Return to Transcripts main page

Piers Morgan Live

Can Obamacare Website Be Fixed?; Miami Dolphins Controversy; Election Day Results

Aired November 06, 2013 - 21:00   ET


PIERS MORGAN, CNN ANCHOR: This is PIERS MORGAN LIVE. Welcome to our viewers in the United States and around the world. Tonight, does Obamacare have a dangerous preexisting condition? The president on the road trying to save it.


BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: This is like having a really good product in the store and the cash registers don't work and there aren't enough parking spots and nobody can get through the door. And so we are working overtime to get this fixed.


MORGAN: Is it all too little, too late? Frank Rich tells me how the GOP is turning this debacle to its election advantage.

Also, why would the Miami Dolphins' quarterback say this?


RYAN TANNEHILL, MIAMI DOLPHINS QUARTERBACK: I think if you were to have asked Jon Martin a week before, you know, who his best friend on the team was. He would say Richie Incognito.


MORGAN: Really? The player who fled the team saying he's being bullied with best friend was his abuser? This man caught on tape in a bar by TMZ?



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Who is it? I didn't ...

INCOGNITO: Who was the most ... ?


MORGAN: Ladies and gentlemen, Mr Incognito. I'll ask Curt Menefee what's really going on here and what the NFL's playbook for crisis control. Plus, nuke this. While some environmentalist say nuclear energy is good for the planet. Two men who couldn't disagree any more about this go head to head. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. versus Robert Stone, the man behind CNN films Pandora's Promise.

I want to begin though with our big story, ObamaCare and how it almost change the course of the Virginia governor's race. Joining me now is Frank Rich, Writer-At-Large for New York magazine and the author the "Greatest Story Ever Sold".

Frank, welcome back to the show. You write a fascinating piece today and the headline was Cuccinelli's near win says more than Christie's landslide. Tell me what you mean.

FRANK RICH, WRITER-AT-LARGE, NEW YORK MAGAZINE: What I mean is this, Virginia is a purple state trending blue and Cuccinelli was an under financed candidate. He's a very far Right Wing candidate particularly on social issues, even in favor of a personhood amendment, he's very hospitable to gay people. He ran as part of Republican administration in the state of Virginia that had us a gift- giving scandal that he was caught up in.

He had almost everything according to conventional wisdom going against him but he came within three points of Terry McAuliffe who had whatever his -- he has his own defects as a candidate. But he had -- the Clinton's campaign for him, you had President Obama campaigning for him. He had a ton of money and he had a government shutdown to beat over Cuccinelli's head because Northern Virginian government workers were affected by it, you know, Cuccinelli is part of the Right Wing that supported the shutdown.

So this guy did as well as he could and might have won frankly if it hadn't been for the third party libertarian candidate. I think does not look great for Democrats and also it does not look great for moderate Republicans who take such hard in Chris Christie's victory in New Jersey because I think that Tea Party is alive and well and not just in, you know, Dixie (ph) but in the state like Virginia.

MORGAN: Well let's come to Chris Christie because he is obviously one of the big stories from last night. Hugely popular figure, credibly popular governor reelected with a thumping majority, many Democrats voting for him, but you always know when somebody's a real threat because opponents immediately raised to lambaste him

Let's watch Marco Rubio and Rand Paul's reaction to the news that Chris Christie had triumphed again.


SEN. MARCO RUBIO (R), FLORIDA: I know everyone wants to jump to what it means for the future because that's what political reporters do. But I think we need to understand that somebody's races don't apply to future races. Every race is different -- has a different set of factors. But I congratulate him on his win. We need as many governors as we can get.

SEN. RAND PAUL (R), KENTUCKY: Some of this ads people running for office put their mug all over these ads while they're in a middle of a political campaign. In New Jersey, 25 million was spent on as it included somebody running for political office. You think there might be a conflict of interest there.


MORGAN: Having quite a comical sniping a little bit. (inaudible) trying to equate (ph) Frank, of what the Republicans problem is going forward which is the kind of festering civil war between the likes of Rubio and Rand and the likes of Chris Christie who has obviously laid his colors right out there and said, "OK, I'm going to run for the tough job."

RICH: There's no question that Christie is doing that, however, this is contrary when a lot of people in the pondered profession think. I think Christie's victory is meaningless in terms of the national Republican Party. This is a guy who is in favor of gun control, one of your pet issues, he is in favor of immigration reform including a pathway for people who are here illegally now. He retreated from a fight on same sex marriage.

This is not an acceptable candidate for the Republicans who are going to vote in presidential primaries. And look at Marco Rubio, he was thought to be a great big hope of the Republican Party only a few months ago and he was a little bit liberal on immigration reform and had his head handed in by the Right.

So Christie is popular in New Jersey, there's no question about it but even in New Jersey in the exit polls that the CNN showed, he lost in a match up with Hillary Clinton of, you know, obviously a very speculative won for the presidency and the Republican Party is incredibly unpopular in New Jersey. Only 38 or 39 percent approve of it and he didn't even use the word Republican most of the time he was running.

So, he's a New Jersey phenomenon is he a national phenomenon only if they -- I think cancel all the Republican primaries and have Wall Street say that they're going to point the candidate. Then Christie would get the Republican nomination.

MORGAN: Jake Tapper, my colleagues sat down with Mayor Michael Bloomberg today. He talks about what he called the centralists who've been having success recently. Watch this.


MAYOR MICHAEL BLOOMBERG, (I) NEW YORK: The lesson for this whole country whether it was Christie or McAuliffe both of them was centralist.

They can work across the aisle being an obstructionist or being a radical, the voters rejected that in both cases that Christie has clearly worked across the aisle with Obama, with Cory Booker, with the Democrats in the New Jersey state legislature and McAuliffe has a long history of working at every part of government on both sides of the aisle.


MORGAN: I mean that is undeniably true, wasn't it Frank, isn't it?

RICH: Well, McAuliffe's long history in government I'm not sure what he's talking about. He was a fund raiser for the Clintons.

I'm not sure what that means, but I think what Mayor Bloomberg is saying is what all sorts of centrists, who live in New York and New Jersey are saying -- they're saying Christie does work across the aisle. It's true. He's a compassionate conservative. He is a gregarious sort of upbeat conservative.

It's exactly the way they talked about George W. Bush in 2000. If we were still in 2000 the Republican Party might again nominate a George W. Bush, but we're not in 2000. We're in 2013 the party is move far to the Right. Bush is almost a villain within the Republican Party. He's been sort of deep sick into a memory hole.

So, it's sort of a fantasy of, you know, a kind of Republican centrist like Bloomberg and many other people who live in the tri- state area of New York, that Chris Christie will somehow win Republican primaries in Iowa in the mid -- throughout the mid west and the Deep South. He'll win Republican primaries in the northeast.

But this is not a party that's going to nominate a moderate. It just doesn't there, the base of the party is the party that shut down the government and they want Cruz or Rand Paul or others we may not know about yet. They don't want it but they think of as another Mitt Romney.

MORGAN: But in the end Frank it comes down to certain degree of pragmatism too. If we get to like 2014 the end of the year and it looks increasingly like a Tea Party candidate which -- to simply cannot beat a Democratic candidate in a general election. Wouldn't that be a movement toward somebody exactly like Chris Christie, somebody who by -- is on a mission today? He said, look I'm about winning.

Elections are about winning. It is time the Republicans learn how to win elections again. I mean he's right, isn't he?

RICH: He is right. But the corrupts in the Republican civil war is that, yes there are people who want that and there are people who write big checks in the Republican Party that want that.

But the base of the party is not persuaded by that. That they feel strongly that they lost last time because Mitt Romney was not conservative enough. Chris Christie is not even invited to some conservative conferences because he threw his arm around President Obama.

And so, rationally what you say is completely correct. But, you know, the same people that you're asking to be rational are the ones who were told it would be disaster for the Republican Party to have a government shutdown. That didn't deter them. They rallied around the shutdown until they had to surrender. But they've not surrendered for good. They mean what they're saying.

And I think, you know, people are in the state of denial about how radical this party is, and they're not going to be moved by Mike Bloomberg or Chris Christie, or, you know, the Bush, you know, if W. Bush gets into the race, I don't think they care what these people think.

MORGAN: There's a fascinating twist to the McAuliffe victory which Michael Bloomberg again in his interview with Jake Tapper picked up on. Let's watch this about guns.


BLOOMBERG: Virginia is the home state of the NRA that's where their headquarters are. South of the Mason-Dixon line.

If I, 20 years ago, said to you that a Democrat who was F-rated by the NRA and unabashedly in favor of common sense gun checks, background checks. If I told you he could win governor, you would have laughed me out of the room.

McAuliffe won which says a majority of the voters in Virginia want common sense, background checks.


MORGAN: It does seem to me Frank ...

RICH: I think -- I'm sorry, I just ...

MORGAN: Sorry go on.

RICH: I'm sorry, I was a, you know, much as I admire Mayor Bloomberg in many ways and I think it's a political analyst he's just looking through a very myopic lens of his own.

I completely agree with him and you about gun control. But I think to say that everyone voted for Terry McAuliffe in Virginia is in favor of common sense, gun control laws just isn't true and even if it were true, it doesn't represent the country and it does not represent Congress where people are, as we know are afraid to pass legislation can't be moved to do it even though ...

MORGAN: Here's the point I was going to make there Frank.

RICH: ... horror shows like new town.

MORGAN: Right. I was just going to make this point which is simply and I strongly agree what you just actually a bit. President Clinton when I interviewed him recently made a point when he said, "Gun control will only really happen in America if the people start to vote for politicians who are in favor of it rather than (inaudible) into silence by the NRA and voting for politicians who are completely against it."

Could that be a bit of momentum, if you had a few politicians who genuinely made gun control a big position of theirs and they actually began to win some elections even a very local level. Is that the way in the end you could see eventually some kind of sensible gun control.

RICH: Absolutely. That's a very fair point and I think that often how change happens in America on a myriad of issues. That said it's going to be very slow and very incremental because too many Americans really, really believe the second amendment is a birthright and they're entitled to all the guns they want and the fact that even something like Newtown could have such a tiny effect. It's disheartening.

That said, that McAuliffe could win with that position in Virginia, it's a small victory. We have to hope that's it's a beginning of snowball but it's going to be a very slow snowball for all forward, I think in America.

MORGAN: Frank stay with me. And when we comeback after break when I talk to you about this highly unusual political scandal, Toronto's crack-smoking mayor who is back in work today as if nothing happened.


MAYOR ROB FORD, TORONTO, CANADA: Yes, I have smoked crack cocaine.


FORD: But no -- do I? Am I an addict? No.



FORD: Yes, I have smoked crack cocaine.


FORD: But no -- do I? Am I an addict? No.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When have you seen ...

FORD: Have I tried it? Probably in one of my drunken stupors approximately about a year ago.


MORGAN: A quite remarkable confession there from Toronto's mayor, Rob Ford. Sharing now with me one of the top political scandals of the year, and Frank Rich, I'm going to ask you, what do you make of all this? I mean, you can cut off (inaudible) on one, haven't you, he says, "Yes, I smoked cracked cocaine and tomorrow I'll be back at my mayoral office desk."

RICH: It' sort of wonderful really. I mean, first of all as Americans, we can all feel better about our own politics because this is sort of off the charts even by our standard. You know, it's just -- it's not very far from Detroit but suddenly this makes Detroit politics what kind of benign and healthy. I do think, you know, Canada has given us -- or in Michael's -- Martin Short, Graydon Carter, Bruce McCall, Barry Blitt, all these witty, comic minds. And I think this is the ultimate SNL sketch on steroids. I mean who could make it up? And it looks great too. And , you know...

MORGAN: Should we care, Frank Rich?

RICH: What can I say...

MORGAN: Should we care about whether any senior politician in the modern age opens up and says, "Yes, I took, you know, cocaine a year ago or yes I had an affair," or whatever it may be? Does any of that really matter? Do you think that (inaudible) any younger people? Are they anywhere near as judgmental as their parents, and grandparents may be are about this kind of thing?

RICH: That's a good question. It's hard to generalize but my guess is that they're not. And if the politician delivers the goods that are desired by his or her constituents, people can put up with a lot. And certainly we've seen in American politics, you know, look at Mark Sanford. People can come back from all sorts of scandals and be accepted by voters even in very conservative parts of the country.

So I think that, you know, the days or the time of easy moralism are ending. And, you know, when you look back, it's been, you know, how many years, not quite 20 years since the Clinton impeachment. Hard to imagine that kind of witch hunt now about somebody's sex life really catching fire in the way it did in the 1990's.

I think you're right. I think we're seeing a generational change. I can't speak for Canada. I mean -- I don't know -- makes me want to go to Toronto. I think it's sort of a great boom to tourist. And don't you want to go like to a comedy club in Chicago ...

MORGAN: Well, I love Toronto...

RICH: They're doing with it.

MORGAN: ... I really do want to go there and go to comedy club. I think they -- here's a reaction in Twitter. I just -- yesterday, for no real reason, I just tweet out, I should go quite sorry for Rob Ford.

And as you've seen the reaction, I go to definite sense of a generational reaction. Sadly, the older people in Toronto feeling ashamed by what he done to their great city and to the image of Canada and a lot of younger people saying, "Totally agree with you. It's a fuss about nothing. How does that affect the way he does his job if he just went crazy one night, had a few too many drinks and he suddenly remembered he took cracked cocaine which is absurd though it is?"

If that was a one off as he claims, do we really need to get so exercised about it? RICH: Yeah. I'm not so sure we do. But luckily, it's Canada. So here are we and just laugh and enjoy our good neighbor's suffering or embarrassment or perhaps their share of pleasure of the comic parts, little spectacle of it all.

MORGAN: Frank Rich, it's always good to talk you about a whole range of issues. Please come back soon and good to see you again.

RICH: Good to see you. Thank you

MORGAN: A lot of people will think the story in Toronto is a bit crazy. I want to bring in someone now who can tell us that sure, either way. Psychiatrist and best selling author, Dr. Gail Saltz.

Gail, what do you make of this story because -- on what level it is as Frank always said is very fascicle and you could laugh at him, but another level there's a guy who's clearly gone through the ringer and he's been lying for quite a long time. He's finally come clean. It seems like a huge thousand pound weight lifts and off his shoulders and so on. What do you think of it?

DR. GAIL SALTZ, PSYCHIATRIST AND BEST-SELLING AUTHOR: I think there's a big difference as you mentioned earlier. Well, there are sex scandals and so on. I think there's a difference between what someone is doing in their personal life and someone who is breaking the law and, you know, who is in the job of enforcing a law. And it doesn't have a problem with the hypocrisy of breaking it. I think that is what -- is a more difficult issue. I also think to say well, you know, yeah maybe I smoked crack when I was busy being bombed is, you know, just sort of further compounds. You sort of wonder about, you know, his self control and...

MORGAN: Does he need treatment this guy? I mean is he actually sensible then to continue trying to be the mayor of Toronto, given that his approval rate since have gone up. The people clearly -- the majority to tell you when to carry on. But is he actually sensible, should he take a back step and get some treatment maybe?

SALTZ: I think the problem is that this is what he's saying now, but he's been lying for a long time. And so we don't really know if this is it. Is this a -- It unlikely, I have to tell you. It's unlikely to be a sort of relatively modest drinker and then suddenly become loaded and then that same night smoke crack. That is an unusual story. So, one has to wonder if that's it. So he has to be able to look inside and say, "Am I being honest with myself?" Because if not, he does need some help.

MORGAN: I mean this whole issue of private behavior and public performance, it really -- ever since Bill Clinton, you know, when you got a guy who humiliated on a national level, nearly impeached and so on, and at the end of it, he's become the most popular president in American history in terms of poll ratings. It could be American public very forgiving and then the end didn't really care that much, same with Kennedy, same with many of the great generals, even the great entertainers. SALTZ: I think it's with the American public is understanding that at some level, it's the high risk takers who will push for things that we do want that there is an upside to be that kind of person, that kind of leader. And it comes with this downside if you will. As long as the downside is in people's personalized. And as long as they are willing to say I'm sorry, (inaudible). It's the one to wait the longest, to lie for a long period of time i.e. Anthony Weiner who say, you know, "No, no I didn't do it," that have a hard of time getting the forgiveness. We're willing to forgive when someone's asks for it.

MORGAN: It was kind of good line was it, he sort of implied he couldn't really remember if he had or not because he is in one of his apparently many drunken stupors. You don't hear that from a man very often.

SALTZ: No, luckily, you don't hear very often. And a questionable defense I would say. But I was taking he might not remember it very well because when we're trying to defend against something that we don't want acknowledge in ourselves, there were tendency to keep it hazy whether it's with alcohol or just psychologically saying, "I don't want to be too aware what I'm doing right now."

MORGAN: But there's something about Rob Ford I just quite like. I watched him today blowing a kiss at the crowd and coming out with a big grin on his face and I felt, there's something about his character that I feel quite warm to him, because I make a completely wrong to do that.

SALTZ: Charismatic, I mean Bill Clinton is one of the most charismatic figures ever and that is not mutually exclusive from doing things that you would not want your spouse to do or you would not want your politician to do.

MORGAN: Maybe if he haven't inhaled the crack, OK and he'd be in a better position taking the Clinton defense. Let's move on to scandalous footballers. When we come back I want to talk about bullying from the locker room to the board room. Are we now in the culture of bullies?


TANNEHILL: Type of culture that I championed since the day I walked through this doors has been one of honesty, respect, the accountability in one another.




INCOGNITIO: You know I'm just trying to weather the storm right now and this will pass.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You know there's an allegation that you left this voice mails on Jonathan Martin's voicemail, what do you have to say about those?

INCOGNITIO: No comment right now. We're just going to kind of weather the storm and that's it.


MORGAN: The perfectly named Richie Incognito saying very little about the Miami Dolphins bullying scandal today. Head Coach Joe Philbin said he was not aware of the alleged bullying of offensive lineman Jonathan Martin by Incognito.

(inaudible) reports from the Sun Central that Incognito was asked by unspecified coaches to toughen up Martin. Everyone was talking about bullying in the NFL right now. That doesn't mean it hasn't happened before in the locker room and in on the workplaces of course, Dr. Gail Saltz is still back with me and joining me is Curt Menefee the host of Fox's NFL Sunday. Let's start with you Curt if I may and welcome to the show.

And is this a mountain made out of a mole hill here. I mean, from looking at what the quarterback said, he said that you'd asked a week ago, Jonathan Martin and Mr. Incognito would have been best pals?

CURT MENEFEE, HOST FOX NFL SUNDAY: Yes I think that I want to say it's a mountain made out of a mole hill. I think the problem is that we are in a society that wants to rush to a decision with everything. We want to know the answer as soon as we hear a problem. But this situation seems to be a lot more nuance than was put out there at the middle of last week when it first began. And the more team mates that have come out today is the first day the players have been back in full, you know, the starting quarterback said that. The center had said when the starting line receivers said he was outraged by all of this because not only were those two best buddies, they hang out together away from the facility at all times but then Martin had the voicemail message and he'd been playing it around the facility (entered) by with laugh of Incognito since the month of April that he never seemed to be offended by this.

I think we don't know how Jonathan Martin truly feels because that young man hasn't come out and said specifically. So that's why I say before we rush to judgment, let's find out his side of it not necessarily what his representative told the Miami Dolphins five days after he walked away from the team.

MORGAN: Dr. Gail Saltz, I mean it's a difficult one in this because in a workplace and somebody behaved like Incognito doing Jonathan Martin, it will be opened and shot case probably a bully and he'd be fired. But it's the NFL, these guys are great big, hulking footballers who are trained all day long to annihilate opponents in the most valiant way imaginable.

So, when one of them certainly goes a bit native if you like and says, "Look ,oh no leave me alone." Is he making too much of it? Should he just choose another sport and get out of it?

SALTZ: You have to treat it like a workplace. Yes, it's a game. Yes, they have to be aggressive but you don't have to emotionally torture someone else, essentially, and it wouldn't be tolerated than any other work place.

That's, I mean, you know, up until, not that long ago, we looked at women in the locker room and we said, "Oh, well, you know, sexual harassment," I mean, that's just part of, you know, the NFL. And now, we say no. We use to say, "Hey, you got concussions. Get up. Play again."

Now, we're looking at and we're saying, "You know, there are ramifications of this. No."

I think, you know, bullying is -- has no place in any work place and it's not the same as fun pranks that pull you all together. It's not the same bullying, it's not even the same as hazing because it's about picking one individual and repeatedly going after them and it -- you can be a big guy. You can be huge guy but it's about emotionally wearing them down or shunning them ...

MORGAN: OK. Let me bring Curt back here because he's done lots of these footballs, obviously, I mean -- they're gone.

MENEFEE: No offense to the doctor here but, you know, I think that the problem is -- and once again, this where I go back to, I think we're trying to find answers before we know all of the issues. Where, this word bullying has been thrown around and I'm not here to defend Richie Incognito because he crossed the line without question.

But we throw the word bullying around which carries a lot of weight in the society right now because it is a real problem particularly with young people but we've assumed that this is bullying.

There's a difference between bullying someone and having someone being a willing participant in going back and forth with one another and giving each other a hard time and then feeling that that person crossed the line. If I do that with you, you have the right to tell me, "Hey, you cross the line" but I haven't bullied you. We got into it and I went too far with it.

MORGAN: And also Curt also...

MENEFFEE: Maybe it's one of those issues that we need to discuss.

MORGAN: Right but also Curt, I think this is a particular issue doing professional sport is very physical like football. Where you're wearing helmets and padding and smashing into people vast rates of speed.

You know, how far do you take this? Do you think everyone has to suddenly stop being incredibly polite and nice to each other. Does that apply to the opposition? Are you allowed to physically bully the opposition? Can you talk to them in a derogatory manner? I mean, eventually, you're new to the sport in some of the Americans love, right? MENEFFEE: Right, you know, it's not just about the physical party. There's been no accusation that he's been physically bullied and once again, I think there should be some questions about whether or not he was bullied at all because we haven't heard him say that he felt bullied because the young men hadn't said anything but I do think that there's a locker room society that the average person does not understand and that those of us in the media can't really convey because we're not in there at all times.

But there's a culture that exist among the guys whether in the locker room. It doesn't mean that they all attack each other and they're all vulgar. I mean, there are a lot of college educated men who were very smart who treat each other with respect but part of their camaraderie is giving each other a hard time. And if you bet around any team sport at all that you know that they say things to one another but the rest of us don't say in "polite society."

MORGAN: Right.

MENEFFEE: And I think that that's one of the issues. Especially when you read something on paper, you know, contacts should be applied here as well. Sometimes you and I can say something to one another and I give you a hard time and I, you know, tell you how crazy you are and I can't stand you and we're laughing 'cause you and I are joking. If you wrote the same statement...

MORGAN: I'm not laughing. I'm deeply (inaudible) of what you just said.

MENEFFEE: But if you're at the same statement on a piece of paper...

MORGAN: I can support, I can support

MENEFFEE: ... it has totally different meaning.

MORGAN: Let me bring...


MORGAN: ... Dr. Gail Saltz back because it's a very interesting line, isn't it. You're going to have to try and draw the sport. You try and make it like any other work place. There is a danger. You turn the whole thing into a bit of farce where these great, big, aggressive powerful passionate men in the NFL have to suddenly start behaving like Choir boys.

SALTZ: I think there's a lot of great area in between Choir boys...

MORGAN: And Richie Incognito

SALTZ: ... and the people that they have to be. Yeah. I think, you know, threats of killing someone, threats of harming someone's mother, racial slurs. I think that you're right that we're going to have to put perhaps, redefine what works. In the military, this comes up as well where you need people to be extremely aggressive, put their life on the line, risk their lives.

And you need to train them as such but there still need to be some lines and the question is from the top down, they have to decide where those lines are going to be. And then there has -- the bystanders have to empowered and the individual has to be empowered to say something if it's crossing the line.

MORGAN: Well try to look at as a smart way of linking the Toronto Crack Smoking Mayor story to the NFL's scandal but Rob Ford did it for us because he came out wearing his NFL tie. There we go. We've meet (inaudible).

MENEFFEE: It's not even up to date.

MORGAN: I think maybe Rob Ford just start playing for the dolphins replacing Jonathan Martin. I'd like to see him and Richie Incognito go at it together.

MENEFEE: Some of those logos are even from the mid 90s. So they're not event current logos that tells you that tie has been around for quite a while.

MORGAN: Let me ask you Curt. If you were in the NFL tomorrow, who do you think you'd rather go to war with in a football sense if you were playing the New York Giants, Richie Incognito, the big beast who destroys all in front of him or Jonathan Martin who runs home to mommy?

MENEFEE: You know, I think that's what we're going to find out. You look at these two, I think Jonathan Martin is a young player, first round draft pick last year. He's been switched around from position to position who just hasn't found himself yet as an NFL player. Richie Incognito is a guy who has proven himself at the NFL level, he's also approved to be quite boorish everywhere he's been. You know, he got suspended and then eventually released by the St. Louis Rams, same thing happened back in college when he was at Nebraska. He went to Oregon, didn't even get to play a game before they got rid of him.

So he's got a pattern of bad behavior that makes him impossible to defend and I hopefully don't come out trying to defend him but I do think once again, there's been a rush to a conclusion with this whole thing before we figure out all the parts of it. And you know, one of the things you were saying earlier really caught me my attention as well is that you're talking about politicians and the different generations and how they look at it.

MORGAN: Right, right.

MENEFEE: I think that's part of this that has gone really unspoken. I grew up -- obviously, I'm a black man. I grew up in a black household where we were not allowed to use the N word. My mother told us, you never use that word in this household. We have 20 year olds and 25 year olds that black, white, Hispanic have grown up around that word in the music culture, in the newly culture...


MENEFEE: And they are not nearly as offended by that word as we are. I still think it's wrong. I still -- whether you're black or white, you shouldn't be using that word but they use it amongst themselves and I've spoken to a couple of guys who were there and we've seen publicly guys coming out of both races who are not offended by that. So obviously, that's one way that you look at maybe they have discussions with each other and give each other hard time about, so.

MORGAN: How tall are you Curt?

MENEFEE: 5'11 and three quarters I'd like to say.

MORGAN: So if you were 6 foot 5, and 315 pounds like Jonathan Martin, I can't help thinking you might be better off if he just march his back into the Dolphins' locker room and pings one straight on Mr. Incognito's nose.

MENEFEE: Well, yeah. I think that's what a lot of players are saying. If he had a problem with it and if he were that offended, go ahead and fight because players are going to -- other players in the locker room would stop a fight. So nobody is going to get seriously injured or -- but you stand up for yourself and the "bullying" would stop.


SALTZ: Oh yeah no one's going to get seriously injured, I mean, look there are plenty of stories of NFL players who carry guns, who used guns...

MENEFEE: But there have been no stories of NFL players who got into a fight in a locker room and then -- the thing is, NFL players, the 53 of them in the locker room. Everybody pretends that they're best friends. A lot of them, especially single guys, hang out together, do things together and they get into arguments they get in a fight. But this is not the rest of society. They don't carry locker rooms -- guns inside their locker room. If you want to talk about what would happen at their home, I think it's different. But I do think a lot of players...


MENEFEE: ... feel that he should have fought.

MORGAN: Well, it's a fascinating debate. It will ran along. Curt Menefee and Dr. Gail Saltz. Thank you both very much indeed.

Coming next. The radioactive debate, could nuclear energy be good for the environment. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. squares off against filmmaker Robert Stone.


MORGAN: The conventional wisdom on energy, coal is bad. Wind and solar are good and nuclear power plants are radioactive disasters waiting to happen. Is it really true, here to debate the issues Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President of Waterkeeper Alliance and Senior Attorney for the National Resource and Defense Council. And filmmaker Robert Stone, who's controversial documentary on nuclear power, Pandora's Promise airs tomorrow night on CNN.

And welcome to both of you, the two Roberts. Let me start with you Robert Stone, tell me why you made the movie and what its central point is.

ROBERT STONE, FILMMAKER: Well, first of all I'm a life long environmentalist, I made a film about the history of the environmental movement, my first film was anti-nuclear movie. So I came to this really out of a genuine concern that everything the environmental movement has been doing to combat climate change has failed. And I've noticed there's a, a growing number of environmentalist, energy experts, climate scientist who were looking to nuclear power as a solution, and if we really -- if you just do the math, wind is great, solar is great, efficiency is great, all these things are good. But you just can't get to powering a world of nine billion people without something else. And if something else that we have available this time is nuclear energy.

MORGAN: Well you've done a U-turn on nuclear energy so have you (inaudible)?

STONE: I have. As has everybody in my film, I mean that was the extraordinary thing, the more I looked into it, the more everything that I thought I knew about things have passed for conventional wisdom just turned out to be, the opposite.

MORGAN: The two key things that people used against it are the cost and the danger. So what has reassured you on those two things?

STONE: Well cost, you know, if we start building nuclear power plants like we build solar panels and like we build wind turbines and like we have iPhones and everything else. The cost are going to come down, So I think, I think the cost argument is a bit of a red herring, we just need to start building these things and mass producing them instead of building this one off, you know, one of kind plants so that's the expense thing. And, and what was the other one?.

MORGAN: Well, if I say, Chernobyl or Fukushima or whatever, how do you know that there wasn't going to be more of this if we have allowed more nuclear plants?

STONE: Well, look I think again, you're going to look at the context. We've had, and what 50 years of nuclear power and we've got 440 reactors operating all over the world. And those 50 years we've had three significant accidents only one of which, Chernobyl has ever cause anybody to die or get sick. And even then the numbers are remarkably low if you, if you look at what the World Health Organization says.

MORGAN: Robert Kennedy, you've heard the case for the, for the defense for nuclear power, what is your argument against it? ROBERT F. KENNEDY, PRESIDENT OF WATERKEEPER ALLIANCE: Well, I'm all for in nuclear power if they can ever make it safe and if they can ever make it economic. And I believe in the free market capitalism, I believe that the lowest cost producer should prevent on the market place. And at his point, you know it's -- we build a lot of nuclear power plants, we have 20 percent of our fleet on nuclear power plants. Nuclear power plant the most recent one built which is in Finland is causing $14 billion a GigaWatt. That compares to $3 billion for coal, $3 billion for gas, $3 billion for solar and $3 billion for wind and conservation is about a 10th of that. So on the cost issue, nuke doesn't make sense. It's the most catastrophically expensive way boil a pot of water as ever been devised.

Secondly on safety, it's not just the environmental community. There is a saying that this is non safe industry. It's the insurance industry. And these plants and this industry cannot get insurance so, Congress had to go in the middle of the night and passed the Price- Anderson Act which absolves the nuclear power industry of responsibility for the damages that are caused by leaks or accidents from their plants and there's no other industry in the world that has that kind of advantage.

Not only do we have to pay $14 billion for the plant but then you have to store the waste for 30, 000 years which is five times the length of recorded human history. And how that can ever be economic is for some -- somebody's got to make that case.

MORGAN: Robert Stone, I guess you have the perfect match to make it so come on. He just debunked your entire claim.

STONE: Absolutely. That's we'll -- keep in mind Bobby's a solar energy executive and so that's his position, I understand that. But look, the cost thing I really think is a red herring because if we haven't build nuclear plants in 30 years in this country we got a few going up now. What we -- you could've said the exact same thing about solar a few years ago. Solar has plummeted what? 1,000 percent in the last decade because we subsidized it, we created a market through subsidies, we started mass producing these things in China now, the cost has come down.

The future of nuclear energy is going to not be these one off plants, they're going to be manufacturing components, modular reactors on assembly lines the same way we manufacture commercial jet aircraft, high technology items, they're super safe, standardized heavy regulation. That's the future. We just got to go start doing it.

MORGAN: On Sunday, four climate and energy sciences released an open (inaudible) calling the world leaders to support the development of safe in nuclear power systems. Let me read a part of it. "Renewables like wind and solar and biomass will certainly play roles in a future energy economy, but those energy sources cannot scale up fast enough to deliver cheap and reliable power at the scale the global economy requires. While it maybe theoretically impossible to stabilize a climate without nuclear power, in the real world there is no credible path to climate stabilization that does not include a substantial role for nuclear power." I sensed there for a lot of experts, Robert Kennedy, is there an inimitability about this?

KENNEDY JR.: Well, those are climate experts they're not people who actually are building power plants and I would say if you talk to people who are building power plants, build particularly solar power plants or wind power plants that they'll tell you a completely different story.

Going back to what Robert said a minute ago, we have -- the plants that are advocated in this film which are a fast reactor plants. I've been around for a long time and everybody who's tried them has abandoned because they are 60 percent more expensive than regular nuclear power plants, they're not any safer even abandoned by the United States, by Germany, by France, by Italy, by Russia. The Russian Navy and US Navy have also abandoned this technology, so it's just the technology that has -- it's like a unicorn. It's something that it's easy to say it would be wonderful if it existed but it doesn't exist.

MORGAN: OK. Let's take a short break and we continue the debate after the break. Robert Stone you got about 10 minutes to girder your loins and come back. Mr. Kennedy.


MORGAN: Back with us Robert F. Kennedy Jr and Robert Stone having as part of the debate here about nuclear energy.

Well let's take a little look at your movie because Pandora's Promises airing tomorrow night with CNN (inaudible). Let's play a little clip and see what all the fuzz is going to be about.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It turns out that United States has been buying nuclear war hits from the Russians for over 10 years now.

16,000 nuclear war heads and they're recycling all of these nuclear war heads into energy, electricity, and nuclear power.

This nuclear power is doing more to de-nuclear weaponize the world than any other thing that we do.


MORGAN: So, film Pandora's Promise gets his global television premier on CNN tomorrow night at 9 Eastern.

So, Robert that was an extraordinary revelation I thought. Sheer volume of nuclear war heads from Russia are now being used for positive gain in this country.

STONE: It's incredible, isn't it? I mean that was one of the most surprising things I found out. I mean one in ten light bulbs in the United States are being powered by energy derived from the former soviet nuclear weapon. That's the clearly...


MORGAN: ... extraordinary the war more.

STONE: Yeah. And now we're about to -- that program is (inaudible) about to the use of America nuclear war heads.

I mean this is -- should be something every environmentalist, peace activist, anti nuclear person should get by. It's a great thing.

MORGAN: OK. Robert Kennedy what is your argument against it? If it's so prevalent and so successful?

KENNEDY: The kind of reactors that are advocated for this film by this film are breeder reactors which actually create more plutonium and more weapons grade plutonium.

They're the kind of reactors that India used to build its atomic bomb which it called a peaceful reactor and a peaceful bomb.

So, you get what normal like water reactors. You cannot use that plutonium to build weapons. But with the kind of breeder reactors are being advocated by this film. You're producing weapons grade plutonium and that's why the Clinton administration killed the program to build these reactors in 1994 in this country. Their reactor does actually create more weapons grade plutonium. And the idea that you can, you know, one of the ideas behind the film is that, well, these kind of reactors actually feed on themselves and create their own fuel. And you can use all the nuclear waste from the existing nuclear power plants and put it in these reactors and they'll eventually process it.

You'd have to create thousands of these reactors for hundred of years, operate them for hundreds of years in order for them to devour.


KENNEDY JR.: Nuclear waste that exist.

MORGAN: I would give you the last word Robert Stone but you're going to have the last word tomorrow night when your movie airs at this time tomorrow night. So people can make their own minds of it. A fascinating debate, Robert Kennedy, Robert Stone, thank you both very much indeed. And we'll be right back.



MORGAN: Friday night I'll be back with a surprising interview with Three Generations of Buffets, Warren Buffet is son and his grandson. Believe or not a ukulele. You're going to see that to believe it. That's all for us tonight. AC360 later starts right now.