MSNBC Hardball - Transcript
MSNBC Hardball - Transcript
4/18/2005
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
MATTHEWS: Hey, thank you, Chris Jansing at the Vatican.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is coming under partisan attack for his upcoming video appearance before the Family Research Council's Justice Sunday telecast this coming Sunday. But Republicans are firing back, calling the Democrats hypocrites because John Kerry preached politics from a church pulpit during the presidential race last year.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN KERRY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: When you pray, move your feet. And we've got to go out there and move our feet. We've got to go out there and build what we need in this country, and we do it at the ballot box. I'll tell you and all the rest of the people in this country struggling for fairness, struggling for justice, I've got your back.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MATTHEWS: I'm now joined by Senator Trent Lott, Republican of Mississippi, and Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California.
Well, what's fair? Is it-Senator Feinstein, you first. What's fair here? Can John Kerry campaign in churches, especially African-American churches, who are motivated to vote Democrat, motivate them some more and that's not politics, whereas, if a guy like Frist goes out to a conservative Christian group and pitches the Republican program, is that any different?
SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D), CALIFORNIA: I think it is different.
I think it is expected that people in political office go to churches, speak about issues in churches. I think this is very different. This is saying that the opposition to certain candidates is an assault on basic religious belief. And I do not believe it is. That has nothing to do with it. And I think, you know, religion is a very sensitive, very personal topic.
And I think, when it is used this way, in a way that is totally false, because I sat on that committee, Chris, for 12 years. Religion has nothing to do with how we feel about any given judge, nothing to do with it. And to make-if he in fact is going to make that accusation, I think it is just simply untrue.
MATTHEWS: Senator Lott, let me ask you about this whole question of this-you know this group, Family Research Council. They have put out a flier for Justice Sunday. At the bottom of it, it says, "The filibuster was once abused to protect racial bias." And we all know that. "And now it is being used against people of faith."
Is it?
SEN. TRENT LOTT ®, MISSISSIPPI: Well, you're trying to attribute to Bill Frist something that was said by somebody that was involved in this event.
I think that the Democrats are being hypocritical here. You know, candidates for office, people in office, go to churches and synagogues and I presume mosques and they take advantage of all the groups they can to speak to. Bill Frist was invited to speak to this group by videotape, a secular statement. He is not getting into the division between church and state. It is a perfectly legitimate thing for the majority leader of the Senate to do, in my opinion.
Look, we are a very religious nation. I want to comment on that. I mean, just look like-how we're all following what's going on with the pope. Look how we all were affected by the pope's funeral.
MATTHEWS: Sure.
LOTT: We in America are a religious country of all kinds of religious backgrounds. And we do have separation between church and state, but not from religion.
And so I think maybe we're beginning to-maybe on both sides, Chris, get a little bit overheated here. You want people of faith in government. I think one of the things that appealed to Floridians, for instance, about Joe Lieberman was his Orthodox Jewish faith.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
LOTT: People respect that of all backgrounds.
But on the point that you're touching on here, you can't have it one way. Oh, it's OK to go talk to a church group.
(CROSSTALK)
MATTHEWS: Well, let me ask you.
(CROSSTALK)
MATTHEWS: I want to ask you, do you believe any of the Democrat objections to any of the judgeships that come up on the lower courts, the federal courts, was based upon religion, the fact that somebody is a practicing Catholic?
LOTT: I don't...
MATTHEWS: And the person may have strong religious beliefs, you're-you're-you-you don't think that any of the Democratic objections had to do with religion, or do you?
LOTT: Well, I don't think so. Some of my colleagues do, however.
But here's the problem, Chris. And this is the conundrum you get into on these issues. If you are a devout Catholic, or if you are a really committed Southern Baptist, you have, you know, very strong views on certain things.
MATTHEWS: Right.
LOTT: And if you reflect those views in your votes, then you're disqualified. And I think that's wrong. And it does quite often get into this question of abortions.
You know, I don't have a litmus test. I voted to confirm Ruth Bader Ginsburg, even though I knew I would not agree with a lot of her decisions. But she was well qualified by education, by experience, decorum. And I do think that's what presidential elections are about. The president won. President Clinton won an election. This was his choice. Unless there was some strong reason to vote against her, I thought I should vote for her, and I did.
MATTHEWS: Let me go to Senator Feinstein.
It seems to me this all comes down to Roe vs. Wade. And Roe vs. Wade said that a woman's decision, at least before the fetus, the child becomes viable, is basically her decision and that it's a privacy matter. And there's a penumbra of privacy, the court ruled. Isn't that something that separates religion from politics?
FEINSTEIN: I think it does.
MATTHEWS: Then shouldn't it do it?
(CROSSTALK)
MATTHEWS: I mean, if you're a Catholic, you can support the right of people to make other decisions than you would make.
FEINSTEIN: Yes, sir.
Look, we're talking about following the law regardless of what your faith holds. And there are differences between what the law is and what some religions hold as part of their faith. And that's the separation of church and state. It's not to impose religion on the law. You may have a religious view, and that's fine. It doesn't bother me, as long as you can look at the law in an objective sense.
Now what Roe did-and Roe is often misunderstood. Roe said that, in the first trimester, a woman does have privacy. In the second and third trimester, the state can enter the arena and set certain laws. And states have in fact set-set certain laws about parental notification, judicial bypass, other things like that. The states have moved. And that's entirely right.
Now, what Roe also does is establish that zone of privacy and protection in other cases, protection of the health of the mother. Now, different religions have different views on that. Nonetheless, I think it is appropriate to ask questions as to how an individual would hold on certain laws. I think that where we're going is a very dangerous place. And I've watched evidence over the last year or so.
And I've seen this separation between church and state be eroded, be eroded through all kinds of different techniques. And I believe it's a mistake, because, once you do that, you get into, whose religion? What church are we talking about? And that's not what this nation was set up to be. It was set up to be freed from tyranny of various archaic church laws that existed and the tyranny that existed, the insurrection, all of those things that involved individuals.
MATTHEWS: OK.
FEINSTEIN: So...
MATTHEWS: We'll come back. We'll come back, Senator. We have to come back and take a break.
We're going to come back and talk about Howard Dean and what he's been saying lately with Senator Trent Lott and Senator Dianne Feinstein. We're also going to talk about Tom DeLay and what people are saying about him.
You're watching HARDBALL on MSNBC.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MATTHEWS: Coming up, who is winning the war of words between conservative Tom DeLay and liberal Howard Dean? We'll be back with Senators Trent Lott and Dianne Feinstein when our HARDBALL special report, "Religion & Politics," returns.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(NEWS BREAK)
MATTHEWS: We're back with Senator Trent Lott and Senator Dianne Feinstein.
This week, Howard Dean-he's the chairman of the Democratic Party-responded to comments by House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, which DeLay later said were inartful, that judges responsible for the Schiavo's ruling-quote-and this is DeLay's comment-"should answer for their behavior."
Let's listen to Howard Dean's response.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HOWARD DEAN (D), DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: It is not a moral value to threaten judges of the United States of America because they made a decision that you don't agree with.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MATTHEWS: What do you make of that back and forth? You've got Tom DeLay out there saying almost like a fatwa in the Mideast, saying the time will come when men responsible for this to answer for their behavior. It sounds like a fatwa of the Middle East.
LOTT: Well, he was reflecting what a lot of people..
MATTHEWS: Is he threatening...
(CROSSTALK)
LOTT: No, I don't think so. And he said-he apologized. He said it was inartful, at the least. And so, I don't think that he was really threatening them, although, let me tell you, Chris, a lot of people get really mad at judges across the board. And I think that's a dangerous trend, quite frankly. But one thing that Howard...
MATTHEWS: Well, what's the job of a judge? To judge.
LOTT: Right.
MATTHEWS: Not to do what Congress tells them to do.
LOTT: Well, that's true, too. But when you're supposed to review a case de novo-that means from the beginning, in its entirely-and you don't do it, then, clearly, you did not do what a bill says. Now, wait a minute. I'm not getting into the Schiavo thing. I have not been into that issue.
One of the things I want to emphasize, though, is, Howard Dean said we're going to demonize. We're going to use the face of Tom DeLay in '06 and '08.
MATTHEWS: Poster me.
LOTT: And that is what-one of the things that bothers me. I've seen it done before. Democrats have done it to Republicans and vice-versa, Republicans to Democrats.
Hey, how about talking about issue? When I go home, people don't want to get into personalities. They want to know, what are you going to do about the price of gasoline? What are you guys going to do about a decent transportation system that keeps my children getting killed on a narrow two-lane, hilly road? They want to know what we're going to do about immigration reform. They're wanting us to deal with real issues, budget.
MATTHEWS: It sounds like you agree with Dianne Feinstein.
Senator Feinstein, people left Europe to get away from these damn religious wars, one prince against another. People left Europe to come to America to get away with religious-get away from religious wars. How are we doing here?
FEINSTEIN: Well, I think, for the first time, we have seen the specter of injecting religion in government. And I find that very dangerous.
Now, I don't want to get into the Tom DeLay matter. I think that's a matter between the House and Mr. DeLay and the courts in Texas and Mr. DeLay. But I think it is right. Criticizing the court because you don't agree with the decision I don't think gets you anywhere. The courts are supposed to be independent. We're supposed to do our job and they interpret what we do. If they find it unconstitutional, there's room to appeal and go up to the Supreme Court.
And that's always been a final and respect judgment. I would hate for that to change, because it is really the first step toward doing away, I think, with a weakening of democracy that has been a very good thing for this nation over the past 200 years.
MATTHEWS: Thank you very much, Senator Dianne Feinstein of California.
And thank you, as always, Senator Trent Lott, for coming over.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7561933/