updated 9/19/2006 11:20:32 AM ET 2006-09-19T15:20:32

Guests: Pat Buchanan


Right now on SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY: Muslim terrorists vow revenge on Christians, even after the pope apologizes for calling Islam evil and inhumane.  Will the angry protests around the world lead to an all-out holy war, as some Muslim clerics are requesting?  Plus, Republicans fire back after Rosie O‘Donnell compares Christians to radical Muslims.  Will outrage over Rosie‘s comments hurt Democrats in the mid-term elections, as the GOP is trying to make sure they do?  And later: Did CBS muzzle Bill Maher?  The controversial talk show host tells us why Katie Couric‘s “free speech” segments are anything but.

Welcome to SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY.  No passport required, only common sense allowed.

Outrage over the pope‘s remarks regarding Islam continue to spread across the Middle East and the world today, with one prominent London cleric calling for the assassination of Pope Benedict, head of the Catholic church.  Now, the cleric told followers, quote, “Whoever insults the message of Mohammed is subject to capital punishment,” and went on to say that his followers would not assassinate the pontiff.  No, Muslims in Italy would do that.  Now, those remarks are coming during a protest outside of Westminster Cathedral today.

In Iran, the leader of that Islamic terrorist state called the pope‘s comments part of a U.S.-Israeli conspiracy to take over the world.  For the record, the German pontiff lives in the Vatican, nestled not in the USA or Israel but in Italy, where Benedict‘s assassins wait.

And possibly—well, probably related news—a nun was shot to death this morning in Somalia by Islamic gunman.  Palestinian churches also came under attack by Muslim extremists last night.  The wave of violence that‘s led some Muslims to call for a holy war started when Pope Benedict quoted a speech from a 14th century emperor that criticized what he called innovations introduced by Mohammed.

Now, the pope‘s since apologized, but his words have done little to quell violence that seems at best extreme and disproportionate.

Al Qaeda in Iraq, obviously, forgetting Rosie O‘Donnell‘s statement that Christians pose a greater threat to America than Islamic terrorists, issued a statement today saying that because of the pope‘s statement, it was now launching an all-out war against Christianity and the West and would continue until the time Muslims take over the world.

NBC‘s Keith Miller has more on this frightening story.


KEITH MILLER, NBC CORRESPONDENT (voice-over):  Muslim rage again today, an image of Pope Benedict burned along with the flags of the Vatican and America in southern Iraq.  Protesters in Indonesia demanded a stronger apology from the pope, calling him Satan.  Iran‘s supreme leader called the pope‘s remarks the latest chain of the crusade against Islam started by Bush.  And a group linked to Iraq‘s branch of al Qaeda posted this threat on a radical Web site: “We shall break the cross and spill the wine.  God will help to conquer Rome.  God enable us to slit their throats.”

All of this even after the pope told his Sunday audience he was deeply sorry his remarks offended Muslims, the pope saying the medieval text he quoted linking Islam to violence did not reflect his own opinions.  It was the third time that the Vatican expressed regret.  But the Muslim world wants more.

ABDEL BARI ATWAN, EDITOR, “AL QUDS AL ARABI”:  Now the Muslims believe that they were actually targeted.  They are humiliated by the West.

MILLER:  And angry enough to torch six churches in the West Bank and Gaza.  But some say Benedict has done enough.

FREDDY GRAY, DEPUTY EDITOR, “CATHOLIC HERALD”:  It‘s tantamount to madness to say that he should still be sort of held to account when he has apologized for offending Islam.

MILLER:  But there is still enough alarm for Italian police to raise the terrorist threat level.

(on camera):  And the Vatican‘s secretary of state has ordered church officials to get in touch with Muslim governments to explain the pope‘s position.

(voice-over):  Tonight the Vatican says Benedict‘s visit to Muslim Turkey next month is still on.  But with the pope now a target of radical Islam, any decision to travel will be based on security.

Keith Miller, NBC News, London.


SCARBOROUGH:  Thank you, Keith.

Here now, Arianna Huffington, founder of the Huffingtonpost.com and the author of “On Becoming Fearless.”  Also with us, Pat Buchanan, MSNBC political analyst and the author of “State of Emergency.”

Arianna, the pope links Islam to violence.  I mean, haven‘t these Islamic radicals just proven his point?

ARIANNA HUFFINGTON, HUFFINGTONPOST.COM:  Well, first of all, he didn‘t just link it to violence but to evil.  And he then said that these words did not reflect his views, but he did not fully apologize for using them.  He apologized if he offended Muslims, which at best shows a stunning insensitivity, especially at a time of such volatility in the world, when...

SCARBOROUGH:  But the quote was made, Arianna, to suggest that violence is connected to the Islamic faith, and it has been since at least the 14th century.  Look at these pictures!  Look at the assassination of the nun.  Again, aren‘t they just proving this pope correct?  And now doesn‘t that make you scratch your head and say, Why would he apologize for stating the obvious?

HUFFINGTON:  But you know, Joe, would you like to read exactly what the statement was, that nothing good has come from Mohammed?  He directly took on the Prophet.  And here is the situation that I find absolutely stunning.  We know that the one thing that the West has to do is to try and separate the extremists, the people that you cannot reason with in Islam, from those who are the moderates.  And what is happening both with the pope‘s absolutely stunning statement and his non-apology apology, and of course, with what this president has done with invading and occupying Iraq, is to simply drive hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions more, into the radical Islam corner, where there is absolutely no hope of any reconciliation.  And we...

SCARBOROUGH:  Pat Buchanan...


HUFFINGTON:  ... to fight all of them.

SCARBOROUGH:  There‘s no doubt, Pat Buchanan, that what this world needs is a pope, a religious leader that will bring reconciliation between all the religions.  Obviously, you‘d even agree that Pope Benedict did not do that by stating what may be obvious to many in the West but also something that‘s very inflammatory in the Middle East.

PAT BUCHANAN, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST:  Well, the pope‘s also got an obligation, Joe, to speak the truth.  And what the pope did say in that quotation from the 14th century emperor—that emperor had asked, What did Mohammed bring that was not evil and inhuman?  And the pope said, I don‘t agree with that, and I‘m sorry for the effect the words—of using this quotation had.  But he was raising the issue of Islam as an earlier Sura said, consistent—or inconsistent with coercion.  In other words, is it a peaceful religion or dopes it go with the later Sura, where Mohammed said, We spread the faith by religious—by force?

And if you take a look at what the pope said, it seems to me that these characters in the Middle East who immediately responded and said, We‘ve been slandered, cut his head off, we need to assassinate the pope and we need to go after the West and the Christians, are affirming exactly what the holy father said...



SCARBOROUGH:  Pat, the part that Keith Miller said—quoted in the piece said that one Web site had asked for God to enable us to slit their throats.  Now, despite the fact, again, that we know that there are Muslim extremists across the world, I will ask again, do you not think that this pope should have done what the last pope did, bite his tongue, try to build a bridge and try to say that, you know, maybe we can reach out to moderate Muslim regimes?

BUCHANAN:  But look, he said what he said.  Joe, let me tell you something.  How do you think Islam came out of Arabia, captured the holy land, all of north Africa, occupied all of Spain and Portugal and drove all the way...

SCARBOROUGH:  Yes, I don‘t want to...


BUCHANAN:  ... in a hundred years, except by the sword, Joe!  This is a fighting faith!


HUFFINGTON:  Joe, can I ask Pat something?

BUCHANAN:  Its history is a fighting faith!

SCARBOROUGH:  I do not want to start a battle about the crusades right now~!

BUCHANAN:  It‘s not the crusades!  How do you think Islam conquers? 

It is a fighting faith!

SCARBOROUGH:  I understand that, but I also understand that Muslims would say that Christians launched the crusades.  There‘s violence...

BUCHANAN:  To take back what we had lost!

SCARBOROUGH:  There‘s violence on both sides.

HUFFINGTON:  But you know, this is really a ludicrous conversation, frankly.

BUCHANAN:  It is not!


HUFFINGTON:  No, it is—to be refighting the crusades, when so much is at stake at the moment, and to be saying that what we did as Christians in the crusades was justified because it was in reaction to what had happened is simply to perpetuate the cycle of action and reaction, where there is absolutely no reconciliation possible.

BUCHANAN:  I know that...

HUFFINGTON:  And basically, the way you are talking makes me believe that you‘re actually endorsing the statement made by the 14th century emperor...


SCARBOROUGH:  Pat, hold on a second.  Let me ask, Pat, are you endorsing the pope‘s statement?

BUCHANAN:  I am not endorsing what the 14th century emperor said because I do believe Islam has created great beauty and a great civilization, quite frankly.  But I am saying this.  Appeasement and constant apologies are not the way to go!  There‘s no reason why we have to apologize for the crusades, any more than they have to apologize for...


SCARBOROUGH:  Hold on a second!  Arianna, I‘m looking at both of you right now talking, and I‘m looking, by the way, just for those who wouldn‘t believe it in the audience, with two people who actually agreed that George Bush shouldn‘t have gone into Iraq.  So this is not some battle over...


SCARBOROUGH:  ... over what‘s going on now.  But let‘s talk about, Arianna—about the—let‘s not talk about the crusades in the 14th century.  Let‘s talk about now.  I mean, is it not a fact that extremism is hatched from the Muslim faith more than the Christian faith, and that‘s the point the pope was trying to make?

HUFFINGTON:  Here is what matters.  If you are a religion leader or a political leader, you have a responsibility be very careful for everything you say.  You have a huge platform if you are the pope.  And for you to make a statement which, clearly, even Pat says he‘s not endorsing, and the pope kind of is implying that he is not endorsing, is absolutely irresponsible.  It would be like somebody quoting Hitler‘s “Mein Kampf” that the Jews are vermin, but saying, I‘m not endorsing it, I‘m merely quoting it.  He‘s not a literature professor, he‘s the pope, for heavens sakes.  So this is not...

BUCHANAN:  The point is...


SCARBOROUGH:  And one more—one more point, too, Pat.  The pope doesn‘t just scribble down speeches before he goes to the talk to a Rotary Club.  All of these are vetted.  All of them are...


SCARBOROUGH:  Every word is carefully sifted through.  They wanted to send this message out for some reason, didn‘t they.

BUCHANAN:  Well, look, there‘s no doubt that the pope‘s disquisition on violence and the Islamic faith was directed there.  But it is, Joe—it is a valid question we have to raise.  Why all over the world today is Islam, whether Sudan, Nigeria, Chechnya, Indonesia, Thailand, India, Kashmir—why is it everywhere at war?  And the pope is asking a question that must be asked.  Is there something endemic in the Islamic faith that it is expanding by force and violence?  We got to address that because that‘s the great issue of our time!

SCARBOROUGH:  All right, we‘re going to have to leave it there.  And I hate to sound like a politician, but I actually tonight agree with both of you.  I think that this issue has to be addressed, but as Arianna said, you know, when you‘re a pope, when you‘re a world leader on the international level, you just have to be very careful with every single word you utter.  Arianna Huffington, Pat Buchanan, thanks so much for being with us.  We greatly appreciate it.

And I just want to say also personally, obviously, there are hundreds of millions of peaceful Muslims across the world, and you cannot generalize.  But you can say that extremism and the type of extremism that causes the greatest threat to America right now in 2006 is Muslim extremism, and we can‘t be afraid to say that because it‘s politically incorrect.

Now, coming up, Republicans have a new target in the mid-term election, Rosie O‘Donnell.  Will her attack on Christians hurt Democrats the way the GOP is trying to make it?  Plus, is Katie Couric stifling America‘s freedom of speech?  Talk show host Bill Maher‘s here to tell us about his run-ins with CBS News.  And later: Janet Jackson can‘t seem to keep her clothes on.  We‘ll tell you why the breast seen around the world‘s unfortunately coming back to a TV set near you.


SCARBOROUGH:  Comments that Rosie O‘Donnell made on “The View” Tuesday are still sparking controversy.  Take a listen.


ROSIE O‘DONNELL, CO-HOST, “THE VIEW”:  We were attacked not by a nation, and as a result of the attack and the killing of nearly 3,000 innocent people, we invaded two countries and killed innocent people in their countries.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  But do you understand that the belief funding those attacks, OK, that is widespread.  And if you take radical Islam and you want to talk about what‘s going on there...


O‘DONNELL:  Just one second.  Radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam in a country like America...


O‘DONNELL:  ... where we have a separation of church and state.  We‘re a democracy.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  We‘re not bombing ourselves here in the country. 

We were attacked.

O‘DONNELL:  No, but we are bombing innocent people in other countries, true or false?


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  Christians are not threatening to kill us~!

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  No, we‘re talking about...


O‘DONNELL:  Well, Iran never threatened to kill us, and Iraq—Iran is a danger.  Iraq and Afghanistan never threatened to kill us, ever.


SCARBOROUGH:  That just remains—oh! -- one of the stupidest comments I ever heard.  Now posted on the Republican National Committee‘s official Web site‘s an entire page listing comments Rosie O‘Donnell‘s made about religion, about the war on Iraq, and then showing all the Democratic candidates to which she‘s given money.  So is Rosie doing Republicans a favor by energizing its base?

Here‘s Rachel Sklar—she‘s media editor for the ffingtonpost.com—and Laura Schwartz (ph), a Democratic strategist.  Rachel, I start with you.  Do you think that Democratic candidates should call on Rosie O‘Donnell to apologize for suggesting that Christians are as dangerous as Muslim extremists?

RACHEL SKLAR, HUFFINGTONPOST.COM:  First of all, I have to correct you.  She didn‘t say that Christians were as dangerous as Muslim extremists.  She said radical Christianity was a danger.  And I have to say that when I see this written up over and over again, that is a detail that is left out.  And that is a key detail because we‘re talking about extremism.  And that narrows the field very considerably.

SCARBOROUGH:  OK.  So let‘s narrow the field.  Do you think that what Rosie calls radical Christians, which I would suggest she believes are Christians who don‘t support same-sex marriage, cause as much of a threat to the world as Muslim extremists, Muslim extremists who we‘ve been watching on TV all day?

SKLAR:  Well, I think you may be taking liberties there with your belief because Rosie didn‘t actually say what she considered radical Christians to be.  And certainly, there‘s a lot that the most extreme right would be opposed to, including and not limited to abortion, contraception and same-sex marriage.  So I‘m not going to put words in Rosie‘s mouth or anybody‘s, for that matter, but what I do think is very interesting is the fact that GOP is attacking Rosie O‘Donnell.  I mean, that kind of seems to me to be a bit of a diversionary tactic and maybe they‘re feeling a little nervous.  It‘s the only thing they have...

SCARBOROUGH:  Well, there is no doubt they are feeling very nervous right now.  Laura, do you think—because I‘ll tell you what I do.  Were I a Democratic candidate and Rosie O‘Donnell had given me money and then Rosie O‘Donnell compared Christians or extreme Christians to extreme Muslims, I‘d either give her money back or I‘d demand that she apologize to get that diversionary tactic out of the way.

What would you recommend to your congressman or senator who had a check from Rosie O‘Donnell?

LAURA SCHWARTZ, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST:  Well, you know, there‘s a difference between the checks that Rosie O‘Donnell wrote, for example, and those checks that came from Jack Abramoff and the coffer that he built up for the Republican Party, which they had to give back earlier this year.  You know, I‘m a huge fan of Rosie O‘Donnell.  She‘s championed children‘s advocacy, foster parenting rights, gay and lesbian human rights and social action issues.  But if any celebrity or ballplayer talks about sex and drugs, it impacts kids.  And if any celebrity pronounced Democrat, as Rosie O‘Donnell is, it impacts voters when she talks politics.

So unfortunately, you‘re right, Joe.  She is energizing the Republican base.  You know, the Republicans this year are spending an unprecedented amount of money for their get-out-the-vote effort this mid-term election than they ever have before.  This is money that they...


SCARBOROUGH:  So Laura, are you --  are you surprised, Laura, that they actually put her comments up on the GOP‘s main Web site?

SCHWARTZ:  Not at all.  This is great for them.  It‘s energizing their base, which is their biggest problem this mid-term election season, and—but you know what?  This is a free country.  These are the freedoms that we‘re supposedly fighting for overseas, and it is her view, and literally a “View” on ABC.  But I just think that now, as we enter the context of these extremely important mid-term elections for the Democrats, in order to advance her agenda, rather than to set it back, she may want to think more strategically and politically the next 50-so days...


SCARBOROUGH:  But Republicans—George Bush, certainly, I think, got a lot of play out of comments Whoopi Goldberg made in the 2004 election.  I just wonder why some people don‘t tell these celebrities that when they go off and pop off and say things that are going to offend millions of middle Americans, they‘re not helping their cause and they‘re not helping the Democratic Party.

SCHWARTZ:  And I was there when Whoopi Goldberg made those comments at the Democratic National Committee fund-raiser last year at Radio City Music Hall—or in 2004.  And you know what?  No matter what they prepare or what they go through with the whole story-telling of the program that they‘re taking part in on behalf of the Democrats and the party, it is their right to go ahead and say their feelings.  And Whoopi was on a roll that night and went with it.  The people in the audience didn‘t think it was going to be as big of a deal, but of course, those things get out.  And Rosie‘s...


SCHWARTZ:  ... with an incredible forum and community to impact.

SCARBOROUGH:  And Rachel, that—that—that community that Rosie speaks to every morning on “The View” is a massive, massive viewing audience, isn‘t it?  I mean, she‘s—she obviously has a lot of impact and has a heck of a platform every morning, doesn‘t she.

SKLAR:  She does, but she‘s not the only person on “The View.”  I mean, there are intelligence women there.  They often have guests.  I mean, this is—the whole point of “The View” is to have lively, informed debate.  And that‘s—you know, it‘s for everybody else to jump in and temper any statements she might make with other facts that may or may not apply and to get the discussion rolling.  And I think it‘s a misnomer to call on Rosie O‘Donnell as the only voice of “The View.”  She‘s simply not the only person on there.

SCARBOROUGH:  Well, you‘re exactly right.  And my main criticism—I mean, Rosie O‘Donnell has been known to inflame before.  And I always said I thought it was the journalist on that panel‘s responsibility to call her down, but she didn‘t.  Hey, Rachel Sklar, thank you, as always.  Laura Schwartz...

SCHWARTZ:  Thanks, Joe.

SCARBOROUGH:  ... we always appreciate you being here.  Appreciate it.

And coming up: It‘s been rumored for ages, now Oprah is finally coming clean about a possible political career.  The shocking truth ahead.  Plus (INAUDIBLE) Bill Maher, Katie Couric, the mid-term elections, and why he‘s calling on all Americans to mock George Bush.  It‘s free speech Scarborough style.


SCARBOROUGH:  It‘s time for tonight‘s “Must See S.C.,” some video you just got to see.  First up, NBC‘s new fall line-up premiers this week, and much has been made about the fact that the new show “Friday Night Lights” +actually airs Tuesdays!  So to avoid any further confusion, Conan O‘Brien had NBC promos put together a helpful explanation of the new fall schedule.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  This fall, NBC‘s got all the shows you want on the nights you expect them to be there.  First, we‘ve got “Friday Night Lights” every Tuesday.  And then on Wednesday, it‘s “Saturday Night Live.”  And if you missed last Monday‘s “Tuesdays With Morrie,” you can catch it next Thursday right after the classic “His Girl Friday.”  And don‘t miss Tuesday Weld and the girl who played Wednesday in “The Addams Family” in their new sitcom, “Sunday Night Football,” every Saturday after the “Monday Evening News.”  NBC, it just makes sense.


SCARBOROUGH:  I love it.  Coming up: Bill Maher tells us why his free speech segment was allegedly banned from Katie Couric‘s newscast.  And later, the first ever scientific study on the lives and personalities of celebrities.  Dr. Drew Pinsky joins us with quite a bit of proof that Hollywood stars just aren‘t like you and me.



SCARBOROUGH:  All right.  So, kids, if you‘re listening at home, don‘t eat spinach. 

So, coming up, is Oprah running for president?  Why the talk show queen is sicking her lawyers on her self-appointed campaign manger.  And later, are Hollywood celebrities really as shallow and narcissistic as they appear to be?  Heck, yes, and we‘ve got the first ever scientific proof to back it up.

Welcome to SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY.  Those stories in just minutes.

But first, when is free speech not really free speech?  Well, according to HBO‘s Bill Maher, it‘s when CBS News gets involved.  Well, now one of the big changes at the Tiffany network‘s newscast recently is a segment they call “FreeSpeech,” and it‘s supposed to give the nation‘s opinion leaders carte blanche to sound off about anything they want.  Well, almost anything, according to Maher.

Tonight, Maher says he was invited on the program, but when the topic he wanted to discuss was religion, they told him, “Thanks, but no thanks.”  Maher talked about it on his show Friday night. 


BILL MAHER, HOST, “REAL TIME”:  I am not trying to rag on them, but, I mean, if CBS News doesn‘t understand what free speech is, what am I supposed to expect of FOX News? 

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  What happened to you?

MAHER:  What happened?  Have you seen the broadcast?


MAHER:  There is nothing—Katie said at the beginning...

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  What happened to you?  Did they not let you say what you wanted? 

MAHER:  Well, I asked if I could talk about religion, and that was a deal-breaker right from the beginning. 

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  That‘s ridiculous, yes.

MAHER:  That‘s my point.  They said, “We‘ll send over a list of acceptable topics”...


... “for our segment on free speech.”


SCARBOROUGH:  But CBS News denies they ever told Maher what he could or couldn‘t talk about.  They say, quote, “Bill Maher was never told he couldn‘t discuss religion in “FreeSpeech.”  In fact, FreeSpeech has already addressed religion, and we expect others will do so in the future.

And later tonight, Bill Maher released a statement saying, quote, “If I or my representatives got it wrong about the ‘FreeSpeech‘ segment of the ‘CBS Evening News,‘ I‘m sorry.  Our bad.  I‘m ready, willing and able to speak about the topic I originally suggested.”

Well, we‘ve got no problem with free speech here in SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY, and we‘ll debate if CBS is in the wrong in just a minute.  But first, we brought Bill Maher here, and he let loose on everything from free speech to Bill Clinton‘s Oval Office habits, and this controversial new rule about George W. Bush.


MAHER:  Let me suggest that, in a world turned hostile to America, the smartest message we can send to those beyond our shores is:  We‘re not with stupid. 


Therefore, I maintain that ridiculing this president is now the most patriotic thing you can possibly do. 





SCARBOROUGH:  Why does ridiculing presidents—which is all about free speech—why does that offend Americans so much?  It certainly offended Democrats.  I got so much hate mail when I was in Congress, when I was going after Bill Clinton.  I‘m sure you get hate mail all the time going after George W. Bush.  Why is it that people are afraid of free speech? 

MAHER:  Ask the “CBS Evening News,” because they‘re doing a segment on free speech every night, and I‘ve yet to hear anything that resembles something that anyone anywhere would disagree with.  And, of course, that‘s not really the best way to prove that you‘re giving someone a forum for free speech. 

But I think, first of all, there‘s a big difference between Bill Clinton—going after Bill Clinton and going after George Bush.  When people went after Bill Clinton, I think most Americans thought it was for political reasons.  They just never accepted him; they wanted to destroy him; and he was really not a bad president. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Well, I mean, those are all opinions.  I sat in Congress on the Government Reform and Oversight Committee.  And, you know, we saw some things that were deeply disturbing to me that had nothing to do with blue dresses or oral sex. 

MAHER:  I don‘t think you can compare his screw-ups to Bush screw-ups, and I really think that, if he had been president during Katrina, if he had been president after 9/11, this country would not be in the shape it is in.

SCARBOROUGH:  And yet Bill Clinton said before the war that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.  Al Gore said before the war Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, as did John Kerry, as did John Edwards, as did everybody.

MAHER:  They said they thought he did.  They didn‘t say definitively.  They said, like a lot of people, they were suspicious.  That doesn‘t mean they would have done what George Bush did, which is to invade that country.  That probably would have done what a lot of people were suggesting, which is leave the inspectors there to do their job, have him contained. 

Saddam Hussein was basically the mayor of Baghdad before there.  There was a no-fly zone in the north, a no-fly zone in the south.  He was contained.  And you know what?  I saw Senator Rockefeller say a couple of days ago what I‘ve been saying for years, and people thought it was a comedy bit—and I have to admit, partly it was a comedy bit—that we would be better off with Saddam Hussein in power.

And you know what?  It‘s not becoming such a comedy bit any more.  I‘m not suggesting that they‘re going to put him back in power.  But I think it‘s pretty funny that we‘ve gotten around to screwing up this war so badly that Saddam Hussein does not look like that bad an option. 

SCARBOROUGH:  What have we done to screw up this war so badly, especially the occupation? 

MAHER:  Probably not enough troops.

SCARBOROUGH:  Yes, exactly.

MAHER:  Probably not planning.  Just having this idea in their neocon heads that, when we arrive, we would be greeted as liberators, they would throw flowers at us.  And so we didn‘t really need a plan.  Why didn‘t we have the plan?  That‘s the question everybody asks.

It‘s because they thought they wouldn‘t need one, because, as I‘ve said before, Republicans are sentimentalists.  And they thought all we had to do was show up and sprinkle freedom dust on these people.  George Bush prayed a lot about the war in Iraq, but he never learned enough about Iraq. 

I saw something on your sister network the other night.  Lisa Myers,

who I admire a lot, had a great report on the fact that these rocket-

propelled grenades that have killed so many of our troops, we have a system

they know about a system that could stop them.  The Israelis have it. 

But Raytheon has the contract for it in this country, and they don‘t want to give up that contract, which is worth a lot of money. 

SCARBOROUGH:  You actually have the United States Army more concerned about Raytheon making money than saving our American lives.  I mean, that is despicable.

MAHER:  But, Joe, Joe, where is your boy, George Bush, on this?  Isn‘t he the top dog in Washington?

SCARBOROUGH:  Is George Bush my boy? 

MAHER:  Well, you‘re always defending him to me.


SCARBOROUGH:  No, no, no, you‘ve known me long enough to know that I don‘t have boys.  I attack Newt Gingrich; I attack Bill Clinton; I‘ve attacked George Bush.  I wrote a piece in “The Washington Monthly” this past month saying that the Republicans should be out of office.  So don‘t talk about my boys.  I play devil‘s advocate with you. 

MAHER:  OK, sorry, sorry. 

SCARBOROUGH:  That‘s all right.

MAHER:  But what do you think about the fact that George Bush goes on and on, making speeches in front of military people around this country, talking about how he is supporting the troops?  Is that supporting the troops?  That‘s supporting Raytheon. 

And, by the way, when people like me ask questions about, does it still make sense to have these troops under fire?  That is supporting the troops.  Asking for a plan is supporting the troops.  Sitting around and parsing the meaning of civil war, that‘s not supporting the troops; that‘s supporting the president, and he‘s not a troop.  He just plays one on TV.


SCARBOROUGH:  All right.  Thank you so much, Bill Maher.

Let‘s bring in Steve Adubato.  Steve, do you side with Bill Maher or CBS on this conflict? 

STEVE ADUBATO, MEDIA ANALYST:  Well, respectfully, Joe, I‘m not sure you have to pick sides so clearly.  And it‘s great that Bill Maher had a chance to have a lot of very free speech tonight. 

Let me just say this—and, listen, I‘m a fan of Bill Maher‘s.  I think he does a great job on HBO.  He‘s very entertaining.  He‘s a satirist; he‘s a comedian; he‘s a commentator.  So it‘s hard to tell whether he‘s doing shtick or he‘s playing it straight.

But let me say this about CBS, and it‘s important, Joe, because the first night when we analyzed Katie Couric, and when she did the news, here‘s what I said about the “FreeSpeech” segment, and I‘ll state it again, Joe:  It‘s problematic, and here‘s why.  It‘s not really a free speech segment.  It‘s a segment that says, “Here are the parameters, Joe Scarborough, for free speech.” 

You‘re not going to have somebody who came back, a soldier who got his arm or his leg blown off in Iraq, come back and says, “I hold George Bush responsible for losing my arm and leg.”  Why?  Because it‘s not seen as in good taste.  You‘re not going to have somebody come on and say, “I think Saddam Hussein is not that bad a guy and they should let him off.”

My point is that it‘s not really free speech because we set parameters around people who say things that are so outrageous.


ADUBATO:  It‘s more of a name than a reality. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Think about this.  Yes, think about this, on TV.  And it‘s been a surprise for me.  On 9/11, I wanted to show clips of what really happened on 9/11.  We couldn‘t do it.  If you want to show Iraqi civilian deaths, either at the hands of U.S. troops or at the hands of Iraqi terrorists...

ADUBATO:  Can‘t do it.

SCARBOROUGH:  ... you can‘t do it. 

ADUBATO:  It‘s distasteful.

SCARBOROUGH:  If you wanted to show—I‘ve always said, you just show a part of an abortion on CBS “60 Minutes,” and you‘d have 80 percent of Americans wanting to ban abortion the next day. 


SCARBOROUGH:  We don‘t have free speech...

ADUBATO:  Joe...

SCARBOROUGH:  ... I mean, unlimited free speech, do we? 

ADUBATO:  Joe, it is not a privilege; it‘s a right.  And I don‘t want to go back and forth philosophically, but I‘ll just say this:  The whole idea of calling—like Katie Couric—and I wish Katie the best.  And, again, I hate when we just blast other networks, but here‘s my problem with Katie.  She made it sound like this was this unbelievably creative idea.  “We‘re going to have a free speech segment, and we‘re going to let average Americans”—average Americans?  Rush Limbaugh was on.  I could hear him three or four hours on the radio.  Bill Maher was going to be on?  I love his HBO show.

Where are the Americans who are sick and tired of taxes or someone who wants to say something that you‘re never going to hear their voice otherwise?  That‘s free speech, and you‘ll never see it on CBS.  Why, Joe?  First of all, we think it‘s boring.  Second of all, you have to read off of a teleprompter.  You have to be a professional. 

These are professional opinion leaders.  It‘s not really free speech.  CBS is more involved in the gimmickry of it or the marketing of it than the reality of free speech.  That‘s a lot harder to pull off. 

SCARBOROUGH:  All right.  No doubt about it.  Hey, thanks a lot, Dr.  Steve Adubato.  Thank you for being with us tonight.  As always, we greatly appreciate your insight. 

Now, coming up next, how narcissistic are you?  And how do you compare to the most self-absorbed people on Earth, celebrities?  Dr. Drew Pinsky joins us with the first scientific study ever conducted on Hollywood stars.  We‘ll tell you about it, some surprising results.

And later, what do you think you‘d do if you pulled over Willie Nelson‘s tour bus?  What would you find?  Well, I‘ll tell you what, a Louisiana state trooper got confirmation as to why the bus is always stocked with munchies.  We‘ll tell you why, when SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY returns.


SCARBOROUGH:  Welcome back.  You know, Americans have long believed that celebrities become self-absorbed after they achieve fame, but a new study says they may have actually been born that way.  Dr. Drew Pinsky, the host of “Loveline,” conducted the research and found celebrities are more in love with themselves than the average person.  And reality TV stars are the biggest narcissists of all.  I asked Dr. Drew about his new study.


DR. DREW PINSKY, HOST, “LOVELINE”:  This is the first time a study has ever been done on a group of celebrities.  Believe it or not, Joe, there has never been any scientific study ever done on a group that‘s been called a celebrity. 

And because I have people I talk with on the radio every night, Dr.  Young (ph).  And I realized we had a study group there and we could sort of administer various kinds of questionnaires and get some information.  So we had over 200 people.  And we were able to get some useful information.

We were able to sort of document the fact there is, in fact, a higher degree of narcissism amongst these people and, more importantly, that the time in which they have been a celebrity had no impact on the degree of narcissism.  That‘s to say, they probably come to this field, being a celebrity, so to speak, with the degree of narcissism that they sustain throughout their career. 

SCARBOROUGH:  I understand reality TV stars have some of the highest scores.  Why do you believe that is?

PINSKY:  Well, again, it‘s just my own—this is not shown by the study, but my own suspicion, which is that people that have no other desire than to be famous are more likely to be narcissistic.  In other words, Joe, you‘re trying to contribute with media, you‘re trying to use media to educate and, you know, communicate to people.  Lo and behold, people that fit that sort of profile are less likely to be narcissistic than somebody who is desperate to get on a reality show just to be seen, just to be in the media, just to be famous.  They‘re not a musician; they don‘t have an acting craft; they just want to be famous.  And, lo and behold, that tends to be a more narcissistic quality. 

SCARBOROUGH:  I‘m surprised about rock stars, musicians being a little bit lower.  It seems to me that, either than network news anchors, they‘re treated more like gods than anybody else. 

PINSKY:  I agree with you.  Again, being treated like God is not what necessarily creates narcissism, though you might say that somebody that wants to be treated like a god would be the one prone to going there. 

We actually have plans to do some other instruments.  We‘re going to look at things like attachment.  We‘re going to look at things like substance abuse indexes.  And I think we‘re going to find the rock stars more in that spectrum than in the narcissism, per se.

Again, you know, you think about it, you‘re thinking in terms of ego, in terms of self-loving, when in fact this is about emptiness, feelings of smallness of the self, difficulty with feelings.  Musicians actually are pretty affectively involved people.  They‘re very expressive.  They‘re artistic.  They‘re involved with feelings all the time, so it kind of makes sense that maybe they‘re not so narcissistic. 

SCARBOROUGH:  How can you be Marilyn Monroe?  How can you be at the top of your game and kill yourself?  How can you feel empty?  How can you feel alone when you have millions of adoring fans?  I mean, that story has been retold time and time again...

PINSKY:  Exactly.

SCARBOROUGH:  ... where these people seem to have absolutely everything, but they have nothing in their own mind.  Is that what, in a sense, about the—the narcissism you‘re talking about? 

PINSKY:  The fact is, what you‘re looking at or what you‘re alluding to is that having everything does not mean happiness and it does not mean mental health.  And, in fact, the people that are driven to, will kill for getting into these positions oftentimes have to be there for pathological reasons, and that‘s what these studies are going to show. 

SCARBOROUGH:  I see that Jenna Jameson was one of your guests.  I‘m curious—not talking about her specifically—but how would porn stars rate in this type of test?  Would they rate high on the narcissism scale or...

PINSKY:  They would rate on the—there‘s a cluster of personality styles, you know, borderline narcissist sociopath, that they would rate high on for sure.  I suspect they probably would not rate that high on the narcissism scale but more in borderline features, which is really the kind of shattered personality that comes out of very traumatic childhoods.  And if, you know, you read Jenna‘s book or you talk about people who have been in the porn industry, you always find trauma. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Thank you so much, Dr. Drew.  We really do appreciate it.  Appreciate the study.

PINSKY:  Anytime, Joe.

SCARBOROUGH:  And appreciate you being here tonight to talk about it.

PINSKY:  Thank you so much. 


SCARBOROUGH:  And speaking of twisted and demented on the West Coast, when we return, “Hollyweird.”


SCARBOROUGH:  Put on the sunscreen and shades.  It‘s time to take a tour of “Hollyweird.” 

First up, take the “Oprah for President” bumper sticker off of your car.  The queen of talk says she doesn‘t want to run for president in 2008 and she wants the guy that‘s trying to recruit her to stop.

With us now with all the buzz on Oprah‘s lack of political ambition and what‘s going on in “Hollyweird,” from “Star” magazine, Jill Dobson, and celebrity blogger from Gawker.com, Jessica Coen. 

Let‘s start with you, Jill.  Oprah Winfrey is so big that she makes news when she doesn‘t run for president.  This is the most powerful woman in America, isn‘t it?

JILL DOBSON, “STAR” MAGAZINE:  Yes, and I think this is clear proof America is ready for a female president.  Here‘s a woman who‘s never even said she wants to run, and she‘s got not one, but two men out there pushing her cause, this guy, Patrick Crowe in the Midwest who has a whole Web site dedicated to “Let‘s Make Oprah President,” and then also, of course, Michael Moore at the Toronto Film Festival who said, “Let‘s make Oprah president.” 

SCARBOROUGH:  And, of course, her lawyers now—she‘s having her lawyers go after these men because she wants them to stop.  So I guess she‘s pretty serious.  We‘re not going to see Oprah in the White House anytime soon, are we? 

DOBSON:  Right.  And I think Oprah is very much in control of her image, of her brand, and she doesn‘t want this guy out there promoting Oprah for president.  If and when she decides to run, she‘s going to control that campaign and not Patrick Crowe in Kansas City. 

SCARBOROUGH:  No doubt about it.  Jessica Coen, we understand breaking news out of Neverland:  Janet Jackson‘s breasts are back.  Explain.

JESSICA COEN, GAWKER.COM:  Again.  Yes, again.  How old is Janet Jackson?  I mean...

SCARBOROUGH:  She‘s like 87, I think. 

COEN:  Too old to be flashing her breasts again.  At this point, it‘s not even shocking.  It‘s just a cry for help.  In her new video, I think it‘s “So Excited,” you get several scandalous breast shots from Janet Jackson, but not quite a nip slip, but close enough to raise just the eyebrows she wants to raise. 


SCARBOROUGH:  You know, Jessica, I mean, when I see Madonna undressing and writhing all over the floor, I‘m thinking, “For god‘s sake, get up.  You could be a grandmom.”  I thought Janet Jackson was too old to be flashing things, like 18 years ago, at the Superbowl.  When is she going to ever learn? 

COEN:  You know, I think until she has a stable celebrity status that doesn‘t disappear every two years, she won‘t learn, you know?  This is her way of making a comeback, an ill-advised way, but this is how she‘s doing it.

SCARBOROUGH:  Ill-advised, runaway beer truck, as we say in the Redneck Riviera. 

Jill Dobson, what‘s going on in Neverland? 

DOBSON:  Well, back to the Janet Jackson thing, I think it‘s interesting that she blames Michael for this.  She says she never felt like a sexy person, and it‘s because Michael always called her fat butt when she was a little girl.  And I don‘t know how that becomes showing things off all the time, but I‘m sure Dr. Drew would have lots to say about it.

SCARBOROUGH:  Everything‘s Michael‘s fault.  It‘s Michael‘s fault that Willie Nelson got busted for pot on his tour bus, isn‘t it, Jessica? 

COEN:  I don‘t think that‘s Michael‘s fault.  I think that‘s Willie‘s fault.  I mean, when doesn‘t Willie Nelson have pot on his tour bus?  What I thought was really, really interesting, though, was not the amount of marijuana he had, but the psychedelic mushrooms.  He had, you know, like, a 10th of a pound of that or some very large amount.  And that‘s pretty hardcore.

SCARBOROUGH:  That is very hardcore.  And you‘re hardcore, too, Jessica.  Thank you, Jessica.  Thank you, Jill.  We‘ll see you tomorrow in SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY.



Copy: Content and programming copyright 2006 MSNBC.  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 MSNBC 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 Scarborough Country each weeknight at 9 p.m. ET


Discussion comments