IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.

'The Rachel Maddow Show' for Monday, February 11th, 2013

February 11, 2013

Guests: Sherrod Brown, Victor Fehrenbach


THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW starts right now.

Good evening, Rachel.

RACHEL MADDOW, HOST: Good evening, Ed. Thank you very much.

SCHULTZ: You bet.

MADDOW: And thanks to you at home for joining this hour.

To those of you who are still snowed in on the East Coast, I salute
you, and I empathize, barely escaped myself. A big thanks to Melissa
Harris-Perry for filling in for me on Friday when I was snowed in.

When Pope Benedict XVI announced today that he would resign as Pope,
that he would abdicate the papacy, the move was greeted, frankly, with
shock. That is something that has not happened in 600 years is happening
right now.

But it was also clear immediately that even though nothing like this
has happened in 600 years, or 598 years to be exact, the Catholic Church
nevertheless had a plan ready to go. Even though no Pope has resigned his
seat since the year 1415, and this resignation announcement today from Pope
Benedict was totally unexpected, despite all of that, there is apparently
an agreed upon protocol for what happens in an instance like this.

Once Pope Benedict leaves the Vatican on February 28th, the church
says he will go live for a while in Castle Gandolfo, which is the Pope`s
summer house in a small town outside of Rome. He will live at that castle
while construction work is done on a cloistered monastery inside the
Vatican complex. Then, when the construction is done, he will move back
into the Vatican. And living in that cloistered monastery, provided that
papal cloistering is like other kinds of cloistering, I think that means he
will have no contact with the outside world while he lives there. He will
be closed off.

In any case, the cardinals will then meet, they say before the end of
March, to choose Pope Benedict`s successor. And then we will have two
living Popes, or one living Pope and an ex-Pope.

But there is a plan. Before we goat the drama and the political and
theological import of the choosing of the new Pope what is remarkable here
just organizationally is that there is an agreed upon and accept wade
forward in an instance like this. There is a plan for how this goes, this
thing that last happened in the early 1400s.

Is this like plan X, plan Y? This can`t possibly be any plans listed
at the beginning of the alphabet. But they have a plan.

We have only existed as a country since the late 1700s, which in world
historical perspective is not long at all. Compared with the institutions
and traditions of the Catholic Church, we as a nation are a spring chicken.

But within our own timetable of American history, our national
history, one of the most ancient rituals and traditions that we have as a
nation is something that will happen tomorrow night, the State of the Union
address. The State of the Union is one of those very specific things like
the post office or the census that is called for explicitly in the United
States Constitution.

Article 1 in the Constitution is about the Congress, the legislative
branch. Article 2 is about the presidency. Article 3 is the judicial
branch. And the part of the Constitution that calls for the State of the
Union message is in Article 2, Section 3. It says the presidential from
time to time give to the congress information about the State of the Union.

And since it is in the Constitution, we have been doing this from the
very beginning. The first one was January 1790, George Washington. He
delivered his State of the Union address to congress. He made his
recommendations to them for action.

George Washington was, of course, the first president. John Adams was
the second president. By the time we got to the third president, Thomas
Jefferson, Jefferson thought the whole speech to Congress thing was
actually a little showy, made the president too king-like for his taste.
So Jefferson decided to meet this particular constitutional obligation in
writing, rather than by giving a speech.

That tradition held sway for more than 100 years until 1913, when the
speaking tradition of the State of the Union was revived in what was a
controversial move at the time by President Woodrow Wilson. So, Wilson`s
innovation was really I guess the major innovation in this ancient ritual
that we have as a nation. The return to it being delivered in speech form,
which happened in 1913.

The only other major innovation that we have had over the centuries
started in 1966. That`s when the party that is not the president`s party
started giving, in effect, a rebut toll the State of the Union. The
Republicans started it when LBJ was president.

They started it in 1966. The top Republican in the House and the top
Republican in the Senate, Everett Dirksen and Gerald Ford, they wanted to
critique LBJ`s State of the Union. So they went on television right after
his speech, and they gave a Republican response.

They thought it was so successful that first year that the same two
Republicans responded to LBJ`s speech again the following year. And then
apparently drunk with their own success, the third year that they did it,
they had 17 Republicans responding to LBJ -- 17.

When Nixon became president the following year, Democrats had their
first chance to do their own party`s rebuttal. And in their first
response, they had seven Democrats respond to Nixon.

Do you get the feeling that it was becoming a little bit of a circus,
you are not alone. And the young tradition of the opposite party`s
response to the State of the Union died after the first couple of years
there. Apparently it died of its own top-heaviness. And it was dead for
most of the next decade.

Eventually, though, the president getting all that unanswered air time
and attention proved too much for Washington`s partisans, and the State of
the Union responses started up again after the 1970s.

And now, it is well-established that every year, the party out of
power, the party who does not hold the White House will offer a response.
After more than a generation of doing it this way, it feels like almost as
much as a tradition as the State of the Union itself. The rebuttal address
or response address from the other party is carried by all of the networks
that carry the State of the Union itself. It`s treated with essentially
the same gravitas.

And to be named as the respondent to the State of the Union for your
party, that is considered a real elevation within your party. I mean, you
essentially bookend the president`s remarks. You alone are responsible for
embodying and articulating your own party`s coherent unified alternative to
what the country has just heard from the president. Or at least you used
to be. Because now, Republicans have come up with yet another innovation
for this most ancient American political ritual.

They were the first ones who came up with the rebuttal address in
1966. And now since Barack Obama has been president, they have come up
with a new idea -- the idea of doing not just a rebuttal to the president`s
State of the Union address, but also a rebuttal to their own rebuttal.

Yes. For the third year in a row now, Republicans are rebutting
themselves as well as rebutting the president. What could possibly go

The first year was 2011 when Minnesota congresswoman and eventual
presidential candidate Michele Bachmann gave not the Republican Party
response, but the Tea Party Republican response to the Republican response
to President Obama`s State of the Union while making meaningful eye contact
with something other than the camera that was pointed at her. That was the
first one.

The year after that, the Tea Party Republican response to the
Republican response to the State of the Union was given by pizza company
executive Herman Cain.


response on behalf of the Tea Party and citizens, people across this
country, with all due respect, Mr. President, some of us are not stupid.
The State of the Union is not good.


MADDOW: The Hermanator making his mark on the Republican Party`s new
attempted tradition of self-rebutting schismatic State of the the response

Less you think the 2012 election changed anything in Republican Party
politics, in case all the anti-abortion legislation in the states has not
been persuasive enough, in case the reelection of party chairman Reince
Priebus by acclimation is not persuasive enough, in case the persistent
efforts at the state level to make voting harder even now in case those
efforts have not been persuasive enough -- let it be known that nothing at
all has changed in Republican Party politics, even after the 2012 election.
And they are sticking with the idea this year of having not just a
Republican Party response to the State of the Union, but a Tea Party
Republican response to the Republican response to the State of the Union

This year the inheritor of the Michele Bachmann/Herman Cain legacy
will be United States Senator Rand Paul. The official Republican Party
response will be delivered by another guy who we are told is a Tea Party
senator, Marco Rubio. But Marco Rubio is giving the Republican response
and Rand Paul is giving the Tea Party Republican response to the Republican
response. Capisce?

It is hard to tell at this point whether or not the Republican Party
still has the wherewithal to be annoyed at its own members being this self-
serving, whether or not they care. This throws kind of a wrench in the
works, right, in terms of the Republican Party`s efforts to portray itself
as having a coherent, unified alternate vision to what President Obama is

I mean, if you like an alternative vision that is presented after the
State of the Union this year, which one do you pick? If you`re in the
market for a Republican message, which one is being offered? And then how
do you demonstrate that you like that message? How do you vote? What do
you do?

On the other side of the aisle, Democrats and the White House are
trying to make the most this year of the attention surrounding the
president`s speech. They are doing everything they can to use the speech
for maximum political effect.

The White House has already announced that after the State of the
Union, the president will get on the road to push for the policies he
unveils in the speech tomorrow night. He will head to Asheville, North
Carolina, on Wednesday. He will travel to Atlanta on Thursday. He will
travel to Chicago on Friday. That`s the sort of thing that presidents have
done in years past.

But this year in addition, Organizing for Action, which is the group
formed out of the Obama campaign, they`re organizing watch parties in
neighborhoods all around the country to get the president`s supporters to
watch the speech together. The president himself immediately after he is
finished delivering the State of the Union, he will get on a conference
call that night with supporters and with members of Organizing for Action.

The president will also participate in what Google is calling a
Fireside Hangout, kind of a riff on the Fireside chat. On Thursday
afternoon, somewhere between North Carolina and Georgia, he is going to be
taking questions on Google Plus.

In terms of invited guests at the State of the Union this year,
traditionally the first lady invites a number of outside guests to sit with
her during the speech. It`s both an honor in itself, and it is to
symbolize some of the proposals the president will discuss in the speech.

This year, the first lady`s guests will include Army Staff Sergeant
Clinton Romesha, who was awarded the Medal of Honor for valor in one of the
deadliest battles in the war in Afghanistan. After attending the funeral
this weekend of Hadiya Pendleton, the young Chicago honor student who was
shot dead in Chicago just a week after she performed as a majorette in the
president`s inauguration parade in Washington, D.C., just after attending
the young woman`s funeral this weekend, the first lady, Michelle, will be
hosting her mother, Hadiya Pendleton`s mother as one of the guests for the
president`s speech.

Interestingly, a number of the Democratic members of the House,
Democratic members of Congress, I should say, both Houses, have also
announced that they have given tickets to the speech to relatives and
friends of people who have been killed by gun violence. Including
relatives and friends of victims of the Aurora mass shooting, Aurora,
Colorado, and the Newtown mass shooting from December, and the Tucson mass

Former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords and her husband will be attending
as guests of her replacement in Congress Ron Barber, who was Gabby
Giffords` staffer and who was himself wounded in the Tucson shooting.
They`ll also be guests of Senator John McCain.

Gabby Giffords` political action group, the group she formed with her
husband, astronaut Mark Kelly asks -- Americans for Responsible Solutions.
Americans for Responsible Solutions cut this ad, which is going to be
running after the State of the Union apparently on FOX and MSNBC and CNN.


we shop, where we pray, where our children go to school. But there are
solutions we can agree on. Even gun owners like us. Take it from me.

Congress must act. Let`s get this done.


MADDOW: In addition to running after the State of the Union tomorrow
night on cable networks, that ad is scheduled to air on local broadcast TV
in Washington, D.C.

According to the group that produced the ad, they`re also planning on
running this in local media markets, reaching the constituents of all four
top congressional leaders from both Houses and both parties. So that`s
Mitch McConnell, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and John Boehner.

In response I think to the number of Democrats and the first lady
bringing victims of gun violence with them as guests to the State of the
Union this year, to highlight that issue, one Republican member of Congress
this year has decided to do his part to advance the serious consideration
of gun violence and lawful gun ownership in America by inviting as his
guest for the State of the Union this gentleman.


TED NUGENT, MUSICIAN: Hey, Obama, you might want to suck on one of
these, you punk! Obama, he`s a piece of (EXPLETIVE DELETED) and I told him
to suck on my machine gun. Let`s hear it for him.

And then I was in New York, I said, I said, hey, Hillary, you might
want to ride one of these into the sunset, you worthless (EXPLETIVE


MADDOW: Mr. Ted Nugent is a musician. I believe he is still mostly
known for "Cat Scratch Fever", but I could be wrong. He was investigated
by the Secret Service last year after telling an NRA convention in April of
2012, quote, "If Barack Obama is elected, I`ll either be dead or in jail
this time next year."

Texas Congressman Steve Stockman has invited Ted Nugent to be his
guest for the State of the Union.

But if you think about what he got in trouble for with the Secret
Service last year, "If Barack Obama`s elected I`ll either be dead or in
jail this time next year," if you think about that, given that it`s
February, that means we only have two months left of Ted Nugent, by his own
account. Maybe one of those nights tomorrow will be in Washington at the
State of the Union, courtesy of a Republican congressman who thought it was
good to invite him.

State of the Union is always an amazing and historic night in American
politics. It is one of our oldest and I think best civil rituals as a
nation. But this year, it`s going to be even more of a hoot than usual.



Andrews Air Force Base and welcomed home some of our last troops to serve
in Iraq. Together, we offered a final proud salute to the colors under
which more than a million of our fellow citizens fought and several
thousand gave their lives. We gather tonight knowing that this generation
of heroes has made the United States safer and more respected around the


For the first time in nine years, there are no Americans fighting in



MADDOW: That was President Obama`s last State of the Union address
January 24th of last year, just weeks after the last U.S. troops had left
Iraq for the last time.

In the run-up to this year`s State of the Union address, just this
weekend, the weekend before the first State of the Union of President
Obama`s second term, this is what happened in Afghanistan. This is the
change of command ceremony in Afghanistan, General John Allen handing over
command of U.S. and international troops in Afghanistan to a new commander,
to General Joseph Dunford.

This is the 14th time that command has transferred in the Afghanistan
war, because that war has been going on for that long. General John Allen
is on his way out as commander. He is handing over the leadership.

If all goes as planned, if everything goes as expected, General
Dunford is going to be the last person to have this job. He will be the
15th of 15 U.S. commanding generals for this war in Afghanistan.

As such, a substantial portion of what he`ll be responsible for as
commander will be leaving, the huge logistical feat of getting us after
fighting there for 12 years.

Is that going to be a focal point of tomorrow`s State of the Union
address? We do not know. We are now in the managing expectations and
strategic leaking and even strategic disinformation part of the process.

We`re told, for example, to expect a message of economic populism in
tomorrow night`s speech, picking up themes offered in the president`s
inaugural address just three weeks ago.

That said, we were also told by a front page above the fold story in
"The New York Times" today to expect the president to talk tomorrow night
about reducing the number of nuclear weapons that we have. And that then
that was flat-out denied this afternoon by the White House. They said no,
that`s not in the speech.

So really, we do not know what is going to be in the president`s
speech tomorrow. There`s no reason to not just wait to hear it.

Our coverage, by the way, starts at 8:00 Eastern tomorrow night.

But in terms of what we know the president wants to get done in his
second term, what his priorities are, what the priorities are of the
Democratic Party, what are the issues that would be best served by having
the president hit them explicitly in this speech? And are there issues
that the president wants to make progress on in this term for which it
actually makes more sense to leave them out of the speech all together?

Joining us now is Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio.

Senator Brown, it`s great to see you again. Thanks for being here.

SEN. SHERROD BROWN (D), OHIO: Good to be back. Thanks, Rachel.

MADDOW: What do you think about this idea that the president himself
has talked about sometimes, which is that sometimes there are things that
Republicans say they want, and then once President Obama comes out and
says, "Yes, I want that too," they change their mind and they run from
them. I`m thinking about things like cap-and-trade and individual mandate
and health reform, even some elements of immigration reform that Democrats
and the president now support, the Republicans used to support and they
have run from.

Are there issues like that that the president has on his plate right
now that would be better for him to not put his imprimatur on by putting it
in this speech?

BROWN: No, I think the president is -- I think the inauguration
showed that. The election showed that the president needs to step forward,
and it`s his agenda we should be talking about and debating. It doesn`t
mean the House and the Senate obviously adopt everything that he wants to

I think you go back, Rachel, to the December 31st tax deal. It really
was ultimately -- it wasn`t everything we wanted, but it was an affirmation
that trickle-down economics doesn`t work. It hasn`t worked for our
lifetimes, and you grow the economy from the middle class out. I think
that`s what that vote on December 31st at the end of the year on the tax
issues showed.

I think that`s the way -- I think that`s what the elections said.
That`s what polling shows. And that`s what voters and citizens of this
country want to hear the president talk about. It means it`s a
manufacturing agenda. It`s a jobs agenda. It needs to be all about that.

MADDOW: You have really made a centerpiece of your time in office a
lot of different economic populist issues, manufacturing you were just
talking about, trade, other issues about jobs effectively for your Ohio

Are there issues where you felt like you and the president had
different agendas in the first term? Are there issues where you would like
to see the president move where he hasn`t been there yet and you`re
expecting him -- you`re expecting that he may move more toward your way of
seeing things in the second term?

BROWN: Yes, sure. Tomorrow night my guest for the State of the Union
will be a steelworker from Cleveland from a company called ArcelorMittal in
downtown Cleveland. She has been a steelworker at that company for a
number of years. That plant, that mill in Cleveland is the first time in
world history where one person hour of labor produced one ton of steel.
That had never happened before.

So we have the most productive. We have some of the most productive
workers in the world. It means we need to do something like the
president`s and my national network of the manufacturing innovation. The
first one of those was located in Youngstown a few months ago. We expect
the president I hope tomorrow night to announce a series of them around the

It`s not the only part of a jobs agenda. It`s infrastructure, it`s
better job training. It`s working to in-source, if you will, some of the
jobs that have gone offshore. Senator Levin from Michigan has been a real
leader in pointing out all the kind of tax breaks that the tax code has put
-- included in the tax code over the years that give far too many
incentives for companies to move offshore, not bring jobs back.

And there is real potential there. And I hope the president where he
has not gone far enough. He has been more aggressive than his predecessors
in enforcing of trade laws.

But he has still not really been where we ought to be on a trade
policy that works for workers, works for American companies, American
manufacturers, and ultimately strengthens our community.

We`ve gained back manufacturing jobs in the last three years. But we
lost far too many in the decade before that. And that`s not the solution
to everything, but it really is a ticket to the middle class for millions
of working class Americans.

MADDOW: Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio, thank you so much for being
here tonight. I really appreciate it, sir.

BROWN: Thanks, Rachel.

MADDOW: Thanks.

All right. We got lots more ahead, including something of a backwards
milestone in civil rights. That`s coming up.


MADDOW: On Thursday afternoon, the National Weather Service posted
this map of the predicted snowfall expected to arrive the following day in
the Northeast. That very, very pale pink section covering nearly the
entire area of this map, including Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode
island, that signified 18 to 24 inches of predicted snow.

By 5:00 on Friday, the Weather Service had to go so far down the color
key that they had to break out the white. Look, they had to go colorless
for a big swath of the map. And indeed, Mother Nature brought it -- over
two feet in the Boston area and other areas getting as much as 30 inches or
more, if you ask my mother-in-law. It was a full-on blizzard, and it is
still a huge mess in much of New England.

But you know what else is turning into a real mess in New England, in
Massachusetts specifically? The Republican Party. And this weekend`s big
beyond the color code blizzard did absolutely nothing to help that very
specific situation. And that story is coming up.


MADDOW: Republicans still do not have the votes to stop President
Obama`s nominee to be the new secretary of defense, Chuck Hagel. Whether
or not they filibuster him, they don`t have the votes, although at least
one Republican senator is threatening to try a filibuster anyway.

Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina is also now threatening to
put a hold on the Hagel nomination, even though there is no precedent for
that ever. No cabinet nomination has ever been filibustered or held by a
senator. While Lindsey Graham is making the decision as to whether or not
he wants to be famous forever for doing something nobody else has ever done
in the history of the Senate in order to block Chuck Hagel, the current
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is on his way out.

They gave Mr. Panetta his ceremonial sendoff on Saturday, though it
looks like he`ll probably be in charge of the Pentagon for another week or
so. Leon Panetta`s time at the Pentagon has been a period of lasting
change for the U.S. military. After the end of the Iraq war, he has
overseen the beginning of the end of America`s longest war ever in

The Clinton era policy of "don`t ask, don`t tell" ended under Leon
Panetta`s watch, at his recommendation that the nation allow openly gay
people to be a part of the military. Last year, Secretary Panetta took
steps to reform the way the military deals with sexual assault in its
ranks, going as far in those reforms as he could without help from
Congress. He also opened new assignments in the military, new roles for
female soldiers. Last month, with the end of his term near, he proclaimed
an end to the ban on women in combat, full stop.

Well, today in a new memo, the outgoing defense secretary, Leon
Panetta, made another historic change, saying that discrimination based on
sexual orientation no longer has a place in the military.

Secretary Panetta ordered that gay service members and their families
be eligible for as many of the benefits that other families get as is
possible under the law -- benefits like being able to shop at stores on a
military base, benefits like getting assigned to the same place if your
spouse is also in the military. Things like visiting your spouse in the
hospital or being notified in the case of the very worst news. Those steps
are as far as Leon Panetta can go under current law.

And this is remarkable. Look at this. This is from the memo today.
He writes, quote, "In the event that the Defense of Marriage Act is no
longer applicable to the Department of Defense, it will be the policy of
the department to construe the words `spouse` and `marriage` without regard
to sexual orientation. And married couples, irrespective of sexual
orientation and their dependents will be granted full military benefits."

It`s remarkable, right? It`s Leon Panetta saying that today`s list of
40 or so new benefits for equal treatment for gay soldiers and their
families is as far as the military can take this equality thing right now.
But that the military would like to go the rest of the way right now. They
would like to equalize all benefits.

The reason they can`t go further is a law called the Defense of
Marriage Act signed into law by President Clinton, and President Clinton
now disavows it. To some extent, the question of whether or not the
military is going to be as equal as it wants to be depends on the U.S.
Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is going to hear challenges to the
Defense of Marriage Act next month.

The question also depends on Congress. And that`s because the Obama
administration has decided to not defend that law. The Obama
administration says they believe that DOMA is unconstitutional. They will
not defend it.

It is House Republicans specifically who are defending that law in
court at the direction of Republican Speaker John Boehner, using your tax

This is Chief Warrant Officer Charlie Morgan, member of the New
Hampshire National Guard. After serving for the better part of two
decades, after deploying overseas, after leaving behind her partner and
their young daughter for a year while she served in Kuwait, Chief Warrant
Officer Charlie Morgan asked for a meeting with Speaker John Boehner.

She told the speaker that she had stage 4 breast cancer, inoperable.
She told him that her own father had served in the Army and was killed in a
car wreck in an accident as he was getting ready for deployment in Vietnam,
when she was just a little kid.

Officer Morgan writing, quote, "My mom and I received V.A. and Social
Security benefits as a result of his death. Those benefits put a roof over
our head, food in our bellies, and clothes on our backs."

She wanted to make the case to John Boehner that her family now, as
she faced death, should qualify for the same treatment honoring her
service. Speaker Boehner did not meet with Charlie Morgan. He sent a
staffer instead.

Officer Morgan told the "Advocate" magazine afterward that the staffer
was, quote, "very empathetic". But he told her that -- excuse me, the
staffer told her that John Boehner would continue to defend DOMA. And he
did continue to defend DOMA,

That was February 2012, a year ago almost to the day. Charlie Morgan
was able to be out. She was able to ask Congress to consider her situation
because the ban on gay people in the military was ended.

This video was made by a project called Legal Stranger, because that
is how the law still views troops like Charlie Morgan and specifically, her
family, her wife. That was the story Ms. Morgan was trying to tell

In this next clip, you can tell how the cancer she was fighting was
affecting her voice.


personally and with Karen here was that she has given me a part of a
blessing of six months.

SEN. JEANNE SHAHEEN (D), NEW HAMPSHIRE: I had actually heard that.

MORGAN: With that being said, I just want to talk to you and ask you
this -- I love Karen, and I just want the make sure she is taken care of.
I`m asking you personally to do everything you can to make sure if I don`t
make this, that somehow she will be taken care of with those benefits that
we`re not able to have right now.

I hope that Casey grows up in an environment where they`ll look back
at this and say, wow, you know, this is crazy that they had to go through
that. But I hope that sees that her parents are proud enough to step up
and fight for her equality as well.


MADDOW: Around Thanksgiving, Charlie Morgan told "The Washington
Post" that she was praying that the Supreme Court would hear the challenge
to DOMA quickly. She said, quote, "I really need to be alive when they
actually do overturn DOMA. Otherwise Karen is not guaranteed anything."

Charlie Morgan did not make it that far. She died on Sunday morning.
She was 48 years old.

"The Washington Post" reports that her widow Karen will not receive
survivor benefits. The paper also notes that in ordinary times, Charlie
and Karen would have been glad for the new executive order allowing the
family to shop on military bases.

We asked today whether Officer Charlie Morgan had heard about the
changes that Secretary Panetta was preparing to announce today. The answer
is that it appears she had not. She apparently had not heard about it.

It`s a very sad story. For many people, it is an enraging story. But
it is not a finished story. Hold on, there is more.


MADDOW: OK. Check out this picture. This picture was taken December
21st, 2010. That`s then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi signing a bill that was
passed by the House so it can be officially sent to the president`s desk to
become law.

Did you know that speaker of the House has to sign every bill passed
by Congress before the president does? That usually does not happen in a
big public ceremony, but this time it did. Because what Nancy Pelosi is
signing there is the official repeal of "don`t ask, don`t tell." On the
far right of the picture you can see Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer of
California. She was one of the chief proponents of repeal in the U.S.

On the far left of the picture, let`s see, there is Major Mike Almy
from the air force, and who is the hairless guy? Ah, the gentleman smiling
from ear to ear, that would be Lieutenant Colonel Victor Fehrenbach. He
has been a guest on this show.

Colonel Fehrenbach came out nationally on this show in May 2009, a
year before the "don`t ask, don`t tell" repeal was signed into law. At
that time, Colonel Fehrenbach was just being informed he was being
discharged from the military for being gay. He was a highly decorative Air
Force fighter pilot with extensive combat experience. He was just two
years short of his retirement, but the U.S. military launched an
investigation into his personal life. They determined he was gay and then
they went about kicking him out.

Victor Fehrenbach fought that discharge. He filed a lawsuit
contending that "don`t ask, don`t tell" was unconstitutional.

And the moral urgency of stories like his ultimately resulted in
"don`t ask, don`t tell" being repealed. More than a year after appearing
on this program, Victor stood alongside House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as she
sent that repeal on to President Obama.

And then nine months later, after a year`s long struggle, Victor
Fehrenbach officially retired from the U.S. Air Force with the full
military benefits that he earned.

Since his retirement, Victor has started grad school, and just very
recently, very recently, he has started a new job at the U.S. State
Department. He is also now the author of a brand-new book about his
journey, which is called "Out of the Blue". We`ve got a link to it posted
of at our Web site today.

And it was from Victor yesterday morning that I first learned that his
friend and his fellow combatant in the fight for equality in the military,
Chief Warrant Officer Charlie Morgan, had died yesterday from the breast
cancer that she had fought for so long. She lived long enough to see the
end of "don`t ask, don`t tell," but not long enough to see the end of the
Defense of Marriage Act. And that law bans her wife, now her widow from
receiving the same benefits that other military families would receive in
such a sad circumstance.

Retired Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Victor Fehrenbach joins us
tonight for the interview.

Victor, thank you for being here.

me, Rachel.

MADDOW: I know you were good friends with Charlie, who died
yesterday. How would you describe her role, what she was fighting for
alongside you?

FEHRENBACH: Well, we met just over a year ago, right about the time
that you talked about where she met with John Boehner`s staff and frankly
enough, she told me a story that while she was deployed in Kuwait, she sat
and she watched you and I at this table telling my story. And she told me
that thank you, by the way, for letting me tell my story, because she said
it inspired her. She said when "don`t ask, don`t tell" is repealed, she`ll
come out and she`ll tell her story about her family and her fight and her
struggles. And I think she made a huge difference.

MADDOW: She did come out. The day of repeal --

FEHRENBACH: Absolutely.

MADDOW: -- she herself got on television for the first time ever.

FEHRENBACH: I think her story, you know, made a big difference in
changing hearts and minds. I know people, no matter what their religious
affiliation or their political affiliation were, when I told Charlie`s
story to them, they just said that`s not right.

MADDOW: Right.

FEHRENBACH: And it changed their minds.

And so, she made a huge impact. I know I was heartbroken yesterday.
Not just because she died. We all knew she was dying.

But we wanted her to live to see March, to see the Supreme Court take
up DOMA, to live until June to see DOMA finally overturned by the Supreme
Court. That wasn`t meant to be. And now, you know, you saw in the video
one of her greatest fears was she would die and then her wife Karen and her
daughter Casey Elena would not be cared for.

So I think some of the steps that we saw Secretary Panetta take today,
those are going to help thousand of people. They`ll be enacted in the
summertime. But it wasn`t in time to help Charlie`s family.

MADDOW: And they`ve gone as far as they can, but the main benefits,
things like, you know, on-base housing and the kinds of benefits that would
make a lifetime of difference to Charlie`s child and to her wife --


MADDOW: -- those benefits, the Pentagon no matter how much they want
to, they can`t do those things --


MADDOW: -- because they are precluded by law because of DOMA.

FEHRENBACH: And Secretary Panetta and the president, they did all
they could under the law. And that`s what a lot of people don`t

Here is another story Charlie told me. She said when she was doing
her lobbying, she went to see Senator Shaheen. We saw that on the video.

She also went to see her then congressman from New Hampshire. And she
told her story. And the congressman said oh, but you`re OK. You live in
New Hampshire. You`re legally married in New Hampshire. That`s legal. So
you`re taken care of.

So her congressman didn`t even know that her wife was treated as a
second class citizen and didn`t enjoy the benefits that other military
families enjoyed.

So if the congressman didn`t know, you know, the American public has
no idea. So we need to continue telling Charlie`s story.

MADDOW: The reason that I wanted to play that particular clip of her
lobbying Jeanne Shaheen there, Jeanne Shaheen obviously somebody who has
been very supportive of her. But you see when she tells Jeanne Shaheen her
diagnosis, and the senator responds by saying, "I`m so sorry, I`m so sorry
to hear about this." And you can see Charlie essentially being like, yes,
I know you`re sorry. I don`t need you to be sorry. I need you to go fast.

FEHRENBACH: Do something.

MADDOW: There is some urgency here there.


MADDOW: Looking ahead to the State of the Union is tomorrow. This is
the president who repealed "don`t ask, don`t tell." The outgoing secretary
ended the end of women in combat, oversaw the implementation of the repeal
of "don`t ask, don`t tell," took all these actions on previously taboo
subjects like sexual assault in the military, there is this sense that
things are moving fast.

What do you think given your experience both in the military and as an
advocate is the way to make the motion go faster?

FEHRENBACH: Just what I did, just what your other guests did, just
what Charlie did, is tell our stories.

You know, I wrote an op-ed in "The Huffington Post" today as well,
because I said, you know, the clock is ticking. We see change accelerate.
I think the repeal of "don`t ask, don`t tell" started that. We see the
vote in the British parliament, an overwhelming vote. We saw the Supreme
Court decision in New Mexico.

We have seen the changes that were announced today -- the changes are
happening faster. But we could all sit idly back and watch the clock tick
away, or we can do something about it. We can become more active. We can
stand up. We can tell our stories and we can vote, things like that.

You know, one of the things that are standing in our right now, as you
mentioned, Speaker John Boehner is defending DOMA, is wasting millions of
taxpayer dollars. As we speak, we can vote, we can make changes in the
House and make the law if the Supreme Court doesn`t overturn it. I think
it will.

But I don`t think we see these changes happening faster unless more of
us come forward and tell stories, because that`s the way to change hearts
and minds.

MADDOW: Didn`t you grow up right near his district?

FEHRENBACH: Yes, he is my congressman.

MADDOW: He doesn`t want to talk with you about this either.

FEHRENBACH: No, no. That`s why -- maybe, I would love to see the
president mention Charlie Morgan`s name with the speaker over his shoulder,
because you know, he sent the staff to speak with Charlie but didn`t do it
himself. And maybe if the president mentions her story, maybe that will
change his mind, as well.

MADDOW: Speaker Boehner, if you would like to get in touch with
retired Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Victor Fehrenbach, I have their
numbers. Even though I`m not supposed to give them out, in this case, I

FEHRENBACH: Please do.

MADDOW: Victor Fehrenbach, thank you so much. It`s great to see you,

FEHRENBACH: Thanks again, Rachel. Good to see you.

MADDOW: We`ll be right back.


MADDOW: No matter where you live, you have surely seen and heard what
happened in New England over the weekend.

Here is a RACHEL MADDOW SHOW specific related sample. This is the
childhood home of proud Massachusetts native and show producer, Mike
Yarvitz. His folks still live there.

As you can see there, that`s the top of the mail box. And oh, my
stars, that is a stop sign, not a child-sized hip-length stop sign, a real
life stop sign and the snow goes almost all the way to the top. That`s
just outside of Boston yesterday.

Now, this is Summerville, Massachusetts, on Saturday, Saturday
morning, before the roads have been properly plowed, before the sidewalks
have been shoveled, while there was still a driving ban in effect for the
whole state.

But these hearty souls were out with their card table, in the snow,
canvassing, collecting signatures. It takes more than two feet of snow to
stop politics in Massachusetts right now and there is a reason for that.

When John Kerry became secretary of state, he had to resign his seat
in the U.S. Senate. Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick then appointed a
man named Mo Cowan to hold that seat until the special election to be held
June 25th to fill the seat permanently. As a condition of being picked for
the place holder job, Mo Cowan says he will not run in the special
election. So that means that both parties have to pick their candidates
and fast.

The deadline is roughly two weeks from now for any candidates in the
special election to turn in 10,000 signatures to get their names on the
Massachusetts ballot. That`s a long way to go and a short time to get

On the Democratic side, there are two guys in for a while now. The
more conservative Democratic Congressman Steven Lynch, and the more liberal
Democratic congressman, Ed Markey.

On the Republican side, though, that has been more complicated. The
frontrunner, of course, was this guy, former Senator Scott Brown, who just
months ago lost his seat in the Senate to Democrat Elizabeth Warren. He
lost by eight points. It turns out he is not running, we know that because
he said that in this text message, because that`s what he`s like.

Also, former Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld is not running, possibly
because of the memories of his own previous run for Senate in the state,
which he also lost by eight points. That was followed by Bill Weld running
for governor again, but in a different state. He ran for governor in New
York after he lost the Massachusetts Senate race and he lost the New York
governor`s race, as well.

Bill Weld, also not running this time, and Scott Brown, not running
this time.

Also not running, this man, Tagg Romney, one of the Romney sons. "The
Boston Herald" floated the Tagg Romney for Senate idea just a few months
after his dad lost the state of Massachusetts by 23 points. But, now,
despite "The Boston Herald" wanting him to run, Tagg will not be running.

And neither will be a gay Republican former state legislator who lost
to state race this year, and neither will be Mitt Romney`s lieutenant
governor who lost the role for governor herself, after Mitt Romney left
office to go start running for president for a decade. Also, a man from
FOX News, who writes books with Glenn Beck, he said that he was going to
run, but now he is not, even though that might have been amazing.


NARRATOR: Psychic twins.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We wrote everything in detail that would
transpire with 9/11.

NARRATOR: Predicted the unthinkable.

DR. KEITH ABLOW, FOX NEWS: What did you do when you`re possessed of
the knowledge that people would perish?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We were terrified.

NARRATOR: Now, they shared their gift with Dr. Keith.


MADDOW: Psychic twins! Dr. Keith will not be the next Republican
senator from Massachusetts. He had said that he would run if the state
party promised that he could just have the nomination without having to win

But when nobody agreed, that he should just get the nomination without
having to compete for it, he backed out. Pity.

So who is running then? Who is willing to be it had every famous
Republican in the whole state is running as fast as they can from this
race, yelling not it, not it. And we`ve now started to go through a whole
lot of Republicans we never heard from and never heard of, they`re all
saying not it, as well.

Who is left? Remember, two weeks left to go now to get 10,000
signatures. And the process of getting signatures in Massachusetts looks
something like that right now.

Well, so far there is one Republican state representative who says he
will run. He has never run for statewide office before and has zero name
recognition. Also, there is a second Republican candidate today who picked
up the nomination papers to start his run, as well. He also has zero name
recognition, has never run for office and is only known political history
is he said he voted for Barack Obama, and is listed publicly as a donor to
several different Democratic Party candidates as recently as last year.

So, that`s what the Republicans have got for the John Kerry seat, for
the statewide election in the country after the presidential election.
They`ve got a state rep who nobody has heard of and another guy who has
never run for anything, who nobody has heard of. That`s it.

That said, consider who they have to work with. This is the Facebook
page for the state Senate Republican caucus in Massachusetts. That`s not
like a sub-group of them. That`s all of them.

There are precisely four Republicans in the Massachusetts state Senate
and more than four times as Democrats. In the House, same deal, look,
about four times as many Democrats as Republicans in the statehouse. The
Massachusetts Republican Party does not have what you would call a deep
bench. Their two totally unknown would-be candidates for U.S. Senate now
have two weeks to get 10,000 signatures amid historic piles of snow and
nobody going anywhere.

What are the odds?

That does it for us tonight. We`ll see you again tomorrow night at
8:00 Eastern, which is when the special coverage of the State of the Union
begins. Again, it all starts tomorrow night at 8:00 Eastern.


Have a great night.


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.>