Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Talkback Live
Free-for-All Friday
Aired June 29, 2001 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DICK CHENEY, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It does raise the possibility that I may need to have implanted sort of -- I think of it as a pacemaker plus.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I didn't hear much about the children while I was in jail.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They were poor, they were destitute. They did what they could to survive.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Nobody else lives in that kind of filth.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The young people are not attempted to increase sexual behavior because they understand sexuality.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHN ASHCROFT, ATTORNEY GENERAL: The intent of the law is one, to protect the privacy of legitimate gun dealers.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It is simply inherently dangerous to hold the wheel with one hand, hold onto the phone with another.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MILES O'BRIEN, GUEST HOST: Fasten your seatbelts, it's free-for- all Friday!
All right, everybody! It is food fight Friday -- I mean, free- for-all Friday. Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Miles O'Brien, in for Bobbie Battista. Let's jump right into our extravaganza.
Our guests: Lisa Evers, host of "Street Soldiers With Lisa Evers" on Hot 97, WQHT FM in New York. In Los Angeles, Jane Chastain, host of "Judicial Watch" for Radio America. Jane is the author of several books, including "I'd Speak Out on the Issues If I Only Knew What to Say." Monique Caradine, host of "Mo' in the Midday," on WVON Radio in Chicago. And in Boston, Peter Blute, radio talk show host on WRKO. He is a former state representative and a U.S. congressman.
And our first round: Vice President Dick Cheney announcing he expects to have a sort of pacemaker put in -- installed. He called it an insurance policy. Doctors say it will be business as usual once the procedures are over. Any cause for concern? Lisa, let's begin with you, are you concerned?
LISA EVERS, WQHT RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: I am absolutely not concerned, because we know that he has a heart condition, but it is being monitored very closely. You can be sure he's getting the best medical care that you could possibly get in the country. And I don't think there is any reason that he should step down, which some people are talking about doing. He's an integral part of the administration, this is not one of those vice presidents who is there simply for ceremonial purposes, and I think many Americans feel very comfortable having him there as the No. 2.
O'BRIEN: Jane Chastain?
JANE CHASTAIN, RADIO AMERICAN TALK SHOW HOST: Well, I'm surprised that the media is having such a field day over this. I can't see what the big to do is. I mean, after all, the man is having regular checkups and he is taking every necessary precaution. I would be much more concerned if he...
O'BRIEN: Wait a minute! Jane! Jane!
CHASTAIN: ... were not.
O'BRIEN: Jane, this is the vice president of the United States, perhaps the most influential vice president ever, he's talking about getting what is an invasive procedure, why shouldn't we be talking about that?
CHASTAIN: Well, you know, I think Dick Cheney is a lot more worried about his health, or concerned about his health, than we are. I mean, after all, he is the one involved. We have to remember that Dick Cheney is a political animal. He wouldn't be happy with his feet propped up on the la-z-boy watching sitcoms. This man is at his best when he is making policy and mixing it up in the political arena. That's where he thrives, so I think we have to leave it up to Dick Cheney.
O'BRIEN: All right, so that would be stressful? The old la-z- boy would be stressful for him?
CHASTAIN: Absolutely. I think it would drive him nuts!
O'BRIEN: OK. All right, that's a good point. Monique, what do you think?
MONIQUE CARADINE, WVON RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: I have to agree, I have to agree with Lisa there. There is absolutely no need for us to be concerned. Dick Cheney knows himself better than any of us. We can talk about this until we are blue in the face, but like she said, I mean, he's going to get the best health care that you can possibly get, he knows his body.
But I must say this: God forbid where something should happen where he has to take some time off. I just hope that he is training the president to operate adequately and efficiently in his absence, because, as a lot of people say, Dick Cheney is the one that's really the president.
CHASTAIN: Oh! Come on now! I mean, you're still trying to prop up the myth that somehow George Bush is an empty suit, and Dick Cheney is still the power behind the throne, calling the shots. I mean, that bubble was burst when Bush put him on solving the nation's energy problem. I mean, if Bush had needed him by his side whispering sweet policy nothings in his ear, he certainly wouldn't have given him an assignment that important.
(CROSSTALK)
O'BRIEN: Wait a minute, sweet policy nothings. I got to remember that one, that was good. Al is from Louisiana and Al has a little story to tell which validates, well, the wonders of modern medicine. Go ahead, Al.
AL: Well, I'm alive on account of modern medicine. We are monitored very closely on a regular basis, and I feel great. I've had five bypasses, what's wrong with it?
O'BRIEN: Five bypasses for Al. He's doing fine. He says Dick -- is Dick Cheney good for the job?
AL: Certainly he's good for the job. Just because he has a condition doesn't affect his mind.
CARADINE: And Miles, I mean, let's be honest, you have people who work jobs that are very stressful that have different kinds of disabilities, if you will, or different kinds of conditions, as the guest put it, but they do their jobs just fine and they are very effective at what they do.
O'BRIEN: I want to pause just here a minute. Give Al a round of applause! For God's sakes, five, five bypasses!
(APPLAUSE)
O'BRIEN: Stand up, take a bow! Take a bow! There you go.
(APPLAUSE)
O'BRIEN: He's tanned, he's rested, he's ready! I think he might be next in line. Who knows? We don't know how the succession goes.
All right, you're next. Go ahead, Chantree (ph).
CHANTREE: Well, like Monique said, I am concerned myself just because I think that he's going to be required to take time from work, and I think that I have a right to be concerned when he is making -- he is an integral part of this administration, and he's making decisions that will affect my life. And with his bypass surgery and heart condition, he will be required to take off work, and I think I have a right to be concerned about that.
O'BRIEN: All right. Talk show hosts, what do you think about that?
(CROSSTALK)
O'BRIEN: Time out, time out!
CHASTAIN: ... the vice president's office to keep the vice president awake. I'm glad this vice president has a lot of experience. But you know, his primary area of expertise is defense, and if Dick Cheney were whispering in Bush's ear, I don't think he would be in the political trouble that he's in right now. He has spent much too much time listening to his political advisers, instead of his defense advisers.
Why else would he have given up on Vieques, our only live-fire training range on the East Coast and put our men and women in jeopardy? I also think it was absolutely foolish for Bush to have opened up our strategic ports to Russian ships when he hasn't even investigated that lasing incident that occurred off of Puget Sound, and also trashed the policy of saying that the United States should be available to fight two wars at once. That doesn't sound like Dick Cheney to me. So, I don't think he's been that engaged.
O'BRIEN: All right. I got to tell you, Jane, you get a lot of credit for getting us all the way to Vieques from that. I don't know how you did it, but you did it. Anyway. All right, Lisa, what do you think?
EVERS: In terms of Vieques or in terms of Dick Cheney?
O'BRIEN: Forget Vieques!
EVERS: Well, I think the point is that, as your guests just aptly demonstrated, the bypass operations, heart conditions today are not what they were 10 or 15 years ago. The doctors know a lot more, they are much more successful, the rate of success is much higher, and I don't think it's any reason for him to cut back on his activity, and I think one of the reasons the media is focusing on it so much is this White House -- we are going through scandal withdrawal right now.
There have been no intern mishaps in terms of the White House, and people are looking for anything they can to talk about. And that's really why there has been so much focus on his health, I think.
O'BRIEN: All right. John is in our audience, what do you think? Scandal withdrawal?
JOHN: Probably. Because there isn't any. Cheney will do fine. If he has to take some time off, it's nothing that no other American is taking time off the job to, you know, get better if they were ill. We've had a president recently got shot, Ronald Reagan, he took some time off, the country went on. We've been doing this for almost 250 years.
CARADINE: And Miles, we have to give Vice President Cheney some credit for even being as open and honest with us as he has been. I mean, some people might not have even told what exactly they were going through in terms of their health. That is a very personal and private thing. So I've got to give him credit for being so open about it.
O'BRIEN: Sherry, go.
SHERRY: I believe the stress of the job will influence the condition of his heart, because one stress that most people don't talk about, and that's the stress caused by others.
O'BRIEN: All right. Peter Blute, are you there?
PETER BLUTE, WRKO RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Yes, I am, Miles.
O'BRIEN: We have contact with Boston. Peter Blute, come in. Peter Blute, come in.
BLUTE: I'm here, Miles.
O'BRIEN: What do you think about Dick Cheney? Most folks here think it's just fine, it's not a big deal, he's going to be able to do his job, don't worry. What do you think?
BLUTE: I would agree with that. I don't think we should overreact because somebody in his high office has a physical problem. That happens every day in America to many people in high, stressful, important job. We've got a governor here in Massachusetts who's been really out of the statehouse for two months on maternity leave, and things have gone fairly well, frankly. So I don't think we should overreact.
O'BRIEN: All right. Let's go to J.C. from Kentucky. J.C., why don't you weigh in here.
J.C.: I've had eight bypasses two years in Central Baptist Hospital in Lexington, Kentucky. Doing fine, walking three miles a day. Dick Cheney is a great guy, and he's doing a good job, and he's got qualifications.
(APPLAUSE)
O'BRIEN: All right. Sorry, Al, you lose! Eight bypasses for J.C. I believe he is the winner in this crowd, anyway.
Couple of faxes, e-mails. "My grandpa had two bypasses and other multiple surgeries. If he can do it and still come out active, I believe that Cheney may even come out a stronger person once his surgery is over," that from Chad.
Another e-mail: "I hope Vice President Cheney will be all right. It's amazing to see a man with his medical history perform at such a high level in a very stressful job. If he had to step down, who would succeed him?" Tom in New Mexico.
(BELL RINGING)
O'BRIEN: Briefly, the succession is pretty simple. The president appoints somebody and both houses of Congress, by a simple majority, will ratify or reject that possibility.
Anyway, that's it for Dick Cheney on this free-for-all Friday. When we return, we will move on. We are moving on to the subject of the Idaho mother. This is a sad story out of Idaho -- charges of child neglect. The felonious portions have now been dropped, but the question remains: Was she endangering her children, and what next on this story? Stay with us for more TALKBACK LIVE and don't forget, by the way, to be our buddy. Please be our buddy. Put TALKBACK LIVE on your AOL Instant Messenger buddy list, send us a message. Who knows? You might see it on air.
And if you aren't on AOL Instant Messenger, just follow our link to the buddy. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O'BRIEN: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE's free-for-all Friday. Remember those kids in Idaho who kept authorities at bay after their mother was arrested and charged with neglect? It happened at the end of May. Well, the charges against JoAnn McGuckin have been reduced. She's out of jail, on bail, and she is seeking custody of her six minor children.
When authorities went into her home it was filthy. No heat, no running water and we could go on with the description but we won't. Although the family was broke, it refused government help. One of McGuckin's daughters says the family problem isn't neglect, it is poverty. And we had a little debate going on about this in the break. Let's begin with you at that side of the room.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, the question was asked, should she have to be helped to learn how to clean up? My thing is that they have a lot of children where their houses are spick-and-span, but they can't play, they can't enjoy it and I do believe that she needs to clean the house. But she may need some assistance, not only just with cleanliness, but with some other issues, because your house just doesn't get that filthy and you just live in it.
So she needs help, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the children are being neglected and abused.
O'BRIEN: Kurt, go ahead.
KURT: Well, I just can't imagine not being able to figure out how to clean up that. That's all -- needing to be taught to clean that mess up.
O'BRIEN: All right, let's go to our talk show radio host.
CARADINE: Miles, do you mind if I jump in here please?
O'BRIEN: Feel free. Go right ahead, Monique.
CARADINE: I think that we can sometimes be extremely judgmental. And just because this woman's house wasn't spick-and-span as your audience member just pointed out, that does not mean that she did not love and have affection for her children.
O'BRIEN: Carolyn.
BLUTE: It looked a little like my college dorm room, as I recall. But I do think there was some serious, purposeful neglect there. You can't let a home get that disheveled without endangering the children in some way, and as the earlier person said, it's not that hard to have a basic cleanliness in a home. So I think she does have a significant problem and maybe we should think twice about giving her children back...
(CROSSTALK)
But is the answer to take those kids away.
CHASTAIN: You're talking about a family who was in crisis. You're talking about a family where the father just died of a very horrible and long and protracted illness, and you're talking about a family in extreme poverty. So, I mean, I think if we want to bring the good housekeeping police in and look at all of our homes, I'm afraid that at least a quarter of our moms might fail at any given time, particularly...
O'BRIEN: Hey, hey! Let's get to the audience here for a minute. Carolyn?
CAROLYN: Yes, just looking at the pictures we just saw, I know a lot of families that are single parents, have a lot of kids in their houses, are not "Good Housekeeping" clean, but they are clean enough for the kids to live a healthy life.
BLUTE: That's right.
CAROLYN: I mean, that -- that doesn't look normal.
(APPLAUSE)
O'BRIEN: Mary Beth -- Mary Beth first. Mary Beth and then...
(CROSSTALK)
O'BRIEN: Excuse me. Let's get Mary Beth, then we'll go to the professional talkers. Go ahead, Mary Beth.
MARY BETH: Exactly what I was going to say. These children are endangered by the vermin that they're surrounded with. This is a disease-filled area. They cannot be safe and they absolutely are being neglected. Love is not in question here. Perhaps she does have some mental illness, she's got some problems and maybe she does need some help. But there's got to be a time of transition before these children can go back, because that can be recreated in about a month's time without any help.
O'BRIEN: Lisa?
EVERS: Miles, I have to jump in here, because what we're seeing in this particular case is something that we're seeing in other cities and in other parts of the country, and that is the criminalization of what are essentially social issues. This is a woman who was in crisis. She watched her husband, as one of the other guests said, die a terrible death. She has six children. I grew up in a family of six children, I know what that's like, under the best of circumstances.
And instead of saying: Why don't we get this woman some help, why don't we get her a social worker, why don't we get some help cleaning up, why don't we find out if she's suffering from a severe depression, which is highly likely -- why don't we take a look at how we can support that family and keep that most sacred of bonds intact, that between the mother and children? What do we do? We go and arrest her, adding to the children's trauma. I think this is a disgrace!
O'BRIEN: Let's go to the switchboard. We have a caller on the line, The caller is?
CALLER: My name is Julie and I'm calling from California.
O'BRIEN: How are you?
CALLER: I'm doing fine, thank you.
O'BRIEN: What do you have to say? What's on your mind?
CALLER: I don't believe any of you should even actually judge her. And she probably was doing fine.
O'BRIEN: All right, Carol is a social worker. Carol, have you run into something, as egregious as that? That really is tough to look at those pictures. CAROL: It's really bad, but you have to understand that these people need help. They have family members that can help them. They should first look into the family and get the family members out there to try to help them clean up their act.
CHASTAIN: But I'd like to know when were these pictures taken?
CAROL: I see too many kids that get pulled out of families that have a lot of love in those families. Those kids stood their ground. They must love their mother, they must want to be with her.
O'BRIEN: I think the pictures were taken after the siege was over. Peter Blute, I read an article, a very interesting article...
EVERS: So, the mother was not in the house, this is after the kids were there by themselves for a while.
CHASTAIN: ... left to fend for themselves.
O'BRIEN: I believe that is true, I believe that is true. Peter, I want to ask, did you hear about -- Mr. McGuckin, according to "The New York Times" is actually the scion of a Boston Brahmin family, and had...
BLUTE: I did read that article.
O'BRIEN: And he actually went out there with a fair amount of wealth, and it's just hard to imagine how this all happened.
BLUTE: There's got to be some mental illness here somewhere that caused the family to disintegrate the way that it did and leave the those kids in a situation of squalor. I think that has to be considered, no doubt.
But I would take my time if I was the Department of Social Services of that state before I returned those children to that situation.
O'BRIEN: All right, let's go to Kiana (ph) .
KIANA: Yes, I think it was very unacceptable for those kids to be living in that type of condition. The mother should be a nurturer. And the father should be a bread winner. So, those kids shouldn't be living in that type of condition. And I don't think she loved the kids. Because if she did they wouldn't live that way.
(BELL RINGING)
O'BRIEN: Kiana has the last word. A couple emails before we take a break. "The Health Department should have stepped in and assisted this family in knowing what cleanliness is all about. These pictures show that the house is not healthy," Linda in Hutchinson, Kansas.
And Mary Lou has this: "Even in poverty, you don't have to live the way she did."
We're going to take a break here on TALKBACK LIVE's Free-For-All Friday, and then -- and then, a question for you as we leave, do you think JoAnn McGuckin should get custody of her children?
The question at the root of all this. Take the TALKBACK LIVE online viewer vote, at cnn.com/talkback, the AOL key word is CNN. Up next on our program: How much protection do gun dealers and owners need?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O'BRIEN: Six months, three months, a day? How long should the government keep track of gun owners? The Justice Department wants to limit the time the government keeps records on people who buy and sell guns to one day. Currently those records are kept up to 180 days. Gun owners say it's a matter of privacy. Gun control advocates say the extra time ensures guns aren't being sold to criminals.
Tell you what, let's start with the audience. Justin had some points about the Second Amendment. Go ahead, Justin?
JUSTIN: Well I was just saying that the issue here is a Constitutional one. And the problem is very simple. The Constitution and the Second Amendment are vague. And until we start making things more specific we're going to haggling over whether someone like Danielle can get a gun every two to three weeks, whether Anita has to get child safety locks and until we things more specific, Congressmen are going to be changing laws after every single Columbine.
O'BRIEN: Judy?
JUDY: Well, the truth of the matter is that the Constitution is not vague. And the truth of the matter is the only people that will (UNINTELLIGIBLE) last year are law-abiding citizens, not criminals. When are we ever going to catch onto this. We have laws on the books, and by the way, my understanding is that they were keeping the records in violation of law at any rate.
O'BRIEN: Lisa Ever.
EVERS: I think this is another round in the ping-pong match that goes on nationally over gun control. It's not going to make any difference whatever happens. What we have to do is look at a policy that applies nationally, that begins from the point of how many guns are being manufactured every year in the United States which nobody seems to know, to actually what parts of the country are affected?
In the Western part of the United States the way the guns are handled and are part of the lifestyle is very different from the way they are used in urban areas. And I think unless we come to a comprehensive policy and find some middle ground, we are just going to keep going back and forth and alienating people on this.
And meantime, the criminals, the stickup kids, the thugs, they are going to be able to get their hands on all the guns they want and this going to be a headache and an invasion of privacy for the law- abiding citizen.
O'BRIEN: All right, how do you really feel, Lisa? All right -- Walt.
WALT: Well, there are so many laws on the books nowadays, we don't enforce them all anyway, so why add more laws to make the situation worse?
O'BRIEN: Peter Blute.
BLUTE: I'm no shill for the gun industry. As a member of Congress I voted for the Brady Bill and for the assault weapons ban which they didn't like too much to say the least. But I do thing that gun owners like all Americans need to be concerned about personal privacy in the age of the Internet, in the age of the increasing phenomena of identity theft and other issues like that.
Gun owners have a legitimate concern about government keeping files on them that could be available to people who shouldn't see them.
O'BRIEN: Dwayne.
DWAYNE: I agree with him. The law was just supposed to be an instant check, and that would tell if he's a criminal out there. I don't think they ought to keep the records at all.
O'BRIEN: Jane Chastain.
CHASTAIN: You know, the amazing thing of the 217,000 attempted illegal gun buys last year, less than 300 were actually prosecuted. Hello! The problem is not keeping records of gun buyers longer. The problem is enforcing the law as we have it right now.
CARADINE: Can I jump in, Miles?
O'BRIEN: Go ahead, Monique.
CARADINE: I have to say first of all, Lisa is a woman after my own heart. She is absolutely right. Is it just me, you guys, or does it feel like the government is cracking down more and more in law abiding citizens like me and you, and less and less on those people who are taking those guns, committing drive-by shootings and leaving communities fearful and havoc, because the criminals, they are not going to fill out paperwork with their names and Social Security numbers, they are going to get guns any way they can. So, we need to worry about doing something about that, and not the average person that wants a gun in his home for whatever the reason may be.
(APPLAUSE)
O'BRIEN: All right, a round of applause for Monique there. Steve from Nebraska, go ahead, Steve.
STEVE: Well, I just think it's -- any kind of gun control -- I mean, if they take the guns out of their hands, what are they going to use? I mean, even in Columbine, those guys made some bombs that they picked up how to make it off the Internet. I mean, if you close down one avenue, some other avenue is going to come about that they're going to use, and maybe it will be even more deadly than a handgun.
EVERS: And Miles, the interesting point is what he said, he mentioned Columbine -- a lot of the school shootings, those guns were legally purchased guns that those young people took from family members or from neighbors, so to have that kind of policy is not going to do away with that.
And the fact that -- I want to piggyback on what one of the other guests said -- a thug is not going to go into a gun shop, have a record check run on him when he wants to get a gun to rob a convenience store. It doesn't happen that way. They get it out of the trunk of a car from somebody that's going around trafficking, or some connections.
CHASTAIN: Hey, let's remember what happened during the L.A. riots. It was the honest, law-abiding people that couldn't get the guns. I remember a news report saying to a young person: how long would it take you to go out on the street and buy a gun? He said about 15 minutes.
O'BRIEN: All right, we're in overtime on this. Quick e-mail before we leave you. Barbara Northfield in New Jersey: "Is anyone surprised that Ashcroft wiped out the requirement that purchase records be kept for 90 days? This is really puts the Brady bill -- guts the Brady bill, and everyone knows it." "Ashcroft is merely paying back the NRA for their support of the Bush -- Bush in the last election. If no records are kept, how can we trace criminal use of guns?" -- Carol in Dumont, New Jersey.
All right. We're going to move on. Up next: are kids learning enough about sex in the classroom? The surgeon general doesn't think so. What do you think? We'll find out in just a minute.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DR. DAVID SATCHER, SURGEON GENERAL: The report actually supports marriage, but the report also makes it very clear that -- that marriage is not a guarantee against problems. There is bisexuality in marriage, there are people who have gotten infected with AIDS in marriage. We promote marriage, and we believe that the family should be supported.
However, the point of this public health report is that we are concerned about mutually monogamous relationships that are enduring and represent real commitment.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O'BRIEN: All right. Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. It's free- for-all Friday time, I am Miles O'Brien in for Bobbie Battista. A new surgeon general's report says it isn't enough just to teach abstinence when it comes to sex education. David Satcher says while kids should learn to respect marriage and monogamous relationship, they also need information about other forms of sexual expression and ways to prevent venereal disease and pregnancy. Our audience is kind of fired up about this subject. Do we have somebody ready, Chris? Yes, Ari, go.
ARI: As a high school student in California, I have taken health, I have taken life education and even biology has discussed sex, and I don't think it's watered down at all. I think that they cover all the points, and I know that children do not feel -- are not held back -- or don't feel held back to ask questions or any concerns they have.
O'BRIEN: All right, we have teachers in the audience. Virginia is from Georgia. Virginia, are you retired yet?
VIRGINIA: Yes.
O'BRIEN: She said with a smile on her face. Virginia, tell us about sex education in the real world these days?
VIRGINIA: We are allowed to discuss very little about sex education in the classroom. The parents will not have it.
O'BRIEN: Like, see...
VIRGINIA: Abstinence, that's it. That's the bottom line, because anything else mentioned, we are in trouble.
O'BRIEN: Gail, what do you think?
GAIL: Well, I made a list of all of the things in New York state that we have to teach. Now, New York state imposed higher standards on education, which is great, but I have to take time out to teach about AIDS, facts and fiction, anger management, peer pressure, dangers of alcohol, venereal disease, sensitivity to handicapped, sexual harassment.
New York is talking about open gambling casinos, so I will probably have to teach about addiction to gambling. When do I meet the higher standards when we're trying to teach my English student to read and write?
O'BRIEN: No wonder these kids can't find the United States on the globe, for God's sakes. They are worried about anger management. Michelle, go.
MICHELLE: I am a parent of two boys, Michael and Jeffrey. And I feel that, first of all, sex education should be taught in the home and the schools, you know, if they want to reinforce some things -- but it first of all should come from the home.
(APPLAUSE) O'BRIEN: Talk show hosts, this is my pet peeve, guys. Lisa Evers, it seems we ask our teachers to do way too much these days, including in sex education. What do you think?
EVERS: I feel very uncomfortable having an English teacher teaching a class of students about sex education, and I think we are dancing to the wrong tune on this whole subject, Miles. What it really should be is disease prevention, it should be health education, the girls separate from the guys.
And once young people, who are mostly my audience for my radio program, I have found that once they know what the consequences are of their actions, they are made aware of the realities out there, the dangers of teen pregnancy, the dangers of contracting these rapidly spreading diseases, of which HIV is only one of them, they usually make the right decision and they decide to hold off a little bit.
CARADINE: I agree, Miles. And you know the saying, if you knew better, you'd do better. And certainly, we do need to have more open and frank discussions about sex and sexuality -- two different things, but I don't think it needs to come at the hands of teachers.
Here in Chicago, we have an overwhelming shortage of counselors in our public schools. I think that the schools in each and every state need to deal with overcoming that shortage, so if a kid wants to talk about sex with someone in the school, they can go to their counselor and not their math teacher. Doesn't make sense.
But indeed, I applaud the surgeon general for bringing this up and making us overcome our hypocritical views on how we're going to deal with sex. You look at every form of media, there are sexual innuendoes on sitcoms, during prime-time, yet the networks don't want to air condoms commercials. That makes absolutely no sense at all. So, we do need to start to...
(CROSSTALK)
O'BRIEN: Wait a minute, can we say that on cable? Susan, go, Susan.
SUSAN: As a teacher, it's my job to teach children how to read and write and do arithmetic. As a parent, it's my job to teach my child about sex education, and it's your job to teach your child.
(APPLAUSE)
O'BRIEN: Gail, go ahead, Gail.
GAIL: Even though I may not teach all those things, time comes out of the students' schedule for all those things that I listed, and we just don't have the time to meet the standards that New York state wants us to make.
O'BRIEN: Peter Blute, go!
BLUTE: Miles, I think they should teach, you know, straightforward, technical information. After all, it is science, basically, and the kids should learn about that, but when you get into -- as the surgeon general suggested -- teaching diversity or someone's version of what that means, I think that is better left to the home environment.
I have a theory that you could put a condom on every desk in every school in America every day of the year, and would not affect the pregnancy rate or the sexually transmitted disease rate one iota. It's about responsibility, and they learn that at home.
O'BRIEN: You'd have a huge water balloon epidemic is what you'd have.
(CROSSTALK)
O'BRIEN: ... problem. Garfield, go.
GARFIELD: The problem that I have is that, with sexual harassment, like we're talking about, what if you have an educator who teaches expressively and accidentally touches a person? Would that educator have a charge against them for sexual harassment?
Then the other thing is is, some of the very people who educate our kids about sex education, or whatever the case, are after your children. So I want to educate my own children about sexual education.
(CROSSTALK)
O'BRIEN: Claudia -- one more audience member. Claudia, go.
CLAUDIA: I have a question, too. My mom is a pastor, and I guess she really didn't explain to me a lot because she wasn't open enough. I think some parents need to go to school and learn this; learn how to teach their own children about the certain situations, especially diseases, and be informed. Parents don't speak about that, because you have to wait before marriage -- after marriage.
CHASTAIN: Well, but the thing to remember is that most parents are doing a good job. And the thing about this report is it's Washington doublespeak. One hand, Mr. Satcher is patting parents on the back, and on the other hand he's pulling the rug out from under them by endorsing the same anything-goes-as-long-as-it-goes-with-a- condom education that we've had for far too many years. You know...
(CROSSTALK)
CARADINE: But isn't that the reality? Isn't that the reality, though, of the world that we live in? Again, he emphasized marriage...
CHASTAIN: Not at all.
CARADINE: ... he emphasized abstinence. But there are people who are going to have sex before marriage and outside of their marriages. That's the reality we live in. CHASTAIN: All right, listen. A teenager's attention span is very short to begin with, and they remember a lot more of what they see than what they hear. And so the message is, abstinence is the best policy, but here's this condom. So when they forget about what was talked about in class, here they've got this condom, which is basically a permission slip with the seal of approval by their public schools saying go out and have fun and forget about the consequences.
O'BRIEN: All right, Judy.
JUDY: I came specifically today because of this issue. I have experience going back 20 years in dealing and developing this kind a plan. Actually, I was opposed to it, so they put me on as a token.
I am delighted to hear these teachers standing up and saying -- and these parents -- that the children belong to the parents and that should be their responsibility.
But one other thing I want to add: We have had, and we still have for the last 25 years, a program in place that not only teaches sex education, but it teaches the values that are contrary to families. We need to be aware of that. It is still mandated. And we need to look at that closely.
And the problem we have in our society is directly related to this program. And they have taken our children; and we need to know that. And we need to voice our opinions to the president regarding this report, which was a part of the Clinton administration...
(BELL RINGING)
O'BRIEN: All right, Judy.
A couple of e-mails as we take you to break and switch gears.
John in Atlanta, Georgia: "Parents should be the main source of information concerning sex. When they teach their kids morals and talk openly with them, bad choices can be avoided."
Marge in Prince George, British Colombia: "There should be sex education in all of the schools, plus the health clinics. Kids should be able to get condoms and birth control pills free. Abstinence alone does not work."
All right, we're going to leave it on that point; we're going to take a break.
When we return, another round, another topic. Up next: driving under the influence of cell phones. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O'BRIEN: Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE "Free-For-All Friday."
New York drivers addicted to their cell phones will have to go cold turkey later this year -- well, in a manner of speaking, they'll go cold turkey. The state has banned the use of handheld cell phones, saying they're dangerous to life and limb. Is it a law people are going to obey?
Now, there is a big loophole in this, and I want to take this to our talk show hosts first: You can still pick up the phone and dial it, OK, which is where I always get into trouble, quite frankly. Where I, you know, tend to get a little off the straight and narrow, if you will, is when I'm looking at my Palm Pilot for a number trying to dial.
I shouldn't do that should I? Now, the question, is this really going to do any good.
Lisa, you're in New York.
EVERS: Well, what it is going to do, it's going to force people to go out and buy the headsets while they're driving.
But the point that you made is very good. The dialing is the much more dangerous point. So unless we have phones that have voice recognition software, where you can just say hey, call this person and dial it up, that loophole is still creating a potential danger.
But on the other hand, you have to say, what are they going to regulate next? I can't put lipstick on? That's kind of dangerous too -- what to do while you're driving.
O'BRIEN: Yes, I mean, pretty soon they won't let you shave in the car on the way to work. What's the deal?
Steve, go.
STEVE: Well, like she was saying, what are they going to ban next? I mean, why don't they ban cigarette smoking? If you drop the cigarette -- the fire down in your lap, it's going to be more dangerous than that cell phone was. I mean, it's just so many different things.
I said, the policeman talking on his two-way; he's got to hold that up and do that. Are they going to ban that so he can't talk to his dispatcher?
O'BRIEN: I'm sure there are a few mothers that would like to ban the kids in the backseat.
Peter Blute, what do you think?
BLUTE: Miles, I think Governor Pataki has been a good governor of New York, but this is a big mistake. It's an overreach. It's reaching into people's personal space, which their automobiles are, in America, and infringing on them and taking away some of their freedom.
And it misses the point, because they don't even have data that shows how many accidents are caused by people on hand phones because police, by and large, do not write that down on the arrest report or the accident report. (CROSSTALK)
O'BRIEN: Ted is on the line from New York -- excuse me, we've got to take a caller on this segment -- if we don't take a caller here.
Ted, are you in a car?
TED: No, I'm not.
O'BRIEN: I was going to say, how did you get cable in your car? That would be interesting.
Anyway, Ted, what do you have to say?
TED: Well, I saw the governor. He's very impassioned about how dangerous it is -- inherently dangerous. What's the difference between a cell phone in hand or a mounted cell phone in hand or a doughnut or a cup of coffee or a Quarter Pounder? You've still got one hand off the wheel.
O'BRIEN: Or all of the above, for that matter.
TED: Exactly.
O'BRIEN: Monique, what do you think?
CARADINE: I tell you what, I'm not going to buy any wireless technology or hands-free technology until these darn gas prices come down in Chicago. I just wish the government would deal more closely with that.
But I agree with what Peter was saying earlier: This is too far- reaching. You're going into my car. I handle business on the phone all the time. I just hope this doesn't come to the state of Illinois.
The other day, though, Miles, I saw a woman combing her daughter's hair in the car. I saw a guy reading the newspaper, a woman putting on her makeup. And you talk about what's dangerous and could cause car accidents, those are some of the things that could cause car accidents as well.
I've got to go with the cell phone industry on this one: I think education would be more effective than creating these kinds of laws.
O'BRIEN: Betty.
BETTY: Hi. I'm an RN for home health, and so my cell phone is basically my livelihood. I wait for doctors' calls. I cannot sit somewhere and wait for them to call. They call when they get a chance, and when they call, it's your last chance talk to them, so I need to be able to talk at that moment, and I do need to be able to talk on the phone while I'm driving.
There's such a thing as speed calling. As far as the dialing goes, that's not a big problem. I don't think it's no worse than changing your CD or your cassette in your car.
O'BRIEN: Jane Chastain...
BLUTE: And Miles, another issue here...
EVERS: Miles, I...
(CROSSTALK)
BLUTE: Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute.
EVERS: Wait, wait, wait, wait.
O'BRIEN: Jane Chastain is out there in L.A., where they have more cell phones than people, right? Isn't that true?
CHASTAIN: Well, that's true. That's true. But you know, I think a little bit too much is being made of this, and I don't like government intervention. But the technology is available to use your cell phone hands-free. And if you just drive down the freeways and you see the number of people talking on their cell phones, I think it makes sense.
I spent $19 a couple of weeks ago to get a hands-free device for my cell phone. I think that's reasonable. That's a problem that's easy to solve.
Now what I am waiting for the is the hands-free hamburger and the hands-free ice cream cup.
BLUTE: That's right.
(LAUGHTER)
EVERS: And Miles...
BLUTE: Miles, the other issue here is that it's an issue of the police power of the state. They have a lot of things to do. They're fighting crime. They want to make sure that people are not drunk driving. They should concentrate on that. Giving them another reason to pull over otherwise law-abiding drivers I think is a big mistake.
O'BRIEN: Felonious...
EVERS: And Miles...
(CROSSTALK)
(BELL RINGING)
O'BRIEN: Felonious chit-chat in New York. All right, e-mail quickly. "Another law is about to intrude into your life." That's Kurt in Richmond, who agrees with Peter Blute. "Driving while talking on a cell phone should be prosecuted the same as drunk driving. In both cases you willingly decide to operate a potentially deadly vehicle without giving it your full attention." A hardy round of boos from the audience to Joe in Columbus.
Taking a break. Back with more in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O'BRIEN: All right. We are plum out of time. Had way too much fun on this "Free-For-All Friday." Thanks to all of my guests, our radio talk-show hosts. You guys were great.
Monday join us when we talk about the drug that's all the rave, if you will, at those dance parties that are called raves. The agony over Ecstasy. It sounds like Hemingway or something. That's on Monday. We'll see you then. Thanks.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
