republicans and the nra. let's play "hardball." good evening, i'm chris matthews in washington. i hope you're having a meaningful good friday and will have a bright and glorious easter sunday. now, get this. the republican party says that marriage consists of one man marrying one woman. how do you explain, or we explain what just happened? five of its men, ted cruz, rand paul, mike lee, marco rubio and jim inhofe just married wayne lapierre. in sickness and in health, until death do us part.

not even that. these five buckaroos won't let the senate vote on a gun safety measures, not even one dealing with better background checks. the hardliners calls it surveillance and want none of it. this is one area where they believe in the right of privacy, darn it, believe in the government's right to know what's going on inside a woman's body, of course, but don't ask if some gun buyer is a nut, a criminal or wife beater. that's his affair and don't forget it. ron reagan, radio talk show host. nia malika henderson for the "washington post." the president made clear many reasons gun control legislation deserved a vote, a vote, not even a vote, just a vote. >> deserves a vote. >> gabby giffords deserves a vote. the family of newtown deserve a vote. the families of aurora deserve a vote.

the families of oak creek and tucson and blacksburg and the countless other communities ripped open by gun violence, they deserve a simple vote. >> well, in a letter to senate majority leader harry reid, five republican senators disagreed. they write, "we the undersigned intend to oppose any legislation that would fringe on american people's constitutional rights to bear arms or exercise this right without being suggested to government surveillance. we'll oppose the motion to proceed to any legislation that will serve as a vehicle for any additional gun restrictions." a filibuster declared. ron reagan, they're not going to fight this thing but make sure nobody gets to vote on background checks. they consider it a privacy matter, apparently. >> there are a couple things going on here. on the political side, of

course, and the least important side, you have marco rubio, rand paul, and ted cruz, three of the five musketeers here, who are really grandstanding and looking ahead to 2016. and these three guys are going to be elbowing their way into each other's limelight for the next three years. so you might as well get used to that. but the more important thing that's going on here has to do with democracy, and how we proceed in this country in a democratic fashion. you've got about nearly 90% of the country that would like at the very least there to be universal background checks on firearm purchases. nearly 90%. that's as close to unanimity as you get in the united states of america, and yet these five individuals have decided that the senate will not even be allowed to vote on something like universal background checks. i don't know how good that's

going to stay, and what kind of stead that's going to stand politically going forward, because it seems to me that there's going to be a backlash against this kind of obstructionism, obvious obstructionism, but we will see. >> you know, nia, i just have to go back to rationality. i always assume rationality in politics. what are they thinking? >> well, they're thinking that if you look at the gop senators in -- it looks like 40 of them have an "a" or a-plus rating with the nra. they only need one extra vote to sustain a filibuster. they're looking at the reality that somebody like max baucus, who's a democrat, probably wouldn't support this legislation. i think that's what they're looking at. they're also looking at a house of probably wouldn't even bring this to the floor. i talked to some pretty high-level house aides -- >> wasn't boehner clapping there for most of the president's rift there? i was watching it. ron, and nia, i was watching boehner.

he was clapping through half of that they deserve a vote, then start to listen to it and sat down. i don't know. >> well, he said, you know, they'll take a look at it. and that doesn't sound like he would bring something to the floor. of course, it would be his decision and cantor's decision. it would have to possibly go through some committees. >> why don't they want a vote? if you're a gun toting nra member, wouldn't you want to get out there with great pride and brio vote against gun control and screw all the other guys by making them vote for it, nail them in their districts? why wouldn't they want to vote? wouldn't they want to be proudly pro gun and make the other guys unproudly anti-gun? wouldn't they want the vote? i don't get this part. >> you would think so, but we do get back to that nearly 90% of the american public wants universal background checks. they can read those polls. they know that. it's more complicated than that. there are people on the democratic side who also are nervous about having to vote for any kind of gun legislation. look at a joe manchin, say, in virginia. harry reid is nervous, about half a dozen or so of his member, seven members or so -- >> if they vote against cloture, if they vote -- this is how it's asymmetric.

if you're a conservative, you're protected from voting maybe too far right. if you're a moderate democrat worried about your red state constituency, you're protected by this. this is good for you, right? >> no, i think, yeah -- >> you can't vote for it. the irony is you can't vote for the right wing filibuster position. >> right. you can't vote for that. you might be able to vote for universal background checks. you probably vote against any amendments involving assault weapons ban. i think the problem is we haven't heard any new voice from any of these discussions. you haven't had a rubio-like figure who is a sort of gateway to the right in terms of immigration. you haven't had that figure around this debate. so it's been very hard for democrats. not only to keep their caucus together, but to get anyone on the republican side, the party of this. >> okay. i think the president's a winner here.

he has -- i was mildly chastising him last night for welcoming back to the fight, because he really turned it over to biden and bloomberg. but he is back in the fight now. isn't this good for him to have, oh, look, i just want a vote. let's hear him back again. he got back into the fight on gun restrictions in a big way surrounded by family members of shooting victims yesterday. it was very dramatic. let's watch the president yesterday. >> less than 100 days ago that happened. and the entire country was shocked. and the entire country pledged we would do something about it and this time would be different. shame on us if we've forgotten. i haven't forgotten those kids. shame on us if we've forgotten. >> how can republicans on the right even deal with that, nia, going down the road? if the president's for a vote and they're against even a vote

after newtown? how do they win that way? >> well, you know, i think the president wins no matter what. even if this goes down, i mean, he has given some of the most compelling speeches of his presidency around this issue, but, again, the reality for republicans is very different in their states. they see this through a very different lens. he hasn't been able to play the inside game with democrats or republicans around this issue. he's been very good -- >> nia, you're right except florida is a normal state. it adds up to a normal state. it's not texas. it's florida. it's a very interesting state where you can easily live there, and it's all kinds of different people. it's not a bunch of right wing gun toting nuts. doesn't have a gun toting history. why would you want to be rubio, being a guy who refuses and has to go out on a campaign stump and talk to regular people and tell them, i don't want the senate to even vote on this gun issue? that we must protect our gun owners? what kind of position is that to run for president?

that's wacky. >> i think rubio can't -- rubio can't decide if he's going to be a moderate guy or tea party guy. he's following behind paul in every instance. this instance paul was out first. you saw rubio sign on later with the drones. it was the same thing. he voted against the violence against women act. he can't really seem to make up his mind whether or not he's going to be an establishment republican or more like a rand paul. >> ron, suppose you're hillary clinton, hillary clinton is on the debating platform or any of the democrats and on the other side of the platform is marco rubio who supports a filibuster against any kind of gun safety. how can you not smash him across the face with this? how can you let him still be standing two minutes later? >> the republicans will be in the same bind they were last time. they'll win primaries but they'll lose the national election. again, 90% of the public is for universal background checks. how good are you going to look in a national primary if you're the guy filibustering national universal background checks here? these three guys, in particular cruz, rand paul, and rubio, are competing against one another to be the young fire brand, young turk of the conservative wing of the republican party. they're all trying to out-conservative one another. >> let's talk about -- i have to

>> happy easter. >> happy easter. >> thank you. happy christmas to you. i meant. happy easter. even better. coming up, here's one reason why republicans are going to have such a tough time courting groups. he just referred to immigrant workers as wet backs. thank you, sir. here's another reason a member of the republican national committee posted an article saying gays live a filthy lifestyle. that was his concern. republicans are not going to win new friends by calling him names. it also doesn't help when you try to stop democrats from voting. we saw how thaw worked in 2012 or didn't work. there they go again. republicans in north carolina right now pushing bills to restrict early voting and sunday voting. anything they can to focus on the other side and keep them from being allowed to exercise their democratic rights.

also, one of the reasons behind the surge in support for same-sex marriage is the very dramatic shift of progressives resistant to the idea of african-americans. there has been a 35-point net swing toward supporting same sex. end sex education. wouldn't you make that connection? yeah, let's have less education for the tours. this is hardball, the place for politics. could only come from nature. discover nectresse™. the 100%-natural no-calorie sweetener made from the goodness of fruit. nectresse™. sweetness naturally.

welcome back to "hardball." more than one republican has recently suggested it's time for the gop to stop being the stupid party. well, less than two weeks after the party's autopsy conceded they need to reach out to women, gays, and minorities, a republican member of the united

states congress violated the new don't be stupid rule using a racial slur in a video interview. longtime alaska congressman don young used a derogatory term, wetbacks, to refer to immigrants who worked on his family ranch. >> my father had a ranch. we used to hire 50 to 60 wetbacks, and pick tomatoes. you know, it takes two people to pick the same tomatoes now. it's all done by machine. >> i can tell by the way he said that with such delight, he didn't know it was a bad word, but it is. in a statement released overnight the 79-year-old congressman tried to explain himself. he said in part "i used a term that was commonly used in my days growing up on a farm in central california. i know that this term is not used in the same way nowadays. i meant no respect." i don't think he called people who were that that. just guessing. anyway, after tough statements today including one from john

boehner, the speaker, reince priebus, young issued a full apology saying "i apologize for the insensitive term i used during an interview in ketchikan, alaska. there was no malice in my heart or intent to offend. that word and the negative attitudes that come with it should be left in the 20th century. all the way up to 1999. "i'm sorry this shifted our focus away from comprehensive immigration reform." i'm not sure how the rnc reboot is supposed to go. not this way. david corn is washington bureau chief for "mother jones." raul reyes writes for nbc latino. raul, i don't know what to make of this, except i'll just say in very modest defense of this guy, he doesn't know what he's doing. he's a bit older and using a term which obviously you never called somebody a wetback to their face. >> we hope not. >> it was a term used by owners about the people working on their ranch. but he obviously didn't ever talk to any of the help. he just talked about them.

apparently. your thoughts? >> right, well, you know, the thing that really struck me, he did by the end of the day issue the full apology, but it shouldn't take a whole day before this happens. and even when he says, let's leave this word in the last century, to be honest, that's a word that didn't have a place in the last century, either, because it is so offensive to hispanics, to immigrants and it's something that really deeply offends latinos. i can tell you, there's very few times where i feel comfortable speaking for the whole community, so to speak, but this is one of them. this is something that is a huge turnoff to latinos and it's exactly, obviously, exactly what the republican party does not need right now when they're trying to re-brand themselves. >> let's take while you're on leer, and i'll get all purposes, david corn. it seems to me it is generational. i was looking at a new poll this week, today i was studying, that showed among people under 30, the millennials, they are really diverse conscious. they don't have, for instance, in the backroom when people are listening, over a beer, it's much more a natural thing to be

positive about other groups, don't you notice? or what do you think? >> absolutely. the interesting thing, also, you know, younger people, they don't see the color like the older generation does. but also, you know, the sensitivity is better. it's higher because they live in a different society. they live in a changing united states. and that's what the republicans are very slow to adapt to. >> do you think it's better, do you think kids who are not latino who are anglo, not everybody is an anglo, north americans, whatever you want to call them, do you think they are more sensitive just by company, just by keeping company? in other words, diverse rooms, diverse communities, diverse classrooms, diverse whatever, does, in fact, make people better in terms of relationships? >> yeah. oh, yes. correct. because, you know, when you're interacting with people on a

daily basis obviously you don't have divide. it's also when you have personal relationships, you see that -- we have more in common than we have different among us. >> you're so smart. you're so smart. >> this makes me think -- >> you are. i'm not being condescending. that's the key thing. we have more in common than we know. >> that's a good question. i keep thinking the republican party still is stuck in 19 -- >> if there's nobody in the room, a latino name or background, nobody is going to raise their hand and say, don't say that. >> they're stuck in 1950s. congressman don young saying that was a term -- >> as recently as 1999. >> that's a big problem they have with the attitudes toward women and the changing demographics. the other thing is because -- >> the pill between the knees, that one? >> all that stuff. they gerrymandered their districts so that their districts, themselves -- >> are claustrophobic. >> they're white, they have the same sentiment, and they're people who also want to go back to 1950. so it's easy to see a lot of these guys say, well, you know, no one back home would be mad at

me for saying this word because -- they have done this to themselves. they have ghettoized themselves. >> we're going to have a country, by the way, that's going to be like they say about the west bank, raul, like swiss cheese. there's going to be different communities clustered around their own thinking. look at michigan today where republican national committeeman is rejecting calls for his resignation. posted an offensive article on his facebook page wednesday called "everyone should know these statistics on homosexuals which include part of the agenda is to get the public to affirm their filthy lifestyle. this is a guy representing the whole state. homosexuals account for half the murders in large cities. that second point there which is so ludicrous, i don't know what the murder rate is among gay people. i bet it is slightly lower than the straight. the idea that half the murders, given the number of about 6% of the population, that they kill half the people is so ludicrous that even the biggest -- in the world probably don't want to

think about this. your thought about this. this is really weird. >> i don't think on this that the republicans we hear a lot about their messaging problem. i think part of their messaging problem in this instance, and also up in alaska, is they are very slow to realize that they make these comments on an obscure radio station, or they post something on their facebook, and the next day or that day, it's all over the word. they just don't recognize the power of social media and what they say even off the cuff goes everywhere. it just seems like these things keep happening again and again and they keep putting their foot in their mouth. >> it's one thing when a progressive points out a republican party. this is coming up right now on the place for politics.

ha! back to "hardball." now to the big sideshow tonight. first, republicans have argued that the cancelation of those white house tours is an obama

gimmick that has nothing to do with sequester. so this a.m., fox news weighed in with a solution. >> the federal government spending apparently $350 million for planned parenthood-style sex education programs in western states including montana, idaho, oregon, alaska, for sex education programs starting now in kindergarten. >> remember the sequester was all about, it's going to end everything, we're going to have to close the white house tours, going to have to close small airport towers and things like that. so they did that and a whole other list of thing, yet they're able to find $350 million for this program. >> you know how long that would keep the white house tours going? >> 20 years? >> 100 years. >> no way. >> 100 years the white house could be open for as long as us and our grandchildren would be around. >> was this really a zero-sum situation? do you really have to choose between sex ed out in the country and white house closing its doors? i don't think so. next, former republican senator alan simpson, love this guy, says his party needs to stop letting the religious right rule the party positioned on issues like abortion rights and gay marriage.

here's what he said to "the l.a. times." "you're a republican, you believe in get out of my life and the precious right to privacy, the right to be left alone. well then, pal, i don't care what you do. you can go worship the great eel at night, but don't mess with me and take a position i have and wrap religion around it." remember when rick perry said this about the possibility of texas seceding from the union? >> texas is unique. when we came in the union in 1845, one of the issues is we would be able to leave if we decided to do that. we've got a great union. there's absolutely no reason to dissolve it, but if washington continues to thumb their nose at the american people, you know, who knows what may come out of that. >> governor perry eventually stopped with that secession talk but not everyone in the state backed off with him.

check out the latest pitch from secession from a group called the texas nationalist movement. >> thanks for being with us. coming up next, "your business" with j.j. ramberg. you'll never go back to a regular manual brush. its three cleaning zones with dynamic power bristles reach between teeth with more brush movements to remove up to 100% more plaque than a regular manual brush. and even 76% more plaque than sonicare flexcare in hard to reach areas. oral-b deep sweep 5000 power brush. life opens up when you do.

by the armful? by the barrelful? the carful? how about...by the bowlful? campbell's soups give you nutrition, energy, and can help you keep a healthy weight. campbell's. it's amazing what soup can do.