CNN.com - Transcripts

Transcript Providers

Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Talkback Live

Should the U.S. Attack Iraq?; Should Women Be Allowed to Join Augusta National Golf Club?

Aired September 19, 2002 - 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.

MICHAEL SMERCONISH, GUEST HOST: Today, we're simulcasting this program on my radio station in Philadelphia called The Big Talker 1210.
Up this hour: the drumbeat for war with Iraq. And then stay tuned, because women's crusader Martha Burk joins us to tell us who she'll pressure next to get women admitted to the men-only Augusta National Golf Club. (AUDIO GAP) a lot of people are talking about in Philadelphia. Or is it a crime to leave an infant in the back seat of a car? It's a subject I want to bring to your attention.

And we are going to do that right now with Iraq. The president's men are out in force this week hard-selling Congress on military action. Yesterday, Secretary Rumsfeld was on the Hill. Today, it is Secretary of State Colin Powell's turn to make the case. Can they do it?

Here to talk Iraq is Lawrence Korb, former assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration. He's currently vice president and director of studies at the Council on Foreign Relations; and Danielle Pletka, vice president of defense policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute.

Welcome to both of you to TALKBACK LIVE.

LAWRENCE KORB, FORMER ASST. DEFENSE SECRETARY: Nice to be with you.

DANIELLE PLETKA, AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE: Thanks.

SMERCONISH: Mr. Korb, I want to share with you a quote that you've probably heard before, sir. It's from Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, and Chuck Hagel no shrinking violet. This is a man who has been awarded two Purple Hearts for his service in Vietnam.

He says many of those who want to rush us into war, they know nothing about it. And, similarly, Middle East envoy Anthony Zinni has said: "Generals see it one way. And those who never fired a shot see it another."

Why the apparent slit of opinion between those who have worn a uniform, who seem to be cautious about a military attack in Iraq, vs. those who have never put on the uniform, who seem awfully anxious to get in there and, "Let's roll," so to speak?

KORB: Well, Chuck Hagel and Tony Zinni are both Vietnam veterans.

Many of the people in this administration who are most anxious to go to war -- the president, the vice president, the deputy secretary of defense -- basically are the same age, but they avoided service there. And I think the military people and people like Chuck Hagel, who served there, are very concerned that we will do another Vietnam, that we'll get in without thinking through the consequences of how to fight it and what comes next.

SMERCONISH: You, sir, have worn the uniform of your country. Is that correct?

KORB: That's correct.

SMERCONISH: Danielle Pletka, let me get your thoughts on this.

First of all, do you believe there is a dichotomy between those who have worn the uniform, who think we need to be cautious, and those who have never suited up, yourself included, who think that, in this particular case, bombs away? Or is that an overstatement?

PLETKA: I think it is a total overstatement.

The truth is that we don't know what the vast mass of the military thinks. We know what a few generals on TV and a few senators who wore the uniform say. It is the job of the military to be cautious. We want our generals and our soldiers and our commanders to be as cautious as they can be with our soldiers' lives. But it is not their job to decide what the foreign defense policy of our country should be. That is up to the president of the United States.

SMERCONISH: Well, do you believe that in Congress -- because the issue, of course, is getting a lot of airing in both the House and Senate -- that more weight should be afforded to those, those members of the House and Senate who have military service on their own bio, vs. those individuals who have never served?

PLETKA: Absolutely not. Ours is a democracy. People elect their members and their representatives based on many different things. You do not get extra points for having served in the military, any more than you get extra points for having a Ph.D. or a master's or a bachelor's degree.

SMERCONISH: But if the Agriculture Committee in the Senate were talking about soybeans, by way of example, and if there were a farmer who were a member of the Senate, I think my ears would perk up, because I would say, now this is a fellow who knows a little bit more about the subject than I.

Why is military involvement any different than that type of expertise?

PLETKA: We are talking here about foreign policy. We are not talking about military operations.

If you want to take your farm analogy and say that a soldier should be able to talk more clearly about what kind of gun he should carry or how his military unit should operate, that would be one question. But what we are talking about here, in the policy of regime change, is a matter of foreign policy. It is not a matter of military policy.

SMERCONISH: Lawrence Korb, do you agree, or do you believe that someone with expertise, with a background in military service should be afforded greater weight in the debate that is now taking place in Washington, D.C.?

KORB: Well, it depends on what you are debating.

If you are debating the policy, whether it should be regime change or let the inspectors in, that is one thing. But if you are talking about how to conduct the operation -- for example, one of the things that people like Chuck Hagel and Tony Zinni are concerned about is, they hear and they read about these ideas that taking over Iraq will be a cakewalk, that you can accomplish your same objectives in Iraq the way you did in Afghanistan. That concerns them.

It also concerns them when they ask the policymakers, "Well, what comes next?" and people can't answer that question, because it is the military that will have to occupy Iraq for however long it might be.

Another question is, do you want to fight with or without allies? If you don't have any allies, it is going to be a much more difficult operation and costly, both in terms of lives and in money, because, if you want to put a couple hundred thousand people in there, and you can't fly over Saudi airspace or use our bases there, it is going to be a more difficult operation.

SMERCONISH: But these so-called allies to me look like they are just searching for any excuse to get out of the whole situation. And you've got to give Saddam -- and I can call him that -- Saddam Hussein credit for having played a smart political card.

The fact of the matter is, I believe this country has been on the brink of war. And now here we are, because the allies say, "Well, he is going to allow the U.N. weapons inspections," the guy appears to have bought time.

Now, am I wrong, Danielle, or did this man pull off a political masterstroke?

PLETKA: I don't think it was a political masterstroke, to be fair. I think it was the obvious step. I think it was the step that a lot of people in the administration expected.

The president did the right thing. He went to the Security Council. He laid out how Saddam Hussein had been flouting international will for 11 1/2 years. He told them that they could step up to the plate and defend their own resolutions, but that he wasn't going to stand by if they weren't going to take that action.

What Saddam has done is, he has taken them up on their offer. He said: "Thank you very much. You can send inspectors," all the while forgetting that the aim here is not inspectors. Inspectors are the means to an end. And the end, demanded by the Security Council resolution since the end of the Gulf War, was total disarmament.

SMERCONISH: But you and I both know that when we are talking about the French, we know how weak-kneed those French can be, right? This is the perfect outcome for the French, because now they can get to say, "Well, Saddam Hussein claims he is going to allow the U.N.'s weapons inspectors in."

Here is the question for both of you. And we'll start with Danielle. In the end, if the U.N. is hesitant, should the United States move forward unilaterally against Iraq and Saddam Hussein?

PLETKA: I don't think that, in any circumstance, we are going to be moving forward unilaterally. I think the British are going to be with us. I think the Australians are going to be with us. And I think a lot of others are going to be with us, whether or not we get the say-so from the U.N.

(CROSSTALK)

SMERCONISH: In the end, are we going alone, Lawrence?

KORB: Well, you should not unless you have a clear and imminent danger. The president has not made that case yet.

And so you should not go unilaterally unless you really have to, because, if you go, the cost is going to be much higher in terms of human lives, money, as well as what is going to happen after it. Larry Lindsey, the president's economic adviser, said this thing could cost $100 billion to $200 billion. And if the United States has to pay that bill themselves, it is going to cause us a lot of strains in our economy.

SMERCONISH: Let me get a comment in here from Fred from Michigan.

Hey, Fred, welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. Nice to have you.

FRED: Thank you.

SMERCONISH: Speak, my friend.

FRED: As a veteran, I believe our country, we have to -- what the president and what our Congress says, we have to go along with. We don't want what happened in Vietnam to happen again. So we have to have the support of our country. And we have to back the president. And if the president feels that we have enough information to attack Iraq, then we...

SMERCONISH: Hey, who cares when the French say. Who cares what the Russians say. Who cares what the Chinese say. You are with W. no matter what. That is what are you telling me.

FRED: I am saying I will follow...

SMERCONISH: It is all right with me, Fred. That's OK with me.

FRED: We do it alone anyway. But I think we will have allies there eventually, but maybe not right now.

SMERCONISH: All right, hey, I want to hear from all of you on this one. Call me or e-mail me.

Don't go away. There's a lot more on TALKBACK LIVE just around the corner.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARTHA BURK, CHAIR NATIONAL COUNCIL OF WOMEN'S ORGANIZATIONS: I am getting hate calls. I do watch my back when I come out my door at night.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: Martha Burk ups the stakes in her gender crusade against Augusta National Golf Club. Talk to Martha today and find out where she is taking it next on TALKBACK LIVE.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: But the United Nations Security Council must work with the United States and other concerned parties to send a clear message that we expect Saddam to disarm. And if the United Nations Security Council won't deal with the problem, the United States and some of our friends will.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: Hey, welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Michael Smerconish, in for Arthel Neville.

We're talking about U.S. plans for Iraq. And we happen to be simulcasting today on my radio station in Philadelphia, The Big Talker 1210.

I have got another question for our guest Lawrence Korb.

Mr. Korb, why is there not, why has not been a presentation in the U.N., ala Adlai Stevenson in the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis? Maybe, sir, it's the trial lawyer in me. I'm looking for photographs. I want the affidavits. I want the blow-ups. I want to see the administration make the case against Saddam Hussein.

KORB: Well, I agree with you.

And I think, if the president had been able to do that in his speech to the U.N. last week, the French and other people wouldn't be saying, "Well, let's let the inspectors go back in." There are one or two reasons. One, you don't want to reveal the sources. The other is, you don't have any specific information that say that the situation has changed dramatically since September 11, because Saddam has been doing this stuff for 20 years.

In fact, we used to be his ally when I was in government. So I think that you have to -- lacking that type of evidence, it is going to be hard to get the rest of the world to go along with us. I wish we had done it.

SMERCONISH: You mentioned September 11. And I want to ask both you and Danielle about this subject.

I am someone who happens to believe that there may be a link between the Oklahoma City bombing and the events of 9/11. There is an investigative reporter out in Oklahoma City named Jayna Davis who has done tremendous work to connect the dots. Are either of you buying into the possibility that there may have been an Iraqi cell group operating in Oklahoma that played a role with McVeigh and with Nichols? Or does that just sound, you know, like the grassy knoll in Dealey Plaza in the Kennedy assassination?

PLETKA: You know, Laurie Mylroie has also been involved in that. There was an article in "The Wall Street Journal" that detailed some of the questions. I don't think there is conclusive evidence right now that Iraq had involvement in the Oklahoma City bombing.

SMERCONISH: But, Danielle, you are not laughing. You are not laughing and saying, hey, that is some...

PLETKA: No, I'm not laughing. You're right.

SMERCONISH: I am no conspiracy guy. I think that Oswald killed Kennedy and he acted alone. But I am looking at this one and I am saying I think Jayna Davis is on to something.

PLETKA: There are a lot of unanswered questions. And I think we really can't pretend to be satisfied until we see the answers to those questions.

(CROSSTALK)

PLETKA: ... Philippines and things like that.

SMERCONISH: Thank you.

Let me go to Damon, a caller from California.

Hey, Damon, welcome to TALKBACK LIVE.

CALLER: It's great to be on. Thank you.

I think that a preemptive attack on a sovereign Arab nation will increase anti-American sentiment throughout the entire Arab and Muslim world.

SMERCONISH: How can it get any higher, my friend? What, are you kidding me, like we should care about what the Arabs think of us now?

CALLER: Well, it is important. We have -- the entire coalition is held together by duct tape and bubble gum. But I think that the preemptive attack will increase anti-American settlement. And that is going to backfire, because it is going to increase hostility toward us and result in increased membership in al Qaeda membership and the like.

SMERCONISH: Damon, thank you, sir. I for one don't buy into the idea that we ought to run our foreign policy by whether everybody loves us in this country.

But I want to ask Fred from Ohio, what do you say, Fred?

FRED: Yes.

I am a veteran. And I do have kind of mixed emotions about the whole subject. On one hand, I feel as though we should go ahead and take care of Saddam and get in there and get out. Then, on the other hand, I feel as though we need to give that time that they need to inspect and get more evidence on exactly what is going to cause us to go in.

SMERCONISH: Let me ask you, Fred, have you been watching Scott Ritter? He's been a guest on TALKBACK LIVE. He's done a lot of CNN appearances. He's the former U.N. weapons inspector who is over there playing footsie with Saddam Hussein, as far as I am concerned. Have you watched this gentleman and what do you think his deal is?

FRED: To be quite honest with you, no, I haven't. I really have not been following the

(CROSSTALK)

SMERCONISH: Don't worry. You haven't missed anything by not seeing him.

Let me ask Lawrence.

Lawrence, are you watching Scott Ritter? And what, sir, is your take on what you are seeing?

KORB: I have no idea what Scott is up to, because there is obviously some inconsistencies with what he said back when he was on the inspection team and what he is saying now. And so I really don't know.

I think the main question is the one you are talking about today: Should the United States go after Saddam and under what conditions? And the point that was made by the previous caller is, I think, very important. This is a point that Brent Scowcroft made. We may not think that people have a legitimate gripe against us. But if we go ahead unilaterally and preemptively, this will become a self- fulfilling prophecy and could lead those people to join al Qaeda.

(CROSSTALK) SMERCONISH: Lawrence, let me interrupt you, because I want to get a quick comment in from Linda before the break, from Washington.

Real quick, Linda.

LINDA: Michael, you are pronouncing the name wrong. It's "So Damn Insane," is the man's name.

SMERCONISH: You and me, baby. We know how this thing is going down.

LINDA: Even though he says, "Come on in; snoop around; look at what we got," you are never going to see what he's got.

SMERCONISH: You're darn right.

LINDA: You are going to see what he shows you.

SMERCONISH: You're darn right. Thank you for that.

Hey, Lawrence Korb, Danielle Pletka, thank you both for joining us today.

KORB: Thank you.

SMERCONISH: We will take a break.

And then: A feminist group ups the ante in its battle to get a woman invited into the all-male enclave at Augusta National Golf Club. You're not going to want to miss this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMERCONISH: To attempts by a women's group to open its membership, recently the home of the prestigious Masters tournament dropped three corporate sponsors from its televised event. Club chairman Hootie Johnson -- I love that name -- said he didn't want the sponsors pressured and that the club would not be pressured either.

Now Martha Burk, head of the National Council of Women's Organizations and the woman spearheading the drive, has a new plan of attack. She joins us from Washington to talk about it.

Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE.

BURK: Thanks. It's good to be here.

SMERCONISH: What is the new plan of attack against Augusta?

BURK: Well, we appealed to CBS, because they have said that they are going to televise the tournament without sponsors, meaning that they are going to lose money on it and become an underwriter of this organization that discriminates against half their viewers.

We don't think that it is a good decision. We would like to meet with CBS to see if they wouldn't reconsider. Their CEO -- one of their CEOs, Vice President Les Moonves, has been very supportive of women in the company. He has mentored a number of women. I am surprised that CBS would make this decision, given their record and their own corporate policies against discrimination.

SMERCONISH: So far, Martha Burk, CBS is telling you, respectfully, no dice. That is where we are at this moment?

BURK: That is where we are with CBS. Of course, we do have some other avenues open to us. Many of the members of Augusta are CEOs of America's largest corporations. We know those corporations have policies against discrimination. We don't think that it is a very good statement for somebody...

SMERCONISH: Well, I want to ask you about that, because Hootie Johnson says that he is not going to admit women at the point of a bayonet. Doesn't it sound a little terroristic for you to say: "Well, we are going to threaten the sponsors. We're going to then go and threaten the corporations"? Hey, if guys want to hang out with guys, what is wrong with that? Is this really such a big deal?

BURK: Well, let me answer the threat question first.

As Julian Bond -- who is chair of the board of the NAACP and who has given us a statement of support here -- said, economic pressure has always been important in fighting discrimination. So we do not apologize for that.

SMERCONISH: But , Martha, this is not a hotel. It's not a restaurant. It's a golf club.

BURK: It's the highest-profile golf event on the planet. I agree: It's not a hotel.

SMERCONISH: That's means they're successful. Yes, but wait a minute. Why don't you go out and start one of your own and only open up the membership to women? Is that such a bad outcome?

BURK: Because we don't think separate but equal ever is.

SMERCONISH: OK, listen, we are going to go another round, a lot of audience interest in this. And we want to hear from you. Martha will be right back with TALKBACK LIVE to talk about Augusta.

Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TIGER WOODS, PROFESSIONAL GOLF PLAYER: They are entitled to set up their own rules the way they want. And it would be nice to see everyone have an equal chance to participate in it if they wanted to. But if it's -- there is nothing you can do about it. If you have a group or organization, that's way they want to set it up, and it is their prerogative to set it up that way.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Michael Smerconish, in for Arthel Neville -- that, of course, Tiger Woods.

We are talking with Martha Burk about her attempts to get a woman member into the Augusta National Golf Club. Now she wants CBS to dump the Masters tournament.

Martha, you saw Tiger Woods or you listened to Tiger Woods. Are you going to go after the players next? You've gone after the sponsors. You're going after the network. What about the players?

BURK: I'd like to see the players make a strong statement. You know, Tiger has made a stronger statement than that tape you just played. But if we stuck with what the members wanted to do, Tiger would be a caddy at the Masters. He would not be playing.

So, when he says...

SMERCONISH: Well, wait a minute. Augusta...

BURK: When he says there's nothing you can do about it, we are trying to do something about it.

SMERCONISH: But wait a minute. Augusta does have African- American members.

BURK: They do now. They do now. But only because they were pressured after the PGA said they would not...

SMERCONISH: You see them as one in the same. If you are discriminating against women, it's no different than if you're discriminating against African-Americans.

BURK: Absolutely. I see it as exactly the same.

SMERCONISH: A lot of the members of the audience agree with you.

BURK: Yes.

SMERCONISH: Francis is joining us from Ohio on TALKBACK LIVE. Hey, Francis, what's your thought?

FRANCIS: My thought is that women are trying to get too much into all of men's things. And we are different. Men are men and women are women. Let's each do our own thing. The men's club has done wonderful work. Let them keep doing it.

SMERCONISH: You are not threatened by the idea that guys want to hang out with guys every once in a while.

FRANCIS: No. I like to hang out with women.

SMERCONISH: All right.

BURK: Hey, this is not a few guys hanging out on the back nine. SMERCONISH: Hey, Diane, who do you want to hang out with?

DIANE: Well, I appreciate hanging out with guys myself, but this is an economic issue. And if they want to keep it private, they should keep it private and not broadcast it, and not take in the money that this brings in. And they can play by themselves.

BURK: Thank you.

SMERCONISH: I've got to think about that. No, you did word that carefully, didn't you? Yes, you did word that carefully.

All right, I want to ask Martha a separate question. Suzy Whaley, and you know the name by now...

BURK: Yes, I do.

SMERCONISH: ... the first female to qualify for a PGA event. She has been invited to the Greater Hartford Open. But to play in Hartford, she has to drive off of the men's tees, and apparently -- I'm a duffer, so I don't understand all of this sort of thing -- but the course is about 1,000 yards longer than what she is accustomed to. And some females are nervous that she could embarrass herself playing with the guys at Hartford next year.

What do you think she should do?

BURK: I think she should play. With her accomplishment, it's impossible to embarrass herself. She may not win the tournament, but nothing can keep her from shooting a good round there. So, I want to encourage her.

And by the way, she said that if the boys at Augusta are looking for their first female member, she is a candidate.

SMERCONISH: Let me go to Annie on the telephone on TALKBACK LIVE. Hey, Annie, what do you think?

ANNIE: I think that these women, who are trying to force the club to let them in, is a dangerous premise. A private club should be private, should not be forced to take in anyone they don't want, just as in my home, if someone comes to my door who I don't want to come in, I have the right say no. And...

BURK: Your private home does not broadcast to billions of people, open to the public, take public money in one form or another...

SMERCONISH: Well, but, Martha...

BURK: ... and produce the highest profile event on the planet.

SMERCONISH: But, Martha Burk, that woman in her own way just articulated the state of the law, because Augusta is not what's known as a place of public accommodation.

BURK: This is not...

SMERCONISH: They're not a hotel. They're not a restaurant.

BURK: This is not about the law. It's about a higher moral principle here. It's about the symbolism of discrimination that is going on in Augusta.

SMERCONISH: Let me ask Charles from Ohio if he agrees with you. Hey, Charles, how are you doing? Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE, and let me hear from you.

CHARLES: Yes, I really do agree with her. My feeling, though, is that the country club is made up -- maybe they have 3,500 members or whatever the numbers are -- 90 percent of them are probably married. If we think for one minute that these men's wives can't make them change their minds, we are dreaming.

BURK: Well, I know...

CHARLES: If they want to make that change...

SMERCONISH: Well, now, wait a minute.

CHARLES: ... they know how to do it.

SMERCONISH: I know who is running your house. Now, that you've told me that, I know -- oh, OK, Diane is running your house. There you go.

CHARLES: There you go.

SMERCONISH: But, listen...

CHARLES: But that's true.

SMERCONISH: Charles, let me talk to you for a second here. The poker game -- I mean, next they're going to be coming to us and saying, hey, I want to come over and play cards with you guys, because it looks like a lot of fun and it's a bunch of guys. Where does this end?

CHARLES: Does it need to?

BURK: When you guys hold the Masters, then we'll probably be knocking on your doors, but unless you are holding the world series of poker, we're going to leave you alone.

SMERCONISH: Martha, let me ask you respectfully. Is this the best use of your time? I mean, you head this prestigious women's organization. I would think that equal pay for different sexes would be...

BURK: We work on that every day. Every day.

SMERCONISH: But it seems like this is the one issue for which you are becoming best known. You're not troubled by that? BURK: This is the one issue you media guys are the most interested in. If you'll cover equal pay on TALKBACK LIVE, I'd love to come back.

SMERCONISH: OK. Jarrod is on the telephone on TALKBACK LIVE. Hey, Jarrod, what say you?

JARROD: Hi, yes. I am Jarrod, and I just had a question for you. As a member of the gay community, it's pretty passe not to be women's lib. But what exactly are you trying to prove? I mean, we know women can do it. We know that women are able to. And also, these organizations make huge contributions to, like, charities and other things that need money. So, what...

BURK: Jarrod, they certainly do, and I find it appalling that they are willing to take money out of the mouths of those charities to underwrite a tournament just to keep women out.

SMERCONISH: Let me ask Linda from Washington what she thinks. She joins us in the TALKBACK LIVE studio.

LINDA: I am speculating, because I don't know this to be a fact. But I'll bet some pretty good money that there are women in low-cut costumes serving cocktails in the country club bar and cooking the food in the kitchen.

BURK: I wouldn't be surprised -- and mopping the floors in the locker room.

SMERCONISH: Darren is from Hawaii. Hey, Darren.

DARREN: Hello. It really doesn't matter. There has been over 400 years of slavery as far as African-American people. I have come to adopt that you can't take candy from a baby. What I'm trying to say is that let's feed the white man a little slow. Tiger Woods has three championships. Once he has swallowed enough of me, then he is able to handle his wife.

SMERCONISH: You are saying over time, it's going to sort itself out, if I'm following where you are coming from.

DARREN: Well, so far, that's the way it looks like it's going.

BURK: But it has been 70 years, and it hasn't sorted out yet. We're trying to hurry that timetable. Seventy more years is another lifetime.

SMERCONISH: Let me include Jennifer from Georgia. Hey, Jennifer.

JENNIFER: Hi. I think women are taking a very -- this puts women in a very poor light.

SMERCONISH: You mean this campaign to open Augusta?

JENNIFER: Absolutely. The Augusta golf tournament is a wonderful golf tournament. I have been there many times, and it is a beautiful tournament and it's very well-run. There are not women with short skirts and small tops running around. It is not a hooters environment at all. It's a very well-respected club.

Women play golf, and they play golf well. And eventually, maybe, there will be, and maybe this will encourage a forum where some men and some women can play. But the reason that they are focusing on the Augusta National golf tournament is because it has been so successful.

SMERCONISH: No doubt about it. Let me look at this e-mail that came in to us on the issue of Augusta.

"This is not a private club. It's a discrimination club. A private club lets those who can afford to play on it play. That's what private means, not boys only."

Thank you, Lisa in Kingston, Ontario.

Hey, Martha Burk, thank you for joining me today on TALKBACK LIVE. It's time for a break.

BURK: My pleasure.

SMERCONISH: Up next: Should a man who forgot and left his granddaughter inside a hot car be charged with a crime? I'll tell you about the controversial judgment that has people riled in my home town of Philadelphia, right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMERCONISH: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE.

Here is a story from my own back yard in Philadelphia. It's a tragic story. A grandfather is being charged with manslaughter after leaving his 20-month-old granddaughter locked inside a hot car where she died.

Now, just yesterday, a judge dropped all charges against Calvin Howell, saying he's already been sentenced to a lifetime of grief. However, the district attorney refiled manslaughter and other charges against Howell, saying she is giving voice to the little girl who literally roasted inside the car.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LYNNE ABRAHAM, PHILADELPHIA DISTRICT ATTORNEY: You just don't say I'm sorry and then go on. There has to be in the law accountability. We are all accountable for what we do. Well, sure, he has suffered. But who suffered more than the baby in that car, when the heat is rising? It's 140 degrees in the interior of that car. She is 20-months-old. She tried to drink water and eat food. Her little handprints are on the windows of the car maybe trying to get out. I mean, what are we saying about our society where we say it's OK for a caregiver to go out of the house or go out of a car and leave a child unattended and the child dies?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: That's the district attorney of Philadelphia, Linda Abraham, on my radio program, "The Big Talker 1210," yesterday.

Now, here's what I know of the story. Howell apparently drove his wife and daughter to the train station every day, and then would drop his granddaughter off at a sitter's house. Well, on the day in question, he forgot to drop the baby off, and then pulled into the parking lot at work, where someone pointed out to him that his taillight was broken. Hours later, Howell took the car to get the taillight fixed. It wasn't until he got home later that afternoon that he discovered the little girl, now dead, in the back seat of the car.

Here to talk about this tragic case is Paul Diamond, a former assistant district attorney in Philadelphia, and former New York prosecutor and criminal defense attorney, Pamela Hayes.

Welcome, Paul. Welcome, Pamela.

PAUL DIAMOND, FORMER ASSISTANT PHILADELPHIA D.A.: Hello, Michael.

PAMELA HAYES, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Good to be here.

SMERCONISH: Paul Diamond, why would the D.A. refile charge in this case? And listen, you and I both know that the judge who threw this case out, Seamus McCaffery, you know, he's a hanging judge, if there is one, in Philadelphia. So, if he says, I'm not going to allow the case to go forward, why in the world would the D.A. refile?

DIAMOND: Because she is doing her job, Michael. The law in Pennsylvania makes it a crime to display gross negligence in the care of a child. If you are grossly negligent in the care of a child, the law calls you to account. She is doing her job. The problem some people have is with the law, not with the district attorney.

SMERCONISH: But hasn't this man suffered enough? I mean, doesn't the law allow for a situation like this, where it's a blood relative, you know that for the rest of his life, he will walk around emotionally traumatized for the role that he played in connection with her death. Isn't that enough?

DIAMOND: I know that if and when he is convicted, these arguments could be made to a judge or a jury at the time of sentencing. I also know that we have a system of laws in this country, and I think all District Attorney Abraham is trying to do is restore some sanity into this world.

SMERCONISH: Let me ask Pamela Hayes. Hey, Pamela, do you agree Paul Diamond? Or do you say, hey, give the guy a break, he suffered enough?

HAYES: It's not about suffering enough. It's about what the law says. This is a depraved (ph) indifference crime, where we are saying that this individual was so negligent that he didn't give the proper care to his granddaughter. In order to bring a criminal accusation, you have you to look at the person's intent. You have to ask whether or not the person meant to do something.

We have, in law, accidents, and we have criminal acts. What we have to find out is whether this was an accident.

SMERCONISH: But, Pamela, I think...

HAYES: If it was an accident, Michael, then he's shouldn't be charged with a criminal offense.

SMERCONISH: Now, everybody is agreeing, Pamela, that in this case, it was inadvertent. The man, of course, did not set out to cause harm to his granddaughter. But let me tell you something that troubles me about this case. The girl was not properly belted in a car seat. She is 21-months-old. She was not properly belted in a car seat in the back of the car. Doesn't that tell you that there could have been a pattern of neglect?

HAYES: Well, it doesn't tell me anything about this particular incident. I need to know what happened when his wife was in the car. Why didn't she remind the husband? I need to know more about the facts of this case, before I am willing to bring a criminal indictment saying this guy did something wrong by his conduct than forgetting that his grandchild was in a car seat.

SMERCONISH: Paul Diamond, you tell me. Is the car seat significant or insignificant?

DIAMOND: I think the car seat is very significant.

SMERCONISH: Why?

DIAMOND: Because if she was in a car seat, maybe he would have seen her, but he couldn't be bothered to get a car seat. It was like he left his cell phone in the car. She was there for eight hours. She baked for eight hours and struggled to get out. And then, he said, oh, my goodness, where is my granddaughter? That is criminal negligence. If that's not gross negligence in the care of a child, what would be?

SMERCONISH: A.J. is married to -- is it Gareesha (ph)?

GAREESHA: Yes.

SMERCONISH: Hi, welcome. Husband and wife, I understand you don't see eye-to-eye on this one.

GAREESHA: We don't.

SMERCONISH: Tell me quickly what you think.

GAREESHA: We don't. I think it's punishment enough that he is going to be emotionally devastated. And one death for another, is that an answer? The little girl is dead. But are you going to punish the grandfather by sentencing him to death or life in prison? SMERCONISH: A.J., you're not buying that.

A.J.: I don't buy that, because the negligence, what amount of negligence you are talking -- you are dealing with the life of a small girl at 21 months -- or girl. And you're not (ph) talking about the death. She is dead because of your negligence. It is not a civil process here.

SMERCONISH: Somebody has got to speak for her is where you're coming from.

A.J.: Sure.

SMERCONISH: Hey, should the grandfather face charges in this case? I want to hear from you on this. I'm talking e-mail and phone calls. We'll be right back to TALKBACK LIVE.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMERCONISH: Hey, welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Michael Smerconish from "The Big Talker" in Philadelphia, where there is a tragic case playing itself out -- the death of a 21-month-old infant.

Paul Diamond and Pamela Hayes are our guests.

Paul Diamond, let me ask you this question. It's clear to me, this guy is never going to serve any time. In other words, if the prosecution continues down this course, and if he is convicted, there is no way a jury of Philadelphians is going to allow him to actually do time. So, why go through this exercise of futility?

DIAMOND: It's important for the people of Philadelphia, the people of Pennsylvania and the people of the United States to know that this is unacceptable behavior, that the law condemns this behavior. If a jury decides to spare him a jail sentence, if a judge decides to spare him a jail sentence, that's the way the system is supposed to work.

SMERCONISH: But you are on national television right now talking about this. It's already gotten so much play from coast-to-coast, hasn't the message been sent?

DIAMOND: The law has to be vindicated in a situation like this, if the law is to have any meaning at all. Otherwise, why make it illegal to display gross negligence to children? He killed her, because he left her in the car like a CD player.

SMERCONISH: Pamela Hayes, is this the same as a parent who inadvertently leaves a gun out and, heaven forbid, a child comes along and uses that weapon to cause themself harm?

HAYES: I think it's a step below, unfortunately. Both of them reflect instances of what I call depraved indifference. But in the case of a gun, it's clear that a gun can kill you, and if you leave it out and don't take it in the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) that a problem can follow. In this case, this man forgot the child was in the car. I don't know how, I don't know why, I don't know whether the seat was broken and she wasn't strapped in properly, but...

SMERCONISH: It's just like someone who forgets a gun.

HAYES: No, it's not.

(CROSSTALK)

SMERCONISH: I mean, heat is dangerous on an August day in Philadelphia.

HAYES: It's not. I think it's a difference here. And I think the difference here is, if you get a conviction and you're not going to send them to jail, what is the point?

SMERCONISH: All right, let me bring in Terry on a telephone. Hey, Terry, welcome to TALKBACK LIVE.

TERRY: Hi.

SMERCONISH: Speak, my friend.

TERRY: Yes, yes. I've got just something to say here. You know, the whole -- the United States is going nuts with putting everybody in jail. Now, to Pamela, the phrase "accident" doesn't appear anywhere in our legal system today at all. You get in car accident, and it's almost vehicular homicide. You just can't say "accident" anymore.

HAYES: But it's not all...

TERRY: Now, hold on, Pam. I only have a short time here, please.

HAYES: OK, OK.

TERRY: The district attorney in Philadelphia, she has a political agenda, and that's the only reason that she is moving forward here.

SMERCONISH: Oh, no, wait a minute. Let me tell you something. As a guy who is from the city of brotherly love, I think this hurts her politically. Paul Diamond, you're up there. What do you say?

DIAMOND: I think it's an act of courage. I think it's an act of political courage. I think she is making more enemies than friends doing this. She is doing it because she thinks she is right, and she is right.

HAYES: I don't know if she is right. I don't think she is right. I think that...

DIAMOND: What would you have the law do? He let his child bake for nine hours in a car on a day when it was 99 degrees in Philadelphia.

SMERCONISH: Quick final word from, Pamela. Go ahead, Pamela. HAYES: Michael, they went before a judge who determined there was no probable cause to think this was a criminal act. If Lynne Abraham wants to do this, she needs to get a grand jury to mount an indictment and see what they say.

SMERCONISH: And by the way, he is a tough judge. He is the same guy who sits at Veterans Stadium during the Eagle's games, because he is so tough he can deal with all of the hooligans.

Hey, I know you have a lot more to say about this, but first, Judy Woodruff wants to tell us what she has planned for "INSIDE POLITICS" today.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMERCONISH: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE.

We're talking about a tragic death of a toddler in Philadelphia, who authorities say was accidentally left in a hot car. Should her grandfather be charged in this case? That's the hot button issue.

Valerie is from Nevada. Hey, Val.

VALERIE: Hi.

SMERCONISH: With do you think?

VALERIE: I think that as adults, there are consequences for all of us, regardless of what we do and what our responsibilities are. And when we go to college, we have to do our school work, and if we don't do it, we fail. When we work, we have projects, if we don't do it, we get fired. And when we're given the responsibility of a child, regardless of what our excuses are, if the child dies, there should be severe consequences.

SMERCONISH: Pamela Hayes, what do you say to that? Val wants to see some consequences for this fellow.

HAYES: I think there are consequences. The question is: What types of consequences are there? If you admit that this was an accident, it's just not a criminal act. There are other consequences that he has to deal with. And one is knowing that his granddaughter died at his hands. The only question I have is whether it was criminal in nature as the statute provides.

SMERCONISH: Paul Diamond, a quick response.

DIAMOND: The law provides that when somebody is killed like this, all of the people are injured and all of the people have the right to ask the person responsible to explain himself and account for what he did. That's all the district attorney is doing here.

SMERCONISH: A quick comment from Carol from Michigan. Hey, Carol.

CAROL: I agree that he does have to account for what he did, and I think he already has. Many people...

SMERCONISH: Enough is enough, you say.

CAROL: Enough is enough, absolutely.

SMERCONISH: The man has suffered.

OK, that's a strong sentiment at home in Philadelphia as well.

Hey, we're out of time. My thanks to Paul Diamond and Pamela Hayes, and all of you for watching. I'm Michael Smerconish in for Arthel Neville. I'll be back here tomorrow from 3:00 to 6:00 Eastern Time. It's "Free-For-All Friday," and we'll see if a panel of congressmen can play our "Free-For-All" game. You better be here.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.

Join Augusta National Golf Club?>

Aired September 19, 2002 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
MICHAEL SMERCONISH, GUEST HOST: Today, we're simulcasting this program on my radio station in Philadelphia called The Big Talker 1210.
Up this hour: the drumbeat for war with Iraq. And then stay tuned, because women's crusader Martha Burk joins us to tell us who she'll pressure next to get women admitted to the men-only Augusta National Golf Club. (AUDIO GAP) a lot of people are talking about in Philadelphia. Or is it a crime to leave an infant in the back seat of a car? It's a subject I want to bring to your attention.

And we are going to do that right now with Iraq. The president's men are out in force this week hard-selling Congress on military action. Yesterday, Secretary Rumsfeld was on the Hill. Today, it is Secretary of State Colin Powell's turn to make the case. Can they do it?

Here to talk Iraq is Lawrence Korb, former assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration. He's currently vice president and director of studies at the Council on Foreign Relations; and Danielle Pletka, vice president of defense policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute.

Welcome to both of you to TALKBACK LIVE.

LAWRENCE KORB, FORMER ASST. DEFENSE SECRETARY: Nice to be with you.

DANIELLE PLETKA, AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE: Thanks.

SMERCONISH: Mr. Korb, I want to share with you a quote that you've probably heard before, sir. It's from Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, and Chuck Hagel no shrinking violet. This is a man who has been awarded two Purple Hearts for his service in Vietnam.

He says many of those who want to rush us into war, they know nothing about it. And, similarly, Middle East envoy Anthony Zinni has said: "Generals see it one way. And those who never fired a shot see it another."

Why the apparent slit of opinion between those who have worn a uniform, who seem to be cautious about a military attack in Iraq, vs. those who have never put on the uniform, who seem awfully anxious to get in there and, "Let's roll," so to speak?

KORB: Well, Chuck Hagel and Tony Zinni are both Vietnam veterans.

Many of the people in this administration who are most anxious to go to war -- the president, the vice president, the deputy secretary of defense -- basically are the same age, but they avoided service there. And I think the military people and people like Chuck Hagel, who served there, are very concerned that we will do another Vietnam, that we'll get in without thinking through the consequences of how to fight it and what comes next.

SMERCONISH: You, sir, have worn the uniform of your country. Is that correct?

KORB: That's correct.

SMERCONISH: Danielle Pletka, let me get your thoughts on this.

First of all, do you believe there is a dichotomy between those who have worn the uniform, who think we need to be cautious, and those who have never suited up, yourself included, who think that, in this particular case, bombs away? Or is that an overstatement?

PLETKA: I think it is a total overstatement.

The truth is that we don't know what the vast mass of the military thinks. We know what a few generals on TV and a few senators who wore the uniform say. It is the job of the military to be cautious. We want our generals and our soldiers and our commanders to be as cautious as they can be with our soldiers' lives. But it is not their job to decide what the foreign defense policy of our country should be. That is up to the president of the United States.

SMERCONISH: Well, do you believe that in Congress -- because the issue, of course, is getting a lot of airing in both the House and Senate -- that more weight should be afforded to those, those members of the House and Senate who have military service on their own bio, vs. those individuals who have never served?

PLETKA: Absolutely not. Ours is a democracy. People elect their members and their representatives based on many different things. You do not get extra points for having served in the military, any more than you get extra points for having a Ph.D. or a master's or a bachelor's degree.

SMERCONISH: But if the Agriculture Committee in the Senate were talking about soybeans, by way of example, and if there were a farmer who were a member of the Senate, I think my ears would perk up, because I would say, now this is a fellow who knows a little bit more about the subject than I.

Why is military involvement any different than that type of expertise?

PLETKA: We are talking here about foreign policy. We are not talking about military operations.

If you want to take your farm analogy and say that a soldier should be able to talk more clearly about what kind of gun he should carry or how his military unit should operate, that would be one question. But what we are talking about here, in the policy of regime change, is a matter of foreign policy. It is not a matter of military policy.

SMERCONISH: Lawrence Korb, do you agree, or do you believe that someone with expertise, with a background in military service should be afforded greater weight in the debate that is now taking place in Washington, D.C.?

KORB: Well, it depends on what you are debating.

If you are debating the policy, whether it should be regime change or let the inspectors in, that is one thing. But if you are talking about how to conduct the operation -- for example, one of the things that people like Chuck Hagel and Tony Zinni are concerned about is, they hear and they read about these ideas that taking over Iraq will be a cakewalk, that you can accomplish your same objectives in Iraq the way you did in Afghanistan. That concerns them.

It also concerns them when they ask the policymakers, "Well, what comes next?" and people can't answer that question, because it is the military that will have to occupy Iraq for however long it might be.

Another question is, do you want to fight with or without allies? If you don't have any allies, it is going to be a much more difficult operation and costly, both in terms of lives and in money, because, if you want to put a couple hundred thousand people in there, and you can't fly over Saudi airspace or use our bases there, it is going to be a more difficult operation.

SMERCONISH: But these so-called allies to me look like they are just searching for any excuse to get out of the whole situation. And you've got to give Saddam -- and I can call him that -- Saddam Hussein credit for having played a smart political card.

The fact of the matter is, I believe this country has been on the brink of war. And now here we are, because the allies say, "Well, he is going to allow the U.N. weapons inspections," the guy appears to have bought time.

Now, am I wrong, Danielle, or did this man pull off a political masterstroke?

PLETKA: I don't think it was a political masterstroke, to be fair. I think it was the obvious step. I think it was the step that a lot of people in the administration expected.

The president did the right thing. He went to the Security Council. He laid out how Saddam Hussein had been flouting international will for 11 1/2 years. He told them that they could step up to the plate and defend their own resolutions, but that he wasn't going to stand by if they weren't going to take that action.

What Saddam has done is, he has taken them up on their offer. He said: "Thank you very much. You can send inspectors," all the while forgetting that the aim here is not inspectors. Inspectors are the means to an end. And the end, demanded by the Security Council resolution since the end of the Gulf War, was total disarmament.

SMERCONISH: But you and I both know that when we are talking about the French, we know how weak-kneed those French can be, right? This is the perfect outcome for the French, because now they can get to say, "Well, Saddam Hussein claims he is going to allow the U.N.'s weapons inspectors in."

Here is the question for both of you. And we'll start with Danielle. In the end, if the U.N. is hesitant, should the United States move forward unilaterally against Iraq and Saddam Hussein?

PLETKA: I don't think that, in any circumstance, we are going to be moving forward unilaterally. I think the British are going to be with us. I think the Australians are going to be with us. And I think a lot of others are going to be with us, whether or not we get the say-so from the U.N.

(CROSSTALK)

SMERCONISH: In the end, are we going alone, Lawrence?

KORB: Well, you should not unless you have a clear and imminent danger. The president has not made that case yet.

And so you should not go unilaterally unless you really have to, because, if you go, the cost is going to be much higher in terms of human lives, money, as well as what is going to happen after it. Larry Lindsey, the president's economic adviser, said this thing could cost $100 billion to $200 billion. And if the United States has to pay that bill themselves, it is going to cause us a lot of strains in our economy.

SMERCONISH: Let me get a comment in here from Fred from Michigan.

Hey, Fred, welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. Nice to have you.

FRED: Thank you.

SMERCONISH: Speak, my friend.

FRED: As a veteran, I believe our country, we have to -- what the president and what our Congress says, we have to go along with. We don't want what happened in Vietnam to happen again. So we have to have the support of our country. And we have to back the president. And if the president feels that we have enough information to attack Iraq, then we...

SMERCONISH: Hey, who cares when the French say. Who cares what the Russians say. Who cares what the Chinese say. You are with W. no matter what. That is what are you telling me.

FRED: I am saying I will follow...

SMERCONISH: It is all right with me, Fred. That's OK with me.

FRED: We do it alone anyway. But I think we will have allies there eventually, but maybe not right now.

SMERCONISH: All right, hey, I want to hear from all of you on this one. Call me or e-mail me.

Don't go away. There's a lot more on TALKBACK LIVE just around the corner.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARTHA BURK, CHAIR NATIONAL COUNCIL OF WOMEN'S ORGANIZATIONS: I am getting hate calls. I do watch my back when I come out my door at night.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: Martha Burk ups the stakes in her gender crusade against Augusta National Golf Club. Talk to Martha today and find out where she is taking it next on TALKBACK LIVE.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: But the United Nations Security Council must work with the United States and other concerned parties to send a clear message that we expect Saddam to disarm. And if the United Nations Security Council won't deal with the problem, the United States and some of our friends will.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: Hey, welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Michael Smerconish, in for Arthel Neville.

We're talking about U.S. plans for Iraq. And we happen to be simulcasting today on my radio station in Philadelphia, The Big Talker 1210.

I have got another question for our guest Lawrence Korb.

Mr. Korb, why is there not, why has not been a presentation in the U.N., ala Adlai Stevenson in the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis? Maybe, sir, it's the trial lawyer in me. I'm looking for photographs. I want the affidavits. I want the blow-ups. I want to see the administration make the case against Saddam Hussein.

KORB: Well, I agree with you.

And I think, if the president had been able to do that in his speech to the U.N. last week, the French and other people wouldn't be saying, "Well, let's let the inspectors go back in." There are one or two reasons. One, you don't want to reveal the sources. The other is, you don't have any specific information that say that the situation has changed dramatically since September 11, because Saddam has been doing this stuff for 20 years.

In fact, we used to be his ally when I was in government. So I think that you have to -- lacking that type of evidence, it is going to be hard to get the rest of the world to go along with us. I wish we had done it.

SMERCONISH: You mentioned September 11. And I want to ask both you and Danielle about this subject.

I am someone who happens to believe that there may be a link between the Oklahoma City bombing and the events of 9/11. There is an investigative reporter out in Oklahoma City named Jayna Davis who has done tremendous work to connect the dots. Are either of you buying into the possibility that there may have been an Iraqi cell group operating in Oklahoma that played a role with McVeigh and with Nichols? Or does that just sound, you know, like the grassy knoll in Dealey Plaza in the Kennedy assassination?

PLETKA: You know, Laurie Mylroie has also been involved in that. There was an article in "The Wall Street Journal" that detailed some of the questions. I don't think there is conclusive evidence right now that Iraq had involvement in the Oklahoma City bombing.

SMERCONISH: But, Danielle, you are not laughing. You are not laughing and saying, hey, that is some...

PLETKA: No, I'm not laughing. You're right.

SMERCONISH: I am no conspiracy guy. I think that Oswald killed Kennedy and he acted alone. But I am looking at this one and I am saying I think Jayna Davis is on to something.

PLETKA: There are a lot of unanswered questions. And I think we really can't pretend to be satisfied until we see the answers to those questions.

(CROSSTALK)

PLETKA: ... Philippines and things like that.

SMERCONISH: Thank you.

Let me go to Damon, a caller from California.

Hey, Damon, welcome to TALKBACK LIVE.

CALLER: It's great to be on. Thank you.

I think that a preemptive attack on a sovereign Arab nation will increase anti-American sentiment throughout the entire Arab and Muslim world.

SMERCONISH: How can it get any higher, my friend? What, are you kidding me, like we should care about what the Arabs think of us now?

CALLER: Well, it is important. We have -- the entire coalition is held together by duct tape and bubble gum. But I think that the preemptive attack will increase anti-American settlement. And that is going to backfire, because it is going to increase hostility toward us and result in increased membership in al Qaeda membership and the like.

SMERCONISH: Damon, thank you, sir. I for one don't buy into the idea that we ought to run our foreign policy by whether everybody loves us in this country.

But I want to ask Fred from Ohio, what do you say, Fred?

FRED: Yes.

I am a veteran. And I do have kind of mixed emotions about the whole subject. On one hand, I feel as though we should go ahead and take care of Saddam and get in there and get out. Then, on the other hand, I feel as though we need to give that time that they need to inspect and get more evidence on exactly what is going to cause us to go in.

SMERCONISH: Let me ask you, Fred, have you been watching Scott Ritter? He's been a guest on TALKBACK LIVE. He's done a lot of CNN appearances. He's the former U.N. weapons inspector who is over there playing footsie with Saddam Hussein, as far as I am concerned. Have you watched this gentleman and what do you think his deal is?

FRED: To be quite honest with you, no, I haven't. I really have not been following the

(CROSSTALK)

SMERCONISH: Don't worry. You haven't missed anything by not seeing him.

Let me ask Lawrence.

Lawrence, are you watching Scott Ritter? And what, sir, is your take on what you are seeing?

KORB: I have no idea what Scott is up to, because there is obviously some inconsistencies with what he said back when he was on the inspection team and what he is saying now. And so I really don't know.

I think the main question is the one you are talking about today: Should the United States go after Saddam and under what conditions? And the point that was made by the previous caller is, I think, very important. This is a point that Brent Scowcroft made. We may not think that people have a legitimate gripe against us. But if we go ahead unilaterally and preemptively, this will become a self- fulfilling prophecy and could lead those people to join al Qaeda.

(CROSSTALK) SMERCONISH: Lawrence, let me interrupt you, because I want to get a quick comment in from Linda before the break, from Washington.

Real quick, Linda.

LINDA: Michael, you are pronouncing the name wrong. It's "So Damn Insane," is the man's name.

SMERCONISH: You and me, baby. We know how this thing is going down.

LINDA: Even though he says, "Come on in; snoop around; look at what we got," you are never going to see what he's got.

SMERCONISH: You're darn right.

LINDA: You are going to see what he shows you.

SMERCONISH: You're darn right. Thank you for that.

Hey, Lawrence Korb, Danielle Pletka, thank you both for joining us today.

KORB: Thank you.

SMERCONISH: We will take a break.

And then: A feminist group ups the ante in its battle to get a woman invited into the all-male enclave at Augusta National Golf Club. You're not going to want to miss this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMERCONISH: To attempts by a women's group to open its membership, recently the home of the prestigious Masters tournament dropped three corporate sponsors from its televised event. Club chairman Hootie Johnson -- I love that name -- said he didn't want the sponsors pressured and that the club would not be pressured either.

Now Martha Burk, head of the National Council of Women's Organizations and the woman spearheading the drive, has a new plan of attack. She joins us from Washington to talk about it.

Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE.

BURK: Thanks. It's good to be here.

SMERCONISH: What is the new plan of attack against Augusta?

BURK: Well, we appealed to CBS, because they have said that they are going to televise the tournament without sponsors, meaning that they are going to lose money on it and become an underwriter of this organization that discriminates against half their viewers.

We don't think that it is a good decision. We would like to meet with CBS to see if they wouldn't reconsider. Their CEO -- one of their CEOs, Vice President Les Moonves, has been very supportive of women in the company. He has mentored a number of women. I am surprised that CBS would make this decision, given their record and their own corporate policies against discrimination.

SMERCONISH: So far, Martha Burk, CBS is telling you, respectfully, no dice. That is where we are at this moment?

BURK: That is where we are with CBS. Of course, we do have some other avenues open to us. Many of the members of Augusta are CEOs of America's largest corporations. We know those corporations have policies against discrimination. We don't think that it is a very good statement for somebody...

SMERCONISH: Well, I want to ask you about that, because Hootie Johnson says that he is not going to admit women at the point of a bayonet. Doesn't it sound a little terroristic for you to say: "Well, we are going to threaten the sponsors. We're going to then go and threaten the corporations"? Hey, if guys want to hang out with guys, what is wrong with that? Is this really such a big deal?

BURK: Well, let me answer the threat question first.

As Julian Bond -- who is chair of the board of the NAACP and who has given us a statement of support here -- said, economic pressure has always been important in fighting discrimination. So we do not apologize for that.

SMERCONISH: But , Martha, this is not a hotel. It's not a restaurant. It's a golf club.

BURK: It's the highest-profile golf event on the planet. I agree: It's not a hotel.

SMERCONISH: That's means they're successful. Yes, but wait a minute. Why don't you go out and start one of your own and only open up the membership to women? Is that such a bad outcome?

BURK: Because we don't think separate but equal ever is.

SMERCONISH: OK, listen, we are going to go another round, a lot of audience interest in this. And we want to hear from you. Martha will be right back with TALKBACK LIVE to talk about Augusta.

Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TIGER WOODS, PROFESSIONAL GOLF PLAYER: They are entitled to set up their own rules the way they want. And it would be nice to see everyone have an equal chance to participate in it if they wanted to. But if it's -- there is nothing you can do about it. If you have a group or organization, that's way they want to set it up, and it is their prerogative to set it up that way.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Michael Smerconish, in for Arthel Neville -- that, of course, Tiger Woods.

We are talking with Martha Burk about her attempts to get a woman member into the Augusta National Golf Club. Now she wants CBS to dump the Masters tournament.

Martha, you saw Tiger Woods or you listened to Tiger Woods. Are you going to go after the players next? You've gone after the sponsors. You're going after the network. What about the players?

BURK: I'd like to see the players make a strong statement. You know, Tiger has made a stronger statement than that tape you just played. But if we stuck with what the members wanted to do, Tiger would be a caddy at the Masters. He would not be playing.

So, when he says...

SMERCONISH: Well, wait a minute. Augusta...

BURK: When he says there's nothing you can do about it, we are trying to do something about it.

SMERCONISH: But wait a minute. Augusta does have African- American members.

BURK: They do now. They do now. But only because they were pressured after the PGA said they would not...

SMERCONISH: You see them as one in the same. If you are discriminating against women, it's no different than if you're discriminating against African-Americans.

BURK: Absolutely. I see it as exactly the same.

SMERCONISH: A lot of the members of the audience agree with you.

BURK: Yes.

SMERCONISH: Francis is joining us from Ohio on TALKBACK LIVE. Hey, Francis, what's your thought?

FRANCIS: My thought is that women are trying to get too much into all of men's things. And we are different. Men are men and women are women. Let's each do our own thing. The men's club has done wonderful work. Let them keep doing it.

SMERCONISH: You are not threatened by the idea that guys want to hang out with guys every once in a while.

FRANCIS: No. I like to hang out with women.

SMERCONISH: All right.

BURK: Hey, this is not a few guys hanging out on the back nine. SMERCONISH: Hey, Diane, who do you want to hang out with?

DIANE: Well, I appreciate hanging out with guys myself, but this is an economic issue. And if they want to keep it private, they should keep it private and not broadcast it, and not take in the money that this brings in. And they can play by themselves.

BURK: Thank you.

SMERCONISH: I've got to think about that. No, you did word that carefully, didn't you? Yes, you did word that carefully.

All right, I want to ask Martha a separate question. Suzy Whaley, and you know the name by now...

BURK: Yes, I do.

SMERCONISH: ... the first female to qualify for a PGA event. She has been invited to the Greater Hartford Open. But to play in Hartford, she has to drive off of the men's tees, and apparently -- I'm a duffer, so I don't understand all of this sort of thing -- but the course is about 1,000 yards longer than what she is accustomed to. And some females are nervous that she could embarrass herself playing with the guys at Hartford next year.

What do you think she should do?

BURK: I think she should play. With her accomplishment, it's impossible to embarrass herself. She may not win the tournament, but nothing can keep her from shooting a good round there. So, I want to encourage her.

And by the way, she said that if the boys at Augusta are looking for their first female member, she is a candidate.

SMERCONISH: Let me go to Annie on the telephone on TALKBACK LIVE. Hey, Annie, what do you think?

ANNIE: I think that these women, who are trying to force the club to let them in, is a dangerous premise. A private club should be private, should not be forced to take in anyone they don't want, just as in my home, if someone comes to my door who I don't want to come in, I have the right say no. And...

BURK: Your private home does not broadcast to billions of people, open to the public, take public money in one form or another...

SMERCONISH: Well, but, Martha...

BURK: ... and produce the highest profile event on the planet.

SMERCONISH: But, Martha Burk, that woman in her own way just articulated the state of the law, because Augusta is not what's known as a place of public accommodation.

BURK: This is not...

SMERCONISH: They're not a hotel. They're not a restaurant.

BURK: This is not about the law. It's about a higher moral principle here. It's about the symbolism of discrimination that is going on in Augusta.

SMERCONISH: Let me ask Charles from Ohio if he agrees with you. Hey, Charles, how are you doing? Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE, and let me hear from you.

CHARLES: Yes, I really do agree with her. My feeling, though, is that the country club is made up -- maybe they have 3,500 members or whatever the numbers are -- 90 percent of them are probably married. If we think for one minute that these men's wives can't make them change their minds, we are dreaming.

BURK: Well, I know...

CHARLES: If they want to make that change...

SMERCONISH: Well, now, wait a minute.

CHARLES: ... they know how to do it.

SMERCONISH: I know who is running your house. Now, that you've told me that, I know -- oh, OK, Diane is running your house. There you go.

CHARLES: There you go.

SMERCONISH: But, listen...

CHARLES: But that's true.

SMERCONISH: Charles, let me talk to you for a second here. The poker game -- I mean, next they're going to be coming to us and saying, hey, I want to come over and play cards with you guys, because it looks like a lot of fun and it's a bunch of guys. Where does this end?

CHARLES: Does it need to?

BURK: When you guys hold the Masters, then we'll probably be knocking on your doors, but unless you are holding the world series of poker, we're going to leave you alone.

SMERCONISH: Martha, let me ask you respectfully. Is this the best use of your time? I mean, you head this prestigious women's organization. I would think that equal pay for different sexes would be...

BURK: We work on that every day. Every day.

SMERCONISH: But it seems like this is the one issue for which you are becoming best known. You're not troubled by that? BURK: This is the one issue you media guys are the most interested in. If you'll cover equal pay on TALKBACK LIVE, I'd love to come back.

SMERCONISH: OK. Jarrod is on the telephone on TALKBACK LIVE. Hey, Jarrod, what say you?

JARROD: Hi, yes. I am Jarrod, and I just had a question for you. As a member of the gay community, it's pretty passe not to be women's lib. But what exactly are you trying to prove? I mean, we know women can do it. We know that women are able to. And also, these organizations make huge contributions to, like, charities and other things that need money. So, what...

BURK: Jarrod, they certainly do, and I find it appalling that they are willing to take money out of the mouths of those charities to underwrite a tournament just to keep women out.

SMERCONISH: Let me ask Linda from Washington what she thinks. She joins us in the TALKBACK LIVE studio.

LINDA: I am speculating, because I don't know this to be a fact. But I'll bet some pretty good money that there are women in low-cut costumes serving cocktails in the country club bar and cooking the food in the kitchen.

BURK: I wouldn't be surprised -- and mopping the floors in the locker room.

SMERCONISH: Darren is from Hawaii. Hey, Darren.

DARREN: Hello. It really doesn't matter. There has been over 400 years of slavery as far as African-American people. I have come to adopt that you can't take candy from a baby. What I'm trying to say is that let's feed the white man a little slow. Tiger Woods has three championships. Once he has swallowed enough of me, then he is able to handle his wife.

SMERCONISH: You are saying over time, it's going to sort itself out, if I'm following where you are coming from.

DARREN: Well, so far, that's the way it looks like it's going.

BURK: But it has been 70 years, and it hasn't sorted out yet. We're trying to hurry that timetable. Seventy more years is another lifetime.

SMERCONISH: Let me include Jennifer from Georgia. Hey, Jennifer.

JENNIFER: Hi. I think women are taking a very -- this puts women in a very poor light.

SMERCONISH: You mean this campaign to open Augusta?

JENNIFER: Absolutely. The Augusta golf tournament is a wonderful golf tournament. I have been there many times, and it is a beautiful tournament and it's very well-run. There are not women with short skirts and small tops running around. It is not a hooters environment at all. It's a very well-respected club.

Women play golf, and they play golf well. And eventually, maybe, there will be, and maybe this will encourage a forum where some men and some women can play. But the reason that they are focusing on the Augusta National golf tournament is because it has been so successful.

SMERCONISH: No doubt about it. Let me look at this e-mail that came in to us on the issue of Augusta.

"This is not a private club. It's a discrimination club. A private club lets those who can afford to play on it play. That's what private means, not boys only."

Thank you, Lisa in Kingston, Ontario.

Hey, Martha Burk, thank you for joining me today on TALKBACK LIVE. It's time for a break.

BURK: My pleasure.

SMERCONISH: Up next: Should a man who forgot and left his granddaughter inside a hot car be charged with a crime? I'll tell you about the controversial judgment that has people riled in my home town of Philadelphia, right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMERCONISH: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE.

Here is a story from my own back yard in Philadelphia. It's a tragic story. A grandfather is being charged with manslaughter after leaving his 20-month-old granddaughter locked inside a hot car where she died.

Now, just yesterday, a judge dropped all charges against Calvin Howell, saying he's already been sentenced to a lifetime of grief. However, the district attorney refiled manslaughter and other charges against Howell, saying she is giving voice to the little girl who literally roasted inside the car.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LYNNE ABRAHAM, PHILADELPHIA DISTRICT ATTORNEY: You just don't say I'm sorry and then go on. There has to be in the law accountability. We are all accountable for what we do. Well, sure, he has suffered. But who suffered more than the baby in that car, when the heat is rising? It's 140 degrees in the interior of that car. She is 20-months-old. She tried to drink water and eat food. Her little handprints are on the windows of the car maybe trying to get out. I mean, what are we saying about our society where we say it's OK for a caregiver to go out of the house or go out of a car and leave a child unattended and the child dies?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: That's the district attorney of Philadelphia, Linda Abraham, on my radio program, "The Big Talker 1210," yesterday.

Now, here's what I know of the story. Howell apparently drove his wife and daughter to the train station every day, and then would drop his granddaughter off at a sitter's house. Well, on the day in question, he forgot to drop the baby off, and then pulled into the parking lot at work, where someone pointed out to him that his taillight was broken. Hours later, Howell took the car to get the taillight fixed. It wasn't until he got home later that afternoon that he discovered the little girl, now dead, in the back seat of the car.

Here to talk about this tragic case is Paul Diamond, a former assistant district attorney in Philadelphia, and former New York prosecutor and criminal defense attorney, Pamela Hayes.

Welcome, Paul. Welcome, Pamela.

PAUL DIAMOND, FORMER ASSISTANT PHILADELPHIA D.A.: Hello, Michael.

PAMELA HAYES, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Good to be here.

SMERCONISH: Paul Diamond, why would the D.A. refile charge in this case? And listen, you and I both know that the judge who threw this case out, Seamus McCaffery, you know, he's a hanging judge, if there is one, in Philadelphia. So, if he says, I'm not going to allow the case to go forward, why in the world would the D.A. refile?

DIAMOND: Because she is doing her job, Michael. The law in Pennsylvania makes it a crime to display gross negligence in the care of a child. If you are grossly negligent in the care of a child, the law calls you to account. She is doing her job. The problem some people have is with the law, not with the district attorney.

SMERCONISH: But hasn't this man suffered enough? I mean, doesn't the law allow for a situation like this, where it's a blood relative, you know that for the rest of his life, he will walk around emotionally traumatized for the role that he played in connection with her death. Isn't that enough?

DIAMOND: I know that if and when he is convicted, these arguments could be made to a judge or a jury at the time of sentencing. I also know that we have a system of laws in this country, and I think all District Attorney Abraham is trying to do is restore some sanity into this world.

SMERCONISH: Let me ask Pamela Hayes. Hey, Pamela, do you agree Paul Diamond? Or do you say, hey, give the guy a break, he suffered enough?

HAYES: It's not about suffering enough. It's about what the law says. This is a depraved (ph) indifference crime, where we are saying that this individual was so negligent that he didn't give the proper care to his granddaughter. In order to bring a criminal accusation, you have you to look at the person's intent. You have to ask whether or not the person meant to do something.

We have, in law, accidents, and we have criminal acts. What we have to find out is whether this was an accident.

SMERCONISH: But, Pamela, I think...

HAYES: If it was an accident, Michael, then he's shouldn't be charged with a criminal offense.

SMERCONISH: Now, everybody is agreeing, Pamela, that in this case, it was inadvertent. The man, of course, did not set out to cause harm to his granddaughter. But let me tell you something that troubles me about this case. The girl was not properly belted in a car seat. She is 21-months-old. She was not properly belted in a car seat in the back of the car. Doesn't that tell you that there could have been a pattern of neglect?

HAYES: Well, it doesn't tell me anything about this particular incident. I need to know what happened when his wife was in the car. Why didn't she remind the husband? I need to know more about the facts of this case, before I am willing to bring a criminal indictment saying this guy did something wrong by his conduct than forgetting that his grandchild was in a car seat.

SMERCONISH: Paul Diamond, you tell me. Is the car seat significant or insignificant?

DIAMOND: I think the car seat is very significant.

SMERCONISH: Why?

DIAMOND: Because if she was in a car seat, maybe he would have seen her, but he couldn't be bothered to get a car seat. It was like he left his cell phone in the car. She was there for eight hours. She baked for eight hours and struggled to get out. And then, he said, oh, my goodness, where is my granddaughter? That is criminal negligence. If that's not gross negligence in the care of a child, what would be?

SMERCONISH: A.J. is married to -- is it Gareesha (ph)?

GAREESHA: Yes.

SMERCONISH: Hi, welcome. Husband and wife, I understand you don't see eye-to-eye on this one.

GAREESHA: We don't.

SMERCONISH: Tell me quickly what you think.

GAREESHA: We don't. I think it's punishment enough that he is going to be emotionally devastated. And one death for another, is that an answer? The little girl is dead. But are you going to punish the grandfather by sentencing him to death or life in prison? SMERCONISH: A.J., you're not buying that.

A.J.: I don't buy that, because the negligence, what amount of negligence you are talking -- you are dealing with the life of a small girl at 21 months -- or girl. And you're not (ph) talking about the death. She is dead because of your negligence. It is not a civil process here.

SMERCONISH: Somebody has got to speak for her is where you're coming from.

A.J.: Sure.

SMERCONISH: Hey, should the grandfather face charges in this case? I want to hear from you on this. I'm talking e-mail and phone calls. We'll be right back to TALKBACK LIVE.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMERCONISH: Hey, welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Michael Smerconish from "The Big Talker" in Philadelphia, where there is a tragic case playing itself out -- the death of a 21-month-old infant.

Paul Diamond and Pamela Hayes are our guests.

Paul Diamond, let me ask you this question. It's clear to me, this guy is never going to serve any time. In other words, if the prosecution continues down this course, and if he is convicted, there is no way a jury of Philadelphians is going to allow him to actually do time. So, why go through this exercise of futility?

DIAMOND: It's important for the people of Philadelphia, the people of Pennsylvania and the people of the United States to know that this is unacceptable behavior, that the law condemns this behavior. If a jury decides to spare him a jail sentence, if a judge decides to spare him a jail sentence, that's the way the system is supposed to work.

SMERCONISH: But you are on national television right now talking about this. It's already gotten so much play from coast-to-coast, hasn't the message been sent?

DIAMOND: The law has to be vindicated in a situation like this, if the law is to have any meaning at all. Otherwise, why make it illegal to display gross negligence to children? He killed her, because he left her in the car like a CD player.

SMERCONISH: Pamela Hayes, is this the same as a parent who inadvertently leaves a gun out and, heaven forbid, a child comes along and uses that weapon to cause themself harm?

HAYES: I think it's a step below, unfortunately. Both of them reflect instances of what I call depraved indifference. But in the case of a gun, it's clear that a gun can kill you, and if you leave it out and don't take it in the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) that a problem can follow. In this case, this man forgot the child was in the car. I don't know how, I don't know why, I don't know whether the seat was broken and she wasn't strapped in properly, but...

SMERCONISH: It's just like someone who forgets a gun.

HAYES: No, it's not.

(CROSSTALK)

SMERCONISH: I mean, heat is dangerous on an August day in Philadelphia.

HAYES: It's not. I think it's a difference here. And I think the difference here is, if you get a conviction and you're not going to send them to jail, what is the point?

SMERCONISH: All right, let me bring in Terry on a telephone. Hey, Terry, welcome to TALKBACK LIVE.

TERRY: Hi.

SMERCONISH: Speak, my friend.

TERRY: Yes, yes. I've got just something to say here. You know, the whole -- the United States is going nuts with putting everybody in jail. Now, to Pamela, the phrase "accident" doesn't appear anywhere in our legal system today at all. You get in car accident, and it's almost vehicular homicide. You just can't say "accident" anymore.

HAYES: But it's not all...

TERRY: Now, hold on, Pam. I only have a short time here, please.

HAYES: OK, OK.

TERRY: The district attorney in Philadelphia, she has a political agenda, and that's the only reason that she is moving forward here.

SMERCONISH: Oh, no, wait a minute. Let me tell you something. As a guy who is from the city of brotherly love, I think this hurts her politically. Paul Diamond, you're up there. What do you say?

DIAMOND: I think it's an act of courage. I think it's an act of political courage. I think she is making more enemies than friends doing this. She is doing it because she thinks she is right, and she is right.

HAYES: I don't know if she is right. I don't think she is right. I think that...

DIAMOND: What would you have the law do? He let his child bake for nine hours in a car on a day when it was 99 degrees in Philadelphia.

SMERCONISH: Quick final word from, Pamela. Go ahead, Pamela. HAYES: Michael, they went before a judge who determined there was no probable cause to think this was a criminal act. If Lynne Abraham wants to do this, she needs to get a grand jury to mount an indictment and see what they say.

SMERCONISH: And by the way, he is a tough judge. He is the same guy who sits at Veterans Stadium during the Eagle's games, because he is so tough he can deal with all of the hooligans.

Hey, I know you have a lot more to say about this, but first, Judy Woodruff wants to tell us what she has planned for "INSIDE POLITICS" today.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMERCONISH: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE.

We're talking about a tragic death of a toddler in Philadelphia, who authorities say was accidentally left in a hot car. Should her grandfather be charged in this case? That's the hot button issue.

Valerie is from Nevada. Hey, Val.

VALERIE: Hi.

SMERCONISH: With do you think?

VALERIE: I think that as adults, there are consequences for all of us, regardless of what we do and what our responsibilities are. And when we go to college, we have to do our school work, and if we don't do it, we fail. When we work, we have projects, if we don't do it, we get fired. And when we're given the responsibility of a child, regardless of what our excuses are, if the child dies, there should be severe consequences.

SMERCONISH: Pamela Hayes, what do you say to that? Val wants to see some consequences for this fellow.

HAYES: I think there are consequences. The question is: What types of consequences are there? If you admit that this was an accident, it's just not a criminal act. There are other consequences that he has to deal with. And one is knowing that his granddaughter died at his hands. The only question I have is whether it was criminal in nature as the statute provides.

SMERCONISH: Paul Diamond, a quick response.

DIAMOND: The law provides that when somebody is killed like this, all of the people are injured and all of the people have the right to ask the person responsible to explain himself and account for what he did. That's all the district attorney is doing here.

SMERCONISH: A quick comment from Carol from Michigan. Hey, Carol.

CAROL: I agree that he does have to account for what he did, and I think he already has. Many people...

SMERCONISH: Enough is enough, you say.

CAROL: Enough is enough, absolutely.

SMERCONISH: The man has suffered.

OK, that's a strong sentiment at home in Philadelphia as well.

Hey, we're out of time. My thanks to Paul Diamond and Pamela Hayes, and all of you for watching. I'm Michael Smerconish in for Arthel Neville. I'll be back here tomorrow from 3:00 to 6:00 Eastern Time. It's "Free-For-All Friday," and we'll see if a panel of congressmen can play our "Free-For-All" game. You better be here.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.

Join Augusta National Golf Club?>