updated 12/9/2013 10:42:13 AM ET 2013-12-09T15:42:13

ALL IN with CHRIS HAYES
December 6, 2013
Guest: Maxine Waters, Thomas Frank, Dorian Warren, Jess McIntosh, Esther
Armah, Molly Crabapple, Michael Moynihan

CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST: Good evening from New York. Happy Friday.
I`m Chris Hayes.

One day after the death of South Africa`s anti-apartheid leader and
founding father, tributes and remembrances are rolling in from leaders from
all over the world and across the ideological spectrum. From Russian
President Vladimir Putin who praised Mandela`s commitment to the ideals of
humanism and justice. To Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who
called him one of the outstanding figures of our time. To Iran`s
president, Hasan Rouhani, who praised Mandela`s firm belief in the freedom
and equality of all humans.

And pretty much every leader in between, in the U.S., the same thing
is happening. Emotional eulogies have been pouring in from left, right and
center, from Bill Clinton, to both Presidents Bush, from Susan Rice to
Condoleezza Rice, everyone is celebrating the life and mourning the loss of
Mandela.

Even arguably the most conservative member of the United States`
Senate today, Ted Cruz, released a heartfelt statement saying, in part,
quote, "Nelson Mandela will live in history as an inspiration for defenders
of liberty around the globe because of his epic fight against injustice, an
entire nation is now free."

But Senator Cruz also posted that statement to his Facebook page, and
that is where the illusion of the bipartisan universally accepted respect
and regard for Nelson Mandela and the anti-apartheid movement evaporated.

The comment thread that follows Ted Cruz`s respectful eulogy is not
pretty. It`s just teeming with stuff like this. "Go home, Ted, you`re
drunk. He was a communist terrorist who targeted people for no other
reason than being white. Stunned to see you support this scumbag, Mr.
Cruz. Mandela was a murderer and a terrorist, not to mention a communist.
He`s also a huge supporter of abortion. Don`t put him up too high.
Careful, Mr. Cruz."

And my personal favorite, "Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao and FDR are
also dead. They don`t deserve a positive eulogy either."

Now, for an outsider unfamiliar with conservatism and its record on
race and apartheid, this open racism and contempt for an internationally
revered figure like Nelson Mandela might be surprising. But that comment
thread is just the capstone on a very long, luckily dwindling tradition.

"Think Progress" is out with a handy guide today detailing much of the
conservative cannon on South Africa, like in the 1960s when Mandela was
sentenced to life in prison and "The National Review" opined, quote, "The
South African court have sentenced a batch of admitted terrorists to life
in the penitentiary. And you would think the court had just finished
barbecuing St. Joan, to hear the house and the liberal press."

In the 1970s, "The Wall Street Journal" argued against sanctioning the
apartheid South African government on economic grounds. In the 1980s, the
late Jerry Falwell urged his supporters to write their congressmen and
senators and tell them to oppose sanctions against the apartheid regime,
telling them, quote, "Sanctions against South Africa will hurt the blacks
much more than the government or anyone else."

In the `90s as Mandela prepared to visit, the Heritage Foundation
warned Americans that quote have reasons to be skeptical of him and arguing
that, quote, "Nelson Mandela is not a freedom fighter."

But it hasn`t just been pundits and commentators and conservative
magazines and think tanks. The modern conservative movement`s most sainted
hero, Ronald Reagan, took that right wing view of apartheid and anti-
apartheid and made it American government policy. He did it even as
outrage over the crimes of apartheid grew around the world and here in the
U.S.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TOM BROKAW, NBC NEWS: In South Africa, the black township of Soweto
exploded in violence again today. There was violence by blacks protesting
a ban on funerals, for people killed by police last week. And there was
violence by police, enforcing the government order. As many as six people
were reported killed today, but there was no way to confirm that number.

South African government censorship limited the details of this report
now by NBC`s Mike Boettcher.

MIKE BOETTCHER, NBC CORRESPONDENT: Before daybreak, the box houses of
Soweto, vigils were held from the dead from last week`s violence. Parents,
relatives and friends jammed into rooms where they prayed to the dead of
each house and waited for the mass funeral that police had forbidden. At
least 20 of the dead had been shot by police.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: In that context, in a world that knew that that`s what I was
like to live under apartheid rule, Ronald Reagan resisted a push by
Congress to join Europe and the rest of the world taking concrete action to
pressure South Africa to end apartheid and release Nelson Mandela from
prison.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Today`s speech was supposed to head off congressional
demands for sanctions, but the effect may have been exactly the opposite,
because the president gave no ground on South Africa, dismissing the
growing call for sanctions as an active folly.

RONALD REAGAN, FORMER PRESIDENT: If Congress imposes sanctions, it
would destroy America`s flexibility, discard our diplomatic leverage and
deepen the crisis. We must stay and work, not cut and run.

REPORTER: The speech was carefully balanced, the president condemning
repression by the white government but also terrorism by blacks. With his
plan to name a black ambassador now on hold, Mr. Reagan was left proposing
reforms South Africa, a timetable for ending apartheid, release of
political prisoners including Nelson Mandela and discussions with black
groups, including the African National Congress.

The president stressed all South Africans must work out their future
together.

REAGAN: As one African remarked recently, southern Africa is like a
zebra. If the white parts are injured, the black parts will die, too.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: And Reagan did have some allies in Congress.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JESSE HELMS (R), NORTH CAROLINA: By intruding into the affairs
of the South African government, we are shooting the farmers of America in
the foot. And I will have no part of it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: In the end, for all of Ronald Reagan`s charisma and persuasive
ability, for all his sway over congressional Republicans, both houses of
Congress voted to impose the sanctions. And even after Reagan vetoed the
measure, both the House and Senate went back and voted to override his
veto.

And it wasn`t just the usual suspects fighting Reagan. The Senate was
controlled at the time by Republicans. This was an open revolt from his
own party.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. RICHARD LUGAR (R), INDIANA: We are against tyranny, and tyranny
is in South Africa. And we must be vigorous in that fight.

SEN. LOWELL WEICKER (R), CONNECTICUT: Today`s vote is today`s
generation saying no to the incipient Holocaust of our times.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: Thirty-one Senate Republicans voted to override Reagan`s veto.
Among them, this fresh-faced young senator from Kentucky.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R), KENTUCKY: I think it`s now time to put a
law in the books. I think it`s now time to put a law on the books even if
we have to do it over the president`s veto.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: There are I think two lessons here, what is morally obvious in
retrospect more obvious at the time at least not to every. There are
people right now who will be caught on the wrong side of history on
something we are debating at this moment.

There`s also this. People can be persuaded. There is such thing as
moral evolution. If reading Ted Cruz`s Facebook thread makes you despair
for humanity, think about how remarkable it is that Ted Cruz, Ted Cruz,
wrote that statement in the first place, given his place in the
conservative movement and the conservative movement`s place on this issue
just 10 or 20 years ago.

Joining me now is Congresswoman Maxine Waters, Democrat from
California. She was a leader of the anti-apartheid movement in the U.S.
and met Mandela when she spoke at the ceremony and awarded the
congressional gold medal in 1998.

Congresswoman, can you walk us through that fight in 1986? How did it
build to the point where this went from an issue that was being fought at
the grass-roots level on campuses and cities to something the U.S. Congress
took up?

REP. MAXINE WATERS (D), CALIFORNIA: Well, as you know, the black
South Africans themselves really began to resist the repression, began to
resist apartheid, led by Nelson Mandela and Winnie Mandela, Oliver Tambo,
Mr. Mbeki, the Sisulus, all of these great men and women, many of whom was
forced into exile but continued the struggle.

It caught fire. They began to educate and send their ANC
representatives out of the country and all over the world talking about
what was going on.

I introduced legislation in the California state assembly where I was
serving to divest all of our pension funds from businesses that were doing
business in South Africa. That caught fire. And investment started all
over the United States in various legislatures. The young people on the
college campuses started to march and rally. Trans Africa forms and began
to sit in at the South African embassy. We closed down the South African
council here in Los Angeles, so the movement took hold. And we added to
that the sanctions, the rallies, the protests, the education about what was
going on, and it brought apartheid to an end.

HAYES: Yes, I think the key point if that is the grass-roots movement
of divestment as the predicate to sanctions. Sanctions became the national
government`s policy version of what universities and cities and states and
all sorts of cities were working on on a grass-roots level. I want to
bring in Thomas Frank, columnist for "Harper`s Magazine," author of "The
Wrecking Crew: How Consumers Ruin Government, Enriched Themselves and
Beggared the Nation."

Tom, there`s an amazing chapter in that book that is about the nexus
between movement conservative, particularly in the 1980s, and if not pro-
apartheid movement, the anti-anti-apartheid movement, that the big issue on
campuses particularly was the South African government, anti-apartheid,
liberals and leftist opposing it and conservatives kind of rising up in its
defense. What did that nexus look like?

THOMAS FRANK, HARPER`S MAGAZINE: It`s good that you put it that way,
anti-anti-apartheid because that`s exactly what these people were. They
would never actually come out and try to rationalize apartheid or try to
sell apartheid to an American audience. I mean, that basically couldn`t be
done.

But there were plenty of conservatives that had other ways of
rationalizing South Africa, I mean, the most important one being the Cold
War, right? This is -- you know, South Africa was surrounded by hostile
countries.

If you asked a South African government to describe its enemies, p
would always say they`re communists. Everyone surrounding us is a
communist, you know. The ANC is communist. And we`ve got to, you know, to
struggle to defeat communism.

In fact, it was an interesting country, you know, the apartheid
regime. In some ways, they were -- you know, they had this vision of the
world as a gigantic communist conspiracy that was very familiar to a lot of
American conservatives.

HAYES: I want to look at -- congresswoman, I want to read this
headline. Ta-Nehisi Coats in writing about this put this up today. This
was kind of an amazing revelation that came out in 1995. It says, "Think
tank was a front for apartheid. A conservative think tank with ties to
U.S. Senator Jesse Helms and other prominent Republicans was actually a
front for South Africa`s white rulers during did the last days of
apartheid, `New York News Day` reported Sunday."

Congresswoman, one of the shocking things about that `86 fight is how
hard the South African government directly lobbied American senators,
American lawmakers, the kind of propaganda arm of the apartheid government
operating here in the U.S.?

WATERS: Absolutely. One of the things we have to come face to face
with and understand is you had had a white South African government, a very
rich basically government and country that was doing well, and they were
selling that these blacks are murderers. These blacks are rioting. These
blacks are crazy.

And you`ve got to help us and understand that we`re trying to keep
peace in our country. But these outrageous people are out to kill us. And
so, when white governments like that sell that story, particularly at that
time, they tend to be believed by even the conservatives here in the United
States.

HAYES: Tom, do you think that the conservative movement has had a
reckoning with its relationship to apartheid? I mean, I`ve been heartened,
and my perspective on this is you welcome changes of heart with open arms.
I`m glad to see the conservatives are no longer in the anti-anti-apartheid
camp.

But do you think it`s had a reckoning with some of the ugly history it
had with the anti-apartheid government?

FRANK: Well, some of it, but we haven`t gotten into the really ugly
details here like there were certain conservatives that would go on tours
of South Africa. There were conservatives that loved the gold standard
because it was a backdoor way of subsidizing South Africa. There were
conservatives that loved South Africa as sort of puppet, you know, strong
man like Jonas Savimbi. I mean, you know, I`ll never get over that one.

There were conservatives here in America who thought that, you know,
the Bantu stance was a really good idea. It was like setting up little
free market experimental territories, you know. We never talk about that
stuff anymore.

I mean, my God, the denunciations of the ANC at the time, you know?
It was as though these people were, you know, were like, you know, the
cultural revolution in China. It was just this sort of unthinkable thing
that was sweeping down on an allied government.

And then you look at them now. It`s fine. It worked out just fine.

HAYES: Right. And the remarkable thing is that reconciliation that
happens, and the forging of this kind of multiracial national identity that
Mandela is now being praised for, that only came after this epic struggle.

Maxine Waters who was an absolute vanguard in that fight and Thomas
Frank from "Harper`s" -- thank you so much.

WATERS: You`re so welcome.

HAYES: When we come back, another installment of our bizarro Congress
series. You want to stick around for that.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: Good economic news on this Friday, the latest jobs report is
out showing a better than expected 203,000 jobs added to the economy in the
month of November, with the unemployment rate dropping to 7 percent. This
is now the lowest unemployment rate we`ve seen since the financial crisis.
And it comes on the heels of revisions that show the economy growing last
quarter at one of the fastest rates since the onset of the Great Recession.
At this pace, 2013 will be the best year for job creation since 2005.

Congress, of course, still has it in its power to screw things up.
But it also has the power to make things better. One of the most
persistent bedeviling problems with job creation throughout this entire
recovery has been that low-wage jobs have accounted for half of job
creation in the past three years according to analysis through April of
this year. And Congress, if it wanted to, could do something about that
today. It could vote to raise minimum wage.

And President Obama would sign it immediately. So we have reached
into the alternate reality in which that happens and we present the latest
installment of our ALL IN "Bizarro Congress" series in which those
lawmakers go ahead and do right by America`s workers.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

HAYES: Good evening from New York. I`m Chris Hayes.

Tremendous news out of Washington today. The House has voted to raise
the minimum wage with stunning bipartisan support.

REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: The questions on
passage, ayes have it.

HAYES: Today, House Republicans finally gave into the will of the
American people and passed the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2013.

After months of intense grass-roots pressure from Walmart workers,
retail workers, to yesterday`s largest-ever fast-food workers strike for
higher wages, the House finally voted to raise the minimum wage to $10.10
per hour.

REP. MICHELE BACHMANN (R), MINNESOTA: You put your finger on the
pulse of America because Americans want fairness.

HAYES: Republicans cited overwhelming public support as the impetus
for action, arguing that the majority of Americans in 62 percent of
Republicans support raising the minimum wage and that that forced their
hand.

REP. MICHAEL GRIMM (R), NEW YORK: The American people have spoken,
and I know I made a commitment to listen to them, and finally we are doing
that.

HAYES: The bill will next go to the Senate where its passage is all
but assured.

SEN. TED CRUZ (R), TEXAS: This is an opportunity for the Senate to
return to the finest traditions of this body, where we listen to and fight
for the American people.

HAYES: Confident that the legislation will reach the president`s
desk, the House Speaker was triumphant.

BOEHNER: We had a victory today for the American people. And
frankly, we also had a victory for common sense.

CROWD: Yes.

HAYES: Democrats who have championed a wage increase cheered the
House.

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I have congratulated
the Republicans.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Republicans stepped up and acted as adults.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I want to commend both sides of the aisle for
working towards an agreement.

HAYES: While low-wage workers across the country celebrate.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This will allow me to work just one job, spend
more time at home with my wife, be able to go back and finish my education
hopefully.

HAYES: Over the last 40 years we`ve watched the minimum wage`s value
plummet from its highest point in 1968 to where it stands today at $7.25 an
hour, $3.25 lower than what it should be if it had kept pace with
inflation.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We need minimum wage to go up so that way we can
survive.

HAYES: The Fair Minimum Wage Act when signed will bring income back
above the poverty line for a family of three, raise of the wages of about
30 million people, affecting the lives of some 15 million children who have
a parent working a minimum-wage job.

KAYE SMITH: Increasing the minimum wage to a livable wage is really
the only humane option we have.

HAYES: It would also have profound effects on the economy.

BOEHNER: It`s good for our country, and it`s good for our economy,
and it`s good for the American people, especially those who are looking for
work.

HAYES: Raising the minimum wage to over $10 an hour would increase
GDP by over $32 billion, create almost 150,000 new jobs, cut food stamps
spending by billions.

PROTESTERS: We can`t survive on $7.25!

HAYES: As workers increase wages mean they no longer have to depend
on the government for help.

Yes, today the house took a heroic first step towards lifting the
minimum wage closer to a living wage. Democracy in action is indeed a
beautiful thing.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HAYES: Joining me now back in our reality is Dorian Warren, associate
professor of political science and international public affairs at Columbia
University.

Dorian, this could happen tomorrow. There is a lot of support
publicly in polling, it`s remarkable popular. There`s support now I think,
strong support in the Democratic Caucus on both sides of the aisle -- both
houses, and the president has come out, and he`s been talking about it a
lot recently, the only obstacle is the House Republican Caucus.

DORIAN WARREN, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY: That`s right. And the president,
remember, started at $9 an hour and has agreed to sign off on $10.10 an
hour if that bill were to pass. And as we know, this week he gave this big
speech on income inequality and talked about those fast-food workers and
other low-wage workers.

So, yes, you`re right, it is our most un-democratic institution, the
Senate, which is the final stumbling block here.

HAYES: You think the Senate actually more than the House?

WARREN: I`m sorry, thank you for that correction.

HAYES: The House.

WARREN: I was still in bizarro world. If you could just replay that
every day, maybe it will become reality, I`m sorry. Right, it`s the House
Republicans that are --

HAYES: Right.

WARREN: -- holding this up.

HAYES: Who got 3 million less votes in the last election.

WARREN: And remember, as you pointed out, over a majority of
Republicans actually support an increase in the minimum wage. So there is
overwhelming consensus among the American public on this issue.

HAYES: So, there`s an interesting, there`s dual tracks here. There`s
a kind of inside strategy with the Progressive Caucus pushing for this and
even kind of Main Street Democrats. Then you`ve got this fight for 15.
These are the fast food worker strikes. There was the biggest yet
yesterday. They`ve been spreading.

How do you think those two are interacting with each other?

WARREN: I think there are a couple things going on. Social movements
and protests in disruption is always great at getting issues on the
national political agenda that normal politics doesn`t allow. So if
anything, we`re having a sustained discussion about income inequality --

HAYES: It`s on every cable news network, it`s on CNBC.

WARREN: Even FOX, right? It`s everywhere.

So one, we`re talking about it, and there`s legislation. But two, we
are seeing actual legislative victories at the state and local level. So,
we`re building up place by place momentum hopefully for some national
change. And in fact, if the federal government refuses to act, we`re still
going to be working to raise wages at the state and local level all around
the country.

HAYES: Yes. The fast food worker fight is a fight that`s actually
about unfair labor practices being allowed to organize and form unions so
that workers can bargain collectively for their own interests and for wage
increases. But we`re also seeing -- there was a clip from our "Bizarro
Congress" -- not to pull the curtain back too much.

But there`s a clip in there, a guy talking about how he`s going to
feed his family. That`s actually from an airport worker in SeaTac, which
is the Seattle-Tacoma Airport. It`s a little town that has the airport in
it that voted by a squeaker to raise there quite a bit, right?

WARREN: To $15 an hour. And so, here`s the question, Chris -- is the
sky going to fall in SeaTac? It didn`t fall on San Francisco when San
Francisco went to $10.55 an hour. It hasn`t fallen on the state of
Washington which had, until recently, the highest state-level minimum wage
at $9.19.

We have empirical evidence all around the country that when you raise
the minimum wage, the job -- the employment effects are negligible. And in
fact, arguably it`s good for business, and it`s good for taxpayers because
those low-wage workers don`t have to rely on food stamps and Medicaid as
much. $7 billion a year according to a UC-Berkeley study in terms of
public subsidies, just in fast food, by the way.

HAYES: Just in fast food, $7 billion a year.

WARREN: So it saves taxpayers money, but it`s good for business.

HAYES: Right. Because they go out and then they spend things at Best
Buy.

WARREN: And Walmart, they buy more burgers at McDonald`s. And guess
what, if McDonald`s workers could make $15 an hour, they could actually buy
more hamburgers at a higher cost than what they can do on the minimum wage.

HAYES: That was Ford`s thinking about paying his workers so that they
could afford to buy a Ford.

Dorian Warren for Columbia University -- thank you so much.

WARREN: Thank you, Chris.

HAYES: Coming up, here`s Bill O`Reilly talking about Nelson Mandela
last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL O`REILLY, FOX NEWS: He was a communist, this man.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.

O`REILLY: He was a communist. All right? But he was a great man.
What he did for his people was stunning. He was a great man. But he was a
communist.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: So, actually, the amazing thing about that clip is that it`s
not clear Bill O`Reilly`s wrong. We will talk about the parts of Mandela`s
life that are being left out, ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Mr. Speaker, what advice do you and other Republican
leaders give to your members when they`re going up against women
candidates, and frankly when they`re trying to appeal to women voters?

BOEHNER: I try them to be a little more sensitive, you know? You
look around the Congress, there are a lot more females in the Democrat
Caucus than there are in the Republican Caucus. And, you know, some of our
members just aren`t as sensitive as they ought to be.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: Females.

That was House Speaker John Boehner yesterday with the understatement
of the year as news got out of the GOP`s latest strategy to attempt to
secure more women voters. The National Republican National Congressional
Committee is holding classes on how to talk to and talk about women folk --
both female political opponents or friendly female constituents, it`s dos
and don`ts for guys like this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TODD AKIN (R), FORMER CONGRESSMAN: If it`s a legitimate rape, the
female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let`s
assume that maybe that didn`t work or something.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why should you vote for me? Because I do not wear
high heels.

(LAUGHTER)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You`re part of the problem. The media is part of
the problem as well.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh, come on. That`s so easy. That`s so easy.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, come on, Carol.

COSTELLO: That is so easy.

REP. ROKITA: Carol, you are beautiful, but you have to be honest as
well.

COSTELLO: OK. I think we should leave it here.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: Leave it right there. Comments like those have helped create
a massive electoral weakness for republicans. But, if you have to have a
class to teach how to talk tweeted democratic senator and also woman Claire
McCaskill, "You have got a much bigger problem than the class is going to
solve.

Republicans` problems with women voters have been a huge electoral
sore spot. Most recently demonstrated in Virginia where democrat Terry
McAuliffe won women voters by 9 points. And since President Obama carried
women voters by 11 points in the last year`s presidential election, since
then just 14% of women say the Republican Party has moved closer to their
perspective.

Now, they are not doing much to change their policy agenda which is
actually most responsible for the gap in women voters. So, instead,
republicans keep trying to repackage repurpose and remessage themselves and
shocker, they are doing it badly. Last year there was this last-minute
move by house republicans to name Representative Candace Miller to chair
the house administration committee which came after weeks of criticism of
Boehner for filling every one of the committee chair posts with white men.

And, more recently, this amazing photo from the government shutdown
that shows eight white men ready to make a deal. Tweeted by House Majority
Leader Eric Cantor behind the hashtag, #fairnessforall. Joining me now is
Jess McIntosh, Communication`s Director for the Progressive Political
Action Committee, EMILY`s List. All right, Jess, how successful do you
envision this latest seminar? Are they contracting with you or EMILY`s
List or anyone else to actually teach the seminar?

JESS MCINTOSH, COMMUNICATION`S DIRECTOR FOR THE PROGRESSIVE POLITICAL
ACTION COMMITTEE, EMILY`S LIST: You mean have they consulted women on how
to talk to women?

HAYES: Yes.

MCINTOSH: I am not sure that they have women in the room to consult,
which might be part of the problem. I think it is going to be more
successful than their last strategy, which was how to lose friends and
alienate women. But, this seems to be probably -- I think it is like the
tenth or 12th time that I have heard about a GOP training course to teach
house incumbents -- these are sitting members of congress. These are not
first-time candidates -- how not to insult women. And, the sad part about
it is that that is their strategy to appeal to women voters. Do not screw
up.

HAYES: Right.

MCINTOSH: Do not say something insulting. It is not appeal to them
by talking to them about their lives, about the future, about what kind of
government and country you envision. It is just maybe do not say some
rapes are legit. That is about as good as it gets for the house
republicans right now.

HAYES: John Boehner talked about this in the intro where he said,
"Look. I mean, the facts are that are we don`t have a lot of women in
other caucus."

MCINTOSH: Females.

HAYES: Here the numbers -- for females, that is right, sorry.
Females --

(LAUGHING)

MCINTOSH: I am so glad you played that clip because maybe not talking
about them like they are not another species --

HAYES: I think don`t go with females as your word might be a good
opener.

MCINTOSH: For democratic congresswomen? Yes. Yes

HAYES: At the seminar. So, 31% of the house democratic caucus is
women. 8.2% of the republican caucus is women. I mean this is an
overwhelmingly male caucus.

MCINTOSH: Yes.

HAYES: And, that is part of the core issue here is that
institutionally, there are just are not a lot of women around over in that
House of Representatives.

MCINTOSH: Yes. Yes. And, apparently they think that they can learn
what being a woman is by osmosis if, you know, democrats are good at it
because there are women around. In fact, democrats have a platform that
appeals to women because they understand their daily lives.

They know how tough it is out there. And, they are talking to them
about the -- about the priorities that matter to them. Whereas republicans
are absolutely hell bent on rolling back on clock on rights and freedoms
that frankly our mothers secured for us.

HAYES: I think there is a really interesting aspect to that public
opinion gap and the electoral performance. I think the way we think of it
-- and I think the way we think of it and I think the big part of it,
obviously, are issues like choice, reproductive freedom, birth control,
things like that.

MCINTOSH: Sure.

HAYES: But, that is not all of it. In fact, if you look into public
opinion data, women are more likely to favor a larger safety net. They are
more skeptical of big business. There are a whole lot of ways in which
women just are more liberal along a range of issues, not just on the so-
called sort of social issues, cultural issues.

MCINTOSH: Well, I think women are sort of the owners of the
pocketbook economic reality in their families. They are the ones most
likely to be dealing with child care. They are the ones most likely to be
dealing with elder care. Because of issues like equal pay, which you
should lump in to the category of things republicans just don`t get and
democrats are actually working quite hard on, women are experiencing a
tougher economic reality. So, I think all of these factors mean that a
populist economic position appeals to women in a way that is stronger and
more compelling.

HAYES: OK. So, but if that is the case, right? -- So if we
stipulate, republicans are going to be -- I can`t see a republican party
not being anti-choice and anti-abortion.

MCINTOSH: Right.

HAYES: Just because of the makeup of America`s two-party system.
And, they are not going to come around on economics. Like, is there
anything that the Republican Party actually could do?

MCINTOSH: Well, during the RNC conference, they had a ladies
pavilion.

(LAUGHING)

HAYES: I think that is going to do it.

MCINTOSH: I do not know what they could do, but I think the second
part of what this training was about is a really interesting one. It is
about talking to women voters and running against women opponents.

HAYES: Right.

MCINTOSH: Which is mission critical for them this year because some
really strong democratic women have stepped up in places like Kentucky and
Wisconsin and Texas to take on these guys. And, they offer a really clear
contrast to voters in terms of priorities.

HAYES: Jess McIntosh from EMILY`s List, thank you so much.

MCINTOSH: Thanks, Chris.

HAYES: We will be right back with Click 3.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

HAYES: We are back. And, I want to share the three awesomest things
on the internet today beginning with a new twist on the televised Yule Log.
The holidays are upon us and nothing says season`s greetings with a
Christmas tree for heart in a room full of cats. They hold the latest and
greatest tool encrasnisation, christmascats.tv.

(VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: Oh, it is so weird. This seasonal cat in comic come to life
has a live video stream over-the-top carol, cats in Christmas sweaters and
some seriously awkward tension between that lady there and her elf friend.
But, this source of odd fascination is all for a good cause. These kitties
are all in need of a home for the holidays and can be adopted through the
north shore animal league. Terrific idea.

Decidedly less frightening than what had been originally proposed.
The second awesomest thing on the internet today brings us the floor of the
house. This week we have been showing you what the world will be like if
we had a bizarre congress if they passed immigration reform.
Unfortunately, we do not have a bizarre congress. We have John Boehner`s
terrible do-nothing congress.

And, if you are frustrated about that, you are not alone. A few
nights ago democrats were calling for the passage of a comprehensive reform
bill. Congressman, Joe Garcia alluded and supported the bill where they
were sitting the house gallery which got him reprimanded by the presiding
officer. And, that is when democratic Congressman Jared Polis stepped in.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JARED POLIS, (D) COLORADO REPRESENTATIVE: Generally, people in the
gallery and men and women who are spending their time here would not have
to be in those galleries advocating if this house simply took up the bill.
You think they want to be spending their time here, madam speaker?

Is that what you think? They wanted to be spending their time here in
the gallery. Probably traveling at their own expense to Washington? And,
you saying we are addressing them, and that is what you are upset about,
madam speaker? I want you, madam speaker, to address the reason that they
are here! They are here because our government is tearing apart their
families, madam speaker.

REP. JACKIE WALORSKI, (R) INDIANA REPRESENTATIVE: Will the gentleman
from Colorado understand all members --

REP. POLIS: I want the speaker to understand --

REP. WALORSKI: I did.

REP. POLIS: That the speaker is obstructing hr-15 from coming to the
floor.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: That is pretty much how a lot of us feel about the issue.
Well done congressman. The third awesomest thing on the internet today
takes us to Northern Germany where this reporter braved the powerful winds
of a massive storm sweeping through Europe. As the pair quickly
discovered, they were not alone.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE REPORTER: [SPEAKING GERMAN]

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: Imagine that, a storm so powerful it literally ripped the
shirts off their backs. Now, while these particular photo bombers are
Germany, the art of video bombing during unusual weather -- this snowstorm
in Cleveland.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER: How long you been out here?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER (1): Oh, we have been out a couple hours
getting the building lear.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER (2): Hold on here. Whoo!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER: Some people are just out of their minds,
you know? What are you going to do? I mean, it is nuts.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: That is right. Two can play at this game, Germany. You can
find all the links for tonight`s Click 3 on our website allin@chris.com.
We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

IDRIS ELBA, AS NELSON MANDELA/AMERICAN ACTOR: Something has to
change.

-- For 50 years we have been talking peace and nonviolence.

-- Not anymore.

-- You have got it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: Those were scenes from the new movie "Mandela: Long Walk To
Freedom," which by all indications does not shy away of the complexities of
the life of Nelson Mandela. In 1960, South African police officers opened
fire on thousands of nonviolent black anti-apartheid protesters, killing 69
of them including 10 children.

It was called the Sharpeville Massacre, and it was such a significant
moment in the struggle that 36 years later, Mandela would travel to
Sharpeville to sign the new South African constitution into law.
Sharpeville changed something in Nelson Mandela and his colleagues in what
was already at that time a long nonviolent movement for democracy.

It led them to conclude Mandela said that their policy to achieve a
nonracial state through nonviolence had achieved nothing. Mandela went on
to co-found what would become the armed wing of the African national
congress, spear of the nation, which would commit its first attack on the
government in December 1961. They explained their thinking in a manifesto,
the time comes in the life of any nation when there remain only two
choices, submit or fight.

That time has now come to South Africa. We shall not submit, and we
have no choice but to hit back by all means in our power in defense of our
people, our future and our freedom. Mandela wanted to start up with the
form of violence that inflicted the least harm against individuals, the
goal of sabotage over killing. But spear of the nations targeted attacks
of sabotage on government buildings would end up killing at least 63
people.

Spear of the nation and the ANC were deemed a terrorist organization
by the South African government and the United States. Mandela and his
movement would ultimately move back toward nonviolent resistance but
Charlayne Hunter-Gault said something important on this show last night
about Mandela`s decision during his 27 years behind bars.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT, NBC NEWS SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT: And, at one
point, they asked him, if he would foreswear violence, they would release
him and he said, "No, I am not going to do that."

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: To the end of his days, Mandela held out the legitimacy of
armed struggle. And, that is something to really grapple with as we
lionize this great reconciler. He was a revolutionary. A man who wrote
his autobiography. He came to believe that only through hardship and
sacrifice and militant action can freedom be won. We are going to talk
about that coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)


HAYES: We are back and it is my great pleasure now to be joined by
Esther Armah host of WBAI FM wakeup call. She has lived in Ghana, reported
from South Africa. We are also joined by artist and writer Molly
Crabapple. She just returned from Lebanon. She wrote an article that
appeared in Today`s "New York Times." You should definitely read. It is
about the Syrian refugee crisis there. And, Michael Moynihan, Editorial
Director for "The Daily Beast" where he just wrote a piece about Mandela`s
legacy.

Esther, I want to start with you because your father -- there was --
the African National Congress was part of the liberation movement across
the continent of Africa at a moment of throwing off these colonial regimes.

ESTHER ARMAH, WBAI FM WAKEUP CALL HOST/JOURNALIST: Yes.

HAYES: And, your father was in the government of one of these great
leaders of an anti-colonial movement.

ARMAH: Yes.

HAYES: And, there was a time when the ANC chose to engage in armed
struggle --

ARMAH: Right.

HAYES: -- when they sent fighters through the Ghana when your father
was in that government to train the.

ARMAH: Yes.

HAYES: Tell me about that.

ARMAH: So, this is so bizarre to me in a lot of ways because it is
very emotional. I was thinking about my dad who died November 24, 2006.
And, if I was still doing a radio show, which I am not now, he would have
been the first guest that I would have had because the spirit of the
nation, it always framed as arms struggle.

It is the resistance of a people to a government who are waging war
against their people. And languaging it that way really matters because
what happens when we think about Nelson Mandela, the three "Ls," loss,
legacy and leadership. And, we start to language him in a way that
separates the man and the movement where it is dangerous because it implies
that it is a magical space that he inhabits as an individual --

HAYES: Right.

ARMAH: As opposed to the institutional structures that framed him and
really shaped who he became.

HAYES: And, there was this struggle inside the movement at the moment
--

ARMAH: Absolutely.

HAYES: -- After Sharpeville. I think it is hard to kind of get into
people`s head the barbarity of Sharpeville. I mean it was a blatant
massacre and it had this profound effect. There was a struggle inside the
movement about like how long are we going to essentially walk into this?

ARMAH: Right.

HAYES: And, when you talk about armed struggle, you talk about the
way it`s framed. Michael, it was the move toward resistance, violent
resistance, armed resistance, that was the thing that triggered the right
to jump on the ANC as terrorists.

MICHAEL MOYNIHAN, EDITORIAL DIRECTOR FOR "THE DAILY BEAST": Yes, it
was. And, I mean, look. The problem is -- and it`s a good point that we
talk about language here -- terrorism as a word is something that
politicians and pundits have degraded so much over the past sort of 20
years and maybe even more is that we have to differentiate here. I mean
this is -- What the ANC was doing, spear of the nation doing was not what -
- this is not Hamas.

HAYES: Right.

MOYNIHAN: The important distinction here is that this -- these were
people who were, you know, sort of living in a giant plantation, you know,
bantu stands and the rest of it and the illegitimate government and
totalitarian regime that took all their rights. So, how does one respond
to that if one does not pick up a gun? Now, it should be said that I do
not think that this is a great tactic in the long run. I do not think it
was the right, you know, tactic.

Ultimately, it did not work in Northern Ireland. You know, you have
things like the church street bombing where there were lots of innocent
people killed. But, you know, it is not terrorism. These are people
waging a war against a government who has waged war upon them. And, I
think it was a perfectly legitimate struggle.

ARMAH: You know, I feel like we have to -- this notion when we start
to say that resistance by taking arms is not the right tactic. It does not
work, is always articulated from the space of never understanding what it
means to be under sustained attack.

HAYES: Right.

ARMAH: And, so it is languaged only from a place of privilege because
Sharpeville is not a single scenario.

HAYES: No. It was a part of --

ARMAH: You know -- It is a cycle. You know, you are talking about a
people whose daily diet was institutionalized injustice, brutality. That
was the reality that they lived under.

HAYES: In terms of what Michael said, what is fascinating if you read
the writing on this, it was the amount of theorizing that was done about
this turn. This was not just like we lost our cool, we are mad now. So,
we are going to -- this was undertaken with tremendous amount of thought.

ARMAH: Absolutely.

HAYES: Here is Mandela`s autobiography. We considered four times of
violent activities, and this goes to Michael`s point. Sabotage, guerrilla
warfare, terrorism and open revolution. For small in flagellant army, open
revolution was inconceivable. Terrorism inevitably reflected poorly on
those who used it, undermining any public support. It might otherwise
garner.

Guerrilla warfare was a possibility, but since the ANC had been
reluctant to embrace violence at all, it made sense to start with the form
of violence that inflicted the least harm against individual and Molly, one
of the reasons I wanted to have you here with, you have just returned from
talking to people engage in the struggle against Bashar Al Assad in Syria,
which started as a nonviolent struggle and became a violent struggle when
Assad responded to nonviolence with massacres and brutality.

MOLLY CRABAPPLE, ARTIST AND WRITER: The Syrian revolution kicked off
when some schoolboys in the town of Dara copied graffiti that they saw in
Tunisian YouTube that said the people want the regime to fall. Bashar Al
Assad`s cousin, who is the police chief, responded by arresting them,
having their fingernails torn out.

And, when their parents asked for them to be returned, threatening to
rape their mothers. There was not a possibility of peaceful resistance to
Bashar Al Assad. The Syrian people tried as hard as they could. There
were many, many peaceful protests. But, they were met with such violence
that armed resistance became inevitable. When a state makes nonviolent
resistance impossible, it makes violent resistance inevitable.

HAYES: The violent resistance of the ANC, even though it was not the
prime tactic -- how do you understand the significance of Mandela saying he
-- be given the choice to renounce violent resistance and not doing it in
his later years of life of upholding the legitimacy of it through the
entire time of his work in the struggle

ARMAH: You know what is so interesting it that because Mandela is
always languaged after Martin Luther King and Gandhi, for me this moment
around armed resistance always makes me think of Malcolm X.

HAYES: Yes.

ARMAH: And, the idea that he was a man of evolution within a
revolution. And, so him saying that I will not renounce armed struggle was
that line in the manifestos, there was two choices, to submit or fight --

HAYES: Yes.

ARMAH: We will not submit. Now, that is radical revolutionary
language. And so the thing that is really painful and challenging for me
is that I feel like what happens when we reduce the importance of this
moment, I feel like what we are trying to do is anesthetize the moment the
racialize brutality. And, make the space where Nelson Mandela was this man
who was individually so extraordinary, he was able to transcend the
circumstances of brutality. That is not what was real. This was about the
power of movements to make change. That was the walk to freedom.

HAYES: Michael, you have written a little bit about the way in which
the violence has kind of been written out in part of this an anesthetizing.
Do you think that is part of us this sort of Santa Clausification process
that we go through with figures like this?

MOYNIHAN: No, it is much easier that way. And, you know, we are
attracted to Nelson Mandela as a character because, you know, as I wrote in
my column today is that, it is actually a simple morality tale. This is a
tale of racial injustice and of a majority being lorded over by a brutal
minority. So that, sure.

And, unfortunately, that kind of plains how we look at this a little
bit. One of the things that always bothered me about Mandela -- and
incidentally, Mandela himself, you know, rejected the beatification of
Nelson Mandela --

HAYES: Right.

MOYNIHAN: He said I am no saint. I have made mistakes. I pointed
out in my column today, and it was no more harsh than what Bill Keller
pointed out too. You know, what Mandela -- he was associated with people
that did the same things to their people, you know, Gadhafi, Castro that
was done to him. And, I think that was one moral failing.

HAYES: Molly, is there something -- a lesson for the people on the
American left for coming out of Syria?

CRABAPPLE: I think Syria has been an incredible challenge for the
American left. On one hand, we want to claim that we are champions of
freedom, but on the other hand, we`ve been incredibly conflicted as to what
to do. Do you arm the resist anticipate resistance in Syria? Do you
reject anything that has to do with the American military? The American
left did not know.

HAYES: Esther Armah, Molly Crabapple, Michael Moynihan, thanks a lot.
That is "All In" for this evening. We will be back on Monday. Good night.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY
BE UPDATED.
END

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.>

Discuss:

Discussion comments

,