but the states should be empowered, as the tenth amendment allows, for them to make their decision on these issues. i don t see let me go back to mike on this. i know you re a democrat, but i think it s hard for your party not to dump on the republicans if they come out against doing something about the inequality of somebody legally married in california, for example, or anywhere else, since they live together, take responsibility for children together in many cases, not to have the normal benefits of survivor benefits, hospital benefits, tax questions, all to their advantage. but they can t take advantage of it under the law unless you do something about it. look, absolutely all that is true. leaving it up to the states won t do. in 10 or 15 years, chris, we re going to be looking back at this and wondering what we re all talking about. this is the civil rights issue of our time, marriage equality is. short term, the republican party, there s a battle for the heart and soul of
appropriate time will make the decision to do whatever resolution with respect to federal benefits it deems necessary. but the states should be empowered, as tenth amendment allows, for them to make their decision on these issues. i don t see let me go back to mike on this. i know you re a democrat, but i think it s hard for your party not to dump on the republicans if they come out against doing something, the unequainequality someone living in california, anywhere else, since they live together, take responsibility for children together in many cases not to have the normal benefits of survivor benefits, hospital visits, all the things, tax questions, all to their advantage, but they can t take advantage to it under the law unless you do something about it. look, absolutely all that is true. leaving it up to the states won t do. in 10 or 15 years, chris, we re going to be looking back and this and wondering what we re all talking about. this is the civil rights issue of our time
the states will work those things out. the federal government at the appropriate time will make the decision to do whatever resolution with respect to federal benefits it deems necessary. but the states should be empowered, as the tenth amendment allows, for them to make their decision on these issues. i don t see let me go back to mike on this. i know you re a democrat, but i think it s hard for your party not to dump on the republicans if they come out against doing something about the inequality of somebody legally married in california, for example, or anywhere else, since they live together, take responsibility for children together in many cases, not to have the normal benefits of survivor benefits, hospital benefits, tax questions, all to their advantage. but they can t take advantage of it under the law unless you do something about it. look, absolutely all that is true. leaving it up to the states won t do. in 10 or 15 years, chris, we re going to be looking back at this
as they should be in my view. shepard: senator, part of this is about the battle for the heart and soul of the party. that s long-held republican and conservative view on war to avoid it at all costs. that sort of a voice has had a difficult time. the rand paul wing, if you will, has had a difficult time having its voice heard. you and others have been interventionists. let s intervene in sirra, intervene in libya, let s been, bomb, bomb, bomb iran, is it your sense that do you really believe that? you really believe that? shepard: sir, all i m asking you, is it your sense that rand paul may be bridging together those people in the base whom align maybe in some cases more closely with the left than with the right? for instance, frank rich this morning, was on board with this. so was eugene robinson. let me say that senator paul was the one vote against the resolution in the united states senate that said we should not allow iran to acquire nuclear
least on background checks? something he can put on the wall and say we got this done? well, i think that he s winning the battle for the heart and soul of the public here. i mean, if you look at the polls, even nra members by a wide, wide margin support universal background checks. nobody is going to sit still for federal agents coming and taking people s guns away, but nobody is planning to do that. but everybody supports sensible regulations like universal background checks. now, is that going to happen in today s congress? i don t know. because the nra is really a shill for the gun industry, and that s a $12 billion industry. so you got guys like lindsey graham who is always going to be willing or other senators and congressmen who are always going to be willing to, you know, dance and like pathetic marionettes to the tune that the nra calls. so this is going to be a tough fight, and it s not going to happen quickly. but there s nothing wrong