tv The Last Word MSNBC March 27, 2013 10:00pm-11:00pm PDT
is dropping every day. that's how it works, right? that's the line from the beltway press. but it is not true this time. we have become a different country the last three months. newtown changed us. in 1996, the senate's most conservative member, republican jessie helms voted for the defense of marriage act, not surprisingly. today, jessie helms' senate seat is occupied by a democrat, kay hagan, who announced support for marriage equality. that seat change was noticed by the supreme court today as they considered the constitutionality of the defense of marriage act. day two of high stakes arguments at the high court. >> the nation's highest court taking up the defense of marriage act.
>> federal ban on same-sex marriage. >> today's doma arguments concern same sex couples already married. >> at the center of this, 83-year-old edith windsor. >> i am an out lesbian who sued the united states of america. >> doma barred the irs from recognizing her marriage. >> recognizing marriage to her partner of 44 years. >> they were making a stranger of this person i lived with and loved. >> the court's liberals were strongly attacking doma. >> i think there are five votes to strike it down. >> just like yesterday, the hearing drew demonstrators. >> we are no longer satisfied living in the shadows of freedom. >> doma reeks of big government. >> this is about discrimination. >> i believe marriage is the union of one man and one woman. >> house republicans are defending the law. >> what a stale role to play in life. >> marriage is the union of one man and one woman. >> republicans knew that doma is not constitutional.
>> the compelling argument is on the side of homosexuals. >> this is going to happen, it is just the direction the culture is heading. >> one of the fastest changing trends we have seen on a social matter. >> it is remarkable the speed at which this has moved. >> doma was wrong 17 years ago, it is wrong today. if we fail to get it right, history will not be kind to us as a people and as a nation. the federal government's refusal to recognize same-sex marriage cost edith windsor $363,000 in inheritance taxes when her wife died in 2009. it was her challenge of that tax liability that propelled her case to the united states supreme court today in a challenge to the defense of marriage act, which has been the law of the land since 1996. paul clement rising today in defense of the defense of
marriage act tried to present it essentially as a federal bookkeeping matter, as a way of clarifying definitions for the tax code, social security, which provoked this response from justice ruth bader ginsberg. >> it is not as though well, there's this little federal sphere and it's only a tax question. 1100 statutes, and it affects every area of life. and so he was really diminishing what the state has said is marriage. you're saying no, state said two kinds of marriages, the full marriage, and then this other skim milk marriage. >> to justice ginsberg, a legal marriage of woman to a woman in new york state is not a full marriage, it is but a skim milk marriage because no other state has to recognize that marriage, and the federal government refuses to recognize that marriage. justice kagan tried to get at
why congress passed that law in the first place. >> 1996, i'm going to quote from the house report here is that congress decided to reflect an honor of collective moral judgment and to express moral disapproval of homosexuality. is that what happened in 1996? >> does the house report say that, of course it says that. if that's enough to invalidate the statute, then you should invalidate the statute. we're not going to strike down a statute because a couple of legislators may have had improper motive. >> everyone, including justice scalia agreed there has been a seat change since doma was passed in 1996. >> you don't doubt the lobby supporting enactment of same-sex marriage laws in different states is politically powerful, do you? >> with respect to that
category, that characterization of the term, for purposes of heightened scrutiny, i would, your honor. >> really? they're falling over to endorse your side of the case. >> fact of the matter, no other group in recent history was subjected to popular referenda to take away rights already given or exclude those rights the way gay people have. i don't think, and until 1990, gay people weren't allowed to enter this country. so i don't think that the political power of gay people today could possibly be seen within that framework. >> joining me, elizabeth birch that fought against passage of doma in 1996. she was in the supreme courtroom today. amy howe, and former vermont governor howard dean, first governor to sign a civil unions bill.
elizabeth birch, i have to ask about the seat change. even justice scalia said there has been this seat change between now and 1996. you were there fighting against it. what did it feel like to be in the courtroom today watching what many of us believe is the fall of the defense of marriage act? >> it was incredibly satisfying and a deep privilege, and indeed justice roberts kept trying to explain it by political power, but that is not what has caused the seat change. it has happened because of thousands upon thousands small acts of courage, large and small, around dining room tables all around the nation, people coming out at a younger age, and frankly, many americans getting to know not just their family members but their co-workers and with rising affection for lbgt people in this country. >> howard dean, you watched this
seat change over the years. when you signed the civil unions bill, it was hugely controversial in vermont, wasn't it? >> vermont has a reputation of being a laid back place and it is in some ways, but the truth is, this is actually true, i had to wear a bulletproof vest to many public appearances at the request of the state police while i was campaigning for re-election after i signed the civil unions bill. elizabeth is right. this is a million acts of courage from gay people, but it also does speak to decency of the american people. i think it is hard to change, the american people are conservative with a small c in many ways, but they also have a generousness of spirit as senator rob portman showed last week. took his son coming out, saying he was gay, and what passed the bill in vermont was parents and lesbians of gays, parents and friends of lesbians and gays,
and the basic thing, you went to a legislator and said my son is gay, our kids grew up together, if your son turned out to be gay, would you love him any less, the answer is almost always i wouldn't love him or her any less, and that's what's gotten to us where we are today from where we were 12 years ago when i signed the first bill. >> let's listen to how justice sotomayor framed that question before the court today. >> but what gives the federal government the right to be concerned at all at what the definition of marriage is? >> amy howe, i haven't heard a satisfactory answer to that question since 1996. was there a satisfactory answer to the court in that room today? >> i'm not sure there was, and really this could welcome down to the key question because this was a concern echoed by justice anthony kennedy who many people
regard as the swing vote on the court, and he has always been someone that's been concerned about states' rights and he was clearly very concerned about states' rights in this case, so although i think people had hopes, supporters of same-sex marriage hoped for a decision coming out of this case, not only striking down doma, but laying the foundation to strike down state same-sex marriage laws, i think they could be disappointed because the court could well lay with justice kennedy who is more concerned about states' rights than what we call the equal protection argument, whether or not the law discriminates against same sex couples. >> let's listen to what justice kennedy said today about how the issue of marriage is so intertwined into federal law now. >> whether or not if congress has the power, it can exercise it for the reason that it wants, that it likes some marriage it does like, i suppose it can do that. but when it has 1100 laws which
in our society means that the federal government is intertwined with the citizens' day-to-day life, you are at real risk of running in conflict with what has always been thought to be the essence of the state police power, which is to regulate marriage, divorce, custody. >> elizabeth birch, 1100 places in federal law where marital status is relevant to the application of that law. i just don't see how the claim can survive that defense of marriage act isn't doing any harm to gay people that want to be married. >> i couldn't agree with you more. i think what we saw in this court for the last two days was perhaps more caution than some of us would have liked to have seen. i think, though, that doma does fall.
i think that proposition 8 falls. and what i hope for is that the court in its wisdom won't wait several years or a decade or a lifetime. we're living in a time of concentrated history. the american people have already come such a long way in a relatively short period of time. we don't need to learn a lot more to know that every single day gay and lesbian couples and their children are being deprived of the rights of those 1100 benefits and so much more. >> howard dean, what do you think the politics are if the justices in effect leave most of this to politics by ruling as elizabeth said to just let prop 8 go and let doma go, and then let the 50 states figure it out for themselves? >> well, i actually think that's a tough position for the republicans to find themselves in. republicans are desperately engaged in a scramble to have
some repeal to people under 35. they have -- some appeal to people under 35. this is a big issue for those under 35. 80% of americans under 35 believe that same sex people ought to be able to get married. i think secretly what the republicans are hoping is that the justices will resolve the problem for the country and they can get this off their plate and move to other problems that they have which are quite leeching. i don't know what's going to happen, amy, i defer to watch the court. it sounded like justice kennedy wouldn't support constitutionality of doma. >> amy, do you think you heard clues to any surprise votes in the last two days? >> the surprise vote may well have been in proposition 8. there's some doubt about whether the court in that case will get to constitutionality of prop 8 at all.
this was something that i think a lot of people thought maybe they added on, this question of whether or not the sponsors of proposition 8 had a legal right to defend proposition 8 when the attorney general of california and governor of california weren't going to do so. they thought this was the justices dotting their i's and crossing t's. it was a question and a little role reversal, the court's four more liberal justices maybe trying to stave off an actual ruling on the merits seemed to support the idea that the sponsors of the initiative couldn't come into court and defend it, and it seemed like the chief justice might be sympathetic to that position as well. >> elizabeth birch, amy howe, howard dean, thank you for joining me. >> thank you. coming up, new police reports tell us much more about the tucson massacre that killed six people and wounded congresswoman gabby giffords. two of the people that were there will join me in a last word exclusive. and in the "rewrite," bill o'reilly rewrites his position
on marriage equality, and rush limbaugh attacks him for it, which brings us to the small matter of why rush limbaugh hates bill o'reilly and why bill o'reilly hates rush limbaugh. that's coming up. ♪ i have direct deposit on my visa prepaid. my paycheck is loaded right on my card. automatic. i am not going downtown standing in line to cash it. i know where my money is, because it is in my pocket. i got more time with my daughter, [ laughing ] we got places to go. [ male announcer ] go open a new world, with visa prepaid. more people go with visa. available at ace cash express.
the original law is god's law. outlined in the ten commandments. marriage is between one man and one woman. >> unfortunately for bible scholar rick perry, the ten commandments don't say anything about marriage being between one man and one woman. only two commandments refer to marriage in any way. the seventh says you shall not commit adultery, the tenth, you shall not covet your neighbor's house, you shall not covet your neighbor's wife or his manservant, or his ox or his ass. ronald reagan married two women,
did it sequentially, so it was fully legal. we know newt gingrich thinks it is between one man and at least three women, and sequential polygamist rush limbaugh believes it is between one man and four women so far. marriage can be between one man and many women or one woman and many men. marriage can now legally be between one man and as many as he can trick into marrying him and between one woman and as many men who she chooses to marry. they're just not supposed to be married to more than one at the same time. the old testament condones polygamy as well as divorce, which is why republicans are having so much trouble finding what would be an oh, so helpful biblical passage about marriage being between one man and one woman.
like a squirrel stashes nuts, you may be muddling through allergies. try zyrtec® liquid gels. nothing starts working faster than zyrtec® at relieving your allergy symptoms for 24 hours. zyrtec®. love the air. i don't believe you need to act like old testament heretics. >> while the republican party studies the old testament instead of the constitution for guidance on the issue of marriage equality constitutionality, democrats continue to continue to step into the future. north carolina senator kay hagan and senator jon tester announced marriage equality today. they have backed official democratic party position in support of marriage equality. the politics of marriage
equality do not seem complicated to the democratic party. but republicans continue to find new lines of opposition to marriage equality. lines that haven't already been ridiculed by the supreme court. here is the theologian in chief of the republican party, reverend mike huckabee, trying a new line of argument. >> i recognize the culture is moving away from the traditional standard, but it is almost like saying well, we have a basketball team and nobody on the team or very few can actually hit the goal that's ten feet off the floor. so we're going to lower the goal down to six feet, that way everybody can slam dunk the ball. the question is, have you improved your basketball game or have you actually just changed the standard so it looks like you're doing better? >> joining me now to decode that riddle, "the washington post" jonathan cape part and julian
epstein, former house judiciary committee council. jonathan capehart, i don't know if any of that made sense to you. the six foot dunking thing, i don't get it. but what's fascinating is to watch all of these arguments that these guys have been using for many years get served up at the supreme court this week and swatted down. where does that leave them? >> it leaves them in a world of misery. they can't quite figure out how to talk about this. i'll say this for them. the leaders in the party know what's happening, they know where the country is going, they even know where their party is going. i keep bringing this number up, 51% of republicans age 18 to 45 in the latest "the washington post" poll support marriage equality. those folks will get older and become leaders in the republican party and the revolution that's happening now among democrats in
the senate will find its way to the republican party, but it's not going to happen this month, this week, probably not before the next presidential election, but that just means that reince priebus and others in the party will have a devil of a time trying to figure out how to talk about this issue, but not enrage this republican party base that they still have to cater to. >> listen to mike huckabee talk about that republican party base. >> if they do, they're going to lose a large part of their base because evangelicals will take a walk. and it is not because there's an anti-homosexual mood, and nobody is homophobic that i know of, but many of us, and i consider myself included, base our standards not on the latest washington post poll, but we base it on an objective standard.
>> julian epstein, can the republicans hold onto the center of power in washington, the house of representatives, as long as they oppose same-sex marriage, and can they possibly expand power in washington while still opposing that? >> well, they're a shrinking party, one, because they're monochromatic, two, a regional party, three because they practice these archie bunker politics which are increasingly unpopular, particularly with younger demographics. i think the republican party can hold the party so long as it gerrymanders districts. i think five to ten years from now, same-sex marriage will be law of the land because of what happens at the ballot box as much as what happens at the court. what happens at the court, i think proposition 8 will go down, the court will punt back to the states, the lower court ruling will stand, and i think doma will go down. the disappointing thing about the court, in both cases they
avoid the question of whether the equal protection clause of the constitution gives gay couples and lesbian couples the right to marry, to have that most cherished relationship. in the case of doma, what you'll see is five justices coming together on states rights issues, that they can't countermand states that decide that same-sex marriage ought to be legal, it can't countermand that decision by withholding benefits. that leaves open the question for the rest of the country as to whether there is an equal protection challenge here. that's the disappointing thing. while the courts are sheepishly are going to take the weasel position and allow proposition 8 to be vacated by punting, have doma go down on states rights argument, they're avoiding the central question which is highly disappointing. i was council during the doma proceedings. i remember how decidedly and openly and unapologetically
bigoted that entire process was. we had two days of markup. i remember a colleague of mine who was counsel, happened to be gay, i remember seeing tears in his eyes because of the open bigotry that went on in that committee room, and it is just really disappointing you don't see the court wanting to tackle the central issue here. >> let's listen to the chairman of the republican party thinking out loud about what has happened to the public attitude that has changed so much on this issue. >> why is this an issue in which we are seeing support for same-sex marriage rise so rapidly in a really short period of time? >> i'm not sure, but i think it's obviously -- i think it is part of culture. i think it's an interesting topic to people, it's not all debts and math and deficits and long term, you know, credit scores and things like that.
>> there you have it, jonathan capehart, there's no math. >> it is oh, so easy, it is an interesting topic. yeah, equality for lesbian and gay people as americans like everyone else. sure, it is an interesting topic. as i said before, the problem for the chairman and the problem for that party is that the country is moving very quickly away from it and away from the folks like reince priebus who still think that way. as julian said, in five to ten years, this country, marriage equality will be legal in this country in some way, shape or form, and quite frankly, if the supreme court decides it wants to punt on process grounds or legal technical grounds to allow marriage in california and strike down doma, i'm fine with that. >> jonathan capehart, julian epstein, thank you for joining me. >> thanks, lawrence. today, rick santorum and ann coulter jumped into the south
carolina campaign to try to stop stephen colbert's sister from becoming the next member of congress from south carolina. and in the "rewrite," it pained rush limbaugh to have to mention bill o'reilly on his show today because those two guys hate each other. but the stakes were important for rush. he was defending marriage, all four of his marriages. that's coming up. i honestly loved smoking, and i honestly didn't think i would ever quit. [ male announcer ] along with support, chantix (varenicline) is proven to help people quit smoking. it reduces the urge to smoke. it put me at ease that you could smoke on the first week. [ male announcer ] some people had changes in behavior, thinking or mood, hostility, agitation, depressed mood and suicidal thoughts or actions while taking or after stopping chantix. if you notice any of these stop taking chantix and call your doctor right away. tell your doctor about any history of depression or other mental health problems, which could get worse while taking chantix. don't take chantix if you've had a serious allergic or skin reaction to it.
if you develop these stop taking chantix and see your doctor right away as some can be life-threatening. tell your doctor if you have a history of heart or blood vessel problems, or if you develop new or worse symptoms. get medical help right away if you have symptoms of a heart attack or stroke. use caution when driving or operating machinery. common side effects include nausea, trouble sleeping and unusual dreams. with chantix and with the support system it worked for me. [ male announcer ] ask your doctor if chantix is right for you. i'd like one of those desserts and some coffee. sure. decaf or regular? regular. cake or pie? pie. apple or cherry? cherry. ♪ oil or cream? oil or cream? cream. [ male announcer ] with reddi-wip, a slice of pie never sounded better. that's because it's always made with real cream, never hydrogenated oil like some other whipped toppings. the sound of reddi-wip is the sound of joy. never hydrogenated oil like some other whipped toppings.
if youthen this willbrids arbe a nice surprise. meet the 5-passenger ford c-max hybrid. c-max come. c-max go. c-max give a ride to everyone it knows. c max has more passenger volume than competitor prius v and we haven't even mentioned... c-max also gets better mpg. say hi to the super fuel efficient ford c-max hybrid.
the surge in support of gay marriage in polls in recent years is easy for rush limbaugh to explain. he is not confused about how that happened. here is rush limbaugh's explanation. >> there's a gay mafia that has inflicted the fear of death, political death in the republican party, for example. >> i, for one, can't wait until the gay mafia turns its attention to gun and ammunition control. [ jackie ] it's just so frustrating... ♪ the middle of this special moment and i need to run off to the bathroom. ♪ i'm fed up with always having to put my bladder's needs
ahead of my daughter. ♪ so today, i'm finally talking to my doctor about overactive bladder symptoms. [ female announcer ] know that gotta go feeling? ask your doctor about prescription toviaz. one toviaz pill a day significantly reduces sudden urges and accidents, for 24 hours. if you have certain stomach problems or glaucoma, or can not empty your bladder, you should not take toviaz. get emergency medical help right away if your face, lips, throat or tongue swells. toviaz can cause blurred vision, dizziness, drowsiness and decreased sweating. do not drive, operate machinery or do unsafe tasks until you know how toviaz affects you. the most common side effects are dry mouth and constipation. talk to your doctor about toviaz.
arrival. with hertz gold plus rewards, you skip the counters, the lines, and the paperwork. zap. it's our fastest and easiest way to get you into your car. it's just another way you'll be traveling at the speed of hertz. be bold, be courageous. please support background checks. thank you very much. >> that was former congresswoman, gabrielle giffords, speaking at the same safeway grocery store where she and 12 other people were wounded, and six people lost their lives when a madman went on a shooting rampage two years ago. in the spotlight tonight, new information on the tucson gunman. the sheriff's department
released close to 3,000 pages of documents about the tucson case. here is what we know now. before the shooting the gunman's family and friends said he behaved erratically. his parents were so concerned that they hid his shotgun and his father disabled the shooter's car at night. one of the gunman's friends told police he quote may have received a call last night warning of the shooting. on the day of the shooting, the gunman fired more than 30 shots before being tackled to the ground. police found two fully loaded glock magazines and a folding knife in his pockets. the shooter told the police, quote, i was the only person that knew about this. in response to this information, gabby giffords released this statement. the details released today regarding the shooting in tucson reaffirm what this country already knew, the mentally disturbed young man that shot me
and murdered six should never have had access to a gun. joining me for an exclusive interview, two of the heroes from that shooting, patricia helped stopped the shooter from reloading, and daniel hernandez, the congressman's intern that helped save gabby giffords' live, author of the book "they call me hero." thank you both for joining me tonight. i see you're standing in the parking lot of the safeway. i think just about on the spot where the shooting happened, is that right? >> the shooting happened behind us against the wall. >> patricia, when you discovered some of these details today and realized that we've known for a long time it was your intervention that stopped this when he had to reload, you were able to make a move on him. we now know exactly how many bullets he had in his pockets that he could have gone to and how many more people could have
been killed and murdered. what did it feel like today to gain this additional knowledge about how threatening he was there? >> it's just a constant reminder and testimony to the fact that we need to continue our strong gun restriction and regulation attempts to, you know, make things better in this country. >> and daniel, a lot of the facts in the reports do constantly show us how much worse this could have been if patricia hadn't been able to do what she did with the help of others. and you in your function in checking people into the event, trying to get contact information for them, one report seems to indicate you had direct contact with the shooter before the event? >> you know, one of the things that happened today is there was no new earth shattering information, and being here with patricia in front of the scene and seeing that information, there was a lot of confusion immediately afterwards.
from what we have been able to find out later, i didn't interact with him, it was somebody else. immediately afterwards, i thought an angry young person i dealt with before had been him. standing here, seeing the new information, not many of what is new, it is disturbing to see how he was able to get a weapon, to see the background check system is so broken that someone whose parents took away his shotgun and said that they were disabling his car was still able to go, after being expelled from community college, purchase a semi automatic glock with extended magazines. >> and there's a lot of details in police reports about the people working at the store where he bought the weapons and one of whom actually knew him. each one of them had a reaction to him that there was something off with him. one of the guys that actually knew him was the one that was most suspicious of him, and yet,
patricia, he had no problem walking out of there with a gun. >> you know, it is easier to buy a gun than to buy sudafed. if you go into the store to buy sudafed, you have to sign your name, you have to show them your driver's license, you have to tell them that you're not going to use it for some illicit purpose. and you know, the second amendment rights people forget about the second and third words in that amendment, and they're well regulated. we don't have much regulation. we do need to make it so that the mental health system doesn't fail us again. we need to make sure everybody's got the name on the background checklist that will keep them from buying a gun. then we need to make sure every gun sale has a background check. >> and daniel hernandez, what's your reaction to apparently the only person having trouble
buying guns today is mark kelly. >> one of the things that -- being here is a stark reminder how little has been done to strengthen the background check system. but congressman giffords' husband mark was trying to show how easy it is because we haven't made any changes. it has been two years since the tucson incident happened and we haven't done anything. tomorrow, 150 cities are planning a national call to action to demand action because we have demanded a plan from the federal government. we got one from the president and vice president in terms of the taskforce. but now we need to ask people like senators john mccain who has gone in the record in 2000 and supported background checks to do it again. because if it is good enough for people in oregon and people in colorado, it is good enough for all americans. >> daniel hernandez, patricia maisch, thanks for joining me. >> thanks for having us. tomorrow, a last word exclusive, mothers of sandy hook students will join me after they
protest outside the national sport shooting foundation in newtown, connecticut. this will be the first time we hear from them about what the children who survived the massacre are coping with. that's tomorrow night. [ construction sounds ] ♪ [ watch ticking ] [ engine revs ] come in. ♪ got the coffee. that was fast. we're outta here. ♪ [ engine revs ] ♪
that nasty odor coming from your washer. say farewell to the smell with tide washing machine cleaner. it goes straight to the source of the stink to lift odor-causing residues off your washer's drum. tide washing machine cleaner. because all these whole grains aren't healthy unless you actually eat them ♪ multigrain cheerios. also available in delicious peanut butter. healthy never tasted so sweet. governor of getting it done. you know how to dance... with a deadline. and you...rent from national. because only national lets you choose any car in the aisle...
and go. you can even take a full-size or above, and still pay the mid-size price. this is awesome. [ male announcer ] yes, it is, business pro. yes, it is. go national. go like a pro. as america's high school seniors eagerly await the thrill of opening college acceptance letters next week, one college decided this is the per week to scare them off. boston college got 34,061 applications. of the students admitted, only 2405 enrolled in boston college. that means 75% of students admitted last year rejected boston college. so this year, boston college decided to try to get even more students to reject boston college.
according to "the boston globe" they're threatening to take disciplinary measures against a group of students distributing condoms out of their dorm rooms, calling the act a violation of the university's mission as a catholic institution. it has the american civil liberties union threatening legal action, they sent letters to students demanding an end to student run safe sites and network of dorm rooms and other locations where free contraceptives and safe sex information are available. the college told the students while we understand that you may not be intentionally violating university policy, we do need to advise you that should we receive any reports that you are, in fact, distributing condoms on campus, the matter would be referred to the student conduct office for disciplinary action by the university. boston college was founded in 1863 and is apparently stuck in 1953.
a talking car. but i'll tell you what impresses me. a talking train. this ge locomotive can tell you exactly where it is, what it's carrying, while using less fuel. delivering whatever the world needs, when it needs it. ♪ after all, what's the point of talking if you don't have something important to say? ♪ retty conservative. if you don't have something important to say?
very logical thinker. (laughs) i'm telling you right now, the girl back at home would absolutely not have taken a zip line in the jungle. (screams) i'm really glad that girl stayed at home. vo: expedia helps 30 million travelers a month find what they're looking for. one traveler at a time. expedia. find yours. you know the king and queen of republican media hate each other, right? i'm not telling you anything you don't know, nothing that's not wicked obvious. limbaugh and o'reilly hate each other. no, i am not getting into which one is king and which one is queen. rush is the biggest money maker in the history of political talk radio and o'reilly the biggest money maker in the history of
political talk tv, and they hate each other, not just because o'reilly tried to compete directly with limbaugh on the radio before completely surrendering to his radio supremacy, and giving up the radio version of "the factor", they're each very jealous of each other. limbaugh tried to take his act to television and failed miserably. he wanted to be the tv star that bill o'reilly is. o'reilly wanted to beat limbaugh at the radio game and failed miserably. o'reilly thinks he is twice as smart as limbaugh, he is right about that, doesn't make him wicked smart, but he is smarter than limbaugh. and rush knows he is more than twice as rich as o'reilly, and for rush, nothing proves a person's value more than money. so if you listen to these guys over time, you will notice that they never, never acknowledge each other's existence. they never mention each other's names, until today, when rush
couldn't take o'reilly rewriting himself on marriage equality. before we consider bill o'reilly's new position on marriage equality, let's sample some of his thinking in the past. >> the secular progressive movement would like to have marriage abolished in my opinion. they don't want it because it is not diverse enough, you know, that's what this gay marriage thing is all about. but now, you know, the poly-amorphous marriage, whatever they call it, you can marry 18 people. >> you want to marry a turtle, you can. >> eight years ago bill o'reilly predicted this is gonna be a totally different country than it is now, laws that you think are in stone are going to evaporate. you'll be able to marry a goat,
you mark my words. that's bill o'reilly saying you're going to be able to maria goat two years from now. and here was bill o'reilly last night. >> the compelling argument is on the side of homosexuals. that's where the compelling argument is. we're americans. we just want to be treated like everybody else. that's a compelling argument. and to deny that, you've got to have a strong argument on the other side. and the other side hasn't been able to do anything but thump the bible. >> rush limbaugh played that piece of the o'reilly factor for his audience today, and then said this. >> well, so how many of you who watch fox are bible thumpers? do you think there are any bible thumpers, quote, unquote, that watch fox?
because last night you were sort of marginalized on "the factor" as not having a compelling argument and just being a bunch of bible thumpers. >> notice how rush doesn't even want to say the word o'reilly. but the defense of marriage is so important to rush that he was willing to allow o'reilly a few seconds of air time today so that rush could prove to his audience that he, rush limbaugh, is the most reliable defender of marriage as an institution solely for the union of one man and as many women as he wants in proper legal sequence, as rush limbaugh has now done with all four of his wives. the really funny thing about bill o'reilly's conversion on marriage equality is that like
rush, he hates people who change their minds about marriage equality. he hates bill clinton, and he hates barack obama for doing exactly what bill o'reilly has done. in the very same segment last night where bill o'reilly announced his change of mind about marriage equality, he actually attacked bill clinton and barack obama for doing exactly the same thing. here is mr. oblivious going after those phonies who change their mind on an issue just because it's popular. >> you're phony, bill clinton, you're phony. it is the same exact issue, same thing, all right? you signed it because you thought it was going to be popular. now that it is not so popular, you're against it. this is what sleazy politicians do. >> do you feel that way about barack obama, too? he was against gay marriage until recently. >> of course i feel that way again, of course i do. they don't care about gays.
if they cared about gays, they would have been on board in the beginning. now, you can change your mind on the issue, but you got to explain that in context other than politics. like how somehow you evolved on this issue. i'm willing to listen to that, but i don't believe any of this is sincere, it is political and it is just awful. >> just awful. yeah. it is just awful when people change their minds, except of course when bill o'reilly does it. we're in san francisco. google's backyard for the bing it on challenge. [fight bell: ding, ding] what's your preferred search engine? search engine, uhh, probably google. if we do a side by side blind test comparison, and you end up choosing google, you get an xbox. i'll bet you the xbox, you bet me your son. well let's look up what you need. okay, i would do the left.
yeah? what?! i am a daddy! bing wins it! bing won. bing did win. people prefer bing over google for the web's top searches. don't believe it? go to bingiton.com and see what you're missing. license and registration please. what's this? uhh, it's my geico insurance id card, sir. it's digital, uh, pretty cool right? maybe. you know why i pulled you over today? because i'm a pig driving a convertible? tail light's out.. fix it. digital insurance id cards. just a click away with the geico mobile app. vo: to the elegant trim es in each and every piece,
restaurant in somerville, south carolina, rick santorum tried to prevent stephen colbert's sister from becoming the next member of the south carolina congressional delegation. rick santorum went to the kicking chicken to support the candidacy of republican curtis bostic, facing mark sanford in a runoff election next week. >> someone who is a strong conservative on fiscal issues, strong conservative on national issues and moral issues, and will go on the offense on all of them, unafraid to talk about them and take them on. you see from the polling, this could be a tough general election. you need someone that's not going to be playing defense. >> mark sanford has been playing defense since 2009. >> i have been unfaithful to my wife. i developed a relationship with -- started as a dear, dear friend from argentina.
>> public policy polling shows elizabeth colbert busch polls at 47%, mark sanford at 45%. but she polls even with curtis bostic, 43% each. ann coulter wrote a very ugly endorsement of curtis bostic today. republicans could nominate hitler and win south carolina's first district. ann coulter really knows how to ingratiate herself to south carolina republicans saying they would vote for hitler for congress. after that endearing beginning, she added if sanford is the nominee, republicans will either lose or win at a cost of $50 million that could be better spent elsewhere when curtis bostic tells his staff he is hiking the appalachian trail. joining me, nia malika-henderson. imagine the scene in bostic
headquarters when the staff says we have good news and bad news. ann coulter has endorsed you, that's the good news. the bad news, she did say that your district would vote for hitler. this is as ugly an endorsement as you could possibly get, isn't it? >> yeah. and i'm guessing bostic doesn't want that endorsement, and barely to be quite frank doesn't necessarily benefit that much even from santorum's endorsement. folks in south carolina in that district don't care about these folks weighing in. this is a district, very conservative. it is going to be about who they feel comfortable with. this race, you know, obviously sanford was in that seat before, a former governor. let's also remember newt gingrich won the south carolina primary by a landslide, and santorum won something like 17%.
so in previous campaigns, you have seen south carolina embrace men unfaithful to their wives. >> mark sanford is way overfinanced compared to bostic. he has $271,000 at this point, bostic, $56,000 for this runoff next week. and the polls indicate that sanford is ahead of bostic in the runoff. it is starting to look like sanford versus colbert. >> we couldn't get ashley judd in the race in kentucky, this might be the next best thing with colbert busch, sister of stephen colbert. it will be an exciting, interesting race. i think mark sanford is the favorite going in at this point, and this could be the beginning of another political climb to maybe a senate seat, maybe back to the governor's mansion because he is making amends with the folks in south carolina, which maybe it is surprising, i don't know.