e.j., for the night that that becomes true. e.j. dionne, thank you very much for joining me tonight, helping me out. the republican war over war. let's play "hardball.." good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. let me start with this predictable situation in iraq. didn't common sense tell us that the people we dumped from power over there in 2003 would act to get it back the moment we left? it was common sense and that's what we are seeing happen. we have to stop saying owe prize surprised we are by everything in the worldful malaki sticks with his own crowd in iraq, that's not a surprise. it's common sense. the people who we dumped with our invasion of 2003 stick together now in rying to

overthrow malaki, that's not a surprise. it's what you would expect. just as being a democrat was no guarantee it had the common sense to oppose the iraq war in 2003 being a republican is no guarantee you think the war makes sense today. rand paul, one of the strongest candidates for 2016 is leading an insurgency in the gop against another military campaign in iraq. he says the united states has no clear cut interest in getting involved in an iraqi civil and sectarian war. harold fineman from the huffington post and david corn is the washington bureau chief for mother jones both are msnbc contributors. yesterday on "meet the press" senator rand paul took after former vice president dick cheney and his discredited case for war in iraq. an abc dick cheney hit back. let's watch both. >> do you think dick cheney is a credible are critic of the president? >> i think the same questions could be asked of those who

supported the iraq war. were they right in their predictions? were there weapons of mass destructions there? the war was sold on that. was the war won in 2005 when many people said it was won? they didn't understand the civil war that would break out. >> rand paul and by my standards as i look at his philosophy is basically an isolationist. it didn't work in the '30s. it won't wosh this the aftermath of 9/11 when 19 guys armed with airline tickets and box cutters came from afghanistan to kill 3,000 of our citizens. >> bringing up hit -- hitler again. every time. the differences between a war we have been and whether to go back in again -- >> wait one second. he's bringing up 9/11 as well. we are not in iraq because of 9/11. he's back to the same bag of tricks. conflating the war in iraq with a response to 9/11.

wmds, a connection with al qaeda. all that disproven. i'm surprised his people let him go on tv to talk this way. he's delusional. >> we're not booking him. somebody keeps booking him. he and wolfowitz and these guys get regular bookings. let's get to the fundamental question. it seems the republican party is doing something it never did in 2004. when you had -- any time ron paul dared to question -- >> he was practically booed off the stage. >> rudy giuliani would be like a vampire going at him. >> better late than never. republicans are having the debate they didn't care are have in the early parts of the last decade. dick cheney didn't answer the questions there. they were implicit in rand paul's critique. rand paul wasn't call names or shouting about world war ii or 9/11.

he very practically said did we understand there would be a civil war there. are we safer than we were? did the war end in 2005? he was asking logical, straight ahead questionses that any sensible person in either party or no party would ask. dick cheney comes back with the name calling. comes back with you're an isolationist. just like hitler in the '30s. >> like 9/11. >> what dick cheney doesn't understand and a lot of republicans including rand paul understand is that kind of name calling an easy route to political superiority the bush/cheney administration used a decade ago won't work now and won't work even in republican primaries. >> let me try something. it wasn't just the idealogues, the freedom agenda people, the bush crowd, the neo-cons and the cheney crowd that got us in the war. it was people that went along with them. there were business republicans,

regular republicans who just wanted lowered taxes and less government. they wept along with that. why? maybe because republicans do troop along. they are more regular than democrats. they like to follow the leader. howard said it. that mentality of follow the guys like dick cheney is over. >> we remember what it was like a year, two years after 9/11. they got that war because they played on fear. you know, the smoking cloud, a mushroom cloud. the smoking gun being a mushroom cloud and all that. it was fear driven to get the public on their side. having gotten one success, one bite of the apple and creating a disaster now the public at large is skeptical. republicans whether they believe it or because of politics won't go for this again. >> why doesn't he just say he's on the big television shows on sunday. why not say, you know what, we have interests about israel, oil.

there are a lot of reasons we don't want a feeding ground or a training ground for terrorists. we give the specifics. these are reasonable arguments. i don't agree with them all put together. anybody who dares to disagree with me is an appeaser. >> he doesn't understand that kind of debate will happen this time around. as david said, theys used the fear card successfully a decade ago. now if we are to continue with this, if we are going to argue that isis is a real threat and so on and so forth, people will want to hear the real reasons. what are then reasons here and the nature of the republican parties has changed. it's more of a grassroots primary oriented party and less of a salute, who's next in line thing. by the way, there is nobody next in line in the republican party which is what gives rand paul and people like him a chance to really have an impact this time around. >> let's look at this interesting conversation yesterday.

senator paul gave a personal answer to david gregory's question on "meet the press" about the u.s. role in iraq. this is a great back and forth. >> do you see a clear cut american interest in iraq? >> i look at it on a personal basis. i ask if i want to send one of my sons or your son to fight. yeah, these are nasty terrorists, shouldn't we want to kill them. but who should want to stop them more? maybe the people who live there. the shiites, the malaki government. should not they stand up? if they are ripping off the uniforms and fleeing? if they don't think mousul is worth saving how do icon vince my son or yours to die for it? i'm not sure where the clear cut american interest is. >> pretty sound response. good question. >> good answer. it's a populist response. the local level.

it's not about the grand ideas about remaking the middle east and the theoretical abstractions that the neo-cons and others pushed for years. do you want your son to die for this? we lost 4500 american men and women. over 200,000 dead iraqis. there is a real exhaustion. we have seen the cost for the exercise to go in led by people who would say there is noen reason to worry. >> funny that dick cheney never asked this question of himself. maybe during the vietnam war which he supported he had five deferments. >> there is a basic divide here. between people who see war and foreign policy as a giant chessboard the to move around the pieces. i don't usually agree with rand paul, but those who see it in human cost and advantages. that's what we are seeing here. dick cheney will never talk about what you paid to get what you got in iraq. >> he never really talked about the people in hospitals now either. >> it's not a question of exhaustion. this isn't really about the

american people's disgust with ten years of war there. the question now is what rationale is there for what we want to do? the american people would be willing to accept some level of involve arement in an international context if it were honestly explained to them what the heck is at stake here? when the president says we are not going to play whack a mole in the region that isn't helpful either. what are we about here? are let's have a real discussion of it. we never really had it in a broad-based way a decade ago. now is the time if we are going to do anything long range in that region. and dick cheney wants to short circuit the debate. i think rand paul, to his credit, wants it to be a center piece of his candidacy -- >> thinking the whole weekend what would i do if i could call the shot.

it's a tough one. malaki knows what he's doing getting in bed with iran and the shia. >> to preserve his place. >> they are going to their people. >> people are following their interests and we talk about pressuring malaki to make him more inclusive while shia clerics are sending volunteers to the front. he's taking no steps. he can turn to iran and it's a big open question. >> remember, to get to your point you made a second ago it's not what the american public is willing to do. you have to show them there is something that can be done that has a connection to positive outcomes. >> whether he like it or not though it wasn't his war to begin with for better or worse the president has to explain this and ignore that noise from

dick cheney and speak to the american people if there is an interest to pursue here. >> explain it -- why there isn't. >> stand in front of a map and point to the map and say, here is what's going on over there. that would be a start. my question is the question of if we get theres as advisers, 300 guys there now. and the shia militia start massacring people we'll be responsible. >> we'll be responsible. >> when i hear advisers we are old enough to remember advisers a generation ago. >> are they back at the barracks? >> aren't they supposed to be? we'll see. >> how do you advise if you don't go into the fighting? >> unlike johnson or kennedy, i think obama having had the lesson of vietnam doesn't want us involved in the shoot ing there because we end up shooting sunnis who aren't part of isis. >> of course. >> and the sunnis will hate us. this has been a rambunctious discussion.

we are all upset about the situation we are in now. thank you, howard and david. coming up -- the republican party is finally in the debate. the question of hillary clinton's awareness when it comes to talking about her wealth, anybody's wealth, first it was the phrase "dead broke" shes used. now she's not truly well off like some people. this is an opening for rivals. i think some of the concern is real. some isn't. plus, mississippi churning. two weeks ago the tea party looked dead for the year. then came eric cantor's defeat. now the tea party looks ready for another big one tomorrow taking down six-term senator thad cochran. then they will go for more wins in tennessee and kansas. and how same sex marriage moved from the fringes of respectability to the main stream with the help of the legal odd couple coming here. david boyes and todd olsson. heroes they are. what an honor. what do yogurt and yoga have in common?

who knows but a misheard question turned into a lecture on the benefits of yogurt. this is "hardball," the place for politics. people join angie's list for all kinds of reasons. i go to angie's list to gauge whether or not the projects will be done in a timely fashion and within budget. angie's list members can tell you which provider is the best in town. you'll find reviews on everything from home repair to healthcare. now that we're expecting, i like the fact i can go onto angie's list and look for pediatricians. the service providers that i've found on angie's list actually have blown me away. find out why more than two million members count on angie's list. angie's list -- reviews you can trust. woman: what do you mean, homeowners insurance doesn't cover floods? [ heart rate increases ] man: a few inches of water caused all this? [ heart rate increases ] woman #2: but i don't even live near the water. what you don't know about flood insurance may shock you --

including the fact that a preferred risk policy starts as low as $129 a year. for an agent, call the number that appears on your screen. new poll numbers on the 2016 presidential race and the key battleground state of iowa. let's check the score board. hillary clinton leads rand paul by six points in iowa. clinton leads paul ryan by six. clinton's lead over huckabee, seven points. clinton 44, christie 36. look at this against jeb bush. supposedly the safe establishment pick. clinton by 13. clinton's 49, bush at 36. and he's the favorite? we'll be right back.

but your erectile dysfunction - it could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or any allergic reactions like rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about experiencing cialis for daily use and a free 30-tablet trial.

welcome back to "hardball." hillary, we might have a problem. when she launched her book tour media blitz in an interview with diane sawyer hillary clinton came under fire for these remarks about her finances. >> we came out of the white house not only dead broke but in debt. we had no money when we got there. we struggled to, you know, piece together the resources for mortgages for houses, for chelsea's education. you know, it was not easy. >> yesterday in an interview with the british guardian newspaper she was asked if her personal wealth could be a liability in 2016 considering income inequality will be a top issue for democrats in the race. this was her response. "people don't see me as part of the problem because we -- bill and i -- pay ordinary income tax, unlike a lot of people who are truly well off, not to name names. we have done it through hard work."

comments like those set off alarm bells that clinton could have a problem connecting with the average voter in 2016. today's washington post spelled it out. some democrats have begun to panic fearing clinton's personal wealth and cloistered lifestyle could jeopardize the democratic party's edge with the middle class that powered obama's wins. the former south carolina democratic party chairman told the newspaper she's generating an imperial image. no less than three advisers to president obama anonymously expressed concerns. here's one. she seems completely out of touch and elitist said one. another, most people can't fix problems by giving $200,000 speeches. that is a vulnerability. here is still a third.

it will be a massive issue for her said a third adviser. asked what democrats should do, the adviser said, "panic." ryan grim is the washington bureau chief for the huffington post and the national reporter with the post. nia, i was looking at the post. i couldn't believe the headline about some democrats worry clinton's wealth and imperial whatever image could be a problem for 2016. that's a strong statement to put on the front page of the newspaper. what do you make of it? >> it is. it's timely. hillary clinton has been rolling out the book tour. now this is the second major gaffe around wealth. she hasn't figured out after several tries, hasn't figured out a way to talk about wealth. we know the democrats are in a position and even republicans, too, where populism is the rage. there is a lot of concern and talk on the progressive side about income equality. so it's reasonable, i think, to put this question to hillary clinton and figure out if her wealth will be a problem for the democratic party.

if we flashback to 2004, you remember john kerry also had something of a problem with his wealth. he was worth something like $200,000 because his wife was wealthy. you saw republicans' attempts to paint him as a wind surfing flip flopper. you see them early on trying to the cast hill clinton in a similar way. >> this is what we do in politics. you try to make the other side the la-di-da. everybody loves george bush senior. remember he said do you want coffee? he said, i'll have a splash. people ridiculed him. it was so country club. he went to the supermarket. he didn't know what the scanner looked like. he ordered sweat socks. there was the great george appley who didn't know. it is early to nail her this quickly. what are your thoughts.

>> once the narrative is set with bush senior, she runs the risk of oh this. she should stay away from personal narrative and stick to inequality issues. it doesn't work for her. her daughter who makes $600,000 a year to be a journalist won't have to pay estate taxes. you don't have to open that debate. she said, yes e we have been fortunate but we grew up middle class. bill clinton was less than middle class. we'll fight for these certain policies rather than trying to say it was tough to cobble together mortgages, plural. >> i have seen people deal with this. jay rockefeller came to the women's press club dinners where

they have a new guy, new woman. he said, don't feel bad if it cost you $75 to come. he said, it cost me $12 million. that's what he paid in the first campaign. kennedy said about his father -- a phony letter saying don't spend more money than you have to. i'm not paying for a landslide. there have been ways politicians have shucked off the charge of being well off. little lord fauntleroys. can hillary clinton do it or is she too middle class to know the old makeup trick? >> bill clinton did it in his 2004 speech. he talked about when he was in office republicans didn't like him much. when he was out of office and made money they liked him and gave him tax breaks that middle class folks had to foot the bill for. that was one waybill clinton did that. but he didn't have to run for

president with the kind of riches that hillary clinton will have to run with and explain. again, you saw in some ways they tried to do this with obama that he liked arugala or something. there are attempts to paint elite is and out of touch. she has to focus on policy. not talk about her own wealth. not try to make it okay or make it seem like she is anything but a wealthy woman. >> i wonder and i want to get back to this. this is basic. why do people want to be fooled? if they notice a person is better off and they are making $200,000 a speech and are accumulating wealth and they have degrees from yale law and they are elected from the senate to new york, become secretary of state, this amazing success why do people expect them to act like it didn't happen. don't act like you went to yale, like you're a senator, secretary

of state. pretend you're like us. you know then it's a fraud. why do people want to be victims of fraud. why do they want prince charles with new guineans dancing in native gowns? why don't we accept them as they are and stop making them like us. i don't know the answer why we want them to be frauds to us. if she's elitist, let her be. >> i don't think people do want that. i think people would be fine with the with jay rockefeller line. people understand that there is a lot of inequality there. they understand the clintons have done well and live comfortably. what they want is just an honest admission of of the fact. you got yours, great. she's fighting for everybody else. they don't need are you to be carrying a lunch pail to work if you don't have to. >> do you agree? that's smart.

>> i think that's right. i think for voters there is something aspirational about voting. when people want to pick presidents there is a common theory that you can be governed by 200 names in the phone book. but it's usually the harvard or yale granule watt who rises to the top and people vote for. you see it every turn on the presidential campaigns. they want to hang out at the bowling alley or talk about the hard knock life. you saw biden do it today. >> he did. >> at the working families summit. he talked about his own wealth and did it in a way that's probably a bit more effective than hillary clinton saying he didn't have a savings account. he doesn't have stocks or bonds. i think he does have a savings account. >> geared toward the working class. vice president joe biden appeared to criticize by implication hillary clinton by playing up the fact that he was close to zero connection to wall street.

he said he doesn't even have a savings account. a savings account. here he is, average joe. >> the first thing you will say is look at bide . he has a mildly expensive suit on. [ laughter ] >> he's vice president of the united states of america. he's the poorest man in congress but makes a lot of money as vice president of the united states. and i do, by the way. i do. don't hold it against me that i don't own a single stock or bond. i have no savings account but i have a good pension and a great salary. [ applause ] for real. >> what he's saying is the 200 he makes is what hillary makes in an hour. he's obviously working against her type. thank you. it's interesting to watch the shadow boxing.

ryan grim, nia-malika henderson. thank you. what happens next when a politician is asked about kwo ga and goes off about yogurt. they are different. this is "hardball," the place for politics. we're moving our company to new york state. the numbers are impressive. over 400,000 new private sector jobs... making new york state number two in the nation in new private sector job creation... with 10 regional development strategies to fit your business needs. and now it's even better because they've introduced startup new york... with the state creating dozens of tax-free zones where businesses pay no taxes for ten years. become the next business to discover the new new york. [ male announcer ] see if your business qualifies.

welcome back. time for the sideshow. first up, former illinois congressman joe walsh had broadcast issues. he was kicked off his own radio show for using racial slurs. it began when he was discussing the controversy surrounding the washington redskins. it began testing what derogatory terms he could get away with on the air. his show cut to commercial. that didn't stop the republican. he began a twitter rant saying, the station keeps cutting me off. i don't know why. then just got kicked off the air until further notice. tried to have honest discussion about racist terms and management censored my language. a.m. 560 said, quote, during the segment joe inintended to cite several common racial slurs as examples. a.m. 560 has a policy of not

using certain words on the air that are highly inflammatory and offensive. next up, former d.c. mayor marion barry was here. he talked about his new book "mayor for life" afterward. he was out promoting a book when a misheard question took a weird turn. a journalist asked mayor barry about the tax under consideration on yoga studios. he responded by saying, yogurt is more healthy than a lot of things, as is cottage cheese. the best kind of yogurt is organic without all those fillers and stuff. the question was about yoga, not yogurt. in barry's defense the huffington post said it was very noisy. his book "mayor for life" is a great read if you want a raw look at racial politics in the nation's capital. finally, politicians were out having fun this weekend. mayor bill deblasio of new york and his family participated in the mermaid parade on coney island.

there was a picture of him, his wife and children in their under the sea garb. joe biden hosted his annual media picnic on saturday. here you can see him planning a water gun attack with his grandchildren along for the fun. a reporter for the associated press tweeted out a picture of biden armed with a water gun. the caption read, the vice president of the united states just shot me with a super soaker. maybe we need background checks for these things. up next, the tea party may be on the verge of another victory in mississippi. there could be more coming. that's ahead. you're watching "hardball," the place for politics. [ grunting ]

i'm taking off, but, uh, don't worry. i'm gonna leave the tv on for you. and if anything happens, don't forget about the new xfinity my account app. you can troubleshoot technical issues here. if you make an appointment, you can check out the status here. you can pay the bill, too. but don't worry about that right now.

okay. how do i look? ♪ thanks. [ male announcer ] troubleshoot, manage appointments, and bill pay from your phone. introducing the xfinity my account app. [ female announcer ] f provokes lust. ♪ it elicits pride... incites envy... ♪ ...and unleashes wrath. ♪ temptation comes in many heart-pounding forms. but only one letter. "f". the performance marque from lexus.

here's what's happening. president obama spoke earlier at the first ever working families summit at the white house. he said 20th century families deserve 20th century workplaces with paid parental lead. welcome back. a few weeks ago the tea party's obituary was being written as the republican establishment was on a roll. besting tea party challengers all over the country. then two things happened. first chris mcdaniel forced six term republican thad cochran into a run off. then conservative radio host laura ingram and mark divine challenged david brat to a stunning win over eric cantor in virginia.

now the tea party has momentum. back down in mississippi where they hope they can beat the 76-year-old thad dock ran in tomorrow's primary run-off. in the new poll out today shows mcdaniel headed into tomorrow's run-off election with an eight-point lead over thad cochran, the incumbent. the post writes while thad cochran stumps on years of bringing federal spending back to mississippi the mcdaniel campaign has tapped into a feeling that the country is slipping away. his bet, more voters will turn out for a revolution than highway spending. sam hall the clarion ledger of jackson, mississippi. and amy kramer is a tea party activist. thank you both. speak your minds. sam, what's the feeling among tea party people that animates them most today? >> i think there is genuine anger now at what they perceived as some of the dirty tactics the

docken ran tam pain is doing reaching out to democratic voters. they feel they are inviting them into the primary and it wouldn't be an accurate reflection of who should be the party nominee. i think that's what's really driving them now. they have -- they found energy in every controversy that should have hurt mccdaniel. i think it helped him going to the nursing home home thing and the three mcdaniel folks locked in a white house. they are thriving over the controversies. >> amy, does it bother you that thad cochran is going after the black vote? >> no. it's a sign of desperation. you have a senator that's been in washington for 42 years. it's time for him to leave. the fact of the matter is the tea party movement weren't right on the issues and didn't have the bootses on the ground you wouldn't have this run off tomorrow. the fact that we are even here speakses to the strength of the movement.

chris, it's bigger than just mississippi. it's this anti-incumbent mentality across the nation. >> i agree. what did you think when you heard eric cantor was knocked off by ten points? a big upset. he was slam banged out of office. what did you think when that happened? >> i was shocked at first. i was not expecting it like everybody everyone else. it shows the people are fed up. that's part of the problem. on both sides of the aisle. these politicians go to washington with and they forget why they went to washington and who they represent. they become disconnected and become more caught up with the power and control and staying on the d.c. cocktail circuit than actually representing the people that sent them there. so the fact that eric cantor lost that seat, i think that had a big part of it. i mean, there are other issue that is come into play there. i was shocked as everyones else.

>> let me ask you, sam. . the people of mississippi when they society in the primary run-off, are they aware they are part of rolling thunder starting with cantor and going into this and on to kansas and tennessee and perhaps knocking off roberts or knocking off lamar alexander? do they know they are part of a national thing amy mentioned? >> oh, yeah. absolutely. i think especially on the tea party side. in this three-week run-off period, cochrane's campaign and his supporters doubled down. their efforts are night and day compared to what they were doing during the primary. there is a fight on one side with the tea party and mcdaniel supporters who are part of the movement. they are excited and genuinely grassroots energized. on the other side, it's a lot of the establishment but also a lot of the elected officials on both sides of the aisle who are desperately trying to hold onto seniority in congress. mississippi has enjoyed a long history of having senior

congressmen or senators in powerful positions. thad cochran represents the last of that. if he were voted out mississippi would find itself without real seniority in potash washington for the first time in a long time. >> amy, i think they should vote on a war and not let the president decide everything. when you get rid of the guys in there now and he's 76 and you bring in younger guys how will you make them any different? big spending is a problem. deficit spending, debt. what is he going to cut, get rid of? what do you want him to do as a standard of whether to keep the job or not now that you've got it? >> that's a big part of this. we have to hold them accountable. why we are in this situation is because for years we have been electing people and sending them to washington with blind trust. now once we elect them we have

to hold them accountable. if they don't do exactly what they promised to do when they went there, then they need to be voted out and come home as well. everything needs to be on the board. we need to re-evaluate all of the big departments with huge budgets. >> what would you get like a -- we run deficits every year. what do you get rid of? name something because if you want to cut down the deficit down to balanced budget you have to get rid of something big the government does now. as a tea partier and a spokesman for them, what are you willing to get rid of that the government shouldn't do more of? name it. >> kwo speak for everyone in the tea party. i'm representing my own views. i think we need to look at the defense department. i think we need to look at the department of education. that's one of the most bloated departments in the federal government. when you have a department of education that does not have one

schoolhouse, one principal, one student and they are taking in all of these billions of dollars, that money needs to go back to the states where it belongs and let the teachers and the parents determine what's best for students. because what's best for kids in georgia is not the same thing as in alaska or hawaii. >> okay. most of the money that goes into defense goes to forces. paying salaries, incentives, dealing with health challenges, beg wounded in action. are you going to reduce the level of the united states military? that's how you save money. everything else is just talk. >> that's not true. i want to say we need to take better care of troops and veterans. >> how do you do that with less money? >> these contract crack tors. you have projects being paid for twice. it's who you know and who gets the contracts and whatnot. we need to look at all of that across the board. >> you know, i know how you get around the arguments but the bottom line is the federal government has to stop doing stuff it's doing if it's going to get smaller. like anything else.

you don't get around it by trimming the edges and stuff. you're talking about force levels. look it up in the budget. >> it's not going to be easy, chris. >> amy, i'm rooting for anybody who gets involved in american politics is on my side. go look at the federal budget and see where the money is going. then you will know more. thank you sam hall and amy kremer. we'll be right back after this. over 400,000 new private sector jobs... making new york state number two in the nation in new private sector job creation... with 10 regional development strategies to fit your business needs. and now it's even better because they've introduced startup new york... with the state creating dozens of tax-free zones where businesses pay no taxes for ten years. become the next business to discover the new new york. [ male announcer ] see if your business qualifies.

up next, a legal will odd couple that's made same-sex marriage main stream in this country. "hardball" is back after this.

we're back. together washington power lawyers david boyes and ted olsson won a crucial case in the fight for marriage equality, teaming up to overturn prop 8 a california ballot measure in 2008 to ban same-sex marriage in that state. boyes and olsson were unlikely allies. 14 years ago they were on opposite sides of the most politicized supreme court case in recent american history -- bush v. gore. boyes as a democrat represented al gore and olsson represented the vick tors use are george w. bush. in 2009 they found a common cause in the fight for marriage equality.

a cause that's made great progress over the last ten years in the united states. today 19 states allow same-sex marriage. in 23 stateses, bans on same-sex marriage are being challenged. eight states have had their bans on same-sex marriage ruled unconstitutional. four are on hold pending appeal. david boyes and ted olsson have teamed up to tell the story of their victory in "redeeming the dream, the case for marriage equality" and in a documentary film on hbo tonight "the case against 8." here is a clip from the doc. >> when we announced it, one of the people at the press conference stood up and said how can we trust what you are doing if you're doing it with ted olsson. >> there was reaction among conservatives that i was a traitor to conservative beliefs. >> it really is a betrayal of everything that ted olsson has purported to stand for. >> i don't know what happened to ted olsson. i have no clue. ted used to be one of us.

>> so many of your fellow conservatives are on the other side of the issue. >> i haven't had a chance to talk with them all yet. >> joining us now, david boies and ted olsson. you're heroes to the country. why did you take on. >> i grew up in california, stunned by what california did to their own citizens. all the diversity that exists in california and the tolerance that californians have for persons of different views or persons of different races seemed to me wrong. when i was asked to do it, i thought there was something i could do about it. >> the old line from mr. cool dooley is it follows the election returns. the changing public opinion, 27% for same-sex back in '96 to 55% today. actual doubling of support for same-sex marriage had something to do with how the courts reacted? >> i think it's part of the atmosphere the courts operate in.

i don't think the courts follow the election polls. i think what the courts do is do consider the whole context when an issue comes in front of it, in terms of how they decide but even more important when they decide. >> i think the idea of marriage is such an interesting idea because marriage is part of our culture. marriage is probably -- could primordial for all we know. we mate and may mate for life. who knows what the anthropology is. gay marriage is something that was new to a lot of people. the very idea of it. what do you think broke through is. >> what broke through -- >> people saying -- because for a while the portrait of the gay community was bars, bathhouses, gay pride parades that didn't make the case. then it began to be couples. we began to see men and men, two men, or two women, and saw them happy together in a familiar coupling together that seemed like straight marriage and people said, you know, what's wrong with that? >> it's very much like straight marriage. it is like straight marriage. it's the same thing.

we say there's a conservative case for gay marriage. people coming together to form an enduring relationship, to be a part of a community, to be a part of our economy. the plaintiffs in our case had been together for 10, 15, 16 years. >> two women and two men. >> two women and two men. they'd been together for a long time. and when people see those relationships and when people see the joy of the two people finally being able to get together and being respected and being a part of the community like the rest of us, the rest of us look at that and say, gee, that's right. that's the way it ought to be. we should be for happiness and for love. and for marriage. >> it seems like the gay community, if you can generalize it, has been so supportive of this legal effort that they have really -- i don't know how to describe it, but way -- maybe it's the natural way that people look. every time i see them coming out of church steps or coming out of city hall, it's a happy positive thing. how can you have a problem with it? what was the argument against gay marriage? i remember in california in your

case, they tried to find somebody who had standing that could say this is hurting straight marriage. >> right. >> what was that argument? >> well, what they tried to do is tried to say somehow this may have damage to straight marriage. because they had to find something wrong. >> what was their molecule of thought there? >> they didn't have any. in fact, their lawyer asked, you say there's harm to straight marriage, what's the harm? he danced around it, danced around it. the judge got cross. he paused and said i don't know. >> the argument they'd make on the right is it's cosmic. going to bed at night saying, god, there's gays getting married. i can't sleep tonight. >> they're not going to get divorced over that. how many people do you know who have a happy marriage who are going to get divorced because their gay neighbor can get married? >> nobody got divorced over this issue? >> not over this issue. >> everywhere it's happened has

been good for marriage. you know, marriage improves because we have a relationship like that where we respect people and we respect -- >> i'm a big believer in books. "redeeming the dream"is the name of your book. people, gay or straight, care about this country, we expand our key democracy every couple years and this is one of the expansions. we're making this country better. congratulations. you, especially. ted olson is a very good guy. we'll be right back after this. let me finish tonight with kind of looking around like... this is too good to be true. it was that good. saving you time and money is what we're all about. so when you're ready to buy a car, visit truecar.

this, and definitely this. and that means this, so if you're looking to buy a car, don't wait because the savings have already begun. just make sure before you buy to go to truecar.com or use the truecar app for guaranteed savings.

i'm taking off, but, uh, don't worry. i'm gonna leave the tv on for you. and if anything happens, don't forget about the new xfinity my account app. you can troubleshoot technical issues here. if you make an appointment, you can check out the status here. you can pay the bill, too. but don't worry about that right now. okay. how do i look? ♪ thanks. [ male announcer ] troubleshoot, manage appointments, and bill pay from your phone. introducing the xfinity my account app.

let me finish tonight with rachel maddow's powerful column in today's "washington post." she has hit the nail right on the head. why on god's earth can the united states congress get away without voting on a new iraqi war effort? how can it advocate its constitutional responsibility to decide on matters of peace and war? is this complicated? is it? is it hard to figure out why the democrats and the republicans elected to represent us on the crucial issues refuse to do so? i get it. and you get it. again, it's not complicated. these people don't want to take the political responsibility to either send our forces into iraq, once more, or take responsibility for not doing it. i get it. they're afraid to be wrong. they're afraid, and yes, this is an insult, to be unpopular. they're afraid to have someone in their constituency or state offended by their vote. so what do they do? they refuse to vote.

they want to leave it up to the president what to do with the vast u.s. arsenal. is it an arsenal if the leaders of congress refuse to vote on the matter? why is it important who controls the united states senate if the united states senate refuses to vote on something as important as war? i'm with rachel on this. right down the line. the media bookers shows with the clowns who got us into the iraq mess while the people we elected to sit and vote for us are sitting on their hands and hope no one will call on them to say what they think we should do. collectively, they're like the kid in class who didn't do his homework and is hoping the teacher won't see them hiding behind the kid in front of them and ask them to stand and give the answer. is it too much to ask for a return to glory when we had people in the who believed the

senate foreign relations committee is there for the most important reason in the world, to stand up to the president or stand with him, that running and hiding isn't an option? on this grotesque abdication of responsibility, i'm embarrassed by a congress i've grown up to respect almost to the point of reverence. and that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. "all in with chris hayes" starts right now. good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. we've got a big night tonight with the debut of our latest "all in america" series coming up shortly. but we begin tonight in iraq where secretary of state john kerry landed in baghdad today as the militant sunni group isis seized further territory over the weekend. isis has by numerous accounts taken multiple additional towns in iraq including three border crossings, one with neighboring jordan, and two keyboarder crossings with syria. further con consolidating. in the kurdish town of jalula, a