share

May 26, 2015 - Rand Paul

  • Episode: 20108
  • Views: 42,529

Sections of the Patriot Act near expiration, Republicans propose a new surveillance act, and Sen. Rand Paul discusses his 11-hour filibuster and religious liberties. (21:30)

(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)♪♪

>> Jon: WELCOME TO "THE DAILYSHOW"!

MY NAME'S JON STEWART!

WE ARE BACK, BABY! BACK ANDBETTER THAN EVER.

MY GUEST TONIGHT, A YOUNGFELLOW, SENATOR RAND PAUL.

RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT OF THESEUNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

AGAINST, LIKE, 35 OTHERREPUBLICANS!

(LAUGHTER)

AND HALF OF THOSE ARE --BOOP-BOOP!

(LAUGHTER)

BUT FIRST, IF YOU HAPPEN TO BE APHONE DATA SURVEILLANCE

PROGRAM -- WELL, MY CONDOLENCESTO YOU.

THIS IS NOT YOUR MONTH.

>> A FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT RULEDTHE CONTROVERSIAL N.S.A. PROGRAM

IS ILLEGAL THURSDAY.

>> THE COLLECTION OF BULK PHONEDATA AT THE N.S.A. EXCEEDS WHAT

WAS AUTHORIZED BY CONGRESS ANDTHE PATRIOT ACT.

>> Jon: WOW!

(LAUGHTER)

YOU KNOW YOUR SURVEILLANCEPROGRAM HAS GONE TOO FAR WHEN

YOU CANNOT GET PERMISSION FROMTHE PATRIOT ACT!

(LAUGHTER)

THAT'S LIKE GETTING THROWN OUTOF AN OLIVE GARDEN FOR EATING

TOO MANY BREAD STICKS!

LISTEN, BUDDY. WE SAIDUNLIMITED, BUDDY, NOT INFINITY!

LOOK HOW GENUINELY UPSET ANDNAUSEOUS BOTH MEN LOOK!

(LAUGHTER)

ARE BREAD STICKS THAT (BLEEP)BIG?

(LAUGHTER)

THOSE LOOK MORE LIKE BREADREDWOODS.

THOSE ARE BIG.

IT'S LIKE A BAT.

ANYWAY, BACK TO SURVEILLANCE.

ACCORDING TO THE COURTS, THEGOVERNMENT DOES NOT HAVE

PERMISSION TO VACUUM UP CELLPHONE METADATA LIKE CELL

NUMBERS, LOCATIONS, CALL TIMESAND THE FREQUENCY WITH WICH

YOU USE THE EGGPLANT EMOJI AS ASTAND-IN FOR A PENIS.

THEY DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TODO IT!

CAN I TELL YOU SOMETHING?

I KNOW IT'S SUPPSOED TO BE APENIS -- AND I SAY THIS AGAIN,

LIKE -- I'M NOT ON THE AIR MUCHLONGER AND I THINK I SHOULD

SHARE AS MUCH ABOUT MYSELFPOSSIBLE --

(LAUGHTER)

BUT -- MY PENIS IS CROWNED BYLITTLE GREEN CLOVER.

I HAVE THE EXACT SAME THING ONMY PENIS.

-- AND I WAS ALWAYS ASHAMEDUNTIL NOW.

NOW I KNOW I'M NOT ALONE.

WHERE DID THE COURT PLACE THECOLLECTION PROGRAM'S FATE?

WELL, THEY PLACED IT INCONGRESS' WRINKLY, ARTHRITIC,

GOD BOND-SCENTED HANDS.

YOU SEEE, THE PATRIOT ACTPROVISIONS RELATIVE TO THIS

PROGRAM EXPIRE JUNE 1, AND THESENATE NEEDS TO VOTE TO

EXTEND PATRIOT ACT.

HOW'S THAT GOING?

>> REPUBLICAN RAND PAUL HAS BEENTRYING TO BLOCK THE EXTENSION ON

CIVIL LIBERTIES GROUNDS.

HE FILIBUSTERED YESTERDAY FORNEARLY 11 HOURS.

>> Jon: NEARLY 11 HOURS!

SO CLOSE TO GETTING THE T-SHIRT.

YOU HAVE TO DO THE FULL, YOUHAVE TO DO THE FULL 11 HOURS.

BUT, HEY!

MAYBE WITH THE 11 HOURS, SENATORRAND PAUL MANAGED TO CHANGE SOME

MINDS.

>> WE HAVE ENTERED INTO AMOMENTOUS DEBATE.

THIS IS A DEBARE ABOUT WHETHEROR NOT A WARRANT WITH A SINGLE

NAME --

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)

>> Jon: WELL!

WHY, RANDALL J. PAUL!

I DO DECLARE!

IF YOU DO NOT STOP THIS NONSENSEIMMEDIATELY!

WELL, I HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TOTAKE MY PUPILS AND ROTATE THEM

FROM ONE SIDE OF MY ORBITALSOCKET TWIXT TO THE OTHER!

(LAUGHTER)

THAT'S RIGHT, RANDALL PAUL. LOOKUPON THE WHITES OF THE CORNER

OF MY EYE AND KNOW TAHT I AM SOOVER THIS!

(APPLAUSE)

(LAUGHTER)

THE FILIBUSTERSPEACH WAS METWITH A TOUCH OF SKEPTICISM, BUT

SURELY THERE ARE GOOD INTENTIONSBEHIND IT.

>> SENATOR McCAIN AND SENATORLINDSEY GRAHAM HAVE BOTH

SUGGESTED THAT THIS ISREVENUE-RAISING, THAT IT IS A

PERFORMANCE MORE THAN ASUBSTANTIVE EFFORT.

>> Jon: OF ALL THE BASE,PETTY, CYNICAL ACCUSATIONS, IT'S

NOT LIKE SENATOR RAND PAUL'SCAMPAIGN WEBSITE PUT OUT SOME

SORT OF FILIBUSTER PACK THATTHEY WERE SELLING --

OH, THEY DID, OH...

(LAUGHTER)

WHAT'S GOING A LITTLE FAR WITH"STAND THE RAND 2016 FILIBUSTER

CATHETER."

(LAUGHTER)

WAIT, I HAVE THE TAG TO IT!

DON'T JUMP THE GUN!

GIVE ME LIBER-PEE OR --

(LAUGHTER)

ALL RIGHT.

SO, OF COURSE, COME ON, MAN,WE'RE ON VACATION.

A COURT ALREADY SAID THEMETADATA COLLECTION PROGRAM GOES

FURTHER THAN THE PATRIOT ACTMANDATES.

THE PATRIOT ACT IS EXPIRINGJUNE 1, ANYWAY.

IT WAS PUT IN PLACE AFTERSEPTEMBER 11.

IT WAS ALWAYS DESIGNED TOEXPIRE.

WHY SHOULD WE ALLOW THE UNITEDSTATES GOVERNMENT TO CONTINUE TO

INFRINGE UPON LIBERTY?

>> THE N.S.A.'S TELEPHONEMETADATA PROGRAM IS A CRITICAL

TOOL THAT OUR NATIONAL SECURITYPROFESSIONALS NEED TO KEEP US

SAFE.

>> THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITYNEEDS THESE TOOLS TO PROTECT US.

>> LEGITIMATE TOOLS OFINTELLIGENCE --

>> IF THIS PROGRAM HAD EXISTEDBEFORE 9/11, AMERICAN LIVES

COULD'VE BEEN SAVED.

>> THE FOUNDERS MADE SURE THEFIRST OBLIGATION OF THE AMERICAN

GOVERNMENT WAS TO PROTECT THELIVES OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

YOU CAN'T ENJOY YOUR CIVILLIBERTIES IF YOU'RE IN A COFFIN.

(LAUGHTER)

>> Jon: A STERN WARNING ABOUTCOFFINS FROM THE GUY WHO WON'T

LET NEW JERSEY PIGS TURNAROUND.

(APPLAUSE)

BY THE WAY -- TONIGHT'S SHOW --

TONIGHT'S SHOW IS BROUGHT TO YOUBY HOG GESTATION CRATES!

HOG GESTATION GRATES: THEY'RELIKE COFFINS FOR PIGS WHO ARE

STILL ALIVE.

BUT I GUESS THE LESSON IS SAVINGAMERICAN LIVES IS SOMETIMES MORE

IMPORTANT THAN CIVIL LIBERTIESAND GOVERNMENT OVERREACH.

YOU KNOW, UNLESS YOU'REOBVIOUSLY TRYING TO SAVE LIVES

BY PROVIDING HEALTH INSURANCE.

>> AN INDIVIDUAL MANDATE IS ANUNPRECIDENTED OVERREACH.

>> AMERICANS AS A WHOLE ARE VERYUPSET ABOUT THE SIZE AND SCOPE

OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

>> THIS MASSIVE GOVERNMENTINTERVENTION.

>> EXPENSIVE AND INTRUSIVE TOBLATANTLY IGNORE THE WILL OF THE

PEOPLE.

>> WE DON'T WANT POLITICIANSAND BUREAUCRATS IN WASHINGTON

MAKING THE MOST INTIMATEDECISIONS WE FACE IN OUR LIVES

ABOUT HEALTHCARE.

>> Jon: WE ONLY WANT TO COLLECTPHONE CALLS TO THE DOCTORS WHILE

THEY'RE SCHEDULING THESEINTIMATE DECISIONS.

I GUESS THAT'S PROBABLY BECAUSEGOVERNMENT HEALTHCARE

OVERREACH IS BAD BECAUSECOMPARED TO TERRORISM,

ONE IS A CLEAR AND PRESENTDANGER.

>> A 2009 HARVARD STUDYESTIMATED THAT 45,000 PEOPLE DIE

EVERY YEAR BECAUSE THEY DON'THAVE HEALTH INSURANCE.

>> Jon: 45,000 PEOPLE A YEAR.

(BLEEP)!

(LAUGHTER)

HOW DO WE MAKE THAT THE THINGTHE GOVERNMENT CARES ABOUT?

DO WE HAVE TO RENAME TYPE TWODIABETES OSAMA BIN UNABLE

TO PROCESS INSILIN.

(LAUGHTER)

SO I GUESS WHILE WE NEED THEPATRIOT ACT IN ITS PRESENT

FORM, THE GOVERNMENT ISOVERSTEPPING AUTHORITY.

SO WE HAVE TO FIX IT,PREFERRABLY IN A WAY THAT REINS

IN SOME OF ITS EXCESSES, BUTDOESN'T MAKE US SOUND LIKE

WIMPY, UNAMERICAN BABIES.

>> I RISE TODAY IN SUPPORT OFTHE USA FREEDOM ACT.

>> Jon: THAT'S WHAT I'MTALKING ABOUT.

THE U.S.A. FREEDOM ACT.

JUST THE NAME IS THELEGISTALTIVE EQUIVALENT OF

WICKED GUITAR SOLO OR BALLSHANGING FROM YOUR TRUCK.

IT'S PERFECT!

>> IT STANDS FOR THE UNITING ANDSTRENGTHENING OF AMERICA BY

FULFILLING RIGHTS AND ENDINGEAVESDROPPING

DRAGNET-COLLECTION, AND ONLINEMONITORING.

(LAUGHTER)

>> Jon: YOU KNOW?

IN THE 14-YEAR HISTORY OF THEWAR ON TERROR, WE'VE HEARD ABOUT

GUANTANAMO, WATER BOARDINGRENDITION, ABU GHRAIB.

NOTHING HAS BEEN MORE TORTUREDTHAN THAT ACRONYM.

WELL, AT LEAST THE FREEDOM ACTFIXED THE GOVERNMENT METADATA

ISSUE.

>> THE U.S.A. FREEDOM ACT INEFFECT WOULD GO BACK TO THE

STATUS QUO.

>> THE TELEPHONE COMPANIES HOLDTHE DATA AND PUT ADDITIONAL

REQUIREMENTS ON THEADMINISTRATION TO SEARCH FOR THE

HAYSTACK, BUT WILL ALLOW THEHAYSTACK TO CONTINUE.

>> Jon: OH, IT DOESN'T GET RIDOF THE HAYSTACK.

WELL, I GUESS IT DOESN'T MATTERWHAT WE CALL THE METADATA, WE

NEED TO COLLECT THE METADATABECAUSE THAT'S BEEN KEEPING

US SAFE AND THWARTING TERRORISMPLOTS.

>> JUSTICE DEPARTMENTS AND THEINSPECTOR GENERAL THIS WEEK

ISSUED A REPORT THAT SAYS THEF.B.I. CAN'T REPORT TO A SINGLE

TERRORIST PLOT THAT WAS BROKENUP AS A RESULT OF THIS PROGRAM.

>> Jon: OKAY.

SO BASICALLY IT BOILS DOWN TO ASENATE DEBATE BETWEEN THOSE WHO

SAY WE MUST GIVE UP LIBERTY TOKEEP US SAFE, EVEN THOUGH IT

DOESN'T, AND THOSE WHO BELIEVEWE MUST PROTECT OUR LIBERTIES,

EVEN THOUGH THEY WON'T.

OR TO PUT THAT ANOTHER WAY,BRING ME MY FAINTIN' COUCH!

(APPLAUSE)

WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK.

(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)

>> Jon: WELCOME BACK!

MY GUEST TONIGHT, UNITED STATESSNARKTS REPRESENTING THE GREAT

STATE OF KENTUCKY!

HIS NEW BOOK, MOVING BEYONDPARTISAN POLITICS TO UNITE

AMERICA.

THAT'S LIKELY

(LAUGHTER)

PLEASE WELCOME BACK TO THEPROGRAM, SENATOR RAND PAUL!

(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)

HAVE SOME WATER, I KNOW YOU MUSTBE TIRED.

WHAT WAS THAT, 11 HOURS OFFILIBUSTERING.

YOU GOTTA BE EXHAUSTED.

CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION?

CAN YOU GO TO THE BATHROOM?

DO YOU GET 30 SECONDS, CAN YOUGO?

>> NO, YOU HAVE TO STAND THEWHOLE TIME.

YOU CANNOT SIT DOWN OR LEAVE THEFLOOR.

>> Jon: CAN YOU HAVE ASUBSTITUTE COME IN FOR JUST

A MINUTE?

>> NO.

NOW, THERE A STORY OF STROMTHURMAN ONCE UPON A TIME GOING

TO THE CLOAK ROOM DOOR ANDRELIEVING HIMSELF INTO A WASTE

BUCKET.

>> Jon: THERE ARE A LOT OFSTORIES ABOUT STROM THURMAN.

THAT MIGHT BE THE NICEST ONE.

>> BUT THE THING IS THAT WASBEFORE TV -- AND I DIDN'T WANT

TO IMPRESS THEM, YOU KNOW, WITHTHE EOMITION THING.

>> Jon: YEAH, I GET THAT.

RESPECT.

THIS IDEA, BY THE WAY, YOU KNOW,YOUR PARTY IS KNOWN FOR WANTING

TO DEFEND THE PEOPLE OF AMERICAFROM GOVERNMENT OVERREACH,

TO PROTECT LIBERTY, I BELIEVETHEY CALL IT, THEY HAVE SIGNS --

(LAUGHTER)

-- "DON'T TREAD ON ME" FLAGS.

BUT WHEN IT COMES TO GOVERNMENTSURVEILLANCE, WHEN IS COMES TO

THE SECURITY STATE, THEY SEEMVERY WILLING TO ALLOW THE

GOVERNMENT, WITH WHAT APPEARS TOBE VERY LITTLE OVERSIGHT, TO GET

WHATEVER THEY WANT.

>> YOU DIDN'T SEE THE OTHER SIGNTHEY HAVE?

WE DON'T LIKE BIG GOVERNMENTUNTIL WE DO LIKE BIG GOVERNMENT.

>> Jon: RIGHT, BUT THAT'S MYPOINT.

>> YEAH, THERE IS ANINCONSISTENCY THERE AND I THINK

THAT'S WHAT SEPARATES SOME OF USWHO ARE MORE FROM THE

LIBERTARIAN WING OF THEREPUBLICAN PARTY.

WE DON'T LIKE BIG GOVERNMENTANYWHERE.

>> Jon: NOW, IS THAT -- WHENYOU TALKING LIKE THAT, IS THAT

WHY LINDSEY GRAHAM ROLLS HISEYES, OR WERE YOU WEARING

WHITE BEFORE MEMORIAL DAY?

(LAUGHTER)

WHAT WAS IT THAT CAUSED HIM --AND WAS IN UNCOMFORTABLE --

DID THEY TAUNT YOU ABOUTTHAT?

DO THEY THINK, RAND, WHAT AREYOU DOING?

WHAT, WHAT ARE YOU DOING?

>> IT WAS MOSTLY, I THINK,PEOPLE ARE UNHAPPY ABOUT

DEBATING THE BILL OF RIGHTS WHENTHEY COULD HAVE BEEN ON

MEMORIAL WEEKEND, AND I THINKIT SHOULD BE THE OPPOSITE.

>> Jon: IN TERMS OFGOVERNEMTN SURVEILLANCE, LET'S

LOOK AT WHERE THE MAJORITY AREAT --

THERE HAVE BEEN MORE SCHOOLSHOOTINGS, WOULDN'T YOU AGREE,

THAN TERRORISM IN AMERICA OVERTHE LAST 15 YEARS.

>> IT'S VERY EMOTIONAL, THOUGH,I DON'T WANT TO DISCOUNT

TERRORISM.

>> Jon: WE'RE NOT DISCOUNTING ITBUT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT IT

REALISTICALLY.

>> THAT'S THE THING, RIGHT NOWTHEY'RE USING SCARE TACTICS

AGAINST ME.

THEY WANT ME TO BACK DOWNBECAUSE IF ANYTHING HAPPENS, IF

ANYONE DIES FOR ANY REASON INTHE WHOLE WORLD, I'M NOW

RESPONSIBLE FOR IT.

14 PEOPLE DIED LAST NIGHT FROMMURDER IN BALTIMORE.

IS THE POLICE CHIEF RESPONSIBLEFOR THAT?

MAYBE THE PEOPLE WHO DO THEKILLING ARE RESPONSIBLE AND THE

REST OF US NEED TO PROTECTSECURITY BUT ALSO NEED TO

REALIZE WHAT WE'RE FIGHTINGAGAINST.

IF WE'RE FIGHTING THIS WARAGAINST TERRORISM WE'RE FIGHTING

TO DEFEND OUR FREEDOMS.

IF WE GIVE UP WHO WE ARE IN THEROCESS, I'M WORRIED WILL THE

BATTLE HAVE BEEN WORTH IT.

THE PROBLEM NOW IS WE ARE IN AWAR THEY SAY IS PERPETUAL.

THEY SAY THE BATTLEGROUND ISEVERYWHERE AND IT WILL GO ON

FOREVER, THOUSANDS OF YEARS.

AND SO WHEN ARE WE GETTING OURFREEDOMS BACK.

BUT I KNOW YOUNG MEN WHO HAVELOST TWO LEGS, YOU KNOW, LOST

THREE LIMBS, AND I ASK THEM WHATTHEY FOUGHT FOR AND THEY SAID

THEY WERE FIGHTING FOR BILL OFRIGHTS, SO I THINK IT'S A

DISSERVICE TO THEIR MEMORY FORME TO SAY, OH, WELL, I'M GOING

TO JUST ROLL MY EYES AND THEBILL OF RIGHTS IS OUT THE WINDOW

BECAUSE I'M NOT WILLING TO STAYHERE ON THE WEEKEND AND FIGHT

FOR SOMETHING OUR FOUNDINGFATHERS THOUGHT WAS

PRETTY IMPORTANT -- IMPORTANT TOPUT INTO THE FOURTH AMENDMENT.

>> Jon: I'M GLAD YOU DIDN'TFRAME THAT IN AN INFLAMMATORY

WAY.

(LAUGHTER)

I'M THE KIND OF GUY WHO DOESN'TMIND WORKING A WEEKEND IF IT

MEANS OUR SOLDIERS DIDN'T DIEIN VAIN.

(APPLAUSE)

I GUESS LINDSEY GRAHAM'S ADIFFERENT KIND OF GUY.

WE'LL COME BACK, WE'LL TALK TOYOU MORE.

MORE WITH SENATOR RAND PAULRIGHT AFTER THIS.

(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)

>> Jon: ALL RIGHT, WELCOME BACK.

WE'RE TALKING WITH SENATOR RANDPAUL.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THEINCONSISTENCIES.

YOU BROUGHT UP A POINT THAT SAYSTHEY'RE AGAINST BIG GOVERNMENT

UNTIL THEY'RE FOR IT.

IT ALMOST SEEMS LIKE THAT'SEVERYBODY, AND I ALMOST THINK,

THEN, I WOULD BE OKAY WITH THATIF THEY MADE THIS INDIVIDUAL

CASES.

YOU KNOW, THIS RELIGIOUS LIBERTYCASE IS AN INTERESTING ONE,

BECAUSE I REMEMBER BACK RIGHTAFTER 9/11 THEY HAD WHAT WAS

CALLED THE GROUND ZERO MOSQUE.

EVERYBODY WAS AGAINST THAT.

YOU CAN'T BUILD THAT.

MAYBE A QUESTION OF RELIGIOUSLIBERTY.

BUT WHEN IT COMES TO A GAYCOUPLE GETTING MARRIED AND

SOMEBODY WANTS TO BUY A CAKEFROM A BAKER, WELL THAT'S

RELIGIOUS LIBERTY, EXACT SAMEPEOPLE STANDING UP FOR ONE

OR THE OTHER.

>> I THINK THE INCONSISTENCIESAND LACK OF GENUINENESS ARE WHAT

BOTHER REPUBLICANS --

WHY CONGRESS HAS ABOUT A 10%APPROVAL RATING.

>> Jon: RIGHT.

>> BUT I THINK YOU'RE EXACTLYRIGHT, PEOPLE WHO LOOK AT THINGS

THE SAME WAY NO MATTER WHAT THEISSUE IS AND NOT WITH THEIR

PERSONAL BIAS INTO IT.

>> Jon: OR MAKE AN ARGUMENT,YOU KNOW, THIS RELIGIOUS

LIBERTY ARGUMENT FEELS LIKE THEY'RE WORKED BACKWARDS FROM

WE ARE AGAINST THE COURTSGRANTING THE CONSTITUTIONAL

RIGHT TO MARRIAGE EQUALITY, ANDWE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO

GET OUT OF THAT.

MAYBE WE'LL TRY THE STATESRIGHTS ARGUMENT.

OKAY, THAT DIDN'T WORK.

NOW LET'S TRY RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.

>> BUT THERE IS ALSO SOMETHINGWE NEED TO SEPARATE OUT.

SO FOR EXAMPLE, THEY TOLD METHEY WERE GOING TO BUILD A

MOSQUE AT 9/11, I WAS HORRIFIEDAND THOUGHT IT WAS A TERRIBLE

THING, BUT AM NOT FOR A LAW TOPREVENT THEM.

IF YOU WANT TO MARCH DOWN THESTREET AND ARE PART OF THE

K.K.K., I AM HORRIFIED BYTTHAT AND OBJECT TO IT, BUT THERE

ARE CERTAIN-- THE FIRSTAMENDMENT IS ABOUT THE RIGHT TO

BE DESPICABLE.

IT'S EASY TO ACCEPT --

>> Jon: BUT YOU CAN'T HARDLYEQUATE THE MOSQUE WITH THE

K.K.K. OR GAY MARRIAGE WITH THEK.K.K. --

I HEAR THAT ARGUMENT A LOT.

>> THE THING IS I THINK YOU CANPERSONALLY OBJECT TO THINGS THE

LAW WILL ALLOW.

IT DOESN'T MEAN WE HAVE TO SAYTHAT WE ACCEPT EVERYONE ELSE'S

BELIEFS ON EVERYTHING ELSE.

SO FOR EXAMPLE, I'M ABSOLUTELYFOR THE LAW ALLOWING -- NOT

PREVENTING A MOSQUE TO BE BUILT,HOWEVER, AT THE SAME TIME, I

I THINK IT'S A REALLY REALLY BADIDEA TO BUILD A MOSQUE AT THE

9/11 SITE.

>> Jon: YOU DO KNOW THOUGH THATTHERE WAS A MOSQUE THERE

ALREADY?

>> I KNOW.

>> Jon: I'M REALLY FASCINATED BYTHE IDEA OF RELIGIOUS

PERSECUTION IN THIS COUNTRYBECAUSE THE DEPTH OF FEELING

SEEMS REAL.

>> FREEDOM DOESN'T MEAN THAT WEALL HAVE TO AGREE WITH EVERYBODY

ELSE'S -- WHO THEY ARE, WHATTHEY ARE, WHAT THE RELIGION IS.

WE DON'T HAVE TO LIKE EVERYBODY.

>> Jon: NOBODY'S ASKING YOU TOBE HAPPY BAKING IT.

>> THE THING IS, WHERE I WOULDSEPARATE IT IS PEOPLE WHO HAVE

PERSONAL OPINIONS, THEY'REAFRAID -- SOME PEOPLE ARE AFRAID

IN OUR COUNTRY THAT THEIRPERSONAL RELIGIOUS OPINIONS

WILL NO LONGER BE ALLOWED EVENIN THEIR CHURCH. AND THERE ARE

PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT THISBECAUSE WHAT THEY'RE SAYING IS,

OKAY, YOU GIVE A DEDUCTION TOYOUR CHURCH, SO WHO'S MONEY

IS THAT?

IS THAT NOT THE GOVERNMENT'SMONEY AND THEY CAN REGULATE THE

CHURCH BECAUSE IT'S A DEDUCTION.

PEOPLE ARE ARGUING THIS.

I THINK THERE'S A DIFFERENCEBETWEEN ACCEPTANCE AND

NEUTRALITY OF THE LAW AND TRYINGTO FORCE YOUR OPINION ON

PEOPLE EVEN IN THEIR CHURCH, OREVEN IN THEIR EXPRESSION.

>> Jon: NOBODY'S FORCING IT ONTHE CHURCH.

YOU KNOW, YOU STAND SOMEWHAT...NOT ALONE IN YOUR PARTY BUT EVEN

THERE WHEN RELIGION ENTERS INTOTHE QUESTION, IT CLOUDS THE IDEA

THAT -- BECAUSE YOU PORTRAY ITAS, WELL, WE DON'T WANT TO

FORCE PEOPLE TO HAVE TO AGREEWITH YOUR BELIEFS, BUT WE'RE

NOT.

WE'RE ASKING THEM TO DO THETHING THAT THEY DO FOR THEIR

BUSINESS.

WHAT IS A CHRIS CHAIN BUSINESS?

AND I DON'T MEAN THATDISRESPECTFULLY.

>> BUT I GUESS THE THING ISLET'S SEE YOU DO HAVE SOMEONE--

AND THIS CASE HAS BEEN RULED ONON SORT OF MAKING T-SHIRTS.

YOU HAVE A CHRISTIAN BUSINESS, ITHINK THIS WAS IN LEXINGTON,

KENTUCKY, IN MY STATE, THEYCHOSE NOT TO MAKE SHIRTS THAT

WERE PRO-CHOICE, THEY CHOSE NOTTO MAKE SHIRTS THAT WERE

DEMOCRAT -- BECAUSE THAT'S NOTCHRISTIAN, OF COURSE --

>> Jon: SURE!

THAT'S SATAN!

SOCIAL SECURITY IS THE DEVIL!

WHOO!

>> NOW WE'RE GETTING SOMEWHERE.

BUT, NO, THEN THEY CHOSE TONOT MAKE T-SHIRTS SUPPORTING GAY

MARRIAGE.

THE THING IS THAT DOES SOUND TOME LIKE A FREEDOM ISSUE WHERE

YOU CAN GO DOWN THE STREET ANDGET SOMEBODY ELSE TO MAKE IT.

AND I'M NOT SOMEBODY WHO ISINTOLERANT.

I'M SOMEONE WHO BELIEVES INLETTING PEOPOLE LIVE LIFE THE

WAY THEY WANT TO LIVE IT, BUT IALSO WOULD INCLUDE CHRISTIANS IN

THAT, TOO, WHO HAVE A BELIEFTHAT IS DIFFERENT THAN MANY --

>> Jon: WE HAVE THIS IDEACORPORATIONS ARE PEOPLE AND

SHOULD IT BE AS EASY AS I DON'TAGREE WITH THIS AND IT'S BECAUSE

I'M CHRISTIAN, BECAUSE THEN,WELL, I MEAN, SEEMS LIKE GAY

MARRIAGE LOOMS A LOT LARGER INTHE MINDS OF CERTAIN

CONSERVATIVES THAN IT DOES INTHE BIBLE, AND THE ONLY THING I

WOULD SAY IS, DON'T THEY SELLCAKES TO SINNERS ALL THE TIME?

ADULTERERS, PEOPLE THAT USE--WHEN YOU COME IN, DO YOU GO,

I'D LIKE A CAKE.

AND THEY GO, DO YOU USE THE NAMEOF THE LORD IN VAIN?

(APPLAUSE)

HOW DO YOU FIGURE THAT OUT? ITFEELS DISINGENUOUS.

>> HERE'S THE THING, JON.

>> Jon: YEAH.

>> I REALLY APPRECIATE THE WAYYOU TIED THIS ALL TOGETHER

BECAUSE YOU BROUGHT US FULLCIRCLE.

>> Jon: THANK YOU. THANK YOU.IT'S WHAT I DO.

(LAUGHTER)

>> NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUTWHETHER CORPORATIONS ARE PEOPLE

AND THAT'S EXACTLY THE QUESTIONOF THE PATRIOT ACT BECAUSE WHAT

HAVE BEEN FILIBUSTERING ABOUT IS--

(LAUGHTER)

-- WHETHER OR NOT A WARRANT THATHAS A CORPORATION'S NAME ON IT,

VERIZON, CAN COLLECT ALL THERECORDS OF ALL THE PEOPLE --

WHETHER A CORPORATION'S APERSON.

>> Jon: THAT'S MY POINT.

>> SO WE'RE RIGHT BACK TO THEPATRIOT ACT AND I THINK WE AGREE

NOW.

(APPLAUSE)

>> Jon: THIS IS GOING TO KEEP MEAWAKE TONIGHT, ISN'T IT?

I'M GOING TO BE SITTING AROUNDGOING, WAIT A MINUTE!

WELL, GOOD LUCK TO YOU WITH ALLTHIS.

>> THANK YOU.

>> Jon: I WISH YOU WELL.

TAKING A STAND, IT'S ON THEBOOKSHELVES NOW.

SENATOR RAND PAUL, EVERYBODY!

(APPLAUSE)

>> Jon: THAT'S IT FOR US!

WE'RE GONNA CHECK IN QUICK WITHLARRY WILMORE, THE NIGHTLY SHOW.

HEY, DID YOU HAVE A GOOD WEEKOFF, LARRY?

>> YEAH, JON.

YOU KNOW, I JUST KIND OFDISCONNECTED AND CAUGHT UP WTH

MY FAVORITE TV SHOW.

19 YEARS AND COUNTING, MAN, ILOVE THE DUGGARS, MAN!

THEY'RE SO GOOD!

>> Jon: I HAVE SOME BAD NEWS.

>> MAN, I MEAN, JON, IT WASJUST SO NICE TO WATCH A SHOW

ABOUT A FAMILY WITH TOGETHERNESSAND GOOD OLD FASHIONED VALUES.

YOU KNOW, I HOPE NOTHING HAPPENSTHAT MAKES ME RECONCEPTUALIZE

THEIR CLOSENESS IN ISOLATION TOSOMETHING DANGEROUS.

>> Jon: LARRY, OBVIOUSLY, FARBE IT FROM ME TO JUST --

>> YES?

>> Jon: -- AH...

JUST ENJOY YOUR FAVORITE SHOW,YOU CRAZY PERSON.

>> THANKS, MAN.

>> Jon: ALL RIGHT, LARRYWILMORE, EVERYBODY!

THAT IS OUR SHOW.

HERE'S YOUR MOMENT ZEN.

>> CAN'T READ MY, CAN'T READ MY,CAN'T READ MY POKER FACE.

>> PO-PO-PO-PO-POKER FACE. MAH,MAH, MAH, MAH.

>> I HATE THAT SONG.

Loading...