Return to Transcripts main page
Campbell Brown
U.S. Military Focuses on Suicide Prevention; General Motors Running on Empty
Aired May 27, 2009 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ROLAND MARTIN, CNN ANCHOR: Folks, something terrible is happening to our troops. They risk everything to defend our country, but now a growing number of U.S. soldiers are taking their own lives.
Tonight, one Army base is taking extraordinary steps to try and stop it. That's just one of stories we're talking about tonight with CNN anchor and correspondent Erica Hill, national political correspondent Jessica Yellin, Lisa Bloom, "In Session" anchor and CNN legal analyst, and Steve Kornacki, columnist for "The New York Observer."
Folks, we begin with the suicides haunting Fort Campbell, the Army base near Paducah, Kentucky. It's not the only place where troops are killing themselves, but the numbers at Fort Campbell alone led commanders to order a stand-down, shutting down operations for three days beginning today.
Pentagon correspondent Chris Lawrence is at Fort Campbell tonight.
Chris, tell us, exactly why do they think this is going to help?
CHRIS LAWRENCE, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, Roland, it's designed to just clear the table and focus everyone just on preventing suicides.
That's why every soldier here has now been assigned a battle buddy to look out for each other. And so far this year, a Fort Campbell soldier is nearly three times more likely to kill himself than die in battle. Think about that. Three soldiers from here were killed in Afghanistan -- 11 committed suicide.
MARTIN: Chris, is there any...
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BRIG. GEN. STEPHEN TOWNSEND, SENIOR COMMANDER, FORT CAMPBELL: Suicide on Fort Campbell is bad, and it's got to stop now.
No matter how tough your problems look right now, they will be better tomorrow. Believe it. Trust me. You don't have to believe it. Just trust me. They will be better tomorrow. Don't take away your tomorrow.
(END VIDEO CLIP) LAWRENCE: And, again, tonight, it's not just one base. There are 64 potential suicides in the Army this year. The Marines had 41 last year -- Roland.
MARTIN: Chris, is there any one reason they can point to as to why these soldiers are killing themselves?
LAWRENCE: It's tough, but about -- but about 70 percent of the suicides last year listed relationship problems as at least part of the answer.
Now, the Pentagon is trying to get a lot of these soldiers more time at home. But it cannot and will not happen for at least 18 months, when we're completely out of Iraq. And some officials have told us privately they're literally holding their breath until that happens.
MARTIN: Chris Lawrence, we certainly appreciate it. Thanks a bunch.
Folks, Iraq Veteran Paul Rieckhoff created the first and largest organization devoted to vets of both Afghanistan and Iraq. He's also author of the book "Chasing Ghosts."
Paul, certainly, welcome back to the program.
PAUL RIECKHOFF, FOUNDER & EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN VETERANS OF AMERICA: Thank you.
MARTIN: Now, this stand-down, Paul, do you think it's actually going to help?
RIECKHOFF: Yes, absolutely. I think the 101st Airborne has always shown leadership. They showed leadership in World War II, in every major conflict. And they're showing leadership here again.
This is a matter of life and death. Taking these folks off the line, giving them mandatory suicide prevention counseling, family counseling will help. It will definitely save lives. And we need it right now. Fort Campbell up until March was losing one soldier a week to suicide. So, this issue definitely an urgent issue they have got to take on head on.
ERICA HILL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: You mentioned March because that was when they actually put into place a prevention campaign.
But one thing I think we need to take into account, Brigadier General Townsend has said, look, treat any mental issue you may have, any concern just the way you would a physical injury on that battlefield.
But there's still such a stigma, Paul, when it comes to seeking help and some concern that it may show weakness, especially as you further your career in the military. How do you overcome that?
RIECKHOFF: Just like this. You take it on as a leadership issue. You have leaders out in front saying, I have gotten help. It's just like a gunshot wound, some other kind of physical injury.
You take it head on. It's treatable. Suicide is entirely preventable. This isn't traumatic brain injury or another type of physical wound. You can get ahead of the curve here, get screening, get counselors in place, get the families involved and save lives.
LISA BLOOM, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: We hear about soldiers taking so many multiple tours of duty. But is there something about fighting an insurgency also that adds to the psychological stress?
RIECKHOFF: Sure. These folks are under tremendous stress. They don't know where the enemy is coming from. They don't know what type of weapon they are going to use.
And every brigade at Fort Campbell has been deployed three times at this point. So, these folks are going over and over again. We have got to give them rest. We have got to give them treatment and we have got to give their families support, too. That's a critical part of a comprehensive solution.
JESSICA YELLIN, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Paul, isn't that really the bottom-line problem, is this redeployment? Can you stop the suicides without stopping this many, three redeployments, for some of these folks, facing a fourth?
RIECKHOFF: You can definitely reduce the number. If we do mandatory mental health screening across the board, you can catch folks who have problems before they go.
We can get psychological trauma counselors in the field, on the front lines when folks are wounded or killed. And we can get them adequate support throughout the entire redeployment process. It's not happening at the higher levels enough right now. We need the president involved. And we can really get ahead of the curve on this.
STEVE KORNACKI, COLUMNIST, "THE NEW YORK OBSERVER": Paul, we heard Chris in that piece there talking about the idea of we have the drawdown in Iraq coming. We're going to get some relief maybe, because these troops can come hone and finally catch their breath. In theory, that sounds great.
But we're also talking about ramping up, having basically a surge in Afghanistan now. We're sending thousands of new troops over there, a lot whom presumably are going to come from Iraq, going from one -- one boilerplate to the next. Is this trend really going to slow down much until we're completely out of Iraq and Afghanistan?
RIECKHOFF: We don't know, but we can definitely eliminate some of the risk factors.
And you can't grow the size of military overnight and deployments. We're not going to pull everybody home from Iraq immediately. But we can get them the care that they need. We can get leadership involved. We need the president talking about these issues. Admiral Mullen has been showing leadership here, Secretary Gates. They can send the right message and let these soldiers know that coming forward is a sign of strength. It will make your unit stronger, not a sign of weakness.
MARTIN: Paul, how do you, though, get a soldier to recognize the condition of his fellow soldier? Because, at the end of the day, those two are by each other side by side. And so how do you convince one person to say, you need to -- you need to tell somebody about your -- about your partner?
RIECKHOFF: Well, it's already part of the culture. You have a buddy system in place. You have got a battle buddy when you go through basic training.
If your battle buddy is struggling, you are supposed to take care of him. He's having a tough issue, you work care of him.
(CROSSTALK)
MARTIN: ... struggling, though. I understand in the battlefield. But what you tell them guys, this is struggling as well.
RIECKHOFF: Yes, absolutely.
You have got to know the warning signs. You have got to know if somebody is having an alcohol or drug problem, if they're having family issues, if they have talked about feeling disconnected from the rest of the unit. Those are the warning signs. And you have an obligation to take care of them, just as though they sprained their ankle or got shot in the battlefield.
HILL: One last quick point, though. I just want to get back to the (INAUDIBLE) for a second. Do you think that the Army, in fact, all branches of the military, are adequately trying to also treat the stigma, not just the problem?
RIECKHOFF: They can definitely do more. And they're behind the curve here. We're into multiple deployments. Admiral Mullen and other folks are catching up for years, I think, of a lack of focus. So, they have got a lot of ground to make up.
But the stigma is a cultural issue, big bureaucracy. It's going to take time and it's going to take leadership.
MARTIN: Paul Rieckhoff, author of "Chasing Ghosts," thanks for coming by and also for your leadership. We appreciate it.
RIECKHOFF: Any time. Thank you, folks.
MARTIN: Folks, barely 24 hours after President Obama announced his Supreme Court nominee is Sonia Sotomayor, some Republicans are already demanding she pull out of the running. We will look why in a moment.
And nobody complains about our kids getting time off for Christmas. But now one school district is thinking about closing the classrooms on Muslim holidays as well.
Spirit from Kansas gives the idea a passing grade. (BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
SPIRIT, KANSAS: Public schools should be closed for a Muslim holiday. If you're going to be closed for a Christian holiday, yes, you should make a closing for a Muslim holiday.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
MARTIN: Agree or disagree? Should a public school be closed for a Muslim holiday? Give us a call, 1-877-NO-BULL-0. That's 1-877-662- 8550.
You can also e-mail me, Roland@CNN.com, or drop me a note on Twitter and Facebook.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARTIN: Wow. That didn't take long, Republicans looking for any sign of controversy from Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor are now lasering in on her comments eight years ago while lecturing at the University of California-Berkeley.
Referring to former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, Sotomayor said -- quote -- "A wise old man and wise old women will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases, adding, "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."
Those words have lit up the GOP. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is calling that racism. Actually, he called it reverse racism, and on his Twitter page today, demanded Sotomayor withdraw her name from consideration.
And, of course, Rush Limbaugh, he had to get in on it as well. He is calling her a reverse racist as well, even though that, frankly, there's no phrase for that.
(LAUGHTER)
MARTIN: Let's bring in criminal defense attorney Alex Sanchez, who, like Sotomayor, grew up in the Bronx section folks New York, and, in Denver, former Republican Congressman and presidential candidate Tom Tancredo.
All right, Tom, here's what you have said about Judge Sotomayor: "She appears to be racist. She said things that are racist. And there's no one would get on the Supreme Court saying a thing like that, except for a Hispanic woman."
Explain that.
TOM TANCREDO (R), FORMER U.S. CONGRESSMAN: This particular -- well, because, of course, everybody is afraid to challenge her on it, for fear of themselves being called racist. So, therefore, it sets this perfect stage. There's no other way, absolutely -- you would have to admit -- I cannot believe that even this show, even this network, even you guys would not agree that anybody else saying something like that, anybody who is attempting to, especially, reach the highest court in the land, would immediately be disqualified.
There is absolutely no two ways about it. It would be over with.
MARTIN: Alex...
(CROSSTALK)
TANCREDO: But she's not, because you are defending her. Why? Why are you defending her?
MARTIN: OK. OK. First of all, Tom, no one sat here and defended her. We simply let the facts out. So, please get that fact straight.
Alex, take a look at this Newt Gingrich...
(CROSSTALK)
TANCREDO: You're not defending her.
(CROSSTALK)
MARTIN: Tom, Tom, Tom, I'm going to Alex.
(CROSSTALK)
MARTIN: Alex, here's what Newt Gingrich said on Twitter: "White man racist nominee would be forced to withdraw. Latina woman racist should also withdraw."
ALEX SANCHEZ, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: You know, I'm disappointed in what Mr. Gingrich has to say, because, look, she's spent years an assistant district attorney, as a judge, as a federal appeals court judge.
Isn't she entitled to have a hearing before the nation's -- before the Senate and to go before the nominating process to determine whether or not these statements have any validity whatsoever? Shouldn't she have a right to explain herself?
MARTIN: How do you respond to, though, the statement? Do you believe that it's a racist comment, what she said?
SANCHEZ: You know, I didn't have a chance to speak to Judge Sotomayor to -- to -- I don't know what it is in the operation of her head.
But, from everything that I know about her, there's nothing about a background which indicates she's a racist in any -- in any shape or form. BLOOM: Tom, can I just ask you this about the statement itself? Isn't there a difference between a statement of ethnic pride by a member of a disadvantaged minority and racism?
TANCREDO: I'm sorry, you're directing it to me?
BLOOM: Yes.
MARTIN: Yes.
BLOOM: That's to you, Tom.
TANCREDO: No. I don't -- you can be a black racist. You can be a brown racist. You can be a white racist. It doesn't matter. Skin color doesn't matter.
(CROSSTALK)
BLOOM: Tom, what if I said to you: "I'm Jewish; Jews rule"? Does that make me a racist?
(CROSSTALK)
TANCREDO: If you think somebody else is less qualified, less able, less competent than you are because of the color of their skin or their sex, it makes you a sexist, a racist. And it doesn't matter what color skin you have.
YELLIN: OK, Congressman, so how about this? Justice Alito, who currently sits on the court, is a conservative and was appointed by President George Bush, said this -- quote -- "When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffer discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or gender. And I do take that into account."
(CROSSTALK)
YELLIN: He wasn't called a racist. What's the difference?
TANCREDO: Absolutely. Every single person -- every single person would do exactly the same thing. We all have our own backgrounds and experiences upon which we dwell.
(CROSSTALK)
TANCREDO: But nobody -- he did not go on to say -- he did not go on to say, however: And, therefore, my judgment as a white male would be better than that of a brown or black female.
(CROSSTALK)
TANCREDO: That was what -- that is what she said.
And, by the way, it wasn't a slip of the tongue. These were -- that quote was in her prepared text. It's not something she stumbled upon. This is -- and you try to -- I will be happy to see, interested to see how she tries to explain that during that hearing.
(CROSSTALK)
KORNACKI: Let me turn to Alex here and let me ask you, though, because I think, to my reading of her statement -- and let me ask you if you agree with this -- is that it's -- she's talking really, maybe not artfully, but about perspective.
She brings a different perspective to this. Is that how you might interpret like that?
SANCHEZ: Yes, I think that's one interpretation.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: But my argument is this. If there's a question with that statement, let it go before the Senate during the confirmation hearings.
There's a lot of tough guys in the United States Senate, as well as tough women. Let them go in there. Let them throw their best punches at her, give her a chance to explain herself.
And if she explains herself properly, and the American people are watching it, they will issue their judgment, like a great jury, and they will tell congressmen and senators which way to vote. That's the way we do things in this country.
(CROSSTALK)
KORNACKI: What she seems to be saying is, she brings a -- her experiences in life as a Latino give her a different perspective.
I wondering, asking you as a Latino, do you have just a different perspective, not better, not worse?
(CROSSTALK)
KORNACKI: And does it inform your decisions in a different way?
SANCHEZ: Well, I grew up in the Bronx, like her. I grew up in the housing projects, like her. And perhaps because of those experiences that I have had, perhaps I look at the world maybe a little bit differently.
But I don't look at anybody any less. And I don't think she looks at anybody any less. Let her go before this Senate. Are those -- are they afraid in the United States Senate to go mano a mano with her? I don't think she is going to back down and a no mas anytime soon.
MARTIN: Tom?
TANCREDO: I certainly agree. That's where it's going. That's where it should go.
I'm -- I'm not saying -- I'm suggesting that they shouldn't ask her about this -- this particular...
(CROSSTALK)
MARTIN: So, Tom, you're saying she should not -- you're saying she should not withdraw, like Newt and Rush are saying; you're saying allow her to go forward and answer the question?
TANCREDO: Oh, I see.
No, I think -- believe me, if I were in her situation, I will tell you, for the -- for the peace that I think needs to come to the party that she represents and to this nomination process, she should -- she should withdraw, absolutely.
(CROSSTALK)
MARTIN: Well, Tom, you can't sit here and say, oh, let's have her explain it, but then she should withdraw. I mean, make a decision.
(CROSSTALK)
TANCREDO: I'm saying -- I'm saying I would not stop her from doing it. Of course it should go.
MARTIN: OK.
All right. Alex Sanchez, Tom Tancredo, we certainly appreciate it. Thanks a bunch.
TANCREDO: My pleasure.
MARTIN: Folks, this is -- this is a crucial week in the struggle to save Chrysler and GM. That's why our chief business correspondent, Ali Velshi, is in Detroit tonight -- Ali.
ALI VELSHI, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Roland.
I'm here in front of General Motors' world headquarters. Time is running out for this company. It looks inevitable now that it will be forced into Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. What does that mean for car buyers? What does it mean for car workers? What does it mean for this economy? What does it mean for you?
We are going to discuss all that when we come back and more right here on CNN. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARTIN: All right, you folks at home are fired up tonight about this story, the Connecticut school district considering a proposal to close schools on two Muslim holidays.
Listen to what Doctor Ricochet says on Twitter: "Hell yeah. Last I checked, this wasn't a socialist country, nor did it require all citizens to be Christian. Religious freedom, baby." But Stacey Annette says: "Hell no. Excuse my French. This isn't a Muslim country. Hello."
So, panel, what the hell do you say?
(LAUGHTER)
BLOOM: Did you actually pick a Britney Spears song to begin this block? I'm having a hard time getting past that.
(LAUGHTER)
MARTIN: Samantha picked that. Trust me, it was not Roland.
(LAUGHTER)
KORNACKI: Can I tell you something? I grew up in a very predominantly Christian town. And we got the Jewish holidays off. And my only reaction as a student was, thank God we didn't have to go to school today.
(CROSSTALK)
BLOOM: Yes. My reaction as a mother is, they have too many holidays already. Let's not add any.
MARTIN: It's like, get the hookup.
All right, folks, we will be talking about this a little bit later.
So, what do you think? Should a public school be closed for a Muslim holiday? Give us a call, 1-877-NO-BULL-0. That's 1-877-662- 8550. Also, drop me an e-mail. I'm also on Twitter and Facebook.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARTIN: Now, Johnnie Taylor -- Johnnie Taylor had a song called "Last Two Dollars." That probably could describe Chrysler and GM.
BLOOM: Oh, dear.
(LAUGHTER)
MARTIN: All right, Chrysler is fighting for their life tonight.
The automaker is in a marathon session in bankruptcy court making a last-ditch attempt to avoid shutting its doors forever. Meanwhile, GM looks like it's headed for Chapter 11 in the next four days. So far, $19.4 billion of your tax dollars have gone to bail out GM and $7.8 billion for Chrysler.
So, what are we getting for our money?
Erica, Jessica, Lisa, and Steve are back, but joining us from D- Town, Detroit, chief business correspondent Ali Velshi in Motown. All right, Ali, explain to us this looming bankruptcy. How did it come to this point? And why did the government decide to let -- they can't let GM fail?
VELSHI: Well, listen, it came to this point over many, many years of -- of U.S. companies being less competitive with their non- American counterparts and the fact that this used to be the biggest employer in the nation. The auto industry was the biggest employer in the nation.
We pay for retired autoworkers' health care. And as a result, you have got a small pool of workers paying for a lot more people, fewer cars being made, more technology, fewer workers. So, the result is, these companies having been struggling for a while.
General Motors as a result of all of these -- what they call these legacy costs made less on a small car than it made on a truck and an SUV. So, they were pushing the trucks and the SUVs. But then gas prices started to -- started to go up. People stopped buying those cars. And then we had this credit crisis, which meant that people who wanted to buy the cars that they do make couldn't afford to buy them.
So, now we're stuck with a problem where General Motors owes a great deal of money. It was renegotiating contracts with its workers. It was renegotiating with its -- some of its dealers, and it was renegotiating with the people who it owed money to, the bondholders.
The bondholders have now said they don't want a share of the company in exchange for the money that they are owed. They want the money, and if GM can't pay it, they will take their chances in bankruptcy court. That was GM's last attempt to avoid bankruptcy protection.
The White House will probably announce some time between now and Monday that they are forcing General Motors into bankruptcy protection, and this company will have to reorganize itself into a much smaller, much more efficient company -- Roland.
HILL: But part of the other fallout, Ali, too -- and just to go back on why this actually matters to so many people across this country, is the fallout that could be felt, not just in Detroit, but across the country.
VELSHI: Yes. Sure.
Well, first of all, even if you're not connected to the auto industry, you're connected to a dealership. There are factories all over the -- all over country. But the issue is this. It's jobs.
If we were not in a tough economy with 8.9 percent unemployment and five million or six million being people put out of work in this recession, this would be less than of an issue. They would say, work it out yourself.
But what the government is concerned about is that many more people, perhaps millions of people, being put out of work if a company like this were to actually go out of business -- Erica.
YELLIN: And can you put it in context compared to other bankruptcies? I mean, for example, Chrysler, how does this one compare? How big a deal is it?
VELSHI: Well, Chrysler is a much smaller company and of course not a public company -- or wasn't a public company. It was taken over by Daimler.
But let's look at some of the big bankruptcies. The biggest bankruptcy of all in the United States actually triggered the financial crisis we're in, Lehman Brothers. After that, Washington Mutual was the second biggest. The third one was WorldCom, a telecom that was partially riddled by scandal and partially by the burst of the tele -- the -- the -- the tech bubble.
so, look at all those three, this comes in fourth. It's bigger than Enron and it is the biggest industrial corporation in the United States to face bankruptcy.
Now, I should be clear, GM is not in bankruptcy protection yet. It just looks very, very likely this will happen in the next few days.
MARTIN: Are they so broke, Ali, you forgot your tie and vest? What happened?
(LAUGHTER)
VELSHI: Yes. And I was trying to find a pocket square for...
(CROSSTALK)
(LAUGHTER)
MARTIN: No. Pocket square and golf short shirts don't go together.
(LAUGHTER)
MARTIN: Ali, thanks a bunch. We appreciate it.
And, of course, Ali will be back Friday night with a special hour on Americans' auto industry in crisis, "How the Wheels Came Off." That's Friday night at 8:00 Eastern.
A U.S. warship sank off the coast of Florida today. But it was no accident. And, believe it or not, a lot of people are pretty happy about it. We will explain when we come right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARTIN: Michael Jackson.
(LAUGHTER)
MARTIN: Who's next? (LAUGHTER)
MARTIN: All right, folks, a quick programming note: Campbell Brown is coming back. On Monday, she will be right here back here in this time slot.
The script says I will be watching, but I'm supposed to be on that night, too. So, I will be sitting here watching her.
(CROSSTALK)
(LAUGHTER)
HILL: Really? You will be sitting here watching yourself and Campbell.
MARTIN: And here as well.
(CROSSTALK)
(LAUGHTER)
MARTIN: All right.
Folks, right now, we go to Erica Hill with the briefing.
HILL: All right, Roland.
And we begin, actually, a very serious and deadly attack in Pakistan, possibly in retaliation for the military's campaign against Taliban militants, gunman detonating a van packed with explosives at a police station Lahore.
That is of course the country's second largest city, 27 people killed, hundreds more wounded. Three suspects, though, are under arrest. Two were arrested almost immediately after.
There's new evidence that a frightening tale of abduction in Pennsylvania could all be a hoax. CNN affiliate WPVI says Bonnie Sweeten and her 9-year-old daughter were seen on surveillance cameras boarding a plane to Florida on Tuesday, the same day Sweeten called 911 to say the pair had been abducted, forced into the trunk of a car by two men in downtown Philly.
An old warship sank off the Florida Keys today, and for good reason. It only took about two minutes. Some well-placed explosives helped send the World War II-era ship to the bottom, where it will serve as an artificial coral reef.
And what is it with some members of Obama administration and teleprompters. Listen for the thump. Vice President Joe Biden's teleprompter blows over during the commencement address at the Air Force Academy today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) JOSEPH BIDEN, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: But it also needs a special brand of strategic thinking gained only in the thin air of Colorado Springs, and the windy air of Colorado Springs.
(LAUGHTER)
BIDEN: What am I going to tell the president when I tell his teleprompter is broken?
(LAUGHTER)
BIDEN: What will he do then?
(LAUGHTER)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HILL: Ouch. There you go.
Of course, as Roland points out, it's always funny that people who read teleprompters are making fun of people reading teleprompters.
(LAUGHTER)
HILL: So, Roland, I agree with you.
MARTIN: Absolutely. Absolutely.
HILL: Touche. Touche.
All right, Lou Dobbs, you do your whole show with no prompter...
(CROSSTALK)
HILL: Hey, we just -- we just did the story, too.
(LAUGHTER)
HILL: We're not done yet, though.
All of you "American Idol" fans saying Adam Lambert was robbed, well, you may have more of a case here.
AT&T admitting some of its employees in Arkansas gave out phones for free text-messaging at "Idol" parties organized by winner Kris Allen's fans.
Now, they even demonstrated how to power-text votes, which is when you send 10 or more texts at once. It turns out there's no chance for a recount, though. "Idol"'s producers say they're absolutely certain Allen won fair and square. The final vote count, though, will be kept a secret.
I believe Lisa Bloom knows the rules here.
BLOOM: Yes. HILL: I believe you're not allowed to power text though.
BLOOM: Violation of the rules to vote more than once.
HILL: Really.
BLOOM: They're written rules.
YELLIN: Do they enforce it?
BLOOM: They didn't give any power texting help to Adam's fans. I'm just saying.
HILL: No parties in San Diego.
MARTIN: OK, let's see, AT&T a big sponsor of the show. Hello. All right. Thanks so much. Erica, we appreciate it.
Folks, they lost the battle but they haven't given up the war. Gay rights advocates renewing the fight over same-sex marriage in California. The question, can they win?
And the Connecticut school district that could put Ramadan right up there with Christmas and Easter as a student holiday.
Here's smweaverservice on Twitter. "Face it Americans. Like it or not, Muslims are residing in this country and we all have to deal with it."
And the question we're posing, should a public school be closed for a Muslim holiday? Give us a shout. 1-877-NO-BULL-0. That's 1- 877-662-8550. You can also hit me on e-mail, Twitter and Facebook.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARTIN: North Korea has been acting like a country that's looking for a fight. They detonated a nuke and test-fired five short- range missiles this week as of daring anyone to stop them.
Now, they're talking about attacking South Korean ships, threatening to violate the armistice that stopped the Korean War. Today, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said North Korea won't get away with it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HILLARY CLINTON, SECRETARY OF STATE: It has ignored the international community. It has abrogated the obligations it entered into through the Six-party talks, and it continues to act in a provocative and belligerent manner toward its neighbors. There are consequences to such actions.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MARTIN: Strongest words yet from the U.S. government. CNN correspondent Sohn Jie-ae is live in Seoul, South Korea. You've got some information for us tonight, so tell us what you got.
SOHN JIE-AE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Roland, what it seems to be that sources from both Washington and Seoul are saying that they are detecting increased activity at the Yongbyon nuclear plant. That the sources are saying, telling CNN that this could be North Korea trying to restart the generators at Yongbyon to possibly create steam for reprocessing.
Now reprocessing means the 8,000 spent fuel rods that are in Yongbyon, which if North Korea actually does reprocess them could make, give North Korea more weapons-grade plutonium.
Now, the Yongbyon plant that we're talking about is the very plant that North Korea uses to create its nuclear weapons and it's the very plant that the rest of the world has been trying to get North Korea to disable and dismantle as a part of the multilateral negotiations to get North Korea to give up its entire nuclear weapons program. And so far it does seem that North Korea is having some sort of activity around this plant which could be interpreted as North Korea really getting ready to restart the plant as a whole, Roland.
MARTIN: Jie-ae, how are South Koreans reacting to these latest developments in North Korea?
SOHN: Well, in contrast to what the rest of the world is looking at, in terms of concern and increased activity -- concern about the increased activity in North Korea, on South Korean streets, it's pretty much business as usual. South Koreans have been living with the North Korea threat for more than half a century. So North Korea making more threats to South Korea really doesn't seem to be anything beyond their concern.
Just a few hours ago, we were at a public viewing for the Manchester United game against Barcelona, the European soccer championship.
Now, this was South Korean fans sitting there. Hundreds of fans trying to get -- cheer on the Korean player that was playing for Manchester United and there was no sign of any type of anxiety about North Korea. For them, you know, North Korea's threats go up and down and it hasn't stopped them from going about their business and being sure to witness the South Korean soccer player as he makes his debut in European finals, Roland.
MARTIN: Sohn Jie-ae, we certainly appreciate it. Thanks so much.
Let's bring back our panel now -- Erica Hill, Jessica Yellin, truTV's Lisa Bloom, and Steve Kornacki from the "New York Observer." Also joining us is Kristen Silverberg. She was an assistant secretary of state under President George W. Bush.
Now, Kristen, for many Americans, this is a major concern. There are more than 28,000 U.S. troops in South Korean. So how real is the threat of war from North Korea? KRISTEN SILVERBERG, FMR. ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE: Well, I think this is a very serious issue. North Korea is a threat first to the U.S., to some of our closest allies, Japan and South Korea. But North Korea is also threatening because of its relationships to some other U.S. adversaries.
We've all seen the press reports about North Korea's assistance to Syria. North Korea has close ties on its missile program to Iran. So this is pretty dangerous business, no question about it.
STEVE KORNACKI, COLUMNIST, "NEW YORK OBSERVER": But, Kristen, the way I read this, isn't North Korea really sort of just, just sort of rubbing it in our face and saying, you know, there's nothing you can do about this because we have no close economic, you know, ties and relations with them so we can't cut any of that off? We can't impose an economic blockade or we can't go with some sort of military strike because the neighbors, the neighbors who are actually friendly with us in that region, they're all against it because it would be a catastrophe for them?
So isn't North Korea really just looking for attention here? And isn't the best thing to do more or less to ignore them and say there isn't anything we can do about it, or to have the neighborhood itself work it out instead of us?
SILVERBERG: You know, we did catch North Korea's attention at a few points (ph) during the Bush administration. And one was on the heels of the U.N. Security Council Resolution 1718.
You'll remember, it was very broad, very aggressive, imposed lots of financial sanctions, limited the countries from providing luxury goods to North Korea. And we saw a much more responsive and cooperative North Korea on the heels of that and that's in part why these next few days in the security council are so important, why so many people are watching to see how Ambassador Rice and her colleagues do in New York, because that's really our best chance of getting the North Koreans to take a different posture.
BLOOM: And, Kristen, certainly we would hope that diplomatic talks could resolve this. So the question is, why haven't they worked in the past?
SILVERBERG: You know, as I say, we've seen real ebbs and flows. The North Koreans are responsive, frequently on the heels of either U.N. Security Council sanctions or sometimes the U.S. sanctions that cut off their access to resources, though when they see the international community start to lose attention, start to look in other directions then they take advantage and they think they have an opening to move ahead. So this is the kind of thing where it's important to get the resolution and then also be very firm on implementing it and following through.
YELLIN: Secretary Clinton had some very tough words for North Korea. But I'm curious what you think tough action by the Obama administration would look like, keeping in mind you work for the Bush administration which had a very different approach. SILVERBERG: Well, you know, I think in addition to the security council resolution, you would see North Korea really move up on our agenda with the Chinese. Some of the analysts who are wondering why did the North Koreans decide to do this now have assessed that it's in part because they see that we're pressing this less actively in our agenda with China. We're pressing climate change and the financial crisis and other important issues. But the North Koreans need to see that we are making this a top priority with China.
I also think this is the wrong time to cut back on missile defense. If anything, this is the time to double down on missile defense because it's really so important particularly to our ally, Japan.
And then the final thing is we really need to look at some additional U.S. measures we can do to keep the pressure on North Korea including moving them back on a state sponsors of terrorism list.
HILL: Real quickly before we let you go, how much of this could be because in the past it seems that North Korea for lack of a better term cried wolf a number of times here? How much of this is perhaps just trying to get the attention of the Obama administration?
SILVERBERG: You know, the 2006 North Korea test was largely a failure. They didn't get that kind of yield they wanted, and so they took a decision that for technical reasons they were going to do another test.
I think the real issue is, why did they do it now as opposed to another time? And I think as I say, I think there are lots of reasons.
They see the U.S. distracted by lots of other important issues. They see that we're pressing this less actively with the Chinese, and they also saw a very weak security council response to their April missile test. And so I think their calculus was that they might get away with it.
MARTIN: All right. Kristen Silverberg, former assistant secretary of state, thank you so very much for joining us.
SILVERBERG: Thank you, Roland.
MARTIN: All right, folks, it's like a blast from the past. Coming up, California's same-sex marriage fight and how it's connected to the 2000 presidential election recount.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARTIN: I love it, Jessica.
YELLIN: Pat Benatar.
BLOOM: Pat Benatar.
YELLIN: Come on. MARTIN: All right.
All right, California Supreme Court may have upheld the state's ban on same-sex marriage but that's certainly not the end of the story. Today, supporters of gay marriage are fighting back with a new lawsuit and talk of going back to the voters. But could a divide between the gay community and other minority groups doom the effort?
Erica, Jessica, Lisa and Steve are here, along with Reverend Byron Williams, pastor of Resurrection Community Church in Oakland. In Oakland, Reverend Williams is a member of a group called African- American Ministers in Action, which is a project of a liberal-leaning organization, People for the American Way.
All right, Jessica, some new developments here?
YELLIN: Yes. Quickly, just the news today is that first of all, this effort, the ruling has fired up supporters of gay marriage who started a massive fund-raising effort to get gay marriage legalized on the 2010 ballot. So on the political front, another vote.
But then in the courts today, a very odd couple got behind the push to get judges to overturn the recent ruling on Prop 8. Lawyers who argue on the opposite side of the 2000 Bush-Gore recount, they've teamed up to challenge the California ruling.
So David Boies, who argued for Al Gore, and Ted Olson who was a Bush attorney, say they're joining forces to show that gay marriage is a bipartisan issue. They think the courts made a wrong decision yesterday.
BLOOM: You got to love that.
YELLIN: Odd couple.
MARTIN: Hey.
BLOOM: Just because lawyers on the opposite sides of the case don't mean that they hate each other.
MARTIN: Good point. All right.
Rev. Byron, Prop 8 passed by a majority in part because of support from some minority groups, especially African-Americans voters (ph) in California. Do you think there's a divide between the gay community and other minority groups?
REV. BYRON WILLIAMS, RESURRECTION COMMUNITY CHURCH: Well, first of all, the first thing I would say is the attention given to the African-American communities vote in Prop 8 I think is a little overstated. African-Americans made up less than 10 percent of the voting electorate in the last election. Prop 8 was defeated in practically every county in California except for those on the coast, so there's no large black population in the inland valley per se. So I think it's overstated. With that said, I would also say that homophobia definitely exists within the black church. There's a lot of work, like the group I'm working with, People for the American Way, that we have to do to sort of debunk that to sort of change some of those existing feelings.
MARTIN: And, of course, Reverend Williams, part of that was because the initial reports said that 70 percent of African-American voted against, but later folks came back and said no -- about 58 percent. So that's probably one of the reasons why that came out there.
Erica?
HILL: Just in terms of religion because there's been so much talk about the role of religion in the votes here and how it played out with Proposition 8. Should this be -- you're a pastor, but should religion really come into play here, or should that decision on marriage be left up to different religions, different faiths to make and leave this to be more of a civil matter? And if that's the case, why should God enter in at all?
WILLIAMS: Well, I think -- I think you make a great point. In addition to being a pastor, I still believe I'm the only syndicated columnist in the country that I've been writing about this for a number of years. And I don't think this is not -- we're talking about civil rights.
So we're not talking about a religious issue. And so, then we're talking about civil rights. Now we've got to go back to the equal protection of the law clause, which I think clearly this denies.
In California right now as a result of the courts ruling, we have three class distinctions of people. We have one group who can get married, get divorced and get remarried. Another group who can get married, get divorced and cannot remarry. Then we have another group who can't do either one of those things.
So I don't see how you can -- how the state can hold equal protection on the law and these conflicting results at the same time. It seems to go against our democratic values.
KORNACKI: Reverend, I have something to tell you. I've been hearing from a lot of gay marriage supporters in the last couple of days especially in the wake of the California ruling yesterday, a lot of this dismay and a lot of, you know, sort of overheated rhetoric about how, you know, awful this is. But in the big picture, isn't there sort of inevitability to all of this?
I mean, there was a similar ballot and measure in California about eight years ago and it passed with 64 percent. Now, you're down to 52 percent. Now, you got four states legalizing it.
You got people under 35 supporting it overwhelmingly. I mean, isn't this just really a question of time and shouldn't be exercised about it? WILLIAMS: Well, I think you're absolutely right. Trajectory regardless of what side of the issue you're on is definitely headed toward full marriage equality for gay, lesbian transgender community. That's the direction. And I've seen polling even recently that has a percentage of people that has the majority favoring same-sex marriage now. So this is inevitable. It is --
YELLIN: Let me -- let me interrupt for a minute and ask you, Lisa, because you're a civil rights lawyer in New York and California. What do you make of this decision? Do you think this is a civil rights issue?
BLOOM: I think it's a huge civil rights issue. And this is the first court ruling that I'm aware of that says that a majority vote, a bare majority vote can take away the constitutional rights of a protected minority group.
You know, Brown versus Board of Education was very unpopular at the time. It wasn't up for a majority vote and neither have any of the civil rights of American minorities ever been up for a popular vote. That's the beauty of our constitutional system.
So this is -- that's why it doesn't surprise me that Ted Olson and David Boies have joined together now to make a federal civil rights case out of it.
MARTIN: All right. Panel, hold tight one second. Reverend Williams, we certainly appreciate it. Thank you very much for joining us.
WILLIAMS: Thank you.
MARTIN: Larry King has got more on the Proposition 8 battle.
Larry, give us a preview.
LARRY KING, HOST, "LARRY KING LIVE": Hey, Roland, you've been talking about it. Well, we're going to talk to David Boies and Ted Olson. As you've been discussing, this time, of course, they're teaming up to defeat the ban on same-sex marriages. That's an unusual pairing.
And we've got an incredible story tonight. This is a man who walked free this afternoon after spending almost half his life in prison for a crime he didn't commit. DNA evidence cleared him. He's here. He'll tell us what his first few hours of freedom have been like.
That's next on "LARRY KING LIVE." This will not be dull, Roland.
MARTIN: That's a hell of a story there -- 22 years. Larry, we appreciate it. Thanks so much.
Folks, tonight, we're talking about the Connecticut school district that's considering closing schools for the two Muslim holidays. We want to know what you think. Here's Joanne in Texas. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOANNE, FROM TEXAS (via telephone): If schools close for Christian holidays, they really should ask both the Muslim and Jewish communities to select maybe two or three of their sacred holidays and close school for those days as well. I think it should have been done years ago.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MARTIN: So, should a public school be closed for a Muslim holiday? Lots of strong opinions on both sides.
Give us a shout. 1-877-NO-BULL-0. That's 1-877-662-8550. You can also e-mail me and hit me on Twitter and Facebook.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARTIN: All right. We were all school children just a couple of years ago. We all love school off for holidays. Thanksgiving, Christmas, Easter, what about Ramadan?
Public school officials in Waterbury, Connecticut might just do that. They meet tonight to consider giving kids the day off for Muslim holidays.
A Muslim student group came up with the idea. At best, it's a lesson in adversity. At worst, it's a whole can of worms.
Erica, Jessica, Lisa Bloom and Steve Kornacki, back for this one. And joining us is Irshad Manji. She's an author and the creator of the PBS documentary "Faith Without Fear."
All right, Irshad, what about this idea? Sounds great or do you say oh, come on?
IRSHAD MANJI, NEW YORK UNIVERSITY: It depends. How's that for a --
MARTIN: OK. Thank you for being so clear, Irshad.
MANJI: Absolutely. Let me tell you how I start with the analysis here.
I have to ask, can a minority be accommodated without imposing severe restrictions on the freedom of the majority? And let me tell you where I think that can be done and has been done?
We all know Orthodox Jewish students, you know, won't or can't sit for tests after a certain time every Friday because that's when the Jewish Sabbath begins. But I've never heard any such students insist that the entire class readjust their schedules in order to accommodate their belief in this chosen faith. OK?
MARTIN: So, should it be a question the majority rules? MANJI: Well, I think it's a question of how much are you willing to accommodate to the majority's worries about what this means for them.
So in the case back to the Jewish students for a second, they often say look, we want to be able to take these tests before everybody else. To me (ph), it's no scamming of the system. It's actually a disadvantage to us because, you know, we're losing out on time to study. But if we're going to ask to be accommodated, we've got to accommodate others as well. And I think that's where the zig and the zag of diversity comes in.
MARTIN: We're going to our panel a second. A lot of folks called in on this.
Nelly from Ontario, Canada. Nelly, what's your comment?
NELLY, ONTARIO, CANADA (via telephone): No, absolutely not. Schools should not be closed for the Muslim holidays?
Would schools in Saudi Arabia be closed for the Christian holiday? This country was -- the U.S. and Canada was founded on Christian principles, and we're so busy celebrating our diversity that we are losing and sacrificing our own identity.
MARTIN: Of course, Nelly, we also know that in Saudi Arabia you have folks who are driving that whole government, frankly, through their religion as opposed to how it's done in the United States.
MANJI: It's a different constitution there obviously.
MARTIN: Gail from --
BLOOM: We're not a theocracy.
MARTIN: Absolutely.
MANJI: Yes, thank God.
MARTIN: Gail from Phoenix, Arizona -- Gail, what's your comment?
GAIL, ARIZONA (via telephone): Hi, Roland. I'm an African- American Muslim born and raised in the United States. We're a country that doesn't discriminate against race, creed or religion. Therefore, I believe we should close schools with Islamic holidays just as we do for the holidays for Christians.
MARTIN: OK. Thanks so much, Gail. We appreciate it.
HILL: An interesting point that Nelly brought up and I notice a lot of the reaction to this initial article that we found on this, in Connecticut, a lot of your actions said this is a Christian nation and people coming here should learn to follow Christian values. But again, Irshad, that isn't -- that isn't, in fact, the case here.
MANJI: Right. HILL: Because this is technically a country that is not a theocracy. It's democracy.
MANJI: But, you know, I want to go back to this whole issue of who accommodates who because I think that is, no pun intended, the crux of the matter here.
Which is to say this, that even if you could find a teacher at this Connecticut school to take the same two days off that the Muslim students want to take off and then come back to the school to teach those students who have lost out on those two days, if those Muslim parents pipe up and insist that, well, the students are not getting the same education as everybody else because there are just certain things you can't do at school if the school is shut down. Well, I would say to those complaining parents look, you were accommodated in the first place, now what are you giving up in the process?
BLOOM: But here's part of the problem. Everybody gets Christmas off whether they're Christian or not. And as I understand it, these Muslim students are only talking about two days a year that they want off.
MANJI: That's right. That's right. That's right.
BLOOM: So why can't we come up with some kind of formula. If there's more than five percent of a particular religion in the school district, they can have a couple of days off for their religious holiday so that no student has to miss tests and scramble, and that's equal for everyone.
HILL: Many school districts do account for that as well. Not every school, every school district (ph). But a number of school districts will say if you're taking a day off for religious reasons, there are certain concessions that are made to understand.
(CROSSTALK)
HILL: Right, Jewish holiday.
BLOOM: Yes. But it's difficult to take off on the Jewish holidays when school is still in session. I always had to do that and it's difficult.
YELLIN: Difficult.
KORNACKI: Can you just - can you just come up with you get two religious holidays a year?
BLOOM: Right.
KORNACKI: And you can take them whenever you want?
MANJI: Yes, as long as the Muslim parents in this case don't come back and say OK, but then what are our students missing by not being at the school. Well, look, depending on what you're asking for you also have to make some accommodations along the way. So everybody has to do some compromise here. And if we can wrap our heads around the fact that diversity is not a one-way street, at worst it's a two-way street and usually a network of interlocking super highways, then I think we can finally begin to see the opportunity.
MARTIN: Oh, Irshad, how dare you say we compromise?
All right, folks, hold tight one second. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARTIN: So, should a public school be closed for a Muslim holiday? Back with our panel and Irshad Manji.
All right. Here's what folks are saying on Facebook.
Gregory -- "Let's revamp the concept by scrapping the observed religious holidays system totally. Give student/teachers the option to take up towards six to eight personal religious days. Numbers depend on school system per 180 days."
Timmy -- "Depends on the Muslim population in that neighborhood. For instance, New York public schools do close for Jewish holidays but not in other cities. If there is a high number of Muslim students in a school, it's only fair."
Russell says, "A public school should not be closed for any religion. Christmas break should be winter holiday and Easter should be spring break. That's it.
(CROSSTALK)
MANJI: Well, that's just rebranding, isn't it? That's just spinning that case, isn't it?
HILL: What if winter break includes Christmas?
MARTIN: His name is Russell, hit him on Facebook. Give him a shout.
MANJI: How very convenient because ultimately, of course, we are talking then about the status quo. All we're doing is put a different frame around it.
KORNACKI: Right.
MANJI: Right? And maybe that works for some people but clearly for this very clever panel, it didn't.
MARTIN: First of all, folks get off for spring break what the hell holiday is that? That's just what? Go to the beach?
HILL: Maybe we all just need a break.
MARTIN: Yes. OK.
BLOOM: It rarely includes Passover.
MARTIN: All right. Irshad Manji, we certainly appreciate it. Thanks so much.
MANJI: Thanks.
MARTIN: Also, we want to thank all of you who called and e- mailed a comment. We certainly appreciate it.
Folks, keep those comments coming. I'll be on Twitter and Facebook responding to them when we get done.
All right. "LARRY KING LIVE" starts right now. What do we say?
ALL: Holla.
