i actually went to a similar republican party convention for the california republican party also in angeles in 2011, where they were facing a similar dynamic. it was interesting to see the dichotomy. on stable, we saw consultant after consultant showing the demographics and talking about modernizing the gop making it more friendly to young voters, backing away from contentious social issues and go into the hallway, and they were collecting signatures to put on the ballot, a repeal of teaching the education of gay americans in california schools. so there's a huge contrast there, and we're running up against what's the matter with kansas problem right because there are 30, maybe 40 congressional districts that are historically very friendly to progressive issues on economic policies, but republicans have dominated them by gay-baiting scapegoating immigrants and how the party deals with these issues as they run up against this demographic problem is the real question. >> joe, they got an idea for this. it's two-fold. i'm going to read you two awesome quotes. number one the report in t

so, of course, he is not on board with any sort of republican party rebranding. that erodes his power that he's held for decades now. >> abby, you know this crowd pretty well. the daily beast wrote about this particular split in the party, rush and o'reilly. the article says limbaugh and o'reilly both see themselves as four star generals in the american culture war. the difference is that limbaugh launches kamikaze missions. o'reilly never yells charge unless he has the infantry masked on his side. is that an accurate description to you? >> that's a pretty accurate description. kr krystal, you bring up a good point. rush limbaugh has no reason to change his tune. he's on a 4$400 million contrac. who even knows what rush limbaugh thinks at the end of the day. it's all business for the guy. even if he recognized the party does need to evolve, he's not going to change his tune. he doesn't have a reason to. he's making the big bucks at the end of the day. o'reilly, he's an intellectual. he has his harvard masters degree. this is a guy that really, i would argue he is

the house is controlled by the republican party. w on earth can we count on congressional republicans, republicans in the house to pass legislation like that? compromise legislation, particularly on a spending matter. how can we count on republicans to do that? we can't. so the democrats did it. mostly. the republicans did let the thing come up for a vote back in january. but it passed with almost all the democrats voting for it and just enough of the republicans voting for it to get it over the hump. it was majority democratic vote that passed that thing out of house, even though the republicans are in control. that was in january. then two weeks later, it happened again. after months and months had passed since hurricane sandy devastated the eastern seaboard the house finally got it together to send money to hurricane sandy victims. the house passed the hurricane sandy relief bill and when i say the house passed it, i mean the democrats in the house passed it. every democrat in the house except for one voted for the sandy relief bi

the republican party's history is rich in eman pation and black history. republican still pride the sense of justice that m.l.k. spoke of when he said an unjustice law is any law that a majority forces on a minority but does not make binding upon tself. [applause] >> i wasn't sure if my speech would be entertaining but now you've had some entertaining. when m.l.k. talked about an unjustice law what intrigued me was m.l.k. talked about race but he talked about a justice law goes beyond race. he said an unjustice law, this is a good way to look at any law, an unjustice law is any law that a majority, any majority enforces on a minority but does not make it binding on themselves. any law that is not universally applied. any law applied to just bankers would be unjustice. any law applied to one particular group, he referred to race but he said something about unjusticeness that applies to all law. republicans never stopped believing that minorities whether it derives from the color of your skin or the shade of your ideology. few people remember the sit-in the p

. >> herein lies the conundrum for the republican party. as the leadership tries to change brand for purposes of politics, it's running up against the unchanged values of members and constituents, while the rnc autopsy report called on republicans to be more welcoming and inclusive regarding the rights and treatment of gay americans, there are many republicans like those i've talked about who are unwilling to reconsider their views, even when those views are politically toxic. in iowa, 16 republican state lawmakers are threatening to defund a community college for holding an anti-bullying event. because it's for lgbt youth said we can't give taxpayer dollars to people or groups who pervert the bible and teach our youp to engage in dangerous behavior. on issues like gay rights, these are deeply-held established beliefs. and the base will not evolve overnight. it might not evolve period. and social conservatives argue that they should not need to change. rick santorum told politico, we are not the libertarian party, we're the republican party.

>> well, absolutely not, but i do not -- >> that wouldn't stop you from joining the republican party? you would join a party that didn't believe in civil is rights for african-americans? because you agree with them on economic issues? >> what you're trying to do is you're trying to equate the issue -- >> i'm only asking the question because i'm going to ask the same question to gregory. >> i am telling you that republicans led the civil rights movement. abraham lincoln was a republi n republican. so i don't accept the premise of your question. i believe wholeheartedly that most americans today agree that marriage is between one man and one woman and republican party will stand on that platform. >> well, let me just go through the latest polling. 53%, sir, do believe and support same sex marriage. 42% oppose. in your party, perhaps in your world politically, 66% of republicans do oppose. but you just threw out a line that's not true. most americans support same sex marriage now, sir. >> well, you know, i'll tell you, i believe it depends on how the wording is phrased, how the poll is p

ben arrested, has this meeting where he honors bob rumm and others, stalwarts of the republican party saying we can't. and they committed $2 million. that's not chump change, committed $2 million that they're willing to spend and know people like a.r. benard and others in the party will hold him accountable because we're going to help guide them through this process because we really believe there's a tremendous opportunity for not just blacks but all who felt the republican party was not a voice for them, they will come back and take a look at this party. and at least give us another look. >> armstrong williams joins us as he talks about minority relations. you want to ask questions: here are the numbers: >> you talked initially about the gop needing to make concessions. what does that look like? >> i do believe that the leadership, along with the commitment of funds, along with going to these different places in the outreach, the gop has together to find a major piece of legislation that is very important to the american black community. but it would take a fierce stance and say thi

the republican party is finished anyway. >> it appears the major road blocks have been worked through. >> every major policy issue has been resolved. >> trying to iron out the details. >> republicans were more cautious. >> keep your eye on senator marco rubio. >> rubio, go slow warning, second in two days. >> i talked to marco, it is semantics. >> politics is more important than solutions? >> the strategy is to get the deal done. >> if that happens it won't matter. >> without antagonizing rush limbaugh. >> the republican party is finished anyway. >> you have marco rubio engaged in a 50 state butt covering. >> republican party establishment and social conservatives are girding for a battle. >> they feel they're not being respected. >> tea party folks. >> not a civil war but culture war. >> did autopsies. >> gop autopsies. >> post mortems. >> our message was weak. we weren't inclusive. >> what happens after the extreme makeover? >> my father had a ranch, hired 50 to 60 wetbacks. >> if they're thinking of standing in the way, the tsunami could knock them over. >> if that happens, it won'

of course, that disappeared. >> right. >> now we see division within the republican party, tea party segments kind of rising. do you think that is a permanent influence on the modern republican party now, and if so, given that is a grassroots movement is there anything in your book where you address individuals working at local levels and what they can do to further the cause? >> well, to answer your last question first, i think that the most important thing that local individuals could do is be successful in local government and successful in your local political activism and campaigns. i think establishing a track record of credible, effective government and proving that limited government is not simply about dismantling things for no reason but for actually maintaining acceptable levels of prosperity and freedom, i think that is the most important thing that can be done. in terms of sort of the federal government, i think that a big hinge that we often miss -- a big thing that we often miss -- actually, i'm bsing you now. of i don't remember the first part of your question. can yo

we'll talk about the republican party. with a difficult election loss behind them there's a time of reflection and soul searching for the g.o.p. we'll let you know if they find one! oh, oh, who wants a piece of this? [cheers and applause] who wants a piece of this? [cheers and applause] [laughter] i kid, of course. really? all right. [ laughter ] last week the republican national committee released its report on what went wrong in the 2012 election and how the republican party can reverse its fortunes in the future. >> officials are calling it an autopsy. >> that's right. they are calling it an autopsy. [ laughter ] >> jon: it is a document of idealistic named for bodies in the river. what do you say we rub a little cancer under our noses and get to the business of cutting this bloated corpse open. we know the time of death. rncrince preebous what is the cause of death? >> the message isn't resonating enough. it goes back to what our moms used to tell us, it's not just what you say it's how we say it. >> jon: for instance,

i think you have at least some people in the republican party who look at what's going on. for example, the republicans risking being tools of the nra and blocking or gutting universal background check law. that's not going to lay in a lot of parts of our country all through the northeast and parts of the midwest on the west coast and the fact that collins feels some freedom now despite the tea party surge of three years ago, suggests that there were more republicans out there who said, wait a minute, we've got to change course and i think on the economics the republicans are still stuck with the 47% image and they talked a lot about the need to move away from what romney talked about. they have a lot of work to do and that polling suggests it. >> clarence, look at what paul ryan is saying on the deficit. let me show you this. >> we're saying, let's balance the budget so we can make sure that we don't have a debt crisis. >> as he's saying that, 64% of people polled say the top priority in congress should be creating jobs. just 33% say it should be deficit reduction. in fact,

when you see the chairman of the republican party, he's against compromise with the president after the rnc meeting. this is the one that did the autopsy. let's look at what priebus says. he says, when it comes to compromise, i think our party has done its fair share and it doesn't seem like we get a lot in return. >> it comes down to whether you're going to get a different pizza or just change the box. and it seems to me that that's the big argument in the party right now. this reminds me of the era before president clinton when the democrats have really lost their way. they lost three elections and bill clinton had to come in and center in order to govern the country and what the republican party needs right now is not just a new pizza box, it needs a new kind of leader and someone and someone who can make sure that those policies are reflecting the changing times of our court. >> melissa? >> there's an institutional change that has made it tough to get those people there and that's the redistricting that they did in 2010. >> the gerrymandering? >> the gerrymandering. what happens is

we have seen the republican party say we need outreach to the latrine know community. ave to be for immigration reform. some republicans in fact, are on board for that. but not all. we heard don young last week talk about the wetbacks that his dad used to hire. now we have another republican who's stepped on it here. >> the outreach isn't going so well for them. representative lou barletta from pennsylvania who you'll remember in january said republicans will never win the hispanic votes because we'll never give them the kind of gifts the democrats give. he's back. and told "the new york times" that look, we can't do immigration reform right now because the country's like a sinking ship. and since the borders are unsecure, all of the water is coming in and we first have to plug the leaks and then we'll figure out what to do with the water on board. so the country is the titanic. immigrants are the water. we're all sinking. i suppose. >> bill: sinking ship. no matter how reince priebus tries to say we'll reform this republican party they're incapable of doing it because

"the republican party is not going to change on this issue. my opinion, it would be suicidal if it did." santorum may run again. that kind of talk is the catnip to republican primary voters but may not play well beyond the party's shrinking base. michael steele is the former chair of the republican national committee. and michael feldman was an adviser to vice president al gore. let's go to these -- let's go to this question. michael, if you were still chair of the republican national committee, what would you say about the issue of marriage equality? that's the phrase people use today. they usually say marriage equality. >> yeah. no, i think probably what i would advocate is what a lot of us hope the supreme court does. and that is let this be resolved in the states, in the communities where people live. they decide for themselves. you know, where they come down on this issue. it should not be, i think, a federal issue. should not be something that's handed down from the federal government for given the intrinsic nature of it, the value that

does the republican party have to go through a full transition on this? or do you think four years from now, it will still mostly high network individuals? >> i think pretending it's whether republican or democrats pretending whoever runs in 2016, the best technology is not going to create a cause for that candidate. i think that's the thing that people have to remember. the cause is built by the message. the technology simply enables that and gets people involved. that really doesn't happen until much later in the campaign. so it's two individuals decide to run for president in the primary on the democratic side, they are going to have to the build a high dollar network. if they think they're going to be able to go out and just have this digital go from a campaign to a cause and have and match the number that's julianna is talking about $66 per contributions that's not going to happen. >> it's much like a start-up. same thing is true in 2007? >> right. >> how do you think, hillary clinton or whoever is the democratic candidate four years from now, what's

does the republican party have to go through a full transition on this? or do you think four years from now, it will still mostly high network individuals? >> i think pretending it's whether republican or democrats pretending whoever runs in 2016, the best technology is not going to create a cause for that candidate. i think that's the thing that people have to remember. the cause is built by the message. the technology simply enables that and gets people involved. that really doesn't happen until much later in the campaign. so it's two individuals decide to run for president in the primary on the democratic side, they are going to have to the build a high dollar network. if they think they're going to be able to go out and just have this digital go from a campaign to a cause and have and match the number that's julianna is talking about $66 per contributions that's not going to happen. >> it's much like a start-up. same thing is true in 2007? >> right. >> how do you think, hillary clinton or whoever is the democratic candidate four years from now, what's

>> the republican party hasn't talked enough about the great history and interaction between the republican party and black history and voting rights in our country. the story of emancipation, of voting rights and citizenship to the modern era is the history of republican partism we see horrible racism that happened in the 30s, 40s, 50s, it was all democrats. it wasn't republicans. >> jon: right but for the most part those bigoted democrats in the 30s, 40s and 50s became republicans post the modern civil rights every are because of it. you can't just yada yada yada the last 60 years. a republican freed the slaves. gays, black people the vote. yada yada and now i'll vote democratic. what the hell. the problem with this theory that all that stands between the republicans ant plurality of the black shift a history lesson is well, enjoy. >> how many of you -- if i would have said who do you think the found yours of naacp would everybody know the founders were republicans. >> yes. >> you know more than i know. >> and i don't mean that to be insulting i don't know what you know and i'm trying to

republican party is finished. it is a mathematics. is is a disaster here for the republicans to support amnesty. they are signing their own death sentence. >> there. rush limbaugh laid it out the typically nuanced fashion. have you 11 million undocumented. if you make them citizens, we see the latinos favor democrats and -- 11 million votes for democrats. that's it. democrats win every election in the future. is that right? >> absolutely not. i -- if we were to run through all the problems of that argument we could spend all day here. i will go with two. first of all, all 11 mon undocumented immigrants in the u.s. are not going to become full citizens. they are not all going to get legal stat us and among those that get legal status not all of them will want to spend 13 years getting full citizenship. also, not all undocumented immigrants are latinos, asians, africans. i think that -- you know, at the end of the day, maybe, you know, top of my head, would be 1 to 2 million new democratic voters. republicans should be more worried about

was a message that attracted conservative democrats and independents like me that expanded the republican party to -- to achieve a majority. that's what we've got to do again. >> it does seem as if that's what the party's looking for. that's the irony here. >> i think they are looking for -- i think what all of us want to see is, you know, whether it's the specifics on the policy or not, it's the courage to go after and try to tackle some of these really big issues that we're dealing with. whether it's social security reform, which we didn't succeed in doing, but i think trod a lot of ground on it. certainly on immigration reform. to be able to talk about these issues in ways that lead to solutions and not demagoguery. that's where the president was on those issues. we were proud of it. i think that's what the party is is looking for today, too. >> sara fagen, tony fratty. the always dressed mark mackinnon. is that a george w. bush presidential library scarf? >> no labels. no ties. >> always plugging something. i got to love it. >>> up next, how the bush presidency still echoes in the republica

do you think that the tea party . >> yes. >> will stick around as the major influence in the republican party today. >> i don't think there are any permanent victory or defeat in politic. i think they will be around far long time. i think how enduring the tea party will be will be how effective it is in terms of ininfluencing the republican party is at winning election. i think that's a big part of it. what i discuss in my book i think if there is no return to a more limited government, the republican party isn't going to have much to say to the american voters. i think we reached a point it's getting to be in the g.o.p.'s political self-interest to advocate some retrenchment. if there's a permanent bidding war over spending, the democrats are going to outbid them every time. what you'll see, i think you see it in western democracies, a major set of party answer what you see in new york city when rudy giuliani was elected. .. from when you said earlier, i want the government to be smaller, but i still want to mike entitlements than i paid into. do you believe there is the ability it changed t

this president is serious and he's offering compromise with republicans that already has some in his own party furious. the progressive caucus called his plan entitlement reform "unpopular, unwise, and unworkable." isn't that what republicans have called for over and over again? >> the president must be willing to reduce spending and ensure entitlement programs that are the primary drivers of our debt. >> what would solve the problem is doing something about the entitlements. >> on the entitlement reforms needed to save medicare and social security, we know what they are. it doesn't require any more study. it just requires the courage to do it. >> unfortunate he look, unfortunately, we could never get the yes. >> senator mcconnell said, "those are the kinds of things that would get republicans interested in new revenue." so they are ready to get on board, right? wrong. speaker boehner had the audacity to call this major proposal modest entitlement savings. he went on to say, "there's no reasons entitlements should be held hostage for more tax hikes. that's no way to lead. it's the same, my way

tent party is acknowledging the fact log cabin republicans exist here. we're not a part of the party because of its stance on so-called traditional marriage. in fact, we're part of the party in spite of that. >> i know. >> we agree -- >> does it bother you when you hear a gentleman like mr. armstrong, a party chair or committeeman say this is essential to the party's belief, this is something that isn't going to change in the foreseeable future? isn't going to change? is essential? how can opposition to same-sex marriage be essential to being a republican? >> you're asking the wrong guy. you can be a republican and be supportive for marriage equality for gay individuals. the party platform in 2012 stated marriage is between one man and one woman did not stop senator portman from evolving on this issue. >> is it going to let the party evolve, though? will the party ever evolve? >> the party is evolving regardless of what the platform says. right now you have congressmen, you have republicans around the country coming out across the country for the freedom

after richard nixon went down in flames and within the entire republican party a republican strategist named jude wouldn't speak at an inspiration. the democrats he said had always been the party of santa clause they gave the american people what they wanted social security unemployment compensation medical help the minimum wage free public education inexpensive public hospitals unions environmental protections child labor laws workplace protections paid vacations sick days meanwhile the republicans had always been the priority of scrooge had said loudly oh to every one of those things over and over and over again. and the american people knew it which is why the republicans didn't control the congress for over forty years and a democrat who was a really good at playing santa claus f.d.r. got elected four count them four times as president so. republicans have to figure out two things first they have to somehow become semi-colons and second and perhaps most important at the figure out a way to force the democrats to shoot santa clause becoming santa clause would be easy to use it just

tonight, we have big news from the republican party. it's a breakthrough. it seems republicans have finally learned their lessons of losing the election and now they are ready to change. really change. >> things like obama care are getting in the way of small business job creation. >> we don't have a spending problem in washington. >> we must not repeal obama care. >> there's no gay mafia that has inflicted the fear of death, political death in the republican party. >> with your help, we will make barack obama a two-term president. >> amazing, right? but april fool's. reality is, they haven't changed a thing. the right wing is in full freakout over what a pastor said when the president and his family attended. it took place in st. john's church across the street from the white house. reverend luis leon said, it drives me crazy when the captains of the religious right are calling us back, for blacks to be back in the back of the bus, for women to be back in the kitchen, for immigrants to be back on the other side of the border. yes, this pastor pointing out w

. >> the political problem the party faces, republicans face among minority communities, is so large if you look at the results from the 2012 election. you've spoken to it as have others and i wonder whether this is enough, the party's repositioning, your leading the way is enough to overcome those difficulties. colin powell was on the program earlier this year. he had some comments about the plight for the republican party and i want to get your response to them. >> i think what the republican party needs to do now is take a very hard look at itself and understand that the country has changed. the country is changing demographically. and if the republican party does not change along with that demographic, they're going to be in trouble. there's also a dark -- a dark vein of intolerance in some parts of the party. what do i mean by that? what i mean by that is they still sort of look down on minorities. >> do you agree with that, and do you think that these efforts on immigration are enough to overcome it? >> well, first of all, i don't agree the republican party characterized by into

listen to what he said, though, that it's not the traditional approach that the republican party wouldand that's exactly what you have. nontraditional republicans. >> now, david, off the record, how did they get out of this bind, david? >> well, frank luntz -- and i've got to say, frank is one of my favorite guys on the republican side. we had a good conversation with them. i disagree what he said about obama's health care system being a government takeover. i think he's a propagandaist but he got caught here. interestingly enough, today he said nothing about this. maybe they are just going to duck and cover and hope it employees over. >> i disagree. i think what they are going to do is demonize this young student. that's what is going to happen tomorrow. >> well, we'll see. david corn, joe madison, thank you for your time tonight. >> thank you. >>> ahead, were the boston bombers planning to hit times square? news on that next. ♪ [ male announcer ] a car has a rather small rear-view mirror, so we can occasionally glance back at where we've been. it has an enormous windshield so we can

the republican party is undergoing a test and his name is dave agema. ittee member for the national party. he was first to note that he was posting things on his facebook page about how the homosexual agenda is to get the public to affirm their filthy life-style and homosexuals prey on children and account for half the murders in charge cities. when that prompted calls for resignation, he said he wouldn't resign telling critics online you want to change the landscape of the party in a direction not accepted 230 years. i am trying to maintain the platform. he said i could send you reams of studies showing negative health effects of this life-style, misspelling reams and effects. i know the republican party hasn't decided where they want to be on this issue, but this guy is kind of a test, right? he is on the republican national committee and the republican party does not particularly want people to think of guys like him when they think of what it means to be republican in 2013. but there's a reason people think that of the republican party. look at this.

tent party is acknowledging the fact log cabin republicans exist here. 're not a part of the party because of its stance on so-called traditional marriage. in fact, we're part of the party in spite of that. >> i know. >> we agree -- >> does it bother you when you hear a gentleman like mr. armstrong, a party chair or committeeman say this is essential to the party's belief, this is something that isn't going to change in the foreseeable future? isn't going to change? is essential? how can opposition to same-sex marriage be essential to being a republican? >> you're asking the wrong guy. you can be a republican and be supportive for marriage equality for gay individuals. the party platform in 2012 stated marriage is between one man and one woman did not stop senator portman from evolving on this issue. >> is it going to let the party evolve, though? will the party ever evolve? >> the party is evolving regardless of what the platform says. right now you have congressmen, you have republicans around the country coming out across the country for the freedom to

most african-americans don't remember when the republican party was the party of black folks. last 50 years here, and that matters, and the policies matter a lot more than -- rhetoric matters a great deal, and republicans can't appeal to hispanics. they're having a hard time appealing to women, and they're having obviously a hard time appealing to african-americans. policy matters too. >> i would say that at least rand paul tried. >> yes. >> it took some courage for him to appear in front of what was sure to be a tough audience. >> i give rand paul a lot of credit for going to howard. i don't give him credit for literally saying i don't know what you know. i mean, this felt like a conversation you should have had in a small group to at least start to know what people know and what they don't know so it came off as just so literally painful to watch, but you do give him credit, and you have to give him credit because he is doing something that the rest of his party is not doing, which is speaking directly to african-americans, seeking out african-american audiences, and at leas

helping the koch brothers and other right wing billionaires drive the polarization within the republican party and thus within america's political discourse ironically. it's frank luntz who says this the top republican consultant and campaign group it's not me it's him earlier this week once told a group of college students at the university of pennsylvania the limbaugh and his fellow right wing talk radio cult leaders are problematic for the republican party because they're responsible for the stark polarization within the party once those comments were secretly recorded it was. a free. drop. from. the first old. guy the others. if. you think. he's getting stronger and more. and more slowly. he's trying on a. long term benefits to immigration is the traditional approach we can still in. its history. to see or. basically once was saying that the right wing media and its cult following are not serving in the national political debate certainly not helping the republican party widen its appeal beyond its declining base of aging boomer cultists but no matter what does limbaugh and the rest of his

this is what the republican party is working on around the country right now. s does not cover republican politics that way, but that is what they're doing. it's not what they're talking about. it's what they're doing. you don't even have to go far outside the beltway to see what they're doing. in richmond, virginia, this past week, which is not very far outside the beltway, in richmond this past week, virginia's republican attorney general petitioned a federal court to let the state of virginia keep its sodomy law. you remember when the supreme court said sodomy laws were unconstitutional and they have to be struck down? virginia decided to keep theirs anyway. a republican state legislator at the time, young man named ken kuch nellie, he was part of the effort to keep virginia's sodomy law on the books, even after the supreme court ruling because, he still really liked the sodomy law. when he was running for attorney general in 2009 he explained his thinking on the subject and why he was against protecting gay people from discrimination telling a virginia paper

is the republican party smart to have this once again heavily visible program on this front. actually being known as the party that doesn't like sex ed? >> no. >> you think that's a healthy position to be in? >> i think all of this coming on the heels of the reboot, again, further exacerbates the problem. >> they didn't get the message. >> it makes people look mean spirited. republicans look mean spirited. you're taking something away from kids who are homeless. sfwl it just seems like the scarlet letter to me. just seems like they're looking for somebody, whoa, look at her, she did it. >> if your problem is with planned parenthood, then make that the central argument. and why you have this issue of planned parenthood. don't nickel and dime, don't cut and slice two programs that have nothing to do with abortion. >> in other words, they're really against planned parenthood because it's involved with abortion, not because it's involved with sex ed. >> right. >> that's what i'm saying. you really talked about the culture issue. they're losing, you're losing on gay marriage. right