>> and that will do it for me. thanks for watching. "state of the union" with candy crowley starts now. ready, aim, so far, but no fire. today, the u.s. warns of consequences if north korea turns its talk into action. >> and kim jong-un needs to understand, as i think he probably does, what the outcome of the conflict would be. >> the threat from pyongyang, a show of force or a sideshow farce? arizona senator john mccain gives us his take. and a compromise on background checks for gun sales means nobody's happy. >> not necessarily as strong as many of us might have preferred. >> the government should not punish or harass law apieding

citizens in the exercise of their second amendment rights. >> democrat joe manchin of west virginia, republican pat toomey on the deal nobody loves but might embrace. and one of the republicans' promising faces is all in, marco rubio on whether he can coax into supporting immigration reform. and the politics of tragedy, a 2016 republican reaching out beyond the party base and the president's budget, does he want a grand compromise or a big midterm campaign issue all with our political panel. i'm candy crowley and this is "state of the union." secretary john kerry made a final stop in asia today meeting with japanese leaders and urging north korea to bring their nuclear rhetoric to a peaceful end. >> hopefully north korea will hear our words and recognize that for the future of its people and for the future

stability in the region as well as on the peninsula itself there is a clear course of action that they are invited to take. >> joining me now arizona senator john mccain. senator, when you put this in context of the history of north korea with the grandfather kim jong-un, with the father of kim jong-un, can you tell me whether this is more serious, less serious? i mean, how do we view this? >> i think it's probably more serious because of their increased capability. but you're right, this has been going on for decades. a cycle of confrontation, negotiation, aid and the false hope that somehow the north koreans would give up their efforts to acquire nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. without that, north korea is totally irrelevant. i mean, both republican and democrat administrations have fallen prey to this, well, if we give them food, if we give them oil, if we give them money, then

they will come around. and they take our money and run. it was the bush administration that they lifted sanctions, freed up a bank account that they had. always we have been in the belief that somehow we can entice them into giving up this capability. they are not. they are not. but can i just say i don't think they're going to do anything more than their predecessors did, but they have greater capability. and they don't think like us. and they do have the ability to set seoul on fire. >> yes, they do. and we've seen them actually attack seoul in the last two, three years. not only damage but kill south korean soldiers. >> they've got artillery along the dmc in caves that would be capable -- before we take them out, would be capable of shelling a city of millions of people. this is dangerous. anybody who's read barbara tukt

man's guns of august know started by accidents of es cla toir measures. and, again, do not believe this young man thinks like we do. he doesn't. >> one of the things that you have said is if he launches a missile, i don't care if it's a test or aimed at someone, we should take it out. i wanted to play you something -- this comes from a man at the university of california in the koreans studies institute. something he had to say. >> one of the questions is, if we try and shoot it down and we miss, it looks a lot worse than if we don't try at all. many of our missile systems haven't been tested in real world situations. and i'm not sure that we want to use this one as the first time. but that's a decision to be made by the military. >> so that is a danger, they fire something and we miss it. >> actually, i think the decision is made by the president. but look, if we showed kim jong-un that he really doesn't

have the ability to launch a missile that would strike guam or the united states of america, i think let's do something different than what we've been doing in the past but also the most important and key element of all this is china. china is the only country that can effect north korean behavior, they can shut down in a sport period of time their economy. and remember this is a country that has 200,000 people where people are being tortured and the worst regime in history, where is our advocacy for human rights? >> in north korea? >> north korea. >> but there is some indication is there not. the china can't lead that -- they said to north korea last year do not shoot up a missile. and what did north korea do? >> and what did china do in response? nothing. so what china needs to do is start squeezing their economy. without china their economy would collapse in a relatively short period of time. and china has got to start stepping up whether it be on

cyber security or we've identified a building in beijing where these attacks come from or whether it be in the south china sea where they are confrontational or whether it be in the united nations where they along with russia veto efforts to reign-in bashar al assad. it's time now for china to step up. >> let me ask you there was quite the to-do this week when at least a portion of what we thought was -- which we know was a defense intelligence assessment congressman doug lambeau in colorado read it. he thought it was unclassified, it was, but apparently was not supposed to have been. makes you a little worried. and part of this was -- part of the quote was the dia assesses with moderate confidence, the north currently has weapons capable of delivering by ballistic missiles, however the reliability will be low. and for the next two days everyone said, oh, no, we don't actually think that. can you interpret this for me? does north korea have the

wearwithall to put a small nuclear device on a missile? >> i don't think we know. there's been other miscalculations by our intelligence agency but have no doubt they're on the path to achieving that capability. look what they've achieved over the last 10, 12 years and also exported including to countries like iran. so they are a danger. i think it's a matter of time before they have that capability. they do not right now, it's not clear. >> doesn't sound like anybody actually knows for sure. let me move you to guns, the other big issue. are you on board with toomey, manchin, which expands to gun shows but allows personal sales, private sales, to a friend, to a relative and also handing a gun to a relative. are you on board with that? can you go with that? >> i'm very favorably disposed. first i would like to thank pat and joe for their work together. we need to do a lot more of

that. and i'm very favorably disposed towards that. 80% of the american people want to see a better background check procedure. the internet aspect of it, which i need more explanations -- greater explanation of, but look i appreciate their work. and the american people want to do what we can to prevent these tragedies. and there's a lot more that needs to be done particularly in the area of mental health. >> and indeed it does look as though there will be some mental health amendment to this. so preliminary thumbs up for this, it's something you could vote for, you think? >> i've got to give them credit. and i want to look at it, but i'm very favorably disposed. >> okay. finally, big immigration rollout. you've been working on this with your other seven colleagues for the gang of eight. do you have any idea how the white house will respond to this? and have you talked to your conservative colleagues? >> a lot of my conservative colleagues have significant questions, and they're

legitimate. this is a start of a process. this is a vehicle that requires hearings, requires input. and we welcome all of that. i think my other seven colleagues have done a great job. i am guardedly optimistic that we will see finally the end of this long, long trek that a lot of us have been on for many years. >> indeed, senator john mccain, so many issues, never enough time. >> thank you, candy. the emotional toll of the gun debate. >> i can't imagine just -- i can do something. >> when we return, senators joe manchin and pat toomey and their plan to broker a gun deal. and later, he's the face of immigration legislation and a potential 2016 candidate, marco rubio joins me for a look at the immigration bill's future and his own. o one says "easy like monday morning." sundays are the warrior's day to unplug and recharge.

what if this feeling could last all week? with centurylink as your trusted partner, it can. our visionary cloud infrastructure and global broadband network free you to focus on what matters. with custom communications solutions and dedicated support, your business can shine all week long. 8% every 10 years.age 40, we can start losing muscle -- wow. wow. but you can help fight muscle loss with exercise and ensure muscle health.

i've got revigor. what's revigor? it's the amino acid metabolite, hmb to help rebuild muscle and strength naturally lost over time. [ female announcer ] ensure muscle health has revigor and protein to help protect, preserve, and promote muscle health. keeps you from getting soft. [ major nutrition ] ensure. nutrition in charge! it's lots of things. all waking up. connecting to the global phenomenon we call the internet of everything. ♪ it's going to be amazing. and exciting. and maybe, most remarkably, not that far away. we're going to wake the world up. and watch, with eyes wide, as it gets to work. cisco. tomorrow starts here. aaah! aaaaah! theres a guy on the window! do something, dad!

aaaah! aaaah! what is happening? they're rate suckers. their bad driving makes car insurance more expensive for the rest of us. good thing there's snapshot from progressive. snap it in and get a discount based on your good driving. stop paying for rate suckers. try snapshot free at progressive.com. jamie mcmurray: a boy born in joplin, missouri, was fascinated by anything with wheels and a motor. the odds of him winning

both the daytona 500 and the brickyard 400 in the same year? 1 in 195 million. the odds of a child being diagnosed with autism? 1 in 88. i'm jamie mcmurray, and my niece has autism. learn more at autismspeaks.org/signs. [ male announcer ] engine light on?

come to meineke now for a free code scan read and you'll say...my money. my choice. my meineke. my interview with marco rubio is coming up. but joining me now is senator manchin and senator toomey of pennsylvania. you all have put together this bill which includes among other things a way to expand background checks to gun shows. when does it go on the floor? and do you have the votes? >> well, we expect a vote this week. it's not certain as to exactly when. i think wednesday's probably the most likely day for a vote for the manchin/toomey, i think it's an open question as to whether or not we have the votes. >> we're asking, candy, just for our colleagues to read it. we've sent it to all of them. we've give an outline of it, but it's a bill that basically looks

at how we treat our veterans and make sure they're treated the way they should be treated with respect and dignity. how we basically look at violence and commission on mass violence, expertise in mental illness and why we don't do more. this bill basically if you're a criminal and if you've been mentally adjudicated, you might not like it. that's all we're saying. at gun shows, internet sales, commercial transactions is that you should not be able to buy a gun if you've been one of those two categories. >> as both of you know as folks who have had strong backing by the national rifle association in the past, there is still huge resistance in the sense that people think, oh, that you expand background checks, the next thing you know they're going to come back and do this in the federal registry which is explicitly banned under your bill, but there's just this feeling that the federal government is -- this is just the tip of the iceberg. i wanted to read you something

that senator chris murphy said, this was quoted in the "new york times" column in which he said "you are not going to disenfranchise the nra overnight. i think ultimately we will get the assault weapons ban because i don't think this is the last time a man will walk into a crowded place with an ar-15." go ahead. >> first of all, let me be very clear, senator manchin and i are not interested and not willing to support infringing the legitimate rights of law-abiding citizens. this is about whether or not it's reasonable to try to make it more difficult for dangerous people for whom it's already illegal for them to have weapons to obtain them. and i think that's a very reasonable thing. now, there are some people that do want to infringe on second amendment rights. i won't be part of that. but i will be part of trying to make sure criminals and dangerously mentally ill people have a harder time getting guns. >> you understand the fear that's out there. >> sure. it's the unknown. and the fact there's lack of trust. pat and i both come from a gun

culture. both people own guns and go out in the woods and enjoy it all. if you're a law-abiding gun owner, you're going to like this bill. we've clarified a lot of things. you know when people look at you, candy, and they think why do you own a gun? like something's wrong with you. this basically puts it in the proper context people have been trying to do for years. all we're asking for is for them to read it. >> have the events over the past three or four months while congress and the president and everyone has sort of wrestled with what to do, has it changed your mind about the national rifle association? we had governor malloy on last week and he called wayne lapierre a clown, a circus clown. do you all feel differently about the nra and its tactics now than you did prior to all of this? >> what we're seeing is is same as we're seeing in the political arena whether you're a democrat or republican, whether you're elected or running for an office, they're getting caught by different other extreme groups, really extreme groups

putting out falsehood and just outright lies. they're not even addressed in this bill. we have put so much protection in this bill. and we're asking people to read it. it's a shame that a nationally organization such as nra -- and we've talked to them, they're my friends. i've worked with them. my door's still open. if they're not going to be for the bill, we just agree to disagree. but there's things in this piece of legislation that they have been working for many, many years to get and it's here. >> have you changed your mind about the nra and its tactics? >> no. i think this debate in some ways is underscoring just to which extent there is a political polarization, the ak ri moanny that's goaten intten into polit that's unfortunate. but i believe strongly as senator manchin did, if people would read the bill and it's been posted online, it will have been available for a week, i think they'll see it's a very reasonable common sense measure

to keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them. >> let me also talk to you a little bit about the specifics of one thing. and it does allow the transfer of a gun within a family. >> right. >> it does allow gun sales within a family. but there's also something that says private sales. so if i own a shotgun and i want to sell it, my neighbor comes to me and says, oh, i know a guy that's looking for a shotgun. can i sell that shotgun to the neighbor's friend without a background check under your bill? >> all private transactions are exempted. >> that's a private transaction? >> if a commercial sale or commercial establishment such as a gun show, if you're going to a gun show, there should be a background check. current law is if you go to a gun store, you have to have a background check and the gun store keeps it. if you go to a gun show today and you're a licensed dealer, you do the same thing. we're treating everybody the

same. if you buy online, i buy from a gun in pennsylvania and i'm in west virginia -- >> but under this bill i could sell my shotgun to anyone i wanted and that is -- >> private transactions, law-abiding citizens you know, absolutely. >> okay. the other thing is you all have -- do you still even though you have this bill out there understand when folks look at this and say, no, we've got to control those private sales as well because if you don't know the background of the guy you're selling to. >> well, i understand, but i just disagree. i think we need to strike a balance here. strike a reasonable balance that is not too onerous. the vast majority of sales are commercial in nature and they're happening either with dealers or at gun shows. those would be captured. subject to a background check, which 94% of which are completed in three minutes. it's really very reasonable. and it would capture a vast majority of transactions. >> i want to move to the

politics of this. some of which actually were touched upon last night in a "saturday night live" skit. i don't know if you all have been able to see it, but i wanted to play a bit of it. >> these men wish everything for this bill. i mean, senator manchin represents west virginia and he's proposing gun reform? he's going to lose his job. and senator toomey, this man is a republican who is willing to make just the slightest compromise on gun control. he's going to lose his job too. >> either one of you worried about any kind of challenge primary or general? >> let me just say i know pat and i have talked, we came here to do something. we came here to make a difference. if you would have met with the families, the strongest people i've ever met with, the families of the newtown victims, they never asked for anybody to take their guns away. they never asked to repeal the second amendment. they said we're gun owners and we respect and honor all that. we know, and they'll even say, we know that this bill that you're working on will not have

saved our children. we know that. but it might save somebody else's child. i mean, you talk about -- if we just had half the courage they had, candy, just half the courage. yes, i came to do something and i want to do something. >> in 1999 i supported expanding background checks. i just think it makes common sense. and i'll just let the political chips fall the way they fall. >> senator pat toomey from pennsylvania, senator joe manchin from west virginia, thank you both for being here today. >> thanks for having us. >> when we return, immigration advocates push for a bill the gang of eight had won. can they deliver. marco rubio on the bill's chances and his own prospects for 2016. that's next. ♪

[ slap! ] [ male announcer ] your favorite foods fighting you? fight back fast with tums. calcium-rich tums starts working so fast you'll forget you had heartburn. ♪ tum tum tum tum tums you'll forget you had heartburn. and every day since, two years ago, the people of bp made a commitment to the gulf. we've worked hard to keep it. bp has paid over twenty-three billion dollars to help people and businesses who were affected, and to cover cleanup costs. today, the beaches and gulf are open for everyone to enjoy -- and many areas are reporting their best tourism seasons in years. we've shared what we've learned with governments and across the industry so we can all produce energy more safely. i want you to know, there's another commitment bp takes just as seriously: our commitment to america. bp supports nearly two-hundred-fifty thousand jobs in communities across the country. we hired three thousand people just last year.

bp invests more in america than in any other country. in fact, over the last five years, no other energy company has invested more in the us than bp. we're working to fuel america for generations to come. today, our commitment to the gulf, and to america, has never been stronger. your doctor will say get smart about your weight. i tried weight loss plans... but their shakes aren't always made for people with diabetes. that's why there's glucerna hunger smart shakes. they have carb steady, with carbs that digest slowly to help minimize blood sugar spikes. and they have six grams of sugars. with fifteen grams of protein to help manage hunger... look who's getting smart about her weight. [ male announcer ] glucerna hunger smart. a smart way to help manage hunger and diabetes.

joining me now from miami, florida senator marco rubio. senator, thank you for joining us. let me ask you a broad question first. >> good morning. >> as you know, the 1986 immigration reform has been criticized in hindsight as something that only encouraged undocumented workers to come into the u.s. we went from some 3 million undocumented workers in the reagan era, they had immigration

reform, now we're dealing with 11 million. what in this bill is going to ensure that that doesn't happen again? >> well, three things. first of all, universal e-verify system which means you won't be able to find a job in the united states if you can't pass that check. 40% of our immigration are people that enter legally and overstay their visas. we only track when people come in, we don't track when they leave. and third is real border security including fencing. all these three things are going to happen because they are triggers, they are triggers for the green card process that we've described or laying out in our proposal. that's the incentive to ensure they happen. in essence, for those undocumented in this country, not only they'll have to wait more than ten years, they will have to wait until those three things are fully implemented. we think that will be incentive. and an immigration system that works. we don't have a legal way for

people to come here for example temporarily to work on a farm. we're going to have that now. so people aren't going to have to come illegally. it's going to be cheaper and easier to come legally. so i think all these things working together -- none by themselves will do the trick but all working together will ensure we never have this problem again. >> my first question on all of that is the president has said in the past that he didn't want the fate of an undocumented worker to be tied to something beyond their control which would be getting the e-verify system to work, checking on courts and et cetera to find out who's overstayed their visa and border security. do you know that the white house approves of the link that you have here? >> well, they don't. the problem is we have a bipartisan disagreement because i think the bipartisan group of senators gree that should be a trigger and the president disagrees and hopefully we can pass a bill that's in there and if we do he'll have a decision

to make about this. we've learned from experience, if we don't do enforcement, if enforcement is not a part of this and don't modernize legal immigration, if we don't do all these things, we'll be back here in ten years having the conversation all over again. and that would be the worst possible outcome. >> so once you get the e-verify system up and working for all businesses, once you have sort of quantifiable amounts that you can say, yes, the border is secure either because there's this much fence or the enforcement shows that it's up or down or whatever measures you set. how long is that going to take? and how much money is that going to cost? >> well, first of all it will be over ten years because obviously the process doesn't begin immediately. in fact, people can't even start applying for their temporary status until the border plans have been created and funded and begin to implement them. >> right. how long does that take? that's what i mean. >> they have six months to create -- >> how long getting everything secure? >> obviously that whole ten-year

period is something we're looking at. but here's what happens, if the department of homeland security does not secure the border, does not meet that met rix of 100% awareness and 90% apprehension in the first ten years, then it goes to an issue to a commission made up of people that have to live and deal with the border and they will take care of that problem and funded to ensure that happens. if you are legally in the u.s. and you can't apply for this until the plans are in place and they begin to implement them and then you're going to have to pay a fine, an application fee, you're going to have to pass a background check and assuming all of that happens, the only thing you get is a work permit. you don't qualify for any federal benefits including obama care and you're going to have to prove you can sustain and support yourself. you're going to have to be in the system at least ten years plus all these enforcement things happen before we give you access to apply for the legal immigration system. in essence we're not awarding anybody anything. all we're doing is giving people the opportunity to eventually

earn access to our new, improved and modernized legal immigration system. >> so what you're talking about is a ten to 13-year minimum before you can even get a green card. so my question is let me take it from the other side, why bother? if you are in the united states undocumented but you have been able to somehow secure a social security number, you're somehow working, why would you step forward knowing that the next step is unknown when you can take it, when life is okay right now? >> well, life is not okay right now for them because they're living in the shadows. they have to hide. they have to lie. they're worried about getting pulled over and deported because they don't have a driver's license. i mean, you're going to have a legal status to work in the u.s. to pay your taxes and to travel. >> but they can't get that provisional for a while, right? how long before you can get a provisional work visa? >> well, the process doesn't begin until the plans are in place and we give the department of homeland security a number of months to come up with that

plan. at the end of the day people are going to get the legalization if they qualify for it. some people will not qualify for it. but that's why e-verify is so important. you won't be able to find a job. employers are going to now have available to them a legal workforce. there will be no incentive and strong disincentive for them to ignore e-verify and hire someone undocumented. you won't be able to find work in the u.s. if you are not legally here. that's why that e-verify part of it is so important. >> let me read something one of your colleagues mike lee said about immigration and about his discussions with you. what i told marco he said was if we can proceed with this in segments, it would be a lot easier to get it passed and it would be a lot easier for people like me, people in both houses in both parties to vote for it. i see no reason why you have to lump everything in one 1,500-page bill and say it's all or nothing. that's from an interview that senator lee did with politico. is it all or nothing? >> no. first of all, that's my preference too is to have done

that in individual bills. i've argued that in the past. that's not the direction the senate was headed. so i made a decision to try to influence the direction we were headed. but here's what i'm pleased about. even though it's one bill, it is divided up into segments just like senator lee has advocated for and so have i. the fact of the matter is through our negotiations we've been able to keep these segments separate from each other. in essence we haven't had to trade less border security in exchange for a modernized system. we haven't had to make the process. this is going to be a lengthy process. if things go according to plan, people are going to have three to four weeks to read this bill and analyze it before the first markup session, the first amendment process begins at the committee level. we're looking forward to see what suggestions our colleague haves to make the product better. but so far what's been promising about the effort is though it's one bill, it's one bill divided up into pieces, the modernization piece, enforcement and what to do with those undocumented. we've been able to deal with each on their own merits not

having to make trades in order to get something good in exchange for four things that are bad. as long as the product stays that way, it will be defensible. if it goes in the opposite direction, it will be difficult to support it. >> so have you agreed with your seven colleagues that helped put this bill together that you will stick together when amendments come up that, i guess, the majority of you deem to upset the balance? >> well, first of all i have principles on immigration reform. and as long as the bill reflects those principles, i'm going to be supportive of it. if it abandons those principles, obviously i can't. >> have you agreed to stick with your colleagues on that? >> no. i think we've all agreed to protect the principles of bill, but we haven't agreed to ban together to keep anyone from aemding it. there are 92 other senators who have their own ideas about immigration reform who i think frankly can help make this bill better. 92 minds with additional thoughts of how to improve this thing.

there will also be amendments designed as poison pills to doom the bill. i'll oppose those if i know that's what they're for. and i'll look forward to justifying in essence there are people with ideas that used to be my original position on some of these issues and i'm talking hypertechnical issues and i'll tell them the thought process i went through that led them to the point we're at right now. and i think i'll be able to justify every single virtual aspect of this bill. >> more with marco rubio when we return on immigration, guns and a potential run in 2016. >> i'm working on something maybe we'll announce later today. [bell dings] ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, llllet's get ready to bundlllllle... [ holding final syllable ] oh, yeah, sorry! let's get ready to bundle and save.

now, that's progressive. oh, i think i broke my spleen! to prove to you that aleve is the better choice for him, he's agreed to give it up. that's today? [ male announcer ] we'll be with him all day as he goes back to taking tylenol. i was okay, but after lunch my knee started to hurt again. and now i've got to take more pills. ♪ yup. another pill stop. can i get my aleve back yet? ♪ for my pain, i want my aleve.

♪ [ male announcer ] look for the easy-open red arthritis cap. ♪ great first gig! let's go! party! awwwww... arigato! we are outta here! party...... finding you the perfect place, every step of the way. hotels.com

you have certainly been designated it seemed as the face of immigration reform in as far as reasons are concerned, how comfortable are you with your conservative colleagues and you point out that very often you've held the positions they still now hold. >> well, first of all, i'm not the self-appointed anything. i've worked on this bill and i can tell you that i think part of my job is to explain to

people what it is we've worked on, try to justify it and hopefully gain their support. that's what i look forward to doing. i think we have addressed and i have taken into account the concerns that i have and others have about our situation. look, i am not happy. i am not pleased with, i am not in support of the reality that we have 10 or 11 million people in this country undocumented. i wish we didn't have that problem. quite frankly the decisions led to that problem were made when i was in ninth grade. but we do have that problem. we're not talking about bringing in 11 million people undocumented, they are here now. we have four choices, we can leave it the way it is, which is de facto amnesty, we can try to round everybody up and send them back, we can make life miserable so they'll deport themselves, i don't think that works either. or we can try to address it in a way that's responsible but humane. a way that's not unfair to people doing it the right way and doesn't encourage people to do it the wrong way. and i think that's what we've arrived at and i hope we can convince people this is the right approach. >> and this very out front

position that you have -- and i wasn't suggesting you self-appointed, you seem to be the go-to guy for this gang of eight. >> yeah, i know. >> do you think this would help or hurt marco rubio if he perhaps ran for president in 2016? >> you know, i haven't even thought about it in that way. >> seriously, senator? >> most of us who live and breathe -- i haven't. i really haven't. i have a job. my belief has been if i do my job and i do my job well, i'll have options and opportunities in the future to do things whether it's run for re-election, run for something else or give someone else a chance at public service. this is a serious problem in florida. we have i don't know how many millions of people in florida undocumented. it's a serious problem in america. >> my time is running out. i wanted to point out to you that the mayor's coalition that is trying to get stiff gun control out of the u.s. congress has put out an ad that's running in florida that says rubio would "let criminals and the mentally ill get guns without a

background check, 91% of floridians support background checks but rubio's presidential ambitions make florida less safe." will you support the new toomey/manchin compromise on expanding background checks to gun shows? >> to be fair, i haven't read it. so i don't like to comment on things i haven't read, but my position on guns is pretty clear. i believe law-abiding people in the united states have a fundamental constitutional right to bear arms. and i believe criminals and dangerous people should not have access to guns. >> but in general -- >> protects those two things -- but in general the point is many of these gun laws are ineffective. they either infringe on the rights of law-abiding people and do nothing to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people. i'm troubled this debate is about guns. it should be violence. violence is the problem, guns are what they're using. we had a kid build a bomb in a dorm room here recently. the fact of the matter is we have a violence problem in the united states. and we are missing a golden opportunity to have an open, honest and serious conversation

about why it is that we are having these horrific violent acts occurring in our society. because everyone's focused on passing these laws that have proven ineffective and prove ineffective in the future. >> and finally i have to quickly ask you do you believe the honeymoon trip of jay-z and beyonce to cuba violated existing rules on u.s. travel there? >> well, i don't know where they went. if they didn't violate, it exposes the ridiculousness of the laws we have in place. we are allowing people to travel to cuba as tourist. they're delivering hard currency to a tyrannical regime who turns around to oppress his people. i think hypocritical of the people who took that trip because they didn't meet with some of the people that are actually in trouble today. there's a rapper in cuba, a hip hop artist in cuba on a hunger strike and persecuted because he has political lyrics in his songs. i wish they would have met with him. if they wanted to know what was going on in cuba, they should have met with some of the people suffering there not simply smoke cigars and take a stroll down the street. >> senator marco rubio, we thank you for your time.

one correction from me that was actually about the honeymoon trip but anand naid anniversary. thank you so much. we appreciate it. >> thank you. when we return, liberals and conservatives can agree on one thing, they both don't like parts of the president's new budget. [ male announcer ] purpose elevates what we do. raises it to a more meaningful place. makes us live what we do, love what we do and fills our work with rewarding possibility. aarp connects you to a community of experienced workers and has tools to help you find what you're good at. an ally for real possibilities. aarp. go to aarp.org/possibilities.

how old is the oldest person you've known? we gave people a sticker and had them show us. we learned a lot of us have known someone who's lived well into their 90s. and that's a great thing. but even though we're living longer, one thing that hasn't changed: the official retirement age. ♪ the question is how do you make sure you have the money you need to enjoy all of these years. ♪ how did i know? well, i didn't really. see, i figured low testosterone would decrease my sex drive... but when i started losing energy and became moody... that's when i had an honest conversation with my doctor.

we discussed all the symptoms... then he gave me some blood tests. showed it was low t. that's it. it was a number -- not just me. [ male announcer ] today, men with low t have androgel 1.62% (testosterone gel). the #1 prescribed topical testosterone replacement therapy, increases testosterone when used daily. women and children should avoid contact with application sites. discontinue androgel and call your doctor if you see unexpected signs of early puberty in a child, or signs in a woman, which may include changes in body hair or a large increase in acne, possibly due to accidental exposure. men with breast cancer or who have or might have prostate cancer, and women who are or may become pregnant or are breastfeeding, should not use androgel. serious side effects include worsening of an enlarged prostate, possible increased risk of prostate cancer, lower sperm count, swelling of ankles, feet, or body, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing during sleep, and blood clots in the legs. tell your doctor about your medical conditions and medications, especially insulin, corticosteroids, or medicines to decrease blood clotting.

so...what do men do when a number's too low? turn it up! [ male announcer ] in a clinical study, over 80% of treated men had their t levels restored to normal. talk to your doctor about all your symptoms. get the blood tests. change your number. turn it up. androgel 1.62%. before we get to the panel, we inadvertently showed the wrong photograph earlier in the show. it was not senator murphy and we apologize for the error. with me now for sure democratic strategist donna brazile and republican strategist ana

navarro. thank you all. the week that was so infused with emotion and politics and policy was capped off by francine wheeler who delivered the president's saturday morning address. here's a quick part of that. >> in the four months since we lost our loved ones, thousands of other americans have died at the end of a gun. thousands of other families across the united states are also drowning in our grief. please help us do something before our tragedy becomes your tragedy. >> so you hesitate even to use the word lobby when it comes to these families. nonetheless they were up on capitol hill. the president made a show of bringing them back from connecticut. how effective do you think they've been? >> you know, i think they're very effective in sending the message that they want something done. obviously social security symbolism. we all know that nothing in that

bill, the manchin/toomey bill, would address what happened in newtown. >> it is true. they also say, gary, that in fact the families didn't come to ask for anything specific. >> no. they just came to ask for action. i think in that sense they were very effective. in other words they got the debate galvanized. i think what's really striking from their point of view and the point of view of gun control advocates how far back the line has moved here. we're talking about background checks, we're not talking assault weapons bans or limits on magazines. in effect the agenda might move forward but more limited agenda than people really would have thought two months ago i believe. >> in fact, donna, we're not talking universal background checks. private sales can go on without background checks, which certainly senators toomey and manchin hope will bring folks on board. is it any less of a victory if it doesn't have kind of the things we started out talking about, assault weapons ban and limiting the rounds that can be in a magazine? >> well, it's not 100% of what

president obama requested. it's not 100% of what the gun safety people out there would like to see, but it is progress. it's moving in the right direction. look, since newtown, 3,000 americans, more than 3,000 americans have lost their lives due to gun violence. it's important that the senate this week open up this debate allow those amendments to go forward and hopefully come up with some common sense. cannot bring back those kids that were murdered, but maybe save lives in the future. >> forcing all of us as americans to think about this issue in a responsible and comprehensible way. you cannot avoid thinking about this issue of violence and brought up the issue of gun control and brought up the issue of the ammunition. >> see this expand beyond guns over the course of this. >> i think the two senators you had on earlier, manchin and toomey leading some of the ad c

advocacy groups to the site. i think that has to be a good thing in the long run. >> the new republican party as it seeks to reshape its image. marco rubio, who we heard from earlier and republicans trying to get immigration reform off the table. and the other came from senator rand paul who went to howard university to talk to students there. here's a little bit of what he said. >> i came to howard today not to preach or prescribe to you some special formula for you, but to say that i want a government that leaves you alone. my hope is that you will hear me out. you'll see me for who i am and not a caricature sometimes presented by political opponents. >> while all this was going on, the reach out to latinos and senator rand paul and you have to give him credit for going to a place that was not going to be particularly welcoming to a republican of any sort. you have the republican party out in california saying, by the way, we just wanted to recommit

to the fact that the republican party often believes that marriage is between a man and a woman. what is this line they're walking? can any of it work? >> if you look at what the rnc said, let's have a softer message. we did a poll this week, the majority is not in favor of gay marriage right now. in that sense, the party leadership is in line with what the party rank and file want on that particular issue, but that stands apart from immigration and even guns to some extent. >> i think the rnc party leadership. you know, they're not representative of the republican party. there is also a very large and important part of the republican party that follows what rand paul is saying, which is, let's not even focus on these social issues, let's talk about some of the other issues. i think what rand paul was incredibly courageous and smart.

he took unscripted, unfiltered questions from the audience. >> i have to move to another subject. >> no question going to howard university, going to kentucky state university in his hometown. go to the muhammad ali center and go to people in kentucky and come to howard university, an important university, but talk to people back at home about his own civil rights views. >> i have to talk about the president's budget. a budget from the democratic president -- >> price you have to pay if you're president. if you make progress in this town by making everybody angry at you, that's what the president did with that budget. democrats under pressure from the left and the right if they go down this path of trimming entitlements and asking for revenues. but that's the path to a big deal, you don't have any choice. >> this was a game-changing week in washington, i think. we had gun control, bipartisan gun control legislation announced and an immigration, bip immigration deal reached

which will be released shortly. a president that has changed cpi and getting heat -- >> and we had republican senators invited to dinner at the white house. this was new winds blowing in washington. >> but, yeah, i don't know if this will produce the kind of bipartisan compromise the president would like to see on a budget because the republicans are not moving on new taxes. that's what is making so many democrats upset. he's putting everything on the table for the republicans to pick and choose. this is not an ala cart menu. >> he has put on the table change cpi. >> i have to move you along here. donna brazille, as always, thank you so much. when we return, north korea readied celebrations for their biggest holiday as its neighbors brace for a possible military display. the headlines are next. doris taerbaum finished her first marathon at 50.

not everyone peaks in their twenties. throughout their lives. passion keeps them realizing possibilities. an ally for real possibilities. aarp. find tools and support at aarp.org/possibilities. [ female announcer ] from meeting customer needs... to meeting patient needs... ♪ wireless is limitless. ♪ from finding the best way... ♪ to finding the best catch... ♪ wireless is limitless. [ slap! ] [ slap! slap! slap! slap! ] ow! ow! [ male announcer ] your favorite foods fighting you? fight back fast with tums. calcium-rich tums starts working so fast you'll forget you had heartburn.

♪ tum tum tum tum tums how old is the oldest person you've known? we gave people a sticker and had them show us. we learned a lot of us have known someone who's lived well into their 90s. and that's a great thing. but even though we're living longer, one thing that hasn't changed: the official retirement age. ♪ the question is how do you make sure you have the money you need to enjoy all of these years. ♪

returning to our top story. north korea has yet to launch a missile, but it is sticking to its hardline rhetoric. earlier this hour on state of the union, john mccain said the communist nation poses a serious

military threat and that china is the key to easing tensions along the korean peninsula. in japan today, secretary of state john kerry urged north korea to pursue a peaceful end to the crisis. china's reporting two new cases of humans with bird flu. the country now has 51 people infect would the virus, a new strain of bird flu was discovered last month. the world health organization says there's no evidence of human-to-human transmission. so far, 11 people have died. l.a. lakers star kobe bryant will be sidelined for the rest of this nba season and into the next. bryant tore his achilles' tendon friday. he underwent successful surgery saturday, but his injury is expected to take six to nine months to heal. thank you so much for watching "state of the union." i'm candy crowley a in washington. head to cnn.com/sotu for extras and analysis including our getting to know interview with senator joe man.