IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.

'Scarborough Country' for April 5

Read the transcript to the Tuesday show

Guest: Jerry Springer, Chris Simcox, Enrique Morones, Carl Bernstein

JOE SCARBOROUGH, HOST:  By now, we all know the stories.  He studied his Bible under the shadow of Nazi occupation.  He survived Stalin‘s cruel reign.  He was the first non-Italian pope in 455 years, and he helped dismantle the Soviet empire. 

He resisted the tides of public opinion, and, instead, he clung to the eternal truths of God‘s word.  And he lived as he died, without fear.  That, in the end, is a lesson Pope John Paul II the great leaves us all this week.  You know, we will never possess his power to bend history.  We will never understand the depth of his relationship with God.  And we will never own his reserves of compassion that led this man to forgive the terrorist who tried to end his life 24 years ago.

This compassion is just part of what made him so remarkable.  Be not afraid, he said.  That was Pope John Paul II‘s message to the world, right after he became pope in 1978.  And it‘s a message that he leaves us once again this week. 

Tonight, as tens of thousands of people across the world flood the streets of the eternal city of Rome, saying farewell to a man for all seasons, an icon for all time, we look closer at the remarkable life and inspiring journey of a man that many are now calling Pope John Paul the great. 

Welcome to our show. 

Now, tonight as the world watches St. Peter‘s Square in Rome, over a billion Catholics worldwide remember the epic life of Pope John Paul II.  Born in 1920, the Polish native grew in body and spirit, enduring Nazi occupation and then laboring under the cruel Soviet reign of Joseph Stalin.  You know, this was the same Stalin who once contemptuously asked, how many military divisions does the pope have? 

Stalin‘s successors, of course, would discover decades later that this pope had enough spiritual divisions to spark a revolution that would bring down the Soviet empire.  And over the inspiring days that have been unfolding before our eyes in Vatican City, we have seen those spiritual divisions march through Vatican City.  It‘s been an incredible scene.

And Chris Matthews has been there through the entire event, watching the faithful flood into St. Peter‘s Square to say goodbye to a spiritual giant who freed a continent and held true to the faith of his fathers. 

Now, earlier tonight, I asked Chris if he got any sense that, going forward, the church will be more progressive or continue to follow the conservative ideals of this pope. 


CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST, “HARDBALL”:  Well, Joe, I think it‘s the latter. 

I think, if you look at the—just the numbers of cardinals who this pope, this late pope, John Paul II, named, he practically named all of them who are voting, almost to the last person.  And they are going to have a lot of—obviously, his legacy will be alive in the conclave, and so—and, also, when you talk to younger priests around here in the Vatican, they are inspired by this man. 

They like his conservative approach.  And so I don‘t see any chance for any abrupt move away from his orthodoxy, his conservative interpretation of Christ‘s message.  And so, I think it‘s going to be pretty much continuum, rather than a pendulum, next time around. 

SCARBOROUGH:  You know, Chris, it‘s interesting that you talk about the young priests, because the one thing I have noticed in the Episcopal Church—my father has been a member of the Episcopalian Church in America for quite some time.  We hear about the big dustup over the gay bishop and the fight about gays in the church and a lot of these other social issues that the Catholic Church is also debating.

But you talk to the younger priests that are being appointed, the younger rectors.  They are all young conservative orthodox men.  Are you telling us, from what you are seeing over in the Vatican, that is the same thing?  That‘s the same church that Pope John Paul II has set up for the 21st century? 

MATTHEWS:  Well, that is certainly the mood here, Joe.

And the only nuance is that, although these young priests are very committed to the conservative interpretations of Christ‘s message, in terms of life and capital punishment, issues like that, they are very liberal, you might say, even left-leaning, to some extent, on the issue of poverty. 

They really don‘t think it‘s OK for the rich nations to just enjoy the wealth.  They believe in sharing the wealth.  And they believe in a tremendous responsibility toward the poor of the world.  And, certainly, if you look at what Pope John Paul II said when he visited countries like Mexico, he said that charity shouldn‘t just be crumbs, that we should clearly share the wealth of the world.

And so, that redistributed part of the message is definitely not right-wing sounding to me.  So, I think it‘s a combination of young priests believing in the responsibility they have towards carrying on the conservative views with regard to sexuality and marriage and then the more liberal view with regard to economics. 


SCARBOROUGH:  That‘s Chris Matthews from Vatican City. 

And that‘s remarkable.  You know, that‘s not only happening in the Catholic Church.  That‘s also happening in evangelical churches.  Nic Kristof in “The New York Times” talking about how evangelical Christians, when they address AIDS in Africa, when they address sexual slavery, when they address a lot of economic issues across the globe, evangelicals are actually becoming more progressive in these issues, just like conservatives in the Catholic Church.  Truly, a new day is dawning for Christ‘s church across the world.  And certainly Pope John Paul II played a big role in that. 

Now, the funeral of Pope John Paul II could be one of the largest events in history. 

“NBC Nightly News” anchor Brian Williams is, of course, in Rome tonight, a witness to that history. 


BRIAN WILLIAMS, NBC ANCHOR (voice-over):  At the point where the line starts, it‘s a brisk parade of mourners just arriving, but then the reality, the enormity of this human event sets in.  In a line that stretches for miles snaking through the streets, it takes hours for the pilgrims to pay their respects. 

(on camera):  How many hours have you waited? 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Around 12:00 noon.  And we have about three more hours to go. 

WILLIAMS:  To make sure they don‘t all push forward at one time, the mourners are stopped periodically by a wall of police officers.  Then they are released to make their way toward the Vatican. 

(voice-over):  In the line, we found two college students from the states who are attending college in Europe and couldn‘t bear watching it all on TV and not being here. 

AARON DECKER, STUDENT:  We took a couple of days off.  We are going to have to make it up at the end of the year, but came over here and pay our respects. 

WILLIAMS:  And there was John Paul from Minnesota.  He was born just after the pope was elected and named for the pope he came here to mourn. 

(on camera):  So, this is a calling and a namesake for you. 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Indeed, a vocation. 

WILLIAMS:  Some have traveled 30 hours to get here.  All incoming trains and planes are booked and full; 4,000 buses are expected.  Many people will have to sleep in stadiums. 

And there in line, where the Vatican finally comes into view for those who have waited so long, we found U.S. Army Colonel Keith Geiger (ph).  Stationed in Belgium, he is just back from the Iraq war, where he was an aide to commanding General Ricardo Sanchez.  He brought his family here to be a part of this and to see one of the giants of his lifetime now at rest. 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  I am a Catholic.  I have been my entire life.  And so, we were coming to Rome to show our daughters Rome.  And the Vatican was going to be certainly a part of that.  And it‘s something that is an important part of our life.  You know, he is really the pope that I know, the pope that I have seen.  And so that‘s—you know, it‘s kind of tough to say goodbye.


SCARBOROUGH:  That‘s a great piece.  And what is so remarkable about it is how young everybody in the crowd seems to be. 

With me now, we have got MSNBC political analyst Pat Buchanan and also MSNBC analyst Anthony Figueiredo, who is a former papal assistant. 

Pat Buchanan, let‘s begin with you.


SCARBOROUGH:  You know, we have talked again.  We‘ve talked an awful lot about how this pope reached out to the younger people in his church.  You look at the crowds, and it certainly doesn‘t look like a mass attended by 65-, 70-year-olds.  We keep hearing about how the Catholic Church is aging. 


SCARBOROUGH:  This appears to be an extraordinarily young group of people here coming to pay their respects to this 84-year-old pope. 

BUCHANAN:  You know, Joe, he not only was 84, but at the end of his life, he had Parkinson‘s.  He slurred his words.  He was elderly, as you say, and yet he had this extraordinary attraction for young people.

And so then, when you use the phrase John Paul the great, but why was he great?  And what was it that attracts these young people?  And, in my view, my humble view, I think there was a sanctity, a holiness, a goodness that the man exuded.  And he was, if you will, a stater of moral absolutes in a world of moral relativism.  He was sort of a beacon of light in a darkening world.

And young people, more than anyone else, I think, know that this world, with all its materialism and hedonism, especially Europe and the United States, it is fundamentally hollow.  And here was a man who was serene in the truth.  And I think they found it very magnetic. 

SCARBOROUGH:  You know, Father Figueiredo, what doesn‘t really line up for me watching these crowds are how secular they look, how young they look.  As Pat Buchanan said, moral relativism has swept across the West since the 1960s, and yet still they come.  Are they coming because it‘s a historical event, or are they coming because it truly is a spiritual event? 

FATHER ANTHONY FIGUEIREDO, FORMER PAPAL ASSISTANT:  Hey, Joe, it truly is an historical event, having studied church history.  We point to great saints who attracted a quarter of the number of these people.

But what really strikes me is that John Paul the great was faithful to the teachings of Jesus Christ.  He simply preserved those teachings and addressed them to people in their current situations.  He‘s loved them.  If you love people, you can teach the truth fearlessly, and they will follow you.  That is what we are seeing in this pope. 

Just imagine, Joe, who could bring to their funeral the president of the United States and Fidel Castro?  It seems he wants to come.  Who can make the future king of England postpone his very wedding to attend the funeral of the leader of the Catholic Church and leave his bride at home?  You know that Tony Blair was supposed to call the general election today in Britain.  He has postponed it. 

Who can bring to his funeral his would-be assassin, who is surely coming to ask forgiveness in return for the forgiveness he received?  Truly, as Pat Buchanan just said, this is John Paul the great.  We are witnessing history, Joe. 

SCARBOROUGH:  We certainly are.  It‘s remarkable. 

And, of course, Tony Blair puts off an election.  Prince Charles puts off a wedding. 


SCARBOROUGH:  The whole world—that poor guy is never going to get married. 


SCARBOROUGH:  The whole world stops and waits for the passing of this pope. 

We are going to have a lot more.  And, Pat, I promise...

BUCHANAN:  Charles had a bad spring





SCARBOROUGH:  I promise it‘s not going to be about Prince Charles.  No, we are going to be talking about Pope John Paul the great when we come back, and also going to be talking to Carl Bernstein, talking about the pope, some of the challenges that he left behind for the church, and where it‘s going in the future when this special SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY remembrance of Pope John Paul the great and his legacy continues in just a minute.


SCARBOROUGH:  You are looking at a live shot of Vatican City right now.  Throughout the day, tens of thousands of people flooding in to pay their respects to Pope John Paul II.  Will he be remembered as Pope John Paul the great or will a storm of controversy rise up? 

We will be talking about that when SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY returns in one minute. 



SCARBOROUGH:  You are looking at a live shot of Vatican City. 

Of course, over the next several days, tens of thousands of people across Europe and the world are going to continue flooding in to pay their respects to Pope John Paul II.  That is, of course, where John Paul II made his legacy that many people are now saying will eventually lead the world to remember him as Pope John Paul the great.

But some critiques, some harsh critiques, are starting to rise to the surface here in America and also across the world.

And to talk about it are MSNBC political analyst Pat Buchanan.  And

here now with us is Carl Bernstein.  He, of course, is the author of “His

Holiness: John Paul II and the Hidden History of Our Time,”

Carl, you know, the first three or four days, it seemed that every time you opened the newspaper or read magazines or turned on the TV set, it was all positive about Pope John Paul II.  Many were talking about how he was going to be remembered.  He was going to be a saint.  He was going to be John Paul the great.  Now, of course, you look in “The New York Times” today, and you have got Thomas Cahill, a respected historian, actually saying—and I wrote the quote down here—that Pope John Paul II could be remembered as the man who destroyed his church because of his conservative theology. 

Should we expect more harsh criticism like this in the coming days and weeks? 


Look, all great men generate controversy.  This is a great pope.  He did great things.  He had great accomplishments.  He also clearly failed at several things that are very important in the history of the church, and, I think—pardon me—in terms of his own objectives of uniting his church.  Tom Cahill, who you mentioned, was actually the first editor on our book, and I have great regard for Tom.

But, you know, you talk about, well, is he going to be known as John Paul the great?  To some people, yes.  To other people, other people are going to remember, for instance, that this pope and his church at this moment had the one institution in Africa that might have been able to do something about the scourge of AIDS, by promoting through its infrastructure, the church, the use of condoms. 

He chose not to because he believed theology wouldn‘t permit it, so he is a figure of great controversy, and rightly so.  It does not diminish his accomplishments in terms of what he did in Poland, what he did in terms of the Iron Curtain, how he looked at questions of social justice and the dignity of those who were marginalized by race, by poverty, by geography, by physical affliction. 

But there is no question that his stands that have to do with gender, with sex, with collegiality in the church have engendered a lot of enmity and will cause a lot of second looking at his papacy. 

SCARBOROUGH:  And, Patrick Buchanan, of course, Thomas Cahill, the author of “How the Irish Saved Civilization,” a great book, a respected author, again, he is going after him.  Also, you have “Vanity Fair”‘s Christopher Hitchens, who accused Pope John Paul II of being part of a cover-up. 

And look at what he did.  Bernard Law out of Boston, after the abuse scandal broke, he actually elevated him to a position in Rome.  And many people are saying that he was, in fact, part of that cover-up.  What would you say to Christopher Hitchens and other critics of Pope John Paul II who said he should have done more to end the child abuse scandal in the church? 

BUCHANAN:  Well, I think the real responsibility for the child abuse scandal, which is—very heavily here in the United States of America rests with the Catholic bishops and the Catholic cardinals. 

And I won‘t deny that they failed the Catholic community and the church terribly, and I think they know this.  But this whole thing broke in the last couple of years.  I would agree.  I thought the Holy Father should have sent a cardinal over here, basically, someone over here to discipline these bishops and tell the Holy Father which ones to remove and which cardinals to remove.

And maybe he can be criticized on that, but let me go as administrator.  And others have.  But let me go to what Carl Bernstein said.  The Holy Father cannot unite the Catholic Church, for the reason that the church is fundamentally divided.  Since the 1960s, post Vatican II, there are many Catholics who no longer accept certain doctrines, who want women priests, who they believe they should ease up on abortion, who believe birth control is essential.

And the Holy Father has to make a choice and he came down, as he has to, on the side of orthodoxy, faith and morals, as he was handed down by the church, by tradition from Aquinas, and all the way from the Bible, Joe.  So, I think he has run the race.  He has done his job.  But there‘s no question, you can‘t unite this church.  But I will say this. 

The future, the future pope and the future leaders are going to look and say, here‘s a man who stood up for what he believed in, who stood against the spirit of the age, who stood against—ran against the current and the tide, and he was beloved at the end of his life.  And look at these trendy clerics, the “Are you running with me, Jesus?” types from the 1960s, and Schillebeeckx and Kung and all the reformers at Vatican II.

They are gone, gone and forgotten.  And the Holy Father is remembered.  I would again use the analogy.  Ronald Reagan.  Every Republican asks, why can‘t he be more like Reagan.  And why?  Reagan did the same thing, stood against the spirit of the age.  So, the pope did the right thing, and he is getting his great crown right now. 

BERNSTEIN:  Can I respond? 




SCARBOROUGH:  Let me just say, though, on the Reagan analogy, Ronald Reagan was really the first president to say no to detente, to challenge the evil empire.  Republicans in his own party thought that he was out of his mind, that he was a reactionary, that he was dangerous. 

Gerald Ford said President Reagan could lead us to World War II.  In many ways, Pope John Paul II was scorned by moderates in the church because he, too, turned his back on some of the more progressive elements of the 1960s.  Is there an analogy there that you can make between Ronald Reagan, the president, and Pope John Paul II, the pope? 

BERNSTEIN:  No.  No.  I think you are getting to too many angels dancing on the head of a pin.  I think that you are talking apples and oranges here. 

There‘s a great affinity between Reagan and this pope.  They collaborated on saving solidarity.  They shared objectives.  They were shot within weeks of each other.  They both believed they had been saved providentially for great works, including the fall of the Iron Curtain.  But that is still is something apart from what you‘re saying.

I want to answer something Pat said, because I agree with most of what Pat said regarding Pope John Paul II, his legacy, his standing up for his own beliefs, and that he will be known as a great pope.  But when you talk about the perennial theology, and Patrick knows more about this than I, God knows.  But...



BUCHANAN:  Go ahead, Father Bernstein. 


BERNSTEIN:  But one of the things—Pat was talking about contraception and how this was handed down by church from the beginning.  I can‘t remember his exact words.  Contraception is a later-day creation. 

And, in fact, John Paul II‘s predecessor, Paul VI, as we write in our book “His Holiness,” had a commission to study the birth control and contraception.  The majority of members of that commission recommended to Paul VI that the church‘s prohibition on birth control be removed, just as three-quarters of American Catholics believed it should be removed, and three-quarters of American Catholics practice birth control, according to the surveys. 

Paul VI was convinced by then Archbishop Karol Wojtyla of Krakow that the prohibition should not be removed, largely on the basis of what he Wojtyla done working with young people, young couples on questions of sex and marriage, and telling the pope that they would stay true to the principles of contraception—anti-contraception. 

Well, in fact, this might have been true in Poland, but it certainly wasn‘t true in the rest of the world.  But my point is this, that those questions are not necessarily part of the perennial theology.  They can be changed, from my understanding.  I will have to ask Archbishop Patrick about that. 


BERNSTEIN:  But I think that they can be changed.

And, again, the Catholic Church is a huge, fluid institution.  It has moved through the history of the world and has made great changes in its liturgy, has made great changes in its rules, in its theology.  It‘s not as consistent.

SCARBOROUGH:  All right, Carl Bernstein, Father Bernstein, Cardinal Buchanan, we are going to have to continue this later. 


SCARBOROUGH:  Thank you so much for being with us tonight, though, a great discussion. 

And coming up next, Americans are volunteering to protect our borders. 

Are they heroes or villains?  That‘s next. 


SCARBOROUGH:  Volunteers who call themselves the Minutemen are rushing down to the border to try to help patrol the border.  Are they helping or hurting?  We will talk about that in our SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY showdown. 

But, first, here‘s the latest news your family needs to know. 


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:  You know, one month ago, we told you about al Qaeda‘s plans to cross into America from Mexico.  And, also, of course, you know, illegal immigration costs U.S. workers over $70 billion a year, and it costs you money, too, by the social services they take from you and your family. 

But, starting last Friday, a group of volunteers who call themselves the Minutemen, well, they have been patrolling a stretch of the U.S.-Mexico border.  And, so far, their calls to Border Patrol have led to the arrests of 118 illegal aliens. 

With me now in this special SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY showdown to talk about this is Chris Simcox.  He‘s the co-organizer of the Minuteman Project.  And we also have Enrique Morones.  He‘s president and the founder of Border Angels, an organization that gives aid to people crossing the border. 

I will talk to Chris in one second.  This is obviously his organization. 

But, Enrique, I want to start with you.  I understand you don‘t like the idea of this Minutemen organization.  I know a lot of people in D.C.  don‘t like the idea of this Minutemen organization.  A lot of politicians across the border, they don‘t like the idea of this organization.  But they have already had 118 arrests because the Minutemen are down there.  What can be so wrong with that? 

ENRIQUE MORONES, BORDER ANGELS:  Well, Joe, I think your premise about the cost of the country, first of all, was wrong, when you started off the commentary on the migrants that are coming to this country, like they have been for hundreds of years.  But as far as the...


SCARBOROUGH:  OK, we will get to that in a second. 


SCARBOROUGH:  What is wrong, though, what is wrong with these Minutemen going down to the border, helping law enforcement officers snag 118 illegal immigrants?  You got to be happy about that, don‘t you?  It makes your job easier. 

MORONES:  Well, my job has nothing to do with that type of situation.

But what we do and what we are opposed to is these vigilante groups that have gathered in Arizona to confront the migrants.  They‘re not law enforcement.  These people are people that have been called together by Chris Simcox, your guest and others, the Barnett brothers, Glenn Spencer. 

A lot of these people have very shaky backgrounds, ties to National Alliance, Aryan Resistance.  These types of groups, when they call people from across the country...

SCARBOROUGH:  Wait, wait, wait, wait.  Are you saying these people are racists? 

MORONES:  A lot of them are, yes, no doubt about it, no doubt about it. 



MORONES:  Well, Chris, I got to call you in on this one, Chris, because you and your organization has just been accused, again, an organization most Americans believe simply trying to stop the flow of millions of illegal immigrants into this country.  You have now been accused of being a racist.  Your organization has been accused of being connected with neo-Nazi groups.  Respond to that one. 

CHRIS SIMCOX, THE MINUTEMAN PROJECT:  Well, I think Enrique is quite ignorant of the facts that we are doing here.  This really has to do with homeland security, you know, and I think my biracial African-American son would have something to say about that.

SCARBOROUGH:  All right, wait, wait, wait.  But before we get to that one, though, Chris—hold on a second, Chris.  Before we get to that, we have got to clear up this Neo-Nazi connection, Aryan groups.  Are there Neo-Nazis in your organization?  Are there bigots in your organization?  Who comprises your organization? 

SIMCOX:  No, not at all.  We have Hispanic Americans.  We have African-Americans working here.  This is—people are just trying to divert your attention away from the real issue, which is national security and stopping illegal immigration. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Are you guys vigilantes? 

SIMCOX:  We have no connections to any organizations.

No.  In fact, we have been out here four days.  We have yet to find a vigilante.  And, if we did, we would contact law enforcement and turn them over. 


SCARBOROUGH:  Enrique, how would you define a vigilante? 

MORONES:  Well, a vigilante is somebody that is going—in this particular situation, they are people that are taking the law into their own hands.  They are not law enforcement.  They are not trained to do this type of work.  You have a mixture of people.

And I didn‘t say specifically Chris or one particular organization.  I said there‘s racists within this group.  And there‘s no doubt about it.  Look at the criminal records of some of these people, the Barnett brothers, who have been closely aligned with him, almost beating a woman to death, holding people at gunpoint.  If they are really trying to reinforce the border, why don‘t they join the Border Patrol or become part of the National Guard?  There‘s a right way and a wrong way to do things here in this country?

SCARBOROUGH:  Enrique, do you have any problem with these guys, though?  You say they are vigilantes.  Do you have problem with these guys patrolling the border, picking up their cell phone?  The way I look at it, it‘s a lot like a neighborhood watch.  You see something suspicious, you pick up the phone, you call the police.  We salute people when they do that in suburbia.  Why can‘t they do that along the borders?  I mean, it‘s already led to the arrests of 118 people.

MORONES:  Well, in your city, Joe, wherever you‘re at, would you like people from the city that you‘re in to go out into the street with guns to be assisting the police?  No. 

You don‘t mind if they are saying, hey, listen, there‘s crime here or crime there.  But these people having—armed.  If they are just observing, they can just be observers.  But why are they carrying weapons?  And the other day, Chris made a statement about, they are not big guns.  They are small guns.  When was the last time somebody got shot and said, was that a big gun they shot with me or a small gun?  What they‘re doing is, they‘re taking...

SCARBOROUGH:  Chris Simcox, are you guys going along the border with Gary Cooper badges wearing cowboy hats and waving guns around?  Are you guys armed and dangerous? 


We have American citizens sitting in lawn chairs with binoculars and cell phones, spotting and reporting suspicious illegal activity, just as the president has asked all Americans to do since the attacks of September 11. 


SIMCOX:  We have a no-contact policy. 

MORONES:  The president himself called the group vigilantes. 


SCARBOROUGH:  Well, hold on a second.  Let Chris respond. 

SIMCOX:  Well, the president is obviously ignorant of the facts and ignorant of the stress that this puts on our communities here. 

We are assisting law enforcement.  We are in no way taking the law into our own hands.  Everything we are doing is legal or the National Guard would be here stopping us.  So, we‘re well within our rights.

SCARBOROUGH:  Pat Buchanan, let me bring you in right now. 

Pat, a lot of people are looking at this Minuteman Project.  And you know what they are saying?  I know because what they‘re saying because I hear them every day, whether I‘m walking—whether I am in my hometown or on my radio show, they are saying, enough is enough.  The federal government has betrayed us.  The president has betrayed us.  Congress has betrayed us.  They want to grant amnesty to all of these illegal immigrants in America.  We are glad some people are going down to the border and trying to enforce the law by just helping out law enforcement officers. 

Do you have a problem with it? 

BUCHANAN:  I have no problem with it.  My little sister Bay was out there with these folks.  She says they are wonderful people.

You‘ve got elderly folks, retired folks, military folks.  You‘ve got Hispanic Americans, African-Americans.  They are going out there, Joe, because they are concerned that their country is being invaded by hundreds of thousands of people every year who are coming here into this country, and not only, frankly, taking jobs, but some of them are committing crimes. 

And the president of the United States is guilty of appeasing Vicente Fox of Mexico by refusing to do his constitutional duty to stop this invasion.  That‘s all people ask.  Look, Congress and the president, enforce the immigration laws, which say the United States cannot be invaded. 

Joe, if you and I are frisked and all these things when we go through an airport, why can‘t our government simply tell folks trying to break in, no, you can‘t do that? 

SCARBOROUGH:  You know, Pat Buchanan, I know, a couple of weeks ago, you saw the “TIME” magazine article that talked about how Zarqawi was frustrated about his lack of progress in Iraq.  They are going to South America.  They were going to bring terrorists through the Mexican and U.S.  border.  And then they were going to focus on civilian targets in America, schools.  They are going to focus on malls.  They were going to focus, again, on places where Americans go. 

And, yet, here we have, a week and a half, two weeks later after that “TIME” magazine exclusive, reports that the U.S. Senate, the Republican Senate, is actually attaching an amnesty program to an emergency funding bill to fund our troops overseas.  What don‘t politicians in Washington, D.C., get?  Why are they doing this?  I don‘t understand it.  

BUCHANAN:  You know, I think there‘s a couple reasons.  One, Karl Rove believes that, if we enforce the laws of the United States, that the Hispanics, we will lose that vote, and that is a decisive swing vote of the future. 

Secondly, business corporations love massive labor coming into this country that holds down wages of working Americans, because you can always hire an illegal immigrant, and the working Americans can‘t work or have to work for a little bit more than that.  Churches want folks here. 


BUCHANAN:  The labor unions want them here, because they are going to organize them.  They have been losing workers.  There‘s tremendously powerful interests, Joe. 

MORONES:  And, Pat...


BUCHANAN:  But the vast majority of the people—go ahead.

MORONES:  This is an issue of human rights.  This is an issue of human rights. 

And remember that most of the Latinos that are in this country came here legally.  A third of the undocumented people in this country are not from Latin America.  The last time there was an invasion of this area, it was an invasion of the United States toward Mexico, when it took half of its territory.  These are people looking for the work that this country needs.    

BUCHANAN:  All right. 

MORONES:  The labor force needs these workers. 

SCARBOROUGH:  But they are here illegally, are they not, Enrique? 


MORONES:  They should be going through a different process.  They should not -- 3,200 people have died since Operation Gatekeeper started.  This has been a terrible failure. 


BUCHANAN:  It is a terrible thing, I agree with you, a terrible thing to have folks dying out there in the desert, most of whom, I agree with you, are coming in here simply to find work.

But what we‘ve got to do is, you got to secure the border at all the places where they come in, in great numbers like Douglas.  The Border Patrol can handle the other areas, and these folks who get caught out there, you can provide for them. 

SCARBOROUGH:  It seems to me, Chris, a lot of Americans are cheering what you are doing, but there are some Americans that are very concerned you are going to take the law into your own hands.  Some of your people may get overly aggressive and may abuse some of these illegal immigrants, who, after all, are just coming here to try to find a job so they can pay their family. 

What safeguards do you have in place to ensure everybody watching tonight that all you are going to do is pick up the phone and help the Border Patrol track down these illegal immigrants and send them back home? 

SIMCOX:  We have thoroughly screened all of our volunteers, and they understand the seriousness of this political protest. 

We have a strict standard operating procedure of no contact.  It would be hypocritical of us to go out here, come out here and break the laws if we are demanding that the laws are to be enforced.  A Guatemalan man the other day who was separated and had been abused by the human smugglers had no fear coming to us and asking for water, which we provided, as well as food and medical attention.  They are human beings. 

And we welcome all immigrants to come to this country.  When they come through a port of entry, they are not exploited.  They are not exploited by vicious human smugglers that operate in Mexico.  We want their human rights protected, and that‘s very important. 

SCARBOROUGH:  All right, thanks so much, Chris. 


SCARBOROUGH:  I greatly appreciate it.  Thank you for being with us tonight. 

I want to thank all of our guests for being here.

And coming up next, Jerry Springer has a new show on the struggling Air America radio network.  Are they struggling or are they growing?  We are going to be asking him coming up next?  And we are going to be talking to Mr. Springer about everything from the pope to the president. 

And, even if you don‘t live in Tornado Alley, you should be paying attention to tornado season.  We will show you a good reason why. 



SCARBOROUGH:  This past Friday morning, Air America started carrying the latest edition to their liberal talk lineup, Jerry Springer.  Now, the former Cincinnati mayor, city councilman and host of the syndicated TV show “The Jerry Springer Show: joins us now to talk about it. 

So, Jerry...


SCARBOROUGH:  Here we go .  If you are keeping score at home, you got “Jerry Springer,” the TV show.  You got Jerry Springer, the politician.  You have got “Jerry Springer,” the opera.  And now we have got Jerry Springer, the radio talk show host.  Why radio?  Why now?  Why Air America? 

SPRINGER:  Well, radio, I wish it was something I would have started earlier.  I really enjoy it, because it‘s a—I want to be part of America‘s talk right now. 

From my perspective, most of what we see, particularly on talk radio, is a very conservative point of view.  I am not saying that everything about conservatism is bad, but, certainly, it can‘t be the only point of view, and I think it‘s fair to say, you know, let‘s hear the other side. 

So, I think now we are starting to get more progressive talk on radio.  I would like to be a part of that.  I think I have got a perspective that is perhaps a little bit populist.  But it‘s OK to be heard.  So I am enjoying it. 

SCARBOROUGH:  You know, Jerry, in the ‘60s and ‘70s, it seemed that you couldn‘t find conservatives to come out and tell people what they really believed.  Ronald Reagan was one of the few people out there, and he was considered to be an idiot, a dangerous ideologue.  Of course, history caught up with him. 

Right now, though, unless you are listening to Air America, unless

you‘re reading “The Nation,” unless you are going to alternative media

sources, you can‘t find Democratic politicians that are going to talk about

·         forget saying liberal and that label.  Let‘s just talk about progressive, talking about a progressive agenda for America.  Why is that?  Why are they scared? 

SPRINGER:  Well, I think this is what happened. 

I think the truth is—and I realize this is a very minority point of view—but I really think the truth is that the liberals won.  The liberals won over the last 25 or 30 years.  Back in the ‘60s, all the protests came from the left because the conservatives were in charge of America.  So, all the protest movements, whether it was the civil rights movement, whether it was the anti-war movement, the women‘s movement, the environmental movement, everything came from the left. 

Well, over time, the liberals finally won.  Now, then, all the protests suddenly comes from the right, and where the protest starts is through the media.  So, through talk radio and cable television, whatever, the protest to the liberalization of America has come from the right. 

Now, the right has been very successful in suddenly winning elections,

but I would argue that, even though all the talk is to the right, the way

Americans live today is clearly liberal.  You can go to the most

conservative homes in America, and you take a look at the kids.  And look -

·         listen to what—the music the kids are listening to, the movies they watch, the way they dress, their lifestyles, the fact that young people today are much more open about gay rights, the fact that people don‘t blink anymore if they see an interracial couple. 

The truth of the matter is that how we live every day is far more liberal than it ever was.  And that—the speeches are conservative, but our lifestyles are liberal. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Yes, but, Jerry, again, you look at some of the issues -

·         and, of course, you are at Air America.  You talk to Al Franken, you talk to Janeane Garofalo, you listen to their shows, they will tell you America under George Bush is going to hell in a handbasket.  They will say, look at the war in Iraq.  That certainly wasn‘t a liberal venture.  Look at the tax cuts, some of the largest tax cuts ever.  That is certainly, again, at the same time, not a liberal venture.  Look at environmental laws. 

SPRINGER:  I agree...


SCARBOROUGH:  They would say that they‘re some of the worst environmental laws ever.  It seems that conservatives have taken control of the White House, taken control of the Congress, taken control of the Senate, and coming soon to a theater near you, the federal judiciary and the Supreme Court. 

SPRINGER:  I agree. 

SCARBOROUGH:  You can‘t argue that this is a good time to be a progressive in America, can you? 

SPRINGER:  No, no, no, no, not at all.  I understand that the conservatives have now grabbed control of basically every institution of government.  You are absolutely right. 

I am saying, so the power right now is in the hands of conservatives, but in terms of how we all live is liberally.  Now there‘s going to be a confrontation.  You are right.  I believe that George Bush is running into the problem that presidents always do in their second term.  They start to believe that they are a gift from God.  They take their reelection as a mandate.  And they don‘t have to worry about being reelected. 

So, right now, the conservatives have won their elections.  They are now in a position of power.  And they are probably saying to themselves, within the Republican Party, they are saying, we are never going to have it better than we have now.  We have the presidency, the Senate, the Congress, the Supreme Court, the statehouses.  So, in these next two years, let‘s ram through everything we can, because we are never going to have it so good, and that‘s exactly what they are trying to do. 

I agree.  Those of us who are liberal and have won the battle in at least the cultural war better wake up, because we are going to lose those freedoms.  And I would argue...


SPRINGER:  Go ahead. 

SCARBOROUGH:  oh, no, no, I‘m sorry.  I‘m sorry.  Jerry, I was just going to say, I am looking at our screen.  It says “Springer Saves Air America?”  There‘s been an ongoing fight about whether Air America deserves saving or not, whether it needs saving.  If you talk to Al Franken, you talk to Janeane Garofalo, you talk to Sam Seder, they will tell you that Air America is doing great. 

You talk to conservatives, they will tell you that Air America is about to go belly up.  I know you work for them, but give us the inside scoop.  How is it doing? 

SPRINGER:  Well, OK.  First of all, it‘s doing great. 

But that doesn‘t matter.  That is a—that‘s a media discussion and a media argument.  And it‘s a competition.  Most Americans, you know what?  They would like to see on the airwaves in the media all kind of points of views expressed.  Let the ideas either succeed or fail based on their merit, not on the fact of, oh, that‘s a liberal station, I am not going to listen to that, or, gee, that Rush Limbaugh. 

I don‘t want to get involved in the personalities.  I happen to think Rush Limbaugh is incredibly good at what he does.  I disagree with almost 95 percent of what he says.


SPRINGER:  But he deserves to be on the air, and so does a progressive point of view.  We should embrace it all.  We should be saying, in America, come on, Air America.  Let there be another network of liberal talk.  You come on, too.  It‘s not a matter of, let‘s silence them.  Bring them all on. 

SCARBOROUGH:  Jerry, it‘s called the free marketplace of ideas. 


SCARBOROUGH:  And I agree with you. 

Good luck on your new venture.  We‘d love to have you back in SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY again sometime soon. 

SPRINGER:  I would love it.  Take care, Joe.   

SCARBOROUGH:  All right, you, too. 

Now, coming up next, a new twist on tornadoes, new, frightening information that may surprise you and even veteran weather watchers.  Watch out.  They are coming your way. 


SCARBOROUGH:  Did you know one of the most respected pollsters in America just issued poll findings that showed 79 percent of Americans were against the way Terri Schiavo died?  Go to our Web site and get the rest of the story.  That‘s


SCARBOROUGH:  Ah, spring, it‘s a time for baseball, a time for flowers and birds, and, yes, tornadoes. 

But that is not just in the Southeast anymore, friends.  I mean, you got Texas.  You got Oklahoma.  But guess where else it may hit?  Well, while the majority of tornadoes in the United States still hit in Texas, a new study of 3,800 tornadoes that hit between 1998 and 2000 says tornadoes are also striking the Midwest now and even in New England. 

The scientist who discovered this out-of-the-alley phenomenon says they are not trying to be alarmist, but they are telling you, you better look out, even if you are not in Texas. 

Hey, that‘s all the time we have for tonight.  We‘ll see you tomorrow right here in SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY.


Content and programming copyright 2005 MSNBC.  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 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.