|
CNN TALKBACK LIVE
Free-For-All Friday for December 13, 2002
Aired December 13, 2002 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ARTHEL NEVILLE, HOST: Hello, everybody. Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Arthel Neville.
Senator Trent Lott is under fire for making statements that seemed to endorse segregationist policies. The Republican leader has repeatedly apologized for the remarks, but now he's fighting to hang on to his position, his leadership position. Do his comments warrant a resignation?
Also: Should Cardinal Law face criminal charges? And would you line up for a smallpox vaccination? We want to find out.
We have so much to talk about here today on TALKBACK LIVE. And I'm so glad you could join us.
And right now, we're going to go live to Boston for the latest on the Cardinal Law controversy. Is his resignation enough for sexual abuse victims?
And you have heard the president's plan about the smallpox vaccination, as I said.
But, right now, though, what we need to do is talk about Republican Senator Trent Lott. He's under fire for making statements that seemed to endorse segregationist policies. At 5:30 p.m. Eastern time, Lott plans to his first former news conference to answer tough questions about his views on race. And, of course, you can see that right here on CNN.
Earlier today, Lott said he had no intention of resigning and said he had spoken with the president.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. TRENT LOTT (R-MS), MINORITY LEADER: I did speak to the president.
QUESTION: Yesterday or today?
LOTT: Yesterday. And the president said, as he should, that I have apologized what I had to say, which was the appropriate thing to do. And I'm going to expand on that even more this afternoon at the press conference.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: OK. Meanwhile, the hits keep coming from Democrats on Capitol Hill.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. EDWARD KENNEDY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: Senator Lott's statements were inappropriate. And it was really a salute to bigotry. It's difficult for me to understand how he can meet his responsibilities as the Republican leader in the United States Senate. That's going to be a decision that is going to be made by his caucus.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: OK. So, what will his fellow Republicans decide to do, and what does this controversy do to Lott's career?
Joining us from Los Angeles is Republican consultant Stuart Stevens. He worked with both President Bush and his father. And here in Atlanta is Ben Johnson, an opinion columnist for the Huntsville, Alabama, "Times."
OK, Mr. Ben, we'll start with you.
You worked here. You work here in the South. I wanted to know the Southern reaction to the Trent Lott story.
BEN JOHNSON, COLUMNIST: My goodness. I can't believe that Mr. Lott got away with saying that.
But the thing that gets me the most is, who's writing his material? He needs a new comedy writer, because that material just didn't go, didn't make it.
NEVILLE: Did it offend you? What are your callers saying?
JOHNSON: To be honest with you, I was not that offended by it. Let's be honest here. We live in America. And in America, race is a factor. And we have not dealt with race seriously as an issue.
You look anywhere in this country and you will find that we are divided by race, black over here, white over here. Even when we work together, we find ways to go our separate ways at lunch, after work, at church. Why are we so excited about race being a divisive issue in this country?
NEVILLE: Yes, but someone who's part of the leadership of the country.
JOHNSON: All the more reason. He's taking us in the direction that we are accustomed to going. They say the best leaders are those who know where their followers want them to take them.
NEVILLE: Stuart, you worked for Bush 41 and 43. President Bush came out strong yesterday. Are even the Republicans losing faith in Lott?
STUART STEVENS, REPUBLICAN CONSULTANT: I think Republicans are embarrassed and some of them appalled by what Trent Lott said.
But I don't think that this worthies his resignation. I agree with the president on this. Look, you have to look at this in context. This was a celebratory occasion. Just about every United States senator, including Ted Kennedy, was saying nice things about Strom Thurmond. So I think, in that sort of context, a dumb thing to say, ought to apologize, ought to keep apologizing until he gets it right, which I think he'll do this afternoon. And then I think we'll move on.
NEVILLE: OK, listen, in the meantime, reports from Senator Lott's past are coming back to haunt him. "TIME" magazine says Lott led the fight to keep blacks out of his college fraternity, Sigma Nu, at the University of Mississippi in the early 1960s.
And a spokesman for Senator Lott says those were different times and a different era and that Lott firmly believes segregation is immoral and repudiates it. We've heard a lot from the political arena. But now how does the public feel about this issue?
Curtis Ellis is a correspondent and host for the ie America Radio Network. And Debbie Schlussel is a radio talk show host, lawyer and political columnist.
And, Debbie, I'll start with you. What can Trent Lott say today to save his post?
DEBBIE SCHLUSSEL, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Well, I think he's already apologized. I don't know what more he can do.
We already have lots of affirmative action programs and government set-asides. So, we can't offer more of those. I think it's very interesting, though. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, two of his biggest critics, they have made racist statements themselves for which they have never apologized. Trent Lott has apologized. Let's move on.
NEVILLE: I'm not sure about that, Debbie. I'm sure that both of those gentlemen have apologized.
SCHLUSSEL: That's actually not correct.
NEVILLE: OK, we'll get Jackson and Mr. Sharpton on the phone and have you on the show and we'll find out. How about that?
SCHLUSSEL: Well, that would be great. I would love to hear when Sharpton apologized for calling white store owners in Harlem white interlopers and making anti-Semitic statements. He's never apologized for that. And people died as a result, too.
NEVILLE: Curtis, on some level, most people made foolish choices while in college. So, should Trent Lott be held accountable today for a stance he took in the 1960s?
CURTIS ELLIS, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: It's not about the stance he took in 1960s. It's about what he said a week ago. He said -- well, we know what he said. He said the country would be better off, we wouldn't have the problem if the segregationist platform had been made the law of the land, if Thurmond had won.
Now, look, I don't think he should resign.
STEVENS: Well, that's not what he said.
ELLIS: I think he's doing a great job for the Republican Party, just like Cardinal Law did for the Catholic Church. but let's stop pussyfooting around here.
The segregationism in the South was enforced by terror, by lynchings and by beatings and by night-riders. And that is what we're talking about here. And to make any kind of excuse for that is wrong. And it's not about him resigning. It's about the president -- this is about the president and the Republican caucus firing him.
If they're afraid to offend a racists in their own party, remember, Lyndon Johnson, when he signed the Civil Rights Act in 1964, he said: We have just lost the South to the Republicans. He wasn't afraid to do the right thing rather than the politically expedient thing. And the Republicans had better shape up and do the same thing. Otherwise, they can have Cardinal Law for their majority leader.
(CROSSTALK)
STEVENS: Well, let me ask a question here.
Do we think that Ted Kennedy should resign because he said positive things about Strom Thurmond? Do we think that John Kerry should resign.
(CROSSTALK)
ELLIS: He didn't say the same positive things. He didn't say, if Strom Thurmond were elected in '48, we wouldn't have all these problems, meaning uppity Negroes.
STEVENS: Called him a great -- that's not what he meant.
JOHNSON: Can you see into the man's heart?
ELLIS: I don't know what's in the man's heart. I also don't know what's in his hair. And that's kind of scary, too.
(CROSSTALK)
JOHNSON: How about this point?
We've spent so much time these past few days talking about race. When we look around the country, see where we live, see where we shop, see where we worship, we don't live together. We don't worship together. And how can we stand up and morally say that racism is wrong, segregation is wrong, when we live these very horrible separate lives? Let's everybody speak up for the issue. ELLIS: That's right. But the separation is not enforced by law and by Ku Kluxers burning people and lynching people.
(CROSSTALK)
SCHLUSSEL: Why didn't Robert Byrd resign?
NEVILLE: Go ahead, Stuart. Go ahead, Stuart.
STEVENS: I've got to say, I think I'm the only Mississippian on the panel here. And Mississippi is actually one of the most integrated states in America now.
JOHNSON: It's a desegregated state. It is not integrated, far from it.
(CROSSTALK)
JOHNSON: There is no place in this country that is integrated.
ELLIS: Well, I've spent a lot of time in Mississippi. I have friends down there.
(CROSSTALK)
NEVILLE: You know what I'm going to do here? Excuse me, panel. Excuse me, panel. I'm going to go to Mississippi right now, where Tina is standing by on the line.
And I want to know what you think about Trent Lott's apology?
CALLER: I don't think he should step down. And I can tell you why. In '68, I have a personal story. And the Black Panther Party beat my mother while she was getting gas. And I had a 1-year-old sister in the car, and they beat my brother. And he committed suicide. Now, it works both ways, people. You need to all wake up. It's not just the whites. It's everybody.
JOHNSON: We're all guilty.
SCHLUSSEL: That's true. It's Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan.
(CROSSTALK)
NEVILLE: Tina, thank you so much for calling. And I'm really sorry that you had to suffer through that horrible situation.
Lynn here visiting us from California, do you think that Trent Lott's apology is enough?
LYNN: First of all, I was a Southern-raised Democrat. I grew up in the South, started out junior high in integrated schools. And I think it was a great thing for our town and for the country.
However -- and I'm now more of a liberal conservative -- I do not think Trent Lott is a good leader. I don't like the man that much. But I think the comments he made at Strom Thurmond's birthday party were off -- just mostly just a joke. I laughed when I heard it.
NEVILLE: So, you don't think he meant anything behind it?
LYNN: No, I don't. But I also don't like the man. But I just want to make sure that...
NEVILLE: I got your point.
JOHNSON: I'll say this. Trent Lott has apologized a lot more than everybody else in this country. When is this country going to apologize for slavery? When is this country going to apologize for Jim Crow? When is this country going to apologize for segregation? We've got a lot of apologizing to do. Get on your knees.
(CROSSTALK)
NEVILLE: All right, listen, you know what? Obviously, there is wrongdoing on many, many sides of the fence. And too bad we can't all just get together.
In the meantime, I want to hear from you about this. It's our "Question of the Day": Should Senator Trent Lott resign his leadership post? Give me a call or e-mail me. And we'll hear what you have to say later in this hour.
And the fear of bioterrorism. The president has a new plan that makes the concern seem very real. But which one scares you more, the threat of a smallpox outbreak or the risks from the vaccine? We'll talk about that next.
Don't go anywhere. TALKBACK LIVE continues in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
NEVILLE (voice-over): The president has a plan: a major smallpox program aimed at protecting Americans against bioterrorism. How serious is the threat?
RICHARD PRESTON, AUTHOR, "THE DEMON IN THE FREEZER": The problem is that we really don't know who has smallpox or what they intend to do with it. But I'm pretty well convinced that Iraq and a number of other countries around the world probably have the virus.
NEVILLE: We'll look at the threat of the deadly disease and the plan of attack against it -- coming up.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: President Bush formally unveiled his strategy to combat bioterrorism today. The vaccination plan is aimed at protecting Americans from the deadly smallpox virus. Half-a-million military personnel will be required to get the inoculation, while health care and emergency workers will be recommended to do so.
The smallpox shots are not recommended for the general public at this time. And the president spoke out about the risks.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: This particular vaccine does involve a small risk of serious health considerations. As commander in chief, I do not believe I can ask others to accept this risk unless I am willing to do the same. Therefore, I will receive the vaccine along with our military.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: OK, Stuart, you've worked with both Presidents Bush. And I would like to ask you what you think of President Bush's plan.
STEVENS: Look, this is dead-solid perfect, the right thing to do. You can't hide your head in the sand about this sort of thing.
There is legitimate risk. He's acknowledged that. But the greater risk is pretending that there's not a risk and not doing anything. This is a president who's not afraid to make tough decisions. And he's going to live by his own decisions. I think every American ought to be proud of him right now.
NEVILLE: Ben Johnson, do you agree with that?
JOHNSON: Let me get this straight. This is the same government that conducted the syphilis experiment in Tuskegee on black men, and they want to give me a smallpox shot? I don't think so.
ELLIS: Yes, you got that right.
SCHLUSSEL: Yes, but the difference is that they're making it voluntary now, except for military personnel.
JOHNSON: Thank you. And I don't volunteer.
SCHLUSSEL: But you know what? When there is a plague, when there is chemical weapons and you need that vaccine, you'll be rushing to your doctor's office with everybody else. And then it will be too late.
JOHNSON: By the time the plagues hits, it will be too late to take a vaccine.
SCHLUSSEL: That's right.
JOHNSON: We're all going to bend over and kiss our tushes goodbye.
SCHLUSSEL: Right, which is why you should do it now.
(CROSSTALK)
NEVILLE: OK, listen, I have Mike here from New Jersey, who's in the military.
And you're going to be required to take the vaccination. Are you worried about this?
MIKE: No, I'm not. We've already started with anthrax for selective personnel. And I think that the president is setting a great example as the commander in chief by leading from the front and being one that will get the vaccine right along with us.
I really think it's naive, especially for military guys, to think that, based upon Bush's axis of evil of Iran, Iraq, and North Korea, that leaders like Saddam Hussein wouldn't hesitate to use some type of weapon of mass destruction or biochemical weapon against military personnel, when he has in fact used it against his own people.
NEVILLE: So, you have to get the vaccination. Would you have your family get the vaccination?
MIKE: Well, I'm single right now. But...
NEVILLE: You still have a mother and a father, right?
MIKE: Right. If...
(LAUGHTER)
MIKE: If my family met the criteria for it, I would encourage it, yes, because we've seen terrorist attacks happen on our own soil, all too close to home. And I don't think that -- it would be naive to think that it couldn't happen again.
NEVILLE: Thank you very much.
ELLIS: Arthel?
NEVILLE: Yes?
ELLIS: Arthel, we haven't seen the evidence that anyone even has weaponized smallpox. I think this is a very hypothetical case. And this is a big overreaction.
What we're talking about doing is introducing smallpox back into a large population. It's been eliminated. And now we're going to reintroduce it. They know that people who get this vaccine can even transmit it to others, yet they're going to give it to nurses, who work around sick people, who are likely to pick up infections.
JOHNSON: Very susceptible to the disease.
ELLIS: We just might get -- we might be spreading smallpox. Then we can blame it on Saddam. And then we can attack him.
STEVENS: Well, that's just not actually true that... NEVILLE: So, then, which is more frightening, Curtis, the risks involved in vaccination or the threat of a possibility of a smallpox outbreak?
ELLIS: Personally, right now, I think the risk is greater than the threat of a smallpox outbreak. I also think this just fits in with the whole Republican Party plan of going back to the '50s.
SCHLUSSEL: Oh, please.
(CROSSTALK)
NEVILLE: How can you say that? You really mean that? Come on, Curtis. You really mean that?
ELLIS: Look, this is old-style thinking. This is just old, way old thinking of: We're going to be prepared, civil defense. We're going to be prepared for something even before we know it could happen.
(CROSSTALK)
NEVILLE: Back in 1948, or 1950s, when you said, you didn't have Saddam Hussein around here acting the way he is. You didn't have Osama bin Laden around here, al Qaeda and stuff. So, come on. It is a different day now, Curtis. You have to admit that.
ELLIS: Show me the evidence. Show me the evidence that
(CROSSTALK)
(BELL RINGING)
NEVILLE: All right, listen, quickly, Ken, you're a doctor. Would you get the vaccination?
ELLIS: I would not.
KEN: At this point, I think I would hold off on getting the vaccination. And I would feel the same way with regard to my family as well.
I think, in a short period of time, we'll have a much greater comfort with giving the vaccine. I think that watching what's going on in Israel right now, where tens of thousands of people have been vaccinated, will give us a little insight into potential side effects, such as encephalitis and some of the other side effects that have been associated with this.
NEVILLE: Bottom line, hold off for a bit?
KEN: Bottom line, I would hold off right now.
NEVILLE: OK, thank you very much.
The bell has rung. I let Mr. Doctor over there, Dr. Ken, speak out.
Listen, Cardinal Law does what his critics have been asking. Now what lies ahead for the Catholic Church?
We'll talk about that when TALKBACK LIVE continues after this break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: And welcome back, everyone. I'm Arthel Neville.
A church in crisis: Boston's Cardinal Law steps down, hoping his decision will help the archdiocese heal and move on. Is that possible?
CNN's Bill Delaney joins us now from Boston.
And, Bill, this is an historic day in Boston. Bring us up to speed.
BILL DELANEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, it is an historic day.
If you had woken up around 5:00 in the morning today, you would have seen one "Boston Herald." By 8:00 or so in the morning, they put out this bulldog edition, this special edition. It graphically shows a degree of the emotion here in Boston and how important this is to everyone in Boston, particularly the two million Catholics here.
Now, the cardinal, by early this morning, had put out a statement that pleaded for forgiveness from the Catholics of Boston.
Let me read it to you in part, Arthel: "To all those who have suffered from my shortcomings and mistakes, I both apologize and from them beg forgiveness. To the bishops, priests, deacons, religious and laity with whom I have been privileged to work in our efforts to fulfill the Church's mission, I express my deep gratitude."
Heartfelt contrition from the archbishop of Boston. The question now: What happens next here in this archdiocese? -- Arthel.
NEVILLE: I got to tell you something, Bill. Some people might ask: How do you know it's heartfelt? You know, come on. You know, seriously, there are families out there, the victims. Is this enough for them?
DELANEY: Well, it's certainly not enough for the victims, who -- at one press conference today, that was graphically clear.
Now, Mitchell Garabedian is a plaintiffs' attorney, who, for many lonely years, many often lonely years, Arthel, has represented alleged and victims of sexual abuse, he held a press conference with victims he's represented for many years.
Listen to what he had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) MITCHELL GARABEDIAN, ATTORNEY FOR ALLEGED VICTIM: Just because Bernard Cardinal Law resigned doesn't mean everything's OK now. There's enormous rot, enormous decay within the Archdiocese of Boston. We've all seen that for years. And now it has to cleanse itself.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DELANEY: You know, Arthel, Mitchell Garabedian, in that press conference, said that this should be just the beginning, that this resignation should be what the Vatican has always feared would happen if an archbishop of Cardinal Law's stature resigned, that it would only be the beginning, that the house of cards would then fall, that many other archbishops with similar accusations against them all over the United States would have to resign now, too, nothing the Vatican feared more than that.
Mitchell Garabedian called for it today. Look for tremendous pressure on other dioceses around the country now, now that the most senior prelate in the United States has resigned.
NEVILLE: Bill Delaney, thank you very much for that report.
And do you think Cardinal Law should face criminal charges for allegedly looking the other way in the abuse scandal? I definitely want to hear from you.
We'll also let you weigh in on the comments made by Senator Trent Lott. What do you think? Should Senator Trent Lott resign his leadership post? Your e-mails are coming up after the break.
Don't go anywhere.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(NEWS ALERT)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRISTOPHER FULCHINO, ALLEGED SEX ABUSE VICTIM: I'll start to heal myself, and all these people -- (UNINTELLIGIBLE) -- and help people to find the strength to come out and be strong and don't be afraid. Just like the Fords (ph), just don't be afraid, because it just gets better, and you'll have so much strength from people around you, like my dad, like Eric (ph). And every day gets easier for you, and I'm glad that the cardinal did resign. I'm glad that this day has finally come.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: Right now, we're talking about the resignation of Boston's Cardinal Law. And Stuart, was the resignation the right move?
STEVENS: Well, it is. I don't think he went far enough. You know he's still a priest in good standing. In fact, is in line to possibly be the next pope.
What this is, there's two things here. It's a PR problem. And what he did addresses is a PR problem, but it's a criminal problem. And I think that it would be terrible if any action he took was seen as precluding criminal action that some of these victims are taking, and I don't think it should.
NEVILLE: So Debbie, what do you think? Do you think all of his rights should be taken away from him?
SCHLUSSEL: Well, certainly, when you are a religious leader and you have children under your charge, or under those under your charge and you look the other way, all of your rights should be taken away. These are supposed to be men of god and men of the cloth, and when you look the other way, when children are being harmed in this most disgusting way, you need to face your maker and you need to face justice.
NEVILLE: I want to go to Virginia now, where Edith (ph) is standing by on the phone And asking you, is this resignation enough, in your opinion?
EDITH: No, it is not enough in my opinion. In my opinion, he should not only resign, he should go to jail. In fact, as far as I'm concerned, he harbored fugitives, felons; he's harbored a host of evil. He's harbored child molesters, pedophiles, you name it. Basically, he nourished them under the House of god. He did.
NEVILLE: Edith (ph), thank you so much for calling in. Lane (ph) here in the audience from Washington, should Cardinal Law be held criminally accountable?
LANE: He should have been held accountable months ago when the allegations first came out. I mean, the Catholic Church has been -- I'm a Catholic, and it's been embarrassing for months and months and months on this. And whether you actually commit the crime or you look away and allow that person to have done it, to continue move on it, it's just as bad.
It should have happened months ago. I'm glad to see that it finally took effect today.
NEVILLE: OK, thank you very much. But Curtis, as we say so, he resigned, but he still has a lot of rights, Cardinal Law we're talking about here. Curtis, what do you think about that? Should he be stripped of all rights?
ELLIS: Well, that's up to the church hierarchy and any criminal charges that may be brought against him. What we have to do is we have to investigate possible cover-up, all of the way they were switching priests around when they knew they were going to do it again and molest more children. I mean, this is a terrible thing. And if they push this all the way, maybe the church will be charge chaed as a Rico (ph) organization.
I mean, I'm serious here. This is a conspiracy to cover up, to protect child abusers. This is not a good picture. For years, many of us in the media have been talking about these kind of activities going on. Now it's coming to light.
NEVILLE: Hang on. Curtis and Debbie, I'd like you to answer this, too. Because, indeed, Law's not the only church official leader who looked the other way. Do you think other heads will roll?
ELLIS: I think so.
SCHLUSSEL: Other heads should roll, because this is not a cover- up of one person. One person could not have looked the other way with all this going on and it not be discovered. This is money, people. I'm not a Catholic, but I'm a religious person. And this has brought down a bad cover on all of us who are religious. And all of these people should face justice.
You know, we're down on a lot of corporate CEOs. These people are corporate CEOs and vice presidents, so to speak, in their own parishes, in their own archdiocese areas, and they should face the same thing that corporate CEOs face. And not only that, but if I did this at a corporation, it would be considered misconduct, and I would lose my pension as well as my job. So should he.
NEVILLE: OK. Hang on, though, Ben, because I have an e-mail coming through I want to share with everybody now. Let's pop it up there. Jay in Alabama.
"The fish rots from the head down. Cardinal Law has stepped down from his post. So should many others, including the pope. It's time for massive changes in the Catholic Church. Ben, do you agree with that e-mail?
JOHNSON: Yes, I definitely agree. And you should remember that the most despised person inside any prison by the inmates is a pedophile. So it's going to be interesting to see what happens when Cardinal Law does go to prison and he meets up with all of those brothers.
NEVILLE: Well, we don't know that. If he goes to prison. Dorie (ph), you live in Boston, a couple of blocks away from the archdiocese. How has this affected you and your family, and do you think that this resignation is enough? You felt this.
DORIE: I feel that the cardinal really needs to be held accountable, and, as I said previously, I'm tired of driving my little children by the archdiocese with signs outside that say, "Bernie the pimp needs to go."
NEVILLE: Ben, you know, you started touching on something. So, I ask you, do you think that Cardinal Law should face criminal charges?
JOHNSON: He should face criminal charges, along with so many others in the Catholic Church. If somebody like me can go to prison, the cardinal can go to prison. He'll look awfully nice in those silver bracelets. NEVILLE: OK. Still to come, growing concerns about weapons of mass destruction in the three so-called axis of evil nations. And we're not talking about Iraq. We'll explain when we come back.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: And welcome back, everyone. I'm Arthel Neville. Later this hour, I'll take your calls and e-mails on our question of the day, which is: Should Trent Lott resign his leadership post?
OK. Right now, though, the White House is dealing with several threats today. Officials say there are apparent holes in Iraq's U.N. weapons declaration. North Korea is upping the stakes, by claiming it will reactivate nuclear facilities. And if that all wasn't enough, U.S. officials now say there is evidence that Iran may be building nuclear facilities capable of producing weapons.
What do we make's all this? I mean, Curtis Ellis, which is the bigger threat right now, Iraq, North Korea or Iran?
ELLIS: Gee, that's a real tough one.
NEVILLE: Yeah.
ELLIS: I think Iran and North Korea are the bigger threats to this administration, because they want us to believe that there's a military solution. But North Korea and Iran show us that we'll have to use diplomacy and something beyond bombers if we want to deal with that complex world out there. We can't attack North Korea, because they'll just start lobbing artillery shells into downtown Seoul. So we've got to talk to them.
NEVILLE: But Curtis, will they go for diplomacy?
ELLIS: Look, in the case of Iraq, we're saying they're buying weapons of mass destruction. They can't get them unless somebody sells them to them. Why don't we start putting pressure on bank accounts, on these big industrial corporations that are selling this stuff? There are other ways to deal with problems than just bombs. Hey, gang, let's wake up.
SCHLUSSEL: Nobody's saying we're going to attack these countries. But in the case of Iran, for example your side of the ideological line, Jimmy Carter was the one that removed the shah and created all the problems that we have there.
ELLIS: Yeah, and it was Eisenhower who removed (UNINTELLIGIBLE) and put this guy in. So it's back on you, OK?
SCHLUSSEL: And now we have the son of the shah in Virginia, and this administration is actually working to try and help put him back into power. That is diplomacy.
NEVILLE: So what's your point, Debbie? SCHLUSSEL: Well, nobody's saying -- nobody in the Bush administration is saying we're going to attack those countries. But Iraq is completely different, it is impossible. We've tried diplomacy since the Gulf War. He signed an agreement, he didn't abide by it, and he has gassed his own people. There is no diplomacy possible.
(CROSSTALK)
ELLIS: And Donald Rumsfeld was in Baghdad when he gassed his own people and didn't say anything about it.
STEVENS: Look, let me make a point. I think it's very important to realize that what we're seeing in Iran and what we're hearing about Iran, makes the case for action in Iraq all the stronger. Because the problem is, Iraq is in the process of developing nuclear weapons, they've admitted. It's just a question of when.
And once they have nuclear weapons, the likelihood of a conflict again between Iraq and Iran becoming a nuclear conflict, a nuclear holocaust, this is extraordinary. The danger isn't that Iraq is going to nuke San Diego. The danger is that Iraq is going to nuke Iran, is going to nuke Tel Aviv. And then you're off to the races.
You have a nuclear catastrophe in the Middle East. And what the president is doing exactly with U.N. support, unanimous Security Council support, exactly the right course of action.
ELLIS: And we have the same problem with Pakistan and India. They both now have nuclear weapons and they could start nuking each other. I agree with you on this point. We do have to do something to stop these countries from getting nuclear weapons and other kinds of horrible weapons.
SCHLUSSEL: Well, part...
ELLIS: And we have to use the U.N. to do it. And to adopt this attitude that we're going to preempt everything with war, that's not the way it works.
(CROSSTALK)
NEVILLE: Hang on for me, Debbie, Stuart. Hang on for me, because right now I'm going to California. Clinan (ph), I think, is on the phone. Do you have a solution?
CLINAN: I'm not going to have a solution. First of all, I want to say hi to Mr. Johnson. I'm originally from Huntsville, Alabama and I'm familiar with his work.
NEVILLE: All right. That's good. Get to the point, though.
CLINAN: All right. Second of all, the point I wanted to make was, out of all the countries that are involved, the one that concerns me the most is Iraq, because we have been trying to get through to Saddam Hussein and trying to get in and inspect his weapons, storehouses. And he hasn't been cooperative, which we think that he's hiding something. And whatever he's hiding, I'm quite sure it has no good, as far as the United States and other countries, that he's involved with.
SCHLUSSEL: That's true. And part of the problem with Pakistan -- Pakistan was mentioned -- is that we've given Pakistan a free pass. And we know that Pakistan, their minister Kan (ph) gave North Korea the technology to make the nuclear weapons. And we've given them a free pass. We shouldn't do that.
Pakistan is not exactly our friend. They night be in the war against Afghanistan, but they may have actually helped Osama bin Laden leave.
ELLIS: Yeah, that's right.
JOHNSON: Let's do this (UNINTELLIGIBLE) mom and dad would do it.
ELLIS: But I thought they were either with us or against us. How does that work now, Debbie?
SCHLUSSEL: Well, I don't know. You seem to be with Jimmy Carter, who removed the shah from Iran and created the mess we have there now with the fundamentalist Islamic theocracy. So how does that work?
ELLIS: Well, Jimmy Carter also started backing the fundamentalists who attacked the Soviet Union and Afghanistan. So I don't know where we're at. And I guess you're with Eisenhower...
(CROSSTALK)
NEVILLE: OK, guys. I'm going to keep it right here, 2002, for a second here.
STEVENS: Let me just -- can I just make one point here? And that is, what the administration talks about often is what the world in the Middle East will be like in a post-Saddam world. And I think the idea of a more reasonable regime, possibly even something of a democracy in power in Iraq, when you start thinking about Iran, you start to think how it could change the entire Middle East.
It's an extraordinarily positive development that could happen here if we allow it to happen and if we take action. There's sort of this idea out there that a lot of people have that there's some sort of daddy figure, be it the U.N. or somebody else, and someone else is going to take care of this problem.
Someone has to lead. And the United States now is the only superpower, but we're doing it the right way. We have unanimous Security Council support. I mean, Syria -- Syria -- is backing us here. So I can't think this idea that we're out there as the Lone Ranger really makes much sense.
NEVILLE: OK, listen...
ELLIST: Well, part of leading -- may I say something -- part of leading is supplying some positive reinforcement. Maybe helping with the hospitals and the healthcare of all those dying Iraqi children. Then we'll have more support within Iraq. And then they'll overthrow Saddam on their own.
SCHLUSSEL: Oh please. They can help with those hospitals themselves. But Saddam Hussein is not helping his own people. We can't make him do that. Please, that's ridiculous.
NEVILLE: All right, Debbie. Good point. Listen, we're going to Alabama here. Edra (ph) is on the line. Go ahead, Edra (ph).
EDRA: Yes. I think that North Korea is a greater threat than Iraq. And I wish that we would go after them more than we are doing Iraq, because we know that North Korea is not our friend.
NEVILLE: OK. Thank you so much for calling in. And Ben, I want to ask this question. Listen, one administration official, regarding Iraq's omissions to the dossier, said that it's "big enough to drive a tank through." Now, will this give President Bush a reason to go to war?
JOHNSON: President Bush doesn't need much of a reason to go to war. What I don't really understand, Saddam Hussein has told us time and time again, I have no weapons of mass destruction. What weapons? Where are they? Why the heck did he have to have a 12,000 page report if he doesn't have any weapons? All he had do was give a one-page sheet and he's done.
NEVILLE: OK. And there's the bell. Coming up: news flashes from across the nation, including a controversial television program that puts its guests under a surgical knife. Plus, news from the sports world has some people crying foul. Don't go anywhere. TALKBACK LIVE continues after this break.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: It is time for our Free-For-All Flash Round. First up, actor Sean Penn says he wants to see for himself what Iraq is up to. He's in Baghdad hoping to gain insight on what he called a frightening conflict. Penn accuses President Bush of stifling debate over Iraq. Is he right, Ben?
JOHNSON: Yes, he's right. And we can only hope that they keep him.
NEVILLE: Stuart.
STEVENS: Oh, you know, Sean Penn's heart led him to Madonna, and now it's leading him to Saddam. I hope he has better results with this case.
NEVILLE: Debbie.
SCHLUSSEL: No way. Mr. Spicoli (ph) has spent too much time smoking pot. Stay out of our politics. Keep acting.
NEVILLE: Curtis.
ELLIS: Yeah, he's right. I encourage everyone to do their own investigation and not just accept the government's line on what we should be thinking about something like war.
NEVILLE: OK. Up next, are things getting rosier for Pete Rose? He's trying to convince baseball Commissioner Bud Selig that he deserves to be reinstated into Major League Baseball. Rose agreed to a lifetime ban in 1989 after a gambling investigation. Should Rose be reinstated, Ben?
JOHNSON: Gambling? There is no gambling in baseball.
NEVILLE: Stuart.
STEVENS: I think that if Bernie (ph) Law can remain a priest, I think we ought to put Pete Rose in the hall of fame. You bet. He was a heck of a player.
NEVILLE: Debbie.
SCHLUSSEL: If baseball players can use steroids and O.J. and Lawrence Taylor (ph) can be in the football pro hall of fame, let Pete Rose back in and let him be in the baseball hall of fame.
NEVILLE: Curtis.
ELLIS: Yeah, lift the ban and then let the hall of famer's vote if they want him. Go ahead.
NEVILLE: All right. Well, next up, is being number one always best? High school basketball player Lebron James (ph) made his national TV debut last night when his high school game was broadcast on ESPN II. He's expected to be the number one NBA draft pick next year. Is drafting a high-schooler a good thing, Ben?
JOHNSON: Yes, but only if he eats all his spinach and does his homework before he goes to the draft.
NEVILLE: All right -- Stuart.
STEVENS: Look, the problem here is that they ought to pay college athletes. They make millions of dollars for colleges. If they did that, then you wouldn't have a guy like having to go into the NBA just to survive.
NEVILLE: Good point -- Debbie.
SCHLUSSEL: Three cheers for Lebron (ph) and people like Kobe Bryant, who skipped college and let us, the consumers, pay for his job, rather than the taxpayers funding him for a phony college education.
NEVILLE: Curtis. ELLIS: Yeah, let him go into the NBA. I'm really not worried about him missing out on a great education on a college sports scholarship.
NEVILLE: Can there be another Kobe Bryant? I don't know. I'm biased. Anyway, this guy looks good.
Listen, up next, an ABC special this week transformed three people from plain to polished. Wow, look at that. "Extreme Makeover" participants got new hair, new clothes, as usual. But the extreme part was more than seven hours of plastic surgery. Plus some intense dental work. Is this raising the bar of beauty too far, Ben?
JOHNSON: Yes. Can we let all the women have that?
NEVILLE: All right. Quickly, Stuart.
STEVENS: Look, if supermodels can benefit from plastic surgery, we all can. I think I'd probably support mandatory plastic surgery. Just put it under Medicare.
NEVILLE: Oh, I'm out of time. Stuart Stevens, Ben Johnson, Curtis Ellis and Debbie Sclussel, thank you so much for joining me.
Just ahead, your e-mails. Senator Trent Lott faces lots of controversy, but is it enough for him to resign? What do you think? We'll talk about that after the break.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: All right, everybody. Welcome back. Let's go straight to our e-mail question. Should Senator Trent Lott resign his leadership post? Our viewers aren't shy about sharing their views. And we're going to Oregon, where Clint (ph) is on the phone. And your answer, sir.
CLINT: Yeah, I think this is just a pure political strategy at this point, because if the Democrats had done better in the midterm elections, I think they would have...
NEVILLE: Should he resign, sir, yes or no?
CLINT: No.
NEVILLE: OK, thank you so much for calling. An e-mail now coming through. It is from Lula. "Morally, Lott should resign, but as a Democrat, I would love to see him keep his job. This would certainly hurt the Republican Party. That is the only reason they are uptight about his statement." Thank you, Lula.
Aaron (ph), should he resign?
AARON: No, he shouldn't. I think that if Bill Clinton can get away with what he did in office, this whole Trent Lott deal seems a little insignificant.
NEVILLE: Thank you very much, Aaron (ph). I think we have time for one more e-mail. Let's share that with everybody right now. From Jane in Dallas, Texas -- go Big D -- "I was in college in the south in the early 1960s, and I was in favor of integration. Trent Lott does not have an excuse."
That is all the time we have for today's show. We thank you so much for watching. I'm Arthel Neville. Don't forget, CNN will bring you Trent Lott's news conference live today at 5:00 PM Eastern, 2:00 Pacific. We will be back Monday with another edition of TALKBACK LIVE. And I will see you tomorrow morning. I will be right here on CNN from 7:00 AM to 10:00 AM Eastern Time. I'll see you then.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
|
