Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
President Obama Awarded the Nobel Peace Prize; NASA Attacks the Moon; Dollar at 14-Month Low; Don Draper Syndrome; It's Raining Beer!; Home Stretch For Health Care
Aired October 09, 2009 - 06:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
JOHN ROBERTS, CNN ANCHOR: And good morning, thanks for being with us on this Friday. It's the 9th of October, and we do have breaking news to tell you about. In fact, if you've been watching Jonathan Mann on CNN International, you know the news already.
Good to have you with us this morning. I'm John Roberts.
KIRAN CHETRY, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Kiran Chetry. And that news, we were all sitting in the newsroom when it came across our announcement there in the newsroom and the wire services that our president, Barack Obama, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize less than nine months into his presidency. And it is quite a stunning development when you look back on the history of this prize. How many sitting presidents have actually earned it?
It would make him the third, not since Woodrow Wilson back in 1919 have we seen a sitting president get it. But he was not even mentioned on a short list of candidates, and he received the honor for, according to the Prize committee "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples."
Now, this surprise announcement came from Oslo less than an hour ago. Let's listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
THORNBJORN JAGLAND, CHAIRMAN, NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE: The Nobel committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CHETRY: CNN is covering this developing story from every angle. We have chief international correspondent Christiane Amanpour with us and also "STATE OF THE UNION" anchor John King standing by.
First of all, we're going to start with White House correspondent Dan Lothian. And we know it's quite early but has there been any reaction from the White House yet, Dan?
DAN LOTHIAN, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: No official reaction from the White House just yet. It obviously shows that they were also caught off guard by this announcement. But two things came to mind when this shocking announcement was made. First of all, that the president obviously is getting an "A" for effort here. The president has made overtures and talked about since he was running for president that he wanted to be one who would engage in dialogue. We've seen him do that with Iran. We've also seen him at the U.N. in New York most recently trying to get both the Israelis and the Palestinians to jump start the peace process there. So certainly that is one of the factors here.
But the other factor as well -- and this is something that we hear from the White House time and time again -- any time there are polls that come out that shows the favorability ratings of the U.S. on the rise around the world, they'll e-mail those to us. And so there's this real sense from the White House here that the president has been able to change the tone and the way that the Americans are viewed around the world. From ones of being bullies to pushing the rest of the global community around to one who says, listen, let's sit down, let's talk together. There's a partnership here.
So there's a sense that that's one of the factors involved here. The president changing the tone of how people view the United States around the world. And then also the president making these efforts towards peace, being willing to sit down, have some dialogue with countries like Iran.
ROBERTS: And, Dan, it's an interesting contrast, too, isn't it because the president's style of diplomacy has not been without its criticism. Republicans, conservatives have criticized him for being sort of pursuing this soft American policies as opposed to a hard American policy. But when you turn the coin around and you look at it from the other side of the world, they really appreciate that.
LOTHIAN: That's right. I mean, there are those critics who say some of these people who the president wants to reach out to and have dialogue with, he's sort of doing it in reverse. That they need to come into line before the United States to bring them to the table.
But this administration really believes that for too long the world community has been -- or some of these leaders have been hit over the head with a hammer. And now it's time to have dialogue. They really believe that this is a way to go forward. And clearly, the prospect of peace and the prospect of having these dialogues around the world certainly came into some perfect consideration for this, John.
CHETRY: It's also interesting about whether it ratchets up the pressure, you know, on this president and on this administration to get something done because of the fact that this prize was awarded.
LOTHIAN: That's true, but on the other hand, it could also help him. I mean, the White House has been beaten up most recently over, you know, what to do next in Afghanistan. Republicans and both Democrats pushing this administration about whether additional troops should be sent in or whether it should be a more focused approach in Afghanistan.
Perhaps this could be something that helps this administration not only push through on the front in Afghanistan but also, you know, health care as well. A lot of hurdles involving health care. And so perhaps this is something that the administration can use to say hey, listen, you know, in the world community, the president has some juice here, so this could help him.
ROBERTS: All right. Dan Lothian for us at the White House this morning. Dan, thanks.
Joining us on the telephone now is our chief national correspondent/anchor of "STATE OF THE UNION," John King.
And, John, a rather surprising announcement today because no one knew that Barack Obama was even on the short list. And while other presidents have won this, they've either won it in their second term or Jimmy Carter decades after his work on forging the Camp David accords. And this is a president who's barely nine months in office. Was this awarded more on sort of, you know, the level of promise of what is possible than what has actually happened?
JOHN KING, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (via telephone): I think that's exactly right, John. And good morning to you. If you read what the judges said, I think much like many American voters in 2008, they are voting for hope. They are saying that he has changed the tone and as Dan Lothian just said, you know, put a premium on talking and on international diplomacy. And so they are investing in President Obama. Someone who, we should note for the record, even as we congratulate him, has been unable to get the Israelis and the Palestinians back to the peace table.
But remember, this is a slice of the international community that widely condemns the Iraq war, and President Obama is trying to end it. And if you look around the world as well, who else might be a question that comes to mind this morning?
Nouri al-Maliki, the prime minister of Iraq, could have been a candidate. Iraq can't pass an election law, John, and there's still sectarian violence. Hamid Karzai, the president of Afghanistan, could be a candidate if he could show Afghanistan to the world as the place where 9/11 was launched, the home of the al Qaeda and the Taliban now reformed, but he is accused of a corruption election. And so the judges have been looking are the world, decides to invest in the president of the United States and say that he has set a hopeful tone.
There will be some who will say where are the results, but the White House, I think, will say that they've made a down payment.
CHETRY: It's very -- yes, it's interesting that the president of Finland who was last year's prize winner said that this was an important encouragement coming from the committee. So as we've said before, more than what has been accomplished, what the committee and what others around the world are hoping he can accomplish. An interesting, I guess, decision-making process on awarding this prize.
KING: It is a perspective award in some sense. And again, remember, this president is being judged very much in the context of what the world thought of his predecessor and especially in the second term when George W. Bush, you know, was escalating a war in Iraq, that most of the international community had condemned, when he was refusing to negotiate with North Korea and refusing, although at the very end, trying to have some conversations but mostly refusing to negotiate with Iran. That was in perspective that was rejected in the world.
And President Obama went to Cairo, gave that big speech about trying to reach out to the Muslim world. He is sitting down from Iran. He is open to negotiations with North Korea. He is trying to bring the troops home from Iraq and end that war, even as he may well escalate the military side of what's happening in Afghanistan. But if you read what the judges said, they essentially are looking at the president of the United States and striking a hopeful tone that he has changed the paradigm of world diplomacy and that progress will come. Maybe not major progress as yet, but the judges seem to be placing a bet that this will change things in the long run.
ROBERTS: And, John, in announcing the award today, the Nobel Committee keyed in particularly on the work that President Obama has done to try to reduce nuclear weapons around the world. He has had some preliminary talks with Russia on that front. But when you look back over recent American presidents, there are presidents who have signed treaties that have resulted in very significant reductions in nuclear arsenals, yet they did not win the Nobel Peace Prize.
President Clinton long thought to be a potential candidate for it, he didn't win. Why do you -- why do you think that they found particular favor with Barack Obama on key points like that, nuclear arms reduction, you know, peace around the world?
KING: Well, for one, and again, this is not said with disrespect, you cannot point to a major diplomatic international achievement yet in this president. He has many big things on the table, but they are not finished yet. And the goal of the nuclear free world is certainly a worthy goal. And this president has invested some time in it, trying to negotiate with Russia, saying he would commit the United States to some unilateral steps to prove its point, trying to get India and other nuclear nations around the world to join those conversations as well.
But to your point about Bill Clinton, you know, he had the Israelis and the Palestinians at the table and thought he had a peace deal in hand. And the past winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, Yasser Arafat, walked away from that deal. And that -- that is to this day a great frustration for President Clinton.
So again, as we watch this reaction to this award now, the president, I assume we will hear from him I'm sure today. It is very much a look down the road as the committee betting that the change in tone that President Obama has set about nuclear weapons, about the value of international diplomacy, about changing a tone that, remember, the Bush doctrine of preemption and the Bush words, "if you're not with us, you're against us," changing that tone, the judges have apparently decided it's worth to award him. They are betting, again, that the rewards will come down the road. ROBERTS: John King, our host of "STATE OF THE UNION." John, thanks. Stay with us because we'd like to get back to you in the not- too-distant future. So good to have you around this morning.
CHETRY: And for more on what this means on the world stage, we want to bring in our chief international correspondent, Christiane Amanpour. She joins us on the phone this morning.
And, Christiane, just give us some perspective here. How highly regarded is the Nobel Peace Prize? Why is it important on a global perspective?
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (via telephone): Well, it is very highly regarded. It is the top prize of its nature around the world. And as John has said and as many have said, it's often unusually awarded for a lifetime achievement. But what is interesting is what the judges have said and what certain members of the Nobel Committee have said, that this is more an award to reward and encourage the promise of what President Obama might bring to the world rather than what has actually been achieved at the moment. And yet, of course, they do, especially in Norway and in those countries, especially in Europe, they value so highly multilateralism, engagement with the world.
This obviously, as John has said, and you've all been discussing, is a direct reflection on the polar opposite of what was perceived around the world to be the situation under President Obama's predecessor. And what they really do like is this notion of back to multilateralism, no going it alone, engagement with the world, instead of isolation, reaching out to the so-called adversaries of the United States, whether they be Iran, North Korea or elsewhere.
The whole idea of a zero nuclear world, not just reducing nuclear weapons, but attempting to say no more nuclear weapons in the world. At a time when there is fear of nuclear proliferation in some of the other states around the world and fear that nuclear weapons or the nuclear know-how might fall into the very wrong hands.
Obviously, of course, what President Obama did at his inauguration, reaching out to the Muslim world, wanting a new relationship, and then that big speech in Cairo goes a long way towards it. And in terms of real numbers around the world, certainly the popularity of President Obama is much, much higher than the popularity of his predecessor.
Having said that, however, it does not necessarily follow that the popularity of the United States is the same as President Obama's personal popularity. So the rest of the world, while encouraging and welcoming the change that President Obama has said he wants to bring, is very much still waiting to see how that translates into policy into some of the crucial areas.
ROBERTS: That's an interesting juxtaposition because during the Bush administration, Christiane, the view from Europe was that Americans are much more popular than the president. Now it seems that the president may be more popular than the actual country is. But how much of a departure is this for the Nobel Committee to award the promise of what's possible as opposed to things that have been accomplished?
AMANPOUR: Well, it is unusual. And I think that you heard, as it was being announced live in Norway, the gasp in the room. So it is unusual.
I'm trying to at this time of the morning search my brain for something similar, and I can't quite come up with it right now. But the fact of the matter is that this has been awarded for what has begun and for what has been promised.
But right now the president is dealing, and right now he's having his strategy sessions, for instance, on Afghanistan, what to do to try to beat back the Taliban and, frankly, to cement peace. Peace which is what the Nobel Peace Prize is all about in that country. And to that end, there are going to be issues with his NATO allies.
Yes, his personal popularity is up in places like Germany, for instance, where it was rock bottom for President Bush, but that does not mean to say that President Obama has yet had the opportunity or the cooperation in terms of more troops from the NATO allies for Afghanistan.
Now, many of them may be waiting to see what he himself does after his strategic review, but so far very little luck in getting the allies to pony up more troops, more resources for a war that is being fought right now.
CHETRY: Stick with us, Christiane. We also want to bring in John King once again.
And, John King, sure to get a lot of reaction around the country and around the world for this announcement today. "Wall Street Journal" had an interesting editorial. I just want to read you a little part of it and get your reaction.
They wrote, "This is completely bizarre. Barack Obama has just won the Peace Prize. It's unclear why -- for making peace of a kind with Hillary Clinton? For giving up the missile shield and cheering up the Iranians?" The editorial on "The Wall Street Journal" goes on to say, "It's so post-modern. A leader can now win the Peace Prize for saying he hopes to bring about peace at some point in the future. He doesn't actually have to do it. Brilliant."
What do you think?
KING: Well, "The Wall Street Journal" editorial page often sets the tone of what becomes the conservative political conversation in the United States. So that sounds a tad sarcastic, maybe even cynical, some might say.
If you remove the conservative bend of the newspaper from it, they are adding their conservative bend to I think what you have heard from Dan, even saying White House officials would concede this point, and myself and Christiane in the sense that this is a bet. This is not an award to reward the president of the United States for a list of achievements. It is an award to congratulate the president of the United States for setting out an agenda, an agenda that is not yet realized.
As Christiane just noted, very difficult time despite his popularity, using his power of diplomacy to win troops in Afghanistan. The Israeli prime minister at the moment is flat out rebuking the president of the United States and refusing to say and do some things including stopping settlements that would get the Israeli/Palestinian peace process resumed.
There are other examples around the world where the president has started things but come nowhere close to finishing them. And I don't say that as a criticism. He's been in office just shy of ten months and he is just beginning many ambitious goals, trying to push for many ambitious goals around the world. And the judges are deciding.
And I think again, we should say in context, after looking around the world perhaps for somebody else, that this was their bet, to make an investment in what they hope will be a different future.
ROBERTS: John King for us this morning. John, thanks so much for that.
President Obama, we want to reiterate, not the first U.S. politician or even sitting president to win the Nobel Peace Prize. Back in 1906, President Teddy Roosevelt won the Peace Prize for his efforts at brokering peace between Russia and Japan, helping to broker the Treaty of Portsmouth.
In 1919, President Woodrow Wilson won the prize for helping to found the League of Nations. In 2002, long after he left office, President Jimmy Carter won the prize in part to the Camp David accords that established peace between Egypt and Israel. And in 2007, former Vice President Al Gore won for his lifetime work on climate change.
CHETRY: So we're going to continue to follow this as reaction comes in. We have Afghanistan's president weighing in this morning. Iran's president on the news that President Barack Obama has won the Nobel Peace Prize this year.
We're going to take a quick break, and when we come back, we're following some other breaking news. In just about an hour and 15 minutes, NASA is set to bomb the moon. We're going to be getting some live pictures of watch parties going on around the country.
Fifteen minutes after the hour.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROBERTS: Welcome back to the Most News in the Morning, and we're following the breaking news. If you're just joining us, a somewhat surprising news this morning that made most of our jaws in the newsroom drop, mostly because we didn't expect it. President Obama has won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize less than nine months into his presidency. No one even knew he was on the list. The announcement coming a little more than an hour ago from Oslo. We are reaching out to the White House to see whether anyone knew that this was coming, and our experts of course weighing in all morning long about what it means in places like Iran and Afghanistan.
CHETRY: Also happening now, the countdown is on, NASA getting ready to bomb part of the moon. In less than five minutes, a rocket...
ROBERTS: That just sounds so weird.
CHETRY: It does sound strange, doesn't it? Well, a rocket will be on a trajectory for the moon's frozen solid south pole, a place that hasn't seen sunlight in billions of years. Impact now 90 minutes away for those keeping count. Scientists hope that the blast will reveal any ice or water underneath the moon's surface and maybe uncover a new real estate opportunity, I guess you could say.
Jason Carroll joins us now with more on this rare event. It all sounds so far out there.
JASON CARROLL, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes.
CHETRY: Bombing the moon, first of all, but also what they're hoping that these findings - if they do find anything - will lead to.
CARROLL: Yes. A lot is riding on this, obviously, a lot of hopes out there as well. You know, if all goes well, the impact should happen sometime around 7:30 this morning. This is definitely a big day for NASA, and depending on what they find, it could lead to another giant step toward space exploration.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CARROLL, (voice-over): Not since man landed on the moon has there been such interest in Earth's closest celestial neighbor. Just ask the man this charge of this morning's lunar mission.
DANIEL ANDREWS, NASA LCROSS PROJECT MANAGER: Tomorrow's impact of the LCROSS Mission is going to be very exciting. Teams worked hard for a long time on this clever, innovative mission and all systems are green. We're looking good going in.
CARROLL: NASA's goal: search for more evidence of water. Why? It's one of the building blocks of life as we know it, and NASA says it's essential if a moon base is ever to become a reality. A recent mission found trace amounts on the surface, but is there more?
Computer animation showing how today's mission is expected to find out: a booster rocket traveling approximately 6,000 miles per hour slams into the surface, sending up a plume of debris six miles high. Then, a satellite analyzes the plume for signs of water. Then the satellite crashes, creating a second plume to be analyzed by telescopes. Watching closely, one man who has literally been there before. BUZZ ALDRIN, APOLLO 11 ASTRONAUT: People to be interested in space for whatever reason, I think, is very, very healthy because that exhibits the curiosity of the human species.
CARROLL: Buzz Aldrin left his footprint on the moon's surface 40 years ago during the Apollo 11 mission - the first man lunar landing. He would rather see experiments focused on long-term space travel instead of exploring our closest neighbor.
ALDRIN: In my opinion of 40 years of seeing the growing space program and its ups and downs, it is not the place where we should go back to.
CARROLL: Planetary scientists like David Paige disagree.
DAVID PAIGE, PROFESSOR OF PLANETARY SCIENCE, UCLA: If we do find ice there and a - a large abundance of it, I think that we'll - we'll be much closer to this notion of inhabiting the moon someday.
CARROLL: The mission's manager says the lunar experiment could bring man closer to long-term space flight.
ANDREWS: Learning to live off the land somewhere other than Earth is - is critical to us going anywhere off of Earth.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CARROLL (on camera): Well, data from this morning's mission should come in to scientists almost instantly, but the mission's manager, Daniel Andrews, tells me it could take weeks to analyze it. So in other words, it could be a while before we know if there is actually more water there trapped on the moon, but exciting nonetheless.
CHETRY: It is! It's fascinating. So you'll be watching, I'm sure, with the popcorn...
CARROLL: Oh, absolutely.
CHETRY: ... in just - what? Like, 80 minutes from now.
CARROLL: Fingers crossed.
CHETRY: Watch parties going on all over the place, right? The museum down in Washington and everything.
ROBERTS: The former Canadian in me is looking for the hockey rink.
CARROLL: It's cold enough, that's for sure.
ROBERTS: All right, Jason, thanks so much.
So the president gets honored with the Nobel Prize at the same time that the American greenback gets a raspberry. Our Christine Romans is "Minding Your Business" dollars at a 14-month low now. Twenty-two minutes after the hour.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CHETRY: Twenty-five minutes past the hour on this Friday, and if you are just joining us, some surprising news this morning and some breaking news. President Obama, the surprise winner of this year's Nobel Peace Prize. We say "surprise" because they don't announce all the nominees, but there were 205 this year. They don't put out their names publicly. But there were some that people said were the front runners, and our president was certainly not on that list.
But the announcement was made in Oslo about an hour ago, and you could hear the audible gasps in the room and the clapping as well when this decision came down. The committee says that the president has "made extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples." And you can certainly guarantee that the reaction is going to be coming in quickly from all sides this morning in the wake of this stunning announcement.
ROBERTS: Absolutely. A big vote of confidence for our president, but, unfortunately, not much confidence in the American dollar these days. Christine Romans here "Minding Your Business" and there's always good news and bad news in the evaluation of currency, but typically (ph) the bad news can outweigh the good.
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: It's true, and - and sometimes, you know, we talk about the dollar - mostly in this country, we talk about what it means for you if you go someplace overseas, what it means for you against, you know, the British pound or another currency. But it's also, it's a symbol of America's economic prowess, and the dollar is the international language of trade.
So when the dollar has been beaten down to a 14-month low now, it starts to - to take notice about what the rest of the world, our creditors in particular, are thinking about the direction of this country. The dollar, as I said, down 14 - a 14-month low. It's down 12 percent, almost, since President Obama took office, so even as he's being awarded this high honor for peace, the currency of this country has been kicked down.
There are a few reasons here, and some of these reasons are conflicting, quite honestly. There's the hope for a recovery, meaning that people might be selling the dollar and buying gold and buying big commodities, thinking that those are going to rise when the recovery finally comes and takes hold. There are also worries about inflation. Inflation could be a very big problem down the road, selling the dollar and buying these inflation-sensitive other - other commodities.
But the bond markets are telling us the opposite. They're telling us that inflation isn't a problem, so there's a bit of a - a puzzle there. Also, you're seeing that the United States continues to stand by its strong dollar. It doesn't necessarily comment publicly about the dollar. It can be very, very dangerous...
ROBERTS: It's officially a strong dollar policy.
ROMANS: It's officially a strong dollar policy, but you mentioned some of the - the up sides after a strong dollar. It's good for our exporters. And so that's starting to make (ph)...
ROBERTS: You mean a weak dollar.
ROMANS: A weak dollar, right. A weak dollar is good for our exporters, and so that might be why...
ROBERTS: (INAUDIBLE) wages relative to other countries where their currencies are higher seem a little cheaper?
ROMANS: That's right. And let's be honest, you know, we need it. So, I mean, that might be why the White House and - and the Treasury Department have been stepping back and this has been allowed to happen. "The Wall Street Journal" says the US stands by as the dollar falls, and that's true. They've basically not been commenting on this. But the dollar has been weakened.
Now, the dollar it's up a little bit this morning, inching up today because the Fed chief, Ben Bernanke, he gave a speech last night and he said that when the economy starts to recover and that recovery takes hold, we will raise interest rates. We will have to raise interest rates that will make dollar-based assets more attractive and more - you know, a better investment and so that's why the dollar's up a little bit today.
ROBERTS: The big worry, though, is inflation, right?
ROMANS: The big worry is inflation - the big worry is inflation, and the big worry is that all of this money that we've jacked into the system, that we're not going to pull it out in the right way at the right time and then it's going to be a problem down the road for the dollar.
ROBERTS: Christine Romans, "Minding Your Business" this morning. Thanks, Christine.
CHETRY: All right. Still ahead, we're going to be joined by John Avlon, "Independent" analyst. He has his picks for "Wingnut of the Week." He's also going to weigh in on the announcement that President Barack Obama is this year's Nobel Peace Prize winner.
It's 28 minutes after the hour.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.
ROBERTS: Welcome back to the Most News in the Morning.
If you're just joining us, some surprising news this morning. President Obama has won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize, less than nine months into his presidency. The president was not even mentioned on a short list of potential winners. The announcement coming a little more than an hour ago in Oslo, Norway - Kiran.
CHETRY: All right. Thanks so much, John.
Well, joining us with reaction to this is -- of Barack Obama being the Nobel Peace laureate is John Avlon, our independent analyst, columnist for TheDailyBeast.com.
You're doing Wingnuts in a minute, but first this news.
What was your reaction when you heard this?
JOHN AVLON, INDEPENDENT POLITICAL ANALYST: I was surprised, to say the least. Look, it's a great day for America when the United States president said to win the Nobel Peace Prize, but this is clearly about intentions, not outcomes. A lot of folks, they are also doing to say that partisan politics are obviously intruding in the Swedes' decision here. You've got Al Gore, Jimmy Carter and now Barack Obama. They all seem to be Democratic side of the aisle there. It's a great day for America, but this is clearly about intentions, not outcomes, because we just don't have them yet.
CHETRY: Well, it's interesting as some have pointed out. I mean, look at Ronald Reagan. He broke up the cold war. He was responsible for major changes to limiting nuclear arms. And he didn't win.
AVLON: Yes. No, that's exactly right. Gave hope to Soviet dissidents and really helped bring about the end of the cold war, but clearly partisan politics intruded in that vision of what constitutes a peacemaker. And so that is, I think, a problem in the long run because these prizes are supposed to be well beyond politics. And we are seeing partisan politics intruding in the assessment that ultimately diminishes the objective work.
CHETRY: And it's also ironic that, you know, it's the peace prize and yet it can be so partisan in terms of our reaction this morning. I have, you know, people e-mailing us saying -- I had a couple of people e-mailing saying can we now agree the peace prize is a joke? Then from the other side people are saying how dare you, you know, make it seem so unbelievable that Barack Obama won. He does deserve it. So it is --
AVLON: It is. And this shouldn't be. This is one thing we need to stay focused on. This is a great thing for America. When the president of the United States is honored with the Nobel Peace Prize, whatever your political persuasion, whatever you believe the motivations behind this award, that's a win for the United States, and that's a good thing.
CHETRY: All right. Well, let's get to your pick now for "Wingnuts of the Week," right?
AVLON: OK.
CHETRY: Let's just switch it up here...
AVLON: Segue into hyper partisanship again.
CHETRY: Exactly.
Who got your nomination or your distinction on the right?
AVLON: On the right, we got Texas Representative Louie Gohmert, who in a speech on the House floor, a rambling speech about the hate crimes bill that was attached to a defense bill, manage to bring -- compared gays and lesbians to bestiality, pedophilia and necrophilia.
Let's listen to this particular high moment, shall we?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. LOUIE GOHMERT (R), TEXAS: If you're oriented toward animals, bestiality, then, you know, that's not something that can be used -- held against you or any bias be held against you for that, which means you'd have to strike any laws against bestiality. If you're oriented toward corpses, toward children.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AVLON: Stay classy, Louie.
CHETRY: Does he have a history of making wing-nutty comments?
AVLON: He does. This year he's been making a run for Wingnut of the Year. He's became a co-sponsor of the "birther" bill going through Congress. And on Alex Jones' radio show he really embraced the kill granny argument against health care. And in this speech alone, he managed to somehow bring Hitler into it. So, always a popular wingnut tactic, Louie Gohmert, ladies and gentlemen.
CHETRY: All right. How about on the left this week. He's also a member of Congress.
AVLON: Yes. And this, I think, the metaphor here is that we've got Congress approval rating down to 21 percent, and these two folks help understand why. Florida freshman Rep. Alan Grayson, who gave a speech on the House floor again on the health care bill who embraced the death threat argument we've heard from folks on the right and really what is, I think, a new low.
Let's take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. ALAN GRAYSON (D), FLORIDA: The Republicans have a backup plan, in case you do get sick. If you get sick in America, this is what the Republicans want you to do. If you get sick, America, the Republican health care plan is this -- die quickly. That's right. The Republicans want you to die quickly.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CHETRY: What was the response on the House floor to his comments, and then also when he was called on it, did he back down?
AVLON: That's right. Well, you know, Republican representatives said this is among the most mean-spirited things they had ever seen on the Florida House. He was called on to apologize, and then he came up to apologize and said he apologized for the holocaust that the current health care system was in America, bringing the holocaust into it, which is also a questionable decision. He's considered a liberal bomb thrower by some folks on the left, but they are excusing what is just absurd statement in the name of hyper partisanship on their side. So Alan Grayson, wingnut on the left this week.
CHETRY: All right. John Avalon, always great to get your picks. Thank you.
AVLON: Thank you.
CHETRY: You can read more about them on the blog. And by the way, he has a new book out - John does. "Attack of the Wingnuts: How the Lunatic Fringe is Hijacking American Politics," that is coming out soon as well. And, again, head to our blog, CNN.com/amfix to read more about his wingnut picks.
John, great to see you. Thanks.
AVLON: Great to see you. Good morning.
CHETRY: John.
ROBERTS: All right. Thirty-five minutes after the hour. Carol Costello "Just Sayin'" coming right up. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED ACTRESS: You were right, Roger, this place really runs on charm.
UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR: This is ridiculous.
Don, I'm not going to let a woman talk to me like this. This meeting is over. Good luck, Ms. Mencken.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CHETRY: Wow! Welcome back to the Most News in the Morning.
Fans of the TV show "Mad Men" just love bad boy Don Draper. The ad man famous for drinking, smoking and diving into the secretarial pools.
ROBERTS: That's obviously not 2009. Well, he may be the picture of chauvinism. He may also be today's ideal man. Draper, in fact, was just named the year's most influential male personality beating out President Obama in a poll. Of course, Draper is not going to win the Nobel Prize. Our Carol Costello live in Washington.
So is the bad boy really what women want, Carol?
CAROL COSTELLO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: John, excuse us for just a minute.
Kiran, he's sexy.
ROBERTS: Oh, goodness me.
COSTELLO: I'm talking about Don Draper.
CHETRY: Oh, I thought you meant John.
COSTELLO: He's also sexy. I didn't mean to leave you out of this, John. But a lot of women like Don Draper simply because he's sexy. But here's where I'm going with this. You know, David Letterman, he admits to being a cad. He's had affairs with women on his staff. His wife is not happy. And yet his ratings have soared. Could it be that most women don't care?
Why do we like certain cads and dislike other men who cheat? Just sayin', it's got to be the Don Draper Syndrome.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
COSTELLO (voice-over): Don Draper, he's the charismatic lead character in Amc's "Mad Men," a TV show that takes place in the '60s when women mostly stayed at home and men brought home the bacon.
UNIDENTIFIED CHILDREN: Daddy!
COSTELLO: Draper is a suave ad man who cheats on his wife, but supports her financially.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What are you doing?
COSTELLO: And who treats most other women like dirt.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I told you to stop talking.
COSTELLO: And women who watch the show love him.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Don Draper. He's just so mysterious.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's a very particular type of magnetism.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He's just so confident. And he never doubts himself.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you know it's not good for you, but you still want it so much. Like oh, my God, you know, I have to have it.
COSTELLO: Some female viewers love Don Draper so much they didn't blink an eye when he went beyond bad boy behavior to sexual assault. Even "Jezebel," a feminist women's magazine gave him a pass for this because, "sometimes assertive women get tired of always being so damn assertive. Sometimes they like to be told what to do."
(on camera): "Just Sayin'," are women secretly yearning for a bad boy?
DR. GAIL SALTZ, PSYCHIATRIST: I think that women have, throughout the ages, yearned for the bad boy.
COSTELLO: Psychiatrist Gail Saltz says women love the idea of Don Draper because today they feel overwhelmed in a down economy with work, the kids and the needy husband. According to a study by the Wharton School, women's happiness has fallen both absolutely and relative to men's. The '60s world of "Mad Men" is what Dr. Saltz calls a fantasy solution.
SALTZ: The idea that sort of the knight would come in and scoop them up and make everything easier is also very appealing. But it's a fantasy that doesn't include being suppressed, not having anything of your own. It doesn't include those things.
UNIDENTIFIED ACTRESS: I'm worried it's a fantasy.
UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR: It's not.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COSTELLO: It's a sexual fantasy. In real life, women have scorned cheaters like former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, South Carolina's Governor Sanford and John Edwards, yet they've given some cheating men a pass like Bill Clinton and now seemingly David Letterman.
Want the real-life reason why? Well, Dr. Saltz says it's very much a function of how much you identify with the woman who's been hurt. Feel sorry for her? You hate the man. Think she can handle it? His cheating heart just might be OK.
We want to know what you think about all this. Why do women love the cheating Don Draper? Do we yearn for that old-fashioned, bring- home-the-bacon kind of guy in these economic times? Write to me on my blog at CNN.com/amfix.
Oh, I can't wait to read some of your comments.
CHETRY: I'm going to write to you. I think I'm going to do it this time.
COSTELLO: Will you?
CHETRY: I have a strong opinion about this one.
ROBERTS: Can I save the writing part and just give it to you now?
COSTELLO: Yes. ROBERTS: I think women like the idea of this, but if they were ever in a relationship with him, they would hate it.
CHETRY: Thank you. I think I agree.
COSTELLO: You paint it...
(CROSSTALK)
CHETRY: No, I think it's two different things, Carol. Bringing home the bacon and being able to trust your man is one important thing to people. Yearn for the cheating part, I mean, he just happens to be cute. He's still a loser. He's cheating on her.
COSTELLO: Right. As Dr. Saltz says, women might want to have a sexual affair with the guy kind of like the orient express, but we marry the Amtrak guy.
ROBERTS: There you go.
COSTELLO: The good guy.
ROBERTS: It's like, you know, I know some women who really think that the sun kind of rises and sets on Kid Rock, but then you say, would you want to be married to him? Oh, no, no, no, no.
COSTELLO: Ew, ew, ew! No! But anyway, CNN...
CHETRY: I also have one rule, you cannot be with a guy whose hair is longer than yours. I'm sorry.
COSTELLO: Oh, that matters a lot.
CHETRY: Oh, your hair is longer than mine, so you could be with Kid Rock.
COSTELLO: No. I could not be with Kid Rock.
(CROSSTALK)
ROBERTS: All right, Carol. We look forward to those comments this morning.
Thanks so much for that.
COSTELLO: Sure.
CHETRY: Well, still ahead, Jay Leno once again taking on AMERICAN MORNING. He poked fun at our "What's Under the Desk" situation, and now he's back at it again. We're going to hear what he's saying about us.
Forty-four minutes after the hour.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) ROBERTS: This is the "Intrepid" at the air and space museum anchored along the Hudson River. And we've got 60 degrees and cloudy right now in New York City. It's going to be rainy with a high of 68 later on today. So, not exactly a beautiful day in New York, but the early part of it should be okay on your way into work.
CHETRY: You laughing?
(LAUGHTER)
ROBERTS: OK. Time for another edition of "What's Under the Desk?"
CHETRY: First of all -- let me just say this. Jay Leno made fun of us one time. Sometimes we change our shoes last minute, or as Christine, she changes from jeans into a skirt in the course of an hour.
ROBERTS: Not on the air, though.
CHETRY: Right. So Jay Leno had a little bit of fun with that. We had a little bit of fun with Jay Leno having fun with that, and he's returned the favor. Let's take a look.
JAY LENO, NBC HOST, "THE JAY LENO SHOW": A couple of nights ago, we poked fun at CNN's "American Morning" anchors. Remember this, Kev, we did the thing with the shoes with some anchors. The following morning they ran our clip on their show. Now here take a look.
ROBERTS: Now that nobody's seeing your feet, you're perfect. Now look, take a shot of her feet. All that trouble.
LENO: Now, Liz, can we see his feet? Look at his feet. Look. See what I'm saying?
CHETRY: The funny thing is, those were not my legs.
ROMANS: They weren't?
CHETRY: Nope. And those were not his - I mean, those were not his legs, obviously, but they weren't my legs either.
LENO: She was a little miffed.
UNKNOWN MALE: All right.
LENO: And we have to admit, those were not her legs. We feel bad. Tey were nice legs.
UNKNOWN MALE: They were nice.
LENO: But they weren't her legs. You know, to be fair, we thought we should show her legs just so she -- show the clip.
CHETRY: Now we're good.
ROBERTS: Then now that nobody's seeing your feet, you're perfect. Can we at least take a shot of her feet? All that trouble.
LENO: Those are hers.
That's why we did it.
CHETRY: Jay, Jay, Jay. There are times when you don't always shave as frequently as you want to, but those were not my legs! Those were not my legs either! Can we do another, please? This is for you, jay. These.
ROBERTS: Another episode of "What's under the Desk?"
CHETRY: These are my legs.
ROBERTS: And those are her lips, too, on your cheek.
CHETRY: They are. Love you, Jay. Thanks for having fun with us. We're having fun with you, too.
ROBERTS: The President of the United States wins the Nobel peace prize, and we are 40 minutes away from a major impact on the moon. Stay with us for the Most News in the Morning. It's ten minutes down to the top of the hour.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CHETRY: Welcome back to the Most News in the Morning. We're coming up on 52 minutes past the hour. In some parts of Atlanta, they're still recovering from last month's record rains, but that's not the case at one local brewery.
ROBERTS: Their motto there at the brewery is let it rain because when it rains, it pours. Pours Beer. Reynolds Wolf has got this week's "Solutions."
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
REYNOLDS WOLF, CNN METEOROLOGIST: At the five seasons brewery in Atlanta, they've been preparing for the perfect pour. They claim to be the first brewery in the world to serve a micro-brewed green beer.
Here we go. Yep. Smack it.
Master brewer, Crawford Moran, gave me the honor of tapping the very first keg.
When you think about green beer, most people think about that stuff you have on St. Patrick's Day or that six-pack that you left in your car on a really hot day.
But here, the term takes on an entirely different meaning.
Crawford, What does green beer mean here?
CRAWFORD MORAN, 5 SEASONS BREWERY: It means something different than St. Paddy's Day stuff. It means beer that is made with pure, pristine rainwater. We just harvest it straight out of the clouds and just the way Mother Nature intended to be.
WOLF: The beer is made with pure rainwater.
RUSS JACKSON, RAIN HARVEST SYSTEMS: Basically what you do is you put this with tank under your downspout, you collect the water. When it rains, the water comes off the roof. It comes through downspout, goes through a series of different filters and collects in the tank, and then from there, we pump it through some more filtration into the brewery and that's where we start with the beer.
WOLF: The management here in says that the water is cleaner than city water, and it's softer, too. One secret of making better beer.
MORAN: There you go.
WOLF: The proof is in the drinking.
UNKNOWN FEMALE: It's actually very smooth, very mild in flavor, really tasty.
UNKNOWN MALE: The flavor of it's a little bit different. I actually like it a lot better.
WOLF: Reynolds Wolf, CNN, Atlanta.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CHETRY: Looks good to us.
ROBERTS: It does. Certainly does.
CHETRY: You know, we've been talking this morning about the surprising news that President Barack Obama was named this year's Nobel peace prize winner. We're getting reaction all over the world from that announcement today.
ROBERTS: Yeah and also in about 35 minutes' time, NASA is going to crash the shell of a rocket into a crater on the South pole of the moon and then send another spacecraft in after it which will also crash on the moon. A lot of crashing going on here. To measure whether or not there is actually water on the moon. It's a fascinating experience. And we'll cover it for you this morning. It's now six minutes to the top of the hour.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CHETRY: We're coming up on four minutes before the top of the hour right now. Welcome back to the Most News in the Morning. Just four days from now, the senate finance committee will vote on its health care reform bill.
It's an attempt at a compromise between democrats and republicans, and it could have the best chance of actually passing both chambers. The White House is applauding it, but some republicans are saying it's loaded with too many new taxes and fees. Our Jim Acosta looks at just how far this measure might go if it gets beyond the committee that crafted it.
JIM ACOSTA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: John and Kiran, after a rough couple of months, democrats are finding the patient has stabilized. Their efforts for health care reform are showing signs of life.
Democrats aren't about to pull the plug on health care reform. In fact, some are all but gift wrapping it for delivery to the White House just in time for the holidays.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SEN. TOM HARKIN (D), IOWA: We're going to have it on the President's desk before Christmas.
ACOSTA: Before Christmas?
HARKIN: Before Christmas.
ACOSTA: You think you'll have a signing?
HARKIN: I do. I believe they'll sign it before Christmas.
ACOSTA: Iowa Senator Tom Harkin who replaced the late Ted Kennedy as chairman of the health committee is confident. That's because they're talk of compromise. But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid begins the process of merging two bills from the health committee and what's expected out of the finance committee.
One compromise is called an "opt out", provision that Harkin says would allow states to choose for themselves whether to join a government insurance program or public option.
HARKIN: In fact, I had suggested maybe one time that there should be a reverse option. In other words, you have a public option, and if the state wants to opt out of it, they can opt out of it.
ACOSTA: Democrats know the public may be coming around with one recent poll showing support for their proposals climbing to 40% from 34% a month ago.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We're coming around the curve. We're coming around the curve.
ACOSTA: Former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole is predicting a bill will pass, and he's warning his fellow republicans to get on board stat.
ROBERT DOLE, FORMER SENATE MAJORITY LEADER: They don't want Obama to get it, so we've got to kill it, not because of the merits of the bill but because they don't want the President to get any credit. Now, you can do that, and I'm probably guilty of it, but you can't make a habit of it. And health care is one of those things.
UNKNOWN MALE: I don't know what kind of process this is. But I think it's outrageous.
ACOSTA: But current GOP leaders on Capitol Hill want none of it, accusing democrats of hiding the true costs of health care reform.
SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R), KENTUCKY: That's because the real bill will soon be cobbled together in a secret conference room, somewhere here in the capitol by a handful of democratic senators and White House officials.
ACOSTA: In the end, Senator Harkin believes democrats will support a robust public option in the final bill. But senate democratic leaders are keeping the opt out in their back pockets just in case they have to win over any last-minute holdouts -- John and Kiran.
CHETRY: Jim Acosta for us this morning. We'll have to wait and see. Thanks, Jim.
