updated 8/25/2006 11:58:21 AM ET 2006-08-25T15:58:21

Guests: Dave Cieslack, Brad Blakeman, Andy Dehnart, Mike Papantonio, Dennis Prager, Mike Rogers

TUCKER CARLSON, HOST:  We‘re continuing our live coverage today. 

To recap again, on the right side of your screen we have pictures from Scottsdale, Arizona, Maricopa County, outside Phoenix, where rainwaters have swollen pretty dramatically.  Apparently, two people trapped inside vehicles.  You see now rescuers walking together as they, I guess, extract one of the trapped passengers from his vehicle. 

On the left hand side of the screen you see a turboprop on the tarmac at Long Beach Airport.  Inside that airplane, John Mark Karr.  He‘s the man who apparently may have, in any case, confessed to killing JonBenet Ramsey accidentally.  In any case, he is deeply enmeshed in that case, a case that was thought by most to be dormant. 

It happened 10 years ago.  He was recently extradited from Asia, waived extradition.  Came her voluntarily, actually.  He is being taken in just moments to Boulder, Colorado. 

We go now to Dave Cieslack.  He‘s a spokesman for the Scottsdale, Arizona, Fire Department joining us on the phone from Arizona. 

Mr. Cieslack, what are we looking at here?  Can you tell us?


Yes, we are looking at a water rescue going on right now in the city of Scottsdale (INAUDIBLE).  We have two vehicles stuck in this flowing wash right now with three motorists inside.  Scottsdale firefighters at this time are escorting one of these motorists to a safe location. 

CARLSON:  Where—where is this?  It looks like a very rural area.  Is this—but it could be a parking lot.  From our perspective, it‘s not clear.  Where are these cars stuck? 

CIESLACK:  You know, believe it or not, Tucker, this is smack dab in the city of Scottsdale, right in the middle.  We have had significant rain here this morning, up to an inch or two in certain areas.  This is right in the middle of Scottsdale, in a very popular area, and the water just suddenly rose and overcame this area and these folks got stuck. 

CARLSON:  So there is pavement underneath that water? 

CIESLACK:  There is indeed pavement underneath that water.  That is a road.

The water is about three and a half to four feet deep right now.  You can see Scottsdale firefighters standing between those two cars discussing how best to get these folks out of those vehicles and make sure that everybody gets to a dry area safely. 

CARLSON:  How—how have—I mean, this seems pretty remarkable to have three feet of water running over the pavement in Scottsdale.  How heavy have the rains been? 

CIESLACK:  You know, this morning, Tucker, we had significant rainfall here.  All morning long it was raining and raining, and that water had to go somewhere.  And it flowed right into the (INAUDIBLE), where it‘s supposed to go. 

Unfortunately, these folks drove into this flooded area.  We encouraged people, you know, not to do that.  Right now, though, the priority on the ground is making sure those folks get out of their vehicles and to dry land safely. 

CARLSON:  Have—have they been taken out of the car yet?  It‘s hard to tell from this vantage.

CIESLACK:  Yes, we are walking one person out of their vehicle right now.  You can see there is a gentleman in a white shirt who is getting out. 

There appears to be one or two more folks inside those cars.  Scottsdale firefighters will return to those vehicles and make sure they‘ll also get to that dry area that you see on your screen. 

CARLSON:  Now, Mr. Cieslack, what is below those cars?  It looks almost like a little dam.  Where is the water going? 

CIESLACK:  No, you know what, Tucker?  It‘s literally a street.  It is a street in the middle of the city of Scottsdale, but this happens here when it rains this hard, this wash will flood, it will overflow into the road.  And unfortunately, these folks did not—I guess didn‘t know this was longer (ph) or didn‘t—didn‘t see the signs and drove into this wash. 

Water rises very quickly here when we have this magnitude, this amount of rain.  And we had significant rainfall this morning. 

CARLSON:  Yes.  Tell me about the rest of Scottsdale.  I mean, are there other streets that have turned into rivers?  Is there extensive property damage, other people being washed away? 

CIESLACK:  Well, there‘s not extensive property damage.  Fortunately, the water has gone to the washes, which is where it‘s supposed to go.  We have had street flooding throughout the city of Scottsdale and Phoenix and Tempe.

There have been a number of incidents like this.  This, though, is unusual in that we have two vehicles with up to three people inside. 

CARLSON:  Are the people inside—what do we know about them?  Are they older people, younger people, able-bodied, no? 

CIESLACK:  You know, I don‘t have information right now, Tucker.  It looks like they were able to walk themselves out, along with the assistance of Scottsdale firefighters.  So, fortunately, these folks are mobile, they‘re getting out of there, and this rescue is carrying off exactly as planned. 

CARLSON:  Have you had any injuries today? 

CIESLACK:  You know, fortunately, we have not.  We had—we did have one individual who suffered an electric shock because of a lightning strike.  He was transported to the hospital in serious condition, but is he stable.  These folks here, as you can see, are being walked out carefully.  They‘re doing OK. 

CARLSON:  We‘re any of them rescued by helicopter, or all by—all by

on foot?

CIESLACK:  This rescue itself has been on foot.  The other rescues in town, I believe, as well, were on foot. 

This rescue is difficult in that there are lines, power lines and phone lines in that area making it more difficult to get a chopper in there.  So that‘s why Scottsdale firefighters elected to walk in there and walk those folks out to safety. 

CARLSON:  How did you know they were there?  Did they call?

CIESLACK:  We did receive a 911 call about 12:15 Arizona time asking us to respond to that scene.  We sent a full crew, a number of units out there, including a ladder truck which has (INAUDIBLE) tools that can effect this rescue easier.

CARLSON:  So is that—pardon my ignorance here, because I know Arizona is, I think, the one state that doesn‘t have Daylight Savings Time, if I‘m remembering correctly.  What time is it there right now? 

CIESLACK:  It is currently 1:10 in this area, Tucker. 

CARLSON:  Oh, so you—I mean, within an hour you were able to get them out of their cars? 

CIESLACK:  Yes.  You know, these—these rescue workers have been in the city of Scottsdale, some of them, for 20, 25 years.  These folks are experts at this kind of thing. 

Actually, this kind of thing happens almost every year when we have these monsoon rainstorms.  So the firefighters who were on the ground there, they‘ve done this before.  They know how to get folks out, and they did a great job, as you can see here, getting those folks to dry land. 

CARLSON:  But pardon my incredulity, but it looks like a beautiful day right now in Scottsdale.  It‘s hard to believe it was just raining in a torrential way.

CIESLACK:  Tucker, the sun has come out and the water is starting to subside, but there was significant rainfall this morning, two to three hours‘ worth of just heavy rain, lightning and thunder.  Fortunately, the sun is coming out, the water is starting to subside, and incidents like this will—will start—will start drifting off. 

CARLSON:  All right.

Dave Cieslack, from the Scottsdale, Arizona, Fire Department, a great spokesman.

Thanks a lot, Dave. 

CIESLACK:  Tucker, thank you so much.

CARLSON:  You‘re looking at a picture also on the right side of your screen of a small—relatively small turboprop that has just taken off from Long Beach Airport.  On board is John Mark Karr.  He is a suspect in the murder 10 years ago of JonBenet Ramsey.  He is being flown by authorities to Boulder, Colorado, where he‘s expected to be charged in her murder and face trial there. 

We‘ll of course be following that story as it unfolds today and over the coming months and, who knows, maybe years. 

Well, for more on what‘s happening in Scottsdale and the Phoenix area, we go now to Bill Karins at Weather Plus. 

Bill, are you there?


We were just looking at some of the information.

Scottsdale Airport had—in the last three hours they had between an inch and inch and a half of rain.  It doesn‘t sound like a lot in some areas of the country, but in the desert areas, where the run-off is very quick, that‘s what happened.  And, of course, that was located with these thunderstorms that just came through the area. 

Now, the flood warning, they‘re actually saying that there are other areas that are just as bad as the pictures that you‘re looking at.  It just happens that people aren‘t trapped.  And as they said, this happens every summer, and especially during the monsoon season out there. 

They‘re saying that substantial water flow continued in a number of washes in northern Maricopa County.  That‘s the county we‘re dealing with right here.  It‘s a large county. 

Chief among them are Indian Bend washes.  That‘s the one you‘re loking at right here.  But they‘re also saying that Cave Creek, New River, they all have a lot of flooding going on now, and that‘s going to continue for the next two hours, they‘re saying. 

They also said some of the smaller washes, including Wickenburg (ph), should subside a little more quickly.  So they‘ve got this issue right now that‘s going to be in the flooding, and especially when we get towards rush hour in the Phoenix area.  It‘s getting to be a nightmare with everyone trying to get in and out, especially if—well, you can see for yourself how long it‘s going to take this water to recede—Tucker. 

CARLSON:  Two quick things, Bill.  First of all, will you define a wash for our viewers who aren‘t from the southwest?

And second, why is it you just said that run-off in a desert or an arid area tends to get pretty dramatic, pretty fast?  Why is that? 

KARINS:  Well, what you consider a wash is, pretend you‘re in the mountains, and pretend it‘s raining hard, and then all of a sudden that water heads down into a valley area where there is normally not a river.  And that becomes what they call a wash.  It‘s an area that normally doesn‘t have rainwater in it, but when you get in a situation like this, that picked up an inch or two of rain, a short period of time, all that water has to head somewhere. 

The second part of Tucker‘s question is, well, why doesn‘t this just soak into the ground and not cause these problems?  Well, this is really sandy soil and also rocky soil, too.  This isn‘t like the kind of soil you‘d find where there‘s grass, where it just kind of soaks right in.

This hits the—it‘s almost like pavement, Tucker. The water, as it goes over this rocky soil and the sandy soil, it just starts flowing and it goes just downhill.  And unfortunately, as you can see here, this water is going downhill right through the middle of Scottsdale. 

And you can see—that guy just panned completely in a different direction, and there is just flooding like this all over the place.  This water just doesn‘t soak in. 

That looks like the back of some homes, maybe a golf course there.  And all of this water flows downhill.  And what they do is they set up those washes like where those people were trapped.  I mean, they had a sign there.  The guy we were talking to on the phone said they expected to get flooding in that wash.  It just happened that those people drove into the middle of it and got trapped, which they obviously probably shouldn‘t have done. 

CARLSON:  That‘s just amazing.  If you live on the East Coast it‘s hard to imagine what a flashflood can look like, but we‘re seeing it now.

Bill Karins, thanks a lot. 


CARLSON:  Well, of course we continue to cover this story developing out of Maricopa County, Arizona, as well as the flight of John Mark Karr as he heads to Boulder and potentially charges in the JonBenet Ramsey murder case.

All that and more when we return.  We‘ll be right back.



GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:  Sometimes I‘m happy.  You know this is—it‘s a—but war is not a time of joy.  These aren‘t joyous times.  These are challenging times and they‘re difficult times.  And they‘re straining the psyche of our country. 


CARLSON:  That was the president, of course, talking about the war in Iraq earlier this week. 

Well, Iran may or may not prove to be an imminent threat, but a majority of Americans agree now that the war in Iraq has turned into a disaster.  Now there are signs that even the commander in chief may be losing hope. 

In a news conference, the one you just saw a moment ago, President Bush used words like “frustrating,” “challenging” and “difficult” to describe the situation on the ground in Iraq.  So is the president giving up on Iraq? 

Here to answer that question, Brad Blakeman, former deputy assistant to President Bush.  He joins us from Washington.

Brad, welcome. 


CARLSON:  I don‘t think the president is giving up on Iraq.  I think that script was a little bit overstated.  Of course he‘s not giving up.  I think he does want to stay the course.

But there was a pretty noticeable and very noticed by “The Washington Post” this morning change in tone.  The president didn‘t suggest that things are getting better in Iraq.  I think this is the first nationally televised address in which he hasn‘t said things are improving. 

What does this mean? 

BLAKEMAN:  What this means is the president is a realist.  Maybe that‘s a little hard to swallow for reporters that the president will tell the truth, but this president said from the very beginning that it‘s going to be tough.  There are going to be days of frustration, there are going to be days of hope, and there are going to be days of success and great joy and everything in between.

And what we‘re seeing now in Iraq is a tough time.  And it‘s time for the Iraqis to step up.

But let me remind you that the unity government has been in place about 90 days.  Some of the ministers have been on the job for 80 days.  They‘re still staffing up their departments. 

So this government is in the very infancy of their democracy, so let‘s...


BLAKEMAN:  Come on, let‘s give them a chance. 

CARLSON:  Well, wait a second.  So your point here, if I understand it, is all of a sudden the Bush administration is adopting a reality-based foreign policy.  He doesn‘t sound that happy about Iraq because there is not that much to be happy about.  He‘s being honest, you say, correct? 

BLAKEMAN:  That‘s correct.  And he‘s been happy on those days...


BLAKEMAN:  ... when we‘ve reached great successes for the people of Iraq and for our troops.  And he‘s been—and he‘s been frustrated on those days when we‘ve not seen the type of successes that we would like to see. 

CARLSON:  Well, then, since he‘s all of a sudden being so honest about Iraq, doesn‘t he owe the rest of us an apology for his grossly inflated estimates of the successes in Iraq and what they were going to be? 

BLAKEMAN:  Absolutely not.  The president...

CARLSON:  Well, wait a second. 

BLAKEMAN:  The president has been honest...


BLAKEMAN:  ... from day one.  He told the American people...


BLAKEMAN:  ... on the deck of the Lincoln that this was going to be a tough and long battle. 


BLAKEMAN:  This is a battle—as the American people are now seeing, this is a regional conflict.  This isn‘t isolated to Iraq. 

CARLSON:  Oh, it‘s certain—that‘s—and all of us who were paying attention know that and have suspected that from the beginning, that Iran and Syria and Turkey and, you know, all the countries that border Iraq are having influence that we don‘t read about all that often here, and that it‘s a big, bad deal in stabilizing the region, and that‘s why it‘s a bad idea.

But the point is, even you will concede the president predicted more successes than we have seen.  Shouldn‘t he apologize?  Shouldn‘t he say, “Look, I kind of, you know, overestimated the successes”? 

BLAKEMAN:  The president has nothing to apologize for.  Everybody wants instant gratification.  And again, I‘ll go back to my term of momentarianism (ph). 

People want—live for the moment.  They want momentary results.  And that‘s not what a democracy is. 

CARLSON:  Wait a  -- no, no, no. 

BLAKEMAN:  That‘s not nation building.  We have to give the Iraqi people an opportunity. 

CARLSON:  Brad, come on.  Nice...

BLAKEMAN:  And that‘s—and you guys are frustrated by the fact that everything is not rosy. 


CARLSON:  I know, because we‘re all a bunch of crack addicts who want it now, now, now, now! 

Let me put this into context for those who aren‘t paying super close attention.  You often bring up the Second World War in our conversations, sometimes I think even the Civil War.  You say, look, these are painful, turbulent moments, out of which comes rebirth and it‘s worth it in the end. 

This war in Iraq, now three and a half years old, has gone on about as long as our involvement in the Second World War, about as long as the Civil War.  OK?  So it‘s not something that has taken place over the last few moments.  We‘ve given it three and a half years. 

BLAKEMAN:  Yes.  And that‘s—and that‘s not an unreasonable amount of time. 

Look at—we haven‘t suffered the casualties that were predicted by -

by the media and by the Democrats.  They said tens of thousands of American soldiers would die.  They have not. 

CARLSON:  Right.  That‘s a fair point.  You‘re right.

BLAKEMAN:  Look at how many soldiers we lost in World War II.

CARLSON:  You‘re absolutely right.

BLAKEMAN:  Four hundred thousand.  Almost 600,000 in the Civil War. 

So we are facing a different enemy today.  They don‘t fight in uniforms.

CARLSON:  You‘re right, but Americans will put up with a lot of casualties.  We know that.  And previous wars have proven that.

If Americans thanking we‘re doing the right thing and there is hope that we‘re moving somewhere, we‘re progressing, things are getting better, maybe slowly, but still inextricably, progressively, day by day they‘re improving, if Americans believe that, they‘ll put up with anything.  But if they things are hopeless, they won‘t put up with anything.  And that‘s how people feel now, that things aren‘t getting better. 

And my point to you again is, the president is not even making the case that they‘re getting better.  So it sounds like all is lost. 

BLAKEMAN:  The president—it is—there are great successes in Iraq.  There is no question about that.  They have a government, they have a constitution, they‘ve had free elections.  But are things perfect?  No.

But the Iraqi people need the opportunity to stick to this the same as

the same as we need in our allies to not cut and run, to give the Iraqi people a chance to stand up.  Now, they could squander that opportunity.


BLAKEMAN:  But what is the timetable?  Is it—what timetable?  Let me ask you, what is the proper timetable? 

CARLSON:  I don‘t—you know what?  I don‘t want America to be humiliated any more than it has been.  All of this hurts America, which is why I hate it.  And I think that if we pulled out tomorrow, we would be humiliated and weakened by it.  So I‘m not calling for a timetable, I‘m merely pointing out the obvious, which is, the Iraqi people, if they‘re going to stand up, better get around to standing up pretty darn soon, because they‘re still flailing around in prone position. 

BLAKEMAN:  And I‘m with you.  And I think we‘ve got to hold their government‘s feet to the fire.  But also, let me remind you that, you know, they have to start producing jobs for these folks.  They‘ve got to give them opportunity. 

They‘ve got to build infrastructure.  They‘ve got to, quite frankly, silence these radical imams which are creating violence.  We wouldn‘t put up with it in this country, and we shouldn‘t have the Iraqis put up with it either. 

CARLSON:  I agree.  I think all of our hope is misplaced.  I hope I‘m wrong and I hope you‘re right. 

Brad Blakeman, thanks a lot.

BLAKEMAN:  Thank you.

CARLSON:  Still to come, are illegal immigrant workers an unfair business advantage?  Why some companies are suing to keep illegals out of the market. 

We‘ll be right back.


CARLSON:  Well, if there is one story that‘s got people across the political spectrum outraged today, it‘s the new season of “Survivor”.  That season hasn‘t even arrived yet.  The problem, the producers of the reality series have decided to divide up the contestants by race. 

They‘ll be pitting blacks, whites, Hispanics and Asians against one another.  Explicit segregation on a network reality show.  It sounds like a recipe for trouble, but my next guest says it‘s just good TV. 

Andy Dehnart is the editor of RealityBlurred.com and writing and journalism lecturer at Stetson University.  He joins us from Orlando, Florida. 

Andy, welcome. 


CARLSON:  Kind of hard to defend this, it seems to me.  I mean, America has this long and sad and incredibly uncomfortable history of race relations.  And, I mean, in this country it‘s almost the ultimate faux pas to intentionally segregate people and then have them compete against one another.  I mean, it‘s so cringe-making, I can‘t imagine watching that. 

DEHNART:  Yes, there‘s—I mean, a lot of people are saying that, and basically the producers are saying that their argument is that when they set out to cast the show they didn‘t have this tribal split in mind, but instead they found that people had really intense ties to their race and ethnicity, and so they thought they‘ll just go ahead and mirror what people are feeling in their own lives as it is and just group them that way. 

CARLSON:  Yes, but that—of course people have intense ties to their race and ethnicity, and around the world people kill each other over their race and ethnicity.  And that‘s why we as a society, reasonable, conscientious people in our society, do all they can to de-emphasize race and ethnicity because they know it‘s such a volatile attachment people have. 

DEHNART:  Exactly.  And, you know, I think on some level, too, it‘s interesting that the show has separated people by other arbitrary considerations in the past, sex and age for last season, sex in previous seasons, and it‘s interesting that shows that, like, we‘re still pretty sensitive about race and the divisions that occur there because we‘re not as comfortable of the idea of splitting people up arbitrarily in this way. 

CARLSON:  Well, it‘s not arbitrary, of course.  It‘s by race. 

But, I mean, isn‘t—I mean, this is really—don‘t you think about ratings in the end?  I mean, this is a show whose numbers have dropped almost a quarter in the past two seasons.  They‘re—you know, the show is tapped out and they‘re looking for a new gimmick.

DEHNART:  Yes.  I mean, it‘s—this is the 13th season.  Six years ago is when the entire country was captivated by “Survivor”.  And it‘s pretty much remained a top 10, top 20 show since its inception.  But like you said, the ratings have sort have slid from season to season.

And just by announcing this twist right now, everyone in the country is talking about “Survivor” for the first time in years.  So the producers have already achieved their goal.  It will most likely garner higher ratings for its first few episodes, at least, but it depends upon whether or not this actually impacts the game.  I mean, the people who are on the show might sort of be indifferent to it.  The tribes might merge sooner than later, and it might turn out to be a nonevent after all. 

CARLSON:  And finally, CBS is justifying this in part by saying, look, we‘ve gotten complaints because the show isn‘t diverse enough.  This is a kind of affirmative action.  Who is saying the show isn‘t diverse enough, and why do we have affirmative action for reality shows?  Is there some magic percentage of minority groups represented on the shows? 

I mean, how absurd can the conversation get? 

DEHNART:  Well, I don‘t think anybody is saying that there should be a certain percentage or that there‘s any kind of affirmative action.  But “Survivor” has been, you know, very, very White.  You know, as white as you and I for the past 12 seasons.  There‘s been a few contestants of color on the show over its time, but for the most part they‘ve been absent. 

So I think it‘s a noble goal for them to sort of go out and see if we can represent America a little bit more on the show.  It‘s just unfortunate they then decided to divide them by race for the actual game plan. 

CARLSON:  It‘s a reality show.  Who cares if it represents America?  I mean, boy, if—I mean, I‘m sad there are people, you know, people of my ethnicity on “Survivor” embarrassing themselves.  You know what I mean?  It‘s like, who cares? 

DEHNART:  Well, that‘s true.  I mean, I guess - and you know—I mean, you‘re going to be on “Dancing with the Stars,” so, you know, it all depends on the personalities of the people more than anything else. 

CARLSON:  All right.

Andy Dehnart, thanks a lot for joining us. 

DEHNART:  Thanks a lot. 

CARLSON:  Still to come, one wrong word in a senator‘s re-election campaign is in trouble, at least momentarily, but is it much ado about nothing?

Find out when we come back.


CARLSON:  Still to come, are illegal immigrant workers an unfair business advantage, some companies are suing to keep them out.  We‘ll have that story and why one man could end up behind bars for putting Hezbollah on television.  We‘ll get that in just a minute but right now here‘s a look at your headlines. 

MARGARET BRENNAN, CNBC ANCHOR:  I‘m Margaret Brennan with your CNBC market wrap.  Stocks making modest gains amid another report showing a housing cool down.   The Dow Jones Industrial Average closing the day up 6-½ points, the S&P 500 up more than 3, the NASDAQ up by almost 2-1/2 points.  New home sales dropping of more than expected 4 percent in July, that‘s the biggest decline since February.  A report out yesterday showed sales of existing homes was also down more than 4 percent and inventory at a record high.  Shares of Apple up about 49 cents on the day the company follows Dell in recalling millions of Sony made laptop batteries.  About 1 million of those batteries are being recalled.  Newer models with Intel chips are not affected.  And the Justice Department wants a federal judge to block a threatened strike by Northwest Airlines flight attendants.  They could walk off the job as soon as tomorrow if the bankrupt airline refuses to open negotiations on a new contract.  Now back to Tucker.  

CARLSON:  Time now for three on three, where we welcome two of the

sharpest people we know to discuss three of today‘s most interesting

stories.  Let‘s get right to it.  Joining me now Dennis Prager, he is host

of “The Dennis Prager Show,” he joins us from Burbank, California.  And

Mike Papantonio, he‘s in Pensacola, Florida, he‘s co-host of “Ring of Fire”

on Air America Radio.  Welcome to you both.  First up word that could bring

down a senator‘s re-election campaign or at least cause it problems any

way.  Senator George Allen of Virginia apologized today for an obscures

reference he made to a worker for his opponent.  Here‘s the comment some

people have called a racial slur.  Watch.


SEN. GEORGE ALLEN:  This fellow here over here with the yellow shirt macaca or whatever his name is, he‘s with my opponent.  And let‘s give a welcome to macaca here, welcome to America and the real world of Virginia.

CARLSON:  So the man he was pointing to is south Asian, he‘s Indian, I think.  And I believe he was there filming one of Allen‘s campaign events.  You saw from the tape yourself Mike that he didn‘t mean this in a nasty way.  He‘s not calling him a widely recognized racist term, macaca, I‘ve never even heard that word before, who cares?

MIKE PAPANTONIO, CO-HOST, “RING OF FIRE”:  The point is there is a lot more creepy parts to George Allen.  His sister, if you follow me, wrote a memoir and she called it the fifth quarter.  She describes this weird George as a person who beat her boyfriend with a cue stick, drug her up flights of stairs by her hair, threw her brother Bruce through a sliding glass window, so the monkey statement to me just sounds like another evolution of this Neanderthal republican.    

CARLSON:  Who cares, who cares, maybe he beat the boyfriend.  Who cares, wait a minute, here‘s the point.  Here‘s a guy who is a sitting U.S.  senator, who is an aggressive supporter of the war in Iraq, ok.  You have right there an issue that if you were against the war in Iraq you can use to fairly attack George Allen.  Instead you go after his family and his sister, who knows the truth and who cares?

PAPANTONIO:  Do you think for a second the republicans have been slow to do that.  So now this creepy cast—

CARLSON:  Who cares, that‘s not the point, it‘s still wrong. 

PAPANTONIO:  There is a lot of people who care Tucker because this is a guy who‘s going around campaigning with the president of the United States George Bush patting him on the back.  This is a creepy guy.  Beyond his monkey statement, this guy is a real creep.  And the point is this, the American—wait a second.  

CARLSON:  You know that is so low and stupid, I mean come on Mikey, not the guy—hold on, the guy disagrees with you and most Americans in fact on a substantive policy question of our age—ok.  I want to bring Dennis Prager in here for a second before I continue to ramble.  Dennis are you bothered by macaca, did you know what that was? 

DENNIS PRAGER, HOST, “THE DENNIS PRAGER SHOW”:  No, I wanted to get a PH.D in zoology but I instead went into international relations so I was not aware of the fact that macaca was a racial slur comparing people from India, after all he is from India, he‘s not a black to monkeys.  Really, there is a level of absurdity here that I really was happy as much as I‘m a talk show host with my own national show, I‘m happy for you to have the whole time with your other guests here.  I think they bury themselves in most Americans‘ eyes when they speak of these ad (INAUDIBLE) attacks when I wonder if Mike here covered the Hillary Clinton statement when she identified Mahatt Magandi(ph) as having run a gas station in St. Louis.  Or covered the Joe Biden statement that Indian Americans --  

PAPANTONIO:  I covered the Trent Lott issue.  I covered the Trent Lott issue when the republicans got rid of him and they abandoned him for a statement mush less than this.  The difference is Dennis, the Republican Party has changed.  

CARLSON:  Hold on, you know Mike at some point calling people racist and implying that all the right wingers are in fact Klansmen, you know it has a limited shelf life and I believe it‘s expired at this point.  The fact is—but who cares, can we all lighten up a little bit about this and judge people on what they do in real life?

PAPANTONIO:  You know why it has a shelf life because now people are going to look at George Allen and there is a lot creepier things about George Allen than his monkey statement.  Go pick up his sister‘s book called “Fifth Quarter” where she writes her memoirs about how weird her brother is.  This is her brother -- 

CARLSON:  Let‘s say someone disconnected your cable television, your internet and stole your newspapers.  Would you take the time to read George Allen‘s disaffected sister‘s book? 

PAPANTONIO:  Yes I would, because you know why, because he is going all over the country campaigning with the president of the United States and implicitly the president of the United States buys into what this guy is about.  He‘s a veiled racist, that‘s all he is. 

CARLSON:  You know what, you guys are probably, democrats are going to win I think any way and it‘s just giving a taste of America what a sleazy group you are by saying things like that, it‘s really totally unfair.   Now, let‘s get—no, I mean it.

PRAGER:  I‘d just like to point out if I may -- 

PAPANTONIO:  You don‘t really mean that because you‘ve seen the republicans do it for years Tucker. 

CARLSON:  And I have never defended that kind of talk ever.  Dennis, tell me. 

PRAGER:  Harry Reid called the senate resolution to declare English the American language racist.  The use of the term racist by democrats and other folks on the left is their form of argument.  This is another example of it. 

CARLSON:  It‘s not a form of argument.  On to a new topic, because I believe we‘re not plowing new ground on this.  Companies that use illegal immigrant workers are now being sued by businesses that play by the rules.  Pretty good idea, a group of temp agencies that provide farm workers in California has filed suit against two competitors who the defendants say hurt their business by using cheap illegal labor.  I‘m not for lawsuits, under almost any circumstances but I think I‘m for this because I think it‘s fair.  Those of us who for instance hire cleaning ladies who are legal and pay all these taxes and go through this ludicrous paperwork, only to be undercut by our neighbors that don‘t feel like doing that.  You know I have reason to be offended. 

PRAGER:  That‘s right.  I happen to agree.  I am as anti-lawsuit as you are, I think that the trial lawyer community has hurt America terribly but there are places for lawsuits, obviously, we‘re not extremists on this issue.  And this is a perfect example and I‘d much rather that the lawsuits come from the private sector than from the government.  I don‘t like when the government sues. 

CARLSON:  I agree with that.

PAPANTONIO:  You know where this lawsuit is going, nowhere, because if you follow the money on this issue just like every issue with the neo-con, it‘s a money issue.  And here‘s where it goes.  The money issue on this one is that big business, not family business, but big business wants illegal aliens in the United States because they can hire illegal aliens for half what they pay everybody else, they pay no benefits, there‘s no union problems, there‘s no pension programs and you know what, who is going to win on this?  This lawsuit that has been filed by a fairly small business is going nowhere because the courts are dominated now by the same republican regime that dominates Washington.  

CARLSON:  Slow down Mike, it‘s a little bit more complicated than that.  I think you‘re half right, I think big business does support illegal immigration because they pay illegals much less than they pay American citizens, you‘re absolutely right.  But you also have a democratic party that‘s almost uniformly for illegal immigration and why is that, because they know that they‘re getting new voters.  So it‘s a little bit more complicated, both sides in fact, presenting on this, and I hope that you‘ll be courageous enough to admit that.  

PAPANTONIO:  Well I‘m not going to admit that democrats across the board want illegal immigration.  I will tell you this, I will tell you this. The corporate fat cats who put money into the republican coffers they want it because all they‘ve done in the past is outsource.  

CARLSON:  Stop being partisan and start being smart.  

PAPANTONIO:  Wait a second, no it is—listen it is a partisan issue Tucker.  The same people who are outsourcing—the same people who are outsourcing jobs are the same people who now what they can‘t outsource they want to import -- 

CARLSON:  I hate to think you‘re a thrown sniffer for the Democratic Party Mike, but that‘s what you‘re convincing me of, so let‘s try a new topic and let‘s see if you can give me a nonpartisan view of this one.  I‘ll be interested to see what you have to say about it.  A New York man has been arrested for broadcasting Hezbollah‘s television station Al Manar.  The United States Treasury Department has designated the station a terrorist entity.  The man‘s company, HDTV Limited, provided New York area customers with Hezbollah TV.  Dennis, I have to say, you know I think Hezbollah is an evil organization and to the extent this man did business with Hezbollah, it‘s wrong and it‘s illegal.  On the other hand, Americans have a right to see Hezbollah TV if they want.  And there‘s something very scary I think about the government arresting somebody for putting a news network, even a biased sick anti-Semitic one on the air? 

PRAGER:  You‘re right but this is a very ambiguous situation here.  First there is the legality issue.  If what he did is legal, then he should not be prosecuted.  I think that that‘s clear.  On the other hand there‘s the larger moral context if during World War II somebody had supplied, we didn‘t have TV then essentially, but if somebody had supplied let‘s say Nazi radio broadcasts, I think that you and I would have had a different view.  I think that today we are so accepting of this pernicious anti-Semitic, anti-American exterminationist annialationist rhetoric from the Muslim world and from places like Hezbollah and that we have so many people supporting we are Hezbollah that we have lowered our anxiety over these issues and that troubles me as well.  Hezbollah is a Nazi type organization.  

CARLSON:  I totally, completely agree.  On the other hand, I mean I certainly am no more tolerant of Hezbollah and groups like it than I was five years ago.  But I also think I have a right to watch their TV station if I want to.    

PRAGER:  That‘s why I said the question was legality.  Listen, there‘s nothing different that they‘ll hear there than they will on the New York Times editorial page for all intents and purposes.  

PAPANTONIO:  Yeah, that‘s true and that‘s a good thing.  We‘re going to see more and more of this as we get up next in the November election.  You say don‘t talk partisan, there is no way to talk about what‘s happening with civil liberties other than to talk about partisan issue.  They have one card Tucker, the Republican Party has one card.  It‘s called the terror card.  They‘ve lost on the Iraq issue, on same sex marriage, on patriotism, on immigration, on the economy, on energy policy, on foreign affairs.  They have one card to play and it‘s the terror card.  So what you‘re going to see—

CARLSON:  No, no, you‘re right.

PAPANTONIO:  Well every time you see one of these events take place it‘s going to be just like Brandon Mayfield who you may recall was put in a mental institution, he was a lawyer out in Oregon, put in a mental institution where he was accused of being a terrorist because the FBI AND CIA found his child‘s Spanish homework when they broke into his house.  

CARLSON:  See Mike, that‘s where you fall down.  I think your critique is half right, in saying that the one thing the republicans have is the general belief that they‘re tougher on terrorism than democrats.  On the other hand, there really are terrorists out there and the implications you often hear from democrats, including yourself a second ago, that a lot of this is sort of just made up, you know it‘s a conspiracy by Karl Rove to win votes for republicans.  That‘s political death pal.  Because you know most people understand that there is an Al Qaeda.  The Bush administration may have bad policies but Al Qaeda does exist.  

PRAGER:  By the way, I find it interesting that --  

CARLSON:  I‘m sorry -- 

PAPANTONIO:  We don‘t change the American system of democracy, I‘m sorry. 

CARLSON:  I agree, Dennis.

PRAGER:  I find it interesting that among the issues that Mike said that the republicans have no case on is same sex marriage.  The democrats were saying that in fact the republicans were using that to get a large part of the American electorate out to vote for them and yesterday WNYC in New York, National Public Radio affiliate in New York WNYC, announced that 48 percent, just 48 percent of the New York State democratic primary voters, that‘s the most activist liberals in New York state, only 48 percent there supported same sex marriage.  So in fact, just to give one of the examples, that‘s huge in America.  

PAPANTONIO:  Dennis I use that as an example because it‘s a long list.  They‘re losing their religious right base, they‘re losing soccer moms, they believe that Bush is dishonest, they have to do something. 

CARLSON:  Mike, but if democrats are going to win and I think they very well may win in the midterm and in 2008, they have to start being more responsible than they have been and certainly than you have been in the last 12 minutes. 

PAPANTONIO:  I hope they will be.

CARLSON:  Thanks, thanks for joining us, both of you. 

PAPANTONIO:  Thank you Tucker.

CARLSON:  Appreciate it.  Coming up, we are continuing to follow John Mark Karr‘s trip back to Boulder, Colorado.  He is in the air right now in a turboprop.  What is the prosecutor‘s case against him?  We hope to learn much more, we‘ll be right back.


CARLSON:  Some republican lawmakers claim the CIA is intentionally underestimating the threat from Iran.  Is the Islamic bomb closer than we think it is or are some in this country using propaganda to push us toward war with Iran?  Joining me now to talk about that, Congressman Mike Rogers of Michigan, he‘s a member of the House Intelligence Committee.  Congressman, thanks a lot for joining us.

REP. MIKE ROGERS, ®, MICHIGAN:  Thanks a lot for having me Tucker, appreciate it.

CARLSON: Why would members of the Intelligence Committee, the CIA, NSA, whomever, but government employees from the United States, why would they want to minimize the threat from Iran?

ROGERS:  Well, I think that there is after the Iraq intelligence failure I think is too strong a word, they just weren‘t as right as they should have been.  There were weapons programs, just not stock piles.  I think after that they‘ve been publicly beaten dragged through the streets for about three or four years, and so I think they‘re very cautious and there is a little bit of risk aversion that has crept in that I think it‘s very important that we stand up and say that‘s really not what we want our intelligence agencies to do.  No we want you to give the best assessment that you believe is honest, true, and correct based on the information that you have.  

CARLSON:  I mean I understand half of what you‘re saying, I understand why they‘d be risk aversed, they‘d be gun shy, a little twitchy at this point.  Most people I think by the way believe it was a failure of intelligence leading up to the war in Iraq, but whatever, I understand that part.  But if they‘re risk aversed, wouldn‘t they be more likely to inflate the risk from Iran, because after all if it turns out that Iran does have a nuclear weapon as of next month or does attack Israel, they‘re going to want to be the group that predicted it, aren‘t they?  

ROGERS:  No I don‘t think so.  I think we misunderestimate which is an old word I just brought out again for your show again today Tucker.  I think they get into this cycle of saying, and believe me, they sign up, these are hard working folks, work long hours, they work in some of the  toughest neighborhoods in the world to try to get this thing right.  And they don‘t want to be the ones that give a wrong piece of information that makes policymakers make a decision that takes the United States in the direction of sanctions or anything else that is wrong.  They would rather say, let‘s be a little more cautious so that we don‘t take an active measure if we‘re not correct. And so these are consummate professionals, they really are, and they work -- 

CARLSON:  That sounds like an attitude I‘m comfortable with.  I don‘t want, when you‘re talking about matters of war and peace and committing American troops and spending billions of our tax money, I mean I want my decisions to be made by cautious people who don‘t make a preemptive move if they don‘t have to.  

ROGERS: Well exactly right. But what this report did say, it just said we‘re a little worried about risk aversion, but what we know about Iran is pretty clear and there is a good consensus and then there are gaps that we thought that they needed to apply some personnel and resource changes and if we can help them do that we wanted to do that.  But it wasn‘t a wholesale condemnation of where the intelligence community was other than to say listen we know where you‘re at, it‘s a very hard target, we‘ve all come to the agreement that Iran is absolutely up to no good when it comes to nuclear biological and chemical weapons.  We know that they‘re exporting terrorism, we know that even Russia and China signed off on the fact that this uranium enrichment is not a good idea.  That‘s why they voted in the Security Council to say on the 31st, suspend to do it.  But are there things that you can do and we think by looking at the classified portion of the intelligence, there are a few areas we‘d like to have them provide more information.  And to their credit Tucker, they‘re working tirelessly to fill those gaps because that‘s where policy makers are sending them.  So I look at this as a very balanced support. 

CARLSON:  They‘re not going to fool congress.  Well they can‘t ignore you you‘re the congress of the United States.  But there is also a suspicion that many people have that they are, people with agendas here, people who would like to see the United States confront Iran maybe militarily and that they‘re trying to push the country in that direction and they‘re doing so with propaganda.  I don‘t know if that‘s accurate or not.  But that is definitely a perception out there and you can see why people are worried about it after Iraq, can‘t you? 

ROGERS:  Well I hope people go and read this report, you can get it on my website, it‘s up there, it‘s about 30 pages long, it‘s worth reading.  Because I think it takes all of this, the politics out of what is a very dangerous situation out of it.  And it needs to be out of it.  This report is pretty balanced.  It says listen, here‘s the things that we know.  Here‘s some things that we don‘t know and what obviously in the intelligence world bothers everybody is what we don‘t know that we don‘t know.  And so what this report does is clearly say, here‘s the things that we agree on and we can all pretty much assume safely that Iran is a strategic threat to the United States.  Is it perfect, no, absolutely not.  Does the agencies involved need to be aggressive to fill the gaps, this is not a wholesale failure, they‘re not collecting, there‘s just some gaps that we‘d like to have.  So I thought the report was very balanced, it was bipartisan signed by both myself and a ranking member.  I think it gives a good and honest and sobering assessment about where Iran is and what the threat is to not only the Mideast, but the United States. 

CARLSON:  Going back to our security situation, our intelligence agencies, the president attempted I think to address some of the gaps in intelligence, some of the problems with analysis that preceded 9/11 and for that matter the Iraq war by creating the office of national intelligence, the director John Negraponte is supposed to oversee and correlate all this intelligence.  Did that not work?

ROGERS:  Oh no, well, that‘s a trick question isn‘t it Tucker?

CARLSON:  It is a trick question because I don‘t think it did work, but you would know, so you tell me.  Did it work, did he miss it somehow?  

ROGERS:  No I don‘t think they did miss it.  I think what happens is, you have to remember, intelligence is not 100 percent rock solid science. 

It‘s not that piece of evidence in the courtroom where everyone gasps and

says, oh, Mike Rogers, you know Colonel Mustard did it in the kitchen with

a candle stick.  That is not what intelligence is.  This is really about

them trying to get as much information as they can.  And by the way, the

report goes into this, they‘re very good at deception and are actively

deceiving -

CARLSON:  Of course.

ROGERS:  So you‘re trying to find something that somebody else is trying to hide.   You‘re never going to get 100 percent.  But can you get good visual acuity so that you can get it to our analysts and then analysts can look at that and come to the conclusion that any reasonable logical trained person would, that this is the conclusion that we come to.  I think that they‘ve been able to do that on some serious issues but we‘d like more information on the gaps and it really clearly also says that Iran really shouldn‘t be trusted.  They played this game -- 

CARLSON:  There is news—

ROGERS:  I‘ll agree, that will shock you on page three.

CARLSON:  Ok congressman, Congressman Mike Rogers of Michigan.  Thanks a lot congressman.

ROGERS:  Thank you, appreciate you having me.

CARLSON:  We will be right back.


CARLSON:  We ran out of time a little faster than expected, luckily we‘ll be back in just an hour at 6:00 p.m. eastern with “Beat the Press” and a whole lot more, so tune in then.  Now Chris and “HARDBALL”, see you in a minute.  



Copy: Content and programming copyright 2006 NBC.  ALL RIGHTS  RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2006 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.




Watch Tucker each weeknight at 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. ET


Discussion comments