Return to Transcripts main page

Paula Zahn Now

Interview With Judge Roy Moore; One Simple Question

Aired December 10, 2004 - 20:00   ET

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

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


HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening, everybody. Thanks for joining us tonight. I'm Heidi Collins. Paula is off tonight.
Remember the Ten Commandments judge, Roy Moore, who wanted to put God back in the courtroom? Well, if the president has anything to say about it, Judge Moore might finally get his wish. I will talk with Judge Moore in just a moment.

But we begin tonight with the power of one simple question and one awkward answer. The question posed earlier this week by one soldier, the answer by secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SPC. THOMAS WILSON, U.S. ARMY: Mr. Secretary, my question is more logistical. We've had troops in Iraq coming up on three years, and we've always staged here out in Kuwait. now, Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to help armor our vehicles and why don't we have those resources readily available to us?

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: I talked to the general coming out here about the pace at which the vehicles are being armored. They have been brought from all over the world, wherever they're not needed, to a place here where they are needed. I'm told that they're being, the Army is -- I think it's something like 400 a month are being done. And it's essentially a matter of physics. It isn't a matter of money. It isn't a matter on the part of the Army of desire. It's a matter of production and capability of doing it.

As you know, you go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: That was in Kuwait on Wednesday. By Thursday, there was a political storm in Washington over the lack of proper armor for U.S. troops in Iraq. That's when the president spoke up.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The concerns expressed are being addressed, and that is, we expect our troops to have the best possible equipment. And if I were a soldier overseas wanting to defend my country, I would want to ask the secretary of defense the same question. And that is, are we getting the best we can get? And they deserve the best.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: And today, a senior Pentagon official tells CNN the Army is renegotiating its contract with a Florida company to have it increase production of armored Humvees. That number will go from 450 a month to 550.

Getting more armor for our soldiers in Iraq has been the mission of our next guests for the past year. Brian and Alma Hart lost their son John in October of last year. They say a week before he died in an unarmored Humvee in Iraq, John warned them that he was worried someone was going to get hurt.

The Harts join me now.

To the both of you, we appreciate your time and certainly do offer our condolences, first off.

Brian, I'd like to ask you about the last time that you spoke with John and what he had to say.

BRIAN HART, FATHER OF KILLED U.S. SOLDIER: John called us a week before he died, talked to the girls at length, and then he got me on the phone.

And whispering into the phone he said, dad, the insurgents are coming our way. We're being attacked on the roads and our vehicles have no armor.

And he was short of all kinds of things from ammunition to breastplates. But, in particular, armor was a concern to him. And he said, I think I'm going to get hit on the road. And I didn't attribute too much to it at the time until a week later when they showed up at our doorstep to tell us he was killed.

COLLINS: As a father, I just -- I can't imagine how that must have felt when you started to put two and two together from what he told you to what happened the week after. What did you do then, when you started at that point, to put things together?

B. HART: We started to look to find out what really happened. And we got that report from people on the scene, the survivors.

And, basically, they were shot to death by an in an unarmored Humvee with no protection. John was shot standing up. And Lieutenant Bernstein through the vehicle and up his leg and bled to death rescuing the driver. We went in and started contacting politicians and finding out why in the world we couldn't get armored Humvee production up and why we couldn't get retrofit plates for the vehicles.

COLLINS: Alma, let me ask you, how did you become involved in helping to fight what's going on here, what we've been learning about is going on as far as armoring these vehicles? What do did you do?

ALMA HART, MOTHER OF KILLED U.S. SOLDIER: I tried to support Brian as much as possible and just help get the word out.

People who don't have a family member over there aren't aware of just what the situation is. Until it hits your family, you're not hearing it.

COLLINS: Brian...

(CROSSTALK)

COLLINS: Go ahead.

B. HART: Go ahead.

Yes. I think we want to make an important point. We've been watching CNN this evening from Wolf Blitzer on with various reports of production and all the intense scrambling to get production done since Rumsfeld was embarrassed. You know, no one knows more about these issues than we do at the moment. And, frankly, we're not afraid to speak what's really going on here. The reason that equipment has not made it into Iraq in sufficient numbers is because the purchase orders were not placed by the Department of Defense.

COLLINS: And do you also feel that you are somehow spokespeople for the rest of the soldiers? And how many other families of soldiers in Iraq have you been able to speak with about this issue?

B. HART: Oh, I don't even know.

Some of the best things that have happened to us have been letters or photos from people in Iraq showing us how they had survived in an up-armored Humvee from an attack. This is important. The grunts, the PFCs that can't speak up, the generals that can't say what needs to be said without losing their jobs, the contractors that are intimidated by the DOD, there's a real problem here. And people -- we're frankly the only people I know that can say things that need to be said.

COLLINS: Quickly, Alma...

A. HART: We don't have anyone currently in the military, so we can speak up.

COLLINS: Understood.

You're also working, quickly, before I let you go, on unarmored trucks. You say this also is an issue -- Alma.

A. HART: Yes.

There's a big issue now. They've got armor in on a good portion of the Humvees, but there's nothing yet, or very little yet, on the heavy trucks for transporting, and the insurgents are now aiming at those.

B. HART: Yes. And we want to be sure. I heard earlier this evening someone say that the Pentagon didn't know the capacity of Armor Holdings and AM General on production of Humvees. That's not true. In February, at least, acting Army Secretary Harold Brownlee went to the plants themselves to confirm reports he'd received from Congress, in particular, Republican Representative Simmons of Connecticut, who went to the plants himself.

And the plants had ample capacity. The purchase order were not let. That's just the flat-out truth of the matter. The purchase orders were not let.

COLLINS: Well, Alma and Brian Hart, we certainly do appreciate your story. We're going to be talking with our Pentagon correspondent here in just a moment to get some more answers there.

And, again, we appreciate your time tonight and thank you for sharing your story.

B. HART: We appreciate that. I just want to let you know, there's still $380 million in unfunded requirements right now for heavy trucks.

COLLINS: All right. Thanks to both of you, Mr. and Mrs. Hart.

B. HART: Thank you.

COLLINS: So exactly what is being done about getting more armor to American forces in Iraq?

We asked senior Pentagon correspondent Jamie McIntyre to look into it.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SR. MILITARY AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT (voice- over): The Army is moving to buy more armored Humvees and see if other production lines can be accelerated, just two days after a pointed question from this soldier put Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on the spot about the lack of armor for military vehicles.

Army officials say they were surprised to hear from news reports that Armor Holdings of Jacksonville, Florida, was prepared to sell the Pentagon 550 armored Humvees a month, because originally the Army was told it could only get 450 because of commitments to other customers. Pentagon officials say the new Army secretary, Francis Harvey, who was sworn in less than a month ago, called the CEO of the company directly and is negotiating to buy all the Humvees the company can supply.

The company says it can produce another 100 Humvees a month by next March and is currently 330 vehicles ahead of schedule. One concern, providing Humvees to the Marine Corps, too. Another company, ArmorWorks of Tempe, Arizona, says it could double production of armor plates that can be added to existing Humvees.

MATT SALMON, PRESIDENT, ARMORWORKS: We produce 300 kits a month. We could be doing 600 kits a month. So when you hear language from the Pentagon that we're doing everything humanly possible, I'm telling you that the industry base is being underutilized.

MCINTYRE: But the Army says it already has a backlog of armor kits and can't install them any faster.

Meanwhile, CNN has learned the U.S. Army arsenal in Rock Island, Illinois, was ordered just this week to resume around-the-clock shifts to make cab armor kits for five-ton trucks and fuel tankers, which is a critical need. And the Army secretary has created a new armor task force to examine all existing contracts to see if there are other opportunities to speed up production of armor or other ways to get it to the battlefield faster.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COLLINS: All right, so, Jamie, we are hearing a lot of numbers out there. What exactly is the number of heavily protected Humvees in Iraq right now?

MCINTYRE: Well, you know, Heidi, it's not just Humvees, as your guests pointed out. It's all the vehicles.

And if you look at all the vehicles the military has both in Afghanistan and Iraq, we're talking 30,000. That includes Humvee, trucks, all kinds of vehicles. About 8,000 of them are still without some level of armor protection. Now, not every one of those has to be armored. They don't all have an armor mission.

But right now in Iraq, there are plenty of vehicles in a combat zone, including Humvees, that still are the thin-skinned version. The Pentagon says, again, it has enough bolt-on armor to put on Humvees, but they don't have the -- it's just a matter of logistics, getting it on there. They say it could take another year before they get every single vehicle that needs to have the full armor protection up to speed.

COLLINS: So, quickly, Jamie, according to the Pentagon, is this something that could have been prepared better for before the war, before it ever began?

MCINTYRE: Well, clearly, if they had known that they were going to be in an insurgency where they were going to be facing roadside bombs, rocket-propelled grenades a year after the invasion, they could have done something ahead of time.

But they insist that the industrial base wasn't there, had to be ramped up. They insist they bought every piece of armor that they can get, realistically, with the extra money they got from Congress. But, clearly, there's a lot of debate about that.

COLLINS: Jamie McIntyre, our senior Pentagon correspondent -- Jamie, thanks so much.

And there is another layer to this story. It has to do with journalism and ethics. Was the soldier speaking for himself or for a journalist? We'll have that and a lot more in a moment.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

COLLINS (voice-over): Tonight, once upon a time, the news landed on your doorstep in the morning and showed up on your TV set in the evening.

WALTER CRONKITE, ANCHOR: And that's the way it is.

COLLINS: The way it was. Now you point, click and pick your stories any time. Does it really matter anymore how you get the news?

And, the passion of Judge Roy Moore. The Ten Commandments are headed back to court as a banished Alabama justice continues a controversial crusade. I'll talk with Roy Moore, the Ten Commandments judge.

And our question of the day. Should the Ten Commandments displayed in U.S. courtrooms? Click on to CNN.com/Paula and let us know. The results and much more coming up.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COLLINS: Welcome back, everybody.

The soldier in the ranks confronting the top man at the Pentagon makes a great story. But it wasn't that simple on Wednesday when Specialist Thomas Wilson posed that now famous question to Defense Secretary Rumsfeld.

Here it is once again.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WILSON: Mr. Secretary, my question is more logistical. We've had troops in Iraq coming up on three years, and we've always staged here out in Kuwait. now, Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to help armor our vehicles and why don't we have those resources readily available to us?

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: The truth, we now know, is that Specialist Wilson had some professional help. Edward Lee Pitts, a reporter for "The Chattanooga Times Free Press," was embedded with Specialist Wilson's unit and coached him.

Pitts has written several front-page stories in the last few weeks about the lack of armor in Iraq. His publisher is defending his reporter, saying -- quote -- "People forget that even if Lee talked to this soldier, the soldier made the decision to ask the question." But he does admit the paper should have made sure its story included the fact that Pitts coached the soldier. All of this raises some ethical questions.

And joining me now -- we're going to talk about it -- Andrew Nachison, director of the Media Center of the American Press Institute.

Andrew, thanks for being here.

And Jane Kirtley, professor of media ethics and law at the University of Minnesota, which you've already determined is my father's alma mater. Got to say it. He's watching.

Anyway, let's get straight to this story, if we could.

Jane, what is wrong with a reporter getting his question asked in a form that he wasn't allowed to, to pose the question himself?

JANE KIRTLEY, UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA: The problem here was disclosure. I think this was a very important question. I am incredibly glad that it was asked, but, frankly, I think everybody was deceived, because they thought that the soldier had spontaneously raised the question, when, in fact, he was coached.

COLLINS: But how does that change the dynamic of what went on in the room?

KIRTLEY: Well, to me, it is tantamount to a staged question. it is that something that journalists are supposedly not going to do.

(CROSSTALK)

COLLINS: And pardon me.

Andrew, was the question staged? We're all taught as a journalist that is an absolute no-no.

ANDREW NACHISON, THE MEDIA CENTER: I think it's ludicrous to criticize the soldier for asking a question and calling it a staged question. The question was...

(CROSSTALK)

COLLINS: I don't think we're criticizing the soldier. I think what we're saying is that the journalist who asked him to ask the question, they didn't include, well, I have this question here, the soldier might have said, from a reporter from "The Chattanooga Times Free Press." Here's the question. Do you think that should that have been divulged at the time?

NACHISON: No. I don't think it's relevant. I don't think it matters. The question stood on its own and I don't think the secretary of defense needed background on where the question came from.

(CROSSTALK)

KIRTLEY: I absolutely disagree with that, and I'll tell you why.

You know, this story is not about the press, or at least it should not be about the press. It should be about this very important question, and part of what made the dynamic of this so compelling was the fact that this question appeared to come from a rank-and-file soldier. It was asked by such a person, but the question is, who was really behind it?

And I think, at a time when journalists are struggling for credibility, we simply don't need to be hiding behind somebody else to ask our questions. If the reporter couldn't ask the question legitimately, in a press conference or something, then I think talking to the soldier was just fine, but that should have been disclosed from the outset.

COLLINS: Andrew, you're a reporter. Was this guy just a clever journalist? Or would you have done things differently?

NACHISON: I don't know what I would have done in that situation. I've never been in a situation like that.

But, yes, I think the reporter was clever. I think the reporter developed sources within the unit that he was embedded with. And I think he used those relationships in a very enterprising way to get a question asked in a very public setting and to draw attention to an issue that that reporter had been reporting on.

COLLINS: What about his paper? Do you think that the paper should have divulged that in their article?

NACHISON: Yes. I think they should have. I don't disagree that the relationship should have been disclosed. I don't think it was concealed or that there was any attempt to hide the relationship.

COLLINS: OK.

Quickly, I want get in before we have to let the both of you go, what the Pentagon said here. Let's put it on the screen here, if we could: "The secretary provides ample opportunity for interaction with the press. It is better that others not infringe on the troops' opportunity to interact with superiors in the chain of command," of course, coming to us from Larry Di Rita.

Is he right? Are reporters getting the access that they need, Jane?

KIRTLEY: No, of course they're not.

And that's why I think that it would have been so compelling if the soldier had said, you know, Mr. Pitts can't ask you this question, Mr. Secretary, so I'm going to ask it, because it's something that I, my fellow soldiers and the American people want an answer to. This is not excusing Mr. Rumsfeld. This is not suggesting that the way he interacts with the press is a good way, but two wrongs don't make a right. And at a time when we in the press are trying to hold ourselves up as this great moral arbiter, I simply don't think that this is a very good way to get -- it's not a good means to an end.

COLLINS: Quick last comment, Andrew.

NACHISON: I don't think anything wrong took place here. I don't think there's anything to be ashamed of. I don't think anything was hidden. I don't think there are two wrongs here at all. So, I disagree with the entire premise that journalists were hurt by this.

COLLINS: All right, to the both of you tonight, we certainly appreciate your time. Andrew Nachison and Jane Kirtley, thanks again.

NACHISON: Thanks.

COLLINS: Before we move ahead, we want to go ahead and clarify some information that was in last night's special edition of PAULA ZAHN NOW. We may have given the impression that Judea Pearl, the father of slain "Wall Street Journal" reporter Daniel Pearl, saw a video of his son being killed. In fact, Judea Pearl only watched part of the tape that showed his son being held hostage. He did not watch, nor has he ever seen tape of the actual murder of his son.

Next, he's the president's choice to keep an eye on homeland security, but is he ready for the job? What we know and what we don't know about Bernard Kerik. Our CNN security watch next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COLLINS: In our security watch tonight, questions about Bernard Kerik, the man President Bush has picked to lead the Department of Homeland Security. The White House acknowledges that Kerik's background may be attracting closer examination than other nominees to the Cabinet. But the president's people say they're not worried.

Here's homeland security correspondent Jeanne Meserve.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BUSH: Bernie is a dedicated, innovative reformer.

JEANNE MESERVE, CNN HOMELAND SECURITY CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): From the moment he was nominated last week, there were questions about Bernard Kerik.

PAUL LIGHT, BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: You're starting to see now these stories popping up, like some are thunder clouds, and the question is whether they'll merge into something quite serious.

MESERVE: A big plus for Kerik, the tale of his dramatic rise in the world. A high school dropout, he overcome poverty and abandonment by his mother, a prostitute. He became a cop, Rudy Giuliani's bodyguard and eventually New York City's commissioner of police. He dealt with the tragedy of the twin towers, has made millions and is now a Cabinet nominee. NORMAN SEABROOK, CORRECTIONS OFFICERS ASSOCIATION: When you look at Bernie Kerik, you look at a confident individuals that holds his head high, sticks his chest out and knows what he wants and what he's going after. And that can turn some people off.

MESERVE: And it has. In Iraq, where he trained police, a senior administration official described Kerik as a loose cannon who lacked judgment, a view shared by a co-worker in Baghdad. In the Saudi Arabian hospital where Kerik headed security investigations in the 1980s, some employees say worse. Dan Mackey was a physician at the hospital at the time.

DAN MACKEY, PHYSICIAN: He was a very arrogant person who tried to throw around his weight, intimidate people into doing what he thought was the correct thing for them to do.

MESERVE: His lawyer puts a different slant on Kerik's style.

JOE TACOPINA, ATTORNEY FOR KERIK: Bernie is not always a gentle guy, but we don't need a gentle guy running Homeland Security.

MESERVE: Kerik's ethics also have come under fire. While police commissioner in New York, he was fined $2,500 for using off-duty detectives to research his autobiography.

MELANIE SLOAN, CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY: Once you're the chief of homeland security, you're going to be under such scrutiny that you can't afford to be making mistakes like that.

MESERVE: When Kerik's publisher, Judith Regan, thought her cell phone and jewelry had been stolen during a visit to Fox News, four homicide detectives were dispatched to investigate several Fox employees.

ROBERT SIMELS, ATTORNEY: Bernie Kerik has abused his power in this instance.

MESERVE: Kerik's lawyers says the detectives were sent, but not by Kerik.

TACOPINA: About that, there was an investigation. He was cleared, I might add, Jeanne, of that. He didn't dispatch any detective. He doesn't ask for preferential treatment for himself or anyone else.

MESERVE: And then there are Kerik's finances. Once a bankrupt street cop, Kerik recently made more than $6 million from the sale of his stock options in Taser International, where he's been on the board of directors. Perfectly legal, but this is just one of many security- related firms to which Kerik has ties and which could do business with the department.

SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: We believe he will take all the appropriate steps to make sure that there are no conflicts. MESERVE: Despite the questions and concerns, there is one man who remains in Kerik's corner, and the president's support trumps all the criticism.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COLLINS: Jeanne Meserve joining us now.

Jeanne, is Bernard Kerik's confirmation in any trouble?

MESERVE: No.

He has the support of New York's Democratic senators, Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton. And the feeling is, unless there's a lot more information and a lot more damaging information, this confirmation is going to go through -- Heidi.

COLLINS: Jeanne Meserve, thanks so much tonight.

MESERVE: You bet.

COLLINS: And here now with their perspectives on Bernard Kerik, two congressmen, both from New York, Democrat Charles Rangel and Republican Peter King.

Thank you for being here, gentlemen.

(CROSSTALK)

COLLINS: And it is interesting. You both are from New York, but seem to have different opinions on Bernard Kerik.

What is the problem with the Bernard Kerik nomination?

REP. CHARLES RANGEL (D), NEW YORK: I didn't know until things came up in the paper about his background. I just thought because he was from New York and lived in New Jersey that he would be more sensitive at least to the financial needs that we need in homeland security.

But now people are raising questions about his training in homeland security and his background as to whether or not, besides being a friend of Giuliani and being there when we needed him in 9/11, exactly can these experiences benefit the nation? But it's all coming up in front of us in the confirmation committee. I hope he does well.

COLLINS: Representative King, any concerns or do you agree with that?

REP. PETER KING (R), NEW YORK: No, I think Bernie is going to be a great commissioner.

Listen, there's always going to be charges made against a guy, especially a guy who worked his way up. He was literally a street kid who worked his way up, got himself straightened out in the Army, became commissioner of the greatest police department in the world. And he is going to have enemies out there, and Giuliani's enemies. Bernie, I'm sure over the years, has made some.

But I think these are just smear attacks. He's going to survive it. He's going to be a great homeland security secretary. I think Charlie and I can agree on one thing, that I think he's going to do a lot more to get money where it's needed, to cities like New York, Houston, Texas, Washington, D.C., that really do need it.

COLLINS: This is clearly not an easy job. This is a huge, huge undertaking.

And though he did very well, some would say, most would say, I believe, hearing what you say tonight, he did a good job in New York, is he ready to expand this role to the country and all of the implications and all of those complexities that come along with that?

KING: I think he is.

I'm on the Homeland Security Committee. One of the problems we have is, there's still not enough intelligence sharing, information sharing between the feds and the local government. Bernie Kerik, as police commissioner of New York, dealt with the FBI, dealt with the Secret Service. He's in a unique position to make sure they cooperate and get the job done.

COLLINS: What sort of ideas have you heard about homeland security coming from Bernard Kerik?

RANGEL: I haven't heard any, really.

No one even knew who Bernard Kerik was until 9/11. And the truth of the matter is that, even our great mayor, Giuliani, his reputation was on the skids before.

(CROSSTALK)

RANGEL: He came when we needed him at 9/11. He was there. Kerik was by his side.

But I think, if you take a look at the short period of time he was with the police department -- I think, before then, he was with the Department of Correction -- I really don't know what experience he's had nationwide in terms of dealing with the problems that we have to face.

COLLINS: Seems though like you do have very different opinions about this.

OLDER GUY: He knows better than I do, but...

REP. PETER KING (R), NEW YORK: I know Bernie pretty well. I have a lot of faith in him. He did a great job (UNINTELLIGIBLE). I believe he certainly did the job on 9/11 and I know that he's going to be able to deal with the federal law enforcement who for the most part have not been cooperative as they should be with the local police. I think Bernie Kerik is going to make sure that works.

COLLINS: Will that be his first priority?

KING: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) security work and as a major part of making homeland security work is get those 22 departments and agencies that are now one, to make them work together, yes. And also to get more money into the areas that need it.

RANGEL: You know Ray Kelly really had a national reputation when he was the police commissioner, now and before for the city of New York. But how long was Kerik commissioner? It was a short period of time, I thought.

KING: He was police commissioner about a year and a half, but again, he was tested 9/11, passed the test. As corrections commissioner, he did a great job. He reduced jail violence by about 90 percent. This guy, every job he's gotten he's done the job. I think he's going to do this one as well.

RANGEL: I'm not knocking him because he's a New Yorker. But taking care of prisoners is hardly...

(CROSSTALK)

KING: As police commissioner of the largest police department in the world.

COLLINS: What do you want his priority to be, Representative Rangel?

RANGEL: To make certain that our nation is safe and for New York City to get a fair shake in terms of the resources available.

COLLINS: We will watch. We've all been watching. You agree. Got that on tape. All right.

Congressman Charles Rangel, and Peter King, we certainly appreciate your time tonight.

Let's find out what's coming up on "NEWSNIGHT" with Aaron Brown.

AARON BROWN, HOST, "NEWSNIGHT": Coming up tonight, Robert Lori (ph) is one of the thousands of young men and women who went to Iraq to fight the war. In one of the many thousand who came back an amputee. What sets him apart, is he also got a bill for nearly $2,000 from the army. Why is that, and what happened when people started to hear about it. Better more, and more on "NEWSNIGHT" tonight.

COLLINS: At 10:00 tonight. Aaron, thanks so much. We'll be watching.

Next, meet a man whose mission is written in stone. He's known as the Ten Commandments judge, and we've got him, coming up, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COLLINS: Welcome back. Is displaying the Ten Commandments on government property, such as courthouses, unconstitutional? The U.S. Supreme Court will take on that question early next year when it hears arguments in two separate cases. This week the Bush administration urged the high court's approval and so did Judge Roy Moore. Although he's not connected to either case, the Ten Commandments cost him his job as Alabama's chief justice.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(voice-over): It was known as Roy's Rock. 2.5 tons of granite at the center of a legal storm over the separation of church and state. It was a major controversy.

Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore's sculpture of the Ten Commandments was removed from the state judicial building just over a year ago. Moore put it there himself in 2001 without telling his supreme court colleagues. Inevitably there were lawsuits charging that the monument was an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. The dispute raged on, and on, and on. The case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Roy lost his rock and his job.

JUDGE ROY MOORE, FMR. ALABAMA CHIEF JUSTICE: Absolutely no regrets. We've done what we were sworn to do. When I took office I said I would uphold the moral foundation of our law. That I have done. I have not denied God and that's exactly what they asked me to do to hold office. I said I could not. They removed me.

COLLINS: Since then he's been touring the country defending his decision. This summer a Christian group took Roy's Rock on a 14-state tour and in a latest twist, the Bush administration has urged the Supreme Court to sanction displays of the Ten Commandments on government property. A weighty decision the justices will likely make early next year.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COLLINS: And joining me now, Judge Roy Moore. Judge, thanks for joining us tonight.

JUDGE ROY MOORE, FMR. ALABAMA CHIEF JUSTICE: Thank you, Heidi. Glad to be with you.

COLLINS: You know, some would say that election results of the presidential election revealed that there are a lot of people who felt some sort of spiritual void. Is that something that you were trying to get after?

MOORE: Well, I think that the Ten Commandments represent the morality which people know our nation is losing. This is simply a truth that when you distance yourself from God you lose your morality and George Washington understood this back in his farewell address back in 1796.

COLLINS: Do you feel vindicated now in some way given what the Bush administration has done? MOORE: Well, I'm glad to see the Bush administration coming out in support of the public display of the Ten Commandments. Of course, it's a little late for my case. I just hope they understand what it's really about. It's really about not the Ten Commandments but about the acknowledgement of God. Whether or not this nation, this state, recognizes and acknowledges a sovereign God.

COLLINS: You have to feel a little bit like -- many people will remember you for what it was called, which was Roy's Rock. Is this a legacy that you want to be known for?

MOORE: Well, I don't deal with -- have a legacy or anything. We did install the Ten Commandments in the rotunda of Alabama judicial building and it meant something then. It means something now. It does not contradict the first amendment of the United States constitution. The first amendment's only purpose was allow the freedom to acknowledge God, and that was guaranteed to the states. And our state specifically acknowledges God as does every state in the union in this constitution.

COLLINS: And yet you would have to agree that there are still people out there who are very nervous and concerned about blurring those lines between the separation of church and state.

MOORE: Yes. And I agree that separation of church and state is a very important doctrine, historically and legally, but it does not separate you from God. It separates the way you worship God from the dictates of government. That's a very important distinction. We're trying to use separation of church or state to separation from God and actually Thomas Jefferson's letter of January 1, 1802 recognizes God even in his letter.

COLLINS: I also know that you're traveling around the United States and talking to a lot of heartland Republicans. What do they tell you about the Bush administration's stance on this issue?

MOORE: Well, I mean, there's different opinions across the country. Many of them would like to see more of a stance on moral issues and I agree that we should recognize that morality is the basis of our strength. And we should recognize that morality does not come from the constitution. It comes from an acknowledgement of God and the Bible upon which our morality is based.

COLLINS: Judge, tell us about any further political ambitions you may have.

MOORE: Well, I'm waiting to see what the future holds for me. I'm praying about it, waiting for God to give me some direction. I don't have any plans specifically at this time.

COLLINS: Sounds like an open door, though.

MOORE: You know, it is possible that I could run for public office in the future, but, we'll wait.

COLLINS: Judge Roy Moore, we'll be watching. We appreciate your time here tonight.

MOORE: Thank you, Heidi. Bye-bye.

COLLINS: So what do you think? Should the Ten Commandments be displayed in U.S. courtrooms? You can vote at CNN.com/paula. We'll have the results at the end of the hour.

Our next bit of news is about the news itself. With the Internet and cable, it's all there 24/7, and the new editor-in-chief is you. Is that a good thing? We'll talk about it, when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COLLINS: A certain job opening at CBS got our special contributor, Frank Sesno, thinking about how much has changed in the news business in the past 25 years and how much more power you have these days over what you see and read.

There's so much out there.

Frank, how are you doing?

FRANK SESNO, CNN SPECIAL CONTRIBUTOR: Great, Heidi. You know, it's interesting. ATMs, cell phones, e-mails, we want what we want when we want it. And that apply to this business, too.

The implications are considerable, and it's playing out not far from here and right before our eyes.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(MUSIC)

SESNO (voice-over): Maybe we can enlist Donald Trump.

DONALD TRUMP, REAL ESTATE MOGUL: You're fired.

ALEX TREBEK, HOST, "JEOPARDY": We'll dealing with rarity.

SESNO: Alex Trebek.

TREBEK: Here's a rare clue.

SESNO: Or Simon Cowell.

SIMON COWELL, JUDGE, "AMERICAN IDOL": It wasn't your best performance.

SESNO: Somebody to select the anchor of this "CBS Evening News" without Dan Rather.

DAN RATHER, ANCHOR, "CBS EVENING NEWS": Good evening.

SESNO: Sure enough, the torch is being passed to a new generation.

BRIAN WILLIAMS, ANCHOR, NBC NEWS: The Bush White House...

SESNO: Over at NBC, Brian Williams has moved into Tom Brokaw's chair, but at CBS, the heir is still not apparent.

CBS chairman Les Moonves jokes maybe they'll bring in the cast of "Friends." Maybe they'll raid the competition and hire the duo from "Saturday Night Live."

But there's more here than meets the eye. It's about network news and its prospects for sure, but it's really about America, about us, the audience, about how we live and learn. The analogue era of the paperboy.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Extra! Extra!

SESNO: Like the era of the venerable anchor...

WALTER CRONKITE, FORMER ANCHOR, CBS NEWS: And that's the way it is.

SESNO: ... has become the digital era of always on 24/7 fragmented America.

ROBOTIC VOICE: Time, weather and...

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Suzanne says...

SESNO: ... where news is fast, news is furious, and news is increasingly interactive. Just like America.

Where news consumers, armed with technology, given the choices, believing there's bias, are taking sides and taking over.

Bloggers turned Rather's report on President Bush inside out. Readers have forced "The Washington Post," circulation down 10 percent over the past two years, to move towards shorter stories with more graphics and more pictures.

Demographics have propelled ethnic media to big business. Spanish language newspaper circulation has tripled in the last decade.

No wonder cable is a battleground, and an estimated 100 million people now get news online. It's the democratization of information, the news consumer as editor-in-chief, with new choices and responsibilities. Seek fact or opinion? Dig deep or not at all?

RATHER: Time to move on.

SESNO: Dan Rather isn't yesterday's story quite yet, but the real news here is what's happening on the other side of the set, in every home in America, where people are deciding where their information will come from, and what kind of reporter they want to be.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SESNO: So, Heidi, people like to say that the broadcast networks are dinosaurs. Their audience is aging, ratings down 34 percent in 10 years. All true but they still have giant audiences every night, some 20 million people or more.

But you know, that leaves some 200 million people who are not watching network news every night.

COLLINS: Right.

SESNO: And they're going to other place, a lot of other places, to get their news. The burden falls increasingly on us, the news consumer, to get that news well, responsibly and from lots of sources.

COLLINS: So you talk about all of these different places where people get their news. And we're talking about the big three, the networks, the cables, the computer, your cell phone. I mean, seriously, everywhere you turn, you've got that news.

What sort of implications, though, does that have?

SESNO: Major, major implications. My friend Tom Rosensteel (ph) was -- over at the Project for Excellence in Journalism has done a study on this. And what he finds is that most Americans, despite all the fanfare about ideology in the news, they're not going only where they're most comfortable. They're getting their news from lots of sources, lots of different times throughout the day.

COLLINS: It's almost -- they're working at it?

SESNO: Well, they're working at it. But what people need to realize is, they're going to really have to challenge themselves. That's what reporters do. It's why they're often unpopular.

If you're going to be the reporter, sometimes you ask a nasty question. Sometimes you challenge authority. Sometimes that just goes with territory.

The real question for us as a society is, will we do that, left to our other devices? Are we going to work hard and challenge ourselves or will we, like when we go to the buffet, just go for the junk food?

COLLINS: Right. Because it automatically comes as the viewer's responsibility to really dig in. It seems like you can't really do that half-heartedly and come up with, you know, the best opinion with all of this information out there. You really have to get good at filtering through it.

SESNO: And there's a lot of stuff out there. You know, I'm fond of saying if we're not born with attention deficit disorder, we in the media will teach it to you. And so we're going to have to find a way to navigate all of that.

Now, back to the Founding Fathers. Thomas Jefferson said, you know, "Given a choice bean a newspaper and a government, I'll take the newspaper." He might not say that today with all the other stuff out there. COLLINS: Sure.

SESNO: But his central point was key. And informed public, his key to a vital and functioning democracy.

COLLINS: Frank Sesno, thanks so much for your insight on it.

SESNO: Thank you.

COLLINS: We appreciate it.

And next now, some thoughts about Christmas. It just wouldn't be the same without the smell of a freshly cut tree. So why are most Americans going artificial? We'll talk about it, coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COLLINS: This week, a Supreme Court ruling in Canada made it the third nation to allow gay marriage. Many Americans say same-sex marriage ruins the sanctity between man and woman.

But as Christine Romans reports now, marriage in America has been on the rocks for 30 years.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): At a theater near you, a cynical view of marriage.

JUDE LAW, ACTOR: Are you married?

JULIA ROBERTS, ACTRESS: Yes. No. Yes.

LAW: Which?

ROBERTS: Separated.

ROMANS: And separations are a permanent feature of our society today.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You may now kiss the bride.

ROMANS: Couples getting married today have an almost 50/50 chance of ending in divorce, and that first marriage probably won't last more than eight years.

DAVID BLANKENHORN, INSTITUTE FOR AMERICAN VALUES: Compared to 30, 40 years ago, there's been a definite weakening of marriage and the family, a much higher divorce rate. We have a very high rate of out of wedlock child bearing. About one of every three babies born today is born to an unmarried mother. People are spending less of their total lives married.

ROMANS: The early Baby Boomers have led the way. A third of Americans born between 1945 and 1954 have divorced at least once, and we're now marrying later. Women waiting until they're at least 25 years old. Men, almost 27.

And we're not having as many kids.

KAREN KORNBLUM, NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION: There's also a lot more stress. There is stress about money. And then the other side of that coin, there's a lot of stress about time. How are you going to find the time to raise your children and to have a quality of life?

ROMANS: Couples are spending more time at work. All those extra hours amount to 12 more weeks a year, and only 30 percent of families have a parent who stays home. It all adds up to enormous pressure on married couples.

At the same time, marriage advocates say popular culture makes a mockery out of marriage.

MATT DANIELS, ALLIANCE FOR MARRIAGE: Here we have a media culture that is celebrating behaviors and attitudes which are destructive to marriage. And what they're really celebrating is something that is destructive to the well being of children.

ROMANS (on camera): A dire assessment overall, but here's the silver lining. The divorce rate over the past few years has stalled, and teen pregnancy is down sharply. That has left the pro-marriage lobby fighting vigorously to keep marriage just between a man and a woman.

Christine Romans, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COLLINS: We'll be back in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COLLINS: The names read like a grand yuletide list. Douglas Fir, Noble Fir and White Fir. But the most popular Christmas tree in American homes is sadly the fake fir. Artificial is in.

We sent Tom Foreman to find out why.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The capitol Christmas tree has risen to "oohs" and "ahs" and lots of applause, but the government may be out of touch, because this is a real tree, and most Americans are going artificial.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I like -- I like a real Christmas tree, but my wife doesn't like cleaning up all the needles.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'd rather get a fake one, because at the end of the season then I see that people throw them out on the street, you know. It looks so sad.

FOREMAN: The National Christmas Tree Association -- yes, Virginia, there is such a group -- says in 1990, about half the people who put up trees went with real ones. Now, 60 to 70 percent are faking it.

(on camera) This can't be true. Next someone's going to say Martha Stewart has a new TV deal.

But the quality of artificial trees has been improving for years, and people do like the convenience.

(voice-over) Consider this. While real trees require an annual pilgrimage to pick one out, cart it home and put it up, a pre-lit artificial tree is cleaner, faster and in the off-season, can park in the basement next to all that exercise gear you once had delusions of using.

(on camera) Christmas trees growers, however, are launching aggressive marketing campaigns to slow this trend. They say there really is nothing else quite like a real tree. And they don't come from the woods.

(voice-over) Christmas trees are a crop, grown and harvested like corn, and 93 percent are recycled from holiday masterpieces into springtime mulch.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This isn't one of those trees that all the needles falls off, is it?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, that's impossible.

FOREMAN: Still, popular culture has long noted this epic and unending struggle.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We should just buy one of those brand new green plastic trees.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, no!

FOREMAN (on camera): I am a real tree person. I've never really considered a fake. On the other hand, my Christmas music is not all Bing Crosby.

(MUSIC)

FOREMAN (voice-over): So maybe, even for traditionalists, cultural tastes are changing. And this Christmas, fake firs are all the rage.

(MUSIC)

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COLLINS: Is his tree leaning to the right, do you think? I don't know. We'll have to see about that. Our Tom Foreman reporting tonight.

Now for your feedback from our question of the day, 40 percent of you think the Ten Commandments should be displayed in U.S. courtrooms. Sixty percent do not. Just a sampling from our website. Not a scientific poll.

Well, that's all for us here tonight. "LARRY KING LIVE" is next with the latest on jury deliberations in the sentencing of Scott Peterson.

I'm Heidi Collins in for Paula Zahn. Have a great weekend, everybody.

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


Aired December 10, 2004 - 20:00   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening, everybody. Thanks for joining us tonight. I'm Heidi Collins. Paula is off tonight.
Remember the Ten Commandments judge, Roy Moore, who wanted to put God back in the courtroom? Well, if the president has anything to say about it, Judge Moore might finally get his wish. I will talk with Judge Moore in just a moment.

But we begin tonight with the power of one simple question and one awkward answer. The question posed earlier this week by one soldier, the answer by secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SPC. THOMAS WILSON, U.S. ARMY: Mr. Secretary, my question is more logistical. We've had troops in Iraq coming up on three years, and we've always staged here out in Kuwait. now, Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to help armor our vehicles and why don't we have those resources readily available to us?

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: I talked to the general coming out here about the pace at which the vehicles are being armored. They have been brought from all over the world, wherever they're not needed, to a place here where they are needed. I'm told that they're being, the Army is -- I think it's something like 400 a month are being done. And it's essentially a matter of physics. It isn't a matter of money. It isn't a matter on the part of the Army of desire. It's a matter of production and capability of doing it.

As you know, you go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: That was in Kuwait on Wednesday. By Thursday, there was a political storm in Washington over the lack of proper armor for U.S. troops in Iraq. That's when the president spoke up.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The concerns expressed are being addressed, and that is, we expect our troops to have the best possible equipment. And if I were a soldier overseas wanting to defend my country, I would want to ask the secretary of defense the same question. And that is, are we getting the best we can get? And they deserve the best.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: And today, a senior Pentagon official tells CNN the Army is renegotiating its contract with a Florida company to have it increase production of armored Humvees. That number will go from 450 a month to 550.

Getting more armor for our soldiers in Iraq has been the mission of our next guests for the past year. Brian and Alma Hart lost their son John in October of last year. They say a week before he died in an unarmored Humvee in Iraq, John warned them that he was worried someone was going to get hurt.

The Harts join me now.

To the both of you, we appreciate your time and certainly do offer our condolences, first off.

Brian, I'd like to ask you about the last time that you spoke with John and what he had to say.

BRIAN HART, FATHER OF KILLED U.S. SOLDIER: John called us a week before he died, talked to the girls at length, and then he got me on the phone.

And whispering into the phone he said, dad, the insurgents are coming our way. We're being attacked on the roads and our vehicles have no armor.

And he was short of all kinds of things from ammunition to breastplates. But, in particular, armor was a concern to him. And he said, I think I'm going to get hit on the road. And I didn't attribute too much to it at the time until a week later when they showed up at our doorstep to tell us he was killed.

COLLINS: As a father, I just -- I can't imagine how that must have felt when you started to put two and two together from what he told you to what happened the week after. What did you do then, when you started at that point, to put things together?

B. HART: We started to look to find out what really happened. And we got that report from people on the scene, the survivors.

And, basically, they were shot to death by an in an unarmored Humvee with no protection. John was shot standing up. And Lieutenant Bernstein through the vehicle and up his leg and bled to death rescuing the driver. We went in and started contacting politicians and finding out why in the world we couldn't get armored Humvee production up and why we couldn't get retrofit plates for the vehicles.

COLLINS: Alma, let me ask you, how did you become involved in helping to fight what's going on here, what we've been learning about is going on as far as armoring these vehicles? What do did you do?

ALMA HART, MOTHER OF KILLED U.S. SOLDIER: I tried to support Brian as much as possible and just help get the word out.

People who don't have a family member over there aren't aware of just what the situation is. Until it hits your family, you're not hearing it.

COLLINS: Brian...

(CROSSTALK)

COLLINS: Go ahead.

B. HART: Go ahead.

Yes. I think we want to make an important point. We've been watching CNN this evening from Wolf Blitzer on with various reports of production and all the intense scrambling to get production done since Rumsfeld was embarrassed. You know, no one knows more about these issues than we do at the moment. And, frankly, we're not afraid to speak what's really going on here. The reason that equipment has not made it into Iraq in sufficient numbers is because the purchase orders were not placed by the Department of Defense.

COLLINS: And do you also feel that you are somehow spokespeople for the rest of the soldiers? And how many other families of soldiers in Iraq have you been able to speak with about this issue?

B. HART: Oh, I don't even know.

Some of the best things that have happened to us have been letters or photos from people in Iraq showing us how they had survived in an up-armored Humvee from an attack. This is important. The grunts, the PFCs that can't speak up, the generals that can't say what needs to be said without losing their jobs, the contractors that are intimidated by the DOD, there's a real problem here. And people -- we're frankly the only people I know that can say things that need to be said.

COLLINS: Quickly, Alma...

A. HART: We don't have anyone currently in the military, so we can speak up.

COLLINS: Understood.

You're also working, quickly, before I let you go, on unarmored trucks. You say this also is an issue -- Alma.

A. HART: Yes.

There's a big issue now. They've got armor in on a good portion of the Humvees, but there's nothing yet, or very little yet, on the heavy trucks for transporting, and the insurgents are now aiming at those.

B. HART: Yes. And we want to be sure. I heard earlier this evening someone say that the Pentagon didn't know the capacity of Armor Holdings and AM General on production of Humvees. That's not true. In February, at least, acting Army Secretary Harold Brownlee went to the plants themselves to confirm reports he'd received from Congress, in particular, Republican Representative Simmons of Connecticut, who went to the plants himself.

And the plants had ample capacity. The purchase order were not let. That's just the flat-out truth of the matter. The purchase orders were not let.

COLLINS: Well, Alma and Brian Hart, we certainly do appreciate your story. We're going to be talking with our Pentagon correspondent here in just a moment to get some more answers there.

And, again, we appreciate your time tonight and thank you for sharing your story.

B. HART: We appreciate that. I just want to let you know, there's still $380 million in unfunded requirements right now for heavy trucks.

COLLINS: All right. Thanks to both of you, Mr. and Mrs. Hart.

B. HART: Thank you.

COLLINS: So exactly what is being done about getting more armor to American forces in Iraq?

We asked senior Pentagon correspondent Jamie McIntyre to look into it.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SR. MILITARY AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT (voice- over): The Army is moving to buy more armored Humvees and see if other production lines can be accelerated, just two days after a pointed question from this soldier put Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on the spot about the lack of armor for military vehicles.

Army officials say they were surprised to hear from news reports that Armor Holdings of Jacksonville, Florida, was prepared to sell the Pentagon 550 armored Humvees a month, because originally the Army was told it could only get 450 because of commitments to other customers. Pentagon officials say the new Army secretary, Francis Harvey, who was sworn in less than a month ago, called the CEO of the company directly and is negotiating to buy all the Humvees the company can supply.

The company says it can produce another 100 Humvees a month by next March and is currently 330 vehicles ahead of schedule. One concern, providing Humvees to the Marine Corps, too. Another company, ArmorWorks of Tempe, Arizona, says it could double production of armor plates that can be added to existing Humvees.

MATT SALMON, PRESIDENT, ARMORWORKS: We produce 300 kits a month. We could be doing 600 kits a month. So when you hear language from the Pentagon that we're doing everything humanly possible, I'm telling you that the industry base is being underutilized.

MCINTYRE: But the Army says it already has a backlog of armor kits and can't install them any faster.

Meanwhile, CNN has learned the U.S. Army arsenal in Rock Island, Illinois, was ordered just this week to resume around-the-clock shifts to make cab armor kits for five-ton trucks and fuel tankers, which is a critical need. And the Army secretary has created a new armor task force to examine all existing contracts to see if there are other opportunities to speed up production of armor or other ways to get it to the battlefield faster.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COLLINS: All right, so, Jamie, we are hearing a lot of numbers out there. What exactly is the number of heavily protected Humvees in Iraq right now?

MCINTYRE: Well, you know, Heidi, it's not just Humvees, as your guests pointed out. It's all the vehicles.

And if you look at all the vehicles the military has both in Afghanistan and Iraq, we're talking 30,000. That includes Humvee, trucks, all kinds of vehicles. About 8,000 of them are still without some level of armor protection. Now, not every one of those has to be armored. They don't all have an armor mission.

But right now in Iraq, there are plenty of vehicles in a combat zone, including Humvees, that still are the thin-skinned version. The Pentagon says, again, it has enough bolt-on armor to put on Humvees, but they don't have the -- it's just a matter of logistics, getting it on there. They say it could take another year before they get every single vehicle that needs to have the full armor protection up to speed.

COLLINS: So, quickly, Jamie, according to the Pentagon, is this something that could have been prepared better for before the war, before it ever began?

MCINTYRE: Well, clearly, if they had known that they were going to be in an insurgency where they were going to be facing roadside bombs, rocket-propelled grenades a year after the invasion, they could have done something ahead of time.

But they insist that the industrial base wasn't there, had to be ramped up. They insist they bought every piece of armor that they can get, realistically, with the extra money they got from Congress. But, clearly, there's a lot of debate about that.

COLLINS: Jamie McIntyre, our senior Pentagon correspondent -- Jamie, thanks so much.

And there is another layer to this story. It has to do with journalism and ethics. Was the soldier speaking for himself or for a journalist? We'll have that and a lot more in a moment.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

COLLINS (voice-over): Tonight, once upon a time, the news landed on your doorstep in the morning and showed up on your TV set in the evening.

WALTER CRONKITE, ANCHOR: And that's the way it is.

COLLINS: The way it was. Now you point, click and pick your stories any time. Does it really matter anymore how you get the news?

And, the passion of Judge Roy Moore. The Ten Commandments are headed back to court as a banished Alabama justice continues a controversial crusade. I'll talk with Roy Moore, the Ten Commandments judge.

And our question of the day. Should the Ten Commandments displayed in U.S. courtrooms? Click on to CNN.com/Paula and let us know. The results and much more coming up.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COLLINS: Welcome back, everybody.

The soldier in the ranks confronting the top man at the Pentagon makes a great story. But it wasn't that simple on Wednesday when Specialist Thomas Wilson posed that now famous question to Defense Secretary Rumsfeld.

Here it is once again.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WILSON: Mr. Secretary, my question is more logistical. We've had troops in Iraq coming up on three years, and we've always staged here out in Kuwait. now, Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to help armor our vehicles and why don't we have those resources readily available to us?

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: The truth, we now know, is that Specialist Wilson had some professional help. Edward Lee Pitts, a reporter for "The Chattanooga Times Free Press," was embedded with Specialist Wilson's unit and coached him.

Pitts has written several front-page stories in the last few weeks about the lack of armor in Iraq. His publisher is defending his reporter, saying -- quote -- "People forget that even if Lee talked to this soldier, the soldier made the decision to ask the question." But he does admit the paper should have made sure its story included the fact that Pitts coached the soldier. All of this raises some ethical questions.

And joining me now -- we're going to talk about it -- Andrew Nachison, director of the Media Center of the American Press Institute.

Andrew, thanks for being here.

And Jane Kirtley, professor of media ethics and law at the University of Minnesota, which you've already determined is my father's alma mater. Got to say it. He's watching.

Anyway, let's get straight to this story, if we could.

Jane, what is wrong with a reporter getting his question asked in a form that he wasn't allowed to, to pose the question himself?

JANE KIRTLEY, UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA: The problem here was disclosure. I think this was a very important question. I am incredibly glad that it was asked, but, frankly, I think everybody was deceived, because they thought that the soldier had spontaneously raised the question, when, in fact, he was coached.

COLLINS: But how does that change the dynamic of what went on in the room?

KIRTLEY: Well, to me, it is tantamount to a staged question. it is that something that journalists are supposedly not going to do.

(CROSSTALK)

COLLINS: And pardon me.

Andrew, was the question staged? We're all taught as a journalist that is an absolute no-no.

ANDREW NACHISON, THE MEDIA CENTER: I think it's ludicrous to criticize the soldier for asking a question and calling it a staged question. The question was...

(CROSSTALK)

COLLINS: I don't think we're criticizing the soldier. I think what we're saying is that the journalist who asked him to ask the question, they didn't include, well, I have this question here, the soldier might have said, from a reporter from "The Chattanooga Times Free Press." Here's the question. Do you think that should that have been divulged at the time?

NACHISON: No. I don't think it's relevant. I don't think it matters. The question stood on its own and I don't think the secretary of defense needed background on where the question came from.

(CROSSTALK)

KIRTLEY: I absolutely disagree with that, and I'll tell you why.

You know, this story is not about the press, or at least it should not be about the press. It should be about this very important question, and part of what made the dynamic of this so compelling was the fact that this question appeared to come from a rank-and-file soldier. It was asked by such a person, but the question is, who was really behind it?

And I think, at a time when journalists are struggling for credibility, we simply don't need to be hiding behind somebody else to ask our questions. If the reporter couldn't ask the question legitimately, in a press conference or something, then I think talking to the soldier was just fine, but that should have been disclosed from the outset.

COLLINS: Andrew, you're a reporter. Was this guy just a clever journalist? Or would you have done things differently?

NACHISON: I don't know what I would have done in that situation. I've never been in a situation like that.

But, yes, I think the reporter was clever. I think the reporter developed sources within the unit that he was embedded with. And I think he used those relationships in a very enterprising way to get a question asked in a very public setting and to draw attention to an issue that that reporter had been reporting on.

COLLINS: What about his paper? Do you think that the paper should have divulged that in their article?

NACHISON: Yes. I think they should have. I don't disagree that the relationship should have been disclosed. I don't think it was concealed or that there was any attempt to hide the relationship.

COLLINS: OK.

Quickly, I want get in before we have to let the both of you go, what the Pentagon said here. Let's put it on the screen here, if we could: "The secretary provides ample opportunity for interaction with the press. It is better that others not infringe on the troops' opportunity to interact with superiors in the chain of command," of course, coming to us from Larry Di Rita.

Is he right? Are reporters getting the access that they need, Jane?

KIRTLEY: No, of course they're not.

And that's why I think that it would have been so compelling if the soldier had said, you know, Mr. Pitts can't ask you this question, Mr. Secretary, so I'm going to ask it, because it's something that I, my fellow soldiers and the American people want an answer to. This is not excusing Mr. Rumsfeld. This is not suggesting that the way he interacts with the press is a good way, but two wrongs don't make a right. And at a time when we in the press are trying to hold ourselves up as this great moral arbiter, I simply don't think that this is a very good way to get -- it's not a good means to an end.

COLLINS: Quick last comment, Andrew.

NACHISON: I don't think anything wrong took place here. I don't think there's anything to be ashamed of. I don't think anything was hidden. I don't think there are two wrongs here at all. So, I disagree with the entire premise that journalists were hurt by this.

COLLINS: All right, to the both of you tonight, we certainly appreciate your time. Andrew Nachison and Jane Kirtley, thanks again.

NACHISON: Thanks.

COLLINS: Before we move ahead, we want to go ahead and clarify some information that was in last night's special edition of PAULA ZAHN NOW. We may have given the impression that Judea Pearl, the father of slain "Wall Street Journal" reporter Daniel Pearl, saw a video of his son being killed. In fact, Judea Pearl only watched part of the tape that showed his son being held hostage. He did not watch, nor has he ever seen tape of the actual murder of his son.

Next, he's the president's choice to keep an eye on homeland security, but is he ready for the job? What we know and what we don't know about Bernard Kerik. Our CNN security watch next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COLLINS: In our security watch tonight, questions about Bernard Kerik, the man President Bush has picked to lead the Department of Homeland Security. The White House acknowledges that Kerik's background may be attracting closer examination than other nominees to the Cabinet. But the president's people say they're not worried.

Here's homeland security correspondent Jeanne Meserve.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BUSH: Bernie is a dedicated, innovative reformer.

JEANNE MESERVE, CNN HOMELAND SECURITY CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): From the moment he was nominated last week, there were questions about Bernard Kerik.

PAUL LIGHT, BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: You're starting to see now these stories popping up, like some are thunder clouds, and the question is whether they'll merge into something quite serious.

MESERVE: A big plus for Kerik, the tale of his dramatic rise in the world. A high school dropout, he overcome poverty and abandonment by his mother, a prostitute. He became a cop, Rudy Giuliani's bodyguard and eventually New York City's commissioner of police. He dealt with the tragedy of the twin towers, has made millions and is now a Cabinet nominee. NORMAN SEABROOK, CORRECTIONS OFFICERS ASSOCIATION: When you look at Bernie Kerik, you look at a confident individuals that holds his head high, sticks his chest out and knows what he wants and what he's going after. And that can turn some people off.

MESERVE: And it has. In Iraq, where he trained police, a senior administration official described Kerik as a loose cannon who lacked judgment, a view shared by a co-worker in Baghdad. In the Saudi Arabian hospital where Kerik headed security investigations in the 1980s, some employees say worse. Dan Mackey was a physician at the hospital at the time.

DAN MACKEY, PHYSICIAN: He was a very arrogant person who tried to throw around his weight, intimidate people into doing what he thought was the correct thing for them to do.

MESERVE: His lawyer puts a different slant on Kerik's style.

JOE TACOPINA, ATTORNEY FOR KERIK: Bernie is not always a gentle guy, but we don't need a gentle guy running Homeland Security.

MESERVE: Kerik's ethics also have come under fire. While police commissioner in New York, he was fined $2,500 for using off-duty detectives to research his autobiography.

MELANIE SLOAN, CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY: Once you're the chief of homeland security, you're going to be under such scrutiny that you can't afford to be making mistakes like that.

MESERVE: When Kerik's publisher, Judith Regan, thought her cell phone and jewelry had been stolen during a visit to Fox News, four homicide detectives were dispatched to investigate several Fox employees.

ROBERT SIMELS, ATTORNEY: Bernie Kerik has abused his power in this instance.

MESERVE: Kerik's lawyers says the detectives were sent, but not by Kerik.

TACOPINA: About that, there was an investigation. He was cleared, I might add, Jeanne, of that. He didn't dispatch any detective. He doesn't ask for preferential treatment for himself or anyone else.

MESERVE: And then there are Kerik's finances. Once a bankrupt street cop, Kerik recently made more than $6 million from the sale of his stock options in Taser International, where he's been on the board of directors. Perfectly legal, but this is just one of many security- related firms to which Kerik has ties and which could do business with the department.

SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: We believe he will take all the appropriate steps to make sure that there are no conflicts. MESERVE: Despite the questions and concerns, there is one man who remains in Kerik's corner, and the president's support trumps all the criticism.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COLLINS: Jeanne Meserve joining us now.

Jeanne, is Bernard Kerik's confirmation in any trouble?

MESERVE: No.

He has the support of New York's Democratic senators, Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton. And the feeling is, unless there's a lot more information and a lot more damaging information, this confirmation is going to go through -- Heidi.

COLLINS: Jeanne Meserve, thanks so much tonight.

MESERVE: You bet.

COLLINS: And here now with their perspectives on Bernard Kerik, two congressmen, both from New York, Democrat Charles Rangel and Republican Peter King.

Thank you for being here, gentlemen.

(CROSSTALK)

COLLINS: And it is interesting. You both are from New York, but seem to have different opinions on Bernard Kerik.

What is the problem with the Bernard Kerik nomination?

REP. CHARLES RANGEL (D), NEW YORK: I didn't know until things came up in the paper about his background. I just thought because he was from New York and lived in New Jersey that he would be more sensitive at least to the financial needs that we need in homeland security.

But now people are raising questions about his training in homeland security and his background as to whether or not, besides being a friend of Giuliani and being there when we needed him in 9/11, exactly can these experiences benefit the nation? But it's all coming up in front of us in the confirmation committee. I hope he does well.

COLLINS: Representative King, any concerns or do you agree with that?

REP. PETER KING (R), NEW YORK: No, I think Bernie is going to be a great commissioner.

Listen, there's always going to be charges made against a guy, especially a guy who worked his way up. He was literally a street kid who worked his way up, got himself straightened out in the Army, became commissioner of the greatest police department in the world. And he is going to have enemies out there, and Giuliani's enemies. Bernie, I'm sure over the years, has made some.

But I think these are just smear attacks. He's going to survive it. He's going to be a great homeland security secretary. I think Charlie and I can agree on one thing, that I think he's going to do a lot more to get money where it's needed, to cities like New York, Houston, Texas, Washington, D.C., that really do need it.

COLLINS: This is clearly not an easy job. This is a huge, huge undertaking.

And though he did very well, some would say, most would say, I believe, hearing what you say tonight, he did a good job in New York, is he ready to expand this role to the country and all of the implications and all of those complexities that come along with that?

KING: I think he is.

I'm on the Homeland Security Committee. One of the problems we have is, there's still not enough intelligence sharing, information sharing between the feds and the local government. Bernie Kerik, as police commissioner of New York, dealt with the FBI, dealt with the Secret Service. He's in a unique position to make sure they cooperate and get the job done.

COLLINS: What sort of ideas have you heard about homeland security coming from Bernard Kerik?

RANGEL: I haven't heard any, really.

No one even knew who Bernard Kerik was until 9/11. And the truth of the matter is that, even our great mayor, Giuliani, his reputation was on the skids before.

(CROSSTALK)

RANGEL: He came when we needed him at 9/11. He was there. Kerik was by his side.

But I think, if you take a look at the short period of time he was with the police department -- I think, before then, he was with the Department of Correction -- I really don't know what experience he's had nationwide in terms of dealing with the problems that we have to face.

COLLINS: Seems though like you do have very different opinions about this.

OLDER GUY: He knows better than I do, but...

REP. PETER KING (R), NEW YORK: I know Bernie pretty well. I have a lot of faith in him. He did a great job (UNINTELLIGIBLE). I believe he certainly did the job on 9/11 and I know that he's going to be able to deal with the federal law enforcement who for the most part have not been cooperative as they should be with the local police. I think Bernie Kerik is going to make sure that works.

COLLINS: Will that be his first priority?

KING: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) security work and as a major part of making homeland security work is get those 22 departments and agencies that are now one, to make them work together, yes. And also to get more money into the areas that need it.

RANGEL: You know Ray Kelly really had a national reputation when he was the police commissioner, now and before for the city of New York. But how long was Kerik commissioner? It was a short period of time, I thought.

KING: He was police commissioner about a year and a half, but again, he was tested 9/11, passed the test. As corrections commissioner, he did a great job. He reduced jail violence by about 90 percent. This guy, every job he's gotten he's done the job. I think he's going to do this one as well.

RANGEL: I'm not knocking him because he's a New Yorker. But taking care of prisoners is hardly...

(CROSSTALK)

KING: As police commissioner of the largest police department in the world.

COLLINS: What do you want his priority to be, Representative Rangel?

RANGEL: To make certain that our nation is safe and for New York City to get a fair shake in terms of the resources available.

COLLINS: We will watch. We've all been watching. You agree. Got that on tape. All right.

Congressman Charles Rangel, and Peter King, we certainly appreciate your time tonight.

Let's find out what's coming up on "NEWSNIGHT" with Aaron Brown.

AARON BROWN, HOST, "NEWSNIGHT": Coming up tonight, Robert Lori (ph) is one of the thousands of young men and women who went to Iraq to fight the war. In one of the many thousand who came back an amputee. What sets him apart, is he also got a bill for nearly $2,000 from the army. Why is that, and what happened when people started to hear about it. Better more, and more on "NEWSNIGHT" tonight.

COLLINS: At 10:00 tonight. Aaron, thanks so much. We'll be watching.

Next, meet a man whose mission is written in stone. He's known as the Ten Commandments judge, and we've got him, coming up, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COLLINS: Welcome back. Is displaying the Ten Commandments on government property, such as courthouses, unconstitutional? The U.S. Supreme Court will take on that question early next year when it hears arguments in two separate cases. This week the Bush administration urged the high court's approval and so did Judge Roy Moore. Although he's not connected to either case, the Ten Commandments cost him his job as Alabama's chief justice.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(voice-over): It was known as Roy's Rock. 2.5 tons of granite at the center of a legal storm over the separation of church and state. It was a major controversy.

Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore's sculpture of the Ten Commandments was removed from the state judicial building just over a year ago. Moore put it there himself in 2001 without telling his supreme court colleagues. Inevitably there were lawsuits charging that the monument was an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. The dispute raged on, and on, and on. The case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Roy lost his rock and his job.

JUDGE ROY MOORE, FMR. ALABAMA CHIEF JUSTICE: Absolutely no regrets. We've done what we were sworn to do. When I took office I said I would uphold the moral foundation of our law. That I have done. I have not denied God and that's exactly what they asked me to do to hold office. I said I could not. They removed me.

COLLINS: Since then he's been touring the country defending his decision. This summer a Christian group took Roy's Rock on a 14-state tour and in a latest twist, the Bush administration has urged the Supreme Court to sanction displays of the Ten Commandments on government property. A weighty decision the justices will likely make early next year.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COLLINS: And joining me now, Judge Roy Moore. Judge, thanks for joining us tonight.

JUDGE ROY MOORE, FMR. ALABAMA CHIEF JUSTICE: Thank you, Heidi. Glad to be with you.

COLLINS: You know, some would say that election results of the presidential election revealed that there are a lot of people who felt some sort of spiritual void. Is that something that you were trying to get after?

MOORE: Well, I think that the Ten Commandments represent the morality which people know our nation is losing. This is simply a truth that when you distance yourself from God you lose your morality and George Washington understood this back in his farewell address back in 1796.

COLLINS: Do you feel vindicated now in some way given what the Bush administration has done? MOORE: Well, I'm glad to see the Bush administration coming out in support of the public display of the Ten Commandments. Of course, it's a little late for my case. I just hope they understand what it's really about. It's really about not the Ten Commandments but about the acknowledgement of God. Whether or not this nation, this state, recognizes and acknowledges a sovereign God.

COLLINS: You have to feel a little bit like -- many people will remember you for what it was called, which was Roy's Rock. Is this a legacy that you want to be known for?

MOORE: Well, I don't deal with -- have a legacy or anything. We did install the Ten Commandments in the rotunda of Alabama judicial building and it meant something then. It means something now. It does not contradict the first amendment of the United States constitution. The first amendment's only purpose was allow the freedom to acknowledge God, and that was guaranteed to the states. And our state specifically acknowledges God as does every state in the union in this constitution.

COLLINS: And yet you would have to agree that there are still people out there who are very nervous and concerned about blurring those lines between the separation of church and state.

MOORE: Yes. And I agree that separation of church and state is a very important doctrine, historically and legally, but it does not separate you from God. It separates the way you worship God from the dictates of government. That's a very important distinction. We're trying to use separation of church or state to separation from God and actually Thomas Jefferson's letter of January 1, 1802 recognizes God even in his letter.

COLLINS: I also know that you're traveling around the United States and talking to a lot of heartland Republicans. What do they tell you about the Bush administration's stance on this issue?

MOORE: Well, I mean, there's different opinions across the country. Many of them would like to see more of a stance on moral issues and I agree that we should recognize that morality is the basis of our strength. And we should recognize that morality does not come from the constitution. It comes from an acknowledgement of God and the Bible upon which our morality is based.

COLLINS: Judge, tell us about any further political ambitions you may have.

MOORE: Well, I'm waiting to see what the future holds for me. I'm praying about it, waiting for God to give me some direction. I don't have any plans specifically at this time.

COLLINS: Sounds like an open door, though.

MOORE: You know, it is possible that I could run for public office in the future, but, we'll wait.

COLLINS: Judge Roy Moore, we'll be watching. We appreciate your time here tonight.

MOORE: Thank you, Heidi. Bye-bye.

COLLINS: So what do you think? Should the Ten Commandments be displayed in U.S. courtrooms? You can vote at CNN.com/paula. We'll have the results at the end of the hour.

Our next bit of news is about the news itself. With the Internet and cable, it's all there 24/7, and the new editor-in-chief is you. Is that a good thing? We'll talk about it, when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COLLINS: A certain job opening at CBS got our special contributor, Frank Sesno, thinking about how much has changed in the news business in the past 25 years and how much more power you have these days over what you see and read.

There's so much out there.

Frank, how are you doing?

FRANK SESNO, CNN SPECIAL CONTRIBUTOR: Great, Heidi. You know, it's interesting. ATMs, cell phones, e-mails, we want what we want when we want it. And that apply to this business, too.

The implications are considerable, and it's playing out not far from here and right before our eyes.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(MUSIC)

SESNO (voice-over): Maybe we can enlist Donald Trump.

DONALD TRUMP, REAL ESTATE MOGUL: You're fired.

ALEX TREBEK, HOST, "JEOPARDY": We'll dealing with rarity.

SESNO: Alex Trebek.

TREBEK: Here's a rare clue.

SESNO: Or Simon Cowell.

SIMON COWELL, JUDGE, "AMERICAN IDOL": It wasn't your best performance.

SESNO: Somebody to select the anchor of this "CBS Evening News" without Dan Rather.

DAN RATHER, ANCHOR, "CBS EVENING NEWS": Good evening.

SESNO: Sure enough, the torch is being passed to a new generation.

BRIAN WILLIAMS, ANCHOR, NBC NEWS: The Bush White House...

SESNO: Over at NBC, Brian Williams has moved into Tom Brokaw's chair, but at CBS, the heir is still not apparent.

CBS chairman Les Moonves jokes maybe they'll bring in the cast of "Friends." Maybe they'll raid the competition and hire the duo from "Saturday Night Live."

But there's more here than meets the eye. It's about network news and its prospects for sure, but it's really about America, about us, the audience, about how we live and learn. The analogue era of the paperboy.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Extra! Extra!

SESNO: Like the era of the venerable anchor...

WALTER CRONKITE, FORMER ANCHOR, CBS NEWS: And that's the way it is.

SESNO: ... has become the digital era of always on 24/7 fragmented America.

ROBOTIC VOICE: Time, weather and...

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Suzanne says...

SESNO: ... where news is fast, news is furious, and news is increasingly interactive. Just like America.

Where news consumers, armed with technology, given the choices, believing there's bias, are taking sides and taking over.

Bloggers turned Rather's report on President Bush inside out. Readers have forced "The Washington Post," circulation down 10 percent over the past two years, to move towards shorter stories with more graphics and more pictures.

Demographics have propelled ethnic media to big business. Spanish language newspaper circulation has tripled in the last decade.

No wonder cable is a battleground, and an estimated 100 million people now get news online. It's the democratization of information, the news consumer as editor-in-chief, with new choices and responsibilities. Seek fact or opinion? Dig deep or not at all?

RATHER: Time to move on.

SESNO: Dan Rather isn't yesterday's story quite yet, but the real news here is what's happening on the other side of the set, in every home in America, where people are deciding where their information will come from, and what kind of reporter they want to be.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SESNO: So, Heidi, people like to say that the broadcast networks are dinosaurs. Their audience is aging, ratings down 34 percent in 10 years. All true but they still have giant audiences every night, some 20 million people or more.

But you know, that leaves some 200 million people who are not watching network news every night.

COLLINS: Right.

SESNO: And they're going to other place, a lot of other places, to get their news. The burden falls increasingly on us, the news consumer, to get that news well, responsibly and from lots of sources.

COLLINS: So you talk about all of these different places where people get their news. And we're talking about the big three, the networks, the cables, the computer, your cell phone. I mean, seriously, everywhere you turn, you've got that news.

What sort of implications, though, does that have?

SESNO: Major, major implications. My friend Tom Rosensteel (ph) was -- over at the Project for Excellence in Journalism has done a study on this. And what he finds is that most Americans, despite all the fanfare about ideology in the news, they're not going only where they're most comfortable. They're getting their news from lots of sources, lots of different times throughout the day.

COLLINS: It's almost -- they're working at it?

SESNO: Well, they're working at it. But what people need to realize is, they're going to really have to challenge themselves. That's what reporters do. It's why they're often unpopular.

If you're going to be the reporter, sometimes you ask a nasty question. Sometimes you challenge authority. Sometimes that just goes with territory.

The real question for us as a society is, will we do that, left to our other devices? Are we going to work hard and challenge ourselves or will we, like when we go to the buffet, just go for the junk food?

COLLINS: Right. Because it automatically comes as the viewer's responsibility to really dig in. It seems like you can't really do that half-heartedly and come up with, you know, the best opinion with all of this information out there. You really have to get good at filtering through it.

SESNO: And there's a lot of stuff out there. You know, I'm fond of saying if we're not born with attention deficit disorder, we in the media will teach it to you. And so we're going to have to find a way to navigate all of that.

Now, back to the Founding Fathers. Thomas Jefferson said, you know, "Given a choice bean a newspaper and a government, I'll take the newspaper." He might not say that today with all the other stuff out there. COLLINS: Sure.

SESNO: But his central point was key. And informed public, his key to a vital and functioning democracy.

COLLINS: Frank Sesno, thanks so much for your insight on it.

SESNO: Thank you.

COLLINS: We appreciate it.

And next now, some thoughts about Christmas. It just wouldn't be the same without the smell of a freshly cut tree. So why are most Americans going artificial? We'll talk about it, coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COLLINS: This week, a Supreme Court ruling in Canada made it the third nation to allow gay marriage. Many Americans say same-sex marriage ruins the sanctity between man and woman.

But as Christine Romans reports now, marriage in America has been on the rocks for 30 years.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): At a theater near you, a cynical view of marriage.

JUDE LAW, ACTOR: Are you married?

JULIA ROBERTS, ACTRESS: Yes. No. Yes.

LAW: Which?

ROBERTS: Separated.

ROMANS: And separations are a permanent feature of our society today.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You may now kiss the bride.

ROMANS: Couples getting married today have an almost 50/50 chance of ending in divorce, and that first marriage probably won't last more than eight years.

DAVID BLANKENHORN, INSTITUTE FOR AMERICAN VALUES: Compared to 30, 40 years ago, there's been a definite weakening of marriage and the family, a much higher divorce rate. We have a very high rate of out of wedlock child bearing. About one of every three babies born today is born to an unmarried mother. People are spending less of their total lives married.

ROMANS: The early Baby Boomers have led the way. A third of Americans born between 1945 and 1954 have divorced at least once, and we're now marrying later. Women waiting until they're at least 25 years old. Men, almost 27.

And we're not having as many kids.

KAREN KORNBLUM, NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION: There's also a lot more stress. There is stress about money. And then the other side of that coin, there's a lot of stress about time. How are you going to find the time to raise your children and to have a quality of life?

ROMANS: Couples are spending more time at work. All those extra hours amount to 12 more weeks a year, and only 30 percent of families have a parent who stays home. It all adds up to enormous pressure on married couples.

At the same time, marriage advocates say popular culture makes a mockery out of marriage.

MATT DANIELS, ALLIANCE FOR MARRIAGE: Here we have a media culture that is celebrating behaviors and attitudes which are destructive to marriage. And what they're really celebrating is something that is destructive to the well being of children.

ROMANS (on camera): A dire assessment overall, but here's the silver lining. The divorce rate over the past few years has stalled, and teen pregnancy is down sharply. That has left the pro-marriage lobby fighting vigorously to keep marriage just between a man and a woman.

Christine Romans, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COLLINS: We'll be back in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COLLINS: The names read like a grand yuletide list. Douglas Fir, Noble Fir and White Fir. But the most popular Christmas tree in American homes is sadly the fake fir. Artificial is in.

We sent Tom Foreman to find out why.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The capitol Christmas tree has risen to "oohs" and "ahs" and lots of applause, but the government may be out of touch, because this is a real tree, and most Americans are going artificial.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I like -- I like a real Christmas tree, but my wife doesn't like cleaning up all the needles.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'd rather get a fake one, because at the end of the season then I see that people throw them out on the street, you know. It looks so sad.

FOREMAN: The National Christmas Tree Association -- yes, Virginia, there is such a group -- says in 1990, about half the people who put up trees went with real ones. Now, 60 to 70 percent are faking it.

(on camera) This can't be true. Next someone's going to say Martha Stewart has a new TV deal.

But the quality of artificial trees has been improving for years, and people do like the convenience.

(voice-over) Consider this. While real trees require an annual pilgrimage to pick one out, cart it home and put it up, a pre-lit artificial tree is cleaner, faster and in the off-season, can park in the basement next to all that exercise gear you once had delusions of using.

(on camera) Christmas trees growers, however, are launching aggressive marketing campaigns to slow this trend. They say there really is nothing else quite like a real tree. And they don't come from the woods.

(voice-over) Christmas trees are a crop, grown and harvested like corn, and 93 percent are recycled from holiday masterpieces into springtime mulch.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This isn't one of those trees that all the needles falls off, is it?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, that's impossible.

FOREMAN: Still, popular culture has long noted this epic and unending struggle.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We should just buy one of those brand new green plastic trees.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, no!

FOREMAN (on camera): I am a real tree person. I've never really considered a fake. On the other hand, my Christmas music is not all Bing Crosby.

(MUSIC)

FOREMAN (voice-over): So maybe, even for traditionalists, cultural tastes are changing. And this Christmas, fake firs are all the rage.

(MUSIC)

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COLLINS: Is his tree leaning to the right, do you think? I don't know. We'll have to see about that. Our Tom Foreman reporting tonight.

Now for your feedback from our question of the day, 40 percent of you think the Ten Commandments should be displayed in U.S. courtrooms. Sixty percent do not. Just a sampling from our website. Not a scientific poll.

Well, that's all for us here tonight. "LARRY KING LIVE" is next with the latest on jury deliberations in the sentencing of Scott Peterson.

I'm Heidi Collins in for Paula Zahn. Have a great weekend, everybody.

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