
yet to have a successful outcome of sitting in a room with
someone and trying to write a song. The way that I generally
co-write is that someone else writes the music or part of
the music. Like on "Round of Blues" I wrote the whole song
but Larry Klein said that it needed a bridge. So he wrote
the bridge and I wrote the words to it. But Elly and I really
shared every part of the song equally. She wrote some of the
words, I wrote some of the words, she wrote some of the music,
I wrote some of the music.
When you finish a song, are they really finished or do
you go back and pick at them?
They're pretty much finished. I have a short attention span
and even when I'm not completely satisfied with a line here
and a line there I generally leave it as it is. I've got a
dilemma, though, because I wrote "The Story" and it makes
mention of not having any children and not being married.
And I'm getting married. So once I get married the question
is...well it's probably so silly to even ponder it. I should
probably just sing it like it's written. But I did think maybe
I should go back and kind of update it for what's going on
now and keep the same spirit. It's kind of a challenge because
I'm getting married and the people who love the depressing
confessional kind of stuff go "don't get too happy," you know
(laughs). I mean there's still a lot of conflict in life even
if you get married, it doesn't solve your own damn problems.
And that song's very angry, so to hang on to my identity in
that song and be married could be interesting.
Tell me about "The Story."
That song was sensitive because it was very directly about
my parents. I kind of chose to write as if I were speaking
to my sister in the song. I wanted to attempt to write about...well,
you can't say the words "dysfunctional family" any more without
it sounding like a buzz word, but that'll pass. It's a valid
term and it applies to me. It's tragic when families are like
mine, I believe, unhealthy and dishonest within their structure
and everybody takes on these roles to try and make the whole
thing balance out. It's destructive to everybody. No matter
what role you're playing. No matter if you're kind of in the
heroic and the do-gooder rolewhich I was not (laughs). And
I really wanted to try to put that into a song. It was a challenge
because that was a real tempting one to just moan and spew.
It was one where I had a lot of harsh lines that I had to
just kind of put down and then pull back.
How does your family feel about the song?
My brothers, I don't know how they feel. My sister likes it.
My father likes it. My mother's mad at me. I sent a copy of
this song to my sister before I put it on the record, and
asked her what she thought. She said, "This is fair. It's
artistic, it's fair, it's good." And I had other people say,
"Look at writers through time and the things they've written
about and what people have exposed." And I'm proud of the
song. I think it's really good.
remember the first time I played "The Story." I was at The
Iron Horse in Northampton, Mass and people got it. Women have
come up to me who have a connection with their mother through
this songyou know, the "cast iron dress" bit. What I've
found is that there are women who went through that housewife
50s thing who can feel an element of sympathy from that song.
That everybody was trapped into that role thing. And my parents
were certainly part of it. My father can look back on that
and have some perspective, but my mother can't. We just don't
talk about it (laughs).
What is the background of "Kill The Messenger"?
It's about Jane Siberry from Toronto. I went to see a concert
of hers at The Bottom Line and it was one of the best shows
that I've ever seen. She's a great woman and performera
bit of a Peter Pan and a bit of a seductress and has the great
ability to combine whimsy and compassion. She's quirky but
accessible. And her show was theatrical in a very accessible,
warm, wonderful way. I walked out of that show going, "Well,
I should just hang it up." And that's really great for an
artist to feel (laughs), it really isit pushes you.
her record called "The Walking" she thanked her songs for
being there. You know, for just always being there. And "Kill
The Messenger" is kind of about writer's block, and it's a
sibling of "The Story." It's about feeling pulled down and
used by people. It's just somewhat of a bitter song. And somewhat
of a plaintive song about wanting to feel the wonderful feelings
of clarity and forgiveness when you're at the best of your
human nature instead of your worst, you know. Your worst being
full of envy or hatred or greed or self pity. And I used her
much like I did my sister in "The Story" to just sort of be
a character to appeal to and in this case one that could sort
of understand my plight and maybe harness the muse more easily
than I.
What was the writing of "Poloroids" like?
It probably took a year, but it was the way I described before.
I mean, I got the first verse on the way to therapysee this
transportation thing really helps! But I was on this bus and
it just came, "Please no more therapy/Mother take care of
me/piece me together with needle and thread," and I just went
"whaaa, thank you!" It had a cadence to it that was really
infectious, kind of sing-songy and I just spent a lot of time
getting involved in the rhythm of it and jotting down anything
that came into my mind. And a lot of it was trash and a lot
of it was funny, and a lot of it was applicable.
Did you really dream the last verse?
Yeah I did. I had this dream where this couple wasn't walking
a plank off of a ship, but they were walking a plank over
a huge excavated hole in the ground. And they were totally
in love, it was the sweetest damn feeling, you know. And he
walked out first and she took a poloroid, then she walked
out and he took a poloroid as she held up this flash card
type of thing that said "Valentine." The good will between
these people must have been something that I was striving
for because I had had relationships with a lot of ill-will,
(laughs) which just seems so wrong, but it was in my life.
What about "I Don't Know Why"?
I wrote it when I first moved to New York. I was on a subway
and I wrote the whole song in my head. I felt very lonely
and horrible at the time. I had this idea of what I would
say to a baby and I'm sure it was more of an attempt just
to console myself. The idea to make up something to comfort
a child is probably what eased my depression at the time.
I just wrote the whole thing really fast in my head, music
and words, and didn't even play it for months.
a friend of mine came to town and asked me if I'd written
anything and I played that song. But because I didn't writebecause
I was kind of invested in the identity of not seeing myself
as a writerI just didn't consider it a real song (laughs).
I just thought "everybody makes up rhymes, everybody writes
little poems, this is just a simple little thing that I wrote
and there's no need to call attention to it."
What has that song done for your career?
I owe a lot to that song. It was like a gift. I hate to be
cosmic about it, but that's the truth. I mean it dropped into
my lap. Around 1985, when Fast Folk Musical Magazine asked
me to do something for themand that organization is for
songwritersthat was the song I had. In Boston there's a
lot of college radio, and they got ahold of that album and
started playing my song. And I got a following in Boston based
on "I Don't Know Why." So instead of playing bars for the
money, I was lured to make this trip to Boston every three
months to a club called Passim where people came to hear me
play, and hear that song. And every time I'd go back to Passim
I felt that that was an audience that wanted to hear what
I was writing so I always tried to have another song finished
by the time I'd go back there. I guess it was even more important
than "Diamond In The Rough" because I was made to feel welcome
in the songwriter's field through the people in Boston that
listened to those radio stations.
Do you feel like you can write for other people?
No I don't. I pitched something recently only because I was
asked if I had anything, and I had something that I thought
really would fit. It's something that I'd like to work on
because it's an alternative source of income. And it's a valid
thing to look into. But up till now it's just all been so
personal that I don't think of it in terms of other people
singing them.
Do you think you'll start writing about other people's
I have a desire but as yet it hasn't translated into anything
palpable. I mean, when I pick up a pencil or pen or whatever,
it's still attitudinalit's emotion driven. And it might
come from some other situation but it's never a story that
I have to tell of somebody else. So I have the desire, but
it hasn't ever really come to fruition. Maybe it will.
How did you develop your very distinct vocal style, and
the way you blend it so perfectly with whatever you happen
to be doing on the guitar?
I don't know that I have a distinct style. I truly don't have
any perspective on that and when I hear myself singing back
it's still difficult. I have a vague idea of what you're talking
about and it would be easiest to point out the two main influences
that I've had which are Joni Mitchell and Richard Thompson.
Both are very strong guitarists and melodicists and singers
and do intricate and interesting work as performers who accompany
themselves. And I have a strong identification with that.
I kind of consider myself as a singer first and foremost,
but something that really helped me come into my own is that
there's not a separation between me singing and me playing
the guitar. The two together were something where one fed
off the other. I worked hard at developing a guitar style
that felt good and also would work to entertain people over
a long period of time all by myself. Something interesting
and strong.
What about the way you tend to leave the melody and take
a song in different directions?
That's just something you have to feel. As a matter of fact,
one of the dumber things my manager said was "Stick to the
melody, I know you're really great at improvising, but stick
to the melody until the people get a handle on it," (laughs).
But I can't. And I'm glad it still works, and it's just something
that I feel.
How did you get put into the folk category?
The folk tag gets a little annoying. That came out of New
York right around the time of Suzanne Vega, Tracy Chapman,
the neo-folk, new folk whatever they started to call it. You
had an acoustic guitar and that's what you were. I listen
to alternative radio stations and hear a lot of folk rock.
The new Soul Asylum single, REM stuff, Toad the Wet Sprocketit's
great folk rock. But they're all in their twenties so they're
called alternative and I'm in my thirties so I'm called folk
(laughs). Sometimes it seems that way. But I don't wave a
flag for any type of music and I don't feel compelled to put
to rest any ideas. Maybe I will some day.
What kind of goals do you have or new things you'd like
to try?
There's tons left to do. I want to be a producer. There are
not many prominent women producers. You know, there's your
top ten list of producers and they're all men. People don't
just pick up the phone to call this woman or that woman to
produce a new album, at least not in my experience. And the
men who are good at what they do are very good, but it's just
silly that there's not more women. I produced a record for
my friend Lucy Kaplanski that should be out on Rounder this
year and I had a blast. I knew my subject, I knew her stuff,
her voice, and I knew our budget. It was quick and it was
simple, but that's what I neededsomething that was not going
to totally overwhelm me. And it was wonderful. I loved it.
Do you have much control over the marketing of yourself?
I have some control over it, but you have to choose your battles.
My records haven't sold millions, so as far as where I make
my demands I've sort of bent toward the musical side of things.
I can put my foot down real hard there. When it comes to marketing
it wears me out. It's a lot of energy that I have not wanted
to waste, especially on this last record. I'm not 100% comfortable
with it. It's a little too safe. I don't know how to get around
that. You go get your picture taken and you go through ten
million rolls of film. I don't find it deplorable, by any
means, but it's just a little too polished as far as I'm concerned.
Have you had much success with your videos?
I find videos extremely annoying. I've done four, but getting
them played is a problem. VH-1 & MTV are like radio stations.
The rules change a lot, and there are just more videos than
can be played. So they sort of tend to be like radio stations
where MTV is sort of an alternative/hard rock radio station
and VH-1 a sort of adult contemporary/soft rock/oldies station.
And they're really pretty much locked into that. Whereas when
Steady On came out VH-1 was really open and they played me,
and they played Bela Fleck's "Sinister Minister," and they
played the Subdudes. But they really reeled it in.
What advice would you give to a struggling songwriter?
I don't know anything to say but be true to yourself and believe
in what you do and stick to it. Because if you're like me,
you wouldn't want to bend yourself around so much to please
someone, then get somewhere with it and then have to live
with it. So if it's good for your soul and it's making you
happy, stick with it. Just don't give up. I've never seen
someone fail or miss out who wasn't kind of pushing ahead
with the best of intentions and with the belief in themselves.
If you've got a goal, a dream that really suits you and you
put it into motion, it generally takes you to somewhere. You've
got to kind of be willing to see where it takes you, and just
enjoy the ride.
Reprinted with permission from Performing
Songwriter magazine.


text:
- Font:
- +
- -
Guest: Rep. Bart Stupak, Rep. Tom Perriello, Rep. John Shadegg,: Joe Klein, Steve Kornacki, Chris Cillizza
CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: The agony and the ecstasy.
Let's play HARDBALL.
Good evening. I'm Chris Matthews in Washington. Leading off tonight,
the thrill of victory, the anger of defeat—that's right, the agony or
the anger and the ecstasy. The Senate completed final action today on the
measure reconciling the health care bill passed by 60 senators back in
December and passed by the House on Sunday. Meanwhile, the threats of
violence against Democrats have become the hottest political story in the
Democratic members of Congress have had their office windows broken.
They've gotten a lot of death threats. U.S. Congressman Russ Carnahan of
Missouri had an empty coffin placed on his lawn. Bart Stupak of Michigan
had this message sent to him and has received gross voicemails that we will
play during the show.
House Republican leader John Boehner condemned the attacks, but Eric
Cantor of Virginia is out there saying the Democrats are using the attacks
on them to make a point. And Glenn Beck is saying that the Democrats are
trying to get themselves shot at. We've got two Democrats who've come
under attack right at the top of the show.
How responsible are Republicans for stoking the anger and giving
protesters license to act out? Today House Minority Leader (SIC) Eric
Cantor said no one condones the violence, but then he said Democrats are
trying to use the incidents to make the Republicans look bad. And as I
said, Glenn Beck has said that Nancy Pelosi and other Democratic leaders
are trying to get protesters to, quote, "kill them."
Also, ditch all those comparisons of Barack Obama to Jimmy Carter.
"Time" magazine columnist Joe Klein, who's coming on tonight, says that in
passing health care reform, President Obama has accomplished something huge
and has changed the landscape of American politics. Joe Klein, as I said,
joins us later on HARDBALL.
Plus, the purge. The right-wing warpath is now besieging Senator Bob
Bennett of Utah, who thanks to Tuesday night's party caucuses, might not
even be renominated. Bennett is under assault for having sided with some
Democrats for a form of health care reform that requires people to buy
insurance, also for breaking his pledge to serve only two terms. He's
going for his fourth.
I'll finish tonight with some thoughts about how the Democrats found a
way to get health care reform done. And it's going to get done tonight,
We start with the threats of violence against Democrats. Two of them
are here on the program tonight, U.S. Congressman Bart Stupak of Michigan
and Tom Perriello of Virginia.
I want to start with Congressman Stupak. What's going on out there?
Here's a message, by the way, (INAUDIBLE) lighten up the show. It's a
recording of a message left for you, Congressman. Let's listen to it.
We've got some bleeps in there to clean it up a bit.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, Congressman Stupak, you baby-killing
(EXPLETIVE DELETED), you turncoat son of a (EXPLETIVE DELETED), I hope you
bleed out your (EXPLETIVE DELETED), got cancer and die, you (EXPLETIVE
DELETED). You do not—you do not say that you're pro-life and then for a
few bucks, you know, do turncoat and hurt the country, you (EXPLETIVE
DELETED) piece of (EXPLETIVE DELETED), (EXPLETIVE DELETED), mother
(EXPLETIVE DELETED). I hope you die!
MATTHEWS: Well, the good news, Congressman Stupak, is, is that I
don't think that was said in a Michigan accent. At least, that's good
news. It sounds like a guy further south from you a bit. But your
thoughts on getting that hateful kind of call in your e-mail.
REP. BART STUPAK (D), MICHIGAN: That's one of the nicer ones, Chris.
MATTHEWS: Not e-mail but voicemail.
STUPAK: Yes, that's one of the nicer ones. You know, it's—that's
how far this whole debate has degraded to. It's sad. We should be talking
about health care and the positive aspects in there that helps out all
Americans. Thirty-two million Americans will have access to quality,
affordable health care. That's what we should be talking about.
MATTHEWS: Well, if you think that guy's a jerk, here's Glenn Beck
today with his thoughts on the subject. I think we have a bit of his tape
today, or at least some—some quote from his show.
GLENN BECK, HOST, "GLENN BECK": I can guarantee you they walked out
and said, What the hell do you have to do to these people to get them to
kill us?
MATTHEWS: That's him speaking of Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic
leaders, Congressman, saying that they've consciously tried to figure out a
way to get the protesters from the right wing, the tea party people and the
others against you, to kill them. He says that Pelosi wanted people to
shoot at them.
STUPAK: That's—that's insane. I mean, no one is suggesting that
anyone shoot at anyone, especially the Speaker. It seems to me it was
Republicans that were on the Speaker's balcony, second floor, with the sign
that had the big photo of the Speaker, showing it to the crowd, and they
would go across her throat. I think Mr. Beck has it backwards. But that
wouldn't be the first time.
MATTHEWS: Congressman Perriello, you're from southern Virginia. You
have been written about a lot in this regard. I'm impressed by your
constituent service, the way you've gone down and dealt with people and
explained, for example, what the jobs bill has done for them in (INAUDIBLE)
down there. You've tried to be a smart politician and a good congressman.
And how's it going for you? I've heard there's a weird case involving your
brother, apparently.
REP. TOM PERRIELLO (D), VIRGINIA: There is an unfortunate case where
some bloggers posted my brother's address as being mine. And someone went
on his property and cut a propane line to the tank. And it's being
investigated, and I feel like law enforcement is just doing a tremendous
But this should be a no-brainer. This should be very, very simple to
simply say, in this country, the most American thing is that we settle our
problems at the ballot box. And I'll tell you, the Republican governor of
my state, the Republican attorney general, they didn't hesitate. They
didn't run a focus group or a poll. They simply said, This is wrong. This
is way over the line.
But for two or three days, we tried to get the Republican leaders in
Washington to understand the same seriousness. There are colleagues of
mine, I've listened to the tapes, where their children are being threatened
I will kill your children if you don't vote this way. You don't need to
run a focus group on that. The very conservative attorney general of my
state, who thinks the bill is unconstitutional, still said even the posting
of the address was way over the line. Certainly, anytime, this is a no-
MATTHEWS: What do you think of Eric Cantor's behavior? What do you
think of—well, let's listen to Eric Cantor, the House Republican whip
here. Here he is. He's from Virginia, from Richmond. Here's what he has
to say. I think he's—well, he's got a couple of points he's making.
Let's listen to them.
REP. ERIC CANTOR (R-VA), MINORITY WHIP: It is reckless to use these
incidents as media vehicles for political gain! That is why I have deep
concerns that some—DCCC chairman Chris Van Hollen and DNC chairman Tim
Kaine, in particular—are dangerously fanning the flames by suggesting
that these incidents be used as a political weapon.
MATTHEWS: Well, I have to tell you, I don't know how you fan the
flames when you—when you say you don't like something. And by the way,
Congressman Stupak, I've got to ask you a question. I know this is
rhetorical. But you know, when Bush got his way on a number of issues—
forget the war. The parties agreed on that for a while there. He got a
huge tax cut for the wealthy. I didn't see the Democrats burning down the
barns and sending hate mail, and you know, throwing rocks through windows.
They lost a big fight on fiscal issues. They got the wrong end of the
stick, you might argue. They still get it in the sense of tax policy. But
they didn't go doing this stuff. They took it on the chin.
STUPAK: You're right. I mean, I've been here for 18 years, and I've
never seen it to this degree, this much hatred being spilled out and fanned
throughout the country. It's—it's—as Tom said, it's really gone over
the line. We've got to clamp down on it.
And if Eric Cantor is right about the DNC and DCCC—well, when Randy
Neugebauer made his comments to me when I was speaking on the floor, the
"baby killer" comment—so what did he do? Next day, he has got a Web
site up to raise money off the comments he made. I mean, it's almost like
this is it now. You shout down somebody on the floor, whether it's the
president or myself during a heated debate, and then you turn around and do
an ad to raise money off it. I mean—it's—it seems like unethical
MATTHEWS: You're being nice. Let me go to Congressman Perriello. It
seems to me that there's some ethnic piece to this. Let's be blunt about
it. Neugebauer is out there selling the birther stuff, the crap, if you
will, that the president wasn't born here. This is of a piece, the "baby
killer" line, this over-the-top attack on the president as a person, as a
person who's not really one of us, and then using this kind of "baby
killer" talk against your colleague.
This isn't—you know, it seems like the right wing likes everything
about democracy except elections and majority votes and government action.
They seem to go for the theory, at least, the nice—well, I don't know
what it is about the democracy they do like. They don't seem to like its
results. Your thoughts?
PERRIELLO: Well, you know, there's certainly a long history of
"othering," and race is a big part of that in our country. But keep in
mind there are a lot of good, decent people out there who are against
health care reform. I happen to think it's a great thing for America, a
great thing for small business. There are a lot of good people who
We had 21 town hall meetings, over an hour. We have five different
tea party groups in my district. We've met together. We've disagreed,
occasionally agreed. And for the majority of people, they understand
that's the way that democracy works. And if you disagree, you go to the
ballot box and you try to win.
So for the Republican Party, or for certain leaders, to be trying to
say it's anything other than that seems disrespectful to those who have
done this the right way and played by the rules. So we don't want to paint
everyone with one brush.
It just seems to me again like for the Becks and the Boehners, this
should be an easy one. Simply come out and say violence and threats of
violence against elected officials, trying to influence a vote through
threat of violence on someone's children—it's clearly wrong. And leave
it there, no political tip-toeing around it. It's just wrong. And then we
can move on to what the benefit, the pros and cons of health care are. It
just seems like a no-brainer.
MATTHEWS: Mr. Stupak, I want to give you one bit of information I've
come across. That is, I know you're pro-life, but among the pro-choice
community in this country, most people who are pro-choice and believe the
ultimate decision doesn't lie with the government or the law, it lies with
the individual—among that group of people, the plurality are against
federal funding.
So the organizations that have come out against you and are putting in
primary opponents against you are off base when it comes to most pro-choice
people. Pro-choice people are against funding! They want the government
to stay out of abortion. They don't want it subsidizing it, getting
involved in it, insuring for it or anything. Stay away from it. Let the
individual person make the decision. Your thoughts?
STUPAK: I would agree with you. I would agree with you. The Supreme
Court said, though, we have to make a decision, and our decision in the
federal government for the last 30-some years is we don't fund it. We
haven't moved to restrict abortion rights. We cannot pass that
legislation. But what we're really saying—and what most pro-life, pro-
choice members agree with—is don't ask us to pay for abortion that we
find objectionable.
MATTHEWS: OK. Thank you very much. Good luck with your campaign,
STUPAK: Thank you.
MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr.—and good luck against the violent types -
Bart Stupak and Congressman Tom Perriello.
Coming up: Do the Republicans need to do more to condemn the violence
and threatening behavior? They're—well, Glenn Beck's out there saying
the Democrats want to be shot at. You know, I never know what he's going
to say next. We're going to ask a Republican member of Congress, Arizona's
John Shadegg, what he thinks of -- (INAUDIBLE) intellectual Republican.
Let's see what he thinks of the violent right-wingers, what he thinks of
the ugly stuff.
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
REP. JAMES CLYBURN (D-SC), MAJORITY WHIP: I will say this to my
Republican friends. If you play with fire, you're bound to get burned.
And I do believe if they don't tamp this down, they're going to feel the
heat for it.
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL. That was House Democratic whip
James Clyburn warning Republicans about the same kind of extreme actions
we've been hearing about lately. Has the anger over the health care bill
led to violence? well, Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Eugene Robinson
has some thoughts on that. Thank you. You're an MSNBC contributor,
You know, this is sort of a zeitgeist thing. Did you notice? We just
got the bad news that Eric Cantor, who I was being tough on—he had his
headquarters shot at when somebody shot a bullet in a window there. This
is—it creates a crazy attitude.
EUGENE ROBINSON, "WASHINGTON POST," MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Exactly. When
you elevate the rhetoric or you—you kind of rev it up, using these
violent metaphors—Don't retreat, reload, that sort of thing.
MATTHEWS: "Baby killer."
ROBINSON: "Baby killer," "You lie," in a joint session of Congress,
it all has an impact, I think, and it kind of grants permission...
MATTHEWS: Well, let's watch those scenes because people need to be
reminded of the official sort of part of this thing, elected officeholders
getting into this tough talk that does lead to worse. Here it is, two
times that the House members yelled out. Let's listen.
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: There are also those
who claim that our reform efforts would insure illegal immigrants. This,
too, is false. The reforms—the reforms I'm proposing would not apply to
those who are here illegally.
REP. JOE WILSON ®, SOUTH CAROLINA: You lie!
OBAMA: Not true.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Those who are shouting out are out of order.
REP. RANDY NEUGEBAUER ®, TEXAS: Baby killer!
MATTHEWS: You know, Neugebauer...
ROBINSON: Yes.
MATTHEWS: ... is the guy that yelled "Baby killer."
ROBINSON: Yes.
MATTHEWS: He's one of the leaders of the birthers...
ROBINSON: Yes.
MATTHEWS: ... the guys that don't believe that President Obama is an
American. You've got to wonder what gives these guys the permission.
ROBINSON: How much you've got to wonder, Chris...
ROBINSON: Are you wondering, really? I'm not wondering.
MATTHEWS: Joe Wilson of South Carolina—these guys feel they can
get away with that at home. This is instinctive bad behavior...
ROBINSON: Yes.
MATTHEWS: ... by those who think...
ROBINSON: It is.
MATTHEWS: ... they can get away with it politically.
MATTHEWS: These aren't profiles in courage, these guys.
ROBINSON: No, they—no, they aren't. If they didn't think they
could get away with it, they wouldn't do it. But they do it. It plays to
an element at home that will probably give them votes. But of course, the
dangerous thing is there are whackos...
MATTHEWS: OK, let's bring on a guy...
MATTHEWS: ... who's not a whacko...
ROBINSON: ... who believe in all this stuff, who...
PERRIELLO: Let's bring in John Shadegg of Arizona.
ROBINSON: ... heavily armed.
MATTHEWS: Congressman Shadegg, your fellow members, Neugebauer and
his "Baby killer," line thrown out there, Joe Wilson and his line, "You
lie"—I'll admit, Eric Cantor got a shot at his headquarters the other—
this zeitgeist out there, this atmosphere of throwing bricks through
windows, this sort of scary stuff that's going on—and the weekend's
coming and booze is now going to be added to it Friday and Saturday night.
I know what happens in this country. If you're going into a weekend with
craziness in the air, it ain't going to settle down at Friday night at
9:00. Your thoughts?
REP. JOHN SHADEGG ®, ARIZONA: I actually think it is going to
settle down Friday night at 9:00. I think it's going to settle down the
minute Congress leaves town.
I think the reality is that this goes on in politics, Chris. My first
job in politics was working for the governor of Arizona taking phone calls,
and I always got the phone calls from the crazies.
The answer is we need to move away from this kind of rhetoric. This
was a huge piece of legislation. It was intensely debated for almost a
year. Intemperate comments were made on both sides. And it's not
surprising that perhaps more were made on the minority because the minority
felt very shut out.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
SHADEGG: And I can make the case that they were shut out. There's no
excuse for this. But as a prosecutor, I don't think you're going to see
this go on. I don't think you're going to see it escalate. I think people
have had their moment. I think that, quite frankly, there's the focus of
the press on it and everybody saying this is a bad idea, and people, quite
frankly, being disgusted at anybody who isn't saying that this is
unacceptable I think is going to cause this to dissipate. The American
people are interested in getting on with their lives, and I think they're
going to get on with their lives.
MATTHEWS: What about your colleagues waving the Gadsden flag, the
"Don't tread on me" flag back of the republic back in the early days of our
country, over the side of the House wall there at the protesters, waving
the flag, and then apparently doing the "cut your throat" line, mentioning
Nancy Pelosi?
What do you make of that kind of behavior by your elected colleagues?
SHADEGG: Well, I—I—the flag they flew...
MATTHEWS: I'm looking at it now.
SHADEGG: OK. The flag they flew, I understand, was the "Don't tread
on me" flag? Is that the flag you're talking about?
MATTHEWS: The Gadsden flag from South Carolina, yes, from the—from
the early days of our country, sure.
I love that flag. But it used at our enemies overseas. We used it at
the London people running our country when we fought for independence. It
was never used against our own country before. That's the difference,
SHADEGG: Oh, I agree.
SHADEGG: I don't think anybody was advocating that it be used against
our own country. I think what they were talking about is that there was a
sentiment in the crowd—and, if you were here, there was 250, 350, maybe
5,000 people, I don't know, 1,000 people, outside that side of the Capitol,
off of what's called the beach.
And members were standing out there. I don't think they were trying
to incite the crowd. I think they were saying, yes, some of us agree with
you. This is an intense debate. People on both sides feel very strongly.
SHADEGG: It's the part of the debate that you happen to like. It's
the part of the debate where we don't just degree on the little stuff that
we do on a bipartisan fashion. It's where we articulate our arguments.
And I think it's worth noting, Chris, that never before...
MATTHEWS: OK. Well, the part I like the argument. But let me just
try this by you.
MATTHEWS: Here's something I don't like.
SHADEGG: Let's talk about the policy.
MATTHEWS: Here's Glenn Beck. Here's Glenn Beck today on his radio
show saying that the speaker of the House and other Democratic leaders
walked out of the Capitol on Sunday in a way aimed at encouraging people to
kill them, to kill them.
Here's Glenn Beck today on the radio saying this. You say the
Democrats are inciting. Look at this. Listen to this.
GLENN BECK, HOST, "GLENN BECK": I can guarantee you, they walked out
and said, what the hell do you have to do to these people to get them to
kill us?
MATTHEWS: "To get them to kill us." What do you make of Glenn Beck?
SHADEGG: No excuse for that kind of rhetoric. There's no excuse for
that kind of rhetoric. I told you I began my life as a prosecutor. That
kind of rhetoric is not good for the nation, not good for the dialogue.
But that does not mean that we ought to be focusing people on the out-
of-the-bounds, the over-the-top rhetoric. What we ought to be focusing on
is, where do we go from here? The reality is, some of us believe this
legislation won't solve the problem. And we want to go in and work on, OK,
how do we fix the things that need to be fixed?
And, quite frankly, the American people understand that this was not
the final bill. Republican ideas on how to fix health care didn't
disappear when this bill passed. Life goes on. Reform goes on. And this
is a country in which the people, including the minority, have remedies.
They have the election, and they have all kinds of remedies other than
MATTHEWS: Yes.
SHADEGG: And we ought to be talking about the fact that they have
remedies other than violence.
Gene Robinson is with me from "The Washington Post."
EUGENE ROBINSON, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes, I...
MATTHEWS: Go ask Congressman...
ROBINSON: Well, Congressman, I was there on Sunday. And the
Republican members who came out on the balcony did whip up the crowd.
And my question to you is, as a prosecutor...
SHADEGG: Well, of course they whipped up the crowd, but they weren't
urging the crowd to violence. I mean, come on.
ROBINSON: But here's my question to you.
ROBINSON: Congressman, here's my question.
SHADEGG: Well, wait. Wait. I walked across the street on the
opposite side where the pro-legislation people were chanting, and they were
whipping up the crowd as well.
That's a part of what happens in this kind of discourse in America.
Just holding up the flag is not saying, go throw a brick through a window
or shoot through a window, for God's sake.
ROBINSON: No. No, it's not.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
ROBINSON: But here's my question.
ROBINSON: Let's assume that 99.9 percent of those—of the people in
that crowd or in the Tea Party movement are—are absolutely law-abiding,
sensible people who make their policy argument and then go home.
SHADEGG: Right.
ROBINSON: It's crazy people who do crazy things. And you look out
there. When you use the specific rhetoric and the specific symbols that
are—that have been adopted by the crazy wing, by the people, you know,
who are sitting at home waiting for the black helicopters to swoop down and
confiscate their weapons, and you are giving those people permission to
have that fantasy and to act out that fantasy, are you not?
MATTHEWS: OK. What do you make of Neugebauer's comment, "baby
killer"? What do you make of Joe Wilson's comment, "You lie?"—both
delivered on the floor of the House? What do you think of them?
SHADEGG: I think both are inappropriate. I think both are out of
And I think the exploitation of those comments by both sides since
then is inappropriate. Look, you know as well as I do that there are
people out there fund-raising right now on the violence that's already
occurred, people on the left using that for a fund-raising device...
MATTHEWS: I know.
SHADEGG: ... people on the right using it for a fund-raising device.
My point is, we should condemn that. And you and I, as people talking
to that audience of American people, which may include some crazies, ought
to be reminding them that that is not what this society is about, that, in
point of fact, they have the ballot. They have the right to peaceably
assembly—peaceably assemble—and they have the right to get involved
in the process.
SHADEGG: And I don't think—I don't think that because they choose
to wave a particular flag, that means that people who share their views
shouldn't wave that flag because there's some nutcase in the audience?
You know, I can't control what nutcases are in the audience are on the
right, the left can't control what nutcases are in the audience on the
MATTHEWS: OK. Let's hope you're right. Let's hope you're right.
MATTHEWS: Let's hope you're right. But just remember, you and I
growing up in this country, we knew that a very terrible incident in this
country occurred a couple of days after a U.N. ambassador—our U.N.
ambassador, Adlai Stevenson, was spat upon in Texas.
These things sometimes escalates from words to actions, and where the
passions create a kind of a Zeitgeist, where a left-winger kills our
president in a right-wing atmosphere. I mean, you never know what nut is
going to come out of the closet when the atmosphere reaches a certain
pressure point. It does happen. I hope it doesn't happen this time.
Of course we hope it doesn't happen. We all do.
SHADEGG: The atmosphere—the atmosphere is—it is bad. I
couldn't agree more that the atmosphere is bad.
SHADEGG: But I think what we ought to be doing, as public officials,
and you, as a communicator and commentator, ought to be saying, look,
there's no place for this on the left or the right, not whipping it up on
the left or whipping it up on the right, and pointing out that this is a
great nation, because we don't have to turn to violence.
SHADEGG: We have the right to petition to our government on a
peaceful means, and that we have the right to and the obligation to engage
in dialogue and to talk about how we fix the system.
MATTHEWS: Yes, maybe—maybe the right wing should take this one on
the chin, the way the liberals did when Bush did his tax cut back in the
early part of this century. They just took it on the chin, no rallies, no
violence, no stone-throwing, no bullets, no nothing.
MATTHEWS: They say, OK, Bush won. We lost.
SHADEGG: But come on, Chris. You don't know that this is all right-
wing. I mean, come on. You know that it's not necessarily all right-wing.
MATTHEWS: No, not—I don't think a right-winger shot a bullet
through the headquarters of Eric Cantor's office down in Richmond. I do
SHADEGG: And, actually, you do not know...
MATTHEWS: I said myself the violence could be coming because of the
Zeitgeist, the atmospherics that can—can splatter all over the place.
MATTHEWS: Congressman Shadegg...
SHADEGG: Maybe it's the prosecutor in me, but I don't think you know
where any of this violence came from.
MATTHEWS: ... you know, as Bill Clinton would say—as Bill Clinton
would say..
SHADEGG: Until you do an investigation and find out who committed
what acts of violence...
SHADEGG: ... nobody knows.
MATTHEWS: OK. As Bill Clinton would say in a different circumstance,
nice tie.
SHADEGG: Thank you.
MATTHEWS: OK, thank you.
MATTHEWS: I will explain later.
MATTHEWS: Thank you very much, U.S. Congressman John Shadegg of
SHADEGG: My pleasure.
MATTHEWS: Thank you, Gene Robinson from "The Washington Post."
ROBINSON: Thanks, Chris.
MATTHEWS: Up next: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi turns 70 tomorrow,
believe it or not. Isn't that amazing? What does that mean for her? What
is she going to get for her birthday? That's fascinating. Wait until you
hear what she wants for her birthday. This is something. It's coming on
the "Sideshow."
You're watching HARDBALL on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: Back to HARDBALL. Now to the "Sideshow."
First, in the run-up to the final action on the health care bill
tonight, the boys of nighttime had their last licks.
JAY LENO, HOST, "THE TONIGHT SHOW WITH JAY LENO": And, of course, a
lot of right-wingers are very upset. They are very upset about this,
because they believe this health care bill will cost a lot of money.
You know what I say? Just pretend it's another unnecessary war. You
will feel better about it already.
DAVID LETTERMAN, HOST, "THE LATE SHOW WITH DAVID LETTERMAN": Here's
two reasons I'm unhappy about it. One, I love paying huge money for health
care. I love it.
LETTERMAN: And the other thing is, I used to love driving to Canada
to buy cheap drugs. I love that, too.
LETTERMAN: I'm steamed.
JIMMY KIMMEL, HOST, "JIMMY KIMMEL LIVE": McCain also said that there
will be no cooperation from Republicans for the rest of the year. So, that
should be good for the country.
KIMMEL: Boy, what a shame to see all of that cooperating end, you
KIMMEL: This is like the coyote announcing he's no longer cooperating
with the Road Runner.
LENO: Sarah Palin spoke out this week against the health care reform
bill, saying, elections have consequences.
Well, of course, elections have consequences. That's why, right now,
instead of being vice president of the United States, she's trying to get a
reality show on the Animal Planet.
LENO: All right? Because they have consequences.
MATTHEWS: Honestly, how would you feel? Would you feel better
knowing that she, Sarah Palin, was a McCain heartbeat away from the
presidency right now? Knowing what John McCain knows right now, would he
feel all that great? Hmm. Think about that one tonight.
Next: turning the lemon—or turning a lemon into lemonade? Joe
Biden can't let go of a good thing. You know that bad word he dropped in
the president's ear during the health care signing ceremony about what a
big 'bleep' deal it all was?
Well, here's what the veep's take on what the president thought of his
choice of words. Since it was a fund-raiser, you know, no cameras, we have
only got the audio. Here it is, Joe Biden on President Obama.
JOSEPH BIDEN, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Today, we walked
in, and he said, you know what the best thing about yesterday was? And he
said, what everybody thought he was going to say, "Joe's comment."
BIDEN: Within 20 minutes after them picking that up, there was a T-
shirt company already (INAUDIBLE). And he said, "Joe, I was going to wear
it, but I couldn't get it in time."
BIDEN: I said, "If you thought it was so good, why didn't you say
MATTHEWS: Well, why didn't you say it? Because, as you would say,
Joe, he's the F-ing president.
MATTHEWS: ... what does the speaker who just got everything want for
her birthday? Well, Nancy Pelosi, who turns 70 tomorrow, believe it or
not, gave reporters a cue to this at the briefing today.
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: You know what I want
for my birthday?
PELOSI: I think it's going to be a stove or a kitchen, I'm just
thinking. And that's good. I want a pool table.
PELOSI: I have always wanted a pool table. I want a pool table. We
will see how I do.
MATTHEWS: Wow. That's all her critics need, Nancy Pelosi, the pool
Up next: "TIME" magazine's Joe Klein on why health care reform
fundamentally changes the Obama presidency.
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
TYLER MATHISEN, CNBC CORRESPONDENT: I'm Tyler Mathisen with your CNBC
"Market Wrap."
Stocks pulling back late in the day to end mostly lower. The Dow
industrials added five points. The S&P 500, it fell two. And the Nasdaq
was off more than one big point.
Stocks started falling as the dollar surged on comments from the
Federal Reserve chief, Ben Bernanke, and the president of the European
Central Bank—Bernanke pledging to keep interest rates low here in the
U.S., even as the Fed phases out a program to buy mortgage-backed
And the European Central Bank president, Jean-Claude Trichet, blasting
the IMF's involvement in a possible bailout for Greece. He says Euro Zone
governments should be allowed to keep their own house in order without
involving the IMF.
In stocks, Best Buy shares on fire today, after smashing fourth-
quarter earnings expectations.
And banks performing well, as the dollar strengthens. Citigroup
surged nearly 3 percent, Bank of America, American Express both climbing
about 1 percent.
That's it from CNBC, first in business worldwide—worldwide—now
back to HARDBALL.
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: What this is, is a
historic step to enshrine the principle that everybody gets health care
coverage in this country...
OBAMA: ... every single person.
MATTHEWS: Well that was President Obama out in Iowa today basking,
you might say, in his health care victory.
Just how does—how huge of a victory is it? And how does it affect
his presidency and American politics overall? How much momentum is there
in this for him? What's it's going to be like on Wall Street on this one?
Columnist Joe Klein, a smart guy from "TIME" magazine, has just
written about it. And he says it recasts the whole Obama presidency,
because he didn't back down. And Lynn Sweet, another brilliant person in
this world, she's Washington bureau chief for "The Chicago Sun-Times."
I want you to start, Joe. You're hot off the press now with "TIME"
this week, and your thoughts. I think you used a word, or you would have,
from the Donald Trump vocabulary: huge, huge.
JOE KLEIN, COLUMNIST, "TIME": Huge.
MATTHEWS: Right.
KLEIN: Well, it is huge.
I mean, you know, we have been—we have been fighting over this one
since Teddy Roosevelt. You know, Democrats have been trying to get this
done ever since Franklin Roosevelt. It got done.
And, you know, it's not going to be repealed. And I think that that
changes the image of the president as someone who—you know, there was a
lot of talk about him being not—not being tough enough, not only in
Washington, but around the world.
And he toughed this one out and he won. And I think it's going to
give him some momentum. Already today, on the next big issue, financial
reform, you see the Republicans kind of buckling, Senator Corker from
Tennessee criticizing the Banking Committee chair, Richard Shelby, for not
That I don't think would have been happening today if Obama hadn't won
on health care.
MATTHEWS: What about overseas? Does this affect—I would just
imagine when he was meeting with the prime minister of Israel at midnight
the other night, alone there, without cameras, or even a picture taken
beforehand, it sure beat being there after losing, had he lost health care,
to be sitting there with a tough opponent like that.
KLEIN: Well, you know, this has been a very good week for him
overseas as well. You know, a deal with the Russians on nuclear arms
reduction, a big deal. And also the Russians and Chinese went to Iran, got
nowhere with the Iranians, and they're now going to be on board with
sanctions against Iran.
MATTHEWS: That is big news.
KLEIN: The thing is that diplomacy takes time. Big legislation, like
health care, takes time. Tax cuts don't take any time. And going to war
doesn't take very much time. The stuff that he's done is all been deferred
gratification. And now the gratification is coming in.
MATTHEWS: You're so smart. Here's what the president—before Lynn
comes in, here's what the president himself said about the Republican
strategy. They're out there saying repeal, repeal. Well, a repeal would
require a president to sign a repeal, or else a two thirds plus one vote in
both houses. What they're talking about is just technically not accurate.
Let's listen to the president on that point.
OBAMA: They're actually going to run on a platform of repeal in
November. You've been hearing that. And my attitude is go for it. I
don't believe that the American people are going to put the insurance
industry back in the driver's seat. We've already been there. We're not
going back. This country is moving forward.
MATTHEWS: Lynn, what do you think of that battle cry?
SWEET: He wants that fight. If you want to run against this bill, he
is waiting for it. One of the reasons he can say it with such confidence
is so much of the immediate benefits are front-loaded, of the things that
individuals might get, coverage for preexisting conditions, having your
kids covered, and being able to have—force insurance companies to pay
your coverage when you're sick. Those things kick in pretty fast. It's
going to be hard to to argue, or harder to argue against it.
MATTHEWS: And the Republicans know that. They know they have a short
window to try to repeal. In other words, they have to get a president
elected, basically, and a majority of Congress, at least, to vote a new
SWEET: Right, so if somebody—I know already that's the cry. But
Chris, it's a lot to say what you're against, when some people will be
getting something right away. And the individual mandate, which is a
contentious issue, well, that doesn't kick in right away. So some of the
benefits up front are things that will really be able to give the Democrats
something to talk about.
MATTHEWS: Joe and Lynn, I'm going to have some comments on this at
the end of the show. But I do think a lot of this is a result of the fact
that Ted Kennedy's seat went to a Republican. That guy in the truck
probably did more for the Democratic party than any Democrat I can think
of. He scared the Bejesus out of them. They got ready for show time.
They woke up.
KLEIN: Also, it caused a fair amount of hubris on the Republican
side. They became over-confident. The insurance companies became over-
confident and started raising premium rates by 40 percent.
The amazing thing to me right now is how the Republicans are reacting.
They're kind of doubling down on it. They're drinking their own Kool-Aid.
It's getting pretty close to Jonestown, I think.
MATTHEWS: We're living in a world of overstatement here, Joe.
KLEIN: No, really. Chris, it's really sad.
MATTHEWS: You're accusing the Republicans of being Jonestown.
KLEIN: They're committing suicide. And it's really sad, because they
have things that they could really add to this health care bill. We really
now have to concentrate on costs. Medicaid is going to explode in this
SWEET: Let me make a quick political point here, Joe and Chris. What
this roll call did was, I think, finally liberate Obama, for better or
worse, from the goal of having a bipartisan roll call. And that will clear
the way for other issues to come.
MATTHEWS: I still think they should do a big jobs bill, building
highways, roads, railroads, getting everybody to work, just like in the
'30s. I want the smell of construction in the air. I want to see it
happening. That's what I want, jobs. Joe Klein, Lynn Sweet. Up next—
Pat Moynihan is what I'm talking about.
Up next, the conservative wing of the Republican party is endangering
Republican Senator Bob Bennett of Utah. What a strange situation out there
in the Nutmeg State. Hardly a moderate, by the way. That's not the Nutmeg
State. That's another state. What am I thinking? Beehive State, Utah,
the Beehive State. This guy could lose his nomination as this thing
develops in the caucuses. He's headed to a primary he could lose. We'll
be right back with that. This could be the high-water mark for the Tea
Party types. We'll be right back with that on HARDBALL.
MATTHEWS: We're back. There's a conservative battle unfolding in
reliably conservative Utah. Republican US Senator Bob Bennett is fighting
to keep his job despite tough competition in the state's nominating
caucuses that started—that started on Tuesday. Here's how the "Salt
Lake Tribune" describes the situation, quote, "while not definitive,
interviews with a dozen caucus-goers around the state reflected a familiar
theme, support was not coalescing behind any Bennett challenger, but there
was a strong anybody but Bennett sentiment."
So what's the beef with Bennett? Well, here's an ad the Club for
Growth ran in Utah before the caucuses, followed by Senator Bennett's take
on that group, the Club for Growth.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Since Utahns last sent Senator Bob Bennett to
Washington, he voted to bail out Wall Street, voted for billions in
wasteful spending, like Alaska's bridge to nowhere, even joined with
liberals supporting big government health care.
Had enough? On March 23rd, vote for a change at your local Republican
precinct caucus. To learn more, go to StopBobBennett.com.
Club Growth is responsible for the content of this advertising.
SEN. BOB BENNETT ®, UTAH: Club for Growth is an out of Utah
organization who really couldn't care less who the Utah senator is. All
they want is some kind of national publicity for their ability to knock off
a Republican in a primary. They spend more o their time dividing
Republicans than they do defeating Democrats.
MATTHEWS: Wow. What does Bennett's trouble mean for other
Republicans around the country? That's the big question. Let's bring in
"Salon's" Steve Kornacki, and the "Washington post's" Chris Cillizza.
Chris, I want to start with you on this. Explain, without too much
detail, what's going on in Utah and how they do these things. They have a
series of caucuses that began early this week. What's going on?
CHRIS CILLIZZA, "THE WASHINGTON POST": OK, Chris, very briefly, on
Tuesday, they elected delegates who will go to the state convention in May.
It's may 8th, I believe. What those delegates will do is pick the nominee.
It will narrow it down. There's a bunch of people running. It will narrow
it down to two. The theory being it will be Senator Bennett, one other
If either of them gets 60 percent of the vote, they're the nominee.
That's how it works. This happens—Utah is very unique in this regard.
We've seen incumbents lose at the convention. The convention, obviously,
is controlled by more of the base of the party, the most conservative.
It's gradations there. Utah is very conservative. But this is the most
conservative element of the part.
They're not happy with Bob Bennett over his vote for Tarp, over being
an appropriator. All these things are fomenting that disappointment.
MATTHEWS: Is it plausible that all the other candidates running
against him could coalesce around one of the challengers, and that
challenger could get 60 percent, and blow him out right in the convention?
CILLIZZA: I do think it's plausible, Chris. It's happened before at
the Congressional level, not at the Senate level. But I do think, again,
the convention rules. It's not everybody and whoever gets the most votes
becomes the nominee. It goes to two. The question is can Bob Bennett get
over 60 percent or not, and can the challenger get over 60 percent?
If not, there's a primary. He has a better chance in a primary. The
electorate is bigger. So the best chance for conservatives, people like
the Club for Growth, to beat him is in this convention in early May.
MATTHEWS: That's May 8th. Let me go to Steve Kornacki. Your
thoughts on this development? What does it mean nationally?
STEVE KORNACKI, "SALON": Yes. I don't think it means much in Utah,
because whoever comes out of the Republican convention or the Republican
primary is going to hold that seat for the Republicans in Utah.
The question is—I think there are two question. One is, is this
something that's metastasizing and popping up in other races? There are
states, I think, where something like this can play out, something similar,
and it can hurt the Republicans.
New Hampshire, I think, is an example, where you have a sort of
moderate, establishment friendly Republican, who is the front-runner for
the Judd Gregg Senate seat up there, and you have a challenger on the
right. His name is Ovide LaMontagne. LaMontagne has actually done this in
New Hampshire before, where he ran from the right against a moderate
Republican in the primary. It was for governor of New Hampshire in 1996,
knocked off the moderate in the primary, and then got clobbered by Jeanne
Shaheen in the general election.
I think Democrats would look at a state like New Hampshire, and
they're hoping LaMontagne can pull it off again and the right can pull it
off again. So there are states where something like this can really matter
this year.
CILLIZZA: Arizona, John McCain and J.D. Hayward, same kind of I
MATTHEWS: Look, they pushed Arlen Specter out of the party. They're
pushing Charlie Christ out of the party. The Club for Growth types, the
conservatives, are succeeding in pushing the parties to the right. Aren't
they, Chris?
CILLIZZA: No question. Look, I think Senator Bennett has a self-
interest in saying the Club for Growth is an out of town group. But in
truth, they are. This is a group of people who have proving that they are
willing, on principle in their mind, to go in and potentially nominate
somebody who is not a strong candidate.
I'll give you an example. In Idaho, they helped a guy name Bill Sali
get elected. He won the primary. It was Idaho. He won the general
election. Well, Bill Sali really struggled. He had no fund-raising
apparatus. He lost that race to Walt Minnick, a Democrat.
MATTHEWS: Steve Kornacki, thanks for joining us. Chris Cillizza,
thank you gentlemen. It's a short time tonight.
When we return, I will have some thoughts about the novel way this
Congress got health care reform done. Looks like it's going to happen
tonight. You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: Let me finish tonight on something wonderful. It's how
things work out in a good democratic society. When the Democrats lost that
big election up in Massachusetts, when a new fellow in a truck from the
other party won that seat held by Ted Kennedy all those years, it got a
certain message across; the people running the government knew they needed
to sharpen up. The Democrats needed to get their rear in gear.
That loss in Massachusetts gave the Dems the kick in the pants they
needed. The president went up to Baltimore to meet with the Republicans.
He called a summit meeting at Blair House. And all of it gave him and his
people the time to get a plan together, to find that magical way you only
find when you really look hard for it, you know, show time.
That way came when somebody came up with the idea of using the
legislative route known as reconciliation. Not to bypass the rules of the
Senate, as some people were pushing them to do, but to put those rules to a
novel new use. The Senate had passed a version of health care reform with
a filibuster proof 60 votes. The Democrats would now use the
reconciliation procedure to reconcile that Senate bill with something the
House of Representatives could accept.
First, the House passed the Senate bill last Sunday, along with the
reconciliation bill. Then the Senate passed a reconciliation bill today.
The House will pass that same slightly reversed reconciliation bill
tonight. The result, a history making health care bill passed by 60 votes
in the Senate, a majority in he house, then reconciled together by use of,
you got it, reconciliation.
The "Washington Post" gave credit for using reconciliation in this
novel way not as alternative to getting 60 votes in the Senate but as a
complement to it, the White House Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Messina, a guy
who, like me, learned his craft working for years on Capitol Hill, learning
from the inside how to do the work of those on the outside, the American
Yes, the system works. New ideas meet old institutions and we, the
people, find new ways to use old tools. It's creaky. It's messy. It's as
Winston Churchill once observed, the worst form of government except for
all the others that have been tried from time-to-time.
That's HARDBALL for now. Thanks for being with us. Catch us again
tomorrow night at 5:00 and 7:00 Eastern. Right now, it's time for "THE ED
SHOW" with Ed Schultz.
Copyright 2010 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 Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.> transcript
Watch Hardball each weeknight
at 5 & 7 p.m. ET
Copyright 2010 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 Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>
Watch Hardball each weeknight at 5 & 7 p.m. ET