|
CNN TALKBACK LIVE
Trent Lott Tries to Salvage Leadership Role; Does Sexual Abuse Justify Murder?
Aired December 17, 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.
ARTHEL NEVILLE, HOST: Hello, everyone. Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Arthel Neville.
Well, it's an uphill battle for incoming Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott. Last night on BET, Lott again tried to salvage his leadership role. We'll listen to some of that. And I want to know if you think the outrage over Lott's comments is about racial dialogue or a political witch hunt.
Then stay tuned, because a jury has acquitted a man of attempted murder after he admitted to shooting his former priest. Does alleged sexual abuse justify an attack?
And would you be offended by a Christmas play titled "Jesus Has Two Mommies"? That lady right there on the screen, by the way, is playing God, I'm told. OK, we'll check this out. And we're going to have to hear from you on this one.
All right, we're going to begin now with Senator Trent Lott's endless round of apologies. Last night's mea culpa on BET apparently didn't win him much support, even though he refused to make excuses for his comments at Strom Thurmond's birthday party.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. TRENT LOTT (R-MS), MINORITY LEADER: The important thing is to recognize the hurt that I caused and ask for forgiveness and find a way to turn this into a positive thing and try to make amends for what I've said and for what others have said and done over the years. I'm looking for this to be not only an opportunity for redemption, but to do something about it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: OK, now, some who watched the BET interview say the apologies didn't sound like they came from the heart and insist Lott should lose his Senate leadership position.
We're getting congressional reaction. And first up is Georgia Congressman Bob Barr. And we want to welcome him to the show.
Listen, the pressure is mounting for Lott to resign. What should he do? REP. BOB BARR (R), GEORGIA: I think that, for the good of the country and the good of the party, he ought to. He certainly has had a very distinguished career in the United States Senate. He has, hopefully, many years ahead of him as a distinguished senator in the Senate from the state of Mississippi.
And I believe he truly can do a lot of great things for Mississippi and the country. But, in terms of a leadership position, no, I think he -- no matter what he says, no matter how many times he apologizes, the damage has been done. And I don't think that he can repair it to the point that he could be effective.
NEVILLE: Be effective. That's what I was going to ask you, yes.
(CROSSTALK)
BARR: And that's the point of being in a leadership position, is to move an agenda forward.
NEVILLE: Sure.
Now, of course, much has been made of Senator Lott's voting record. And we want to listen to what he said last night about his vote against the Martin Luther King holiday.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LOTT: I'm not sure we in America -- certainly not white America and the people in the South -- fully understood who this man was, the impact he was having on the fabric of this country.
ED GORDON, BET: But you certainly understood it by the time that vote came up, Senator. You knew who Dr. King was at that point.
LOTT: I did, but I've learned a lot more since then, and I want to make this point clearly. I have a high appreciation for him being a man of peace, a man that was for nonviolence, a man that did change this country. I made a mistake, and I now would vote now for Martin Luther King holiday.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: I got to tell you, I think that's ridiculous that he would say that, at the time of the vote in 1983, he wasn't really aware of who Dr. Martin Luther King was.
BARR: Well, it doesn't ring in a way that makes sense, you're right, because, if that were something that had taken place in 1960 or '61 or even maybe in the mid-'60s, perhaps, in some communities -- maybe they didn't have TV or radios. I don't know. But, no, it doesn't really ring in a way that makes sense.
NEVILLE: So, does it seem that Senator Lott is trying to change his position on all race-related issues because of the pressure now?
BARR: This is the problem, Arthel. Even if you disagree with somebody, if they can articulate a principled reason, you can respect them. And Senator Lott has voted against, for example, certain affirmative action programs. And he has done so based on arguments that he's articulated that he doesn't believe this is the best way to move the country forward. Now, all of a sudden, he says: Oh, I'm for that.
NEVILLE: He says he practices it, too, because he's hired people, black people on his staff.
BARR: Yes. And I'm sure he has.
But there's a difference between that and having a principled stand for or against a program. And you don't like to see people all of a sudden change and say: Oh, yes, I'm for that. It appears as if that's a position that is being taken out of expediency, not principle.
NEVILLE: OK, so, bottom line, is this about race or politics?
BARR: I think it's about -- different aspects of it are about different things.
At the core, it is about race. It raises legitimate questions about race in America. Certainly, there are politics involved. There are those who are taking advantage of this on both the Republican and the Democrat side to, I think somebody was quoted, to beat up on Trent Lott like a pinata. But, by and large, this is a very legitimate debate. And the quicker it can get resolved, in terms of the Republican agenda, which is the party that I belong to, the better.
NEVILLE: Listen, I know you have to run. Thank you so much for your time. Good to see you right here on TALKBACK LIVE.
BARR: Always a pleasure. Happy holidays.
NEVILLE: Happy holidays. Thank you very much.
BARR: Thank you.
NEVILLE: OK.
And with us now is California Congresswoman Maxine Waters.
We want to welcome you to the show as well. Nice to see you again.
REP. MAXINE WATERS (D), CALIFORNIA: Nice to see you. Thank you.
NEVILLE: Well, apology accepted?
WATERS: Absolutely not.
You know, Bob Barr and I have not agreed on a lot of things when he served in the Congress of the United States. But we certainly agree on this today. It's time for Trent Lott to step down. I understand that his colleagues have come together and they're talking about perhaps holding an election. But he need not put the Senate through it. He need not put us all through it.
His explanation just did not ring true. His history has been consistent. He sounded last night like the typical politician who thinks he can talk his way out of anything. It doesn't work. He doesn't have credibility. And I think that he is, indeed, defining what is wrong with politics today. He is, indeed, the face of those politicians and those efforts that have excluded people who have just, well, literally, marginalized and discriminated against African- Americans in this country. It's time for him to go.
I don't know what else he can say. He's apologized and he's tried it several times. But it still does not ring true.
NEVILLE: When you say it's time for him to go, step down as leader or go completely, bye-bye, go on out of there?
WATERS: Step down as leader.
NEVILLE: OK.
WATERS: I think that's something that can be decided by his colleagues. The people who elect him can decide whether or not they want to send him back.
But I don't expect his colleagues, Democrat or Republican, to support someone who they claim to disagree with. It's time for the senators in the United States Senate to decide whether or not that's the kind of leader that should be helping to make and direct and lead public policy for this country.
NEVILLE: Now, of course, Senator Lott's entire record is now under scrutiny. And, right now, we're going to take a look at another part of this interview he did with Ed Gordon on BET.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GORDON: What about affirmative action?
LOTT: I'm for that. I think you should reach out to people. . .
GORDON: Across the board?
LOTT: Absolutely across the board.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: OK, now, Lott voted against affirmative action. Do you believe he has sincerely changed his views or is he simply succumbing to pressure?
WATERS: Well, as a matter of fact, I think he did not tell the truth last night. He is not for affirmative action. He's never, ever voted in any way to show his support for affirmative action. He acted last night as if he really didn't understand what it was, when he started to talk about he hired someone of color.
NEVILLE: Correct. Correct.
WATERS: That certainly seemed to display a lack of understanding about what affirmative action really is. And I think that, if he is queried about it today, that he will say something different. I don't think he told the truth about being for affirmative action last evening.
NEVILLE: So, Representative John Lewis, a fellow Democrat, and a fellow member of the Congressional Black Caucus, here is what Representative Lewis is saying about Senator Lott.
He says: "I believe his apology is sincere. And I accept his apology. The ability to forgive, to heal and come together for the common good is very much consistent with the philosophy of nonviolence of the civil rights movement."
So is he right?
WATERS: Oh, he has a right to his opinion. And John Lewis is a respected individual, who certainly paid his dues in the civil rights movement.
But I think that what he's attempting to do now is a day late and a dollar short. I don't think that it's time to try and have Trent Lott change who he is. It's a little bit late for that in terms of leadership. If John Lewis wants him to go with him to someplace in the South and walk across the Edmund Pettus Bridge, fine. He should do that. And he can do that. I don't happen to share the same opinion. I want him to step down.
(CROSSTALK)
NEVILLE: How do you really feel, Congresswoman Waters?
(LAUGHTER)
NEVILLE: Let me get to this final question which is, is this about ration relations or politics at this point?
WATERS: It's about all of that. And, you know, we are entering into a debate on race that's long overdo.
We have some people speculating that, if there is a censure motion, that they may even amend it to include Senator Byrd. My response to that is, let the debate begin and let the chips fall where they may. It's time for us to have a real discussion about race and try and resolve this in America. It has gone on undercover for too long, with people disliking, hating, maligning. It's time for us to get it all out and let's deal with it.
NEVILLE: And perhaps this could actually be the catalyst for the start of those types of dialogues.
WATERS: This could be catalyst. This certainly could be catalyst for it.
NEVILLE: Great.
Well, Congresswoman Maxine Waters, always good to see you. Thank you so much for joining us. Happy holidays.
WATERS: You're certainly welcome.
NEVILLE: OK, is the attack on Trent Lott motivated by racial outrage or political gain? That's our "Question of the Day." And our panel will tackle it right after this.
TALKBACK LIVE continues in a moment. Stay right there.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
NEVILLE: (voice-over): Today on TALKBACK LIVE: Can Trent Lott find forgiveness?
LOTT: I'm now trying to find a way to deal with the understandable hurt that I've caused. You can say it was innocent, but it was insensitive, at the very least, and repugnant, frankly.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think that it's going to be hard to change those who see him as the devil and put wings on him by virtue of what he said last night.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: Racial dialogue or political witch hunt?
You decide, as TALKBACK LIVE continues.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: And welcome back, everyone. I'm Arthel Neville.
We're talking about whether Senator Trent Lott is the object of a political witch hunt.
Here to talk about it is Armstrong Williams, host of the syndicated show "The Right Side with Armstrong Williams." He once worked for Strom Thurmond and attended the senator's 100th birthday party. Carlos Watson is a former journalist and attorney. He's worked with several Democratic candidates, as well as former Democratic National Chairman Ron Brown.
Welcome to both of you.
Armstrong, you're up first.
If you're in the Republican caucus room on January 6, would you vote Lott out or in?
ARMSTRONG WILLIAMS, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: I would vote him out. No question.
You know, I was there. And we did not have to wait for the reaction from the national media. You know, it's interesting, Arthel. When the senator mentioned that Mississippi was one of four states that voted for the senator, the applause sort of dissipated. There was a lot of applause. And you can tell, as a speaker, when you probably have said something that didn't really register with the audience. Then you have to quickly come back with something.
And then he went on to say, because, Senator, we would not have many of the problems that we have today. And when he said that, there was just a deafness in the room. There was no applause. People turned red-faced. I burst out. I said, "God, that's a scary thought." I was upset. I left the room. And then the next day, I started writing my column, which was Friday, finished it on Monday, and sent it out, my syndicated column.
But, here we are now, he's gone on this apology tour. I accept his apology. I believe in forgiveness. I respect what Congressman Lewis said. But we can have that, but, also, I can support Maxine Waters in the fact that he does not need to be the Senate majority leader, not at this time. He needs to go. He has some soul-searching that he has to do. I felt that he was struggling. At least the man was trying to get it right.
And there are a lot of people who come from that era who harbor some of those feelings. I believe that the man spoke from the heart. I believe he was sincere. But what he had to realize at that moment: Hey, this is not right in 2002. Strom Thurmond changed. I haven't.
Now is the time, but not as Senate majority leader, as a United States senator.
NEVILLE: So, do you think maybe he'll change from this point forward?
WILLIAMS: I absolutely believe that he can change. I absolutely believe that. I think he's started on the road of recovery. No question.
NEVILLE: So, Carlos, you were a chief of staff for a congressman. What would you tell Lott to do at this point?
CARLOS WATSON, ATTORNEY: Actually, it was for a member of the Florida legislature.
But I think Trent Lott is going to make a dramatic mistake and the Republican Party is going to make a significant mistake if they wait until January the 6th. In fact, having spoken to a number of people on Capitol Hill today, I expect that Trent Lott will announce his resignation on Christmas Eve or the day after Christmas, hoping to lose it in the news cycle there. I don't think, at this point, there's any way that the White House or Senate leaders will allow him to wait until January 6. Really, too much damage has been done at this point, Arthel.
NEVILLE: But he'll still stay in the Senate, though, of course, right?
WATSON: I think there's a real question about that. Today, his hometown newspaper announced that they're calling for his resignation. I think it's significant that Bob Barr, Armstrong Williams, Don Nickles, and a host of others who traditionally are not on the side of more progressive causes, if you will, have come out and very vocally and unequivocally said that he needs to step down. So, I would not be surprised...
WILLIAMS: Step down as majority leader, not from the U.S. Senate. Let us be clear here.
WATSON: Well, Armstrong, I think, to be really clear, I think often these things take on a life of their own.
As we saw with Bob Packwood, although he was not the majority leader, I think often, once people really start to look back at the record and see that there's not just one example, but multiple examples of what Lott himself calls repugnant behavior, I think the reality is, he ultimately may be forced to step aside.
WILLIAMS: Listen, I think that is the decision of the people of the state of Mississippi. This is still a democracy.
(CROSSTALK)
WILLIAMS: Well, Senator Byrd is still in the United States Senate. He's still in the Senate.
WATSON: Hang on one second.
WILLIAMS: The Republican Party is not the only party that has people with this ideology. The Democratic Party has its share also. Let us be principled here.
WATSON: Armstrong, I think what you're saying is fair, but here is what I think is interesting.
WILLIAMS: I don't want you to get carried away.
WATSON: None of us want to get carried away.
But what I think is really interesting here is, as Maxine Waters said, I say let the chips fall where they may. I say, to the extent that people have a history, like Trent Lott, of repeatedly, not once, not twice, but repeatedly doing the wrong thing as it relates to race and as it relates to making sure that everyone has an opportunity, I think it's critical that they be called to task, too.
So, yes, Trent Lott will go as Senate majority leader before the year is out. Yes, I think that Trent Lott will not be in the Senate for his full term. Yes, I think that it's a difficult time right now for him to do it...
WILLIAMS: You're hopeful.
WATSON: ... because there's a Democratic governor in Mississippi.
But I tell you what. To the extent that he continues to be an albatross around the neck of Republicans, Armstrong, I guarantee you, you'll have a column out before the end of 2003 calling for him to step aside.
WILLIAMS: I would never call -- that is for the people of Mississippi to decide.
NEVILLE: All right, Armstrong, I have to take a break right now.
We're going to continue this in a minute. And we're going to add two new members to our panel.
And Jabar (ph) in Nevada, don't go anywhere. I'm going to get your phone call when we come back.
And later this hour: A controversial Christmas play proclaims "Jesus Has Two Mommies." What's the story there? Stay tuned and you'll hear about it.
Don't go anywhere. TALKBACK LIVE continues after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: And welcome back, everyone. I'm Arthel Neville.
Joining us now is Greg Knapp. He is host of "The Greg Knapp Show" on KLIF Radio in Dallas. And Victoria Jones is a host with Talk Radio News Service.
Hello to both of you.
All right, Greg, are Lott's comments now being used by the Democrats for political gain?
GREG KNAPP, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Well, there's a lot of stories here here.
Lott absolutely said unbelievable things that you cannot forgive. He should step down as leader. He has gotten to a point where he's not going to help the party. And the Democrats are going to use him to paint the entire Republican Party as a racist party. That's one story and there's no excusing it. The second side is, obviously, they've gone overboard now and the Democrats are using it for political gain. And they will continue to do so, which is one of the reasons he's ineffective as the leader.
But the irony here is, of course, that the Republican Party is the party of Lincoln, ended slavery, passed the Civil Rights Amendment, started affirmative action back before it was a quota system, is the party that's going to help inner-city youth, black and white, get out of failing schools with school choice, did welfare reform that has helped more poor black and white family get out of generational welfare than any other thing that's been done in generations.
It's the party that is pushing all the things going to help all white and black Americans, including privatizing Social Security that lets a black man, whose average life expectancy is 67, 68, pass on all the money he put into Social Security to his heirs, whereas the regular Social Security system doesn't do it.
So, we lose all of that with Trent Lott's ridiculous comments. He should step down. He should do it on his own before January 6.
NEVILLE: But perhaps those comments will actually be the catalyst for these types of conversations that need to take place.
KNAPP: I'm sorry? Say it again, Arthel.
I'm going to go to Nevada right now, where Jabar is standing by.
Jabar, what do you think about this story? Should Senator Trent Lott step down?
CALLER: Well, it's just a matter of opinion. It depends on how you look at it.
I honestly felt I was very disappointed in what he had to say last night, because of, you check the man's record. I mean, if it was a mistake, what he said, I understand. But to go back and look at everything that he has voted on and what he stands for, it's consistent with what he's saying.
NEVILLE: So Jabar, did you the BET interview helped Lott or hurt him?
CALLER: I think it hurt him. I would have liked to see Trent Lott, honestly, keep it real. Obviously, you feel the way you feel. You grew up in Mississippi. I don't know how old he is, 60-plus, I do believe. I could kind of understand having the kind of attitude that he has, given the climate in which he came up in.
But to get on TV and to do a 360-degrees turn to say that, oh, now you're for affirmative action, oh, now you're for a Martin Luther King holiday, I mean...
NEVILLE: Right. Listen, Jabar, I understand your passion. I have to clip you, though, because I've got to go to Victoria Jones and ask her if she thinks there is anything that Lott can do to get out of this hole.
VICTORIA JONES, TALK RADIO NEWS SERVICE: Yes. He can resign. And he can resign completely and totally and just go. That is the best thing for him and it's the best thing for his party. And it's astonishing to me that he hasn't done it so far. This is a really interesting phase we're in, where people don't step down, like Harvey Pitt should have stepped down from the SEC. And I think he's going to be forced to do that. But it would be much more noble a gesture if he said: You know what? I'm causing too much trouble, I'm getting out of here and I'm going to take time and I'm going to rethink my life. And that's what he should do.
KNAPP: Wait a second. Trent Lott should totally resign, when you have Robert Byrd, who is a former KKK member
(CROSSTALK)
KNAPP: ... a recruiter, a man who said the N-word a year and a half ago on Fox News?
JONES: It is fascinating to me how the Republican talking point memo is, if we're going to go after Lott, let's go after Byrd. Let's go after Byrd. I have no problem with that.
(CROSSTALK)
KNAPP: If you bring up a former KKK member, it's a talking point memo.
JONES: Yes, that's exactly what it is.
(CROSSTALK)
KNAPP: How about Gephardt talking to the same CCC in the '80s? How about Louis Farrakhan? How about Jesse Jackson?
(CROSSTALK)
NEVILLE: All right, listen, Greg and Victoria, thanks for the lively discussion.
JONES: I didn't say that. I agree. Let the chips fall where they may. And I think that's frightening to you.
KNAPP: No, it's not at all. Absolutely. Bring it on.
NEVILLE: And somebody's trying to jump in. I think it's Carlos.
Go ahead.
WATSON: Arthel, can I add something?
NEVILLE: Absolutely.
WATSON: One of the really interesting stories, I think, that has come out of this is how much not only African-Americans, but white Americans, Latinos, Asians, everybody really has come to a new consensus as it relates to race and what's acceptable here.
This same incident 10, 20, 30 years ago would have divided the country pretty clearly. But I've got to say that one of the things that makes me excited about being an American, excited about being here in the early 21st century is that everybody, that Greg Knapp, that Victoria Jones, that Armstrong Williams, that Carlos Watson, that people across the aisle have come together to say it's not acceptable.
And I think, even as we become upset over what Trent Lott did, I think, at some level, we also have to celebrate the fact that there is a new consensus, a new moral consensus, really, that has emerged over the last 10 or 15 years.
KNAPP: But there's one other thing here that I have to throw out there, is this idea that, if you vote a certain way, it can only be because you're racist. If you are against the quota of affirmative action, which is what it's turned into in many states, somehow you're racist, instead of someone who is looking to treat everyone equally. And that is the problem with what Trent Lott did.
(CROSSTALK)
JONES: I've not heard anybody say that.
KNAPP: Then you need to read some columns. Eleanor Clift says states rights is a code word.
(CROSSTALK)
NEVILLE: OK, guys. You guys have to do one at a time. And right now, I'm going to be that one voice. We're out of time for Senator Lott right now.
Up next: a man who admits he shot a priest won't go to jail. I'll tell you why the jury sided with the shooter after the break. And we'll let Victoria and Greg talk about that when we come back. And you get in on the conversation as well.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: And welcome back, everybody. We're switching gears right now. Dontee Stokes says his priest, Reverend Maurice Blackwell, molested him as a young man. Now, when he confronted the priest to get an apology this past May, Blackwell apparently refused, so Stokes shot him. But Dontee Stokes won't serve any time for attempted murder. A Maryland jury acquitted him of most of the charges, and Stokes was also able to negotiate a deal to serve house arrest and three years' probation for handgun violations.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONTEE STOKES, SHOT PRIEST: I was very happy. I'm ecstatic that the jury found favor with me. I'm glad that the folks and citizens of Baltimore city found me not guilty on the major charges that they booked me for. And I'm glad that they continue to exercise their rights to leniency. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Justice, I don't know if you can say justice was served in the sense that we have a gentleman still who is injured, but the jury thought that was justice, and that's justice in this case.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: OK. Carlos, as an attorney, does this open the door to leniency in any future attacks on alleged abusers?
CARLOS WATSON, ATTORNEY: Unfortunately, I think in some ways it's a really troubling decision. We can't condone violence, I think, in any case, and certainly we all understand Mr. Stokes' at least alleged pain. But I think condoning violence in any way, as to some extent this seems to do, I think is troubling.
Let me add one other thing, Arthel, which is I think it's a real symbol of how much crisis the Catholic Church is in that people, at this point, are resorting to their own vigilante justice, if you will, as opposed to turning to the more traditional system of justice to deal with these sorts of issues.
NEVILLE: OK. Heather (ph), should the shooter have gotten a more -- a stronger sentence?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: : He should have been convicted, first of all. I think he admitted -- or they were able to prove intent, and there was the physical act. So that is attempted murder. As far as...
NEVILLE: Now you know he was convicted of gun violation. So that's not enough in your opinion, is what you're saying?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: : It's not, because intent was established. I think he intended to cause the death of this man. As far as the sentence, it's up to the jurisdiction on how they convict him, I think. Obviously, there were mitigating factors working in his favor, but he definitely should have been convicted.
NEVILLE: So, Greg...
ARMSTRONG WILLIAMS, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: If I could just say one thing. There is something in this case that, really, you must consider. The priest that was shot came to the courtroom, never testified, but he extended his hand to the gentleman that shot him, and that gentleman extended his hand back and they shook hands. This was a sign to the jury and to the courtroom that the church had forgiven him and they had moved beyond it.
I think this impacted the jury. I don't think anyone here is advocating violence, when you take your legal issues into your own hands. But I think that moment in the courtroom, even if I were a juror, as much of a law and order person as I am, I too would have not have wanted this guy to serve any time in prison, realizing that he had committed a crime. But I think forgiveness was the order of the day and it was shown by that handshake. (CROSSTALK)
NEVILLE: Go ahead, Heather (ph). Heather (ph) wants to respond. One second, guys.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Number one, I believe in forgiveness, but you have to look at the actual act as it occurred. You have the handshake, the showing of forgiveness that occurred after the fact. That can go to the sentence. The effects on the victim can go to his sentence. But he definitely should have been convicted.
NEVILLE: Of more than gun charges?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Absolutely.
NEVILLE: OK, thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Of attempted murder.
GREG KNAPP, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: This is an extremely tough thing, though. I mean, evidently, when I'm reading all these stories, he went to the police and they decided not to prosecute. He went to the cardinal, they decided not to do anything except send him to some counseling.
If I have two little daughters, and if anyone sexually abuses them, I go to the police and nothing happens, man, it might be time to break out that shotgun. I'm not saying that's the way to handle it, but I'm saying we understand people's emotions, and you understand how serious this is, and what's been going on with the Catholic Church. And I think that's what the jury looked at.
WILLIAMS: Absolutely.
NEVILLE: And his attorney said he had an emotional breakdown, a psychological breakdown.
VICTORIA JONES, TALK RADIO NEWS SERVICE: Well I think he did have an emotional breakdown. I have no doubt about it. And I think five years ago, before the scandal broke, the result and the verdict would have been very different. But I think people realize now how very serious these issues are.
And I find it very encouraging that a jury is able to look at this and say attempted murder is too strong here; we're not going to go for it. Maybe if they'd charged him with something less, the jury would have said OK. But it was too strong. The jury recognized that and they made the right decision.
KNAPP: And it's one of the reasons juries are important in America, really.
WILLIAMS: That's right.
WATSON: Arthel, one of the things that I think should be noted here is that the Catholic Church, still to this point, has not done enough, at least in my estimation, to own up and really to try and reach out to their parishioners and say that we understand what's happened over the last several decades. It's not just wrong, but egregiously wrong, and we want to make a clear break and a clear change. And so Cardinal Bernard Law's recent resignation and apology, which, by the way, is a good example for Trent Lott, I think is a step in that direction, but there's still a lot more to do.
KNAPP: How about we actually prosecute the cardinals and the priests that allowed these people to continue to move around and claim more and more child victims? Are they not accomplices? I want to know why they're not being prosecuted.
JONES: Absolutely. It's such a good question. And I think all of us are asking that question.
NEVILLE: Absolutely.
JONES: As astounded as we are that the church was going to declare bankruptcy, we all went, say what?
NEVILLE: Beverly (ph) here in the audience from Arizona has something very interesting.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm sorry, but I believe in an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Had that gentleman been my nephew, I'd have saved him the trouble of going to jail. Because I'd have been in jail for shooting the priest. That's the way I feel.
WATSON: Arthel, I understand, and I think all of us here, both on the panel and in the audience, certainly understand the emotions that are involved. And nobody can understand it better than Dontee Stokes. But let me say once again, whether it's Dontee Stokes or Bernie Goetz a number of years ago in New York City or others, I think we're going to go down a real slippery slope the moment we start to condone violence, especially vigilante justice.
As Greg Knapp and others are saying, I think we need a lot more prosecution of those who have done wrong. I think President Bush and the US Justice Department needs to be much more aggressive about helping to prosecute some of these crimes. But I think agreeing that people can go out on their own and exact vengeance, I think, is a real troublesome idea for any of us to agree to.
WILLIAMS: I don't think it's anything new, and it's not anything we're going to advocate. But people need to see that the Church and our court system and the police department, who have taken an oath to protect us from harm and danger if we obey these laws, and if we keep going to them complaining about these issues of molestation and abuse and even rape, and it's harming our children, sometimes we can become mentally deranged where we just snap like that boy did and we do something that we end up regretting. So they have an obligation, just as we have an obligation.
NEVILLE: And that is the final word. And, of course, we'll let you know that you can hear more on the story when Connie Chung interviews Dontee Stokes tonight at 8:00 Eastern: that's 5:00 Pacific. Make sure you tune in to that show tonight.
And up next: a new segment we're doing here on TALKBACK LIVE called "What's the Story?" Today, a new twist on a Christmas tradition. The play is called "Jesus Has Two Mommies." It has a lot of people talking in Boston, and we'll be talking about it next. Don't go anywhere. TALKBACK LIVE continues after this break.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: All right, time for a new segment here on TALKBACK LIVE. It's called "What's the Story?" And bringing you stories from hometowns like yours. Today it's about a holiday play that has everyone in the Boston area talking, and it's called "Jesus Has Two Mommies." Steve Cooper, from Somerville, Massachusetts, affiliate station WHDH fills us in.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
STEVE COOPER, WHDH (voice-over): It's what's happening on this stage in Somerville that's created all the controversy. A comedic take on homosexuality and religion. Creator Faith Soloway wrote "Jesus Has Two Mommies" to tell her story. That of a pregnant lesbian couple facing the prospect of motherhood.
FAITH SOLOWAY, WRITER-DIRECTOR: They have a total crisis and can't get with the picture, and something's wrong with me.
COOPER: Soloway gets a little help from god in the form of a soulful black woman with a massive afro. God is supported by the angel Gabriel. And Jesus, who tells the story of his lesbian mothers, Mary and her partner Josephina (ph). It's this portrayal of religious figures that have some Catholics incensed.
ROBERT RITCHIE, PROTESTER: It's an insult to the truth about the story of our lord Jesus Christ and his birth.
COOPER: Soloway admits the play is irreverent. But says that, at its heart, it's about finding strength through spirituality.
SOLOWAY: Can't Jesus and Mary take care of themselves? Do these people really have to stand up for Jesus and Mary? Don't they know who they are? Aren't they looking at my show and laughing? I think they are.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
NEVILLE: All right. Victoria, is this blasphemy or artistic freedom?
JONES: Well, I don't like to say it's blasphemy, because in those countries where blasphemy is a crime, we see fatwas put on people and people under sentence of death. So that I don't like. Yes, it's artistic freedom. Is it very bad taste? Yes it is. When you start to portray a prophet of god -- whatever religion you are -- in this way, deliberately distorting the true story to make another point, I think it's kind of sad. The play may be very funny, I don't know, but I think it's in very bad taste. However, this is America, it should be allowed to play and let the market sort it out. If people want to pay to see it, let them. And if they don't, then it will fold.
KNAPP: I actually agree with Victoria there. This is America, absolutely every right to do this play. But I think what it is an example of is, once again, how tolerance and sensitivity only go one way in America. The majority is supposed to be tolerant and sensitive to other minority fringes, but the minority fringe is never supposed to be tolerant of mainstream America. To say Jesus has two mommies and do a lesbian thing about this, she says it's just fantasy, but obviously it's going to be offensive and insensitive to the 77 percent of Americans who say they're Christian.
NEVILLE: So I guess they just wouldn't go see the play then, right?
KNAPP: Well, yeah. But Arthel, if a conservative Christian organization put on something that was offensive to the gay and lesbian community, they would be going crazy over it. And the point is, they say be tolerant, be sensitive, and yet they purposely do something that is intolerant and offensive, and you cannot have it both ways.
One quick story. Here in Dallas we had the Radio City Christmas Spectacular come, and the "Fort Worth Star-Telegram" theater critic wrote a piece on it that said the play was great with Santa Claus and the Rockettes, until they started talking about Jesus Christ. I can't believe it.
It was the Christmas show. How dare they say Christ in Christmas? And this is what I'm saying. There's no tolerance for the mainstream culture. We're supposed to be tolerant of everything else, but no tolerance for the mainstream.
(CROSSTALK)
ARMSTRONG: Well, you know what? I want to say, as a Christian, that I find it to be offensive. I find it to be insulting. I find no social redeeming value in it. It's one of the problems with this country now.
We allow ourselves, in the name of freedom and free speech to demonize religion, to demonize faith, to demonize god, to demonize everything we believe in. Our children are misdirected. They go to these plays with homes that don't teach them the kind of values that this country was built on. They take this stuff in, they go out and make it theirs.
I just -- I don't think there's a place for it. No, I don't believe in censorship, but for me it's garbage and it belongs in the sewer. KNAPP: But the thing is, Armstrong, they know they're going to get good reviews, just like if you put a cross in a cup of urine or if you paint the Madonna and put feces on it, it's edgy, it's high art.
NEVILLE: All right. Good point, Greg.
JONES: I don't think...
(CROSSTALK)
NEVILLE: Well, but he's right that it's going to get publicity. And I want to find out, though, bottom line, when I come back, hold your thought, would you go see the play? And don't forget, I'm going to ask you the question of the day. Is the attack on Trent Lott motivated by racial outrage or political gain? I'll take your calls and letters shortly. The talk continues in a moment.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: And welcome back. We're talking about a Christmas play called "Jesus Has Two Mommies."
Carlos, would you see the play?
WATSON: I wouldn't. But Arthel, let me note one thing I didn't hear clearly enough is that one of the things that makes this country great -- and I don't mean to be hokie about this-- but is that there's a real sense of inclusion here. That, while we may not always agree, we're at least willing to try and be open to different ideas.
So I would not go see the play, because, frankly, I wouldn't see it as being interesting. But I think it's important to underscore that America is not America the minute we lose our first amendment rights.
NEVILLE: Chuck (ph) from California, would you go see the play?
CHUCK: No, I would not. And I feel it's an insult to the Christian community. And I really wonder what the purpose of this whole thing is.
NEVILLE: They say it's satire. Victoria, would you see the play?
JONES: No, I wouldn't go and see the play. It sounds gross, and I wouldn't want to spend my money on it. I go back, though, to the freedom of expression thing and to my fear about some other countries that don't allow freedom of expression and the way that they've twisted religion and the fact that we need to keep freedom of expression so that we can keep freedom of religion.
NEVILLE: Ms. Edie (ph) here in the audience, would you see the play?
EDIE: No, I would not, because it's very offensive. I mean, being a Christian, no, I don't want to go see it.
NEVILLE: OK. Armstrong, would you see it? I think I know the answer.
WILLIAMS: No, absolutely not.
NEVILLE: Greg, I'm curious, I think you might go see the play, Greg.
KNAPP: Well, you know, no, I probably wouldn't go see it, because I'm pretty tight. I got the staple in the wallet. But I think you ought to let the free market work. It's pretty obvious you're not going to have a lot of people go see this. My only concern is, please let's not have any grant money go to this thing. No government money.
JONES: I feel very sorry for all the Catholics who are going to go and protest this, because they're already protesting the Catholic Church. Now they have to go and protest this. Somebody should have to start paying these guys, because there's so much to protest right now and it's cold. I think that's a shame.
NEVILLE: That's the final word. I want to say thanks to Armstrong Williams, Carlos Watson.
WATSON: Happy holidays.
NEVILLE: Happy holidays. Greg Knapp and Victoria Jones, thank you so much for being here today.
And if you want to see more stories like the one we just discussed, just tune into "American Stories" with Leon Harris every Saturday at 2:00 PM Eastern, right here on CNN. And coming up next: our question of the day. Is the attack on Trent Lott motivated by racial outrage or political gain? I'll take your calls and e-mails after the break.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: Welcome back, everybody. It's time to answer the question of the day. Is the attack on Trent Lott motivated by racial outrage or political gain? We have an e-mail coming in right now we want to share it with you. Bob in Pennsylvania says, "To the black community it was an outrage. To the Democrats it was an opportunity. But to the Republicans that are lining up to rip Lott apart, it's for political gain within the party."
Going to the phones now. Carl (ph), racial outrage or political gain?
CARL: Yes, it -- yes, it -- the Democrats now are using it to regain control of the Senate. It started out as a terrible remark by Senator Lott, but the Democrats are now using it to regain control. NEVILLE: Thank you very much for your opinion, Carl (ph). Now, another e-mail coming in right now. Let's see, from Caroline in Connecticut, "Lott's comments are just another example of his pattern of racist thoughts and behavior. I don't think Republicans want someone like that as a leader."
NEVILLE: And we are out of time. But before I go, I want to say happy birthday to my daddy, Art Neville in New Orleans watching. Happy birthday, daddy, love you much. Thanks to all of you for watching. I'm Arthel Neville, and I'll see you again tomorrow right here on TALKBACK LIVE.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Abuse Justify Murder?>
|
