michael smerconish. i got a call you want to go at this one.before i read the actual column. i was appalled, there's that critical line of he speaks conventional views needing a gag reflex with regard to an interracial couple. when you read the entire column as you mentioned, tamron, he's trying to analyze what becomes of a chris christie candidacy in 2016 and can he really succeed within this very conservative gop base. then he shifts his attention to talking about whether the gop is racist at its core. he concludes that it isn't. and then comes that line. i guess the point is, this is not richard cohen speaking. this is not richard cohen saying i think people of conventional views but rather it's him trying to get in the minds of the gop hard core. i get my point is, i'm surprised by the criticism from the left. i'm surprised by the criticism by way of illustration from huffington post. the people who should be most offended are those within the gop base. his word choice was poor but i do think i understand where he's coming from. he's not ra

i'm michael smerconish in for chris matthews. leading off tonight, who deserves the real apology here? agreement in washington is a rare there but there's widespread recognition that the rollout of the affordable care act has been a mess. president obama himself has acknowledged that his baby, what he's been fighting for these last four years is sick. he's owned up to the failures of his team which botched the website's launch, and last night in an interview with chuck todd, he owned up to a failure of his own. that people feel betrayed by a promise he made them but couldn't keep. a promise they could keep their insurance if they liked it. let's listen to the president. >> well, first of all, i meant what i said, and we worked hard to try to make sure that we implemented it properly, but obviously we didn't do a good enough job. and i regret that. >> i am sorry that they are finding themselves in this situation based on assurances they got from me. we've got to work hard to make sure that they know we hear them and we're going to

let me bring in sirius xm's michael smerconish. michael, this story has taken many twist and turns since it first broke. now you have at least one former dolphins player, not named, that said richie is an honorary black guy. he says, i don't expect you to understand because you're not black, but being a black guy, being a brother is more than just about skin color. it's about how you carry yourself, how you play, where you come from, what you've experienced. when this story went from bullying to the issue of race, obviously, that became a headline everywhere. now you've got some of these players defending richie incognito. what's your take on this? >> my take on it is that none of this behavior would fly at msnbc or in any other workplace. but i wonder if there's a special set of rules and circumstances that kick in when it's an nfl locker room. and tamron, i'm thinking about a legal case that was litigated within the last couple of years in california where there was some really baudy language used in it the writers room in hollywo

i'm michael smerconish in for chris matthews.onight, who deserves the real apology here? agreement in washington is a rare there but there's widespread recognition that the rollout of the affordable care act has been a mess. president obama himself has acknowledged that his baby, what he's been fighting for these last four years is sick. he's owned up to the failures of his team which botched the website's launch, and last night in an interview with chuck todd, he owned up to a ur

. >> let me bring in michael smerconish, msnbc contributor and to the point rehema has made, the families want to focus on the love shared with that person who was no longer with them, that child or that sibling who is no longer with them. michael, there are other questions we're looking at details and knowing that adam lan lanza's mother written out a check to purchase a gun for him, that they only communicated via e-mail, this person had an isolated life and his parents either was unwilling to do something or did not know what to do, michael. >> well, he was clearly troubled. let me state the obvious, mom should not have been purchasing weapons nor contemplating a christmas gift that was yet another firearm for him. i read that report, and a lot of folks say it doesn't answer the why question, why did he do this? what most intrigues me about it and i have quite a conversation on radio today with a lot of folks who feel similarly, this case speaks to the difficulty faced by family members, and parents in particular, who have ahe i troubled young adult with no history of violence. they do

>> joining me now, michael smerconish. it's interesting, we've talked and focused so much on the case, what was happening in the courtroom with the two young men who were eventually convicted here but now the eyes are back on the adults here. what is your take as this is now folding into adult responsibility and enabling behavior according to the attorney general? >> the indictments don't layout the particulars with regard to the new defendants. in a word or in a word or two, it's cover-up and it's enabling. and tamron, one of the ironies in this case, the two young men who have been convicted of rape and sentenced to in excess of a year in a juvenile facility, if these individuals, the adults are convicted, they will end up doing far more time than the two rapists, that let's you know the seriousness which the system looks at this behavior. >> he said it was a culture of anything goes. we often hear that around sports particularly when the team is a great powerhouse that a lot is covered up, maybe bad grades that somehow

correspondent pete williams inside the supreme court chamber for today's arguments and also with us michael smerconishs talk about what happened today. i heard a couple of your reports, particularly what justice elena kagan had to say? >> it's one thing for somebody to sit in a town board meeting and the supreme court 30 years ago said there noz constitutional problem with legislative bodies opening with prayer. suppose the supreme court opened with a minister being called up by the chief justice and minister talked about the sacrifice of jesus on the cross and asked everyone to pray, would that cross the line? that was -- that sort of typical of how far can you go here. the problem is that the town has history on its side. the supreme court upheld legislative prayer noting that the very first congress started it the at the same time with the bill of rights. it didn't bother the founders. they say it's different from you're sitting in a town board meeting and you're there to ask the town for something, zoning change or some policy change and if the town leads a prayer that you find offensive or don't

joining me now, michael smerconish, what's your take on this case? like a law school final exam. this is the sort of thing that law students would fill an entire blue book on because you have these competing constitutional values. on one hand you have the couple saying we're entitled to equal protection and equal treatment under the law. the photographer says, i have a first amendment right in jeopardy because i will take portraits of the couple but if you ask me to assemble them in a storybook, in a picture book that celebrates the day, i'm celebrating something that is at odds with my core religious afflictions. i think the supreme court of new mexico got it right when they came down on the side of saying discrimination applies, anti-discrimination laws apply to the expressive professions as well. i don't think you can have an outcome that would be any other way because it would open pandora's box. i don't know if the supreme court were to take it. >> it's interesting, you compare it to the debate that some pharmacists have attempted to present reg

. >> let's bring in michael smerconish i i'm startled at the motorcycle incident that happened in nework. what's your take here? >> mom put her kids in harm's way and the police reaction was way over the top. but i think both of those at least to the extent this is the full record of what occurred, both of those are not subject to debate. i also think, tamron, this is perhaps the top reaction of the police officer with the baton may provide some level of defense to the police officer who fired his weapon. by that i mean, if cop number two arrives on the scene and he sees cop number one using the baton to break the window, logically he must think that police officer's life is in jeopardy. what else would cause that reaction when and that doesn't appear to be the case. cop number two may say this guy has taken a batonto the window. i thought i needed to defend him. >> he fired off shots there. they are trained to use logic but trained by far more than anything we would ever be able to understand when to use deadly force. i assume some were in the back when the officer comes to the scene

. >> joining me now, sara cliff, health policy reporter for the "washington post" and michael smerconish. thank you both. you heard senator nelson say it's a small percentage with 39 house democrats who went along with the upton bill. we know a good number of democrats, 22 voted for a one year delay of the individual mandate and 35 voted for a one year delay of the employer mandate, both july 17th. percentagewise it's a small number of democrats but they are obviously attempting to sends a message and define request of the leadership not to support the upton bill. >> you're right. i think so. and there's obviously a lot of frustration about the cancellation. i think the members are congress are hearing back in the district from the people they represent who are not happy if they lost their policy. it's a tricky area for members of congress to navigate, especially those who are in swing districts and who may have been a little hesitant about getting behind the affordable care act in the first place. this rollout does not give them faith that things are going to be fixed any time soon. >>

today, michael smerconished asked jay carney if president obama has spoken to bill clinton since thenave any calls between the two presidents to readout. they speak very frequently. president bill clinton has been extremely supportive of the affordable care act. i know how this works, being a journalist for 21 years. but if you look at that interview, everything he said about the affordable care act was positive, including we are better off without it -- i mean with it than without it. president clinton knows of what he speaks. >> as far as you know they haven't it sounds like. >> he has been very supportive of the affordable care act and i think you've seen him again, and again and again say so. >> joining me now, washington post political reporter nia malik henderson. why can't jay carney simply say whether barack obama has been on the phone with bill clinton? what's the problem there? >> what we take away from that is apparently bill clinton has been enormously supportive of the affordable care act. >> really? >> but it doesn't sound like it, right, from that call -- i mean, from t

i'm michael smerconish in for chris matthews tonight.eading off tonight, who deserves the real apology here? there's recognition that the rollout of the affordable care act has been a mess. president obama himself has acknowledged that his baby, what he's been fighting for these last four years is sick. he's owned up to the failures of his team which botched the website's launch. and last night in an interview with chuck todd, he owned up to a failure of his own. that people feel betrayed bay promise he made them but couldn't keep. a promise they could keep their insurance if they liked it. let's listen to the president. >> first of all, i meant what i said. and we worked hard to try to make sure we implemented it properly, but obviously we didn't do a good enough job. and i regret that. i am sorry that they are finding themselves in this situation based on assurances they got from me. we've got to work hard to make sure that they know we hear them and we're going to do everything to deal with folks who find themselves in a tough positio