Return to Transcripts main page

Rick's List

Alleged Killer of Abortion Doctor Takes the Stand; Stimulus Funds Making a Difference?

Aired January 28, 2010 - 16:00   ET

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

RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: "No water-boarding? Well, maybe with Nancy."

For joking about water-boarding about the speaker of the House, Bill O'Reilly finds himself coming in at number two on the list that nobody wants to be on.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ (voice-over): Here's what's making the LIST.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Driver, stop! Get down on your knees.

SANCHEZ: Apprehended, and accused of killing an abortion doctor. He says it is not murder, and today, he takes the stand.

Then, there are the extremes. Which TV host joked about water- boarding Nancy Pelosi?

Which one said to Haitians, you deserve your fate? Nice.

Speaking of stuck in up the position, the oops moment of the day.

The lists you need to know about. Who is today's most intriguing person? Who is on the list you don't want to be on? You will find out as our national conversation on Twitter, on the air continues.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: Welcome back. We kind of gave one of our stories away there, didn't we?

I'm Rick Sanchez.

Making the LIST this hour, that man, the man you are about to see right there. There he is, Scott Roeder. And what you are seeing is something most defense lawyers say is a bad, bad, bad idea.

He's testifying on his own behalf in his murder trial. The victim was a doctor. And Roeder does not deny that he walked up to that doctor in church, no less, and shot him dead.

I have got someone here who has been watching this story.

Midwin Charles, a defense attorney, legal contributor to the network "In Session" joining us now.

First of all, what do you make so far of his testimony? How much of it have you heard and has he been able to represent his case well, which I imagine is this, right? I needed to kill that person because that person was going to kill other people, and, in defense of those people, those children, those babies, I did what I did, right?

MIDWIN CHARLES, LEGAL COMMENTATOR: Well, to a certain extent.

I mean, what you have just described, Rick, is the necessity defense, which really wasn't allowed here by the judge. But, instead, what this defendant is doing is trying to get a charge of voluntary manslaughter, which basically means that he had an unreasonable, but honest belief that his actions were justified. And as you can imagine, that is a very dangerous road to go down.

SANCHEZ: Wow. Yes, that's interesting.

Let's let the viewers listen to some of the sound bites, some of the information that we heard from him, from Roeder today.

Have we got some of those? Go ahead, Rog. Hit the first one.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Sir, what are your feelings on the practice of abortion?

SCOTT ROEDER, DEFENDANT: From conception forward, it is murder. It is not man's job to take life -- or it is our heavenly father's. He is our creator. He gives and takes life. It is never up to man to take life, only in cases of self-defense or defense of others.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: So, that's his feeling.

Obviously, he's a very religious man. He bases everything on the Bible. How does that play in court, though?

CHARLES: Well, you know, the jury is there. They are listening to it.

And I have got to tell you, Rick, his testimony was bone-chilling, particularly since he clearly admitted that he shot and killed this man and planned to do it. The fact that he thinks that it is going to go over on the jury that he had this unreasonable, but honest belief, it is a stretch, but it would be interesting to see whether they buy it.

SANCHEZ: But we live in a system where there's -- look, there's God's law. And I get it. I'm -- you know, I grew up Catholic. And, as a Christian, sometimes, I'm torn between what my religion tells me and what society tells me.

But there's man's law as well. And I suppose I should just ask you this question, because there's probably people asking themselves the same thing.

If everyone who adhered to a certain religion that told them that they needed to do something did that, at the expense of or bypassing whatever man's law is, we would have a pretty chaotic society. Right?

CHARLES: We would. We would have a chaotic society. And, frankly, Rick, that's exactly what terrorists say that they are doing. They say that they have an honest belief that their actions are justified, because it is based on religion or politics.

So, just imagine the slippery slope that this argument can take us all on.

SANCHEZ: Is was that -- was that raised? I mean, this prosecutor, did he did -- that argument that you just made that you have probably heard from folks around the courtroom, was that raised? Was that -- was that what -- is that the point being made by his opposition, the prosecution in this case?

CHARLES: Well, yes. The prosecution actually, interestingly enough, a team of all women, they have made various arguments on this.

But the most main one is that, look, this is a first-degree murder trial. Abortion doesn't come into it. Politics don't come into it, nor do religion.

SANCHEZ: That's interesting. Let's -- here's Roeder again. Here, he is talking about how he would sidewalk-counsel women at some of these protest clinics. Let's pick that up.

Rog?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you take any personal steps to get yourself involved in the pro-life movement?

ROEDER: Yes. I began sidewalk-counseling.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let me interrupt you there.

ROEDER: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Can you explain what sidewalk-counseling is?

ROEDER: We would go to the abortion clinics and meet the women coming in with pamphlets and literature and try to talk to them and give them literature for -- for -- so they could be further educated on what is really happening, and that they would ultimately change their mind.

So, yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Where would -- is it fair to say that what you call sidewalk-counseling, others might call protesting?

ROEDER: Yes. I guess there's really -- they could be intertwined. You could sidewalk-counsel and protest. Some carried signs. And sidewalk-counseling would mostly involve trying to have the women change their mind.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: All right.

Now, here's the bone-chilling part, where you say he actually talks about what he did. This is Roeder not denying any the state's evidence. Let's listen to that together.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you dispute any of the evidence that's been presented by the state?

ROEDER: I do not.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Isn't that amazing? I mean, he basically is copping to what he did. How significant is that?

CHARLES: Oh, it is huge. I think it is huge, because, remember, the charge he's facing is first-degree murder.

Now, I know the defense is trying to get the judge at the end of the trial to instruct the jury to consider a voluntary manslaughter charge based upon the evidence that is put forth during this trial.

SANCHEZ: How can that happen, though? I mean, you have got a guy who is charged with murder on the stand. And you and I and the jury just heard him say, yes, I murdered that person. He's copping to it. He's admitting to it. How can the jury do anything but then find him guilty of murder?

CHARLES: Oh, I agree with you. I think that's a very good question.

But if they put forth evidence that he had an honest belief that he had to do this -- and I have got to tell you, I listened to all his testimony. It is incredible. But if he honestly believed that he had to do this in order to prevent the killing of unborn children, then you start going into the world of voluntary manslaughter.

SANCHEZ: That's interesting. What a case.

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: What a case. I'm glad we had you along the take us through it. We appreciate it. We will see you again next time, Midwin.

CHARLES: Sure, Rick.

SANCHEZ: The state of the stimulus. Are the billions of tax dollars making a difference? We are going to drill down on one of the projects to see just how many people are actually going to work. You see these two girls that are fighting right there? You would think that somebody would be arrested, right? Somebody was. But it wasn't one of the girls. You've got to stick around to see how this is a twist that we will take you through on the LIST, as we scroll on.

I'm Rick Sanchez.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: A couple of things to bring up to date on.

First of all, I want to show what you the reaction so far to the president's speech last night. And it is interesting, because -- before I go to this, there is an irony here, folks. The president last night was saying we have got to stop bickering amongst each other. We have got to stop just arguing with each other, and try and work for the American people.

So, what are we seeing on some of these tweets today? Well, watch this. I will share it with you. Let's go.

OK. First, the House Democrats are saying about the post -- the Republican response to the president that was given by McDonnell, House Democrats are saying, all rhetoric, no real solutions. That's how they critique the Republican response.

How are Republicans critiquing the president's response -- or the president's speech, the State of the Union? Here's what Virginia Foxx a very staunch Republican, says. "Not inspiring. People are asking, where's the beef? Talk is cheap. Need more than rhetoric." Huh. I wonder if they called each other.

Here's the founder of the Daily Kos, Markos Moulitsas. He says: "Obama never acted as if Dems had the majority either, insisting on bipartisanship. That just weakened legislation, without garnering GOP votes."

And then Erick Erickson says -- he is a conservative blogger, by the way -- "I know the left doesn't like us to root against the president, but can we root against the teleprompter?" Suggestion that the president -- well, you know what the suggestion is.

Was the truck too high, or was the bridge too low? Watch this. I think the bridge was fine. It was the truck. Doesn't matter if you are walking across bridge one way or another. Details on this bizarre crash is just a couple of minutes away.

Also, this man widely called one of the most influential leaders of the 20th century spoke 13 languages fluently. The lengths he went to worship and understand God were revealed for the first time.

But, first, the confirmation just happened moments ago. This means that Ben Bernanke is all but assured to continue in his post. I understand the final vote was something like 77-23, right? And that means that cloture stops the filibuster, and now they are actually confirming. They only needed 51 votes, right? And that means it is passed.

Has he gotten -- Angie, just to be sure, he has been confirmed. So, he's gotten the 51 votes. It is over, folks. Ben Bernanke stays. He would have run out of his term Sunday. So, this pretty much seals the deal, breaking news as we bring it to you. Glad we could. I will be right back. RICK'S LIST continues.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Welcome back.

Almost five years have passed since his death. And, yet, details of his life are still so fascinating to us. Time for another most intriguing.

Pretty much universally beloved, he visited more countries than any other man to hold his post. And in a new biography out this week, a group of insiders who knew his life behind the scenes describe him as a man who beat himself with a belt to bring himself closer to Christ, an act of self-flagellation, they call.

Our most intriguing person of the day, Pope John Paul II. He's being considered for sainthood. The Opus Dei sect of the Catholic Church says self-flagellation is not harmful or bloody, regardless of how it's depicted in scenes from the hit film "The Da Vinci Code."

Pope John Paul II, one of today's most intriguing.

Up next, look who is manning the stimulus desk, one of my faves. Tom Foreman has been tracking some of the billions of dollars landing in cities like yours. He has got some help over them from Steve Brusk (ph), too. Keep an eye on Steve Brusk (ph), I'm telling you, Tom.

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes.

SANCHEZ: Seeing any difference yet?

FOREMAN: I have seen some things.

SANCHEZ: Yes? All right.

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: Well, we will come to you in just a little bit. Stay right there.

FOREMAN: All right.

SANCHEZ: This will be good.

Watching your money, folks. This is the LIST.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP) CALLER: Hey, Rick. This is Angela from Maryland. Thank you and CNN for investigating where the stimulus money is going. But could you present the entire list of the corporations or agencies or businesses that are corrupt, instead of giving us just one or two of them, as you highlight the story?

Thank you for being the man with a plan. We love you, Rick. Bye-bye.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: I think you can get the answer to that question, by the way, at CNN.com/stimulusplan, right? There you go. Go there. You will find it -- or just stimulus, actually, not stimulusplan.

OK. All week, CNN has been examining and reporting on projects around the country funded by the massive stimulus package. The stated intention, as I have told you repeatedly, of the stimulus project is to put unemployed Americans to work.

That's what they said. Well, guess what? One of those projects, I kid you not, is a study of the stimulus.

Tom Foreman has the details over at stimulus desk.

Oh, my goodness.

FOREMAN: Rick, I thought I was the man with the plan.

SANCHEZ: Yes. Well, we both are today.

FOREMAN: You have a different plan, I think.

(LAUGHTER)

FOREMAN: Yes. Yes.

You know, a tremendous amount of this money, when you go through these books with all these pages we have of all this spending, a tremendous amount of this is for research grants at universities all over this country. And one that really caught our eye was a grant that looked at this question of if you spend the stimulus money, what result will you get from spending the stimulus money on grants?

SANCHEZ: Huh.

FOREMAN: Now, there are many other grants in here for things like cancer research and -- and autism, all sorts of things like that, a lot of important work. But we were interested in this one.

So, we have this giant pile of books here that we have been going through, looking at all these potential studies. And this grant is for about $400,000, just under. It went to the University of Virginia and the University of Michigan.

And what they are studying is, if you spend money this way, how much do you generate work down the line for people at these universities, related to the studies that they did down line? Also, one of the things they considered was, how much does this affect the bringing in of workers under these special visas from other countries who are specialists, for example, in brain work or in blood work or something? You may bring them in for a while. How much do the jobs go there?

Now, here's the thing. When you look at the study of about $200,000 to UVA, $200,000 to University of Michigan, it is easy to look at this and say, look, this does not create any jobs. And we can bring up the graphic that shows that, really, this doesn't create any actual jobs in its current form.

This is simply money that they are spending, and they are creating no jobs. But the researchers say they believe this is still pretty valuable work because it is studying the impact in the long run of spending this kind of money.

The question is whether do people out there buy it or not. The bottom line is, one of the researchers said to us this grant is more complex and potentially helpful than just a using stimulus money to measure the stimulus quip. So, maybe we shouldn't be quipping so much. But I think that's up to our viewers out there to decide, whether or not this money was well-spent.

But, nonetheless, Rick, we are going to add it to our big tote board here, as we have been looking at this total of $254 billion spent on projects. We're now up over $8 billion, $198 million. And we just keep adding it up and adding it up, Rick, trying to go through all these projects, as our caller suggested just a minute ago, figuring out all the people who are getting money and where that money is going and whether or not you are getting what you paid for when you backed the stimulus.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

Well, and, again, the frustrating part of this in some cases, not all, because there have been many jobs created, obviously. But it is a question of numbers. If you looked at this from a Rooseveltian, point of view, thinking back to the last depression, there, the money was used to get people literally concrete jobs.

FOREMAN: Yes.

SANCHEZ: I mean, the guy had a hammer in his hand, and the other guy had a wrench in his hand. Here, it is much more nuanced.

FOREMAN: That's right.

Well, and, Rick, this has been one of the complaints from some of the critics of this from the beginning. They have said really all that should matter is immediate, real jobs right now.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

FOREMAN: And one of their complaints is that a lot of this grant money is really a backdoor way of the administration funding programs they wanted to fund anyway. That's one of the big complaints. But we will keep digging through it...

SANCHEZ: OK.

FOREMAN: ... and seeing it, and, as I said, let the viewers out there sort it out and decide for themselves.

SANCHEZ: Good. Tom Foreman, good work. Thanks. Appreciate it.

FOREMAN: All right, Rick.

SANCHEZ: So, there you have it, nearly $400,000 in stimulus money given to two researchers at two universities to analyze whether the stimulus is working as intended or not. Total jobs created, zero. These researchers were already employed. But maybe it is going to help show what works and what doesn't, so they can be smarter about it in the future. That's why we do it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We have good officers, and even the best officer is susceptible to this type of stress and this type of pressure.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Huh? Well, look at that video. What could cause that kind of pressure? You can't see it. He's at the bottom of your screen there. But what he is doing is certainly something that's raising a lot of eyebrows. Talk about needing a lift.

Also, take a look at this. Here's a guy who ended up on the wrong side of a Chevy Camaro. We are going to tell you how that one happened as well and how he was saved in just a couple of minutes. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: This is one of those stories that get my wife yelling at me. I put up my Christmas lights last year. And when I got to the very, very top of the ladder -- and we got a two-story home -- I asked myself, what am I doing here? I mean, what if something goes wrong? What if I fall? Next day, I hired professionals.

Let's do "Fotos."

Taos, New Mexico.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Help is on the way.

I need some additional manpower here as soon as possible.

Help is coming there, buddy.

OK, guys. We need to get the car up. All right, get him out. Pull him out. Pull him out. (END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Taos, New Mexico. One minute, the guy is tightening some bolts under his Camaro. The next minute, the Camaro is awfully tight up against his face.

One, then two police officers try to help. But it took five of them to lift the muscle car high enough for the guy to be able to squirm out of there. Only suffered a scrape on his back. Can you believe that? Still, next time, he may want to do as I did and hire a professional.

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Take a listen to Mr. Sanchez.

SANCHEZ: Istanbul, Turkey, tough truck vs. bridge. Who wins? Nobody.

Ahh! Can you believe that?

BALDWIN: Look at those other cars. They are like, what is going on?

SANCHEZ: Watch. The guy on the left stops and jumps out of the car. And everybody -- it is crazy. A raised dumper wiped out the pedestrian walkway. Three people on the bridge were blindsided. They were knocked off the bridge. Believe it or not, two of them just walked away unharmed.

The driver is trying to convince his bosses now not to dump him.

(LAUGHTER)

SANCHEZ: He says the back of the truck went up all by itself. "I had nothing do with it."

(LAUGHTER)

SANCHEZ: Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Two teenage girls are slugging it out, a disturbing sight made even more upsetting when you hear that adults are nearby apparently egging them on. Yes, that's real adult. The video went viral, eventually getting police's attention. Now two of those adults -- or so-called adults -- are under arrest., accused of cruelty to a juvenile. If convicted, they could face 10 years in prison.

Prison, now, there's a place that knows a thing or two about a good fight.

Video surfaced this week that sparked a whole lot of outrage when we saw it. It shows a police officer in Sante Fe, New Mexico, strifing -- pardon me -- striking and roughing up a teenager. Now, that's bad enough. But the kid who he is roughing up is handcuffed. The cop was fired, and then hired by another police department.

Brooke Baldwin is here to join us once again to talk about this story and its implications to all citizens and police officers.

BALDWIN: Correct.

And I think really the video tells the story. So, if we can just roll video and then we can deconstruct it on the back half.

SANCHEZ: All right.

BALDWIN: We can talk through it. Take a look. You're going to see, there's the teen who is handcuffed in the chair. And that is officer David Smoker. This is Sante Fe Police Department. He's hitting him a couple times, slapping him in the face. The guy goes down.

Now, according to reports -- want to get this on -- this teen was -- quote, unquote -- "drunk and belligerent" and tried to spit on the officer.

Now, here's what we know. Smoker was never charged, but he was fired from the Sante Fe Police Department. That led to a lawsuit, cost the city $15,000.

SANCHEZ: How old is this kid again?

BALDWIN: We don't know. Teenager.

MATTHEWS: OK. But he's a kid?

BALDWIN: He's a kid.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

BALDWIN: Obviously, he is a kid.

More than two years after this, timeline-wise -- this is February -- the video you're looking at, this is from 2007, November. Fast forward, February 2009.

Officer Smoker, as you mentioned, he got a new job as a police officer in a small town -- I checked out the map -- about 100 miles away from Sante Fe, a town called Cuba. Now, the Cuba police chief says he did see the video, but his decision to hire Smoker was based upon his veteran career, his perfect record prior to the incident.

Here is that chief defending his decision. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHIEF JASON GRIEGO, CUBA, NEW MEXICO, POLICE DEPT.: He's a great asset to the community. And as of today, I've yet to receive any complaints on Officer Smoker.

He had a stellar career prior to this incident, had never had any use of force incidents. And I was not going to judge an individual off of 15 seconds off his entire life.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Now, I did reach out to the chief of the Cuban Police Department, Sante Fe police chief, and, of course, also Officer Smoker. No one as of yet has returned my phone calls.

But you know who did call me who heard I was calling around in the Cuba area? The mayor of Cuba. And he told me that since this video has surfaced this week, they have put Officer Smoker on administrative leave.

That said, of course, I asked the mayor, "Hey, well, you've seen the video. What do you think?"

SANCHEZ: Well, it's not our place to decide whether the guy keeps his job or not. But the video does speak for itself.

Is there anything -- did you see or have you learned anything in the video that would show that the officer was either in jeopardy or in danger? I mean, the kid was sitting in a chair with his hand cuffed...

BALDWIN: Right. And I'm glad you asked me that.

I did not, and the clip of the video that we have here and CNN obtained from our affiliate in Albuquerque. But, when I talked to the mayor, he said, "Brooke, I have seen two minutes' worth of the video prior to this incident" when you see Smoker going up to the kid and slapping him around.

SANCHEZ: Right.

BALDWIN: And he says his belief, possibly, is that the video was misedited. We tried to dig around, tried to find that video. Haven't seen it yet.

SANCHEZ: OK. Well, we'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

BALDWIN: Absolutely.

SANCHEZ: In the meantime, we'll let our viewers judge for themselves.

BALDWIN: Yes, thanks.

SANCHEZ: Good stuff. Appreciate it.

This, too...

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SANDRA DAY O'CONNOR, FMR. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE: So much money has been going into judicial campaign races in recent years.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: A former Supreme Court justice takes on the court's decision to open up campaign spending by the corporate world. Now, there's something unique about her.

Wolf Blitzer joins us in just a little bit with this interview in the next hour. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: We here at CNN have made a commitment to tracking your stimulus money, all $862 billion of it. Many people assume that the money is going to projects like fixing roads, beefing up police forces, things like that. So you might be surprised to hear from time to time what's being described as a pet project.

Microsoft is getting a piece of the stimulus pie. Microsoft? For what? A bridge.

Here's CNN's Patrick Oppmann.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

PATRICK OPPMANN, CNN ALL PLATFORM JOURNALIST: Everyone hates to sit in traffic on the way to work but, but in Redmond, Washington, money from the federal stimulus plan is actually going to ease some of that gridlock and create jobs.

This project though has generated some controversy, not for what it's building, but for where. So what the project is going to do is connect Microsoft's newer west campus over here to the original east campus and go across a very busy highway.

So here's how federal stimulus money ends up paying for a bridge that connects two campuses at Microsoft. The bridge project behind me, this is all actually only supposed to have cost $25 million -- $17.5 million was going to come from Microsoft, $5 million from the city of Redmond, and $2.5 million from federal money during the Bush administration. The cost overruns raised the price of the project to $30 million, so the stimulus money essentially erased that $5 million shortfall.

Both Redmond's mayor and the governor for Washington State say this is a good partnership for the private sector that's going to create jobs and a bridge that anybody can use, not just Microsoft.

Part of the controversy over this bridge comes from the fact that to connect it to campuses, they had to build the bridge at a diagonal over the highway which adds substantially to the cost. And critics say Microsoft, not the stimulus plan, should have picked up the bill.

Patrick Oppmann, CNN, Redmond.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: So the Microsoft bridge gets $5 million from the stimulus plan. How many jobs did that create? More than 1,200 workers have been hired for that project, though. Not all of the jobs are full time.

We'll keep checking for you.

Which State of the Union were you watching? I guess it depends whether you're a Democrat, a Republican or an Independent. Donna Brazile and Kevin Madden are standing by to dissect the speech and what's ahead for the Obama agenda, what he really tried to accomplish.

And drum roll, please. Our signature segment, our "Most Intriguing Person of the Day." From social worker to elected official, can you guess?

We're going to tell you who that is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: She was a social worker before she headed to Washington, but now she's called congresswoman.

Time for "Most Intriguing."

She is up for re-election in New Hampshire this year, and our comments on health care reform, specifically who can handle the task better, men or women, is attracting the ire of some Republicans. One of today's "Most Intriguing Persons of the Day" is Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter, who said this about the gender gap on Capitol Hill...

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. CAROL SHEA-PORTER (D), NEW HAMPSHIRE: We go to the ladies room, the Republican women and the Democratic women, and we just roll our eyes at what's being said out there. And the Republican women said when we were fighting over the health care bill, "If we sent the men home, we could get this done quicker (ph)."

(APPLAUSE)

SHEA-PORTER: You know why? I'm not trying to diss the men, but I am telling you that every single woman there has been responsible for taking care of her mother, her husband's mother, her children, her sister's children, her brother's children, and so we think we could find a common ground there.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter is one of today's "Most Intriguing People."

All right. Let's have some fun with politics now.

Kevin Madden says the president's State of the Union was underwhelming. He is the former campaign spokesperson for Mitt Romney, and he's good enough to join me now from Washington.

Democratic strategist Donna Brazile is also joining us.

Kevin, let me start with you.

Underwehelming, huh? That's a strong word. I mean, it's basically saying that you are at all impressed? Nothing about the speech impressed you.

KEVIN MADDEN, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Well, I was just surprised. I didn't really have that high of expectations, but I did expect the president to lay out a little bit more of grander vision for his presidency and his party. And I just felt like what it really, you know, added up to last night was a -- you know, a laundry list of very small items.

They almost seemed poll-tested, and it seemed like the president was trying to master the unobjectionable. Now, maybe that's what he got out of the Massachusetts results, and results in places like Virginia and New Jersey, but I just found that it didn't seem like there was really much "there" there last night.

SANCHEZ: OK. I get it.

Let's listen to a little bit of the president. And then, Donna, I'm going to bring you in on the back side.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Change has not come fast enough. Some are frustrated, some are angry. They don't understand why it seems like bad behavior on Wall Street is rewarded but hard work on Main Street isn't, or why Washington has been unable or unwilling to solve any of our problems.

They are tired of the partisanship and the shouting and the pettiness. They know we can't afford it. Not now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Donna, you underwhelmed as well, or not?

DONNA BRAZILE, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Oh, absolutely not. Look, I wasn't out dancing in the street the same way I was the other day when the Saints won the NFC title, but I was delighted to see -- Rick, I had to go put that in there.

SANCHEZ: I knew it was coming.

BRAZILE: Go Saints. But I was -- and I'm coming to Miami, so I can meet up with you if you need a little party, too.

SANCHEZ: I'll tell you where to go, by the way.

BRAZILE: But I was delighted to hear the president.

Sugar, you can show up with me. OK? But don't get me off message. Don't get me off message. You know I'm excited.

But I thought the president really gave a masterful speech because he told the story of just how far we have come since the economic collapse of 2008. He talked about the small steps and the large steps that his administration has taken, working with the Democrats on Capitol Hill, to get this country back on the road to economic recovery.

But he also said that in order for us to fully become a nation where we can provide jobs, we have got to make an investment with small businesses. So I thought his speech was wonderful in the sense that it gave ordinary citizens an opportunity to say your president just spelled out how he would go about creating this jobs.

He also talked about health care and the fact that he's not going quit. But he also challenged Republicans, and I think this is something Kevin should understand. He said, look, work with me, and he listed several issues, including reducing the national debt...

SANCHEZ: Well, let's ask Kevin that.

BRAZILE: Nuclear energy, earmark reform. So, that's a challenge that the Republicans need to take up.

SANCHEZ: That's a good question, though.

Is it the president's fall for not reaching out, Kevin, to the Republicans, or is the Republicans' fault for not responding to the president, being obstructionists or uncooperative or whatever the buzzword of the day is up there in Washington?

MADDEN: No. Look, and I think the president and the Democrats have tried to paint the party as "party of no" from the very beginning, and it hasn't worked, because, look, the three elections, we've won. I mean, if anything, the electorate right now is saying they don't want any more spending and they don't want any more deficits. I think what the president has mastered is he has mastered the pageantry, he's mastered the words of talking in very flowery rhetoric about...

SANCHEZ: But that sounds Reaganesque. Isn't that good? That sounds like -- that sounds Reaganesque.

MADDEN: It sounds great, but when he faces off -- when he -- but when he faces opposition, he goes out there and he's lambastes the party.

SANCHEZ: OK.

MADDEN: And I think that's what happened with the stimulus bill. I think that's what happened with the health care bill. And that's why you have an electorate that's looking at Washington as dysfunctional, and they're blaming President Obama and the Democrats.

SANCHEZ: Kevin, one final very difficult question. I'm just going to put you right here, right on the spot, man. Are you pulling for the Colts?

MADDEN: Sure.

SANCHEZ: You are?

MADDEN: I am pulling for the Colts.

SANCHEZ: Wow! MADDEN: I am a Cincinnati...

BRAZILE: Oh, Kevin. I'm so sad.

MADDEN: You want to hear crazy? You want to hear crazy?

SANCHEZ: Go ahead.

MADDEN: I'm a New York resident. I grew up in Yonkers, New York. I'm a Cincinnati Bengals fan. So I'm a long-suffering Cincinnati Bengals fan.

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: Somebody has to be.

Hey, my thanks to both of you.

BRAZILE: You know what, Rick? I'm giving him some gumbo, some sausages, and I'm going to convince him that he needs to, "Go Saints." Who dat? We dat.

SANCHEZ: You guys are both great.

BRAZILE: Come on.

SANCHEZ: Appreciate you, Kevin.

You too, Donna.

BRAZILE: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: We'll do it again. All right.

MADDEN: Great to be with you.

BRAZILE: All right.

SANCHEZ: Up next, Wolf's going to join me.

Stay right there.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: My colleague, Christine Romans, has just done an interview with embattled Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner. And she's joining us now to take us through this.

Congratulations. That sounds like great stuff, Christine. What you got?

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Well, first of all, he was listening to the vote-by-vote count in the Senate over Ben Bernanke. And with a fist pump and overjoyed by the Ben Bernanke news, this is what he said about the Fed chief.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TIMOTHY GEITHNER, TREASURY SECRETARY: I think it's one of the most important things they can do for the country, to make sure that you have strong people help lead the economy out of this crisis, here to help lead us to rercovery and growth.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROMANS: Strong people to lead us out of this crisis.

As you know, Rick, Timothy Geithner was just hammered yesterday by people on both sides of the aisle who said he's not the strong person to lead us out of the crisis, and we're concerned about some of the things that he did during the AIG bailout more than a year ago.

Last night, in the State of the Union, though, the president seemed to single him out and give him a special little pep talk. And asked the Treasury secretary -- I said, "What was the president saying to you when he pulled you aside and seemed to spend an extra moment to say 'good job' or to give you that pep talk?"

He said, "Christine, I don't say or reveal what my boss tells me. And we don't speak out of school about what we talk about."

But I asked him -- I said, "Look, there are a lot of questions about this AIG bailout. Why didn't you and Henry Paulson and Ben Bernanke do a better job of negotiating on behalf of the American people? Why do the banks -- why were they made whole when the American people feel like they weren't made whole?" And he seems pretty at peace with the decisions he made and really defended his role in the AIG bailout.

Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEITHNER: I will carry the burden of those decisions forever. And I'm very proud and very confident in the choices we made.

And I will be a source of criticism any time I'm making decisions in this case. In any financial crisis, that's what happens. But, you know, my job is to try to make things better, try to make sure we're fixing (ph) things that were broken. And I am honored and privileged to work for this president in helping him do that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROMANS: Now, Rick, I really hammered him on, "How can you be a steward of the president's policies now with so much anger still around the AIG bailout, still around the taxpayer outlays for AIG and for the big banks, in particular through AIG?" And he said it was the right decision to make.

And you know what he said, Rick? He said he can handle this political firestorm easily after the firestorm they went through more than a year ago...

SANCHEZ: Interesting.

ROMANS: ... when they were worried about the whole system buckling.

He says, "I tell you, Christine, we did the right thing. It was a tragic situation to have to be in. There were no good choices. But the American taxpayer would have paid more if we hadn't done what we did."

So, he's really defending it and trying to move forward, push forward on jobs, push forward the president's stimulus, push forward the message that his stimulus is working. And he says he can work through this political firestorm and really be an effective advocate for the president.

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: The guy is unflappable, which is interesting. And you know what? A credit, a credit to his character. And it is a difficult thing he has gone through, and it's still a difficult thing that he's undergoing with all the criticism.

ROMANS: I asked him...

SANCHEZ: Go ahead. We've got 10 seconds if you want to close it out.

ROMANS: ... about how it feels -- I asked him, "How does it feel right now?" You know, the political firestorm versus what was happening a year and a half ago.

And he said, "Have you seen the movie 'The Hurt Locker?'" And he said, "One of the best movies I've ever seen. Watch it and you'll understand."

I think they were diffusing bombs. Have you seen that movie?

SANCHEZ: Yes.

ROMANS: The treasury secretary recommends it for an analogy, I think.

SANCHEZ: It's called cold sweat in many ways.

Thanks so much, Christine. Good work. Exceptional work. Good interview.

Wolf Blitzer is standing by now. He's got an interview as well he's sharing with us.

Wolf, what you got?

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Well, I spent some time earlier in the week with the former Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O'Connor. We had an exchange on the Supreme Court decision last week opening up the door to a lot more political fundraising for big corporations, for unions, for special interest groups.

Listen to this exchange. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Because the majority now in the 5-5 decision said it was an element of free speech. But do you buy that?

O'CONNOR: Well, certainly it's an element of free speech. But the question is whether it can be regulated when it's corporations involved.

BLITZER: Or labor unions.

O'CONNOR: Or a labor union. It was not individual speech. It's not you and me. It was restrictions on corporate and union activity.

BLITZER: I know this is an issue now, it's going to open up the floodgates for campaign fundraising by the corporations, the labor unions, other special interests.

O'CONNOR: Well, I hope that it won't. It could. It has that potential.

BLITZER: Are you worried about that?

O'CONNOR: Well, of course I'm worried about it, because so much money has been going into judicial campaign races in recent years.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: You know, I'm just thinking, you know what makes her particularly interesting to this case and really the perfect person to interview? She wasn't only a Supreme Court justice, she is one of the rare Supreme Court justices who was truly a politician as well.

BLITZER: Right. That's why she is so worried, especially in the states, because the judges -- most of the state judges, they are elected. They are not appointed like the president of the United States appoints a judge to the federal bench, the Supreme Court.

In the states they're elected, they've got to go out there and raise money. They become politicians.

She's worried about the corrupting process of this right now. And she made it very clear, as you will see in more of the interview which we will air coming up, where she would have been in the minority, she would have been on the other side if she remained on the Supreme Court, that 5-4 decision. She makes it clear she would have been with the four. And maybe if she had been on the Supreme Court, the 5-4 would have gone the other way.

SANCHEZ: When will we see the rest of the interview?

BLITZER: 6:00 p.m. Eastern here -- in the 6:00 p.m. Eastern hour. We're going to run that interview in "THE SITUATION ROOM."

SANCHEZ: Cool.

By the way, heck of a job last night, man. I watched. You were great.

BLITZER: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Appreciate.

BLITZER: Here is a question to you. If Timothy Geithner is unflappable, what about Rick Sanchez? Are you flappable?

SANCHEZ: I am most unflappable.

BLITZER: OK, good.

SANCHEZ: I think that's what most people would describe me, if you ever read my clips. Better yet, don't. It will scare you. Don't Google me either.

Thanks, Wolf. Appreciate it.

(LAUGHTER)

SANCHEZ: Now this...

It's been called the West Coast version of Times Square. Tomorrow, check out how your stimulus dollars are getting the Sunset Strip of badly needed facelift.

And did I mention I will be in Los Angeles tomorrow? I have been asked to go there for the Grammys, which is pretty cool, actually, considering, what am I going to be doing there?

Well, you've never heard me sing. I'm kidding.

Here's a hint about what we're going to be doing there -- if you tweet, you will get it.

Also, we're going to tell you who tops our "List That U Don't Want 2 Be On." That's next, and that's the one that everybody always waits for.

Who's number one today? Who is it?

Stay there. I'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Time to reveal the very top of our "List that U Don't Want 2 Be On."

First, let's recap.

Illinois Governor Pat Quinn still raising money for a U.S. Senate run from 14 years ago. A campaign account opened in 1996 is still open and is still racking up interest. He says he will close it.

Number two, Bill O'Reilly shares with a live audience his vision of kidnapping Nancy Pelosi and waterboarding her. It was a joke. One of his critics would call it both crude and partisan.

OK. You ready? Here we go. Who is number one on the list though?

It is Paul Shirley, former NBA player and now a former employee -- former employee -- of ESPN.

He was fired yesterday by ESPN for writing a blog about donations to Haiti that made him sound possibly about as insensitive as anybody who's commented on this story yet. He says he won't give the Haitian people a penny of his money and suggests that they deserve what they get.

And here's the letter he writes to the people of Haiti.

"Dear Haitians: First of all, kudos on developing the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere. Your commitment to human rights, infrastructure, and birth control should be applauded." He goes on, "A polite request: if it's possible, could you not rebuild your island home in the image of your predecessor? And could some of you maybe use a condom once in a while? Sincerely, The Rest of the World."

Paul Shirley, now out of a job at ESPN. And today, at the very top of "The List That Nobody Wants 2 Be On."

I want to tell you about something we've got coming up before we go. Look at this tweet that we got in from Dan Choi.

Go ahead and do that if you possibly could.

He was chosen as one of our "Most Intriguing Persons" today, and he just sent us this tweet after watching himself on television.

"What's so intrigue being me?" he asks. "I just refused to lie. One day honestly will be seen as the norm, not intrigue."

He's obviously referring about the policy of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and the president's comment last night.

Dan Choi joins us here next Tuesday, live, for an interview. Just thought you would like to know.

Wolf Blitzer standing by. Here now, "THE SITUATION ROOM."