the behavior of men relative to women, sexually in their lives is not really a matter that should impact their political lives. and i think that's a mistake not so much for the kind of factor that don't we all want to watch what happens? but it matters because there's a way that it creates a second class citizenship for the women in these stories who are, in fact, wronged. so i certainly do hope that they will come forward and speak openly about it. >> in the other case governor sanford first abandons the state, humiliates mrs. sanford, now he abandons the state while trying to patch things up with mrs. sanford. clearly south carolina is number one on the list of the abused people in this equation but again, is it the woman victim here, jenny sanford, the glue that is keeping her husband together with that job? >> you know, it's too bad. i have to say i love jenny sanford early on because her responses were, you know, i'm

worried about my children. whatever happens in his political career is his business. and then of course there was a kind of humiliation factor when, you know, senator motor mouth just started talking about his soul mate and just, you know, sort of really exploded this. what i can say is this. you know, clearly, i hope that the choices jenny sanford is making about her family, which, you know, any of us can understand, a womanmayor -- married and raising children, people make all kinds of choices in marriage. that said i was dating a man who was running for mayor of new orleans and part of the reason that i feel comfortable endorsing him politically is because i have such a clear sense of his private morality and his private ethics. i'll just say if you know the private ethics are messed up it ought to call into question the public ethics as well. >> melissa harris-lacewell, princeton university. great thanks. take care. >> thank you. that's "countdown" for this the 2,264th day since the

previous president declared mission accomplished in iraq. i'm keith olbermann. good night and good luck. now with a special guest, ladies and gentlemen, here is rachel maddow. good evening. >> good evening, keith. i always just assumed that was sort of your knuckleball. your delayed impact. >> it goes so fast. the sound arrives later than the pitch does. >> very impressive. thanks, keith. >> take care. >> thank aut home for tuning in. we have boiled down the sonia sotomayor confirmation hearings tonight to their snappy core. the bad news is that that snappy core appears to still be the racial obsession of the republican senators who are opposed to her. also there was only one real problem with sarah palin's big debut as a policy wonk but it

was a doozie of a problem. plus, sharp attack survivors were on capitol hill today defending sharks. one of them, a survivor, not a shark, will join us along with lots of super awesome shock video. and we have a seriously feel good followup to the story of iraq's national baseball team coming up this hour. stick around for the details. in part about how amusing the people who watch this show are. we begin tonight with new details on the secretive religious organization that finds itself at the center of two major republican sex scandals this summer. the group is called the family. they run a house that a number of members of congress live in in washington, d.c. it's called c street. now, we've learned this summer that both senator john ensign of nevada and governor mark sanford of south carolina got counseling of some sort at c street while they were both carrying on their extra marital affairs. as c street has become an intrical part of the story of those two scandals the group's trademark extreme xrelsy secrec

appears to be starting to crack. first we have new comments to report about the family and c street from republican congressman zack wamp of tennessee. congressman wamp has lived at the c street house for 12 years. after the ensign scandal broke he spoke to the "knoxville news sentinel" and they reported, quote, the c street residents have all agreed they won't talk about their private living arrangements, wamp said, and he intends to honor that pact. quoting him, i hate it that john ensign lives in the house and this happened because it opens up all these kinds of questions, wamp said. but, he said, i'm not going to be the guy who goes out and talks. after we read that quote from the "knoxville news sentinel" on this show a few days ago congressman wamp complains to us, insisting that those who live in the house are not actually sworn to secrecy. even though that was the clear implication of what he told that knoxville paper. we followed up with the "knoxville news sentinel" again

today and they say congressman wamp's office has made no complaint to them like the one he made to us. he's still only complaining to us for broadcasting what the paper printed. now congressman wamp has given another interview about the family. this time for "the chattanooga times free press." they asked him specifically about the c street house. >> people can go off the hill in a bipartisan way and get along and, you know, hold each other accountable. it's not like -- there's really nothing to talk about except that's what we chose to do. >> by all accounts it seems to be a secretive group. >> it's not. i'm telling you. it's where people live and we go there to fellowship and, you know, we happen to have a common denominator of our faith. but that's a good thing. >> it's a good thing. there's really nothing to talk about. we hold each other accountable. we're all sworn not to talk about this thing but it's not like that means it's secretive.

>> they didn't want to violate people's private decisions to come there. and unwhat happens when you share and the media writes about it? nobody comes and the whole thing evaporates. that's why. it's not secretive. it's that that's the only way something like this can exist. that's why it happens that way, man. it's not like anybody is trying to hide anything. it's so that people will feel like they can. >> it's not secretive. it's that that's the only way something like this can exist. it's not secretive. it's just that if we don't keep secrets, nobody will come talk to us. nobody will join. so they all knew about governor sanford's affair in argentina and senator ensign's affair with this campaign treasurer. they knew about those affairs for months. while those affairs were kept secret from everyone else. now yet another c streeter is coming forward. his name is former republican congressman steve largent of oklahoma. he lived at the c street house while in congress and says he

still participates in weekly dinners and discussions there and now tells "the tulsa world newspaper" that he came back to c street to participate in a confrontation between c street members and john ensign about his extra marital affair. he says, quote, we are all very good friends. he was wandering off the reservation. largent said the group who confronted ensign left unsure of its impact but eventually the meeting produced quote a good result. it turned out to be very constructive. he denies anyone at c street suggested john ensign pay off his mistress or her family. but he does provide us a little more insight into the internal accountability that's at work in this mysterious group. accountability which it now seems may be designed to replace the members of this group sense of responsibility to anyone outside the group. mr. largent said each of the men who live in the house has given others license to confront each other if there's something going on that shouldn't be going on in

someone's life. asked if senator ensign and mark sanford should resign in light of their affairs mr. largent said, quote, first of all, my biggest concern is about their personal well being and their family's well being. beyond that whether they stay in office or not i think that's a calculation that only they can make. my biggest concern is about their personal well being. when it came to president clinton's affair back in 1998 steve largent was a congressman then. when he was a congressman he had a much different view of such situations. saying at the time, quote, i don't think any reasonable people could say that the president should not resign. i think even reading the president's own censure resolution you can't come away with any other conclusion than that this president should resign. it's the honorable thing to do. the honorable thing to do apparently is what matters when you're not a member of the family. when you are a member of the family, forget honor. it's your personal well being that matters now.

in both the john ensign case and the mark sanford case the more we learn about the theology of this secret group, its reason for being, the way it operates, the more the group seems to explain how these politicians were able to involve many, many other members of congress and even former members of congress in keeping their affairs secret and why both men who had called on other politicians to resign when they'd had affairs are themselves refusing to resign themselves now that they have been caught doing the same thing. there's still a lot we don't know about c street but the picture that's beginning to emerge is of a group whose members essentially agree to disclose their secrets to one another as an alternative to disclosing them to anyone else. members who agree not to talk about the family but who are accountable for their actions to the family and to nobody else. democracy. right? joining us now once again is jeff sharlet who lived with members of this secret organization for a year as part

of some extraordinary reporting he did for "harpers" magazine. that reporting turned into one of the hottest books on the market right now called "the family, the secret fundamentalism at the heart of american power" out now in paperback. thanks very much for coming back on the show tonight. >> hi, rachel. thanks for having me. >> when it comes to the issue of giving up any power, i feel like the more these members of the group start to talk publicly now i'm starting to get a sense of a standard here. if you're in the group the outcome of a scandal like this is about your personal well being. if you're not in the group you have to give up power as the honorable thing to do. do you feel from what you know about the group there is something going on about internal accountability to the members of the family replacing accountability to anybody else? >> that's exactly it. when they talk about accountability they're referring to accountability to your fellow brothers in this fellowship. zach wamp, himself, in fact has cited a scripture verse that says when you walk in a special fellowship together you are purified of all sin.

only when you're in that fellowship, only when you're in this family. if you're outside of the family then you're accountable to the public but inside you are accountable to a higher calling which is this idea the family teaches the poll tigs involved that they've been chosen for their leadership positions not by the people who elected them but by god who they believe put them in power. >> that's why the secretive nature of this group i think has anti-democratic, small d democratic implications. i think that's why c street and the family have turned out to be the much larger story than the two individual affairs. jeff, congressman largent said those who live in the house give each other license to intervene in each other's affairs. how does that work? >> yeah, that reflects a documentarian that you're given as you sort of move up into positions of authority within the group. you're assigned a sort of core group. that's what ensign and coburn and largent were in as long as

spor brownbeck was involved as well. when you join this group which they describe as a publically invisible but privately identifiable group of companions or invisible believing group, you agree to give the other men in your prayer cell veto rights over your life. we've seen that with senator ensign and the way in which the affair was handled. and these questions around whether, who directed him to give money to his mistress. it seems like he's getting instruction from the group and that's what i think is -- former congressman largent is referring to when he says you give one another license. >> on that issue of secrecy, congressman wamp as i mentioned in the introduction complained to us about our essentially reading a quote from a newspaper that he, when he didn't complain to the newspaper about it. and i raise that again because congressman wamp seems to be sort of tying himself into knots about the issue of secrecy. simultaneously complaining this group isn't secretive but also

saying if they didn't keep secrets then the group would have no power. nobody would join and the group would go away. now you've been talking about this in terms of how it functions among these individual members but is secrecy integral to their idea of power and their version of christianity? >> absolutely. they would say we're avoiding institutionalization and don't want to get gunked up with bureaucracy. at the same time they say we're like the mafia, the christian mafia. the leader of the group who has been spiritually counseling these congressmen through their affairs says the more invisible you make your organization the more influence you have. congressman wamp, zach wamp said, there's nothing to hide here to which i can only respond, why are so many internal family documents that you can get if you get ahold of the internal documents marked please destroy after reading?

i don't write that on my documents. that seems like something you're doing if you are trying to hide in fact a specific document says we don't want our political activities to leak to the public. >> in terms of the fact that members of these groups agree to divulge mat e.r.a.s monwuivulge themselves but not the outside world, and thinking about the way they related to the senator ensign and sanford scandal it got me thinking about the limits of this. if a member of a prayer cell came to the group and said i've committed murder would they feel an obligation to tell people outside the group? what's the limit of what they would keep to themselves? these guys, a lot of people here kept these affairs secret from the public for months. >> yes, you know, i think one thing we have to deal with when looking at religious groups like the family, we have to take their beliefs seriously. when they say your first loyalty is not to your constituents,

it's not to the public that elects you, it's not even to your own personal family, it's to your brothers in this family, they mean it. they do believe it seriously. so i think if you look at those kinds of situations where possibly a crime is being committed, i think the family is going to attempt to address that internally and when you look back at their history certainly with some of the foreign leaders they've dealt with, that's exactly how they've done it. they were very involved with a lot of the death squad leaders in central america. and they would say, look. we might discuss that internally but they're not going to go public with very little, the murder those guys were committing. and i think we see on the level of these sort of personal ethics and professional ethics that senator ensign and governor sanford are displaying, we see that same kind of approach of loyalty to the sect above loyalty to the public, to the constituents, to the people of america. >> jeff sharlet author of "the

family, the secret fundamentalism at the heart of american power" and, jeff, as always, scary and illuminating. thanks for coming back on the show. >> thanks very much, rachel. sonia sotomayor's supreme court confirmation hearing continued today and as befits the solemnity of such an occasion oklahoma senator tom coburn quoted ricky ricardo. thereby officially establishing the fine line between awkward and oh, god please tell me he did not just do that. later, sarah palin took a serious policy position on the cap and trade energy bill in "the washington post" this week except it wasn't sarah palin's policy position. a whole different kind of awkward involving governor palin. that is coming up.

you have questions. who can give you the financial advice you need? where will you find the stability and resources to keep you ahead of this rapidly evolving world? these are tough questions. that's why we brought together two of the most powerful names in the industry. introducing morgan stanley smith barney. here to rethink wealth management. here to answer... your questions. morgan stanley smith barney. a new wealth management firm with over 130 years of experience. 90s slacker hip-hop. ♪ that can strain your relationships and hurt yourody 'cause we'pride ♪ng a ride ♪ ♪ it's the credit roller aster ♪

♪ and as you can see it kinda bites! ♪ ♪ so sing the lyrics with me: ♪ when your debt goes up your score goes down ♪ ♪ when you pay a little off it goes the other way 'round ♪ ♪ it's just the same for everybody, every boy and girl ♪ ♪ the credit roller coaster makes you wanna hurl ♪ ♪ so throw your hands in the air, and wave 'em around ♪ ♪ like a wanna-be frat boy trying to get down ♪ ♪ then bring 'em right back to where your laptop's at... ♪ ♪ log on to free credit report dot com - stat! ♪ vo: free credit score and report with enrollment in triple advantage.

so i want to just start with the comments that you've made about the wise latina. >> of course that's where you want to start. that was sort of the name of the game again today. as republican senators chose for the third straight day at the supreme court nomination hearings of judge sonia sotomayor to focus on race. >> i'm still concerned about some of the issues that have been raised with regard to the wise latina quote where you said

that they should make decisions that are better than a white male. >> that was senator jeff sessions of alabama, the lead republican senator on the judiciary committee, not to be outdone, oklahoma republican senator tom coburn sort of swung for the fences today with a brief impression of the cuban husband character played by dezi arnez on "i love lucy" in the 1950s. the strange moment came up in a strange hypothetical about gun rights. >> if i go home, get a gun, come back and shoot you, that may not be legal under new york law because you would have alternative ways to -- >> you'd have lots of explaining to do. >> lots of splaining to do. senator goes ricky ricardo. as a person who loved the ricky ricardo character and all of "i

love lucy" this is certainly not the most offensive thing senator coburn has ever said in the senate and it was certainly not the most revealing moment of racial fixation in these hearings. but, still. meanwhile, msnbc's own pat buchanan known in these parts as uncle pat is now urging the republicans on in one of the most over the top racial politics commentaries i have seen in years arguing in his regular column at human events.com that republicans should be using the sonia sotomayor hearings even more overtly to exploit racial animus amongst minorities among white voters. pat writes, quote, these are the folks who paid the price of affirmative action when their sons and daughters are pushed aside to make room for the sonia sotomayors. what republicans must do is expose sotomayor as a political activist whose career bespeaks a life long resolve to discriminate against white males. sonia is first and foremost, pat

writes, a latina. sonia is --. somehow i doubt that uncle pat and judge sotomayor are on a first name basis but who knows? the stoking of white people's racial animus, not to stop this nomination but to get votes in the future, does seem to be the big elephant in the room, republican strategy in these hearings anyway. we may have mr. buchanan's column to thank for making that strategy way less subtle. pat will be here tomorrow night after the close of the hearings to talk it through with me but right now we are joined with our unpaid but much appreciated defacto hearings correspondent dahlia lithwick. thanks very much for coming back on the show. >> thank you for having me. >> so today on slate you wrote that republicans chose to turn this historic hearing into a bitter conversation about the impact of race on america. you said it was the gop's choice to turn this hearing from a conversation about diversity into a fight about race.

i'm guessing that means no change from the race focus on day three of the hearings, then, huh? >> it becomes almost unfathomable, rachel. i get it. she shouldn't have said the wise latina thing. question her about it once. question her about it twice. but when you're going and going and going on it, when jeff sessions does his second round on it, it just starts to look as though maybe they don't understand how this sounds. maybe they think they're having a civil conversation about judicial activism and interpretation and they're just using the wise latina quote, but every time you hear it, what comes out is, why do you hate white guys, sonia? and it's just, i mean, it's like being battered with it. >> well, i wanted to mention the pat buchanan column today. we're going to have pat on the show tomorrow to talk about his column. i'm really looking forward to that. he is overtly urging republicans to try to use these hearings to build support among white voters who feel under attack by

minorities to really stoke that. and i feel like that's been the analysis i've had that i've been trying to point out that's what it seems like they're doing. he is overtly urging them to do it. when you're in the room does it seem like that's what they're trying or does it seem like they think they're having a civil conversation? >> i think they feel like they are having a juris prudential discussion about something she said that concerns them. i really -- democrats keep going out of their way to commend them on how polite and respectful they're being so i think that there's just a tin ear problem here where they're not entirely clear on how it's landing and certainly not clear that landing the same point again and again and again at the risk of talking about something that's serious and meaningful like her record, just the aggregate of this is really overwhelming. >> you've also raised the issue of the democrats' lost opportunity here. you said at slate today you learned more about liberal

theories on juris prudence from democrats' opposition to robertson alito than you could glean from the way they're supporting sotomayor. what do you mean by that? >> this has been an amazing lost opportunity for democrats. they had a three-day informercial. all they needed to do for three days was just wind up and explain what's wrong with the john roberts court. why does the roberts court have this determination to keep americans, average americans out of the courthouse doors? why are they so set on doing away with the racial progress we've made? nobody makes that point. instead we have at least half the democrats on the committee racing into the embrace of john roberts. you know, promising us that sotomayor is going to be tough on crime, loves guns, is a strict constructionist, is a minimalist. it's just bizarre, the extent to which john roberts' shadow hovers over these hearings. and democrats it's like patty herst syndrome. they've completely bought into the notion that, you know,

justice is justice and anything over and above that is horrible. you get these flickering moments. again today, al franken who has been a senator for less than a week actually making this pointed critique of the roberts court and saying to judge sotomayor, how can they talk about striking down the voting rights act? how can that not be activist? why haven't all the democrats been messaging that? it's really been this very confounding caught between a bunch of doctrine they can't explain. >> i guess that may be what al meant when he talked about wanting to be the people's proxy in these hearings. it's really great to have you on the show again. thanks, dahlia. >> thank you rachel. coming up an update on what in our office we're calling operation iraqi baseball. and sarah palin bravely comes out against her own position on energy. and scary things in water which include both sharks and a giant unknowable blob in alaska.

gecko vo: geico's the third-largest car insurance company in the nation. but, it's not like we're kicking back, now, havin' a cuppa tea. gecko vo: takes lots of sweat to become that big. gecko vo: 'course, geckos don't literally sweat...

it's just not our thing... gecko vo: ...but i do work hard, mind you. gecko vo: first rule of "hard work equals success." gecko vo: that's why geico is consistently rated excellent or better in terms of financial strength. gecko vo: second rule: "don't steal a coworker's egg salad, 'specially if it's marked "the gecko." come on people.

coming up, as sarah palin steps down from being an elected official she is making a move to reinvent herself, reposition herself as an ideas person, a policy wonk. three guesses as to how that's turning out so far and the first two don't count. first an update on what we're calling operation iraqi baseball. yesterday the mcclatchy news

service ran a story about the iraqi national baseball team which has precisely one baseball jersey for its entire squad and that's from a japanese team. they have three baseballs, nine gloves that they share, and one 5-year-old softball bat. this is the iraqi national baseball team. mcclatchy reported the iraqi olympic committee has given the team enough money to enter into the international associations they need to enter if they're ever going to get a shot at playing another country's team. but other than that, they are financially tapped out. plus, no one in iraq sells baseball gear even if the team had the money to buy it. now, if you're a fan of this show you may have noticed that the staff of this show and a certain host of this show happen to be big, gooey, emotional saps about sports. therefore, in response to mcclatchy's story i mentioned on last night's show we've been seeing what we can responsibly do to get the team some gear. we didn't mean for that literally one sentence mention in last night's show to be a

huge deal but we did get a huge response. on twitter, by e-mail, by phone, from friends and from famous people and from regular viewers, coast to coast and beyond, we got offers of everything from money to used gear to new gear to shipping help to contacts in the iraqi government to contacts in the american government who might be able to help. the response was honestly overwhelming and really heart warming. here's the deal. here's the update. we are trying to keep it simple. there isn't anyone in iraq we can figure out who sells regulation baseball gear so we have no option but to ship some in. we have an agreement with someone who will receive the gear from us in baghdad and deliver it to the team. the assistant coach of the national team is helping us with the logistics. he knows the gear is coming. and he's apparently very psyched. we've got the team's jersey sizes and they're getting their feet measured for their clete sizes tomorrow. i bought a case of baseballs today and an official rulebook. they are already in our office. we have an agreement from a company to field us, provide us

with bats, batting gloves, fielding gloves, and cleats for the team. they should be delivered on friday. once we have shoe sizes from the men tomorrow. we have another agreement from another company to make custom jerseys for the team. they will get 20 jerseys and at the team's request they'll have the post saddam iraqi flag on the front and the words iraqi baseball on the back above the number. those will take some time to produce obviously and we'll ship those as soon as they're ready. so in terms of gear and logistics i think we're set. i will give you another update once the stuff is on its way. we're thinking probably either friday or monday. in the meantime, thank you. thank you to the folks who are donating things we're actually sending to the team. you will get further thanks from me later. thank you also to the folks who offered to send gear we're not going to be able to send and to people who offered logistical help and donations. thank you. here is my last request. don't let the generous impulse you had toward these iraqi baseball players go to waste. it is more than just the thought

that counts. at our website today at rachel.msnbc.com we've posted online donation links for charities that provide humanitarian help and supplies and in some cases even sports gear for iraqi civilians and they do it in a way more sustainable way than any tv show could ever handle. if you were moved to help these iraqi baseball players by this story and so many people were, please think about making good on that impulse and making a donation if you can. the links again are at rachel.msnbc.com. we will have more to come. i know that you were just living with it. that was my normal. i thought that was normal. what changed? i saw activia in my mom's fridge, tried it for a couple of weeks. and it's liberating. hummm. announcer: activia is clinically proven to help regulate your digestive system in two weeks when eaten every day. ♪ activia and now try a delicious blend of cereal, fiber and activia yogurt. new activia fiber.

when she started forgetting things, i was hoping it was nothing. grandma! what a nice surprise! mom, it's sunday. that's when i knew i couldn't wait. mom's doctor said these were signs of alzheimer's, a type of dementia, and that prescription aricept could help. he said it's the only treatment proven effective... for all stages of alzheimer's. studies showed aricept slows the progression... of alzheimer's symptoms. it improves cognition...

and slows the decline of overall function. aricept is well tolerated but not for everyone. people at risk for stomach ulcers... or who take certain other medicines... should tell their doctors... because serious stomach problems... such as bleeding may get worse. some people may experience fainting. some people may have nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, bruising, or not sleep well. some people may have muscle cramps... or loss of appetite or may feel tired. in studies, these were usually mild and temporary. mom. talk to your doctor about aricept. don't wait. alzheimer's isn't waiting.

in 11 days governor sarah palin will officially leave office and become a private citizen. this week she appears to have started auditioning for what she wants her new role to be in the republican party. her audition is essentially a wonky op-ed published in "the washington post" decrying the cap and trade provision in the president's energy plan, which would reduce the emissions that cause global warming. governor palin's op-ed of course includes a swipe at the sh chattering class. that would be me and there is

for the record exactly one unnecessary exclamation point in the op-ed. but aside from those signature sarah palin flourishes it appears to be boilerplate republican argument on a boilerplate republican policy issue and in putting it out there governor palin seems to be trying to position herself as a republican party ideas person. a new conservative policy wonk maybe in the mold of newt gingrich or an eric cantor. it's a logical, totally understandable strategic move for somebody trying to set themselves up for their political future. it's also not working out very well so far. because governor palin appears to have forgotten to consult her own record on the subject before writing the op-ed. remember the op-ed is against cap and trade, against capping emissions. here's governor palin at the vice presidential debate last october. >> do you support capping carbon emissions? >> i do. i do.

>> here's her elaborating on what appears to have been sort of downright enthusiastic support for cap and trade in her famous interview with katie couric. >> john mccain proposed legislation calling for mandatory caps on global warming gases or co2 emissions. do you agree with that? >> i support his position on that absolutely. >> but he somewhat backtracked on the campaign trail saying the caps wouldn't be mandatory. what do you think? do you think voluntary caps go far enough or they should be mandatory? >> he's got a good cap and trade policy that he supports and details are being hashed out even right now but in principle absolutely i support all that we can do to reduce emissions and clean up this planet. >> we've got to reduce emissions. he's got a good cap and trade policy. to make matters worse here's what the mccain-palin website said during the election season. it's a page that isn't posted online anymore for obvious reasons but has been preserved in time by a group focused on tracking candidates' positions, a group called see through the

podium. quote, john mccain and sarah palin have proposed a cap and trade system that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions. a climate cap and trade mechanism would set a limit on greenhouse gas emissions. a cap and trade system harnesses human ingenuity. you notice she didn't used to call it a cap and tax program like she does now? back when it was part of her platform as a candidate for vice president of the united states? it does take a truly out of the box thinker to come out so boldly against one's own policy positions but it may not set one up well to be a policy wonk in the future. joining us now is "the washington post" blogger ezra klein who wrote about palin's op-ed this week on his "the washington post" blog, meow. thanks for coming on the show. nice to see you. >> great to see you, rachel. >> i can't think of you without thinking of the old tag line on your blog, mama said wonk you out. tell me this from a wonk's perspective. was governor palin's anticap and

trade op-ed sort of in the main stream of republican energy policy or is she out on her own here? >> i wouldn't really call it anywhere in terms of policy. governor sarah palin missed a bunch of the sort of key policy concepts in cap and trade including the words global warming, climate change, carbon emissions, all things that figured into the questions you replayed her being asked a moment ago. she plays into i think what the republican minority is doing which is not so much having a global warming policy as having an opposition to a global warming policy. so in that, you know, she probably isn't main stream but i wouldn't consider it a policy position. i would consider it a sort of an opposition orientation. >> in terms of the dynamics of republican party politics, and i guess conservative politics more broadly is a better way to put it what does it mean she is coming out against her own previous position in favor of cap and trade? which is more of a liability for her in conservative circles, to be for it or against it? >> oh, to be for it is definitely more of a liability. you know, i think conservatives

are going to use this as they see it as a weakness for obama. it is on some level an energy tax. it's one that'll get rebated to people, one that will save the globe from becoming sort of crispy over time. but it is nevertheless taxes. people don't like them. it will be a tricky thing to sell. you know, i think she's in the main stream there. i think she's going to face a bit of trouble though because sarah palin's caught between a rock and a hard place, right? she is desperate to get credibility from people like you, the main stream media. i mean, the first thing she does after sort of quitting the governorship although she is running this op-ed while still governor and tweeting furiously, you wonder what she spends her day doing, but she comes out with a pretty wonky op-ed. she wants to be taken seriously as a thinker and it isn't going well yet. this read a little bit like somebody who had heard policy speeches but hadn't understood them. it had the sort of language you see in a policy speech but didn't all fit together. it was a strange outing. >> the reason that sarah palin is continuing to be so

newsworthy is because she is so popular nan trying to think about what the republican party of the future looks like, we i think have to consider a republican party in which sarah palin has a major role. i think with this op-ed she is signaling she'd like that role to be a policy role. from what you know about conservative and republican politics and what she said here, can you tell what the republican party future policy would be on energy if sarah palin's in it? would it be a repudiation of what john mccain was in favor of during the campaign? >> it looks a little bit like that. it's like before his campaign, one of his signatures as a compromiser was he was for cap and trade. it was fundamentally a good plan. she is, i almost would caution against saying she wants her future to be in ideas. she wants her future to be in opposition. it's what she knows what to do. it isn't the country so much that she's popular with as the

media. when she quit she said the problem is engaging with the media is taking too much time from my job. now the first thing she does is publish in my paper. it seems a bit like the real problem was that her job was taking too much time from engaging with the media. >> ezra klein, very smart points. ezra writes an online column for "the washington post." thanks so much for joining us. nice to see you. >> thank you. metaphors aside we do not often hear about sharks on capitol hill. but today a group of shark attack survivors lobbied to protect the razor-toothed ocean predators that injured them. coming up next we'll talk to a shark attack survivor and filmmaker. stay with us. first, one more thing, not about sarah palin but about the state of which she is governor for another week. off the alaska coast there currently floats a big blob of goo in the sea between alaska and russia. the black slime reportedly stretches for more than ten miles.

officials say it's been hanging off ice, tangling up jelly fish and someone even turned into their local wildlife department the remains of a dead goose, just bones and feathers they found tangled up in the blob. the coast guard insists that the blob looks and smells like something that is alive. they're saying they don't think it's anything like an oil spill. samples of the slime are being tested to find out exactly what it is. we should have results of the tests hopefully next week. meanwhile, maybe this explains the waders. dinner bell sfx: ping ping ping fancy feast elegant medleys tuscany entrées restaurant inspired dishes with long grain rice and garden greens is it love? or is it fancy feast? as we get older, our bodies become... less able to absorb calcium. he recommended citracal. it's a different kind of calcium. calcium citrate. with vitamin d... for unsurpassed absorption, to nourish your bones.

90s slacker hip-hop. ♪ that can strain your relationships and hurt yourody 'cause we'pride ♪ng a ride ♪ ♪ it's the credit roller coaster ♪ ♪ and as you can see it kinda bites! ♪ ♪ so sing the lyrics with me: ♪ when your debt goes up your score goes down ♪ ♪ when you pay a little off it goes the other way 'round ♪ ♪ it's just the same for everybody, every boy and girl ♪ ♪ the credit roller coaster makes you wanna hurl ♪ ♪ so throw your hands in the air, and wave 'em around ♪ ♪ like a wanna-be frat boy trying to get down ♪ ♪ then bring 'em right back to where your laptop's at... ♪ ♪ log on to free credit report dot com - stat! ♪ vo: free credit score and report with enrollment in triple advantage. we have ever created. a car that can help awaken its driver if he begins to doze... keep him in his lane if he starts to wander... even stop itself if he becomes distracted. if you want to see the future of the automobile, just look at the new e-class... today. this is the 9th generation e-class. this is mercedes-benz. this is the 9th generation e-class.

just don't feel like they used to. are you one of them? remember when you had more energy... for 18 holes with your buddies? more passion for the one you love? more fun with your family and friends? could be an easily treatable condition called low t. c'mon, stop living in the shadows. you've got a life to live. so don't blame it on aging. go to isitlowt.com to find out more. this morning the obama administration released an official letter about its position on the bill that would fund the pentagon next year. bills like that are massive and a letter like this is routine practice. it's full of fine print detailing specific provisions of the bill that the administration is in favor of and others about which they have concerns. in a great catch spencer ackerman of "the washington independent" today found in the white house's letter an

administration concern that's frankly now a rachel maddow concern. in a paragraph on interrogation issues the letter from the white house says, quote, the administration also would object to any amendment requiring video recording of all intelligence interrogations. the obama administration is against videotaping interrogations in the middle of the criminal investigation of the cia destroying videotapes of its interrogations? this is the same barack obama whose most famous achievement as a state senator in illinois was requiring the police there to videotape interrogations? is this the same guy? can we get an explanation here? <

a picture of the giant shark that washed up on the long island shore yesterday. here it is. a 20-foot long basking shark. researchers still need to examine the shark to figure out exactly why it died. they think it was some kind of illness, not a violent injury. still, though, 20 feet long. and even though this guy may have died of natural causes, billions of that fat fellow's fellow sharks aren't so lucky. each year fishermen kill about 70 million sharks. many of them by something called finning. they catch sharks, slice off their fins, and then throw the carcass back into the sea. the fins end up in shark fin soup around the world. now some shark populations are seriously threatened. the counts of some types of shark are down by as much as 80% over the last 30 years. and one unlikely group of people

is hoping to reverse that trend. they are shark attack survivors. presumably suffering from what they called sharkholm syndrome. there were at least nine shark survivors on capitol hill today lobbying to protect their toothy attackers. they want the u.s. senate to pass the shark conservation act. it passed the house in march and introduced to the senate by senator john kerry last april. this would ban shark finning and restrict shark fishing in u.s. waters. joining us is mike degree, one of the shark attack survivors who was in washington today. he's also a filmmaker and volunteer with the pugh environment group. thank you very much for coming on the show. >> thank you very much. i would say it's nice to see you but i can't. you're hundreds of miles away. >> fair enough. was this in fact the largest gathering of american shark survivors in one place ever? >> well, it's certainly the largest that i ever heard of but

i have never been involved in anything like this before. so that could have happened without me knowing about it. it's a large gathering of people, if it wasn't a serious issue, i would think barnum & bailey would have something to do with it. >> you were bitten by a shark and you are now lobbying with other folks who suffered the same fate to save them, essentially, to make sure their numbers are protected. can you talk to me at all about how you came to this position? >> well, i came to the position of being bitten by a shark by a fluke. that wasn't very much fun. in fact, they can do that. they can hurt you. they don't very often, thank heavens, or we would all be in trouble in the oceans. but the pugh group decided they would bring together an unlikely group of people who would be able tosy something about shark and give a unique experience as we went around talking to the senators, as we did today. and i think it worked out very well. i was skeptical about the idea at first, in all honest yab. i thought, i don't want to wear

this badge of being a shark attack guy. i want to help the sharks but i'm not sure about the shark attack group. but i think it worked out. the fact i'm here and we got "the washington post" article today, it's a pretty big interest in what we have to say. so it's worked out pretty well. >> the u.s. shark conservation act, the specific piece of legislation you were lobbying on, unanimously passed the house. you met with senators to discuss the bill. it went pretty well. does it seem likely to pass in the senate? and is this just the first step? does more need to be done legislatively? yes, and yes. as far as the meetings that i had today and gathering together and debriefing with the rest of the people that were out talking with the senators and their staff, that it went extremely well. we got a lot of positive feedback. but it isn't surprising. what we're doing is basically just patching holes in a law that already is on the books. the law passed in 2000. finning is illegal in the country. it's just there's some loopholes, which i can tell you a couple if you want.

otherwise, that's all we are doing is patching holes. and once that is accomplished, there's a much, much better way of taking care of the finning issue in this country, and once america has it, then it's easy to be, you know, ambassadors to other countries and hope that the trends continue, because finning is barbaric. >> in terms of the overall climate around the issue in this country, and i totally take your point that that's us getting our house in order is the first step towards us helping other people get their house in order on this, americans, along with other people, have almost a primeval fear when it comes to sharks. when you talk to people about saving sharks, is it something you feel like you can get across as to why they should be protected, why they're something other than just scary? >> yeah, there is. and you're right, there is a primal fear. and i think it is rooted in the fact that these animals can eat you and there's something creepy about that. >> yeah. >> and in fact they have eaten people. you go in the water at night

and/or in the daytime, any time, it's kind of in your minds, especially with all of the press that sharks get. not all good press, mind you. so what i'm interested in, and what i try to tell others about, especially others in a position to enact law, is that there's a lot -- they're a lot more than feeding machines that run around making baby sharks and eating anything in sight. they're very sophisticated animals. anything that's had 400 million years to evolve, you can imagine how good they are at what they do. that's where sharks are. they are extremely well adapted to the environment and to be underwater and look at these animals is something that can take your breath away. they're beautiful animals. perfectly suited to do what they do. now, the fact that they hurt people occasionally, that's just an artifact of us going into that environment that they are so perfect predators in. so i -- i would like people to

appreciate them for what they are. but i think more significantly, and certainly more appropriate to why i am here with the rest of the people who have been attacked is that they're vanishing. that is just -- they have a very low rate, they don't produce many babies. they don't produce fast at all. they have a slow growth rate. they reach sexual maturity halfway through their lifetime, often ten years into it, and they just have a couple of pups. they can't possibly keep up with the rate of fishing. they are going to go away. it is going to happen if we don't flip a switch. and if we don't flip it and turn our course around towards, you know, killing sharks, it's going to flip anyway because they're going to go away. >> mike degruy, shark attack survivor, filmmaker and volunteer with the pugh group. thank you for your time, sir. >> thank you. coming up on "countdown," keith looks at what we really know about the cia assassination

that vice president dick cheney ordered be kept from congress. (male announcer) if you've had a heart attack

caused by a completely blocked artery, another heart attack could be rking, waiting to strike. a heart attack caused by a clot, one that could be fatal. but plavix helps save lives. plavix, taken with other heart medicines goes beyond what other heart medicines do alone to provide greater protection against heart attack or stroke and even death by helping to keep blood platelets from sticking together and forming clots. ask your doctor about plavix, protection that helps save lives. (female announcer) if you have stomach ulcer or other condition that causes bleeding, you should not use plavix. when taking plavix alone or with some other medicines including aspirin, the risk of bleeding may increase so tell your doctor before planning surgery. and always talk to your doctor before taking aspirin or other medicines with plavix, especially if you've had a stroke. if you develop fever or unexplained weakness or confusion, tell your doctor promptly as these may be signs of a rare but potentially life-threatening condition called ttp, which has been reported rarely, sometimes in less than two weeks after starting therapy. other rare but serious side effects may occur.