The Rachel Maddow Show, Transcript 04/12/13

RACHEL MADDOW, HOST: Good evening, Chris. Thank you very, very much. Have a good weekend. CHRIS HAYES, "ALL IN" HOST: Have a great weekend. MADDOW: And thanks to you at home for being with us for this hour. This week of news is ending in way that basically nobody could have predicted when this week in news began. To start the week, on Sunday night, the CBS program, "60 Minutes" aired an emotional and I think riveting two-part interview on a story that we all knew was going to be the all-consuming policy news in Washington this week. "60 Minutes" broke the story into two pieces, two segments. And this is the way they divided them. This is how part one ended. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DAVID WHEELER, FATHER OF MASSACRE VICTIM: I would like every parent in this country, that`s 150 million people, I would like them to look in the mirror and that`s a figure of speech, Scott. I mean, literally find a mirror in your house and look at it and look in your eyes and say, this will never happen to me. This will never happen in my school. This will never happen in any community. And see if you actually believe that. And if there is a shadow, the slightest shadow of doubt about what you`ve said, think about what can you do to change that in your house, in your community, in your school, in your country, because we have an obligation to our children to do this for them. It`s going to happen again. It is going to happen again. And every time, you know, it`s somebody else`s school. It`s somebody else`s town. It`s somebody else`s community. Until one day, you wake up and it`s not. (END VIDEO CLIP) MADDOW: That`s David Wheeler, the father of Ben Wheeler who was killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown. David Wheeler speaking there on "60 Minutes", on Sunday night. Well, tomorrow, David Wheeler will stand with his wife, Francine, Ben`s mother, as she delivered President Obama`s weekly address. Every Saturday morning, the president of the United States delivers a weekly address. It gets carried on the TV, radio stations, it goes up online. But this week, tomorrow, for the first time ever in this presidency, the president will hand off his address to a citizen. He`ll be handing off his address to Francine and to David to talk about them losing Ben. What gives a person the strength to do this? When in the process do you realize that you have the strength to not just grief the loss of your child but also to speak, to take what happened to you and turn it into a way of trying to stop it from happening to someone else`s child. Do you know from the beginning that you will act to try to protect other people`s children now that this has happened to you? Or do you find yourself doing it and marvel that you are capable of it? Marvel that it is happening? One week after her son, Dylan was killed, alongside Ben and those 18 other kids at Sandy Hook, Dylan Hockley`s mother, Nicole, spoke at Dylan`s memorial service. Dylan was 6 years old when he died. He had autism. They held the memorial one week after he died and they held it as a celebration of his life. Watch this. This is remarkable. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) NICOLE HOCKLEY, MOTHER OF MASSACRE VICTIM: Like many people on the spectrum, Dylan demonstrated several aspects of repetitive movement. Some autistic individuals rock their bodies. Roll their heads or flap their hands. Dylan was a flapper. Whenever he got excited or happy, he jumped up and down and flapped as hard as he could. One day I asked Dylan, why do you flab? In all honesty, because Dylan had underdeveloped language skills, I wasn`t expecting him to answer, but he did. He said, "Because I`m a beautiful butterfly." It has been said that something as small as a butterfly flapping its wings can cause a hurricane half way around the world. That a small change or single occurrence in one place can result in large differences elsewhere. It redefines the future. Dylan is our butterfly. All of the children and adults who lost their lives last week are our butterflies. And if one butterfly can cause a hurricane, then 26 butterflies can change the world. I refuse to accept this as a senseless tragedy. I believe Dylan and the others that died with him, are catalysts and while I selfishly wish my child was still with me and while I fear the empty space in my heart may never be filled, I`m also at peace to take comfort in the knowledge that his death will have meaning. There will be a positive change from this and we will be part of it. Newtown will be part of it. (END VIDEO CLIP) MADDOW: That`s Dylan Hockley`s mom, Nicole, speaking a week after he was killed at his memorial service, that celebration of his life. One month after killings at Sandy Hook, I was at the event in Newtown, Connecticut, that launched the group Sandy Hook Promise and saw Nicole speak again thereabout Dylan and about how losing him must be a catalyst for change. The Newtown families went to the state capitol in Connecticut to press there to negotiate amongst themselves and then to vote for that state`s landmark bipartisan package of gun reforms. The faces of those family members were the last thing the legislators saw before they walked into the chambers to vote. The photos of their kids and their family members who were killed that day at Sandy Hook were the last things put in those legislators` hands before they walked into the chambers to vote. That vote passed with bipartisan support and the Connecticut`s gun reforms are now signed into law. Soon after that, the families with President Obama. Nicole Hockley introduced the president when he spoke in Connecticut. The families met with president, 11 family members traveled back with him to Washington, D.C. on Air Force One, and when they got to Washington, D.C., they started the process of meeting with senators. Again, summoning the strength, meeting these senators directly, explaining, talking about who it was that they lost and what it means to them and how this senator`s vote, you, Senator, look at me eye to eye, could help stop this from happening to somebody else`s child. And at the end of those meetings, 22 senators who have A ratings from the NRA voted with the majority to move the debate forward, to defeat the filibuster, to at least let it come for a vote. Twenty-two senators with A ratings from the NRA were on the let it go forward side of that vote. Tonight and tomorrow, there are dozens of pro-reform events planned all over the country. In Arizona tonight, starting tomorrow in California and Colorado and Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Maine, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, Wisconsin, all over the country tonight and tomorrow. Mayors against illegal guns tonight will start running new ads in seven states. They are asking senators to vote in favor of the bipartisan background checks proposal that`s moving forward in the Senate, thanks to this week`s vote. The husband of Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, Mark Kelly, he has recorded robocalls that`s started going out today to West Virginia and Pennsylvania. West Virginia and Pennsylvania specifically because the robocalls are thanking the bipartisan NRA, A-rated pair of senators, who are brave enough to put the background checks bill forward. They are from Pennsylvania and West Virginia. There`s a lot going on. The vote in the Senate is still a week away. But the core, the center, reason this is happening, politically, is that the surviving family members of these people who have been killed in our country have found the strength to try to stop what happened to them from happening to somebody else`s family. The Teves family in Arizona right now is trying to get their senator, Republican Senator Jeff Flake, to commit to supporting background checks or any other gun-related reforms. The Teves son, Alex, was 24 years old when he was killed at the movie theater massacre in Aurora, Colorado. The Teves family has now asked their senator, Senator Jeff Flake to come eat dinner at their house, to sit in Alex`s seat at the dinner table so they can talk with him. Asked by KPNX in Phoenix if it is fair to use that kind of emotional appeal to try to reach their senator, Mrs. Teves said in response, you know what, the guns are not shooting targets, they are shooting people. People have emotions. It is impossible to take emotion out of the equation. Unless it has happened to you, none of us can imagine what it is to lose a child, to lose a family member, to utterly senseless gun violence. But now, as a country, we are being propelled toward change by the very people who not only have experienced that loss directly but have also from somewhere summoned the strength to lead us to try to stop it from ever happening again. Joining us for the interview tonight is Nicole Hockley. Nicole Hockley`s 6-year-old son Dylan was killed December 14th at Sandy Hook Elementary. Nicole, thank you very much for being here tonight. HOCKLEY: Thank you for having me. MADDOW: I know that you have just come from D.C. as of this afternoon. I have heard you say in talking to other people that you`ve never done anything like this before, the kind of meeting with senators and stuff that you`ve done. What was it like this week? HOCKLEY: It was certainly a very interesting experience. Never, to be honest, this is the first time I`ve been in D.C. I learned a great deal, had no idea what to expect and went in is with very few expectations. Just wanting to meet with senators and talk to them person to person along with all of the other families first to tell our stories and see what could be done. Do you feel you are being listened to? That people are being -- obviously, people have a lot of emotion about what happened and meeting you is an emotional experience for a lot of people. Members of the different families, members I talked to talk about how hard it is that people burst into tears upon meeting you, and that makes it harder for you. You put in the position to comfort people. Do you feel like you`re able to bridge through the emotion to make an argument that people can hear? HOCKLEY: I think so. I mean, people definitely are taking the time. Senators have taken the time to listen to us. And that`s the whole point we`re reaching to the -- we`re reaching out to them as people because they are parents and grandparents. They are parent just like us. There is nothing wrong with talking person to person. It`s not about politics. There`s nothing wrong with being emotional about that. There are numbers, statistics and logic to look at but you have to consider the love element as well. You have to consider the human element when making these important decisions. MADDOW: Let me ask you the question that I posed a moment ago, which is about your decision to speak out. Obviously, nobody would hold it against you if you chose to remain an entirely private person and never speak to anybody about this. When in this process did you realize that you had the strength to take what happened to your family and to act to try to keep this from happening to somebody else`s children? Did you know right away that you would or how did that happen? HOCKLEY: I still find it very strange when anyone thinks that I`m strong. I know several other family members feel the same way. I don`t feel strong at any point of the day, at any single moment. This is just something I feel I have to do for Dylan and for my living son and for all of the other children and adults who might face this sort of violence in their lives and try to prevent that. If I could stop one other person from dying or one other mother from feeling this way, so they don`t have to find way to find their strength, then it will never be worthwhile because it`s too high of a price to have paid. But at least I will feel that something good will have come from this. MADDOW: I thought of you when -- I heard a comment from Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe this week, he has said so far he is opposed to any reforms, though who knows how he will vote when it comes time to vote. He said he felt that the Newtown families, being used some something that would not have prevented their horrible loss. What do you think about that claim? HOCKLEY: There`s two aspects there. First of all, no one is using me. These are active choices that I`m making everyday. The things I say come out of my mouth. I`m not a puppeteer in any way. These are my thoughts and my opinions. And, fortunately, I share a lot of thoughts and opinions with other families as well. So, we have a combined voice. In terms of whether these reforms would have prevented Newtown, some of them, no, they wouldn`t have. Does that mean we shouldn`t be making these changes and preventing other tragedies? I mean, that -- why wouldn`t you do that if it could save other lives and if it helps, then you have an obligation to do these things. And some of the things we`re talking about could have made a difference in Newtown as well. Not all of them, but some of them. And that`s important to remember. MADDOW: What do you think happens in terms of the timeframe here? Obviously, the big hurdle of even getting to a vote in the Senate this week is something that honestly at the beginning of the week most people were not predicting. People think the filibuster would be sustained. It was not only beaten, it was beaten handily, I think because of the work that you and the other families did in Washington. But the vote itself is going to be next week. And then it moves on to the House. What`s your plan in terms of staying involved or otherwise? HOCKLEY: My plan is absolutely to stay involved and this isn`t just about gun responsibility at the end of the day. There is a lot of other issues and families will be involved in those going forward as well. And for myself, I`m just going to continue doing exactly what I`ve been doing so far, talking to people, listening to them, and hoping that they have the courage to continue to listen to what we have to say and then to act in terms of what`s right for their constituents but also what`s right as a person. MADDOW: Do you -- my analysis, I should ask you this actually rather than just saying it. My analysis is that you guys have made things possible that didn`t seem possible. I heard Senator Chris Murphy, your U.S. Senator Murphy, talking about what happened at the state level in Connecticut, saying that what passed in Connecticut no one believed would happen until the intervention from the families so that it changed it and made it so that it could be bipartisan and made it the big vote that it was. I see that happening with this big vote that happened weekend in Washington as well. Do you share that assessment? Do you think you are making things happen that wouldn`t otherwise happen? HOCKLEY: I`ve been told, as you just said, that we are making a difference. To me, this is just common sense. When we started off going to Connecticut and we`re told, this is what is going to happen and we think it`s pretty much stopping here, we wanted it to go a little further. It didn`t go quite as far as we hoped but then provisions were strengthened and that was a really good result for a bipartisan committee to come together like that and deliver the strongest gun legislation in the country. And in the Senate, yes -- I mean, going in this past weekend, I will admit I didn`t even know what a filibuster was. When I understood what it was, I thought what a ridiculous concept that government won`t even debate this. And to have moved that from, you know, stopping the filibuster and having the debate and now this is going to go forward. It doesn`t necessarily mean that -- we don`t know what`s going to happen next, but this is an important first step and it`s the first of a long, long journey that each step we`re just going to get a little bit closer to our goals. MADDOW: When my observation before I was in media and before ways doing this kind of media, I was student of political science. I did a doctorate of political science and I studied social movements and how activists bring about change. And the one thing that I learned and saw in action and was never able to prove academically but I believe it with all my heart is that thing that makes you most likely to win, is winning -- and that when you are unexpectedly able to achieve something, you`re not only attracting attention, you attract hope, and hope is momentum. And I think you`re on the hope tipping point at this point. HOCKLEY: Good. MADDOW: Again, I can`t thank you enough for being willing to talk about this here. Especially after the long day and long week you`ve had talking about this with all sorts of people. Nicole Hockley, thank you so much. HOCKLEY: Thank you very much. MADDOW: Good luck. Keep in touch. All right. We`ll be right back. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) MADDOW: This is a little important context in terms of understanding what`s about to happen next in Congress and why the common wisdom might be wrong. When the Congress decided back in January that they were not going to throw us off the so-called fiscal cliff, remember that, they didn`t just get to make that decision. They actually had to pass legislation to do that. And as legislation, it doesn`t have to just go through the Democratic controlled Senate, it had to go through the Republican- controlled House of Representatives. The House is controlled by the Republican Party. How on Earth can we as a country 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 bill. Combine that with a couple dozen Republicans you need to get it over the hump and that is how they got that bill passed. Then they did it again the next month. It was the Violence Against Woman Act. The House finally passed the Violence Against Women Act after stalling for more than a year. They had every single Democrat voting for it, every single one down to the last drop. But that`s not just majority. So, again was they got a few House Republicans to cross over, enough to let it to pass so it could get a majority, so it could get passed. This is week another example, slightly more obscure one. The House needed to vote to suspend the rules in order to pass a bill maintaining commemorated American battlefield sites. Well, in toward do something like that procedurally, you usually need the party in power to vote for it. But if you can`t count on the party in power to do that, and this something you need done, you got to find another way. So, again on battlefield sites you put together a way to get this thing done by lining up the minority party -- lining up almost every Democrat in the house and you just need enough Republicans to get it over the hump. Voila, rule suspended. This is not normally how people expect the Congress to work. This is a weird thing, right, to have the minority party do most of voting for stuff while the majority splits itself. So it can offer just enough support to pass what needs to be passed. But in the House of Representatives that does not like to vote for even the basic stuff, this is the new keep it quiet kind of way that some stuff has been getting passed this year. John Boehner, the House speaker -- as House speaker, has almost dictatorial power in the House over what comes up and how it comes up. House Speaker John Boehner has let this -- for lack of better word, this "letting Democrats do it" way of passing bills, go head and pass that at least four times in the things the way they have passed the last four months. They call it breaking the Hastert when Republicans do that because Denny Hastert reportedly never liked things to pass this way. But you know what? Who cares about process for processes sake? The important thing here is what this might mean for the country in terms of policy. If you have been wondering how something like better background checks for gun purchases might conceivably pass the House, if it gets through Senate this next week, gun reform hopefuls are floating the idea that this odd procedural route that the Republicans don`t much like to admit to but they sometimes let happen, that route would be the way that this thing would get through if it gets through. That is the narrow path to background checks or gun reforms potentially becoming law. The Greg Sargent at "The Washington Post" this week has been trying to map this path for how gun reform might pass the House. He notes when Republican Senate sponsor of background checks Pat Toomey talked about what he was able to come up with for the Senate, he said at the time that there are a substantial number of Republicans in the House who also support that general approach to that part of the gun`s issue. Well, if Pat Toomey is right, if that is true, if there are some Republicans that could go along with this and Democrats sick together, which seems likely, this could happen. If enough Senate Republicans support the proposal, continued pressure on House Republicans to allow a vote for the sake of the Newtown families who will be actively lobbying in day ahead, that pressure could get very, very intense. I think that is exactly about what`s about to happen. I think that we`re going to see in the Senate this week, it`s going to be very unpredictable, but the pressure is going to be almost unbelievable. And as it becomes clearer that it may pass Senate, the focus on the House right now to at least let this come for vote in the House, you got 90 percent support among the American public. You can count on every Democrat in the House pretty much to support it. All you need is enough Republicans to peel off -- to be allowed to peel off to put it over the top. The pressure on this is going to be unbelievably intense and that`s going to make for a very unpredictable few news days on this subject. Stay up late. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) MADDOW: This afternoon, President Obama presented the U.S. Naval Academy football team with the Commander-in-Chief`s trophy. Every season, the football teams from the military service academies play against each other. And just about every year since 1984, the sitting president of the United States then bestows the Commander-in-Chief`s Trophy to the best of the teams. Well, today, the midshipman from Annapolis decided that they would give President Obama a gift of their own in return. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: All right, that`s the official Navy helmet, fitted for me. Pretty sharp, huh? All right. (LAUGHTER) OBAMA: Here`s the general rule: you don`t put stuff on your head, if you`re president. That`s politics 101. You never look good wearing something on your head. (END VIDEO CLIP) MADDOW: Put it on, put it on. No. The president has learned the politicians don`t put stuff on your head rule. It did take him a while to learn it. There was the momentary cowboy hat floatation back in 2007. But since he has been actual president, really, he has been very good about the no headgear rule. Barely even a baseball hat. That kind of learning curve is important to all politicians but right now, the learning curve seems to be running in reverse for the Republican Party since the last election. Did you hear what Republican Party did today on the issue of race, at their big national Republican Party meeting in California? Did you hear what they did? That`s coming up. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) MADDOW: An update for you tonight on this guy. Dave Agema, one of the Republican Party`s top officials in the great state of Michigan, is a committee member of the national Republican Party. Well, a couple of weeks ago, you might remember we told you the story of Mr. Agema posting on his Facebook page about how the homosexual agenda is to get the public to affirm their filthy lifestyle and how homosexuals prey on children and how homosexuals account for half the murders in large cities. Since then, some young Republicans in Michigan have been calling for Dave Agema to resign his leadership positions with the party. The national Republican Party chairman Reince Priebus and Michigan`s Republican Party have both made statements effectively distancing themselves from Mr. Agema. The Michigan chairman said Mr. Agema`s post, quote, "undermines the party platform." We can tell you tonight that Dave Agema has not resigned. He`s, in fact, at the Republican National Committee`s spring meeting in California right now where he has mounted a pretty good defense for himself by pointing out that he feels very comfortable rejecting all that criticism, especially the part about undermining the party platform, since the anti- guy thing that he`s very much in favor of actually is in the Republican Party platform. And he`s right. This is the Republican Party platform from the last convention. Republicans ran on the anti-gay in 2012 elections. And today, after 13 somewhat famous social conservatives demanded it, the Republican National Committee at this meeting in California, they voted on that part of their platform. They voted on whether or not they want to reaffirm the anti-guy stuff that was in the platform as of November. Republicans voted on this resolution that was introduced by Dave Agema himself. That exact guy, Mr. Homosexuals are filthy killers who eat stray rabbit and parakeets. That guy introduced himself, introduced the resolution for the whole RNC, asking the Republican Party as a whole to reaffirm that Republicans really do believe in one man/one woman marriage only no matter who you love on account of the future of America. Dave Agema introduced this anti-guy marriage resolution himself personally to the whole Republican National Committee. And it passed. It passed unanimously. The social conservatives won. Social conservatives win in the Republican Party, pretty much always. They win inside the Republican Party itself when it comes to setting policy for the party and they win outside the party. They win in the states wherever Republicans hold power. Since then passed election, when Republicans lost the White House and lost ground in the White House and lost ground in the Senate, they have used the power that they`ve still got in the states to push the most aggressive social conservative policy agenda in a generation. Republicans in the states have put plat out unconstitutional bans into law. Bans on abortion into law in and in North Dakota. The North Dakota legislature sent the governor another abortion bill today just for good measure. Republicans in Kansas have sent their governor an abortion ban as well. We are waiting for Governor Brownback to sign it at this point. Since the November election, new TRAP laws designed to force abortion clinics out of business have spread from Mississippi where they were at work before the election, to now also North Dakota, and Alabama. And as of today, the great state of Virginia. Today in Virginia, the state board of health gave final approval for regulations that are designed to shut down Virginia`s clinics that provide abortions. The vote follows threats and direct intervention by the Republican state attorney general Ken Cuccinelli to force the board of health to reverse their earlier ruling on this issue to close the clinics so they end up where they ended up today. The state health commissioner resigned in protest of the pressure, resigned in protest of the new requirements that are designed to be difficult if not impossible to comply with. She said she could no longer fulfill role as state health commissioner, quote, "in good faith." But today, Ken Cuccinelli, the attorney general now in the Republican Party`s candidate for governor this year, Ken Cuccinelli got what he wanted in Virginia. The board of health in that state passed the rules to shut down Virginia`s clinics. After the vote, protesters shouted "Shame, shame". You see they are holding up cardboard faces there. Those are faces that are supposed to make them look like Ken Cuccinelli. Little images of Ken Cuccinelli`s head -- as if to remind their fellow Virginians of Ken Cuccinelli`s role in this act. The board of health member in this next clip you are about to see was on the losing side of today`s vote. This is one of the board of health members who voted to keep the clinics open. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: My concern from the beginning has been access. I don`t want to see any of those closed. (END VIDEO CLIP) MADDOW: The new rules designed to close Virginia`s clinics that provide abortions are now slated to take effect this summer. Mississippi`s done it. Alabama`s doing it. North Dakota is doing it. This is Republican governance in 2013. Joining us now is Charniele Herring. She`s a member of the Virginia House of Delegates. She`s the Democratic Party minority whip. She`s the chair of the Democratic Party of Virginia and she`s former chair of the Pro-Choice Caucus. Delegate Herring, it`s really nice to have you with us here tonight. Thank you for joining us. STATE DEL. CHARNIELLE HERRING (D), VIRGINIA: Thank you for having me. MADDOW: Obviously, today`s vote in the board of health was if not a surprise, at least a big deal for supporters of the Virginia clinics. What do you think happens next? Is this over? HERRING: No. The fight`s not over. It is more than likely that governor is going to go ahead and sign these regulations. But it remind Virginia voters what`s at stake this coming November in the elections. It is possibility that the new governor, whoever it may be, may go ahead and suspend those regulations. But it`s important that voters realize what`s happening is that Ken Cuccinelli used his heavy hand of government basically hijacked the regulatory process, wrote his own regulations, bullied the board of health into voting for those regulations and this is what we have. You know, it`s sad day for Virginia and for Virginia`s women because we are talking about closing clinics that provide diagnostic procedures for women, such as mammograms, or pelvic exams. MADDOW: You know, one of the things that we`ve been watching at the national level is that at the national level Republicans don`t really want to talk about their aggressive social conservative agenda. They don`t want to be known as the crusading anti-abortion activist party, even though they are really governing that way everywhere, that they`ve got power. You`re the chair of the Democratic Party in Virginia, are Democrats going to put issues of social conservativism, the anti-gay abuse of Ken Cuccinelli, the way that he`s been such an activist against abortion rights in your state and these other matters? Is that going to be front and center in the gubernatorial campaign? HERRING: It already is, Rachel. It already is. I can tell you people have their eye on Ken Cuccinelli and watching what he has been doing and already, voters are in tune. It`s been an issue. It will continue to be an issue because what we`re talking about and what`s at stake is women`s freedom to access healthcare. We`re talking about equality for every Virginian. People realize this translates into what -- our economy and how free we are going to be as a people of the commonwealth. In fact, Ken Cuccinelli`s extremism has gone into the business community. They are concerned about what he is doing, where his focus has been. MADDOW: Virginia has voted twice now for President Obama. It is a place obviously where Democrats can win. Why do you think that Republicans and socially conservative Republicans in particular have been able to set so much policy for the state? I mean, you look at Virginia, and if you squint, it sort of looks like Alabama in terms of the way Republicans there prioritized their issues. Governor McDonnell wants to be known as the business guy. But you look at what he`s done and there is a reason people call him governor ultra sound. Why do they keep winning the policy fights? HERRING: Because when they campaign, they talk about, I want to talk about business and jobs. When they get into office, they talk these extreme votes and measures and I`ll tell you why. It`s the Tea Party. If a Republican even has a whiff of moderation, says let`s look at science, let`s look at medical evidence and determine what we need for these clinics, they face a primary by the Tea Party. So we have an extreme element that`s coming in. But it`s up to voters to realize what is good for the common wealth. It`s not extremism but it`s moderation. MADDOW: It opens up space in the sent are for the Democratic Party, if you guys are going to fill that vacuum. Charniele Herring, member of the Virginia House, Democratic minority whip, chair of the Democratic Party of Virginia -- thank you very much for your time tonight. I would love to stay in touch with you on these matters as they keep moving forward quickly in Virginia. Thanks a lot. HERRING: I appreciate it. Thank you. MADDOW: All right. THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW Jeopardy-style tease time. The answer is, helping the political Tea Party expand its appeal. The question? It`s a daily double and then some. RNC meeting underway, and, oh, boy, is it rich with content? Stay with us. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) MADDOW: Happy Friday. Pure weirdness involving a fake congressional hearing, former members of Congress, and space aliens. It`s coming up because it`s Friday, and you deserve it. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) MADDOW: Happy Friday. You know those, we the people, petitions at the White House, you get 5,000 people to sign an online petition and the White House says it will respond to the issue that you brought up. They must respond if you give them 5,000 signatures? It`s an awesome idea, right? It`s the heart in the right place kind of stuff. But eventually that meant that seat of power in the most powerful country on Earth, the White House, was coming within a thousand signatures of having to answer the question of having to, quote, "nationalize the Twinkie industry." When that happens, maybe it is time to raise the bar in terms of things they must respond to. So, even they though started with 5,000 signature plan, the White House upped the threshold to 25,000 signatures. That still wasn`t high enough to filter out stuff like this. Invite Neal Boortz to spend an hour talking to the president about tax reform. OK, Google Neal Boortz. Come on, America. The president is busy. So, the threshold started at 5,000, then it went to 25,000. That can clear the Boortz hurdle. Now, you have to get a hundred thousand signatures on your petition for the White House to respond to it. But it was back in the old days of only 5,000 signatures that White House did have to respond to this question. Quote, "We the undersigned strongly urge the president of the United States to formally acknowledge an extraterrestrial presence, engaging the human race. Immediately release into the public domain all files from all agencies and military services relevant to this phenomenon." That position got more than 12,000 signatures and this is the White House response from the Office of Science and Technology Policy. It`s actually very considerate and good. Listen to this, "The U.S. government has no evidence that any life exists outside our planet or that an extraterrestrial presence has contacted or engaged any member of the human race. In addition, there`s no credible information to suggest that any evidence is being hidden from the public`s eye many scientists and mathematicians have looked with a statistical mind-set at the question of whether life likely exists beyond and have come to the conclusion that the odds are pretty ,that somewhere among the trillions and trillions of stars in the universe, there is a planet other than ours that is home to life. Many have also noted however that the odds of us making contact with any of them especially any intelligent ones are extremely small given the distances involved. But that`s all statistics and speculations. The fact is, we have no credible evidence that extraterrestrial presence here on earth." Asked and answered, right? No, of course not. Since the White House will not give them the truth that they know is out there, the group behind that petition is now turning to another branch of government to uncover the real evidence. Sort of. They are sort of approaching Congress but -- well, they`ve decided to hold a fake congressional hearing. A five-day marathon hearing involving testimony from dozens of witnesses, witnesses questioned by former members of Congress in a room at the National Press Club that has been configured to resemble a Senate hearing room. There will be press sections and audience area and witness and committee tables just like the real thing except it`s fake. They are calling it a citizen hearing on disclosure. And they`ve created like a movie trailer for it. Look. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think it`s time to open the books on questions that have remained in the dark, question of government investigations of UFOs. CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC: Stop the music, Governor. Did you say the United States government is covering up a history of a UFO sighting in your state? DR. EDGAR MITCHELL, APOLLO 14 ASTRONAUT: It is now time to put away this embargo of truth about alien presence. BILL RICHARDSON (D), FORMER NEW MEXICO GOVERNOR: They don`t produce documents, Chris. They should just get it all out. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We ought to do it because the American people quite frankly can` can handle the truth and it is about the law. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It`s no longer about lights on the sky. It`s about lies on the ground. (END VIDEO CLIP) MADDOW: Release the x files! Embargo of truth about the alien presence, you`re going down. So that`s the fake hearing, over five days of testimony, dozens of witnesses will talk about strange things they say they witnessed. They will give that testimony to a panel of members of Congress -- excuse me, wait, former members of Congress, including one former senator, Mike Gravel of Alaska, who once read the Pentagon papers and other interesting stuff in Washington. But who more recently is perhaps best remembered for his long Zen, otherwise inexplicable campaign ads when he briefly ran for president in 2008. But let`s assume that former Senator Mike Gravel and company are doing this fake hearing thing because they believe in aliens visiting Earth. The organizers of the fake UFOs hearing told "Roll Call", quote, "I don`t care what ex-members actually think about extraterrestrial issues." The organizer said he only cares, quote, "that they served in Congress, that they know how it is done, that they are willing to run these hearings like an actual hearing in order to create a rather amazing and I think important event." Also I should say fake committee members are going to get paid $20,000 a pop to do it. So there`s that. "Roll Call" and "The Washington Post" report the fake hearing adventure is expected to cost over $600,000, including the $20,000 fee paid to each of the former members of Congress who is going to preside over that fake hearing. Nobody knows who the anonymous donor is who`s footing the bill. But it is somebody rich enough to put up 600 grand to pay for a fake congressional hearing about UFOs, and it is someone of the mindset a fake congressional hearing about UFOs is what America needs to see the light about UFOs. The eerie, eerie, oddly compelling light. Watch this space. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) MADDOW: On Wednesday night, two nights ago, we reported on this show a story when I first saw it, I swear I thought it couldn`t possibly be true, I thought I was getting punk`d. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) MADDOW: On the ten year anniversary of the Saddam statue being pulled down, House Republicans celebrated this week inviting former Vice President Dick Cheney to a closed door meeting, for him to share with him his Dick Cheney wisdom on foreign policy. To be clear, Dick Cheney did not show up uninvited and they felt bad and had to let him in, they invited him to talk to them. He is their chosen expert, still. (END VIDEO CLIP) MADDOW: Since we reported that story Wednesday, I have been waiting for some sort of correction, waiting to feel stupid, right? I`ve been waiting to hear it was some lefty satire that fooled us. And no way did House Republicans seek out Dick Cheney for advice on foreign policy in 2013, can`t be. But, alas, there has been no correction, that apparently actually happened. And it gets better or worse, better/worse. Vice President Cheney`s next stop after meeting to advise House Republicans on foreign policy this week was another speaking gig at the Republican National Committee spring meeting in Los Angeles. This is the official National Republican Party meeting. This year is aimed specifically at the challenge of, quote, "broadening the Republican Party`s appeal with voters." So congressional Republicans called in Dick Cheney for advice on foreign policy matters, and the national Republican Party turned to Dick Cheney for advice on broadening the party`s appeal, because when you think broad appeal to the electorate, do you think Dick Cheney? Now to be fair, the RNC didn`t just turn to Dick Cheney on this matter. They decided to bring in other experts as well. Again, the stated aim of the Republican Party`s national meeting right now in Los Angeles is to reach out to new voters, specifically Asian Americans, blacks, Hispanics, and young people. So, to do that, to make that outreach, the party decided to bring in the aforementioned Dick Cheney. Also, they decided to bring in one of the people that runs Breitbart Web site. You know the Breitbart Web site? That`s the conservative Web site that fixated on attacking ACORN and Van Jones and Eric Holder and Shirley Sherrod. Remember how they invented the whole thing where Shirley Sherrod is a racist against white people and it turns out, they totally made up the tape that made it seem like that? Yes, to broaden the appeal to Asian Americans, blacks, Hispanics, and young people, the Republicans at the national meeting tapped the Breitbart guy, Dick Cheney, and also this guy. (BEGIN AUDIO CLIP) HUGH HEWITT, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: I`m still trying to find two tickets to the Ohio State/USC game -- since it`s probably the last football game we will get to see before the United States gets blown up by the Islamists under Obama. (END VIDEO CLIP) MADDOW: That guy and Dick Cheney and the guy from Breitbart, and they have to turn out black votes and other minorities to the Republican Party`s way of looking at things, there`s also this guy. Another expert being appealing the party is topping for its national meeting right now, on how to attract minorities. If the name David Horowitz is unfamiliar, perhaps his books might ring a bell. There`s this one, "Black Skin Privilege and the American Dream". Or this one, "Hating Whitey and Other Progressive Causes." This is also a popular one, I`m sure, for modernizing, broadening the Republican Party appeal, his magnum opus, "The Race Card: White Guilt, Black Resentment, and the Assault on Truth and Justice." See, if it only weren`t for all of the black resentment, truth and justice would be alive and well. I like watching and studying up on Republican politics more than anything. I obsess on Republican politics. But, honestly, there`s something weird going on right now in Republican politics. It`s inexplicable. The Republicans are in the let`s hit the reset button mode post- election. And in the past 48 hours, they`ve unanimously voted to oppose gay rights. They`ve asked Dick Cheney to lead them on foreign policy, and they`ve asked to talk about how to appeal to African-Americans, the author of the book, "Hating Whitey". I am mentally preparing myself to do a correction on these matters when it turns out that I am being punk`d and this can`t possibly be the truth. But until then, stay tuned. That does it for us tonight. We will see you again Monday. In the meantime, though, as you know, you now have to go to prison. You have to go to prison in three, two, one. THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. END <Copy: Content and programming copyright 2013 MSNBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2013 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>