Guests: Mike Allen, P.J. O‘Rourke, Jeff Milyo, Julius Spohn, Tony Delorenzo, Max Kellerman
TUCKER CARLSON, HOST: Thanks to you at home for staying with us tonight. We appreciate it, as we always do.
Tonight, I‘ll talk to author P.J. O‘Rourke about why the rest of the world hates us so much. We‘ll also reveal which news organizations are the most biased, according to a new study. You‘ll be surprised by those answers.
Plus, I‘ll speak to the former Marine who ripped down a bloody pornographic Santa display in New York City.
We begin tonight with the horrific scene earlier today in Miami, Florida, where a sea plane carrying 20 people bound for the Bahamas crashed into the water just off the beach. Nineteen people reported dead tonight, including three children.
We go now to Miami Beach, where NBC News Mark Potter is standing by live with the very latest—Mark.
MARK POTTER, NBC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Tucker.
Behind me is the command post that has been set up for the search effort and also perhaps for the recovery of the plane. Those lights are just this side of the area where the crash occurred this afternoon in the shipping channel here in Miami, quite well known here, known as government cut. I‘m standing on the southern tip of Miami Beach just to orient people.
Nineteen bodies, as you said, have been recovered. There were 20 people, it‘s believe, on the plane, so one person is still unaccounted for. The search will continue in the morning. Although we‘re told that the Coast Guard has suspended the search overnight, although there still are a lot of boats out in that area, so it‘s possible that they are continuing to look for that one other victim.
Now, tonight just a short while ago, at the Miami Beach Coast Guard base, there was a news conference. The acting chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board updated everyone.
Perhaps the most important thing he said, besides that the investigation is underway already, in full, is that the plane itself will be—they‘re going to try to lift the plane tomorrow out of that channel, where it‘s about 35 feet of water, to bring it up, to see if there‘s anything that the plane itself can tell them, the investigators, mechanically about what happened. And there are also many other things that they‘ll be looking for.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Tomorrow, we‘ll begin the process of gathering records, maintenance records, flight records, on the accident aircraft, and the operator. We will also be attempting to retrieve the cockpit voice recorder, and get it back to Washington for a reading.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
POTTER: Now, some 19 investigators from the NTSB are coming into this area. They‘ll be supported by other specialists out of town. In fact, the acting chairman said that they‘ll be coming out here in just a short while tonight to get their first look at the scene.
Of course, the big question is why the plane caught fire and crashed just shortly after takeoff, as it was heading with the 20 passengers from Miami to Bimini in the Bahamas just a short trip away, about 25 minutes.
One of the things that‘s really helping the investigators is that there were a lot of people in this area on South Miami Beach, who were eyewitnesses to the crash. Some of them said they heard an explosion. Others said they saw a fireball. Some of those people also took pictures with their cell phones. Some video was shot. All of that will be sought by the investigators.
They‘ve also put out a phone number in this area for anyone with information that wants to share that with investigators. In this case, it appears that they will be assisted by a lot of people, and that‘s not always the case in these crash investigations, in cases that often occur in remote areas. This one occurred in front of a lot of people, and that certainly can‘t hurt the investigation—Tucker.
CARLSON: All right. NBC‘s Mark Potter in Miami, thanks, mark.
We go now to Washington, where President Bush gave a rare news conference today. Topic A, reports that the administration has been spying on phone conversations originating in the United States. Both Democrats and Republicans in the Congress have harshly criticized the practice.
But President Bush refused to back down today. He promised to continue the wiretaps. He also took aim at the “New York times” for printing the story in the first place. Here‘s a sample of what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I‘ve re-authorized this program more than 30 times since September the 11th attacks, and I intend to do so for so long as our nation—so long as the nation faces the continuing threat of an enemy that wants to kill American citizens.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: For more on today‘s developments, we welcome “TIME” magazine White House correspondent, Mike Allen. He joins us tonight live from Washington. Mike, thanks for coming on.
MIKE ALLEN, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, “TIME” MAGAZINE: Hey, Tucker.
CARLSON: This is not the end of the story, is it? There are indications tonight that the federal government is spying on Americans in more ways than we even have known until now? What are you hearing about that?
ALLEN: Yes, well, Tucker, the Democrats think that they‘re on to the latest and perhaps the most damaging shenanigans of the wartime Bush White House, and even Republicans are saying that they‘re very disturbed by what is going on, what is being revealed.
Now, you‘d never known it to see the president come out at that news conference. You just played the clip of—he was full of what my grandmother calls vim and vigor.
I think you and I talked about his sort of confessional, his address to the nation last night, where he acknowledged some of the problems, even said that he would accept constructive criticism, something that we‘ve never heard this president say.
When he came out to the news conference, he was kidding around with reporters. David Sanger of the New York Times asked him a question, and the president said, “Sanger, I hate to admit it, but that‘s an excellent question.” And he was giving the reporters a hard time, when they were asking a double question.
But he‘s very unyielding in his defense of this domestic eavesdropping. And the part that he talked about in news conference today, was about he emphasized that these phone calls, that it always was one of the parties international. So the example that e gave, if you‘re calling from Houston to somewhere in the United States, that‘s not going to be monitored. At least one of the callers has to be internationally.
And so in doing that, again and again, the Bush White House says that they think they‘re going to be on the safe side of this issue with the American people, because they could always say they‘re protecting people from terrorists.
Congress, obviously, sees it very differently. And Tucker, I‘ll give you a little news here. One of the objections that I‘m hearing privately from the staff and members of Congress, the White House keeps saying that they have briefed Congress.
CARLSON: Right.
ALLEN: But Congress members say there was incomplete or misleading, and it seemed to be about computers, that there was not a frank disclosure of what was occurring. And if it was, it was buried in so much gobbledygook, that it was not clear to them what was occurring. So the forthcomingness has not been as much as being portrayed.
CARLSON: I don‘t buy it. That‘s—but that‘s what Congress always says. They always claim they don‘t have enough information. I mean, didn‘t—didn‘t Senator Rockefeller of West Virginia, didn‘t the New York Times reveal that he did know all about this program the NSA was conducting and was upset about it?
ALLEN: Right. And Tucker—correct. And Tucker, tonight he‘s
released a letter, to be sent Vice President Cheney, 2003, presenting his -
his objections, to it.
But what you saw, Tucker, here was a good example of the president, talking to a bigger audience than the one in the room. The president recognized, he even mentioned history several times tonight. He mentioned, the news conference, he mentioned the march of history.
And the president made it clear that he didn‘t see his audience as being the people in the room, reporters who know or care what an expended pool is. He‘s talking to Americans who used to support him, maybe Americans who are on the fence, and is saying that when he said that he would do anything to protect the public, he has followed through on that.
Now, of course, what Democrats are saying is, oh, that means he‘ll do anything. He‘ll break the law; he‘ll break the Constitution.
So this legal case has not been made, and the legal case that the administration came forth with today, the attorney general, Gonzales, was in the White House briefing room at 8:30 this morning tying to make this case. It relies a lot on the discretion of the president. He‘s not pointing to a specific legal loophole or a specific statute.
CARLSON: Right.
ALLEN: He‘s pointing to the wartime powers of the commander-in-chief.
And that‘s what Democrats will argue has been abused.
CARLSON: Interesting. All right. “TIME” magazine‘s Mike Allen, reporting live tonight from Washington. Thanks a lot, Mike.
ALLEN: Have a great week, Tucker.
CARLSON: I hope you do.
ALLEN: Thanks.
For more on the president and also insight on why the rest on the world seems to despise us, we are honored to welcome reporter and author of the book, “Peace Kills: America‘s Fun New Imperialism.” The great P.J. O‘Rourke of the “Atlanta Monthly” joins us tonight live from Washington.
P.J., thank you for coming on.
P.J. O‘ROURKE, AUTHOR/JOURNALIST: Oh, Tucker, it‘s good to see you.
Merry Christmas.
CARLSON: Merry Christmas.
O‘ROURKE: No holiday season for me.
CARLSON: Amen. That‘s the spirit. As a kind of crypto libertarian, that would be you.
O‘ROURKE: Yes.
CARLSON: I‘m interested to know what you think of these revelations that the NSA has been wire-tapping conversations.
O‘ROURKE: Tucker, what do we spend all day overhearing, whether we want to or not? Phone conversations. I mean, all day long, people screaming into their cells.
CARLSON: That‘s a good point.
O‘ROURKE: I have heard details about people‘s lives that, you know, this is family television, even at this hour, I don‘t think we can go there. And so what‘s the big deal, you know? As long as they‘re not opening the letters to Santa, I‘m OK with it.
CARLSON: So you—I mean, Bush‘s numbers are, in the latest ABC/”Washington Post” poll, have risen about eight points in the last three or four weeks. Those don‘t reflect this news, but do you think this news is going to have any effect on those numbers?
O‘ROURKE: Probably push them a little higher, especially if he keeps giving as much grief to reporters as he was in that news conference. I mean, it was—I listened to a lot of that today on the radio. And it was hilarious. I mean, he‘s getting better. He‘s got a mean tongue. He‘s a little bit of a locker room bully. I‘ve always been able to picture Bush as one of those guys who could twirl a towel really—a wet towel really tight, you know.
CARLSON: Oh, yes.
O‘ROURKE: And get you from halfway across the room.
CARLSON: He‘s a towel snapper of the first water.
O‘ROURKE: Definitely.
CARLSON: If you like towel snappers, and I kind of do, there‘s something appealing about that. Now, you‘ve traveled...
O‘ROURKE: Especially when they pick on reporters, because, let‘s face it.
CARLSON: Yes, as long as it‘s not me, I guess.
O‘ROURKE: That‘s right.
CARLSON: You‘ve been everywhere. I don‘t think there‘s a bad country, a crummy place on this planet you haven‘t been. So I‘m interested to know why you think, kind of the age-old question, why is the United States so unpopular around the world?
O‘ROURKE: Oh, because we‘re there. You know, because we are there.
Let me tell a little story. I have a story that explains the whole thing.
I got stopped during the Lebanese civil war, 1984. I got stopped at a road block, Hezbollah, very radical, Shiite Muslims. About a 16-year-old kid with an A.K., seized my American passport, starts screaming at me, waving the gun in my face, yelling at me, “America, Satan, devil,” how we invented Zionism and all the other problems in the entire world. And he goes on like this for about 15 minutes. I‘m scared, you know.
And at the end of it, he hands me back the passport and he says, “And as soon as I get my green card, I am going to study dentist school in Detroit.”
CARLSON: He probably is. Probably did my fillings.
O‘ROURKE: He‘s a wealthy orthodontist today, and God bless him, you know, or Allah bless him or whoever. I mean, you know, and he‘s probably voting Republican. This is—they hate us with their mouths. They don‘t hate us with their feet.
CARLSON: So you think it‘s not real, then?
O‘ROURKE: No, no. It‘s because we‘re there, you know. If you go out into the bush, in really primitive areas of the world, where they kind of haven‘t gotten the news about America yet they‘ll still tell you that everything is the British; the British did it all. That it‘s all the queen‘s fault. The queen owns everything, and the British rule.
And so you go way out back in India or Pakistan, or other parts of the old British empire, you‘ll get an earful about—about the Brits.
CARLSON: Right.
O‘ROURKE: You can even get it in Ireland.
CARLSON: I think it has to do with, you know, this idea of drinking scotch without ice. You know, people still resent that.
O‘ROURKE: And who can blame them?
CARLSON: What do you think? Tell me what your prediction is for the ‘06, for midterms coming up. My feeling is that people are concerned about the ethical behavior of the Republican Party in Congress more than they‘re concerned about the ideology of the Republican Party.
O‘ROURKE: Oh, yes. No, I mean, most people are ideologically Republicans but are repelled by Republicans in action, as well they might be.
This always happens when you have a one-party state. We see it all over Africa. We saw it in the—you know, they just can‘t keep their hands out of the cookie jar, can they?
I mean, it‘s—I think the Republicans are going to be fine as far as the midterm elections go, but for all the wrong reasons; because they managed to gerrymander their districts into making it very difficult for challengers.
But I am really interested in this Abramoff thing, and how big this—how big this oil slick is going to—is going to end up being.
CARLSON: That‘s Jack Abramoff, the Republican lobbyist in Washington, who‘s now, I believe, under indictment, certainly investigation by the Congress for cheating Indian tribes out of money.
O‘ROURKE: And we‘re finding out, very disturbing news, is that he was giving money to reporters to mention some of these Indian tribes, and really most disturbing of all is that, is that Tucker, he did not give any money to us. I can work...
CARLSON: I never got a call.
O‘ROURKE: No, I could have worked Indian reservations into any number of things that I did. Just a little aside here and there, noting that cigarettes are cheaper.
CARLSON: Much cheaper. This is exactly—this is exactly what you didn‘t think would happen in 1994, when the right was ascended, and it was, you know, kicking out.
O‘ROURKE: You didn‘t think so? You were very young, Tucker. You were very young.
CARLSON: I think I was. It didn‘t take long. What was the turning point, do you think, where the new became very much like the old?
O‘ROURKE: That was December 1994. I think was the turning point. No, really, I think what happens is that, you know, just too many temptations, too many opportunities.
CARLSON: Yes.
O‘ROURKE: And of course, with the journalism—with the journalists getting paid by the lobbyists, that‘s because we‘re not paid enough as journalists. If they would up our salaries, we would be more honest.
CARLSON: And that‘s why more people ought to buy your book, “Peace Kills,” an excellent book.
O‘ROURKE: That‘s right. Yes.
CARLSON: P.J. O‘Rourke, I don‘t have many heroes. In journalism, you are at the top of the list.
O‘ROURKE: Thanks you.
CARLSON: Thanks for coming on, P.J.
O‘ROURKE: And Merry Christmas.
CARLSON: Merry Christmas.
Still to come, some remarkable new information about media bias and how it affects news coverage. It does, by the way. Just how biased is the “New York Times”? What about the Drudge Report and Rush Limbaugh? You‘re going to be surprised by some of these results.
Plus, a blood splattered Christmas display torn down by an enraged former Marine. We‘ll speak to the man who put the claws in Santa Claus when THE SITUATION returns.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: Welcome back. Get ready to disregard your preconceptions. For instance, what if I told you public television and radio are more conservative than the mainstream media, that the “Wall Street Journal” is, in fact, more liberal than the “New York Times”?
Those are a couple of the conclusions on a new study by media bias, co-authored by the University of Missouri professor Jeffrey Milyo. Professor Milyo joins us live tonight from Columbia, Missouri. Thanks for joining us. Mr. Milyo, thanks for tonight.
JEFFREY MILYO, MISSOURI PROFESSOR: Thank you.
CARLSON: How can that be? Public television and radio, more conservative than commercial radio and television?
MILYO: Well, first of all, we only rate particular shows, so in terms of the news hour with Jim Lehrer, that comes out, most centrist analysis, and yes, NPR, while liberal, is not quite so far to the left as certain mainstream outlets.
CARLSON: Such as?
MILYO: Well, “L.A. Times,” CBS Evening News, “New York Times”, and as you mentioned, “Wall Street Journal,” comes out most liberal by our measure.
CARLSON: By your measure, NPR is more conservative than the CBS Evening News?
MILYO: That begs some explanation.
CARLSON: Terrifying. How do you measure this?
MILYO: We compare the sources of outside expertise that media outlets cite and we compare those patterns to sources of outside expertise that have members of Congress with no known ideological rankings cite, and perform statistical analysis that generates estimates of ideological meanings of different media outlets. I should also add, when we are looking at outlets, we are looking at the news contents, not the opinion page of the “wall street journal,” for example. We are not rating those. We are rating the news content.
Of course, but that‘s how bias sneaks into news coverage. The reporter doesn‘t say, “I think this.” He says, “According to our expert say Barbra Streisand, this is true.” Right? It‘s the choice of the experts that allows the opinion to get in.
MILYO: That was the idea that motivated this study.
CARLSON: Which is the most liberal newspaper in America that you found?
MILYO: The most liberal is the “Wall Street Journal.”
CARLSON: Fascinating.
MILYO: In terms of its news content. And again, if you subscribe to the “Wall Street Journal,” you see they cite Urban Institute, Economy Policy Institute.
CARLSON: Right.
MILYO: They cite the Center on Budget Policy Priorities. And these are groups that only the most left-wing Democrats refer to positively. So it‘s the...
CARLSON: Interesting. So this study, is this the kind of study—I mean, I assume that these news organizations themselves must conduct in-house studies like this all the time, just to make certain that their coverage isn‘t affected by bias of any kind, right?
MILYO: That‘s correct, but I think if everybody is standing in one corner, then they feel like they‘re moderate.
CARLSON: Is everyone standing in one corner? I mean, do you have information on the political affiliations of people who work at those news organizations?
MILYO: Well, I think a number of opinion surveys have been done that suggest that journalists, however they‘re defined, tend to be about as liberal as the voters in Berkeley, California. So there is that.
And the same is true in academia too, by the way, and you know, so that doesn‘t mean that those preconceptions or biases or favoritism infects the job that people do. But that‘s what we were trying to get at.
CARLSON: Did you find a lot of straight news organizations that lean conservative?
MILYO: No, we did not. The only—we only looked at about 20 different outlets. The only ones that fell on the conservative side were “FOX News Special Report with Brit Hume,” which is the only FOX News show that we looked at, and the “Washington Times.”
And they come out—FOX News with “Special Report” comes out with an ideological ranking where it looks a lot like a liberal Republican, say Olympia Snowe.
CARLSON: Interesting. That‘s as right wing as they got? Olympia Snowe? Not good enough, in my view. Jeff Milyo.
MILYO: This is “Special Report with Brit Hume.”
CARLSON: Interesting. Professor Jeff Milyo, University of Missouri, joining us tonight from Columbia, thanks a lot.
MILYO: Thank you very much. My wife‘s a big fan.
CARLSON: I appreciate it. Thanks.
Still to come, what do a billionaire computer geek and a legendary rock star have in common? You wouldn‘t think much, but they do, in fact. We‘ll tell you what it is when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: Welcome back.
What‘s Christmas without a Scrooge? This year, we found quite a few, and they‘re all taking their frustrations out on jolly old St. Nick. Remember this knife-wielding Santa, holding the severed head of a doll in New York City?
Well, my next guest saw the story in the cover of the “New York Post” and decided to do something about it. Julius Spohn, a former Marine, took good taste into his own hands and single-handedly knocked down that obscene Santa display. He joins us live tonight in the studio.
Mr. Spohn, thanks a lot for coming on.
JULIUS SPOHN, KNOCKED DOWN DISPLAY: Tucker, glad to be here.
CARLSON: So what happened? You saw this on the cover of the “New York Post,” and what did you think?
SPOHN: I thought it was one of the most disgusting things I‘ve ever seen in my life, especially during the holiday season. You know, children are supposed to look up to Santa. He‘s a little role model.
CARLSON: Yes.
SPOHN: He‘s been around for a couple hundred years. You don‘t see Santa with a bloody knife in one hand, a severed head in the other with blood coming down the, you know, eyes of this thing.
CARLSON: Not typically.
SPOHN: Not typical. Not typical. If you‘re a 4-, 5-year-old, 6-year-old kid, you would be afraid to go sit on Santa‘s lap over at Bloomingdale‘s.
CARLSON: Yes, you would.
SPOHN: I just think it was disgusting.
CARLSON: So you got up one morning, and you decided no more?
SPOHN: No, I just decided to go have brunch in the city yesterday, and walked down 18th Street to just check it out. And when I saw it, it was more disgusting in life than the paper.
In addition to the Santa Claus, in the tree next to it, there‘s about four or five Barbie dolls with their heads severed, blood coming out of their neck, and just hanging on the tree. It was one of the most disgusting sites you‘d ever want to see.
CARLSON: Was there anyone around?
SPOHN: No, there‘s no one there. And the gate, there‘s no lock on the gate, so I just walked right through the gate and ripped the damn thing down.
CARLSON: Wow, and then what happened?
SPOHN: Then what happened, the lady came out, yelled and screamed, “What are you doing? What are you doing?” I said...
CARLSON: Who yelled?
SPOHN: The daughter. I‘m not sure of her name. And I said, “I‘m taking this piece of garbage down.” And then we got into an argument. Wound up in an argument. And I just said, goodbye. And I walked away.
CARLSON: What did she say to you?
SPOHN: She was still ranting and raving as I walked away. Then I walked to a coffee shop around the corner, and I called the “Post,” and I said to whoever answered the phone at the desk, “I‘m the guy that just tore down the Santa Claus that you guys have been writing on.”
He said, “Oh, you own the house?”
I said, “No, I‘m the guy who just tore the damn thing down.”
CARLSON: Had you ever ripped down a holiday display before?
SPOHN: First time, never had cause in 65 years to tear anything down.
CARLSON: How did you feel after you did it?
SPOHN: I feel great. I feel great. I didn‘t do it for me. I did it because, for the children for the people in the neighborhood who have to put up and walk by there every day and see this nonsense. While I was there, there were mothers walking by, pushing their babies in the carriages, walking 3-, 4-, 5-year-old kids, just staring at this monstrosity that was hanging on the side of the building there.
CARLSON: Did you take any of it with you? Or did you just pull it down and leave it on the ground?
SPOHN: No, I just pulled it down and left them on the ground. And then about 20 minutes later, two photographers showed up, and the reporter showed up, and I walked back down the street. The daughter, when she first came out, her comment was “I‘ll punch you in the face.”
CARLSON: How old is she?
SPOHN: About 16, 17.
And then I‘m walking around the block a little bit on First Avenue, and then somebody came hollering, “Hey you. Hey, you in the yellow jacket.” And I turned around, and it was the daughter with another man. Turns out it was her brother. And he said, “You‘re the guy that just tore down our Santa Claus?”
And I said, “Yes, I am.”
He said, “I‘ll punch you in the face.”
I said, “Oh, just like your sister.” So then we argued a few more minutes. And I started walking down 18th Street.
CARLSON: Did they take a swing at you?
SPOHN: No, no, no. So I walked down the other side of the street from their house, trying to team up with the photographers now. And the two photographers are there. And we walked back across the street.
And then the second son comes out of the house. He says the same thing, “I‘ll punch you in the face.” I guess it must be a standard line in the family. About that time, the reporter showed up, and we‘re talking.
And then police car pulls up, male cop and a female cop. And he asked the daughter what happened. And she said, “This guy just tore down the Santa Claus.”
And the cop said, “Did you do that?”
And I said, “Yes.”
And he said, “You know that‘s private property?”
I said, “Yes.”
He said, “You better be careful the answers you‘re giving me, because you can get in trouble.”
I said, “OK.”
CARLSON: Good for you. You just told it to him straight.
SPOHN: Just told him straight up. Just straight up there. Then the cops said, “Any arrest warrants on you?”
I said, “No, never.”
He said, “I got to check you out.” So he asked me for my license, and I gave it to him. And he called it in.
While he called it in, the reporter was asking me questions and the cop came over to me, and he said, you know, “I bet you don‘t like Halloween. Or All Saints Day.”
I said, “Why not?”
He said, “I bet you don‘t like to see little kids dressed as devils.”
CARLSON: No, but that‘s not the point at all. That‘s defacing Santa.
That‘s exactly right.
SPOHN: I said I had no problem with kids running around in costumes. I probably wouldn‘t even mind Santa. I wouldn‘t want to see it, but I would rather see it on Halloween than during the Christmas season.
CARLSON: What you did may have been wrong. I can see why people would think it was wrong, but I‘m glad you did it and I‘m glad you‘re admitting it. If you‘re going to sin, as Martin Luther said, sin boldly.
SPOHN: Absolutely.
CARLSON: And don‘t lie about it. And you did. Julius Spohn, thanks a lot for coming on, and thanks a lot for ripping down the severed head Santa. Outrageous. Thanks.
SPOHN: Merry Christmas, happy holidays, all the rest.
CARLSON: Amen.
Still to come, a surgeon tells a smoker to kick the habit or don‘t even bother getting treated. Is it smart medicine, or is it discrimination? We‘ll debate that with “The Outsider.”
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: Welcome back. Benjamin Disraeli once said, “The wisdom of the wise and the experience of the ages are perpetuated by quotations.” The perfect quote to welcome back our own wise man, live in our SITUATION studio, “the Outsider,” ESPN Radio and HBO Boxing host Max Kellerman.
MAX KELLERMAN, ESPN RADIO: I feel like I should be stroking my beard.
The wise man .
CARLSON: I am not sure there‘s a beard to stroke there, no offense or anything.
KELLERMAN: No. It‘s trimmed way down.
CARLSON: Quite trimmed. Brazilian bikini wax on the face. First up, more bad news for cigarette smokers. A doctor in the U.K. has told one patient he won‘t treat him for a life-threatening illness until he quits smoking. Frederick Smith suffered from narrowed arteries in his legs, a condition that could leave him in a wheelchair, but the vascular surgeon Andrew Lambrton says he won‘t see him unless he kicks his half pack a day habit for six months.
Obviously cigarette smoking makes a lot of medical procedures difficult, Max, including even going under anesthesia. Cigarette smoking is bad in every way and it‘s particularly bad for sick people.
However, so are a lot of things, so is smoking crack, so is alcoholism, so is super-promiscuous sex, to be totally honest. A lot of things that people enjoy doing are bad for them. Cigarette smoking is being zeroed out among all those things because it‘s unpopular, and this patient is suffering as a result.
This doctor, I think, has a moral obligation to treat him whether he can quit smoking or not.
KELLERMAN: Yeah. He certainly has a moral obligation to treat. It‘s called the Hippocratic Oath. And if he is a doctor, he took it, or should have. And he has a moral obligation and an ethical obligation to treat him.
However, this may be part of the treatment. This doctor, you are saying, he is refusing to treat the patient until the patient stops smoking. The doctor in his experience, through the years in the medical profession, may be thinking, this is how I begin the treatment. By telling him, he must stop doing this thing that is most likely the cause of the illness itself.
CARLSON: That‘s right. That‘s actually a very smart point. However, where it falls down is on this point. And that is that cigarette smoking is irrational behavior. And cigarette smokers are irrational in doing it. They are not able many times to respond to the normal stimuli the rest of us respond to, right?
KELLERMAN: Ah. Ah. My .
CARLSON: He may not quit smoking, in other words.
KELLERMAN: My B.S. argument is actually starting to convince me, because.
CARLSON: That‘s scary.
KELLERMAN: He will not likely respond to normal stimulus, right, to stimuli the doctor may try to give him incentive, not to smoke or tell him, hey, you really can‘t be smoking. And therefore, the doctor is trying the approach. This new kind of revolutionary approach, saying, I am not going to see you until you stop smoking, thereby, giving this guy all the motivation he needs.
CARLSON: How about, I am not going to operate on you for cancer until you change that tie. That‘s an unattractive tie, and I don‘t care for it. Take it off, or I am not getting the knife out.
KELLERMAN: I can‘t believe I was as convincing as I was. Because of course the guy has to treat the cigarette smoker.
CARLSON: Poor cigarette smokers.
Well, it‘s a year-end ritual that prompts weeks of media speculation every year, what does it take to become “Time” magazine‘s person of the year? This year it‘s actually three people of the year. Bill and Melinda Gates along with U2 front man Bono. The magazine chose them for their charitable work, and activism, aimed as reducing global poverty and improving world health.
No, Max, I am sure you are expecting me to attack “Time” magazine for having these ludicrous awards every year. Failing that, me to attack them for picking Bono, because he is some flaky rock star. No, I am offended by the choice of Bill Gates. And here‘s why. He is chosen because he cares about humanity so much, he is willing to devote his billions to helping humanity. That‘s not true.
I want to read to you quickly from a “New Yorker” profile, back in
October of Bill Gates. “It was Melinda Gates who first suggested she and
her husband concentrate on global health. Gates didn‘t get it. He was
interested in population control and thought improving the world‘s health
might even run counter to the goal.” Quote, “‘It was only when I dug into
it and came to understand that better health leads to lower populations and
more resources.‘”
This is a guy who despises humanity so much, he was resistant to curing their illnesses or even trying because he thought they would breed and more of them would be created. This guy should not be rewarded in any way.
KELLERMAN: That is a very interesting argument. I will have to rethink the position very quickly because I was not expecting that. Let me just start by saying, Melinda Gates is the one who shouldn‘t be ...
CARLSON: Yes.
KELLERMAN: . Oh, great humanitarian, spending some of her husband‘s billions. No, Bill Gates, here‘s the argument why, even if his means.
CARLSON: Yes.
KELLERMAN: Were incorrect or seemingly inhumane, why the motivation for those means makes him deserving of the cover of “Time” magazine.
CARLSON: Right.
KELLERMAN: Even if he thinks that illness will help population control and in the end cure the world‘s ills, the fact is, his focus is on curing the world‘s ills.
CARLSON: Right.
KELLERMAN: Doesn‘t matter as long as he arrives at the right end.
CARLSON: Right.
KELLERMAN: His means, his motivation I think, his motives are good. The means towards the ends maybe are Machiavellian, in the sense that they are immoral, but the motivation for them is good. He wants to help the world.
CARLSON: No. He is interested in having fewer people on the planet.
I just think this “Time” magazine man of the year.
KELLERMAN: Are you (inaudible)
CARLSON: No. I love children.
KELLERMAN: So you‘re a breed and multiply guy.
CARLSON: Completely.
People are good and they find ways to sustain themselves. That‘s what separates us from, say, cocker spaniels, I am for people always, and I am against people who are against more people.
KELLERMAN: But he is still spending billions and billions of dollars, and in the end, made the right decision, spent the billions and billions of dollars wisely.
CARLSON: You know why? Because he doesn‘t want to give it to his kids.
KELLERMAN: That bothers me.
CARLSON: It bothers me too.
KELLERMAN: It bothers me .
CARLSON: He is a weird guy. Don‘t reward him with this man of the year thing. Just my view.
KELLERMAN: All right. I concede. You leave the money to your kids for crying out ...
CARLSON: I agree.
KELLERMAN: And me, Bill, where are you?
CARLSON: Thank you, Max. Stay tuned. Still plenty more ahead on THE
SITUATION.
Barbie bashing, why you might want to think twice before getting your little princess a new doll this Christmas.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Just exactly what are you trying to say?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Then, you make the call. One viewer drives home the point about choosing to buckle up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If you want to go through the windshield in a crash, so be it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Plus. It‘s the real thing. When you drink this soft drink, you will know why things do go better with Coke.
And we‘ll show you why this woman‘s home might have some people think it‘s a jungle in there.
All ahead on THE SITUATION.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh that sounds good.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: Welcome back. If you‘ve been naughty this year, I wouldn‘t worry about Santa. . I would worry about my next guest. He is a private investigator and an infidelity expert. He makes a living catching people who cheat on their spouses. He says his job is a lot easier during the holidays. Joining me live in the studio to explain why, the cheating spouses nightmare, Tony Delorenzo.
Tony, thanks for coming on.
TONY DELORENZO, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR AND INFIDELITY EXPERT: Oh, my pleasure.
CARLSON: So give us some sense, before we get into signs of whether your spouse is cheating or not, what you do.
DELORENZO: What happens is if someone things their spouse might be cheating, they need to know the proof, if it‘s true or not. We have a job going right now and guys working the 4:00 to 12:00 shift, he tells his wife he is working overtime on a double shift to bring home extra money home for the holidays. He is actually getting off at 12:00 tonight, going to his girlfriend‘s house, and spending eight hours with her and then going home in the morning.
CARLSON: Tonight, right now.
DELORENZO: Right now. 12:00.
CARLSON: So how do you know that?
DELORENZO: We have surveillance, knowing what his routines are, but one of the signs, the wife checked his odometer, and there‘s always extra 10, 15 miles on the odometer showing he drove someplace besides coming straight home. So that‘s what tipped her off what night it was.
CARLSON: Huh. So she knows for certain he is doing this.
DELORENZO: She knows and tonight she is going to know because she is actually going to park across from the girlfriend‘s house, actually see him pull in, because she has to see for her own eyes. Because she doesn‘t believe it herself, so she wants to see it herself.
CARLSON: High drama, I wish our cameras were there to capture that. What are the signs, apart from the odometer if you‘re concerned with your spouse is doing this, what should you look for?
DELORENZO: Right now for the holidays, this is a big time for a lover to have see each other. Because if you have a girlfriend or boyfriend, you have to see them during the holidays. You have to spend your holiday time. One is unexplained purchases on the credit card. One of them is unaccountable hours. Extra Christmas parties, going out with people during Christmas parties your spouse doesn‘t know about.
Because this way if you say you are going out with friends from work, she might know another one of their families, but saying some is a new person at work, we‘re showing him around, he is going out, that‘s all the free time they have. Unaccountable hours or times you cannot contact the person to find out where they are.
CARLSON: You say she, the implication is that most of the cheaters are men. Is that true?
DELORENZO: We do 62 percent following men, and 38 percent following women.
CARLSON: Is that because women are more likely—wives are more likely to call you about their spouses, or do you think most people who cheat are men?
DELORENZO: Right now, most men are cheating, but with women getting in the work force, and on the Internet, we find that percentage climbs every single year.
CARLSON: Really. Do people cheat more during the holidays?
DELORENZO: Well, they cheat all the time throughout the year, but this week here we actually do less work because a lot of people don‘t want to affect the holidays. But the work that we do do, the percentage of catching someone is very high because you have to see someone this week, you have no choice.
CARLSON: So tonight you are about to bust a guy cheating on his wife. His wife is going to see the bust take place. You are going to wreck that man‘s Christmas. Do you feel bad about that?
DELORENZO: We‘re just bringing the truth to the table. We‘re like Santa Claus except we bring them bad gifts, not good gifts.
CARLSON: You certainly are, you‘re an evil Santa, there is no doubt.
All right. OK. It‘s the truth, but it‘s a life-changing truth that will possibly destroy this man‘s life.
DELORENZO: No. The funny thing is that 75 percent of women, when they catch their husbands having an affair, take them back.
CARLSON: Really?
DELORENZO: Seventy-five percent of men who catch their wives do not take them back.
CARLSON: So there is a 25 percent of men who catch their wives, do take their wives back. I am surprised it‘s even that high.
DELORENZO: Correct.
CARLSON: Interesting. If you were to boil it down to the top two signs, not even during the holidays, but generally, what would they be?
DELORENZO: Working overtime, hard to come home and say I‘m going out again so you say I am working overtime.
And the number one way to catch someone is if you can find your spouse‘s or your lover‘s cell phone bill, their lover is always on the bill. If you call your lover once a day, in a 30-day billing cycle, that number is going to show 30, 40, 50 times, very easy to find out who the person is.
CARLSON: Seems to me you will be making a lot of spouses out there suspicious of their hard-working spouses, right, so if a man works a lot, does his wife have cause to be suspicious?
DELORENZO: Well, what we say is if a person works 12 hours a day and they actually work 12 hours, they don‘t have free time it‘s hard for them to cheat. If you have a lot of people with free time, wing and dining people, those with a lot of free time usually get in trouble, and those are the ones usually that we catch.
CARLSON: High drama again. Tony Delorenzo, private investigator, infidelity expert, the most academic sense.
DELORENZO: Correct.
CARLSON: Thanks for joining us.
DELORENZO: My pleasure.
CARLSON: Coming up, some don‘t want you to smoke in the privacy of your home. As long as they are telling us how to live they ought to come for our cheeseburgers too. That‘s just a taste of the ranting we‘ll hear when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: Welcome back. You‘re joining the only show brave enough to throw open our cameras to your ranting voice mails. First up.
CALLER: Dennis from Fredonia, Kentucky.
I don‘t like seat belts. I don‘t wear seat belts. It‘s my God-given right. If you want to go through the windshield in a crash, so be it. And who is to say a seat belt is going to save my life anyhow. I may be a little bit better off but I don‘t really give a hoot if I lose the top part of my teeth because I didn‘t wear a seat belt. I guess I‘m over.
CARLSON: Dennis, I think you may be a spokesman for the burgeoning anti-seat belt law movement. We need to get you on the show, Dennis. Next up.
CALLER: Paul from Griffith, Indiana. On the parent smoking issue, they have also determined junk food is unhealthy and dangerous, and I just wonder if that will be the next thing that the government regulates.
CARLSON: Of course it will be, and it often seems like, and someone on our staff said this the other day, you are always defending smokers. Why do you like smoking? I don‘t smoke and I don‘t like smoking and it‘s not good for you. That‘s not the point. There‘s a principle here, and the principle is, you ought not to be allowed to tell adults what they can do to themselves as long as they are not hurting anybody else, and so once you concede that principle, you allow government to control everything that you do, that it doesn‘t like.
You don‘t want that. Trust me, they will be coming for your Big Macs, can‘t say I didn‘t tell you so. Next up.
CALLER: Jim from Calgary, Alberta, Canada. You can kiss my (EXPLETIVE DELETED) in regard to your comments about Canada.
CARLSON: About Canada? Where is Calgary, Alberta, Canada? That is so nice. I know you don‘t mean that, Jim, because Canadians are such a nice gentle dog-sledding people. I know you mean that in the best way.
Let me know what you are thinking, particularly if you are Canadian. You can call 1-877-TCARLSON. That‘s 877-822-7576. You can also email tucker@msnbc.com. Moreover, you can read the blog every day. Tucker.msnbc.com.
Still ahead on THE SITUATION, a story no parent will want to miss. Are Barbie dolls preparing your children for future in the interrogation room, in secret CIA prison, in some undisclosed country? The alarming answer to that question can only be found on “The Cutting Room Floor.” Stay tune.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: Welcome back. Time for “The Cutting Room Floor.” Joining us, one of the least Canadian men I have ever met, Willie Geist.
WILLIE GEIST, MSNBC PRODUCER: I was going to say, Tucker, nice job patching things up with Canadians. I think we can move forward on that now.
CARLSON: Love the Canadian stuff.
GEIST: I know you do.
CARLSON: All right. If you are looking to get away this holiday season, and you are an elephant, we give our official five-star SITUATION recommendation to the luxurious elephant resort in southern India. It‘s a special camp set up by the Indian government to give a little R&R to the country‘s hard-working elephants. The five-ton beasts can splash in a stream, lounge in the forest, or enjoy the handfed gourmet cuisine.
GEIST: Tucker, you know I am a friend of the pachyderm community. I always have been. But it costs the government $1,600 bucks per elephant, now it seems it might be better spent on something like improving the literacy rate, I‘d like to see infant mortality down a little bit there in India. Elephant spas probably not the best expenditure.
CARLSON: Millions of people live on the street.
GEIST: That‘s exactly right. Call me crazy.
CARLSON: We couldn‘t find baby pandas tonight, so we‘re meeting our daily cute animal quota with lion cubs from the Ukraine. They have been adopted by a former veterinarian, who runs a refuge for exotic animals in her home. The three month old cubs appear to be enjoying domestic life, they have even made friends with the woman‘s cat.
GEIST: Now, Tucker, I am no student of big cats, but certainly a snowy cabin in remote corner of the Ukraine is probably not the lion‘s natural habitat.
CARLSON: I would say not.
GEIST: It seems to me. Do you think?
CARLSON: No.
GEIST: They strike me, from my understanding, more of a desert plain animal.
CALRSON: Yes, the savannah, one pictures them ...
GEIST: And also, that relationship with domestic cat is going to sour quickly.
CARLSON: It‘s going to end badly. If there‘s one prediction with full confidence, that‘s not going to end well.
I‘ll give you one guess, which country is making a soft drink, that contains the primary ingredient in cocaine. If you guessed Colombia, you have officially mastered the obvious. Coca-Sec goes on sale in that country this week. The golden colored drink is made from coca extract. Coca-Sec probably won‘t be exported to this country because of laws that block importation of coca here. Coca is the plant from which cocaine is refined.
GEIST: No that, Tucker, is an energy drink.
CARLSON: Yes it is.
GEIST: Red Bull is cute but the boys over in Medellin have a little something special for everybody. Don‘t they?
CARLSON: Coca tea. One of the official drinks of Colombia, and Peru.
Very excellent, by the way. I have had it.
GEIST: And you‘ll never get that drink in the United States.
CARLSON: Never will.
GEIST: They‘ve had so much trouble getting cocaine here.
CARLSON: With all the cheer and booze around the holidays, some place step up vigilance against drunk driving, not Mexico, no sir. Quite the opposite actually. Officials in Mexico City have announced they will go easy on drunk drivers on both Christmas Eve and New Year‘s Eve.
The suspension of drunk driving laws is in observance of Noche Libre (ph), a celebration held on those two nights.
GEIST: OK. I don‘t want to offend any more NAFTA partners than we have but it seems to me Mexico always goes with the counterintuitive. New Year‘s Eve, the biggest drinking day of the year, let‘s roll back the drunk driving laws.
CARLSON: It‘s like the best thing I have heard about the Mexican government in a long time. But it does seem humane to me in a way.
Parents, while you think of your sweet little daughter upstairs, combing her Barbie doll‘s hair, a new story tells us, she is probably decapitating her, setting her on fire. Not so sweet now, is she?
Researchers at the University of Bath in England found young girls consider Barbie torture a normal play activity. The study found that preferred methods of torture are hair removal, decapitation, burning, even microwaving.
GEIST: That last one is sick, that‘s a future serial killer. The obvious question, who commissioned the Barbie torture study? Don‘t we have other things we should be working on?
CARLSON: The government, obviously, the question is which government.
GEIST: And as a guy, I thought the whole point of Barbie‘s was torture. As a young boy, you always ripped the heads off, the legs.
CARLSON: To think girls would do it, that‘s disturbing.
GEIST: Sick.
CARLSON: Willie Geist.
GEIST: All right Tucker.
CARLSON: As always.
That‘s SITUATION for tonight. Thank you for watching. Have a great night.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
Copy: Content and programming copyright 2005 NBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2005 Voxant, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material other than for research. User may not reproduce or redistribute the material except for user‘s personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon NBC and Voxant, Inc.‘s copyright or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.