The Web    CNN.com      Powered by
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
SERVICES
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
SEARCH
Web CNN.com
powered by Yahoo!
TRANSCRIPTS


 

Return to Transcripts main page

PAULA ZAHN NOW

Presidential Campaign Ad Sparks Debate; Sex Advice Columns Increasing on College Campuses

Aired March 4, 2004 - 20:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening. Thanks so much for joining us tonight. I'm Paula Zahn.
The world, the news, the names, the faces, and where we go from here on this Thursday, March 4, 2004.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ZAHN (voice-over): Tonight, pictures of the 9/11 horror turn up in the president's campaign ads. Is a tragic chapter in American history being used for political gain?

If you haven't committed a crime, can police arrest you for simply refusing to show an I.D.? It happened to this man, who is taking his case to the Supreme Court. I'll have an exclusive interview.

And sex on campus is nothing new, but sex advice columns are catching on in college newspapers nationwide. Wait until you hear the kind of questions students are asking.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ZAHN: All that ahead tonight, plus the Alabama pastor who has put a sign in front of his church that has sparked outrage. And we're going to find out what is behind the sudden spike in gas prices.

Firs, though, here's the headlines you need to know right now. The number of federal air marshals has gone down. Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge said modest cuts were made during the current fiscal year and more will happen under the president's proposed budget for next year. The exact number of air marshals is classified, but is said to be in the thousands.

It has been a violent day for parts of America's heartland. A band of thunderstorms stretching from Missouri to Texas brought rain, hail and high winds, some with gusts more than 100 miles per hour. Tornado warnings were issued for some regions, as the storm flipped trucks and trailer homes and uprooted some trees.

Martha Stewart has another verdict to wait for, The Emmy verdict today. Stewart's television show Martha Stewart Living was nominated for six Daytime Emmy Awards. Stewart herself was nominated as top service show host. They're Emmys out May 21.

"In Focus" tonight: a sign of the times. One pastor's response to the same-sex marriage controversy is stirring up a lot of anger. This is the sign outside the New Era Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama. Pastor Michael Jordan says he got the message. AIDS -- quote -- "is God's curse on a homosexual life as a revelation from God."

Pastor Jordan joins us now from Birmingham, from Los Angeles tonight, so does the Reverend Troy Perry, founder of the Metropolitan Community Churches. Perry himself is gay and says he performed the nation's first same-sex church wedding back in 1969.

Welcome, gentlemen. Glad to have both of you with us.

Pastor Jordan, why did you post this sign outside your church?

MICHAEL R. JORDAN, SENIOR PASTOR, NEW ERA BAPTIST CHURCH: Yes.

God spoke to me in a revelation that -- and I stand on God's holy word -- that marriage is between a male and a female. God created male and female. He said be fruitful and multiply and replenish the Earth. And when two men get married and two women get married, God says they are defiling and interrupting his creation. And that why he has cursed the homosexual population with AIDS because interrupting God's creation. They're out of God's order.

ZAHN: Reverend Perry, your reaction to that?

REV. TROY PERRY, FOUNDER, METROPOLITAN COMMUNITY CHURCHES: I want to say first that, as a Christian minister, when Jesus was asked about disease, specifically with someone who is blind, in the scriptures in the Gospel, when his disciples said, who is to be blamed here, he or his parents, Jesus said nobody.

In Metropolitan Community Churches, we don't believe that disease is given by God. We believe it's just that, a disease. I don't believe that sickle cell anemia is a gift to blacks or toxic shock syndrome is a gift to women or Legionnaires disease is given to members of the American Legion for being too patriotic. I just don't believe that.

ZAHN: Pastor Jordan, let's talk about what the statistics show, that the majority of AIDS sufferers are in fact heterosexual. According to your logic, then, does it mean heterosexuals are equally cursed?

JORDAN: Well, what we're dealing with now, Paula, is the aftershock of the earthquake. The earthquake is the homosexual curse of AIDS. The aftershock is that the heterosexual population has received it simply because the female heterosexual with AIDS either got it through drugs or with the veins or the needles or transfusion or they slept with a male that's homosexual.

So that's what I stand on. And that same Christ that came that dealt with diseases came to deliver those who are lost and save those from their sins.

ZAHN: So what you're basically saying, Reverend, is that you're putting less of a burden on heterosexuals who have contracted AIDS than on homosexuals who have AIDS?

JORDAN: No. The heterosexuals that contracted AIDS, actually, by needles or actually by transfusion or sleeping with a homosexual. We want to go back to the origin of it. Right now, you have more heterosexuals actually with AIDS, but you have more homosexual males that has died with it.

And I believe because they have contaminated and interrupted God's creation with same-sex marriage, I actually believe that this is God's curse, because we're stopping God's creation. If all men marry men, or women marry women, no babies are born and we are out of God's order and a violation of God's holy word.

ZAHN: Reverend Perry, this is a very emotional issue for you. You've been marrying same-sex partners in your church for more than 35 years. When you hear the viewpoint of Pastor Jordan, what does this indicate to you?

PERRY: I'm just shocked by it. I travel all over the world. I go visit AIDS patients.

Our church was at the forefront of that sickness, that illness. We know that it doesn't come from God. We know it didn't come from the homosexual community. The medical community itself says that, that we don't know where it came from. We do know that people contracted this disease. But that's not the real thing.

Today, we have to reach out to people. Putting up signs that says somehow that victims are to be blamed for a disease is terrible and ugly. At one time, the Christian church taught that people who were epileptics, for instance, automatically, they were demon possessed. And yet we have come to this part where we know that's not true. That's not what the medical profession says. And, again, it's not what the church says. There's wonderful people who care.

ZAHN: Pastor Jordan, will you ever take the sign down?

JORDAN: I'll take it down when the lord tells me so.

ZAHN: And when might that happen?

JORDAN: Well, I don't know, whenever I get a divine revelation, because what I'm not hearing from the pastor is repentance and giving their lives to Christ. You cannot come to Christ the same way. I'm not hearing repentance and accepting that homosexuality is a sin. Romans speaks that God gave them up -- Romans, Chapter 1 -- that he gave them up to reprobate mind because they continue.

ZAHN: All right.

JORDAN: God's word says during this passion season, God came to save...

ZAHN: Unfortunately, gentlemen, I need to move on here. We really appreciate both of your perspectives.

Pastor Michael Jordan, Reverend Troy Perry, thank you for spending some time with us tonight.

PERRY: Thank you so much. Bye-bye.

JORDAN: Thank you.

ZAHN: Coming up, I'm going to have an exclusive interview with the cowboy about to take his case to the Supreme Court. He says police had no right to arrest him after he refused to show them an I.D.

Also, John Kerry had to mortgage his house to stay in the presidential race. How will he wage a fight against a president with a $140 million war chest?

And the new look of sex on college campuses, sex advice columns popping up in college newspapers all over the country.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ZAHN: Here's a police video from Humboldt County, Nevada, nothing special, just the police checking out a pickup on the side of the road. But what happened next is now a Supreme Court case and involves the rights of all Americans.

Nevada cowboy Dudley Hiibel repeatedly refused to identify himself when a sheriff's deputy demanded to see identification. He insisted he had the right to remain silent. And here's what happened next.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let me see some I.D.

DUDLEY HIIBEL, CHALLENGED NEVADA I.D. LAW: Why?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Because.

HIIBEL: Why?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're facing arrest here if I don't get some identification.

HIIBEL: Because I've done nothing.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're not going to cooperate?

HIIBEL: I don't care

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're not going to cooperate?

HIIBEL: Because I ...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So then you're not gonna cooperate with me at all? OK, turn around and put your hands on your back. Spread your feet.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZAHN: Now it's up to the Supreme Court to decide the limits of police power and a person's right to privacy.

Dudley Hiibel joins us now from Reno, Nevada, for an exclusive interview less than three weeks before the high court hears his case.

Good to see you, Dudley. Welcome.

HIIBEL: Thank you, Paula.

ZAHN: So when the police asked to see your I.D., why didn't you show them anything?

HIIBEL: Well, I felt like that he was demanding something that I didn't need to show him. He was very demanding. And I felt I had a right to remain silent at that point.

ZAHN: If he had told you why he wanted the I.D., would that have made any difference?

HIIBEL: It very possibly could have. When he approached me at the pickup, when I was standing outside the pickup, I asked him why he wanted my identification. And he refused to answer that question.

ZAHN: As you know, someone had called the police to report that you and your daughter were fighting in your car. Didn't the police have any right to question you?

HIIBEL: They had a right to question me. But I had to -- I had a right to remain silent.

ZAHN: Did you ever in your wildest dreams think this case would end up at the Supreme Court level?

HIIBEL: Not at that time, I certainly didn't, no.

ZAHN: When did it sink in that it might go all the way to the Supreme Court?

HIIBEL: Well, me and my attorney firmly believe that the matter would have been settled in the Nevada courts. So it was after the hearing at the Supreme Court in Nevada that we decided to go on to the Supreme Court of the United States.

ZAHN: We contacted the Humboldt County Sheriff's Department. And this is the statement they gave us for tonight -- quote -- "It is now in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court. On March 22, arguments from both sides will be heard, and once a decision is made by the Supreme Court, we, as all law enforcement across the nation, will abide by it."

What do you think's going to end up happening here?

HIIBEL: In the Supreme Court decision?

ZAHN: Yes.

HIIBEL: Yes, I -- I'm optimistic that the Bill of Rights will be upheld and that the citizens of America will be able to remain silent and be able to travel freely without being hindered by the police.

ZAHN: Mr. Hiibel, we'll be watching your case, and we thank you for sharing your story with us tonight.

HIIBEL: Thank you.

ZAHN: Next time your child gets an ear infection, we're going to tell you why your doctor might refuse to actually give you an antibiotic.

And the first of hundreds of potential jurors start answering personal questions as jury selection gets under way in Scott Peterson's murder trial.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ZAHN: Are you overusing antibiotics? If your child gets an ear infection, there's a possibility your pediatrician may no longer prescribe antibiotics for it. Health officials will issue new guidelines they believe can stop the rise in antibiotic-resistant germs by cutting back prescriptions for the drugs.

We're giving antibiotics the "High Five" treatment tonight, five quick questions, five direct answers.

Joining us now, Dr. Richard Besser of the CDC's National Center For Infectious Diseases.

Good to see you, Doctor. Welcome.

DR. RICHARD BESSER, NATIONAL CENTER FOR INFECTIOUS DISEASES: Good evening.

ZAHN: So, Doctor, I can't think of anything worse than watching a child suffer through an ear infection. It's painful. Does that mean you're not going to let us give them antibiotics anymore?

BESSER: Well, I think that's a really important point, Paula. These guidelines are not saying do not give children antibiotics when they're indicated. What they're saying is, we need to make sure when we're prescribing them, it's in situations where they're going to work.

ZAHN: So how do antibiotics work?

BESSER: Well, antibiotics kill certain germs, germs that cause infections. The key thing is, antibiotics only kill bacteria.

ZAHN: How do you know the difference between a bacterial infection and a viral infection?

BESSER: Well, that's something that you will not know. And what you need to do is make sure that when you are sick or your child is sick, you see your health care provider, so they can try and determine, is this an infection, for which antibiotics will work, or is this an infection for which it's caused by a virus and antibiotics really don't have a role?

ZAHN: So, as a nation, are we overmedicating with antibiotics?

BESSER: Yes.

We've seen some very alarming trends during the 1990s. Antibiotic resistance rose dramatically. And the big thing pushing antibiotic resistance is the overuse of antibiotics.

ZAHN: And what kind of health problems does that create?

BESSER: Well, it creates a lot. We don't want to lose our ability to treat serious infections when they occur, pneumonia, bad sinus infections, many ear infections. We need to maintain our ability to have antibiotics that will be effective against these infections.

Early on, everyone wants the antibiotic. But four or five days into the course, when you're feeling better, it's very hard to remember to take those antibiotics.

ZAHN: I am so guilty of not going the full 10 days.

Dr. Besser, thank you for educating us tonight. Appreciate it.

BESSER: It's a pleasure being here.

ZAHN: College newspapers printing sex advice columns. At many universities, student sex is more open than ever. We're going to tell you what students are asking and exactly who is giving them answers.

And tears and cheers when the president visited ground zero. But political ads showing the 9/11 tragedy raise some furious objections. We'll hear from both sides of the debate.

And tomorrow, President Bush has already raised $140 million for his campaign. We're going to look at why it costs so much to be elected president of the United States.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ZAHN: Here's what you need to know right now.

Democrats want a Republican congressman to apologize to presidential hopeful Kerry. On Sunday, Congressman Tom Cole of Oklahoma said, if George Bush loses the election, Osama bin Laden wins. Cole insists he wasn't criticizing Kerry. He says enemies would view a change in leadership during a war as a victory.

Meanwhile, the number of U.S. troops killed by hostile fire in Iraq is at its lowest point since May of last year, 12 troops killed in February. The Pentagon says that is a sign that insurgents are in fact being defeated and are attacking weaker targets.

How much will your next tank of gas cost? Probably a lot more than it used to. Gas prices have been soaring. The national average is $1.72 a gallon, just 3 cents shy of a record set just last August. Well, the Bush administration says it is extremely concerned about the spike.

J.J. Ramberg joins us live from Marina del Rey, California, where gas prices have risen above the $2 mark.

Good to see you, J.J. What's going on?

J.J. RAMBERG, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Paula.

Well, I'm here at Costco. And this is the cheapest gas that you can get in the neighborhood and still consumers are experiencing sticker shock. I just talked to one customer here who just spent $45 filling up his tank. And he was pretty outraged about it.

And it's just not here in Los Angeles. It's all across the country people are feeling this. Just to look at a few cities, the average here in L.A., it's a bit cheaper here at Costco. It's $2.20. In New York, it's almost at $1.90. In Washington, D.C., it's $1.70. And the most expensive gas in the nation is in Wailuku, Hawaii, where you have to spend $2.36 for a gallon of gas.

So why is this happening right now? Well, primarily it's because the price of crude oil has gone up. And it's at its highest level that it's been since fighting ended in Iraq. And crude oil prices account for about 50 percent of what we as consumers pay here for gas at the pump. And, unfortunately, analysts are saying that we probably won't see relief anytime soon. We may even see prices go up in the next few weeks -- Paula.

ZAHN: In the meantime, why don't you point us to where we can find the cheapest gas in America right now?

(LAUGHTER)

RAMBERG: It's probably not going to be too helpful for me or you. That's in Cheyenne, Wyoming, where you can get a gallon of gas for $1.49.

ZAHN: We're going to all rush there tonight. J.J. Ramberg, thanks so much.

To politics now. President Bush already has $140 million in his war chest. Democrat John Kerry has a fraction of that and had to mortgage his own home to stay in the race back in December. That move, it turns out, may cost him more than monthly house payments.

Jeanne Meserve explains why.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JEANNE MESERVE, CNN HOMELAND SECURITY CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In December, John Kerry's bid for the presidency was on life support, its vital signs fading. He resuscitated it by borrowing $6.4 million to inject into his campaign.

MICHAEL MEEHAN, SENIOR ADVISER, JOHN KERRY CAMPAIGN: It allowed us time just to go and talk to voters in Iowa and New Hampshire, with were the two, for us, critical January tests, without having to leave the states to go raise money.

MESERVE (on camera): So, essentially, this money kept him in the race?

MEEHAN: Absolutely.

MESERVE (voice-over): Kerry got the money by taking out a mortgage on the Boston home he owns with his fabulously wealthy wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry; 19 Louisburg Square is one of the swankiest addresses in the city. The Kerrys bought the one-time convent for $1.7 million in 1996 and did extensive renovations. What used to be a chapel is now a kitchen. What is the house worth?

For 2004, the city assessed it at $6.6 million. But an appraisal for the Mellon Bank, which gave Kerry his loan, came in at almost double that, $12.8 million. The valuation is critical, because, under Federal Election Commission rules, a candidate can contribute only half the value of jointly held property.

LARRY NOBLE, CENTER FOR RESPONSIVE POLITICS: Well, if the house is worth less than $12.8, then you start getting into the realm of Teresa Heinz having made an illegal contribution to his campaign.

MESERVE: Neither the bank, nor the campaign will make the appraisal available. But Debra Taylor, who runs a Boston listing service, says it's on target.

DEBRA TAYLOR, LISTING INFORMATION NETWORK: I'm not surprised at all. I think it sounds absolutely normal. It follows the rule of thumb for property selling at twice the assessed value.

MESERVE: Boston's tax assessor insists his number is in line with comparable sales. Now there is another issue, the payoff.

Under the new McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, Kerry's campaign could retire the debt, but only before he receives the nomination. After that, virtually all of it would have to come out of his pocket. He cannot tap into his wife's estimated half a billion- dollar fortune. His own worth is a comparatively modest $2 million. His Senate salary, roughly $158,000 a year, his monthly payment, $15,000.

MEEHAN: He has said that he will pay it back.

MESERVE (on camera): How? With what?

MEEHAN: Senator Kerry's a man of substantial means, some that might not be readily apparent from his tax returns or from his personal disclosure form. MESERVE (on camera): The Kerry campaign has made the first two payments. But doing more would divert crucial funds from Kerry's face-off with President Bush, whose campaign has already begun an advertising onslaught with some of the $150 million it has raised already.

Ironically, the very loan that helped Kerry win early could hobble him in the end.

Jeanne Meserve, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ZAHN: Well, the first campaign ad blitz for the president's reelection campaign began being rolled out today. But it was this one that outraged a lot of folks.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I'm George W. Bush, and I approved this message.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZAHN: Glimpses of World Trade Center wreckage, as you just saw, and human remains being removed from the site provoked outrage from the Firefighters Union and some victims' families.

To put the president's ad campaign "In Plain English" tonight, joining us now, Ken Goldstein, a professor who specializes in campaign advertising at the University of Wisconsin in Madison.

Welcome. Good to see you.

KEN GOLDSTEIN, PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN: Good evening, Paula.

ZAHN: Good evening.

So who's actually going to see these ads?

GOLDSTEIN: Well, viewers of CNN are going to see these ads. The Bush campaign is basically targeting them in two different areas. They made a national cable buy, so CNN, Fox, Fox Sports, ESPN. So cable viewers across the whole nation will see them and then viewers in 15, 16 targeted states.

This is going to be the first shot in a barrage of advertisements that people who live in places like Wisconsin, Ohio, Missouri, Michigan, Pennsylvania, the swing states that we saw in 2000 that are certainly going to be the states that decide the presidential election in 2004.

ZAHN: And is the sense of anticipation for these ads any different than in the 2000 campaign at this stage of the campaign?

GOLDSTEIN: Well, I would have to say that this has been the most anticipated advertising buy in political history.

As the package that preceded us talked about, President Bush has raised $140 million, $150 million. He has over $100 million cash on hand. And all of us political junkies and political science geeks were waiting to see when he would start spending that and how he would start spending that. We knew he would spend it on political advertising and we were just waiting to see when that would happen. And it's -- and it's happened today.

ZAHN: So do you know how much the president's campaign will end up spending on ads out of that large amount of money raised?

GOLDSTEIN: The initial reports, which are mostly coming from Democratic operatives who were calling around, was in the $5 million to $6 million range. The White House today has actually confirmed a number that it's in the $10 million range. Now, they haven't told us how long these ads are going to last. So $10 million over a week or two is quite a substantial buy; $10 million over a couple months is a less substantial buy. What I'm hearing is this is a $10 million buy for about two weeks, which is a substantial buy.

ZAHN: Ken Goldstein, thanks for putting that in perspective for us tonight. Appreciate it.

GOLDSTEIN: Thank you.

ZAHN: So are 9/11 images out of bounds? Here's what one 9/11 widow had to say about it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PATTI CASSAZA, WIDOW OF WTC VICTIM: When I look at the ads and I see Bush standing there and speaking over ground zero, I know that in my heart, President Bush failed the 3,000 Americans that died there on that day.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZAHN: Now let's hear from two New York congressmen whose districts were directly affected by the World Trade Center attack, Democrat Jerrold Nadler, whose district includes ground zero, and in Washington tonight, Republican Vito Fossella, whose district suffered nearly 300 casualties. Welcome, gentlemen.

Congressman Fossella, I'm going to start with you this evening. The head of the International Association of Fire Fighters has called this ad "disgraceful," and went on to say this, "Bush is calling on the biggest disaster in our country's history, and indeed in the history of the fire service, to win sympathy for his campaign."

How do you explain to some of the families from your district why you're not opposed to this kind of ad?

REP. VITO FOSSELLA (R), NEW YORK : Well, first off, I think we can never do anything, in our opinion, to dishonor the loss of life on September 11 and those families who have suffered since then and will continue to suffer. But I think it's fair to say, and it's truthful to say, that September 11 was a defining moment not just in the history of the United States, but indeed, the world. And we have to ask ourselves, I think, a legitimate question of what happened up until 9/11, what happened on that day, and what we have done as a nation since then.

The president of the United States happened to be George W. Bush. I personally believe that he responded in a -- and has responded in a steady and consistent way, has been a true leader for not just this country but has engaged the war against terror.

And let me just say this, that I recognize that some folks feel that this ad or images are not appropriate. But the reality is, that's not true across the board. I happened to speak to a firefighter today who lost both his brother and his cousin on 9/11, and he indicated to me that it was perfectly legitimate to raise it.

If national security and homeland security is a critical element of being president and about this campaign, then I think we can put it on the table. It is appropriate.

ZAHN: All right...

FOSSELLA: The president should be proud of his record of fighting and leading in this war against terror. And we can't just ignore the reality of September 11, if we're going to move forward as a nation.

ZAHN: Congressman Nadler, Mayor Giuliani was on CNN earlier tonight and pretty much mirrored what your fellow congressman just had to say. Let's listen to what the mayor said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RUDY GIULIANI (R), FORMER NEW YORK CITY MAYOR: It's part of our history. It's part of the history of America, of all America. And the reality is that President Bush played a very, very big role in bringing our country through the worst attack in our history. So it's an appropriate thing for him to point out as part of his record.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZAHN: Why do you have such a problem with the president using this in an ad?

REP. JERROLD NADLER (D), NEW YORK: Well, because the president is politicizing the emotions of the people who survived and the people who died on that day. You know, the United States was attacked, not George Bush, not the Republican Party. And yes, Vito is right, the mayor -- Mayor Giuliani is right, it is perfectly appropriate to debate the adequacy or the inadequacy of what George Bush did after that day and before that day. But that's not what this ad does.

This ad connects emotionally George Bush personally with the victims and with the attack on -- with the victims of the attack on the United States. That's an emotional exploitation of the victims, and they have very right -- relatives have every right to feel exploited. George Bush said that it would be wrong to exploit for political gain the attack on the United States. That was a correct statement.

Now, for example -- now, we can debate whether his subsequent -- whether his actions preceding that were adequate, and that's what the 9/11 commission, which the president tried to prevent from being formed and which he's trying to stiff-arm from getting all the information now, is about. And we can certainly debate the adequacy or inadequacy of what he did afterwards. And that's legitimate debate. But that's not what these ads are.

ZAHN: All right...

NADLER: These ads are emotional exploitation of the murder of 3,000 people. You never saw similar ads on radio from Franklin Roosevelt about Pearl Harbor. No one would have thought of that.

ZAHN: Congressman Fossella, respond directly to that point. I know you said you have constituents and even victims' family members who actually said they had no problem with these ads. But you've got to understand the great sensitivity that other family members have. What about that charge, that this is simple exploitation and making an emotional connection that is inappropriate?

FOSSELLA: Well, again, I think it is. It's a sensitive matter. And you know, we relive September 11 day in and day out. And I -- while -- I have friends, I have neighbors, I have family members who lost loved ones on 9/11. I understand how sensitive it is. I've been to the funerals. I've spoken to the firefighters who lost -- Rescue 5 on Staten Island lost 11 firefighters on that day. I've been in constant contact with these folks, so I can appreciate where they're coming from.

But at the same time, I think we need to understand, as a nation, if we're going to go forward against this war on terrorism -- because there are those who are out there who still want to bring carnage and wreckage and evil and spread it throughout this country and throughout the free-loving people of this world. We have to understand that we can talk about these things and acknowledge the truth. This isn't a representation, this is the truth. This is a tragedy that actually occurred...

ZAHN: OK, Congressman Nadler...

FOSSELLA: ... and the president...

ZAHN: I need to...

FOSSELLA: The president of the United States...

NADLER: We can...

(CROSSTALK)

ZAHN: Jump in there, Mr. Nadler. We've got to do it in 10 seconds.

NADLER: We can debate what Bush did after and before and we should, and we can debate why they still won't pay for the medical treatment of the firemen and the other firefighters who were injured in the first response. But whether you like President Bush or not, we can debate his actions before and after. But to exploit this emotionally, the way these ads are doing, is, frankly, disgusting.

ZAHN: Gentlemen, we got to leave it there. Congressmen Jerrold Nadler, Vito Fossella, thank you both.

FOSSELLA: Thank you kindly.

ZAHN: Choosing a jury for Scott Peterson's murder trial. The first of possibly hundreds of people were interviewed today. We'll ask an expert in jury selection about some of the personal questions they will face.

And the growing number of sex advice columnists for college students. Are student attitudes towards sex really changing?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ZAHN: Well, if you happen to be the parent of a college kid, sorry about this, but sex in really out in the open these days. More and more campus newspapers are publishing columns that deal straight out with sexual advice. Jason Bellini found one college sophomore who dispenses sex advice at New York's Columbia University.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JASON BELLINI, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): the sex column is now a mainstay of the student newspaper at a growing list of schools, including Yale, Princeton, Columbia, NYU, University of Virginia and U. Cal. Berkeley. With more and more students admitting they're looking for the time of their life, not the love of their life in college, the sex column offers advice on the do's and don'ts of casual sex.

KATIE FERNANDEZ, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY SEX COLUMNIST: "There's this hottie in my section, and all I do is stare at her for the entire two hours."

BELLINI: This week, Katie Fernandez, Columbia University sex columnist, addresses whether to hook up with someone you'll run into every day.

FERNANDEZ: I bring up a funny thing that we call floorcest (ph). It's line incest, when you hook up with someone on your floor and then they hook up with other people on the floor.

BELLINI (on camera): Have you taken on any really risque topics, where you thought, You know what? We're not sure how people are going to react.

FERNANDEZ: The title (ph). (UNINTELLIGIBLE) It's post-oral-sex etiquette. I think our parents, as disgusting as it may be, had just as much sex in college as we did. I think parents would be happy that we are dealing with it. And they're really, like, intelligent and mature (UNINTELLIGIBLE)

BELLINI (voice-over): Mature? Intelligent? That's for the readers to decide.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's a little trashy, but it's what students want to read. So that's the point of "The Spectator (ph)," to cater to the students' wishes.

BELLINI: students wishing to hear not from the experts but from their peers. Jason Bellini, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ZAHN: Well, sex on campus is certainly nothing new. But what does the more open attitude, at least on some campuses, say about students these days? Yvonne K. Fulbright writes "The Sexpert Tells All" for New York University's "Washington Square News." Welcome.

YVONNE K. FULBRIGHT, SEX COLUMNIST: Thank you. Thanks for having me.

ZAHN: So people might be surprised, or maybe not so surprised, that these Columbia University students claim that they are not looking for relationships, they only want to have sex. Do you think it is the casual sex that dominates your campus?

FULBRIGHT: Not NYU. I found that working with students -- I'm a professor there, as well as a sex columnist -- that they have a wide range of experiences and a wide range as far as what they want. The are the people who want the monogamous long-term relationship, who are looking for their life partner. Then there are people who just totally want to play the scene and have the one-night stands or the more experimental, maybe threesome, moresomes getting a little more on the kinky side.

ZAHN: What do the guys want to know when they write to you?

FULBRIGHT: The guys want to know mostly how to help out their girlfriends. They're mostly concerned with any pain she's experiencing during sex and the fact that she's not having an orgasm because they're taking that really personally. It's mostly about her welfare.

ZAHN: Well, that's a pretty good thing, then, isn't it?

FULBRIGHT: Great.

ZAHN: Positive development, as far as you're concerned?

FULBRIGHT: Definitely.

ZAHN: And what do the women want to know? FULBRIGHT: The women want to know those same things. Why am I having trouble obtaining orgasm? Why does it hurt when he tries to penetrate me? Also birth control's a huge thing, especially the pill and how effective is it compared to condom use, if you don't want to use the condom. And pregnancy concerns on top of that.

ZAHN: So would you say the majority of your readers are interested in practicing what some might call responsible sex?

FULBRIGHT: I hope so. I have a very faithful readership. I have students on campus who recognize me, who always give me compliments on the column. They're big fans. And NYU has been so supportive of the column, and the student staff there at "The Washington Square News," they've really been my cheerleaders with it. And the reason it's been so well received is that it's for all of the readers. There's no sort of heterosexist attitude. There's no sort of agenda. It's just really practical but fun advice, which people are after.

ZAHN: We're going to go to some of the trends now that you hear pretty common on campuses lately these days. Hanging out and hooking up.

FULBRIGHT: These are the people who are actually, in some ways, modeling the "Friends" TV show that's been so popular for years -- not getting too serious, maybe hanging out in front of the TV together, then fooling around later. If you're doing that within a pack of friends, every couple months, you might switch who you're hooking up with. But the welfare of the group always goes before that of the relationship. It's just really kind of a commitment-free way of still having a good time.

ZAHN: Then you have joined at the hip.

FULBRIGHT: This is the couple that everybody else recognizes as a couple, but they don't really go out and say, Hey, we're exclusive, we're monogamous, we're boyfriend-girlfriend.

ZAHN: And then friends with benefits.

FULBRIGHT: This is becoming more popular, though it's often short-lived, usually because one person ends up wanting more. But it's the commitment-free relationship where you have good rapport, you get your sexual fulfillment, but you don't have all the obligations that come along with a relationship.

ZAHN: I just want to know how much pressure is on you. If these kids all recognize you on campus and they want all the information and you don't have it?

FULBRIGHT: Oh, they catch me every now and then, but unlike a lot of the other sex columnists, I'm an expert. I have a master's in sex education. So they find me to be a real reliable resource.

ZAHN: Yvonne Fulbright, thank you very much for stopping by tonight. FULBRIGHT: Thank you.

ZAHN: We're going to take a look at how Americans in their 30s and 40s want to know about sex.

And they are beginning to choose a jury in the murder trial of Scott Peterson. What kind of people are likely to be chosen? We'll get an expert's opinion.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ZAHN: So we've seen how sexual attitudes are changing on many college campuses, but what about Americans in their 30s and 40s and maybe even in their 50s, if they're still having sex? Dan Savage answers thousands of questions a week. His "Savage Love Column runs in 70 newspapers in the U.S., Canada, Asia and Europe. He joins us now from Seattle.

That was a joke, Dan, about people having sex in their 50s. I assume many are...

(CROSSTALK)

DAN SAVAGE, SYNDICATED SEX COLUMNIST: I assume they don't have sex in their 50s.

ZAHN: Are you making that assumption tonight?

SAVAGE: No, not tonight. I know plenty of people in their 50s who have plenty of sex, and they write me all the time.

ZAHN: You have been writing this column for 14 years. What's the biggest change you've noticed in the kinds of questions people are asking about sex?

SAVAGE: Well, I used to -- before the Internet, you got a lot of questions, if you were writing a sex advice column, from people who were very ignorant and needed just really basic information. And now with Google and the Internet, a lot of the really basic information is out there and really easily accessible. So you don't get a lot of the, you know, What is this, what is that, what does this mean, what's this word, or is there a word for this, questions. You get much more sort of situational questions and more complicated questions than you used to.

ZAHN: And do you think that both men and women are more concerned about pleasing each other than they used to be in the past?

SAVAGE: Absolutely. There does seem to be some disconnect between the questions men ask and the questions women ask. You know, men and women are different and seem to have different approaches to sex.

ZAHN: Illuminate us. Educate us.

SAVAGE: Well, women are always asking why men have to continue being men, why men can't be women. And vice versa, actually. I get a lot of questions from women who are upset because their partners or their husbands look at pornography still or go on line and look at pornography still, and why not just look at them, since they're there. And my answer is always, you know, Men look, and men will always look. And women look, too, they're just slyer about it, I think, better at it. And if you want to be with someone who doesn't look at others and lust after others, you should get a dog or girlfriend or a plant or something besides a husband.

ZAHN: You really think women are slyer or they just don't admit it, Dan?

SAVAGE: I think so. I think women are slyer about checking out guys than guys are about checking out women.

ZAHN: But seriously, how does the prevalence of pornography influence people's sex lives today?

SAVAGE: Oh, I think people compare their sex lives to the pornography they see. I think people who aren't very smart compare their sex lives to the pornography that they consume. And pornography is a huge industry, bigger than Hollywood. And a lot of people sometimes forget that pornography is stylized, I call it kabuki sex. It's not the way sex really looks or works or feels. But a lot of people get ideas from pornography and act on them or, you know, feel that they're coming up short or wonder why things can't be as perfect and beautiful in their sex lives as they appear to be in pornography and then feel that there's something lack from their sex life, when actually, they just have to remind themselves that, you know, real life isn't like pornography any more than real life isn't like a TV sitcom.

ZAHN: All right, but Dan, I guess that -- that leads me to this question. Do you really think that people have greater performance anxiety today than they did 15, 20 years ago?

SAVAGE: I think men do because things are fairer today than they used to be. It all used to be saddled up on women's shoulders and how the sex as going to go (UNINTELLIGIBLE) women. And now men have to be concerned, in a way that they didn't used to a generation or two ago about women's pleasure, about women's orgasms, about women's fetishes and kinks, which is something that, you know, once upon a time, people didn't think women could have a fetish or a kink. And that's grand, I think, that men are pausing to worry about not only their performance these days but also their appearance. Straight guys are doing sit- ups. That's kind of a miracle.

(LAUGHTER)

ZAHN: And they're not only just doing 20 of those crunches a day, they're doing hundreds of them!

SAVAGE: As they should.

ZAHN: Just a final question about the tone of the questions that you answer. You really are finding, then, even people who would be shy in the past about talking about sex are pretty happy to embrace the topic today.

SAVAGE: Especially in a forum where you're anonymous, like a sex advice column. A good sex advice column -- and I think mine reads like this -- is like a conversation you have with your friends about sex. And usually, when you talk to your friends about sex, you're very ribald and you use a lot of really filthy language and you make jokes at each other's expense before you give your friends advice. And that kind of comfort and language I think is really helpful. When you use the words in an advice situation that people actually use when they talk about their sex interests and their sex problems, people learn and can pick up better. And when you use humor, people can learn and pick up better. And I think I try to do that in my column.

ZAHN: Well, Dan Savage, thank you for joining us tonight. Appreciate it.

SAVAGE: Thanks for having me.

ZAHN: And then, in our next segment, quite a change of focus, Scott Peterson, accused of killing his wife and his unborn son. Jury selection begins with the asking of some very intimate questions. We'll explain what and why.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SHARON ROCHA, LACI PETERSON'S MOTHER: There have to be enough people someplace that haven't heard about it or aren't involved with it. Not everybody follows this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZAHN: Laci Peterson's mother commenting on the prospect of finding jurors for the murder trial of her son-in-law. The first of hundreds of potential jurors started filing -- or, that is, filling out 30-page questionnaires today, as jury selection got going in the Scott Peterson case.

Joining us now from Los Angeles, jury consultant Richard Gabriel. He worked on the Heidi Fleiss and O.J. Simpson cases and he's president of the American Society of Trial Consultants. Welcome.

RICHARD GABRIEL, JURY CONSULTANT: Good to be here, Paula.

ZAHN: Our pleasure. Let's talk a little bit about this questionnaire. What do they want to know about these potential jurors?

GABRIEL: Well, they want to know as much as they can about these jurors. Please remember that this is a trial which involves the death penalty, which means that people's experiences, their life experiences, their beliefs, their opinions all relating to how they view the death penalty, how -- what they might have heard about this case, and also their own personal life experiences, such as the loss of a child or the loss of a loved one, are all things that jurors bring to bear when they're ultimately making a decision on this case. So this very extensive questionnaire probes into -- sometimes very personally into people's backgrounds, experiences and beliefs to find out if there might be something that inclines them one way or would prevent them from being a fair and impartial juror.

ZAHN: I think it's pretty easy to understand how the loss of a child might impact on a juror's mindset, but there are pretty invasive questions being asked of these jurors. Help us understand what a previous marriage might have to do with the outcome of this trial, what someone's extramarital affair record would bear impact on it?

GABRIEL: Well, it is very invasive. And the thing that the -- that both sides want to know is if there's something about somebody's background experience that would prevent them from being fair and impartial. For example, let's say somebody has -- had a spouse that's been involved in an extramarital affair and has some really strong emotions about it. I think both sides really are entitled to know that because it's hard to sort of set that aside and say, These are my feelings, based on my own personal experiences, versus my views based on the evidence coming from the witness stand.

So those are the kinds of questions that sometimes jurors themselves are not necessarily aware that that may give rise to a bias that both sides are really entitled to hear about.

ZAHN: Scott Peterson greeting some of those prospective jurors today, basically saying, Hello, good morning to you. Why was that initial introduction so important for him today?

GABRIEL: It's the first impression. People might have seen him on television. They might have read about him in the newspaper. But here they are, live in court with the defendant. And they are immediately assessing his demeanor and his credibility and looking at him, quite frankly, to say, Is this man potentially guilty? Could he have done this horrible crime that he's accused of doing?

ZAHN: Isn't there a risk, though, that some people might view that as arrogant or smug in some way? This is a very serious proceeding.

GABRIEL: It is a very serious proceeding. The way he does it is important. I'm sure jurors do believe that he is trying to make a good impression. But any kind of demeanor, if he -- he also runs the risk, if he doesn't greet them at all, of looking cold and distant, which can also be interpreted by jurors in a very negative way. So it's a very fine line that he has to walk when he's sitting there in court.

ZAHN: Do you think, in the end, Scott Peterson will end up with a jury that will be fair to him, or that Laci Peterson's family feels will be fair to them?

GABRIEL: Well, I think they're engaged in a very lengthy process to find that. Whether it's fair -- I think there's going to be balancing interests, and it has to be a very, very intensive process. I think, ultimately, they can find a fair jury. However, it really is going to take some in-depth probing to find out what people's biases are and...

ZAHN: How long are you talking about here? Are you talking weeks?

GABRIEL: I think it's going to be weeks. I think we're talking about four weeks, maybe more.

ZAHN: Really?

GABRIEL: Yes. I think it could be a very extensive process. Partly, it could have to do with -- if the judge decides that, We want to sit down and talk to these jurors individually and really get to probe into their answers and beliefs -- if you're talking about one, two, three, four, even five jurors a day, that can really drag on.

ZAHN: We will be watching from here. Jury consultant Richard Gabriel, thank you for your insights tonight.

And we want to thank you all for being with us tonight. Appreciate your joining us. We'll be back same time, same place tomorrow night. Until then, have a good night.

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



Increasing on College Campuses>


International Edition
CNN TV CNN International Headline News Transcripts Advertise With Us About Us
SEARCH
   The Web    CNN.com     
Powered by
© 2005 Cable News Network LP, LLLP.
A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.
Terms under which this service is provided to you.
Read our privacy guidelines. Contact us.
external link
All external sites will open in a new browser.
CNN.com does not endorse external sites.
 Premium content icon Denotes premium content.
Add RSS headlines.