Guest: Gary Morrison, Bob Kohn, Ken Kramer, Anthony Weiner, Jack Burkman, Sohail Mohammed, Michael Smerconish, Jim VandeHei
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I felt like the person who made that statement was very misguided and ill-informed.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOE SCARBOROUGH, HOST: Tonight‘s top headlines, President Bush fires back at the U.N. bureaucrat who accused Americans of being stingy with international aid.
The “Real Deal”: America is the most generous country in the world.
Welcome to SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY, where no passport is required and only common sense is allowed.
The death toll from Sunday‘s disaster rises by the hour and many are predicting it‘s going to top 100,000. And, as always, America stands ready to help. President Bush pledges that our $35 million contribution is just the beginning. Do you agree with the U.N. bureaucrat that says the U.S. is stingy? Take our poll at Joe.MSNBC.com.
And we are going to be looking at how dangerous America‘s skies are three years after 9/11. The controversial author of “Flying Blind” enters SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY to say that we need to stop being politically correct and start targeting Arabs at airports. And maybe he can explain to me why airport screeners continue to frisk my 16-month-old daughter.
Plus, mainstream media bashed “The Passion.” They bashed the swift vets. They bashed Zell Miller. And, of course, they bash George W. Bush, and yet these people were all big winners this year. And, tonight, we are going to take you through the biggest stories that the elite media got all wrong in 2004.
ANNOUNCER: From the press room, to the courtroom, to the halls of Congress, Joe Scarborough has seen it all. Welcome to SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY.
SCARBOROUGH: Hey, welcome to our show.
You know, there‘s a lot to update you on tonight on the tsunami that swept ashore in Southeast Asia this week. The tidal waves of almost biblical proportions are responsible for killing tens of thousands of people and causing billions of dollars in damage. Tonight, the best estimates are that the death toll has soared to over 70,000.
Towns and coastlines along the Sri Lankan coast have been obliterated by the floodwaters, and there are estimates tonight that, for every Sri Lankan native killed in this natural disaster, two tourists lost their lives. And, today, after being blasted as stingy, the United States reiterated on its promise to help in the region, doubled its aid efforts to that troubled area. And that means America is going to be sending $35 million of your tax dollars to those affected by the disaster.
Now, I tell you that not to suggest that you mind giving those in need this holiday season, but to let you know exactly what constitutes stingy in the minds of U.N. bureaucrats. And, by the way, America remains the top donor for aid in this disaster.
Now, speaking of Americans, hundreds remain missing in the region, while former SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY guest and “Sports Illustrated” cover girl Petra Nemcova remains in a Thai hospital recovering from internal injuries sustained when the tsunami swept through her beachside bungalow. Nemcova she saved herself by holding onto a tree for eight long hours while her boyfriend was swept out to sea and remains missing.
You know, the greatest tragedy of this story is the fact that it may have all been avoided. Officials are reporting tonight that Thailand may have delayed sounding the tsunami warning on Sunday after being warned in the past that such alarms could hurt the country‘s tourist industry.
So, too, we would guess tonight that apocalyptic natural disasters may keep the tourists away also.
But putting it into perspective and giving you the very latest on this greatest natural disaster of the past quarter century is NBC‘s James Hattori. He‘s from Colombo, Sri Lanka—James.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JAMES HATTORI, NBC CORRESPONDENT: Joe, the president of Sri Lanka in a phone call with President Bush today made a direct appeal for help as countries struggle with relief efforts under way, that as more victims of the devastating tsunami continue to be found and decomposing bodies are literally piling up in villages and government offices.
Mass burial sites and funeral piles have been prepared even before victims have been completely identified. New pictures continue to emerge of the tsunami‘s deadly force, thrashing homes, cars, and people, even an eight-car passenger train south of Colombo, where 800 people perished on Sunday. Adding to all these concerns is the potential health problems in coming days and weeks. Officials say the death toll from the communicable diseases like cholera and malaria could equal the death toll from the tsunami itself.
While aid is beginning to reach some areas, including U.S. military assistance made available in Thailand, relief officials concede it will be a long-term effort and a costly effort, with damage estimated in excess of $10 billion now. But for all the numbers used to describe the scale of the devastation here, they simply don‘t convey the human pain and suffering that so much of the population here will be enduring for some time ahead—
Joe.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCARBOROUGH: Thanks, James.
Now, nearly half of those killed in Sunday‘s tsunami were in Indonesia. In fact, officials estimate that, in the end, the death toll could be between 58,000 on one province alone.
Dan Rivers of our British broadcasting partner ITN is in that province, Aceh. And he files this report. And we have to warn you tonight, there are some images you are about to see that are very graphic.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DAN RIVERS, ITN REPORTER (voice-over): This was the moment of impact in Banda Aceh, this staggering footage taken by a family on a second-floor apartment as the sea swallowed their town. Terrified, the family think they will surely die. Somehow, they escape.
Four days on, this is the scene in the port area, perhaps one of the most devastated sectors of this crippled town. We picked our way through with our guide, missing person posters pinned to upturned trawlers. It was surreal, obscene, stranded boats, the twisted wreckage of a once thriving fishing community.
In the town center, corpses are being pulled by the hundreds from the ruins of Banda Aceh. There is a nauseating stench everywhere, death and decay at every turn. The army is ferrying in troops, but they are facing apocalyptic destruction, entire neighborhoods razed to the ground. Like many, this man has lost everything, his home, his family.
(on camera): Nothing left.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Absolutely nothing left.
RIVERS: Nothing at all?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: My house has been destroyed, as you can see.
RIVERS: Destroyed?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
RIVERS: If you want a graphic illustration of the sheer power of this tsunami, have a look at this. This trawler was smashed a mile and a half into the center of Banda Aceh. The locals say the tsunami was 60 feet high.
(voice-over): Those that survived are trying to clear the streets. but so far there is Apparently little outside help. Banda Aceh is now in acute crisis. They are desperate for basic supplies.
The destruction is relentless, street after street utterly destroyed. Survivors stupefied by this carnage. In some places, only dogs survived, waiting in vain for their owners. But, out of town, the horror of all those deaths is concentrated at one place, lorries streaming in, carrying body after body.
(on camera): I‘ve seen some terrible, awful sights today, but this is by far the worst. They are burying bodies by lorry loads here in mass graves. They estimate there will be tens of thousands of corpses here by the end of the week.
Dan Rivers, ITV News, in Banda Aceh, Indonesia.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCARBOROUGH: Now, the president spent his holiday at his ranch in Crawford, Texas. And took some hits for not speaking out publicly about the tsunami.
He did, though, say something this morning.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BUSH: This morning, I spoke with the leaders of India, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Indonesia. I expressed my condolences and our country‘s condolences. I told them of our support. We are grateful to the American and international organizations that are working courageously to save lives and to provide assistance, and I assured those leaders this is just only the beginning of our help.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCARBOROUGH: And Jim VandeHei of “The Washington Post” was there this morning.
Jim, we appreciate you being here tonight.
JIM VANDEHEI, “THE WASHINGTON POST”: Good to see you, Joe.
SCARBOROUGH: Now, actually you wrote—you wrote a story this morning in “The Washington Post” that some people believe got the White House back on their heels, made them feel defensive, and pushed the president out. Tell us about the contents of the story.
VANDEHEI: Right.
There was growing criticism from critics of the president that he appeared insensitive to the plight of the people over there, that he wasn‘t out here speaking publicly, that this was a perfect opportunity for the president to come out and show that compassionate side that he talks about when he talks about the global war on terror.
SCARBOROUGH: And did you get a feeling, a sense this morning that that growing criticism is the only reason why the president decided to go out this morning and actually give an update to the American people on what he has actually been doing regarding this disaster while he has been in Crawford?
VANDEHEI: I think it‘s a part of it. There were a lot of questions posed yesterday from reporters asking, why aren‘t we seeing the president? Why isn‘t he taking a break from his vacation to come out and address this issue? The White House spokesman yesterday suggested that we weren‘t going to hear from the president at all this week.
Then, after the criticism started to roll and roll, then we heard that the president was going to speak today, and you heard his comments this morning.
SCARBOROUGH: Jim, there appeared to be a bit of a snarky remark from one White House aide, who basically say they didn‘t want to be Bill Clinton and come out and say, I feel your pain without knowing what was going on. Was that spin or is there actually a good bit of resentment toward Bill Clinton for actually beating the president to the punch and getting out in front of cameras, expressing his concern for the people of this region?
VANDEHEI: Well, you have got to look back all the way to the standoff that we had with China early in the Bush administration. It‘s always the president‘s style to take a real low-key approach when dealing with international disaster or controversy.
With the exception of domestic problems, like the hurricanes in Florida, where he was much more hands-on, the president has not taken a big public roll. Think back a year ago, when we had the huge earthquake in Iran. The president did not come out and make a lot of public statements. He let Colin Powell and others take the lead on that. And the White House had planned on doing the same in this instance.
A lot of White House aides do point to Bill Clinton. They say, we don‘t want to showboat. We don‘t want to take these disasters and try to use them for our political or foreign policy advantage.
SCARBOROUGH: So, do you believe that this decision by the president not to come out was a calculated decision, or do you think they just dropped the ball and unfortunately made the president appear insensitive to the world?
VANDEHEI: I think they want—like they handle most issues, they wanted to stick to the strategy that they feel has worked for them in the past. But they saw the criticism coming. They saw that this was such a huge catastrophe. The White House has described it as one of the greatest catastrophes that countries have had to deal with in all time.
So, the president sort of was forced to come out and speak on this. And I think that we are going to see more and more involvement from the United States. The $35 million that you‘ve been talking about I think is a tiny fraction of the amount of money that, at the end of the day, the United States is going to end up kicking in.
I do not think that the president came out because of this one guy at the U.N. criticizing the U.S. initial investment as stingy. I think that we always thought that—the government always thought that you have to sit back, you have to assess the needs, and then you‘ll talk about how much money we‘re going to kick in. Some U.S. officials are talking about as much as $1 billion when all is said and done.
SCARBOROUGH: All right, Jim VandeHei of “The Washington Post,” thanks so much for being with us tonight. We greatly appreciate.
VANDEHEI: Take care.
SCARBOROUGH: Now, talking about the amount of money that the United States has given, the president did say that the $35 million was just the beginning.
But the United States funds one-fifth of the entire U.N. budget, for those of you that don‘t know that. And, by department, the United States provides more than half of the financing for the United Nations‘ World Food Program, more than a third to the Refugee Agency, and over a quarter to the Department of Peacekeeping Operations.
And then, when something like this tsunami happens, we dig into our pockets once again. In fact, Americans send almost $35 billion in private aid around the world every year, a full 10 times the amount of the United Nations‘ total budget.
Now, we want to know what you in SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY think. Are we stingy? Log on to Joe.MSNBC.com and vote in our poll and let us know if you agree with the United Nations bureaucrat who says we need to give more. We will give you results of that when we come back.
Also, are we catching terrorists by searching senior citizens at our airport? Our next guest says no. He thinks profiling young Arab Americans is the best way to go, other than shaking down grandma.
Plus, the press loves reporting on bad news, but why don‘t they talk about the good news from Iraq? We are going to bring you an untold story of one of America‘s fallen heroes later in the show.
But, first, the horrific tsunami left a trail of destruction throughout Asia. I leave you with some of the most haunting images of devastation.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCARBOROUGH: Is a politically correct airline security policy putting Americans in danger? Our next guest says yes, and he is here to tell you what we need to do to protect our skies.
That‘s when SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY returns.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCARBOROUGH: Now, if you believe the Federal Aviation Administration learned valuable lessons from September 11 and you wish to remain ignorantly blissful about the current state of air travel in America, you may want to skip this segment.
But for those who travel a great deal, the sorry state of passenger screening is not breaking news. You have seen grandma getting frisked, while others who could have come out of central casting for 9/11 terrorists have walked unmolested onto airlines. And it‘s only getting worse.
On two of my last flights before going down with my back injury this fall, I had to endure the sight of my family being frisked down by TSA agents repeatedly. And, yes, this included my 14-month-old baby girl, Kate Scarborough, being grabbed screaming from her mother‘s arms and being inspected for hidden explosives.
This is the equivalent of trying to get leads on the Ku Klux Klan by frisking young black children. But the insanity continues.
And here to talk about the increasingly unfriendly skies is radio talk show host Michael Smerconish. He‘s also the author of “Flying Blind: How Political Correctness Continues to Compromise Airline Safety Post 9/11.” And we also have immigration attorney Sohail Mohammed, who has represented Arabs detained by the federal government.
Let‘s begin with you, Michael.
You have written an explosive book. Talk about some of my concerns about why you grab a 14- or 15-month-old daughter, girl, why you frisk grandma at the airport, when there seems to be when you are talking about terrorism in America‘s skies a fairly distinct group that should be focused on.
MICHAEL SMERCONISH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Joe, I had a similar experience to your own, and that‘s really how my investigation began.
In my case, it was my 8-year-old son who had a Pokemon backpack and a Gameboy in his hand on a domestic flight down to Florida. And I didn‘t complain about it. I just thought it was an incredible waste of resources, because he bears no commonalities with Mohamed Atta or any of the 18 others.
It was the 9/11 Commission hearings and the questioning of John Lehman of certain of the witnesses that really focused my attention on this situation. And here‘s the bottom line. Those 19 on 9/11 had a variety of commonalities. They had their race, their gender, their religion, and I am not afraid to say their appearance in common. And yet today, our government has a conscious policy of turning a blind eye toward all of those common dominators, and I think it‘s insanity.
SCARBOROUGH: You know, Sohail Mohammed, thank you so much for being with us tonight.
SOHAIL MOHAMMED, IMMIGRATION ATTORNEY: Sure, Joe.
SCARBOROUGH: You know, back in the ‘80s and the ‘90s, in Pensacola, Florida, my hometown, there were a series of bombings at abortion clinics, and most of the people that committed those acts looked like me. They were white. They were in their 20s or 30s. They were evangelical Christians. There were a series of commonalities.
So when there was an abortion bombing, police officers immediately looked for white, Christian, ultraconservative males. Why can‘t we do that when we are screening for terrorism in a post-9/11 world?
MOHAMMED: Joe, very good reason. If we were to follow what our guest Michael has said, race, ethnicity, all the commonalities, Richard Reid boarded the plane and did not fit the profile that you are talking about. Richard Reid would have blown up the plane if it wasn‘t for a careful—the stewardess that basically tipped off.
So things like this is going to happen. And I agree with you. I travel with my children. I have three children. The youngest one is a two-week-old. And I don‘t mind going through the screening if there is a legitimate reason, if there is a focused issue. If you get a tip that a man with three children is traveling and is going to be tied with some explosives, yes, fine.
I don‘t care if it‘s a dead body that you are going to have to check through. But simply to say, well, the hijackers—are we learning—are the hijackers our teachers? Are they going to provide security consulting for us, to say, well, 9/11 hijackers profile, fit this profile? What happened, Michael, after the TWA 800 flight? We had a profiling system, the CAPPS system. It failed.
SCARBOROUGH: Michael, let me have you talk about Richard Reid. Here you have a British citizen, I believe, didn‘t fit the profile that you were talking about.
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: And he tried to blow up a plane going to Miami. Talk about it.
SMERCONISH: A convert to radical Islam. I think that Richard Reid does fit the prototype.
rMD-BO_Thurston Howell, bald guys from suburbs with whales on their pants, aren‘t committing acts of terrorism. Why are we wasting our resources on them? And, you know, it‘s even worse than you and I have described with the incidents with our kids. Our government has actually fined airlines millions of dollars when they believe that those airlines, and I am talking about United and American, the airlines that were most victimized on 9/11, lost two airplanes apiece, and more than 30 of their personnel—they were fined $1.5 million each...
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: Michael, I want you to name names. Michael, let‘s name names.
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: Hold on a second. Guys, stop for a second.
Michael, is the president‘s fault? Is it Norm Mineta‘s fault? Is it Congress‘ fault? Who is responsible for, as you say, having TSA agents wasting their time frisking Thurston Howell IIIs, 14-month-old babies, and grandmas in pink and green?
SMERCONISH: Listen, I am going to tell it like it is. And I am a guy that supports the president, danced at a White House party a week ago, but it‘s happening on his watch, and he bears responsibility.
And Norman Mineta set this mind-set, and he has got to go. The TSA is now under the umbrage of the Department of Homeland Security, and so my former governor, Tom Ridge, good guy, straight arrow, he bears responsibility as well. And we have got to fill those slots, Homeland Security and Transportation, when we get rid of Mineta, with people who understand that this is a war against radical Islam.
MOHAMMED: OK.
SCARBOROUGH: Sohail, let me ask you a question that a lot of Americans out there...
MOHAMMED: Yes.
SCARBOROUGH: I hear it time and time and again, and maybe you can enlighten us.
MOHAMMED: Yes.
SCARBOROUGH: They will say, look at 9/11. The 19 hijackers all had these commonalities. Look at the USS Cole attack in 2000, all the same commonalities. Look at the 1998 attack on the Khobar Towers. All the attackers had the same commonalities. You can go all the way back to 1982 and the attack on the Lebanon barracks, killing the U.S. Marines, over 200, again, all the same commonalities.
So, why should we tell our police officers, when it comes to screening for terrorists in the air, look at young Arab Americans or look at young Arabs with U.S. passports? And, after all, wouldn‘t that make you and your family safer, just like it would make my family and Michael‘s family safer?
MOHAMMED: Joe, in one word, I can tell you. The TSA recently did a test and explosive baggage slipped through. I am more for tighter security with our baggage. I think that bag could have caused—Michael‘s notion of the profiling, we would have—everyone would have flown with flying colors.
There was nobody there to profile. What about the baggage? That baggage could have caused damage. I am for the security of our baggages;
100 percent baggage screening should be done. Those are the kind of things that we should be supporting, not basically saying, well, if they fit this profile—yes, of course, they‘re all male. Are you searching just male? Every single one that you have mentioned were males. Why are we searching females? Are we stopping at males?
No, we are not doing it. All I am saying is, this profile is counterproductive. It does not work. It hasn‘t worked. And it‘s sexy laws that we have. It‘s basically sexy. The administration basically said, we‘re doing something.
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: Michael, I will give you the last word. You got 15 seconds. Go.
SMERCONISH: What I am advocating is what the Israelis do with El-Al. Our mistake in the United States, we spend too much time looking for bombs and not enough time looking for bombers. That‘s the solution.
SCARBOROUGH: All right.
Michael, thanks for being with us.
Sohail, we greatly appreciate you being here, too, especially because you are outnumbered on this one 2-1, but thanks a lot for coming here and giving us your point of view.
It‘s very important for everybody to hear both sides on this story, because it does seem obvious to so many of us that you want profiling. You want profiling if you are going after Klan members. You want profiling if you are going after abortion bombers. And, yes, you want profiling done to make police officers‘ jobs done when you‘re trying to policing the air.
Now, still ahead on SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY, critics throughout thought that Mel Gibson‘s “The Passion of the Christ” would bomb. Instead, it became one of the highest grossing films of all time. And that isn‘t the only story that big media got wrong in 2004. I am going to give you my list coming up in a second.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCARBOROUGH: Can liberals and Democrats do anything to slow down the formidable Bush machine? Or will the president appoint every judge he wants? That debate is coming up next.
But, first, let‘s get the latest headlines from the MSNBC News Desk.
(NEWS BREAK)
ANNOUNCER: From the press room, to the courtroom, to the halls of Congress, Joe Scarborough has seen it all. Welcome back to SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY.
SCARBOROUGH: Hey, welcome back to the show.
You know, 16 years ago, George Bush Sr. stood before congressional Democrats on the day of his inauguration and he assured them that his presidency would usher in the age of the extended hand. Bush 41 did extend his political hand. It promptly got bitten off.
But fast-forward 16 years, and another George Bush is preparing for his second inauguration. Now, this Bush is offering no hand to Democrats. Instead, his recent decision to renominate 20 conservative judges rejected by Democrat filibusters over the past four years sends a kind of unmistakable message to Democratic senators. That message is, drop dead or, in the alternative, remember Daschle.
With us now to talk about the president‘s brinkmanship strategy on judges and whether it‘s going to lead to what the Republicans are calling the nuclear option are Democratic Congressman Anthony Weiner, who serves on the Judiciary Committee and House—and Republican strategist Jack Burkman.
Congressman, let me begin with you. A lot of people out there don‘t understand why a president sends up a judicial nominee to the Senate, and yet the Senate doesn‘t even get to vote on it because you can‘t get 60 senators to break a filibuster. Don‘t you think it should be—every judicial nominee should deserve an up-or-down vote?
REP. ANTHONY WEINER (D), NEW YORK: Well, let‘s, first of all, keep it in perspective that President Bush has had nearly 90 percent of his appointments confirmed. He‘s actually had a much higher success rate than most presidents.
But, I think, you know, look, do you want to have people get the fullest possible hearing, and, at the end of the day, I do believe that the minority in both houses has a right to use every tool at their disposal if they think that we are headed down a bad path. There‘s a reason why the Senate was given the right to advice and consent. I think the founding fathers were wise to realize that it wasn‘t just going to be a popular president and even a majority in Congress that are going to get to decide these things, that we are going to have to have some element of consensus when it comes to the judiciary.
SCARBOROUGH: But advise and consent means exactly that. You would think, again, that would be up-or-down vote. Everybody would deserve it. And majority vote would confirm a judge. Nowhere in the Constitution...
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: Hold on a second. Hold on. Let me finish.
Nowhere in the Constitution is there the suggestion that each judge will only be confirmed if he gets a supermajority of Senate votes.
WEINER: That‘s why filibusters are very rare, and that‘s why for the most part, I think only 11 judges have been filibustered by the Senate.
But I think that you will have no filibusters in this Congress if the president realizes that I don‘t think—we have enough ideologues in Congress, enough ideologues in the media. Let‘s have some moderate, thoughtful people in the judiciary, not ideologues either the left or right, and you probably wouldn‘t have any filibusters. But this is a decision the president has made.
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: Hold on a second.
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: Hold it. Hold it.
Congressman, though, you talk about ideologues, but the way the Democrats define ideologues right now is anybody that is pro-life. So, if you are a practicing Catholic, you are an ideologue by the definition of Washington Democrats.
WEINER: First of all, there have been plenty of Catholics that have confirmed and plenty of people that have had decisions in their background that could reasonably lead to believe that they would support a right of—would oppose the right to choose.
That‘s not the point here. The point is, there are some people that simply probably don‘t have the temperament to be in the highest court in the land or at least in the federal judiciary. But I am not quite sure I understand...
(CROSSTALK)
WEINER: If I could just finish my thought.
I don‘t know why this has become such an issue. When you think of it, President Bush has had more confirmed, far more than Clinton and far fewer filibusters than Clinton did. So, I‘m not sure I understand even why this is a source of contention.
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: Jack Burkman, answer that question, Jack. Answer that, because we hear it time and again, that President Bush actually had the better confirmation success than Bill Clinton.
JACK BURKMAN, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: It‘s all an issue of perspective.
The congressman didn‘t answer your initial question, Joe, about, will you give up-or-down vote to the judges? He refused to answer that. He said they should use every tool at their disposal. Look, the use of the filibuster, this idea of the congressman‘s that they should use every tool at their disposal in the minority to stop judges, it is a relatively new phenomenon.
When Scalia, who is very conservative justice, came up, there were many on the left who had all kinds of concerns about his ideology, but he was confirmed 98-1. But what we are seeing now is even worse than stalling tactics. We‘re seeing religious bigotry. Look at a guy like David Pryor. He should have been confirmed in a second. He‘s enormously well qualified.
They didn‘t like his religion. They said, he‘s a Christian conservative.
It was some of the worst bigotry I have ever seen in the Senate. They had no legitimate argument against him. Look, the country has elected a Christian conservative president by 3.5 million votes. He has every right. Indeed, he has a mandate to send up conservative justices. If they are going to have a litmus test—the problem, Joe—and I will give this piece of advice to the president.
What you have got to do here is hammer the moderates. You cannot allow Arlen Specter—my blood, the president‘s blood, a lot of blood and money were spent getting this guy reelected. Frankly, I am just about to the point where I regret having done that, because he made a lot of commitments to support the conservative agenda. He is now backing away from that.
The way this has to go is, one of the moderates has to be made example of. You have to have somebody‘s head on a platter and somebody stripped of their committee assignments and say, if you do this, this will happen to you.
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: Hold on. Let me ask a question.
What do you think, Congressman, is going to happen if Bill Frist and the Republicans in the Senate decide to roll out the nuclear option, which is, for our viewers that don‘t know, is changing the rules of the Senate to say all these judges now need to get a vote on the floor is a majority vote, instead of the supermajority, 60?
WEINER: Well, listen, I think that many of us who are Democrats believe that, at the end of the day, the great undoing of the Republican agenda this time will be an overreach.
And I think, fundamentally, the American people are neither ideologues on the left or ideologues on the right, that they want jurists, who are the ultimate backstop of a democracy, to have a moderate temperament, to have a thoughtful temperament. And I think...
(CROSSTALK)
BURKMAN: Let me ask you this. What is wrong David—you oppose David Pryor. What is wrong with David Pryor as a judge?
(CROSSTALK)
WEINER: It is preposterous, first of all. It is, first of all, preposterous to posit that someone‘s religion should disqualify them. That‘s absolutely wrong. And that hasn‘t happened.
BURKMAN: But your senior senator from New York, Chuck Schumer, and Hillary Clinton led that charge on that very point. Let me ask you a question.
(CROSSTALK)
WEINER: On what very point? On what very point?
(CROSSTALK)
BURKMAN: David Pryor was disqualified because of his religion and because of his views on...
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: Jack Burkman, let the Congressman respond.
Go ahead, Congressman. Respond.
WEINER: That is not true. At no point did they object to his religion and you know that. Now, you would like it because it‘s fodder for your base, but, in fact, it was the judicial temperament of the person, one of only 11 out of (AUDIO GAP) that were filibustered.
And I say again, why is this such a concern, when there have been so few of them? I believe that most Americans believe that what the United States Senate should do is make sure that no lemons get through. And I‘ve got to tell you, 90 percent of the president‘s appointments have gotten through. That seems like a pretty good record. I don‘t think anyone has overreached here at all.
SCARBOROUGH: All right, thank you so much, Congressman. And I do agree with you. If the Republicans fail in the next two to four years, it‘s going to be because they overreach.
Congressman, thanks for being with us.
And, also, Jack Burkman, as always, we appreciate you being here.
And just, my point is this. Whether it‘s a Democrat or a Republican who is president, I think their judicial nominees deserve an up-or-down vote. And that‘s what Democrats said when Bill Clinton was in the White House. I think it‘s what Democrats need to say now that George W. Bush is in the White House.
But, still ahead, the top stories that the mainstream media got wrong or missed altogether in 2004 when SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY returns.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCARBOROUGH: Hey, welcome back.
Now, remember, we have got a poll going on right now on whether you agree with the United Nations bureaucrat who said that the United States was stingy with its aid money to natural disasters like the one that is rocking Southeast Asia. Again, you can cast your vote at Joe.MSNBC.com. The votes are flooding in, and we will give you the results online after the show.
Now, from Mel Gibson to the swift vets to Zell Miller to George W. Bush, the mainstream media seemed to get most of the biggest stories wrong when those stories didn‘t line up neatly with their own political or cultural prejudices. But far more troubling than movie stars and politicians getting slighted is the fact that U.S. troops overseas are perhaps the greatest victims of liberal bias, because most reporters and anchors are what the publisher of “The New Republic” recently called anti-war activists.
That means soldiers sacrificing their lives for a cause they believe in are routinely ignored. Now, here‘s the story of an immigrant to the United States who signed up for military duty the day he got his green card. He went to Iraq and promptly volunteered for the most dangerous of duties and then proved himself worthy of the title American hero.
Sadly, few media outlets have shared his heroics with the American people, because it doesn‘t fit their liberal agenda. So, you probably haven‘t heard about his story, that is, until now.
Rory Devine and Ken Kramer of our San Diego affiliate, KNSD, are covering this story. Ken Kramer brings us this report of the Marine who sacrificed his life to save the lives of his fellow soldiers.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KEN KRAMER, KNSD REPORTER (voice-over): They gathered at the chapel at the Marine Corps recruit depot to say goodbye to Rafael Peralta, Marine Sergeant, whose death, according to those who were there, was the kind of thing that could make him a legend in the Corps.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For wounds received in action.
KRAMER: Today, he was awarded the Purple Heart, but there are those who say that, because of what he did, he could be in line for the Medal of Honor.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I wouldn‘t be surprised if he gets it. Like I said, that‘s the type of Marine that I knew, sir. It‘s all about making it happen, sir.
KRAMER: According to “The Army Times,” quoting those who were there, a fragmentation grenade was rolled into a room where he and fellow Marines were seeking cover. He grabbed it and cradled it to his body, saving their lives, sacrificing his own.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He should be remembered as a hero, not anything else or anything less than a hero.
KRAMER: For his family, this is an anguishing loss. They are devastated. His burial at Fort Rosecrans was almost too heartbreaking to watch. The tribute was crisp and conducted with the utmost of military dignity and respect, but even hardened Marines were moved to tears and eloquence.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We call football players heroes. We call soccer players heroes. They are not the real heroes. The real heroes are men like him who are lying six feet under for their country.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCARBOROUGH: Log on to Joe.MSNBC.com to find out more about Sergeant Peralta. Tomorrow, we are going to have a Web exclusive with his brother and sister and have the last letters that he wrote home.
It‘s—I am telling you, this is a remarkable story. And I agree.
This gentleman deserves a lot more than a Purple Heart for what he did. It‘s just—what a great American. What a great Marine. I just don‘t know where we find these type of men.
With me now is Bob Kohn. And Bob is of course the author of “Journalistic Fraud: How The New York Times Distorts the News and Should Not Be Trusted.”
Bob, we have you here for a very good reason. It seems to me every day the newspapers are filled with bad news about what is going on in Iraq. You know, if we had had a Marine that had punched an Iraqi that waved a gun at him, it would be on the front page of many newspapers. Every time we have these punks that decide to call press conferences and say they are not going to go over to Iraq or Afghanistan, the press swarms.
And yet here, we have the story of a young man who saved the lives of fellow Marines by taking a hand grenade that was thrown at them, placing it under himself, and then taking his own life, saving them. Isn‘t this the worst example of journalistic bias regarding this war?
BOB KOHN, AUTHOR, “JOURNALISTIC FRAUD”: Well, as you know, we have been talking about how the mainstream media has been biased against the war. We saw 26 straight days on the front page of “The New York Times” the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. Twenty-six straight days on the front page? I mean, come on.
But I think the most poignant example was written today by Oliver North in “Human Events” magazine, where he points out the contrast between the story that you just talked about, the soldier who jumped on the grenade to protect his fellow Marines. That is a real hero. But what the mainstream media calls a hero is this Navy petty officer who protested against the war by refusing to go on his ship.
Now, thousands of media outlets covered this Navy petty officer protesting the war. But only a handful—he counted less than 25 media outlets—maybe “The Los Angeles Times” was one exception—covered this story. So, the mainstream media just simply doesn‘t want to cover the good news. And thank goodness for Oliver North, because I don‘t think this story would have come to light without him bringing it to the attention to all of us.
SCARBOROUGH: And how often does this happen with the press, where they actually either cover up or willfully neglect to report good news that‘s happening over in Iraq with our soldiers, with our Marines, with our sailors?
KOHN: Yes.
Well, this is media bias 101. The press controls what—they control story selection, what gets covered and what doesn‘t. This is a classic case of not covering a good story. And then they decide whether something gets buried on page 15 of “The New York Times” or put on the front page. They control the news that way.
And then, of course, they spin the actual facts. But I think the most egregious example is this one right here, where just about everyone covered the so-called hero who protested the war, and nobody is covering the real hero, the one who just jumped on this grenade to protect his fellow Marines. It‘s just completely outrageous.
And I think the mainstream media has to ask itself, what in the world are they doing? What is news?
SCARBOROUGH: It is very unfortunate. And, of course, we congratulate “The Los Angeles Times” for printing this story. And I will tell you what. There are heroes in every state, in every city, in every community over in Iraq and over in Afghanistan. But, unfortunately, there aren‘t heroes in the newsrooms of America tonight that want to report those stories.
Let‘s bring in Gary Morrison. Now, Gary‘s son‘s life was actually saved when Sergeant Peralta made the ultimate sacrifice.
Gary, tell us about this story and tell us about this brave Marine who was responsible for saving your son‘s life and the life of others that were with him in Fallujah.
GARY MORRISON, FATHER OF U.S. SOLDIER: Sergeant Peralta‘s acts will be something my family and I will never forget. It‘s something that is heartfelt. And he saved the life of our son, like you said, and others in that room as well. And we are eternally grateful for Sergeant Peralta‘s heroic acts.
SCARBOROUGH: How did your son describe Sergeant Peralta? What did he say about him?
MORRISON: It‘s hard for him to talk about it at this time. The boys are saddened by the loss of Sergeant Peralta. He was their leader.
SCARBOROUGH: Is your son and are those that fight with him discouraged by the reporting back in the United States? Because it seems to me that every time I talk to somebody that is serving over in Iraq or in Afghanistan, they say the media is not reporting what is really going on, on the ground there, that they are focusing on the negative so much that they are not giving Americans the proper perspective on all the great work that‘s being done in Iraq and in Afghanistan.
MORRISON: Oh, Joe, I wish I could talk to my son more often, but I don‘t have the answer to that question.
These—he knows that we are proud of not only him, but other troops over there on what they are doing.
SCARBOROUGH: Well, Bob Kohn, let me bring you back in here.
Obviously, I talk to troops a good bit and also get e-mails. I got one last night from somebody in Iraq talking about how distorted the media press is in the reporting of this war.
And I want to give you one more example of bias with “The New York Times,” not on the editorial page, which always drives me crazy. And you always tell me, you can‘t look at that. So, let‘s talk about what happened this past week, where there was actually a connection, yes, a connection between Iraq and al Qaeda, where you have Osama bin Laden tapping Zarqawi.
That was buried on page nine of “The New York Times,” when they have been crowing for a year and a half that there‘s no connection between al Qaeda and Iraq. Was that—do they do it on purpose? Do you believe they did it because it went against the story that they have been telling Americans for almost two years now?
KOHN: I can‘t get into their heads and their motivations.
But the evidence, the forensic evidence that you and I see every day on the front page or buried on page nine of “The New York Times” is, I think, proof beyond a reasonable doubt that these people are expressing their views through their news pages, in addition to their editorial page. “The New York Times” is a $3 billion company, $3 billion in revenues. And they are against the war, using both their editorial page and the front page.
That‘s a large soft money machine here that is trying to influence public opinion. It‘s outrageous, and it‘s really dropping the standard of journalism throughout the entire country.
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: I agree with you, Bob. And, unfortunately, we have got to go. I agree with you. But they are going to be proven wrong in this war, just like they were proven wrong during the Cold War and Ronald Reagan.
Thank you, gentlemen, for being with us. We‘ll be right back with final thoughts.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCARBOROUGH: We want to know what you think in SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY, so log on to Joe.MSNBC.com and vote in our poll and let us know if you think that America is being stingy with foreign aid.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCARBOROUGH: We are back talking media bias with Bob Kohn.
Bob, why don‘t you give us your media winners and losers for 2004?
KOHN: Sure.
Well, let‘s start off with the loser. The big loser for 2004 was Dan Rather. He is the personification of liberal media bias. And he was caught in a Nixonian like cover-up over this forged memo scandal, which is now being called Rather-gate. He is, I think, the biggest loser for the entire mainstream media and represents their loss.
The big winner are the Internet bloggers. These are the people who took Dan Rather down, who, in a matter of hours, determined that these documents were obvious forgeries. So, that is it. I think, at the end of the day here, this is good news. The mainstream media can‘t get away with their tricks anymore. We have Internet bloggers. We have cable television, cable news, as well as the talk radio looking after the mainstream media. We have built-in ombudsmanship here, and it‘s going to make it.
SCARBOROUGH: I think that‘s great.
Hey, Bob Kohn, thanks so much for joining us. I agree with you. I think the blogging community is extraordinarily important to keeping the—keeping press, including us, on our toes, and making sure we are giving you the stories straight.
Now, Thursday, we‘ve got Carson Daly with a preview of the NBC New Year‘s Eve bash at Rockefeller Center. And, up next, we got “HARDBALL.”
Remember, vote on Joe.MSNBC.com on whether you think the United States is stingy in foreign aid. You have got a few more minutes. That‘s Joe.MSNBC.com.
Have a great night and we‘ll see you tomorrow in SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
END
Copy: Content and programming copyright 2004 MSNBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2004 FDCH e-Media, Inc. (f/k/a/ Federal Document Clearing House Inc., eMediaMillWorks, 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 FDCH e-Media, Inc.‘s copyright or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.