Guest: Michael Lyman, John K. Wilson, Sam Harris, Max Kellerman
CURTIS SLIWA, GUEST HOST: Thanks, Joe.
And thanks to you at home for tuning in.
We've got a lot to cover tonight, including the controversial shooting of a knife-wielding man in New Orleans. Witnesses say at least half a dozen shots were fired. Was it really necessary?
Also, how should Bill Clinton's impeachment scandal be handled in middle and high school textbooks? Should students hear all about what went down between Bubba and Monica? I'll debate that with Flavia Colgan.
Plus, a web site devoted to outing dangerous dogs. The question is:
who decides if the dog is actually dangerous? We'll dig into that subject a bit later in the show.
But we want to begin tonight with a killing in broad daylight. Thirty-eight-year-old Anthony Hayes was gunned down by police in New Orleans. The incident was caught on tape by a bystander, as you can see here. And the officers who fired on the knife-wielding man will be reassigned, pending the outcome of an internal investigation.
Here now to discuss whether the New Orleans cops handled this properly is an expert in police procedure and certified police instructor. Michael Lyman joins us live tonight from Columbia, Missouri.
Thanks for joining us, Mike.
MICHAEL LYMAN, CERTIFIED POLICE INSTRUCTOR: Good evening. Thanks for having me.
SLIWA: Now, Michael, they've played the video portion of the police officers surrounding this gentleman, Mr. Hayes, over and over and over, and what did you derive from the initial attempt by the half dozen or more police to surround the knife-wielding suspect?
LYMAN: Well, we have to look at several factors, Curtis. First of all, this event took place around 4 p.m. in the afternoon, presumably in a fairly busy part of town, at a busy part of the day.
A number of officers obviously responded, maybe a half a dozen, maybe more than that responded. That's appropriate, that type of response. It's also appropriate, given the fact that Mr. Hayes was apparently wielding a knife, for the officers to have their weapons drawn at that time.
However, the manner in which the officers responded once they were on the scene is a little bit unclear. I'm curious to know what available alternatives they might have had prior to cornering him, as the video seems to suggest, because I see Mr. Hayes backing away a little bit from the officers, and I understand that he was cornered at one point, at which time he was shot.
SLIWA: All right. But Michael, he appears to be wielding the knife, as you said, in constant movement, and the half dozen cops have drawn down on him. Why couldn't they use possibly another method first, pepper spray?
LYMAN: Well, the less lethal weapon issue is a big issue in a case like this, especially with a large police department like New Orleans. Now, they have had some obvious problems this last year, but on the other hand, the availability of less lethal weapons is commonplace throughout the nation.
For an example, the Phoenix Police Department has 14,000 taser guns available to them, and now the taser organization is—they're in Arizona, but these departments these days. Chandler, Arizona, their officers on duty all are equipped with taser guns.
SLIWA: All right. But aside...
LYMAN: There's other types.
SLIWA: Right, but aside from the taser, you have bean bags. You have prodding poles. You have shields. You could have waited for other police officers to arrive from an emergency service unit, maybe who were more skilled in dealing with deranged individuals.
Do you think, based on what limited coverage we saw in the video, from a citizen, who was obviously filming that from a balcony, that the police had to discharge their weapons? Because apparently, 10 shell casings were found at the scene?
LYMAN: I don't think—well, it's hard to say whether or not they had to discharge their weapons at the time that they did, and, yes, the use of less lethal weapons is important in this case. In fact, with so many officers on the scene, I'm surprised that at least one of those officers did not have some less lethal weapon available to them.
SLIWA: Now, Michael, very quickly.
LYMAN: Now, the...
SLIWA: Very quickly, from your police experience, a lot of people are watching this video, say, well, why didn't the cops just take their weapon, their pistol, and just shoot him in the legs? Shoot him in a location that wouldn't have cost him his life?
LYMAN: Well, out of fairness to the police profession, law enforcement officers are not trained to shoot to wound. They are not trained to shoot in a person's extremities. In fact, they are nationwide really trained to shoot at center mass, and center mass is defined as one's torso or one's upper body area. And obviously being shot in that area, an individual has a high probability of dying.
SLIWA: All right. Well, thanks, Michael.
And obviously we'll be staying on top of all the late-breaking details, the autopsy, and the police investigation into the shooting in New Orleans earlier today.
Now, on to Iraq, where on the same day, another one of Saddam's mass graves was reportedly found, over 10,000 people marched through Baghdad, and they weren't shouting “Death to the U.S., death to Israel.” They were there to support a national unity government, both Shiites and Sunnis, seculars.
With all of the insurgent attacks protesting the December 15 election getting media coverage, why isn't this peaceful rally getting any attention? Mainstream top of the line news attention?
Here now to hopefully answer this question and also discuss Bill Clinton's textbook legacy is MSNBC political contributor, Flavia Colgan, who joins us live tonight from Washington, D.C.
Good evening, Flavia.
FLAVIA COLGAN, MSNBC POLITICAL CONTRIBUTOR: Good evening, Curtis.
SLIWA: All right. Straight out of the box, 10,000 peaceful Iraqis in the streets of Baghdad, Shiites and Sunnis, singing “Kumbaya,” not urging that we leave Iraq now, or death to the evil Satan Israel, but actually saying, “Hey, we want a secular government, not a Shiite theocracy.”
Why wasn't that the No. 1 story on this evening's mainstream newscasts?
COLGAN: Well, I missed the “Kumbaya,” Curtis, so I must have been watching a different one, but I did see it covered throughout, and of course we'll have to wait to see what the papers do with it tomorrow.
But I want to be a little clear, because I heard a couple people describe it as a unity protest. But what these people were protesting was that the religious Shias and the religious Sunnis, you know, obviously are winning right now. And they're protesting, saying that they're going to essentially boycott the government and they don't feel that it's legitimate if they don't get more representation.
So I don't know that I would characterize this completely as a positive development. And I think that what I'm looking at, what's going on overall, I find it very concerning that the Shias, the religious, got as many seats as they did, because of their close connection with Iran.
And also the level of militia men that they're now moving in. The police and army, and at least giving complicit state approval to go out on these raids against Sunnis. I find it very disturbing.
SLIWA: Flavia, how is that different than Democrats who protested the initial victory of George W. Bush versus Al Gore after eight weeks of constant debate back and forth, and then eventually George W. Bush's victory over John Kerry?
SLIWA: There were all kinds of demonstrations of Democrats who said that the Republicans stole the election both times.
COLGAN: No, I agree with you, and I think that the complaints about fraud are certainly not widespread enough. They appear to be isolated incidents. And I think that the election was very peaceful. I think the turnout was great. I think that it was, you know, a celebratory day, certainly.
However, you know, 70 people have died the last four days. As you know, Curtis, yesterday a governor was attempted assassination. A council member was killed. A deputy chief was killed.
I mean, so I think that we have to keep this in mind. And I certainly am very positive and want the best in terms of this new Iraqi government, but I think we have to be very cautious, because the last elections...
SLIWA: Yes, but Flavia.
COLGAN: Hold on, I just want to make one point.
SLIWA: The holy rollers, the Shiites have the majority. Shouldn't they be properly represented in their parliamentary form of government, whether you like them because they want a theocracy, or not?
COLGAN: Well, you know, yes, I suppose so, but I think that it's very concerning, and I think the relationship that Iraq could have with Iran could bring us even more troubles than we had under Saddam.
But I think that what the news should be talking about is I think we have a tremendous opportunity here. Like you mentioned, the elections did go very well. However, the last time we had elections, because of some of the parliamentary rules, there's essentially three months almost that it takes to form a new government, and there tends to be a huge power vacuum, which led to the hugest surge in violence the country had had in January elections.
SLIWA: OK. Now—now...
COLGAN: We need to be focused on that right now. And I don't know that it's necessarily a time to be excited juts because people have the right to demonstrate in the streets. We still have a constitution that needs to be changed.
SLIWA: OK. Understood, Flavia.
COLGAN: There are a lot of steps.
SLIWA: Understood, but there was a lot of good news today, and you reflected the bad.
Meantime, I need to flip the script. How should Bill Clinton, and I'm assuming you're a Bill Clinton fan, but his impeachment be handled in school textbooks?
COLGAN: Well, I think the way—based on the articles that I saw today coming out of the A.P., I think the way that it's being handled is appropriate. In middle school textbooks, it refers to the impeachment, you know, because of an improper relationship with a White House intern.
In high school and college textbooks, it gets a little bit more graphic. It lacks the salacious commentary of Ken Starr's report, which I do not think is appropriate to be taught in classrooms.
And I think that people, you know, for the Republicans I saw in the blogosphere today saying, “Look, there really should be more information,” I think that we have to be honest with ourselves in terms of the precedent historically.
I mean, if you ask most Americans why was Andrew Johnson impeached, you know, I took tons of history classes. My dad is an American history school teacher, and I barely remember. What I do recall is that he was impeached, that it was a very divisive time.
SLIWA: Flavia. Flavia.
COLGAN: Why was Andrew Johnson impeached?
SLIWA: Flavia, we didn't have videotape of Andrew Johnson's rantings:
“I did not have sex with that woman.” We could play it over and over. He perjured himself. He lied to the nation. He committed a crime.
Now, he got a half deck: the Senate gave him a pass, and Congress impeached him. Don't you think it demands in the history textbooks, particularly for the Generation X-ers, a complete, full detailed explanation, without all the graphic explanations of what transpired between Bubba and Monica, but the reality that he lied to us?
COLGAN: Well, I think if you look at the textbooks that have come out thus far, I think McGraw and a few others, I think that they do say that. I think they say that it was, you know, generally felt across the board that he lied, that he did perjure himself, that there were some discrepancies as to whether people felt that reached the level of impeachment, which was, in fact, true.
They don't include the reality also, which is the votes really did come down on party lines. And you know, I certainly don't think that it reaches the level of something like a Watergate where there's systemic, you know, fraud and wire tapping and all of that. I think that the amount that they give to it in textbooks thus far, and again, I've only seen two or three, so we'll have to wait until more come out. I think it's been appropriate, and of course, it's a very sensitive issue, because it's fresh and its recent history.
SLIWA: That's right.
COLGAN: It's always hard to know how to comment.
SLIWA: That's right. And let's face it, there were a lot of children who grew up having to watch this on TV, night after nigh after night, who never got a complete explanation.
And now they're of age where they should be able to read about it at length in a history text, because it certainly reflects why George W. Bush then became the president of the United States because so many people were just disgusted with the years in the White House and Bill Clinton, and the disgrace he brought to the office.
But anyway, on that note, Flavia.
COLGAN: On that note.
SLIWA: We've got to go.
COLGAN: Thank you.
SLIWA: Because I know we could be here all night with you. So thank you very much for joining us once again.
COLGAN: And thank you.
SLIWA: Meantime, still to come, are conservatives on college campuses being harassed by their liberal colleagues and professors? I'll discuss that with an author who thinks conservatives have been very effective in promoting their own victimization. Their own victimization? Wait until you hear that when we come back.
Plus, “Faith is nothing more than the license religious people give themselves to keep believing when reasons fail.” These are the words written by Sam Harris in his controversial new book, “The End of Faith.” I'll ask the author about his call for the end of religious faith in the modern world. We're talking no Druids, no Mennonites, no Quakers, no religion, when THE SITUATION returns.
SLIWA: Welcome back. Sitting in for Tucker Carlson, obviously. He wears the bow tie. I'm Curtis Sliwa, the Guardian Angel red beret.
Well, let's get to the subject at hand. College campuses have long been considered a haven for liberals, and now there's a movement afoot to correct that.
Last month, an Ohio State University graduate, proud Buckeye, who claims he was bullied by liberals on campus launched a web site called the Network of College Conservatives. The site aims to expose liberal professors and give college students a venue for conservative thought. But my next guest would have you believe this site is completely unnecessary.
John K. Wilson is the author of “The Myth of Political Correctness:
The Conservative Attack on Higher Education.” He joins me live tonight from Chicago.
Thanks for joining us, John.
JOHN K. WILSON, AUTHOR, “THE MYTH OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS: Glad to be here, Curtis.
SLIWA: All right. Now, there have been so many surveys done to this point that indicates a preponderance of professors and teachers who've contributed to these surveys have said that they tend to be very liberal when it comes to the main social issues: abortion, the war in Iraq, George W. Bush's presidency.
So why don't you think that that liberal progressive mentality in a majority of teachers and professors wouldn't bleed over into their commentary in the classroom?
WILSON: Well, it may in some cases. That's the case with anything, whether it's talk show hosts or teachers or business executives. Sometimes personal views do influence that.
But teachers are professionals. They allow, in general, students to express their views. They allow different views, and they're very sensitive to the fact that people don't necessarily share their ideas.
SLIWA: Yes, but, John, for instance let's say we're in a chemistry class and we're talking about the origins of petroleum, and how all of a sudden now it's used to make plastics and fiber-optics and a whole—a whole load of products.
And then all of a sudden the professor, in front of the Bunsen burner, says, “And you know this is an illegal war in Iraq. It's a war for oil.” Do you really think that a chemistry class is the place for discussion about whether the president of the United States was legally empowered to go to war in Iraq?
WILSON: Well, maybe it's not. Sometimes professors do things that are inappropriate that some people may argue with.
But the point is that we have to have freedom on campus. We have to give professors that kind of freedom, unless we're going to trust some administrator, some government, some government, some official to decide that criticizing the government isn't going to be allowed.
We need to have academic freedom on campuses. Sometimes it will be abused, but in general, it serves the common good to have these kind of political discussions.
SLIWA: OK. And no problem, keeping a level playing field, but if you feel you're in the minority, if you feel you have a conservative ideology, and you're a student, oftentimes you feel that you've been ostracized. You've been given a scarlet letter, a big “C.”
You feel that some professors are going to hold it against you and maybe impact on your grade levels, and other youngsters will collectively literally intellectually bully you because your opinions are not part of the peer pressure that exists on campus. Now, you would have to admit, that's totally wrong, John.
WILSON: Well, I don't know. It depends on what you're talking about. We're talking about adults here. People who are 18 years old in college shouldn't expect college classrooms to be a place where everybody goes around singing “Kumbaya” and is friends with each other. College classrooms are about debating ideas, and sometimes people don't like the ideas they hear.
SLIWA: All right, but let me—let me give you an example. Recently at the University of Connecticut, the Huskies came forward and protested the presentation after school by Ann Coulter.
It's an organization on campus that brought her in, and she was there not only to make a presentation on her conservative value system, but do a Q and A, even to let her adversaries go after her. They shouted her down. They protested. They wouldn't allow her to exercise her right of free speech.
We've seen that with David Horowitz, who wants a bill of rights for all students and all professors who teach at state universities so that there's a level playing field. He's been shouted down on campus—on college campuses and been denied his right of free speech.
Certainly, you would be opposed to that. You would tell these liberal progressive student groups that they need to put, literally, a zipper on their mouth and allow for different thought, conservative thought, to be heard equally, as they're so prone to hear their own liberal progressive thought?
WILSON: Well, I think it's completely wrong for people to shout down speakers. I am not aware that that actually happened to Ann Coulter or that it's every happened to David Horowitz. It has happened on a few occasions. It's completely wrong.
But you also have cases of liberal speakers who have not only been shouted down but have been banned from campuses. Last fall, there was a number of campuses that tried to ban Michael Moore from speaking on campus or showing his movie. I think we have to look at cases both on the right and the left and make sure that there is freedom of speech on campus.
SLIWA: All right. John, do appreciate your input. Thanks for having joined us from Chicago.
But still to come, raise your hand, guys and gals, and keep them where I can see them, not because you have them on guns. We'll tell you about the new no contact policy that has some students up in arms, when THE SITUATION returns.
SLIWA: Welcome back. When is the last time you heard someone say, being a believer is bad, B-A-D? Well, my next guest says any religion, not just Islamic fundamentalism, is bad for society.
Here to explain his position is Sam Harris, author of “The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason.” He joins us live tonight from Los Angeles.
Sam, all religion? I mean, I read through your book as much as I could right before the show and I've got to tell you, the only group you didn't seem to attack were the tree hugging Druids, but you're like really down on religion, period. Why?
SAM HARRIS, AUTHOR, “THE END OF FAITH”: Well, what I argue in my book is that people either have good reasons for what they believe or they don't. And faith, religious faith is the only area in our discourse where we tolerate people having no reasons or very bad reasons for their core beliefs, the beliefs they're willing quite Literally to live for and die for and all too often kill for.
SLIWA: All right. But let me give you an example.
HARRIS: Terrible problem.
SLIWA: Let me give you an example. This is the year of the philanthropist, the person who gives of their own wealth or goes out and does great outreach. We saw that. “TIME” magazine's person of the years, the Gates family and Bono.
SLIWA: They don't represent religion but for years, faith-based organizations have been going into third world countries, no attention, no recognition, because they feel it's God's calling to them that they go out and help the destitute, the poor, the impoverished.
Now, this is religion that provides some direction, some sense that we have to believe in us and we, and not I and me. Certainly, you can see the positive attributes of having a religious upbringing, when you go out and do this faith-based outreach.
HARRIS: Well, the question is, what is the real source of that positive human behavior? Because alongside them there are all kinds of secular groups, groups like Doctors without Borders, doing the same kind of heroic work.
I don't—I don't discount the fact that there are many religious people doing very compassionate and necessary things in the developing world and in sub-Saharan Africa, for instance. But the problem is, we need to find reasonable motivations for that behavior, and secular people happen to have those reasonable motivations. Pure compassion.
SLIWA: Well, now, you're saying...
HARRIS: Pure compassion for other people.
SLIWA: Right. When you say reasonable motivations, let me take you to Dorothy Day, who has led the Catholic workers. The Barican (ph) brothers, who were at the forefront of passivism. Mahatma Gandhi.
I mean, all of these people were literally basted in a religious sense of being, and clearly these are people that liberals and progressives and others all over the world look up to. Are you trying to take away from their passivism, their belief that you should turn the other cheek and follow in Jesus' teachings as being wrong?
HARRIS: Well, I think you're drawing the wrong lesson from those examples. The truth is, almost everyone has grown up in a culture that is more or less a culture of faith. Eighty-three percent of Americans believe that Jesus literally rose from the dead.
So you can point to all the good things that have been done in human history and ascribe them to the work of people of faith, but there's been nobody else to do the job.
Everything that was good done prior to 1950 was done by people who didn't know anything about molecular biology or the genetic inheritance, the basis for genetic inheritance. It doesn't mean ignorance of biology is a good thing.
We can find rational ways and rational motives to help people.
SLIWA: Yes, but...
HARRIS: The problem with faith is that it stops conversation. These are core beliefs that are nonnegotiable. We have people flying planes into our buildings because they think they're going to get to paradise. They're blowing themselves on a daily basis. They think they're going to get to paradise.
SLIWA: Hold on. Sam, the No. 1 atheist in the world, people who have discarded religion, their dogma basically attacked religion. Mao Tse-Tung was responsible for the death of 70 million of his own people.
SLIWA: Joe Stalin, probably half as much. So what is the alternative? You're claiming that faith-based people are responsible for this, but those with no faith, who had no basis of religious belief, have actually contributed more to death and destruction in the history of the world, at least in the past century.
HARRIS: Actually, you named the problem perfectly. The problem is dogma. And it's just that religion, all religions have more than their fair share of dogma. Dogma are these core beliefs that we refuse to subject to the same pressures of criticism that we subject all of our other beliefs to.
And Stalinism, Nazism, these were political religions. They were not talking about what happens after death, but they were—they were brittle ideologies, shot through with dogma. The problem with dogma...
HARRIS: Dogma stops conversation.
SLIWA: Understood. But Sam, just from my perspective, I'm not the most religious person. I'm an A&P Catholic, you know? Ashes on Wednesday, Palms on Sunday. And you don't see me for a month of Sundays.
The best thing that religion sort of embeds in us is a feeling of guilt, and guilt propels you to do things that normally would make you a very selfish person, and immediately makes you feel like you have to do for others.
But anyway, I appreciate you joining us. Sam Harris, his book.
SLIWA: Is really down on faith, I mean, about the only ones who escape criticism are the tree-hugging Druids.
But now, still to come, neighborhoods are putting the mug shots of dangerous dogs online. We're not talking philanderers here. But does this country need a canine version of Megan's Law? I'll debate that with “The Outsider,” right up next.
SLIWA: Welcome back. The Scarecrow in “The Wizard of Oz” said, “I know a lot of people without brains who do an awful lot of talking.” True, but you can't say that about the Outsider. Joining me live in our SITUATION studio, ESPN radio and HBO boxing...
MAX KELLERMAN, ESPN RADIO: Analyst, I guess.
SLIWA: No, I mean, you are at the top of your game, Max Kellerman.
KELLERMAN: Thank you very much. I'm not sure—that's like an
imponderable statement by the Scarecrow. Should I be insulted or praised
by that? I'm not sure.
SLIWA: No, I just want you to figure out at the end of this if I am the great white hope or the great white dope.
First up, touchy subject in one California middle school. In Culver City, middle school kids as young as sixth grade must follow a strict no-contact policy. That means no holding hands, hugging, kissing, smooching at school. The rule is meant to put a stop to fighting, bullying and sexual harassment. But some kids say it goes way too far. What do you think, Max?
KELLERMAN: Well, I am set up here as a devil's advocate, and I know where you come down on this, Curtis, so I will argue the opposite.
SLIWA: I am the minister of vice and virtue here.
SLIWA: I am a little bit to the left of the Taliban.
KELLERMAN: Part of school, part of getting an education, is educating yourself in terms of socializing with peers. It's for the rest of your life. That includes dealing with the opposite sex. That includes how to deal with a bully. You know, it's—that's part of life. You have to learn how to do those things. And proponents of home schooling I think miss that. Do you ever watch “South Park?”
KELLERMAN: “South Park” had a whole episode on home schooling, how these two kids, once they got to school and started interacting with other children, they didn't know what to do. They were out of their element. And part—and I would say equally as important as the education you get in the classroom is the education you get outside the classroom with your peers, socially.
SLIWA: Yeah, but you know, Max, I am going to put my throwback jersey on, Joe Namath, and I'm thinking of me and you as kids. If I were in school, I would say, look at the size of your head. Perfect for a headlock.
KELLERMAN: Now, what...
KELLERMAN: ... put me in a headlock?
SLIWA: You would be my lunch money, you would be my moving ATM machine. All the more reason to have a policy that says, hands off, no hands whatsoever, whether it's a physical confrontation or it's the urge to merge.
KELLERMAN: Oh, I see. I went to PS 41 right down here in New York City, in Greenwich Village, but a regular school, public school, and the fact is, because I went to a normal school with normal kids, I would love for someone to try to put me in a headlock. I'd love it. And you know what? If they can, good, but I can handle myself enough to let's see them try. And maybe if I wasn't—maybe if I went to a place where you couldn't hold hands—I mean, you know, they are talking about this one school administrator...
SLIWA: I will tell you this much, I am not holding your hand. Let me go to round two.
KELLERMAN: Boy, you're smooth.
SLIWA: The latest thing in cyber space could be good news for mail carriers, the guy who delivers FedEx, and the Brownie everywhere. Bag dog Web sites. They identify dangerous dogs by name and address and include a mug shot. One click, and a map pops up exactly showing you where the pet lives.
To make the list, a dog has to severely bite a human or a pet without provocation or chase, someone in a menacing fashion. But experts say the Web sites could give a false sense of security.
I tell you this, not only do I want a Web site, and not only do I want...
KELLERMAN: Let me guess where Curtis Sliwa comes down on the dangerous dog issue.
SLIWA: I mean, if John Walsh ever retires, I want him to do the top five predator dogs. But I want to know all their aliases, you know, whether they went from Buster to Buttkiss to Noodles, whatever. I want to know everything about these dogs, particularly if I am a delivery guy and I have got to come to this house.
KELLERMAN: Yes, or if you're a family with kids in the neighborhood.
I totally agree, but I will play devil's advocate.
This costs the owner of the dog money. Because you have got to do all kinds of—you go through a whole rigmarole, you get them a special collar and you've got to get them registered and all these things. And who is deciding this? Really, some pet—some animal control. So basically a government agency is making determination, that dog chased someone in a threatening manner. What is a threatening manner?
SLIWA: If you decide to go out because you are grumpy or you're mean and you say, I want a dog that sort of matches my personality, the bull mastiff, the rottweiler, the pit bull, you are asking for double trouble. I mean, I want you to take out a Lloyd's of London insurance policy. I want neon lights on this dog, saying, big D, danger, danger. I mean, this is just a precaution.
KELLERMAN: Maybe. But what if you are on your property—say, you are a delivery guy—and you are on your private property, and your dog is trained to guard the house. There is nothing wrong with that, to have a guard dog, you have guarding your loved ones, your private property, and someone comes on your property and the dog chases them in a menacing way. Now, suddenly he is on a list for doing what he is supposed to do, he's on a list, and you've got to spend money to get him all these tags and everything?
SLIWA: You know, you must think everybody has a fluffy little yarn bulldog (ph) out there. You know, Fifi, the French poodle friend of men and women. Anyway, thanks, Max Kellerman.
KELLERMAN: Oh, a high five. From Curtis, a great American. An American hero, ladies and gentlemen.
SLIWA: I didn't hit him, so don't use your famous martial art on me.
I will sue.
KELLERMAN: As a matter of fact, that was a hit. Did anyone see that?
He hit me. He abused me.
SLIWA: Up next, Sam the ugliest dog shows us his true colors. And Mikey the chimp, goes berserk in the studio. The best of this year's curious SITUATIONS coming up next.
SLIWA: Welcome back. One of the most popular segments on this show, or any other show, is called the curious SITUATION. It's where you will find everything from the world's ugliest dog to what must be America's most manic monkey. If you have ever seen it before, you know what you are in for. If you haven't seen it, words just don't do it justice. Here's Tucker Carlson with some of the best curious moments, including a little lady with a big appetite for brats.
TUCKER CARLSON, HOST: All right. Sonya Thomas, go to it.
CARLSON: Ladies and gentlemen, here she is. The world speed eating champion. No one can eat brats faster than Sonya Thomas. There she is (INAUDIBLE). She breaks it in half. She stuffs them in. Can we turn up our audio a little bit? There you go.
Notice the concentration. Nothing I getting between her and the brats. That is remarkable, the well timed sips, enough to lubricate but not too much, not enough to fill her up, a lot of chewing involved, more than you would expect.
You would think given the shape of a brat you could suck it on down like a sardine but she doesn't. She chews them. That's legitimately eating. That's not just scarfing. That's not inhaling. She's eating those brats.
Look at that. She doesn't slow down though, breathing through her nose of course. Look at that. That is incredible. That is incredible. I believe she's on her fourth brat, but you know the plate doesn't even look any smaller. Uhm, there's a grunt of satisfaction there.
THOMAS: Uh huh.
CARLSON: That's incredible. I think I'd feel a little guilty if I asked you to keep going, but at that pace I have no doubt you'd be able to finish that plate like that. You're incredible. How do you feel? Give me the after action report.
THOMAS: It's good.
MONICA CROWLEY, MSNBC: Does Sam know he's a champion? Does he know that he's a winner of this ugliest dog contest?
SUSIE LOCKHEED: Yes. Yes, but I always tell him...
CROWLEY: Has it affected his personality.
LOCKHEED: Not too much. He's a little oblivious but (INAUDIBLE).
CROWLEY: He knows you were talking about him, Susie.
CROWLEY: Susie, do you think...
LOCKHEED: He's really showing off tonight.
CROWLEY: Would Sam ever consider cosmetic surgery?
LOCKHEED: Well, he could—if you look at his neck here, it would be an amazing ad for a cosmetic thing because this is the before. Now watch. Doesn't he look like a lot younger if you pull that all up?
CROWLEY: Oh, much better, much better. So, Susie, I have to ask you, does Sam have a girlfriend?
LOCKHEED: Well, he kind of has three. He has a little harem at home. Tater is one of them. Tater is a two-time ugliest mixed breed champion, but sometimes they have lover's spats.
CROWLEY: I see them right there. They're going at it right now.
CROWLEY: So, speaking of girlfriends, Susie, I understand that through Max you actually found a boyfriend? Oh, my God, Susie are you OK?
CARLSON: We could not resist the opportunity to meet Mikey in person. We're honored and humbled tonight. We're joined live in the studio by Mikey the Chimp and his handler, Dr. Kim Hammond. Dr. Hammond, thanks a lot for joining us.
DR. KIM HAMMOND, ANIMAL HANDLER: It's a pleasure. Underscore humble.
CARLSON: So the obvious question is, how many TV sets has Mikey wrecked?
HAMMOND: Several, and after tonight, probably two or three more.
CARLSON: So when he is not—Mikey—hey, buddy.
HAMMOND: Come here, Mikey. Come here.
CARLSON: When he is not wrecking sets, where does he live? Can he live in a house?
HAMMOND: Yeah, he's one of our—he's sort of an emissary for our (INAUDIBLE). He travels around the country and does...
HAMMOND: ... does speaking tours. And does a lot of TV, he does a lot of movies and commercials, and things like that.
HAMMOND: Yes, and he will show up at a function as, you know, sort of emblematic of what is going on as far as the environment is concerned. You know, we will have discussions, ecological discussions based on encroaching environments and his loss of an environment.
You know, Tucker...
CARLSON: So, wait, wait. So when you are having the meeting, when you are discussing global warming or the melting polar ice caps, is Mikey at the conference table like, you know, eating the mints and sipping from...
HAMMOND: Right. Just doing his thing. But you know, to be a little serious too, you know, these guys are going to disappear. You know, in 50 years or so, we are going to have half the population, so we really have to sort of figure out ways to save these species and preserve the DNA.
CARLSON: Why, is it deforestation?
HAMMOND: Deforestation. There's development. There's pollution.
There's all sorts of things.
He likes you.
CARLSON: I like him. Hey.
CARLSON: Can hey—can chimps—here, buddy. Can chimps live in the United States? I mean, is there any habitat here that is suitable for him?
HAMMOND: No, they're too dangerous. They're too wild.
CARLSON: The enduring image I have of you is wearing a woman's wedding dress. What do you think of the new NBA dress code? You wouldn't meet the standards, by the way, but what do you think of it?
DENNIS RODMAN, FORMER NBA PLAYER: I don't think I meet the standards, just because, you know, I am very free spirited, I'm very outgoing. I'm elusive. I just couldn't go—I will be dressing the way I want to dress. You know, as far as like bling-bling, I don't wear bling-bling, I just wear jewelry like this kind of jewelry here, I don't wear diamonds or nothing like that. You know, I got five championship rings I've never even—I haven't seen my rings in five years. So basically, I really don't even wear any jewelry pretty much.
CARLSON: I mean, but what do you think of the way other players in the NBA dress? I mean, do you think it's fair to tell them they have to wear coat and ties and can't wear certain clothes?
RODMAN: Well, David Stern needs to shove it up his, you know, but I just think that he should have sat down with all the owners and told the owners to go back to (INAUDIBLE) teams and tell your players, how do you want to dress, can we come to a compromise, and come to an agreement that we are going to do certain things, you know, in the proper situation. Instead of just saying, OK, we'll write this amendment, and that's it.
CARLSON: This is Elvis the Hampster, about to charge Peter Ash's cell phone. Here he goes. Getting situated there. He's sniffing. His last prewheel stretches. All right, Elvis, get to it. There he goes.
PETER ASH: Come on.
CARLSON: That wheel looks a little small, no offense to Elvis or anything. Should it be bigger?
ASH: Well, it can be bigger, yes.
CARLSON: Looks a little snug in that.
ASH: It's just the size. Yes, but he is quite happy.
CARLSON: So he is essentially going on strike here. OK. All right.
Look at that.
ASH: He will do that for four or five hours at least at night. And he enjoys his wheel. And basically, when this is rotating, there's an axle here that comes to a gearing system inside. And the gearing system then turns the turbine, which then creates a—which then creates a current, through the circuit board I've made, and out through the lead here, and out to the mobile phone. So it's charging.
CARLSON: That is tremendous.
Show me the most difficult pizza toss move. Well, that's amazing right there. That's incredible. Josh, I am not even going to talk over your performance.
You know, I think even the French judge is going to have to give you full points for that. That's absolutely incredible.
SLIWA: Just give me a slice and a coke, please. That was just the tip of the iceberg in our hour-long special. Make sure you tune in Friday night at 11:00 p.m. Eastern for THE SITUATION 2005 year-end spectacular. Tucker takes on everything from Hurricane Katrina's wrath to the execution of Stanley “Tookie” Williams. I am happy he is room temperature. You won't want to miss it.
Up next, how responsible is the president for terrorist attacks that take place on his soil? The blaming of Bush continues ad nauseum when THE SITUATION returns.
SLIWA: Welcome back. Time now for our voicemail segment. You at home get to chime in on anything and everything, and I get to respond. First up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAEL: Michael O'Toole (ph) from Wichita, Kansas. I don't think that Alito should be appointed to the court after the revelations that he believes it's OK to go ahead and surveil, break in and arrest people without warrants for any justification.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SLIWA: Well, let's get it on. Isn't this what we really wanted? Conservatives on one side, liberals on the other, gladiators? And we will determine if Sam Alito makes the pick. Isn't it better than the milquetoast Harriet Miers, whom nobody liked?
Let's go to voicemail number two.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ERIC: This is Eric in Tampa. The thing I'm curious about is that if everyone wants to give Bush credit for not being attacked since 9/11, how much blame is he accepting for the attacks that took place on his watch?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SLIWA: Wait a second, you are a total wisenheimer. What do you have, window shades on your eyes, cotton balls in your ears? We haven't been attacked since 9/11! All the Democrats are saying, oh, yes, but we are still vulnerable, so said the 9/11 Commission. Bottom line is, report card A plus, we have yet to be attacked.
Let's go, voicemail number three.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DOUG: Hey, man, this is Doug in St. Louis wishing you a merry Hannukwanzmas.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SLIWA: Oh, man. I don't know, maybe you've been drinking from the muddy brown Mississippi River. You seem to have all the furniture upstairs and rearranged into the wrong politically correct rooms.
Meantime, let us know what you are thinking. Call 1-877-TCARLSON, or 1-877-822-7576.
Still to come, if being called naked Satan wasn't bad enough, wait until you hear what this Florida man did to a sheriff's deputy. Stay tuned.
SLIWA: Welcome back. It's time for tales of wrongdoing and justice served with the return of THE SITUATION “Crime Blotter”—our summary of who done it and who caught them.
First up, Florida can breathe easy tonight with the arrest of serial rape suspect Reynaldo Elias Rapalo. The suspected Shenandoah rapist was on the run for nearly a week after escaping from jail on a rope made of bedsheets. He was pinched last night at a Miami strip mall.
One of the top relief pitchers in baseball history is back in the news, but his latest effort lands him firmly in the lost column. Jeff Reardon, a four-time All-Star, is charged with robbing a Florida jewelry store on Monday. Reardon apologized and blamed medication he is taking for depression. That's why he robbed the joint?
And one more story from Florida. Well, I guess you'd have to say the devil made him do it. Roy Lee Hanson (ph) was found wandering the street, screaming, going mashugana (ph), his boxers around his ankles, and claiming to be Satan. He was jailed after he allegedly threatened a sheriff's deputy.
Now, I need to get something off my chest. Let me tell you something, I went through a Christmas that almost gave me post-traumatic shock. My son, little Anthony, 2 years old, right, can barely speak yet, and what do the grandparents and the wife and the extended relatives bring him? The flavor of the day, Dora the Explorer tchotchkes. And what does Dora speak? Spanish! The kid can barely speak English. He is speaking Spanish now because of Dora the Explorer. Now, what is my kid, little Anthony, going to do in the history class? Instead of saying George Washington, he's going to go, “Viva Zapata!” Pancho Villa instead of Thomas Jefferson. Zorro instead of Superman. And instead of George W. Bush, he will be saluting Vicente Fox. I've had it with Dora the Explorer. That's THE SITUATION—shut up! That's THE SITUATION for tonight. Thanks for watching. Up next, COUNTDOWN with Keith Olbermann. Have a great night.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
Content and programming copyright 2005 NBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2005 Voxant, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material other than for research. User may not reproduce or redistribute the material except for user's personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon NBC and Voxant, Inc.'s copyright or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.