any of them have entered the mine and gone underground. that would require, before they would do that, some reasonable assurance that they -- the conditions in the mine, the gas levels, the ventilation was such that they weren't expecting a follow up blast of some sort. but, you know, time is everything in these situations. and we're not hearing much confirmed information about whether or not the rescue teams have actually entered the mine and are actively searching for these -- the other 19 workers yet. >> do you have any further information on what may have caused this explosion? how large the explosion was, and if they're able to identify whether there's further risk of additional explosions now? >> we -- we don't know much of anything at all about what would have caused it. it would have been either a methane gas explosion or a coal dust explosion, we don't have enough information to say which, or it could have been a

combination of the two. we do know it was apparently a fairly sizeable explosion. my colleague kathleen gregory is on the scene there in montcoal. witnesses have described smoke bill lowing out of the mine and there was a fire immediately afterward and those things. so it was a substantial explosion. >> is there anything else you can tell us in terms of context for our viewers trying to imagine the scene, we're still trying to get cameras on scene. it's in a hard to get to area. is there anything else you can tell us just to describe that setting, or this environment, how large an operation this is and how hard it is to get to? >> in is a very large underground mine, though, you know, it's not something if you drove past it you won't necessarily know that, because it's all underground. this is a quite a different sort of operation than the sago mine that folks may remember from four years ago. unfortunately, these sorts of

things play out periodically in the coal fields. the families are rushed to a church or a school and kind of sit there and wait to find out what's become of their loved ones. and we had sago and other disasters in 2006 and the kentucky darby, and crandall in 2007. the mining industry in congress would have led us to believe that they improved the safety so these things wouldn't happen again. but here we are in 2010, and we have 19 families that don't know if their loved ones are p could go home, and we have seven family that's are just experiencing the worst sort of horror that they could. >> ken ward, jr., with "charleston gas zet" giving us the latest and brutal context of this zars disaster. thank you for your time. >> thank you. joining us the democratic

senator from the state of west virginia, senator rockefeller. thank you for your time tonight. appreciate it. >> thank you. >> what are you hearing about the accident so far and the rescue efforts? can you add anything to what we know thus far? >> probably not a great deal. and i think that's important. i think it's incredibly important we get these highly emotional, highly traumatized, complex and very mysterious, what are the circumstances, what caused it, lots of smoke, lots of traffic, everything clogged, nobody able to move anywhere, it's very important not to say more than you actually know. if people tell me there are seven people dead, and that's what they have, or that there's 21 or 28, depending upon who says it, who are still -- that being 49 still waiting to see what happens to them, that makes me worry very deeply.

primarily because it is underground, and when i've been underground in situations like that, or after that, it's -- it's a really, really scary situation. you don't know where you are. the dust that ken ward was just talking about, the smoke that he was just talking about, disorients people. there are chambers, and i don't know whether massey coal has them or not, but they're required to -- for oxygen breathing so that miners can go every single step or cut in the mine, they can go into one of those oxygen mine and put that on, and it carries them for a long period of time. there are also wire ropes, because people can't see, it's pitch-black. and smoke, and panic, and chaos, that they can hold on to that wire and just follow the wire, and it will eventually lead them out of the mine or at least to

where the elevator will come down and pick them up. but i think it's wrong at this point to speculate on more than we actually know. and i think what we have to concentrate on, i'm going down tomorrow morning, and i think what the -- you have to concentrate on is, one, that it is a horrible time to be in the family or the circle of friends of a miner, either dead or in danger or in general. secondly, in that you have to -- that's where you have to put your main work, when you go down there, is just into being with them, usually in churches, with preachers. it's very emotional, very powerful, very awful -- and finally, very appalachian. and the second part is the professionalism of the rescue mine teams.

people have no idea these people train all the time. they have state competitions, they have county competitions. they have intercompany competitions, constantly training to be able to go in and rescue people. but they have to know what the problem is. they have to be able to see to get in. they have to be able to get down into the mine. maybe the vehicle in which you get into the mine has been burned. or maybe the shaft on the way down is not operating. so we're working right now in a world of mystery, and tremendous human tragedy. hopefully things will begin to sort themselves out. but i think the grave mistake now is to speculate what may be. what we know is bad enough. and if it's what we hear, this would be the worst disaster since farmington in the early

'70s. as ken ward said, this is something that is in the sadness of all the glory of west virginia characteristics, climbing hills all the time, this is the tragic part. >> senator jay rockefeller of west virginia, thank you so much for joining us tonight. the whole country is pulling for those west virginians. >> thank you. >> the tragedy comes hours after the complicated nature of mining disaster in northern china that 115 miners were rescued after being trapped underground for more than a week. those miners accidentally breached an old mine shaft that was filled with water. the miners survived by eating sawdust, tree bark and by drinking the floodwaters. some used their belts to suspend themselves from the mine shaft

wall to avoid accidentally falling into the water and drowning while they were asleep. they spent eight days getting water out of the mine. 38 miners are said to be still trapped in that mine in northern china right now. rescue efforts continue tonight, as here in america, in west virginia we face our own mine disaster and rescue effort again, as senator rockefeller just told us, one, that although we do not know for sure, could be the worst disaster in mining since the early 1970s. joining us now, former prosecutor of mine safety violations and former federal mine official in the clinton administration, mr. opergard joins us by phone on short notice. thanks for your time. >> thank you. >> we were told this was an explosion. we don't know if it may have been a methane gas explosion, a coal dust explosion. what particular challenges would that pose for rescuers? what does that mean to the rescue effort?

>> well, the first thing is to ensure that the rescue team members are going to be safe in performing their job. i mean, it's -- they're thrust into a chaotic situation and one that's highly volatile and dangerous. so they are risking their lives just going underground. and you want to make sure that you take all steps necessary to protect their safety. back in 1976 in eastern kentucky, we had the skotia mine explosion on march 9th and there were 15 miners killed. as the rescue workers were attempting to recover their bodies two days later on march 11th, there was another explosion, and 11 mine rescue workers and federal mine inspectors were killed. so it was a double disaster, and you want to make sure -- that's why mine rescue work is very difficult.

there isn't a lot -- another ignition source, for instance, that you have a bunch of rescue workers underground who are killed. that being said, the families obviously want those rescue workers to get in as soon as they can and get to where the miners are located. >> how do the rescue teams determine where the trapped miners are? is there technology they have to avail themselves of that helps them zero in on the greatest chance for preserving life? >> rachel, there is technology. i don't know if it's available for this particular mine. there are some mines in kentucky, i know, that use a tracking device for each individual miner, it's like a minigps system. where the mine can tell you on a computer screen that such-and-such miner is located at number four head drive, or at this conveyor belt. they know where they are, they can track them throughout their working shift. whether that's available in this mine, i don't know.

and i also don't know, maybe some of your other guests have told you whether or not there are rescue chambers, or refuge chambers available in the mine. if they are in place, the company would know precisely where they are for each shift, and they could -- they have to be located within 1,000 feet of the shift, of the face, under federal law. so hopefully they would be able to say, if some of these workers survived the explosion, they're in the refuge chamber and here's where it's located. which obviously would make the mine rescue teams work a whole lot easier. >> tony oppegard an expert in these matters, thank you very much for your time, sir. appreciate it. >> thank you. we will of course continue to monitor these rescue efforts at the upper big branch mine in montcoal, west virginia. what we know now is seven workers are thought to have been

killed, at least 19 miners are thought to be trapped underground right now. we're told by an engineering consultant who spoke to the associated press tonight that there are air-tight refuge chambers in this mine. that's what we're hearing from the associated press. that is what we're told by the ap. we of course will bring you any updates as they become available. this is a breaking story, the nation's thoughts and prayers with those families in west virginia right now. okay. still ahead, senator amy klobuchar is due to join us live in studio. her name was floemted as a potential supreme court nominee. absolutely! i have a lot of stuffiness at night. it wakes me up. i have allergies. ♪ you're right. i'm getting more air. -oh, yeah. -oh, wow! [ female announcer ] for two free samples, go to breatheright.com.

- sure, cake or pie? - pie. - apple or cherry? - cherry. oil or cream? oil or cream? cream. some use hydrogenated oil. reddi-wip uses real dairy cream. nothing's more real than reddi-wip. so, at national, i go right past the counter... and you get to choose any car in the aisle. choose any car? you cannot be serious! okay. seriously, you choose. go national. go like a pro.

will talk unprecedented filibusters and the supreme court with minnesota senator amy klobuchar. she's here live in studio. et it. ♪

♪ with gillette's fusion regimen. proven to lubricate during shaving and hydrate after... so your skin looks and feels refreshed. gillette's fusion regimen. clinically tested to hydrate your skin. ♪

congress is not in session right now. but one of washington's favorite things to fight about, a supreme court vacancy, appears to be on the horizon. as such, republicans are itching to make it as big a political fight as they can this election year. of course, nothing's happened yet. there's not a nominee or even a vacancy yet. but clearly republicans want their next big fight to be about the supreme court. here's the context of them wanting that. in the house, when you vote on something, all you need is half of the house, plus one. you need a simple majority. that's all you need to pass legislation in the house. in the senate, the rules are the same. you can get things passed with a simple majority. 51 votes. except in the senate, if you're in the minority, you can also invoke a special procedural rule

that used to not be used very often, which says for this particular item you need more than 51 votes. you need 60 votes. you need a supermajority to get something done. in the constitution there's only a couple things considered important enough to need a supermajority, ratifying, changing the constitution, but in the senate they think whenever the minority feels like forcing the issue. it used to be really rare. in the '50s it was never used more than twice in any two-year session of congress. in the '60s it was never used more than seven times in any two-year period. but look how it's been used in the course, oh, just say for a random period, my lifetime, starting in 1973. as you can see there's a gentle upward drift in the number of times this rule was used. this sort of gentle drift up,

right? but then, 2006 happened. and in 2006, democrats won a majority in the senate. with that in mind, watch what happens with this infrequently-used rule, watch what happens starting in 2007 when republicans suddenly found themselves in the minority. boing. the filibuster had never been used this way before. it had never been used so frequently before the republicans found themselves in the minority after the 2006 midterm elections. and ever since then, ever since 2007 republicans have been acting ahistorically. they have changed the senate into something it has never been before. in making it so that a simple majority doesn't actually rule anymore, they have done something unprecedented. something civics geeks have been hyperventilating for three years, trying to get americans to realize how important this change is for our democracy. but now, for this expected upcoming vacancy on the supreme

court, republicans are thinking of doing something really, really, really unprecedented. they're talking about taking their own party's unprecedented action to a whole new level. the only time a supreme court nominee has been filibustered successfully was in 1968. president lyndon johnson wanted to elevate abe fortis to being chief justice. now, when lbj nominated mr. fortis to be chief justice, mr. fortis was already in political trouble for already being too close to the president, for advising him on policy matters, for example, for writing his state of the union address one year, for accepting thousands of dollars in outside payments on top of his supreme court salary as well. so mr. fortas' nomination was filibustered. in the following year he actually became the first-ever supreme court justice to resign under threat of impeachment after news got out he had seekly taken out a retainer from a wall street financier who ended up in prison. that remarkable anomaly from the

otherwise boring history of the supreme court is the only supreme court nominee to have ever been successfully filibustered. the guy about to be impaeshed for side money. and now republicans are saying, straight out of the gate, that they very well may filibuster again. this year. so the entire history of supreme court filibusters in our nation will be abe fortas and then president obama's nominee this year. it is understandable given how extreme the nominee is who president obama has -- i'm sorry, what? oh, he hasn't. i'm sorry, president obama hasn't actually picked anyone yet. i'm sorry, sorry. actually, there's not even a vacancy yet. oh. never mind, though. republicans are letting it be known that they may filibuster this nominee who doesn't exist. republicans are prepared to go to unprecedented lengths to stop

this nominee who doesn't exist to fill a vacancy that doesn't exist. >> are you willing to pledge right now that the gop will not filibuster whoever the president nominates? >> it will all depend on what kind of a person it is. i think the president will nominate a qualified person, i hope, however, he does not nominate an overly ideological person. that will be the test. >> here's the thing. the justice who might retire is john paul stevens. he's a liberal. barack obama is, therefore, very likely to replace him with a liberal. so that the balance of the court won't change. and frankly, it may be a little unreasonable to expect a democratic president to replace a liberal supreme court justice, with, say, a conservative who would move the court dramatically to the right. but who here is willing to bet that being a liberal is going to be enough to meet jon kyl's definition of someone who is so overly ideological that they must be filibustered? joining us now, someone whose name has been floated as a

potential nominee for the seat, i'm dying to know how seriously she's taking that, amy klobuchar, hello. >> well, hello, rachel. >> as you see, i'm wearing the wrong color to be on the supreme court. >> well, your microphone is black, and it's very slimming. >> there's the speeches, remember the sotomayor, i'm slav vain yin. >> it could be a small bloc. >> it's a small country. that's right. >> is it flattering to be mentioned? is it awkward? is it both? >> it is, but i love my job now. as you pointed out with the senate there's a lot of work to be done there, and i think we need people that are willing to push the envelope to work across the aisle and get things done, and i think we've started to. i remember the last time i was on you referred to the senate -- do you remember this? >> as a dysfunction junction. that's right. >> i will say the train has left the station now.

we passed health care reform, we passed the jobs bill, we passed the extendsers, we now have more to do on that. we got the faa authorization, aviation, travel promotion. we're moving. and part of that, and i think part of the answer to the filibuster, as much as i'd like to see reform and hope we do it. but it's calling people out. when they slow down the process, when jim bunning gives his finger not just to the media but to every employed worker in this country, we call them out. we've started being more aggressive about calling people out when they're doing these things. if you want to lead to true bipartisanship you have to be honest with the american people about what's happening. >> but the bunning story is i think a telling one. it is true that democrats and some republicans even called him out when he blocked unemployment benefits for all those people in the country. now republicans are blocking unemploipt benefits again, and republicans in leadership positions are saying things like, we're all jim bunning now. we should have stood with jim bunning the first time around. we're all going to do that now. >> well, at their own peril. when you look at supreme court

justice nominee, whoever it's going to be, the point of this is that the american people want us to keep working on jobs, fnlg regulation, to move forward on home grown energy. they do it at their own peril if they want to devote the summer to blocking a nominee. when you look at sotomayor who they claimed was -- they called her all kinds of names, 95% of the time she voted with a republican nominee when she was on a three-judge panel. and most scholars that looked at her record said she was basically a moderate, that she wasn't extreme. so i actually believe in reality here, that some of the names that have been put forthhere that the president could nominate, who clearly would be democratic nominees, but when you look at a lindsey graham, with what he said at sotomayor, he said i wouldn't have picked her, but my job is to look at who's qualified. do they have the qualifications, and i'm proud to vote for her. and i'll never forget that moment. that's what i'm hopeful will happen here as well. >> i think it's not an accident that it was senator jon kyl this weekend who floated the idea of again, filibustering a

nonexistent nominee for a vacancy that doesn't exist. he's already outraged by the prospect of this nonexistent person. but jon kyl made those same comment within a week of the election in 2008. he was already talking about filibustering a supreme court nominee. >> right. >> on the other side of the aisle they see some political advantage to mounting a filibuster campaign here. as historic as it would be. >> they do. but in the end on the sotomayor case, as you know, they backed down. there were a lot of people within their own party who had different feelings about her. they didn't want to piss off every hispanic voter in the country. they knew that she had some qualities. does not mean they all voted for her, but they asked her tough questions and then the hearing got done, and she got confirmed. i'm hopeful that will happen as well in this case. >> optimism. >> i am. >> i can feel it. i can feel it in the room. when i look at that graph that i showed in the intro here of the filibuster, over time it looks

like a half pipe, it makes me think, hey, this needs to be fixed. hey, this is a problem, it's being abused. does it make you feel that way too? >> yes. >> does it make people in the senate generally -- >> especially the newer senators that have come in, that aren't steeped in the tradition of this wonderful filibuster. we see it as a problem. a lot of us have managed organizations and we like to move forward and get things done. so there are a lot of efforts to reform. i will point out the last person successful in reform was walter mondale from minnesota. it was 67 votes and he got it down to 60. a number of us are saying can we get it down some more? can we allow for this debate? can we allow for people to stand on the floor and push the filibuster so they have to own what they're doing? if they want to filibuster unemployment benefits for people who are out of work for no fault of their own because wall street messed up? are they going to take to the floor and do that day after day after day, that's another reform we'd love to see. >> and you'd support that? >> yes.

>> amy klobuchar from minnesota, thank you. >> i think you could talk them into pink robes, especially on scalia. >> i was going to say alito, but you're totally right. it's scalia. >> appreciate it. all right. last week could not have gone more poorly for the republican national committee. it started with a fake lesbian club scandal and that was actually the highlight. the headlines are getting worse even today and chairman michael steele has chosen to defend himself on live tv. which is always risky. the nation's chris hayes joins us next.

having the right real estate agent on your side is more important than ever. at remax.com, you can find the experts you need, whether you're trying to sell of hoping to buy. nobody sells more real estate than re/max. visit remax.com today. ♪ this one is. ♪ new purefitness from crystal light. ♪ the first crystal light with no artificial sweeteners, flavors, or preservatives. ♪ new purefitness from crystal light. a pure way to water your body.

ah! silver one. that's not a volkswagen. ♪ [ tires screech ] ♪ [ sighs ] ♪ that's two for doubting. [ chuckles ] you hit like my sister. really? i'd like to meet her. [ male announcer ] the volkswagen cc. award-winning design starting under $28,000. it's a whole new volkswagen, and a whole new game.

i'm not a washington insider, even though i grew up here in d.c. my view on politics is much more grass roots oriented, it's not -- i tend to come at it more streetwise if you will. that's ruffled feathers the wrong way. >> michael steele trying to rub feathers back the right way. to move back, from last week's very bad headlines before he got hit with today's bad headlines. a week ago today it was daily caller that broke the story that republican party spent nearly $2,000 of its donors' money at a bondage-themed sex show nightclub in west hollywood. the money was spent there on rnc business, and then reimbursed out of rnc funds. after the article came out, mr.

steele said the funds would be unreimbursed and that a young female staffer would be fired. then the daughter of the co-chair was paid $13,000 of republican donor's money to be a speech writer. then we found out that among the rnc's list of expenditures were office supplies they say they bought at a liquor store and meals bought at a fancy clothing boutique and a fly fishing tackle shop. night crawlers. many of these that make michael steele look very bad did appear -- if he's getting pushed here, if there's a campaign afoot to leak damaging stuff to make him look bad, it seems to be coming from within the republican party. now, if you're looking for further signs of division among top tier republicans, consider also a group of former republican party officials last week announced they were forming an alternative to the rnc.

pe publicly called on republican donors to give funds to them instead of to the party and michael steele. then sarah palin tried to distance herself from the rnc as well, demanding publicly that they take her name off of an rnc fundraising appeal. all that happened in just one week. one long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long week. and now starts week two. to add to last week's litany, consider also the new news that one of the biggest fund-raisers in the whole republican party, former ambassador sam fox has resigned from his post at the rnc. according to once again, anonymous republican sources, quoted in politico, mr. fox was, quote, deeply troubled by the pattern of self-inflicted wounds and missteps at the rnc under chairman steele. also today, the chief of staff of the republican national committee resigned. his name is ken mckay. the new chief of staff of the rnc will be the man who ran

michael steele's unsuccessful senate campaign in maryland in 2006. if that is supposed to inspire confidence, consider that after that campaign was over, and mr. steele lost mi by more than ten points, his campaign finance chairman said the campaign gave $37,000 in campaign funds to a company that was run by michael steele's sister. the steele campaign finance chairman said that to the feds right before he was sentenced to nine years in federal prison for a multi million dollar fraud unrelated to the campaign. but wait, there's more. in addition to elevating his old campaign chairman, michael steele has also brought on board at the rnc a special assistant for finance, is the title. a special assistant for finance. at a time when it might really behoove the rnc to be hiring people with spotless reputations, as fiscally responsible stewards of its money, who does the rnc pick for its special assistant for finance? they picked a man who was recently fined thousands of

dollars for using donor funds to pay for his own personal expenses. as "the washington post" reports, new rnc fund-raiser kneel alpert was ordered in 2007 to repay more than $37,000 that he was found to have spent improperly while he chaired a political action committee in d.c. mr. alpert denied the allegations, but politics daily reports today that he did pay a $4,000 fine that was leveed against him by the d.c. office of campaign finance. again, we're trying to find out if he repaid the money he was found to have misappropriated. money that was supposed to go to inner city kids for things like rehabbing run down playing fields. we think he paid the fine, but we're trying to find out if he paid back the money that was supposed to go to the inner city kids. we'll let you know if the rnc ever, ever calls us back.

all in all, week two is not an improvement on last week in terms of headlines for michael steele and the republican national committee. joining us now, chris hayes, washington editor of "the nation" with whom i think i'm going to disagree tonight. >> bring it on. >> all right. let's fight. ready? >> yes. >> i think there's no way that michael steele survives this. i think he has to resign. you think he won't. >> right. i think he won't. let me say, this is not an endorsement of his performance at the rnc, which, as you've laid out quite aptly, is not very good. here's the reason i think he won't. one of the things i've learned in washington, it's the donald rumsfeld rule. which is that, after abu ghraib there's all this pressure and mounting pressure, people start speculating if you're going to resign. if you just refuse to do it. eventually it goes away. i think michael steele understands that because he's enough of a loose cannon. the other thing fascinating about this, similar to howard dean, there's two constituents here.

two constituencies here. there's the constituencies of the donors who are clearly infuriated. but they're not the ones who actually institutionally control his fate. the people who control his fate are the members of the republican national committee made up of the county chairs, the ones that elected him. and to get rid of him, you'd have to get two-thirds of those people to vote him out. i think michael steele understands basically he's bullet proof. from the sort of first person perspective of michael steele, if he's smart, he'll just hang on. >> but doesn't it matter who's pushing? even with just the rumsfeld example, in that case you get, you know, moon bats like me and retired military officers and those people calling for him to step down, and then he just gets to stand firm and look conservative and have people line up behind him. >> right. >> in this case it seems very clear that the peel both pushing and pulling michael steele are in the upper echelons of the republican national committee. which both means they're people he needs to keep doing his job well, because he needs money from them. but there are also people in the position of offering him the

next job that he gets to go to so he gets to sort of have a glide landing here. >> that's exactly i think actually -- you put your finger on the crucial issue. how much does michael steele care about his next gig? because if he doesn't care, and if he understands that he -- he kind of has these people over a barrel because firing him in a really messy way in which he says, i was forced out, makes things really ugly for the republicans. if he realizes he has them over a barrel and doesn't care about his next gig, he's bullet proof. if he's worried he won't work in the town again, then you're right, they can ease him out. but whatever influence they have over michael steele it is exactly about his next gig. it's not about him as head of the rnc. because those -- however many people there are that are talking smack about him to the papers, they're not the ones ultimately that will control his fats. >> i think they get him to resign by offering him something sweet. i think it happens soon. seven months from the election is better than two months from the election, is better than keeping him as a huge

distraction from the election. most of all i'm loan being forward to having civil disagreement with you on the air. >> that's right. i won't be shouting. >> thank you, chris, appreciate it. >> you're welcome. >> chris hayes is washington editor of "the nation" magazine. all right. so my next cockamamie theory is that someone is impersonating john mccain. he looks like john mccain, he sounds like john mccain, but he doesn't believe any of the things john mccain used to say and he doesn't like the word maverick. it's maybe even worse than an imposter, it's a fake imposter, which is -- a fake imposter? that's next. say hi to the doctor. - is he in? - he's in copenhagen. - oh, well, that's nice. - but you can still see him. - you just said he was in-- - copenhagen. - come on. - that's pretty far. - doc, look who's in town. - ellen! - copenhagen? - cool, right? vacation. - but still seeing patients. ( whispers ) workaholic. - i heard that. - she said it. - i--

cisco-- introducing healthpresence. somewhere in america... there's a home by the sea powered by the wind on the plains. there's a hospital where technology has a healing touch. there's a factory giving old industries new life. and there's a train that got a whole city moving again. somewhere in america, the toughest questions are answered every day. because somewhere in america, more than sixty thousand people spend every day answering them. siemens. answers. wellbeing. we're all striving for it. purina cat chow helps you nuture it in your cat... with a full family of excellent nutrition... and helpful resources. ♪

purina cat chow. share a better life.

the epic story of senator john mccain's long career in politics was supposed to be punk waited with an exclamation point. president john mccain. barring that, elder statesman and party leader john mccain. lion of the senate, john mccain. instead it's looking like the story will end with no punctuation at all, just smaller and smaller font size until nobody can read it anymore. over the weekend he abandoned

the one thing that has marked his time on capitol hill, his widely bought brand, this quote to "newsweek." i never considered myself a maverick. i consider myself a person who serves the people of arizona to the best of his abilities. senator john mccain never considered himself a maverick. it's hard to square with a lot of videotape starring senator john mccain. >> he's the original maverick. one is ready to leave. mccain. >> i've been called a maverick. the american people know me very well, and that is independent and a maverick of the senate, and i'm happy to say that i've got a partner that's a good maverick along with me now. what do you expect with two mavericks? >> the original mavericks. real change. >> i'm john mccain and i approve this message. >> john mccain now says he hasn't considered himself a maverick except repeatedly over and over and over again when

he's called himself a maverick in speeches, town halls, debates and campaign ads. and it should be noted in the subtitle of his own autobiography, the education of an american maverick and heroes who inspired him. it's the rare politician who will try to disavow the title of his own autobiography, but john mccain is up to the task. i'm on an aspirin regimen now. my doctor told me it's the easiest preventative thing you can do. [ male announcer ] be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. see your doctor. simple. so i was surprised when my doctor told me i still had high cholesterol. that really hit me, and got me thinking about my health. i knew i had to get my cholesterol under control. but exercise and eating healthy weren't enough for me. now i trust my heart to lipitor. [ male announcer ] when diet and exercise are not enough, adding lipitor has been shown to lower bad cholesterol 39 to 60%.

lipitor is backed by over 17 years of research. lipitor is not for everyone, including people with liver problems and women who are nursing, pregnant or may become pregnant. you need simple blood tests to check for liver problems. tell your doctor if you are taking other medications, or if you have any muscle pain or weakness. this may be a sign of a rare but serious side effect. i thought i was doing enough to lower my cholesterol, but i needed more help. what are you doing about yours? [ male announcer ] have a heart to heart with your doctor about your cholesterol. and about lipitor. because with national, i roll past the counter... and choose any car in the aisle. choosing your own car? now that's a good call. go national. go like a pro.

coming up on "countdown," keith asks alan grayson about the doctor to tell people to get care elsewhere. and the next story dominating the next week and a half in politics, it is just breaking tonight. please stay with us.

still ahead, baseball season has begun. although it's only been one game and one great game last night, we may have already seen the best play you will see all year. that is a bold statement but i am feeling good about this one. ten seconds of straight up unbelievable awesomeness and replays of the awesomeness. that's incredible, that's coming up. first. a couple of other stories today. for the first time u.s. and nato officials admit a february raid by u.s. special operations troops in afghanistan went very, very wrong. in a major blow to u.s. efforts to reduce u.s. casualties in afghanistan, three afghan women and two men were killed on february 12th in a nighttime

raid in southeastern afghanistan. special forces showed up looking for taliban insurgents, one of the men killed that night was reportedly carrying an ak-47. the u.s. officer opened fire killing him and three women who were gathered around him. two of them were pregnant. a third was a teenager. right after the attack when reports of the attacks surfaced, they claim the women had been tied up, gagged and killed hours before the raid. the implication being that they were victims of perhaps honor killings that preceded the raid all together. but now the commander of u.s. and nato forces is admitting responsibility. they have, quote, concluded that the women were accidentally killed as a result of the joint force firing at the men. the force went to the compound based on the liable information and we now understand the men killed were only trying to protect their families. now for the really horrible twist. the "times of london" is reporting that not only did u.s.

special operations forces try and kill these women but tried to cover it up. ", they dug bullets out of their victims bodies. and then washed the wounds with alcohol before lying to their superiors about what happened. nato officials are denying any cover-up even as they admit responsibility for the deaths. finding out what really happened that night after the shooting is going to be very difficult. the victims have already been buried, repairs have been made to the building that was damaged by gunfire. we will be keeping our ear to the news ground on this one. i doubt very much this is the last we will hear of this. also, late news this evening from the "new york times" that president obama will unilaterally revise and, quoting the times, substantially narrow, substantially narrow the conditions underwhich the united states could use nuclear weapons. points of the president's new policy, the u.s. will renounce the develop o-any nuclear weapons. a decision that overrules the

position of the defense secretary bob gates. also, the u.s. will commit not to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states if those states are in compliance with the nonproliferation treaty. even if those states launch attacks against us, biological or chemical or cyber attacks against the u.s. white house officials tells the times that the new strategy leaves open the option of reconsidering the possibility of nuclear retaliation against biological attacks depending on the level of devastation, depending on what's made possible by the ongoing development of bio weapons. president obama telling the time he would carve out exceptions for, i'm quoting the president here, outliers like iran and north korea. countries that have violated or renounced nonproliferation agreements. the strategy that's going to be announced is known as the nuclear posture refume. it's going to be announced tomorrow. that will begin an intensive nine-day, focus on reminding americans that foreign policy and national security are about

more than just wars. the president will travel to prague to sign a new nuclear weapons treaty on thursday. and then on monday of next week he'll convene a summit in d.c. with representatives of 47 countries. that's almost unheard of to have that many countries convening at the request of the u.s. president. that meeting on monday is about keeping nuclear materials out of the hands of terrorists. cracking down on loose nukes was president obama's pet issue as a senator and it is among his first and boldest foreign policy initiatives that was not forced on him by previous administration. i imagine that we will have much more to report on this tomorrow and for the next nine days. as president obama attempts to implement his personal vision of foreign policy. very important, very exciting. potentially very con ttroversia news to come. which is why, mechanics nowadays are more like rocket scientists. they have to be. the technicians at ford and lincoln mercury dealerships are highly trained. they really do know their stuff.

and, they have all the parts to make sure the job gets done right. get the works - an oil change, tire rotation and more just $29.95 or less after $10 mail-in rebate. does this thing do email? you betcha. see, smart and friendly. an everyday moment can turn romantic at a moment's notice. and when it does, men with erectile dysfunction can be more confident in their ability to be ready with cialis. with two clinically proven dosing options, you can choose the moment that's right for you and your partner. 36-hour cialis and cialis for daily use. cialis for daily use is a low-dose tablet you take every day, so you can be ready anytime the moment's right. day or night. >> tell your doctor about your medical condition and all medications and ask if you're healthy enough for sexual activity. >> don't take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. >> don't drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache, or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help

for an erection lasting more than 4 hours. >> if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, stop taking cialis and call your doctor right away. >> 36-hour cialis or cialis for daily use. ask your doctor if cialis is right for you. you can be ready for your moment with cialis. anncr vo: ...you can get help gwith a flat tire.... anncr vo: ...find a nearby tow truck or gas station... anncr vo: ...call emergency services... anncr vo: ...collect accident information. anncr vo: or just watch some fun videos. anncr vo: it's so easy, a caveman can do it. caveman: unbelievable... caveman: where's my coat? it was suede with the fringe. vo: download the glovebox app free at geico.com. these are actual farmers who raise vegetables in campbell's condensed soup. so if you've ever wondered who grew my soup, well, here they are. ♪ so many, many reasons ♪ it's so m'm! m'm! good! ♪

for joint pain. for joint pain.

not counting last night's glorious come from behind victory of the boston red sox over the new york yankees, today was opening day in major league baseball. a day every year when men, women and children all over the country fake illness in order to make it out to the ballpark. yes, the mets played in new york and, yes, we noticed you weren't here. now, i personally didn't think today's opening day games would be able to top last night's action at fenway park. if every sunday night could be so awesome. however, i may have been wrong about the insure mountibility of the red sox awesomeness because what happened today in a game between the cleveland indians and chicago white sox may go down as play of the year in baseball. the play of the year on day one. did you see this today? no, we're not a baseball show, we couldn't help it. fifth inning of that game. lou marson is hitting for the indians. watch what happens. watch this.

>> 2-2. the foot of burlily. through the legs. >> got him! >> that's why he's gold, baby. >> did you see that? did you see that? in order to fully appreciate these circus like incredibleness of this play you have to watch it again in slow-mo. the ball deflects off of burley's leg. then he runs over to the first baseline. grabs the ball with his glove, flips it from his glove between his legs to the first baseman who catches it with his bare hand. whoop! and he's out. are you kidding me? it is tough to crown something the play of the year when there are roughly 2,418 more regular season games to be played, but good luck top that one. i don't even like the white sox. do you believe that? that does it for us tonight. see you again tomorrow night. until then, hang out with us on

our new blog. we do all sorts of things we can't do online. "countdown with keith olbermann" starts right now. have a great night. which of these stories will you be talking about tomorrow? here goes the judge? as supreme court justice stevens mulls retirement, the republicans might filibuster even stevens. >> i think the president will nominate a qualified person, i hope, however, he does not nominate an overly ideological person. that will be the test. >> meaning what? no liberals or moderates? the sometimes rumored nominee says to justice stevens, wait until next year, after the elections. >> after a year passes there's a much better chance we could come to a consensus. >> like you came to a consensus on the expiration of unemployment benefits? bunning and coburn forced it, it happened, today they blame the democrats? bondage club gate.

today michael steele says he's under pressure because he's african-american. the same guy who criticized the president for saying some of the criticism he got is because he's african-american. >> barack obama has a slimmer margin. a lot of folks do. it's a different role for me to play and others to play. and that's just the reality of it. >> line of the day, robert gibbs, quote, i think michael steele's problem isn't the race card, it's the credit card. the florida urologist who puts politics ahead of patients. who says if you voted for obama you should go see a different doctor. >> it was just fun for me. it's like a provocative billboard. >> not fun for a would-be patient who complains to the authorities. congressman alan grayson facilitates. he's our special guest. beck compares what he's doing to what rosa parks did. seriously. and the tiger woods apology tour stop number two.