working for him specter could pull it off. >> we haven't heard anything about the african-american vote in philadelphia. you know, what's going on with it? >> well, arlen specter better hope that that's a big story coming out of this election. that this vote turned out hugely for him. look, president obama has been on radio for several weeks in the philadelphia area targeted at the african-american vote. he's on tv now. that's what that's about. arlen specter has to recreate the ed rendell 2002 gubernatorial primary mechanics against bob casey. win huge in philly, don't lose that bad the rest of the state. >> arkansas, we know blanch blinken is going to be the leading vote getter. is she going to be at 50% plus 1? >> seems like probably not. that could make the runoff interesting. >> she can't win down there, can she? >> i think it will, very, very tough to do that. it looks like she's going to have a runoff. in a case with two other candidates how do you get 51? >> what's going to stop bill halter's momentum? he was moving, moving, then he

stopped. >> blanche lincoln ran the opposite of what a lot of you would advise incumbents run. agriculture committee, ran on being in washington. i think it worked to an extent. arkansas is the small-state mentality, okay, this person can deliver for us. one quick thing, d.c. morrison, third guy in the democratic primary, is running to the right of both of them in the primary. it's possible some of those people go to lincoln, though in a one-on-one why do you go to the incumbent if you're not already with her? d.c. morrison, a dekenz yan name. >> specter, really interesting, running on the same thing in p.a. talking about the pork he's bringing back -- >> 30 seconds. how special -- how special, pennsylvania '12, the murtha seat. two weeks ago everyone said republicans are going to win it. >> democrats could lose the state for one reason. going after the republican hitting hard on economic issues,

ignoring d.c., ignoring obama. >> if they do give credit to the dccc for that ground game. >> that's it for "hardball." thanks for being with us. both of you. i'll get you back. right now it's time for "the ed show" with ed schultz. good evening, and welcome to "the ed show." i'm lawrence o'donnell in for ed schultz. here are the stories we're hitting tonight. a year ago on this show, pennsylvania governor ed rendell predicted joe sestak would get killed if he challenged senator arlen specter. we'll see what the governor says tonight. governor rendell joins me in just a moment. president obama is fired up about republican obstructionism. he says they drove the economy into a ditch and they're trying to keep it there. experts say the damage from the gulf oil disaster may be grossly underestimated. that's all coming up. first, it is high noon for democrats in pennsylvania. the fight between congressman

joe sestak and converted democrat senator arlen specter will be decided tuesday. here is where the polls stand now. quinnipiac has specter up by 2, that's a statistical dead heat, with 14% undecided. franklin and marshal has sestak up by 2, also a statistical dead heat with 25% undecided. some factors those undecideds may be considering, the democrats didn't have a supermajority until arlen specter switched parties in april of last year. specter admits that the switch was self-interested. he said, quote, i wanted to keep my job. nonetheless, without that 60th vote, health care reform wouldn't even have gotten started in the senate. let alone accomplished. the republicans would have been able to just say no and the new democratic president would have met the waterloo the republicans had set up for him. the landscape for the democrats in november is not pretty, but it looks a whole lot worse than it would have looked a whole lot

worse running with 10% unemployment and no legislative achievements. can democrats trust arlen specter to remain a reliable democrat once he's out of danger of being ousted in the democratic primary? moveon put it to a vote. 67% of its pennsylvania members voted to endorse joe sestak. the announcement from moveon today focused on the concerns from democratic voters. sell from state college told moveon that sestak is a democrat out of conviction, not desperation. while christine from meadville worries that arlen specter is an opportunist and cannot be trusted to side with the democrats. the real question is, which candidate can win in november? democratic purity tests won't matter if a republican ultimately wins. will the roughly 1/5 of undecided democrats follow

president obama's lead and support specter or will they rage against the pennsylvania political machine and vote for sestak? we're just three days away from finding out. and on tuesday we'll see how democrats are really feeling. nancy pelosi said, quote, there's no question at this point there's an anti-incumbent mood out there, but she says she has confidence in her members to be able to handle that. come tuesday we'll find out and we'll get a better picture of what november holds. get your cell phones out. i want to know what you think. tonight's text survey is, does arlen specter deserve the democratic nomination? text "a" for yes, text "b" for no to 622639. i'll bring you the results later in the show. joining me now is pennsylvania governor ed rendell. governor rendell, sestak was going to get killed, according to your first prediction about

this race on this show. how are you feeling about tuesday now? >> well, i still think senator specter is going to win. interestingly you quoted the f&m poll which has sestak up by 2 which is also margin of error. among all democratic voters arlen is up by 9 and it's just a case of making sure that we get a significant turnout. if we do i think he wins comfortably. let me say, i underestimated the anti-incumbency feeling in america. if you had told me senator bennett in utah, where i thought he was almost a folk hero, would get bounced and not allowed to run in his own primary in january, that would have been unthinkable. it happened. the anti-incumbency feeling is out there and arlen is a 30-year incumbent. that's problem number one. problem number two, joe sestak has my media consultants, the one who has run all my successful campaigns. i should never have betted against them making it a close race. they're terrific. a campaign group. they were in washington they'd

be the number one in the country, but they're in philadelphia. they ran a great campaign, a great campaign. look, they've made some effective ads. the question you asked is the seminal question. because arlen specter deserve the democratic nomination? he deserves it big-time. there's a sestak ad out right now that says arlen specter voted to save only one job, his. wrong, joe. arlen specter in addition to health care providing the crucial vote that saved president obama's major legislative initiative, he also was the crucial vote when he was a republican. he looked down the barrel of the gun at his own extinction and he did something which took a lot of courage, and that was vote for the stimulus plan. and because of that we just released figures at the end of march for the first quarter of the year. 20,558 jobs were stimulus paid for in march. 20,558. so, joe, arlen didn't just vote to save his job. he voted to save over 20,000

jobs in pennsylvania. those are newly created jobs. he also, by his vote for stimulus, saved me from having to cut because of the $2.5 billion of stimulus funds that are in the state budget, he saved me from having to lay off 15,000, 20,000, 25,000 state workers, firemen, policemen, emergency workers. arlen specter deserves the democratic nomination. he's always support eed democrac causes, even when a republican. he's certainly shown what he's made of by making that courageous vote on stimulus and the deciding vote on health care, as you noted. >> governor, these numbers looked very bad for an incumbent, as we all know, the undecideds tend to break for the challenger. they've had a long time to make up minds about the incumbent, these are large undecided blocs in these polls. so how does specter convince someone who has -- who had, you know, 30 years, if they're old enough, or you know, several

years to be convinced that he should be the senator? if he hasn't convinced them already, how does he do that between now and tuesday? >> the ad with president obama is enormously effective. i think robo calls that are going in from the president, from the vice president, from me into the southeast and the lehigh valley, i think you're hearing from people who bleed democratic blue in their veins and they're telling democratic voters not only is arlen specter an okay vote, i think president obama says in the ad he ends the ad by saying, i love arlen specter. so do i. now, i love him because i've had a 40-year association with him. he gave me his first job. i also know whenever i needed him as mayor of philadelphia, whenever i needed him as governor, didn't matter whether it was republican or democrat, he delivered for pennsylvania. we don't want to throw away that 30 years of seniority and the tremendous clout he has for the state in washington, d.c. >> governor, quickly before we

go, why does arlen specter have a problem with president obama's choice for the supreme court? why can't he say, today, of course i'm going to vote for elena kagan? >> i think he is going to vote for el for elena kagan. he is not ready to commit his vote just for political expediency, just like if arlen specter wanted to do the expedient thing he wouldn't have supported the stimulus bill. he could have saved himself, as you recall congressman toomey was talking about running for governor at that time, not senator. he might have gotten the senate nomination by himself. in a general election arlen specter has always pulled democratic votes. when he lost -- beat toomey by less than 1% back in 2004 he went on to win the general election overwhelmingly, even though john kerry carried the state. he beat a very good democratic candidate, joe huffel, by hundreds of thousands of votes because he got democratic votes. he could have saved his political rear end by voting

against the stimulus and we wouldn't have had the level of economic recovery in pennsylvania we've had. >> governor, you have once again shown why all of us in tv news love you. you knew the first question was going to be the quote you gave on this show saying sestak was going to get killed and you still came on to talk about it. >> people out there should hire the campaign group. that's the moral of this story. >> that's the ad of the day. thanks very much, governor. >> thanks. for more, let's bring in michael smerconish, radio talk show host on wpht in philadelphia and columnist for "the philadelphia enquirer." michael, it's breaking, it looks like it's really breaking for sestak here. with that running neck in neck like this, undecided bloc big enough to decide it, what can specter do between now and tuesday? >> my hunch is joe sestak peaked too soon. he peaked two or three days ago. what i'm seeing in polling data now is a settling out of those numbers and perhaps breaking back toward arlen specter in the

next couple of days. my own view, for what it's worth, this is not a campaign that ultimately is going to be dictated by what have been effective television commercials on both sides, but rather now it all gets down to who has a better organization, a better field organization on election day. that's arlen specter. because it's specter who has the democratic leadership, not only the governor who you just heard from, but statewide elected officials, meaning elected officials in democratic ranks across the commonwealth, the unions and so forth. joe sestak has had tremendous television. he has hardcore liberals in his corner. i think the party organization is going to make the decision in this case and if so it will be specter victory, albeit not be a large margin. >> you have arlen specter, committed democrat he says, who's unable to say, as most other democratic senators are right now, that, of course, he's going to vote for elena kagan. how is that playing among pennsylvania democrats? >> at a minimum it puts him in a

very awkward position. i have questioned senator specter a number of times on this issue. he says he was dissatisfied with the level of response. the lack of response by then-solicitor general candidate elena kagan. and so now, you know, he's kind of boxed in. he can't say, obviously she's someone for whom i will vote to confirm on the supreme court because of the way he went in that. that's been bad timing for him. that's been a terrible issue he's had to confront in the last couple kays and i think that accounts for some of the numbers you made reference to at the outset. >> who would be stronger in november, sestak or specter? >> well, larry, that's where i say, if i were a democrat, i'd be looking at this and if everything was equal i'd be going for arlen specter because here's one thing we all know. if specter had stayed in the republican party, having voted for the stimulus bill and if toomey had then entered gop primary against him, then arlen specter would have been defeated on tuesday by pat toomey for all

those emotional reasons with which you're familiar with. what's going on across the country. that sensement would have doomed specter in the party in the primary. i'm part of that exodus of moderate republicans who have had enough and left the gop. it's a very hardcore conservative base that is left behind and toomey would have won. to answer your question, i say that it's specter who can put together the coalition that would be necessary both democrats and independents, many of whom used to be republicans, to beat pat toomey. i think if it's toomey and sestak then pat toomey is the next senator from pennsylvania. >> michael smerconish of "the philadelphia enquirer," thanks for joining us don't. >> thank you. coming up, spilling out of control. a new report says the amount of oil gushing into the gulf is more than ten times the official estimate. the lawyer suing bp will join me at the bottom of the hour. and no more mr. nice guy. president obama slams

republicans for killing the economy. robert reich gives me his take. plus, a strip club in tampa is making quite an offer to any republicans that swing by. ♪

♪ well, if you come from the hood ♪ ♪ or ya come from the burbs ♪ got the fellas up in here tonight ♪ ♪ ♪ we at the block party having fun ♪ the right seems to be warming to elena kagan, but progressives still want to know is she liberal enough? smart ted kauffman says not to worry, he calls her, quote, a democrats democrat.

senator susan collins says

she isn't worried about elena kagan's lack of judicial experience. senator scott brown says he isn't concerned she once banned military recruiters. neither has committed to voting for solicitor general kagan but comments don't sound like start of a gop mill bufilibuster. ted kauffman, member of the senate judiciary, thanks for joining us. >> lawrence, thanks for having me. >> it seems no real problem on the right. susan collins said she doesn't think there's reason to mount a filibuster. this is a good show for you to address the qualms of progressives. there are a lot of progressives worried about elena kagan. they don't feel confident in her progressive credentials. what do you say to them? >> look at her pedigree and where she is and where she worked. she worked in the clinton administration. she worked for senator biden when we did the judicial nomination of ruth bader

ginsburg. she's working in the obama administration. she's been democrat, democrat, k democrat. she's very, very smart. very hard thinker. look at what she's done. she's dean of the harvard law school. look at her, where she's been. i think you'll know where she'll go. >> we have not had such a constitutional scholar as president before making this kind of selection. do you think there's any way that some kind of stealth conservative could possibly have gotten past barack obama in his vetting process? >> i think, look, i think when you go back to some of the others with souter and the rest, we knew early on souter was not going to be a -- you remember when senator biden was chairman of the judiciary committee. you can find out when there's going to be a big change. everything about elena kagan, and maybe someone can slip by some way, some how, but it's not going to be elena kagan. we know elena kagan. she has so many personal relationships with people. this is not a stealth right-wing

candidate. this is a candidate i predict will be one of the great supreme court justices, she has the mind, the thought and i've been saying for a while, it's okay to have a circuit court judge on supreme court. that's fine. nine circuit court judge judges think we went overboard. >> senator ted kauffman of the senate judiciary committee. >> thank you, lawrence. thanks for having me. >> thanks. coming up, the president is slamming republicans for driving our economy into the ditch. e 100% who[ male announcer ] whu start with simple ingredients,

triscuit does, like 100% whole grain,ounu you always end up with something delicious. ♪ triscuit. weave some goodness. how's it work? ok, she's gas. he's constipation... why am i constipation? ...he's diarrhea. and our special fiber helps our probiotics so that you can show those symptoms who's in charge. this isn't even floor. [ elevator bell dings ]

okay, we're going to get going right away. [ announcer ] he's never met an appendix he couldn't fix! the abdomen-ator dr. bob bergowitz! yeah, woo! [ announcer ] she's the queen of clean! the 2009 surgeon of the year, dr. nancy mendelsohn! [ male announcer ] doctors and nurses are true heroes. at ge, we're working to give them the innovation, fresh thinking, and advanced technology they need to keep bringing better health to more people. are you ready, mr. randall? let's do this! [ crowd cheering ] ♪ you took my eggs ! it's an "egg management fee." what does that even mean ? egg management fee. even kids know it's wrong to take other people's stuff. that's why at ally bank, we offer rates among the most competitive in the country... ...that won't get eaten away by fees. it's just the right thing to do.

you would have thought at a time of historic crisis that republican leaders would have been more willing to help us find a way out of this mess. particularly since they created the mess. they've done their best to gum up the works, to make things look broken, to say no to every single thing. after they drove the car into the ditch, made it as difficult as possible for us to pull it back, now they want the keys back. no. you can't drive. we don't want to have to go back into the ditch. we just got the car out. >> some tough and funny talk from president obama last night at a democratic fund-raiser in new york city.

the president also defended the steps his administration took to rescue the economy, and he emphasized the importance of preventing another crisis by passing financial reform. joining me now, robert reich, former secretary of labor and a professor at u.c. berkeley. bob, what do you make of the president's speech last night? is he finding the right tone for conveying who deserves the credit for any upticks we're seeing in the economic indicators? >> lawrence, obvioustly this is going to be the campaign theme for the midterms and might be the campaign theme for 2012. that is the republicans did have the car keys, and we know what they did with them. we know that george w. bush had a big surplus going into this administration, and he, by the end of the administration, had a $1.3 trillion deficit and that every vote since then the republicans have said essentially no, no, no. without coming up with a single new idea or a single remedy, whereas the democrats have come up with, well, not only a

stimulus package, but also health care and credit card reform, and financial reform, and everything else to get the car out of the ditch. so we're going to hear more and more about it. >> well, you know, despite its validity as an argument, how do you -- you have to deal, i think, with some voters sense that might be too much of a reach-back. you're reaching too far back, since in politics we have such short memories. how do you make that story current? how should they going forward make it feel like it's a legitimate reach-back? >> you make it current by pointing out the democrat -- the republicans, even today, vote after vote they are saying no. they don't have any clear strategy for financial reform. wall street, according to the republican naysayers, would just go back and do the same thing over again that it did before. with regard to every other major vote and there are many votes on environment, on the environment, on everything else, the republicans just simply say no without coming up with their own

plan. what the president needs to do and i think what he is trying to do is basically say to the public these are the guys that got us into the problem but these are the guys who also say essentially no to every idea we have for getting us out of it and on top of that, we are beginning to see the economy turn around. now, that's the problem. this is the central problem that the president has. if come the midterm election, november, the economy is not substantially turning around, if most americans don't feel that they are going to be in better shape, fairly soon, then no amount of shifting blame, no amount of partisan politicking is going to really be of much help to incumbents of either party. >> before we go, i just want to take you back to your secretary of labor days, and just ask you, do we really in the 21st century live in a country that cannot guarantee worker safety in dangerous jobs? coal mining, this accident with the -- so-called accident which i think is a corporate crime that we've seen in the gulf. are we really allowing people to

go to work in environments that are so dangerous they can loose their lives? isn't there anything the labor department can be doing about that? >> lawrence, there is no excuse for any worker who loses his life or her life or any limb during the course of employment. we have to have tough regulations. osha, the -- actually occupational safety and health administration, emsha, the mine safety administration, the administration in the interior department that was supposed to be looking out for oil rigs, all of these particular agencies have to do more. there is no excuse for overlooking any safety violation. there's no excuse for being cozy with industry. there's also no excuse for not having the right fines and penalties that are adequate for making industry obey the law. that is sometimes the case. >> thank you, robert reich, former secretary of labor. >> thanks, lawrence. coming up, more bad news for bp.

a not so surprising new report says the amount of oil pouring into the gulf is much worse than estimated. the lawyer suing bp sounds off next. vegetables are naturally low in calories. v8 juice gives you 3 of your 5 daily servings. it's a tasty, nutritious way to make this number go up... and help this one go down. v8. what's your number? ♪ ♪ do u gonna be there? ♪ are u sure u gonna call back? ♪ ♪ when am calling up and all that? ♪ ♪ ♪ can't u hear i'm sick? ♪ i'm lovesick ♪ can't u hear it explode? ♪ all down, all down ♪ can't u hear it explode? now your chase card let's you make your own payment plan for what you charge. introducing blueprint.

blueprint's free and exclusively for chase customers. for a big purchase, there's split. it lets you decide how much... or how many months you want to pay. so you can be comfortable managing all of your large purchases. if having a plan matters, chase what matters. create your own blueprint at chase.com/blueprint. claritin-d helps me breathe in and out. nothing works stronger, faster, or longer to relieve all my symptoms... ...including congestion without drowsiness. get claritin-d at the pharmacy counter. live claritin clear.

lost in the massive media coverage of the environmental disaster in the gulf of mexico is the worst part of this industrial crime. the killing of 11 men who entrusted their lives to the corporations that put them on the deep water horizon oil rig and guaranteed their safety. you can be horrified by the pictures we bring you of the oil floating on the gulf. you can feel for the birds. you can feel for the shrimpers, you can feel for the kids who just want to have fun on a clean beach. you should feel something more for the loved ones of the deep water 11. we in the media should never let you forget them. we should make sure that all the corporate executives responsible

for these 11 deaths have to see their pictures every day, every night. shane roshto was a roustabout, 22 years old. he leaves his wife, natalie, and his son. roy wyatt kemp was a darakand, 27 years old, leaves his wife, courtney, and two daughters. karl kleppinger, jr., a floor hand, a desert storm veteran. he leaves his wife, tracy, and one son. jason anderson was a tool pusher. he leaves his wife, shelley, and two children. stephen curtis, was an assist tant driller. he leaves his wife, nancy, a son, and a daughter. dewey revette was a driller. he leaves his wife, sherry, and two daughters.

adam weise, was a floor hand, 24 years old, high school football star. leaves his girlfriend and family. blair manuel was a mud engineer. he leaves his fiancee, melinda, and his three daughters. donald clark was an assistant driller. he leaves his wife, sheila, and four children. aaron dale bukeen was a crane operator. he helped get other crew members to safety in the minutes after the explosion but could not get off the rig in time to save his own life. he leaves his wife, rhonda, and two children. gordon jones was a mud engineer. he leaves a son and his pregnant wife, michelle, who is due to give birth seven days from now. just before the explosion gordon called michelle.

she told "the los angeles times," quote, his last words were, i love you. ten minutes later everything changed. yes, everything changed, but the executives at bp and halliburton and transocean don't know that yet. they think they can get away with ducking blame in congressional hearings and wait for all of us to move on and forget these 11 men. and they think they can admit missteps and keep calling a crime an accident. not this time. not as long as i can get to a microphone. these corporations and these executives are going to be charged with wrongful death in civil cases and they are going to settle those cases out of court because they know there is not a jury anywhere in this country who would not find for these 11 men. the only legal questions remaining are has everything

changed enough so that this time they will face criminal charges of manslaughter? and is that what it takes to get the corporations running our oil rigs, our coal mines, to at long last find their consciences? for the answer to those questions, let's bring in mike papantonio, and environmental lawyer who's leading the class-action lawsuits against bp. mike, clearly there will be wrongful death cases mounted here. it seems to me. am i right in calling it that they won't make it to trial? they will absolutely settle these things? they'll be afraid of any civil jury here. >> lawrence, they'll settle some, but i got to tell you something. the problem is, and you pointed it out, this company has to be concerned about more than civil problems. they have to be concerned about the criminal aspects of what's happening here. something happened yesterday that i think is critically important. when obama forced bp to release

the deep water video of this catastrophic oil gusher, it became apparent that this company has been lying to the american public and to the federal government from day one. and what's happened is when this video was released all of a sudden this lie becomes something that they really can't cover up anymore. here's what i'm trying to say here. remember when they began their story by saying this was a minor problem? this was simply going to pass? day two it was 25,000 gallons leaking into our gulf. day three it was 45,000. the important thing about this is it tells you something about the culture of this company. it tells you about something -- when you see a culture like this, inevitably it ends up with criminal problems. today we learn there's about 4 million gallons a day gushing from there. and it didn't just happen. this isn't something that happened by negligence. one way this happened is by way of politics. the corporate shield that comes

on to the scene. the lisa murkowski, today saying this company should not have to pay for the full claim. what you have to understand is that's part of the denial game this company has played from day one. when they start a denial game like that what ends up happening in the end, it spins into criminal problems. murkowski is a good example. exon, coke industries, consolation energy, $300,000 has spun to politicians like murkowski to become a sock puppet for this industry. so they could get away with virtually anything they wanted. if you look at this story as it develops, it's like kicking over a rotting log and seeing these creepy characters run out from underneath it day after day. the murkowski types who are nothing more than shields for this industry. when that starts -- >> mike, let me get to the manslaughter question. i've been chasing this manslaughter question. it's been bothering me from the start here. what is the legal threshold that has to be met to bring a manslaughter case in this

instance? >> recklessness to the point that it almost -- it almost knocks on the edge of intent. manslaughter when you see manslaughter driving incident, it's not they intended to kill somebody but they were so reckless -- they just had so little attention to what they should have been doing. there was reckless abandon in the way they approach the issue. that is all over this case. from day one we started seeing it. day one we started hearing stories that at first blush they were almost implausible. you'd hear a witness call and say, this is a company that drilled deeper than their permit. this is a company that failed to have a failsafe system in place that's used all over the world. this is a company that knew hours before this thing was -- before it blew -- that they had an intrinsic problem in the safety system. this is a company that knew all this and chose to ignore it, because to respond would have cost them money. when you get to the point where

there's such reckless abandonment -- such little care about human life then you do knock on the door of something like manslaughter. so i -- let me tell you something. i used to be a prosecutor. i have to tell you, if i had the facts of this case in front of me when i was prosecuting i would tell you the chances of success in a real criminal -- real criminal conviction are very high. the problem we have here is we don't throw corporations in prison. the u.s. supreme court says we have to treat a corporation like they're a person. who are we going to take to prison? are we going to take tony hayward, the ceo of this company who today said this was a relatively tiny problem? that it's a tiny problem because it was such a small spill in this huge body of water called the gulf of mexico? are we going to put tony hayward in prison? the corporate structure is put in the way. we can throw a man in prison for robbing a jiffy store with a gun. when you get a man with a briefcase who kills people for

nothing more than sheer greed, then we have problems with that and we have to relive the way we look at corporate america. >> mike, we're going to have to leave it there for today. i appreciate yeour passion and insight on this. thanks, mike. >> thank you. let's get "rapid fire" response from our panel on a couple stories. oklahoma senator jim inhofe says members of the u.s. military won't be willing to fight and day for comrades who are gay. in nevada tea party endorsed candidate sharon angle is surging in the fight to challenge senator harry reid. and the "washington post's" ruth marcus says it's easier for a brilliant, accomplished woman like elena kagan to get a supreme court nomination than to get a man. we'll see what our panel thinks about that one. with us tonight, publisher karen hunter and radio talk show host heidi harris. let's go in reverse order. ruth marcus had an interesting piece today in the "washington

post." provoked by the elena kagan situation and questions about her personal life. and ruth marcus says it's very difficult for women to -- for smart, accomplished women to find mates. and it's very unlikely that they will find guys who are comfortable with the women being smarter than they are. karen hunter, what do you think? >> well, i mean, the statistics are there. we can drum them out and obviously, you know, they do point to that -- in that direction. i think that's ridiculous. i don't know any case where if you're in love with someone that it really matters whether or not that person is smarter. i just think it's one more reason for us to try to discount ms. kagan's nomination. >> heidi, ruth marcus wrote, the smarter and more successful the woman, the more complicated the dating dynamic. how to leaven that intellect and competence to make the package a bit less threatening. >> women are supposed to play

stupid to get a man? i think if a man is confident and intelligence in his own right and maybe has his own talents, i don't think a real man is threatened by a woman who's smart. i know men who prefer to date dumb women but smart guys date smart women. >> republican primary in nevada is very tight. lowden at 30%, angle 35%. tarkanian 22%. what's the outcome for harry reid? >> i have to tell you the truth, in the last couple weeks as you mentioned sharon angle is doing better. tea party endorsed her. i never counted her out. she's a scrapper, fighter, has a record in the state of nevada. sue lowden and danny tarkanian i've known for a long time. they're good candidates. what's happening with sue recently, she made comments about taking chicken to the doctor, bartering for medical care, which i don't think is a ridiculous statement to make.

people have done it. they still do it. it was taken out of context. what's happened, it's fed into this marie antoinette thing. the problem for sue is she's beautiful and wealthy. and there's already a certain group of people that resent her for that. that's what's fanning the flames i think more so than just the chicken comment in itself. >> to answer your question, i think he'd rather face a traditional republican because i think the tea party movement is galvanizing a lot of people in that area. and even with those off statements she's made, she's still going to be a tough opponent. tougher than a mainstream republican. >> and karen, to senator jim inhofe's comment that in the military you won't -- they won't be willing to fight for their gay comrades when they're in combat? >> went so far to say people don't fight for their flag, don't fight for the country, they fight for the person in the foxhole next to them, which i thought was a gay comment. when he served in the military in 1957 and '58 we didn't have

rights for women, we didn't have rights for blacks in this country. he needs to be reminded that this is a new world and that people in this country have a different way of thinking about things. as evidenced by our president, barack obama, being elected. so you know, someone needs to pluck him in the head and wake him up. >> heidi, jim inhofe never saw one minute of combat but feels he's an authority on how it will work nowadays in the foxhole. >> he's gone through training. barack obama's not a veteran. so ultimately i think the problem with bringing gays into the military is lack of unit cohesion. whether you have women and men sleeping in the same building, men who want to sleep with other men sleeping in the same building, it's a big mistake. >> they're already there. >> i know that. >> we're acting like there are no gays in the military now? we're just doing the whole thing with the don't ask/don't tell. i can't believe we're talking about this in the 21st century. >> i have my own don't ask/don't

tell policy. >> heidi, have to cut it there. karen, thank you, karen hunter and heidi harris. coming up, kneel and cover if you think arizona is the most radical state in the nation, listen to this. the louisiana house just passed a bill clearing the way for loaded guns in church. more on that next. - woman #1: hey. - woman #2: hey. i was just in town for a few days and i was wondering if i could 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.

we want to correct the record on something that was reported earlier in the week on this program. senator mary landrieu did not receive $1.8 million in contributions from bp. her office advises that the actual amount she received from bp is $28,200. as we said wednesday the total number of dollars she has received from the oil and gas industries is in excess of $752,000. here, kitty. here, kitty.

oh! just come snuggle with mama. [ male announcer ] missing something? like 2 pairs of glasses fo$99.99 at sears optical, with bifocal lenses for just $25 more per pair. hurry in to sears optical today and don miss a thing. ♪ well, if you come from the hood ♪ ♪ or ya come from the burbs ♪ got the fellas up in here tonight ♪ ♪ ♪ we at the block party having fun ♪

tdd# 1-800-345-2550 investment firms wouldn't even dream of overcharging people. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 in fact, they'd spend all of their time dreaming up ways tdd# 1-800-345-2550 to give us more for our money. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 i guess i'd just like to see a little more give tdd# 1-800-345-2550 and a little less take, you know? tdd# 1-800-345-2550 if it was up to me, they'd spend a lot more time tdd# 1-800-345-2550 worrying about my bottom line. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 (announcer) at charles schwab, investors rule. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 are you ready to rule? is the u.s. along with its

allies winning the war in afghanistan? >> i think in the last year we've made a lot of progress. i think i'd be prepared to say nobody is winning at this point. the insir gents i think they felt had momentum a year ago felt they were making clear progress, i think that's stopped. >> so the u.s. commander in afghanistan says nobody is winning the war there. and today we found out the u.s. is spending more in afghanistan per month than we did in iraq. robert greenwald is the founder and president of brave new films, and the director of the documentary "rethink afghanistan." okay, robert, i'll bite. tell me how to rethink afghanistan. >> well, begin with the basic assumpti assumptions. why are we there? how long are we going to be there? how much is it costing? how many troops? and when do we know it's time to get out? these questions are tragically not being answered, and the result is what you just talked about. it's a war that's not winnable.

there are many problems there. i was in afghanistan. we have reporters and people over there, and over and over again we hear about the problems, but they're not solvable by military solutions. >> robert, it seems the question that the strategists keep as asking, and the reason they advocate staying, is their unsettling answer to the question, what happens if we leave? what do you think happens if we leave? >> what happens if we leave is the civil war in afghanistan, and make no mistake, it's a civil war, it's not good guys and bad guys here, it's a civil war that plays itself out. over and over again, look, they took a poll, the u.s. army took a poll in kandahar. 94% of the people in kandahar said they don't want a military solution or their don't want a military invasion. they want a negotiation. there can be a negotiation. extraordinary efforts and

strengths put into solving the problems we'd be able to do it. we're never going to do it with the killing and the taking over of large parts of this country. it's just never going to work. >> it seems to -- afghanistan seems to have fallen off the political radar screen. we have these democratic senate primaries going on around the country, and afghanistan does not seem to be one of the areas of difference. it doesn't seem to be one of the areas of any kind of campaign argument. how does afghanistan find its way back into our campaign politics? >> well, that's a really good question. it is in some races, out here in california, marcie running against harmman, running on a strong policy of the financial cost in afghanistan. ultimately it's the news that came out today. we're spending almost $7 billion in one month on the war in afghanistan. that's 30,000 health care jobs. as people really begin to understand that part of the reason our economy is going to

hell is these two wars, as they get the idea of what it means to spend $1 trillion on these two wars and not tax people. i think the dots will start to be connected and then people will start to continue to ask these important questions as well as, sadly and tragically, the u.s. death toll in afghanistan is going to reach thousands very soon. >> robert greenwald, thanks very much for your time today. >> certainly, lawrence. a story update on -- a story update you need tonight. a tampa area strip club gearing up for the 2012 rnc convention. the owner of the legendary mons venus club is promising secrecy for all conventiongoers. we hope that includes all pundits. he says any time there's a convention in time, clubs do well and he didn't expect it to be any different with republicans. the rnc ended up in some trouble

earlier this year, you will recall, after financial records revealed gop officials entertained themselves at a lesbian bondage-themed nightclub in west hollywood, which i still have not found my way into. coming up, another incumbent senate democrat is kplinging to her job before next tuesday's primary. arkansas's lieutenant governor bill halter has blanche lincoln on the run. i'll ask him if he can close the deal, next. s. but we're also in the showing-kids- new-worlds business. and the startup-capital- for-barbers business. and the this-won't- hurt-a-bit business. because we don't just work here. we live here. these are our families. and our neighbors. and by changing lives we're in more than the energy business we're in the human energy business. chevron. that's what's gonna happen here.

♪ because you're tasty with toasty whole grain. [ crunch ] wheat thins. toasted. whole grain. crunch. the crunch is calling. under pressure. ♪ and pressure can cause anyone's deodorant to fail. ♪ introducing gillette odor shield antiperspirant. unlike regular deodorants, it targets and neutralizes odor at the source. help eliminate odor, don't just cover it up.

♪ gillette odor shield antiperspirant. also try odor shield technology in new body wash. ♪ but my doctor told me that most calcium supplements... aren't absorbed properly unless taken with food. he recommended citracal. it's different -- it's calcium citrate, so it can be absorbed with or without food. citracal.

welcome back to "the ed show." the democratic senate primary race in arkansas could be headed for a runoff.

a recent poll shows incumbent blanche lincoln leading her closest competitor lieutenant governor bill halter by nine points but she falls short of the 50% she would need to win outright on tuesday. arkansas lieutenant governor bill halter joins me now. lieutenant governor, the first time we spoke on this network we were talking about your differences with blanche lincoln on health care. you had not yet decided to run against her. you're now within closing an election here where you may force a runoff. doesn't this kind of primary just make it easier for the republicans in november, with a very divisive democratic party now in arkansas? >> absolutely not, lawrence. in this sense. i run five to eight points better against the republican opponents than senator lincoln does. it's a testimony to how much political trouble she's in that she's consistently polling well beneath 50% in a democratic primary and against republican opponents she's way back. this doesn't divide democra