sentence1
stringlengths 15
1.2k
| sentence2
stringlengths 46
501k
|
|---|---|
On Monday's show, Alex Chadwick talked with Slate.com "XX Factor" bloggers Emily Bazelon and Dahlia Lithwick about Hillary Clinton — should she give a speech about her husband? Now we hear what listeners think. Also, some listeners have been wondering what became of Day to Day columnist Brian Unger. | ALEX CHADWICK, host: Now, yesterday, I put a question to Emily Bazelon and Dahlia Lithwick. They are contributing writers to a column on the online magazine Slate. The column is called "The XX Factor." Here's what I asked.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: Now, if Senator Obama had to give the race speech, and then earlier remember Mitt Romney had to give the faith speech, does Hillary Clinton have to give the husband speech?</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: Well, senior producer Deborah Clark is back with us by a remarkable coincidence. She is our Letters producer this week, and the producer of the "Husband" segment. Deborah, how did the listeners assess this issue?</s>DEBORAH CLARK: Well, they were all over the place. We'll start with Beth Raypatch(ph) from Columbus, Ohio. She thought we had the issue all wrong. The real gorilla in the room, her word, not mine, is that things haven't improved all that much for women. Quote, "no consideration is given in the workplace to a woman's role as primary care giver to her children." She asked for some discussion about these issues instead.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: Well, I raised the issue with Emily and Dahlia that recent scandals involving Eliot Spitzer and his successor David Patterson have made marital infidelity a political flashpoint that is worth addressing.</s>DEBORAH CLARK: But Andrew Swanson(ph) of Reidsville, North Carolina, disagreed. He said Clinton was the cheatee, rather than the cheater.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: He did point out something else, though, citing a new story from last week that showed Hillary Clinton was actually in the White House on many occasions when her husband was known to have dallied with intern Monica Lewinsky.</s>DEBORAH CLARK: One begins to wonder if she is an enabler, Mr. Swanson writes. Quote, "her political record reflects that, as well. What with the vote to invade Iraq, that to this day she does not regret. I strongly question Senator Clinton's ability to lead a nation when she can be so easily duped."</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: Dahlia Lithwick made the following point about why Senator Clinton did not need to address her husband's infidelities.</s>Ms. DAHLIA LITHWICK (The XX Factor, Slate Magazine): She's always very adroitly played herself as the victim of Bill's philandering, so she doesn't have to own this the way Obama had to own the Reverend Wright. Nobody is going to say, account for your husband's infidelity, and what it meant to you because it just looks like it's victimizing her more.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: But listener Lacy Duncan (ph) of Indianapolis says, Senator Clinton does have a responsibility to speak to all women about her husband's behavior.</s>DEBORAH CLARK: She writes, otherwise women all over the world go on without addressing incidents like this that happen to them, which will only further the degradation of women.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: Now, Deborah, a follow up to our letters last week. A couple of careful listeners took issue with a letter that we read criticizing Senator Obama's race speech. The original letter said, he was at fault for attending a segregated church. Of course, that church in Chicago is not, in fact, segregated, which we should have pointed out.</s>DEBORAH CLARK: Yeah, that's true. We don't usually edit letters, but in that instance, we probably should have chosen a different one altogether. That's my bad. But let me redeem myself here, I hope. We've had a couple of letters asking what happened to Brian Unger? So I tracked him down.</s>DEBORAH CLARK: Hey, Brian, it's Deb from Day to Day.</s>BRIAN UNGER: Hi, Deb, how you doing?</s>DEBORAH CLARK: I'm good. So listen, our listeners think that we fired you. We've had a couple of people write in and wonder where you are. So?</s>BRIAN UNGER: Oh, well, we've been filming season two of "Some Assembly Required" for the Discovery Channel, but have I been fired?</s>DEBORAH CLARK: No, we'll hold the place for you, but when will that be?</s>BRIAN UNGER: Oh, probably towards the end of April.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: There you have it, mystery solved, Brian Unger back here soon. Deborah Clark, thank you.</s>DEBORAH CLARK: You are very welcome, Alex.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: And NPR's Day to Day continues. |
Almost a year since a young black man from west Baltimore died in police custody, trials of the officers charged in his case are set to begin. A citizen commission released its findings. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: In Baltimore, the anniversary of the death of Freddie Gray is fast approaching. Gray was the young black man who died in police custody, and his death sparked protests and civil unrest across the city. Six police officers face charges in the incident, though legal proceedings have dragged on for months. Now, a judge has cleared the way for trials to begin. Reporter Andrea Seabrook spent some time talking with Freddie Gray's neighbors.</s>ANDREA SEABROOK, BYLINE: In the West Baltimore neighborhood where Freddie Gray lived, people gathered this past week to tell their stories.</s>TALIA MARROW: My brother was never found to have any weapon of any sort - no money, nor contraband. My brother also was running when he was murdered.</s>ANDREA SEABROOK, BYLINE: This is Talia Marrow. Her brother, Jeffrey Marrow, was shot by police after, they said, he stole a bus pass.</s>TALIA MARROW: I know now no matter how fast he ran, he still was going to lose his life.</s>ANDREA SEABROOK, BYLINE: Marrow's story was just one of dozens collected by a community group called the No Boundaries Coalition. Almost a year ago, after Freddie Gray died in police custody, the people in this coalition went door-to-door collecting stories of how police work in West Baltimore.</s>CW HARRIS: Who are you guarding? Who are you protecting? You're protecting yourself first.</s>ANDREA SEABROOK, BYLINE: This is Elder C.W. Harris of a church in the neighborhood. He's lived and worked here for more than 60 years and he says...</s>CW HARRIS: The life that we're living is not normal. We need to change that.</s>ANDREA SEABROOK, BYLINE: There are signs of change, some say. This past week, a judge cleared the way for jury trials to begin for the six police officers charged in connection with Freddie Gray's death. And on the street in Baltimore's poorest neighborhoods, police say they're doing things differently now.</s>DONNY MOSES: First, we had to take a look at ourselves, which is really why we're pushing to be back out in the community.</s>ANDREA SEABROOK, BYLINE: Detective Donny Moses walks the beat in another poor, troubled block in Baltimore.</s>DONNY MOSES: Hey, what's up, baby? How you doing? Good, good.</s>ANDREA SEABROOK, BYLINE: He knows people here. Detective Moses lives nearby. And, he says, the police department isn't trying to hide the fact that there have been big problems in the past.</s>DONNY MOSES: We had gotten away from dealing with people. I mean, any district you go to, you can see where we're out and about and we're doing things.</s>ANDREA SEABROOK, BYLINE: Moses says there are more cops out of their cars, walking the sidewalk, blending into communities. It's a start, he says, though the police department knows right now is a tense time.</s>DONNY MOSES: We know that anniversary is coming. We know the trials are coming. We realize people will be protesting. All of those emotions may come back up.</s>ANDREA SEABROOK, BYLINE: They also know it's not just Baltimore, but the whole country watching what happens here. People are asking - will the court proceedings into Freddie Gray's death be fair? Can cops really be put on trial? And will Gray's family find justice? It's not just the police being scrutinized here but law enforcement and the justice system itself. Andrea Seabrook, NPR News, Baltimore. |
Don Reid is a former council member in Charlotte, N.C. NPR's Rachel Martin met him on a reporting trip there earlier this year, and talks to him about why he's supporting Donald Trump. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: As we mentioned, there were five states that voted in the presidential race yesterday. Bottom line, Donald Trump still holds the most delegates. And his supporters are doubling down after those comments made by Mitt Romney last week. We wanted to check back in with a man we met a few months ago on a reporting trip to Charlotte, N.C. His name is Don Reid. He's a longtime Republican and former member of the city council in Charlotte. When we met, he had already made up his mind to support Trump. And now, as his chosen nominee is gaining momentum, Reid is pretty psyched.</s>DON REID: I just absolutely love the fact that Donald Trump is challenging the establishment Republicans. He's redefining the party and, hopefully, destroying the power that has been in that little oligarchy of establishment Republicans in Washington, D.C.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: All right. So let's talk a little more about that. Why do you think the party has failed you?</s>DON REID: Well, since Reagan, they've offered people like me the choice of either voting for a loser like McCain or Dole or voting for the Democrat. And since I'm a conservative Republican, I held my nose and voted for the Republican. But they did nothing about illegal immigration. They did nothing about the debt. They shipped our jobs overseas. And so they've used the conservatives just like the Democrats have used the minorities to control the party.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: What makes you think that Donald Trump is different - that he's interested in anything more than just what's best for him?</s>DON REID: Well, first of all, Donald Trump has many things about him that I don't particularly like.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Like what? Tell me what you don't like.</s>DON REID: Well, I don't like the way he treated Fiorina about her face. I don't like some of the language he uses occasionally, and he comes across often as an arrogant elitist. But Trump has been successful. You can't take that away from him. He is an outsider, which we all need for sure. And he does speak to the three big issues that I think will destroy our country unless we do something about them, and he is the only one who promises to do something. Now, will he do it? I don't know. But if we don't find someone who at least says they will do it, then we don't have a chance.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: And you don't think Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio or John Kasich is making that argument?</s>DON REID: Well, to some degree - I like Cruz. I think he comes in second, but I do not think Rubio is - I think he's a lightweight. He's very glib, very smart, very inexperienced and has not accomplished much in his life except get elected to office. Kasich is a nice guy, but he is not - I'm off the board with him regarding illegal immigration. To me, the illegal immigration is the biggest problem that our country faces. It will destroy this country and our culture, and we must do something about it.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: You think Donald Trump can actually fulfill his promise to deport 11 million illegal immigrants?</s>DON REID: I don't know. I think that it's unfair to ask him all the details about it. But the fact that somebody says - I will do it if I get in office. I'll find the people to help me, and I will build a wall. All those things can be done if we have the resolve to do it. And if we don't have the resolve to do it, let's just fold our tent and forget that we're a country and become a Greece.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: How are you making the case to your friends and family who are still not sold on Donald Trump as the guy who should be the Republican nominee?</s>DON REID: Exactly the way I'm making it to you now, and I'm not convincing all of them. But I feel very confident that I'm correct. I will tell you this, though. Trump is redefining the Republican Party. And for conservatives like me, once this thing is redefined, we may not be so happy with it. I'm not sure of that. I'm very - a strong - a social conservative. I don't believe Trump is. But social conservatism can be put on hold for four years. Doing something about illegal immigration, security of our country, building up our military, doing something about our national debt and the jobs - that can't wait. Otherwise, nothing else matters.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So what do you think of the idea of a brokered convention? I mean, if Donald Trump doesn't garner the number of delegates he needs and it does go to some kind of brokered situation where delegates could ignore the popular vote and vote against Donald Trump, how would you feel about that?</s>DON REID: I think that could happen, and I feel that if Donald Trump goes into that convention - I think he needs 1,237 delegates - if he goes in with a 1,000 - 1,100 and the establishment comes in with its power and money and effectively gets rid of him and picks somebody else, I think he will run on a third-party ticket, and I hope he does. And contrary to what a lot of people think, I think he could win.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Don Reid, former member of the city council in Charlotte, N.C. He is a Republican and a Trump supporter.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Don, thanks so much for talking with us.</s>DON REID: Hey, let's talk again, Rachel.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: I'd like it. |
Adam Davidson of Gimlet, explains how free trade helps everyone a little bit, and also how it has directly ruined the lives millions of workers in certain sectors. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: As we have heard time and again in this election season, Donald Trump supporters are angry. Many have seen their jobs disappear and they blame free trade agreements. That issue has become a recurring refrain in Trump's speeches on the campaign trail.</s>DONALD TRUMP: China is killing us. Japan is killing us. Vietnam - new one - killing us.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: He's not the only candidate talking about trade. On the Democratic side, Bernie Sanders has made it a central part of his message.</s>SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS: When we talk about why the middle class of America is disappearing, one of the major factors is our disastrous trade policy.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: And now that the primaries are moving through the American Rust Belt, conversations about free trade and its effect on the working class are going to continue to be front and center in this campaign. So to talk more about it, we've called up Adam Davidson. He writes for The New York Times on economic issues. He's also the co-host of the podcast "Surprisingly Awesome."</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Hey, Adam.</s>ADAM DAVIDSON: Hey, Rachel.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Even though they talk about it differently, both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump blame free trade, to some degree, for the loss of a good number of American jobs, which, they argue, has put even more pressure on an American middle class that's shrinking. So is there any truth to that?</s>ADAM DAVIDSON: Look, the United States economy has shifted in fundamental and very scary ways since the late 1970s. And we do look to trade as one of the reasons for it. But that being said, if we imagine a counterfactual - a world in which we had not signed NAFTA, we had not helped create and join the WTO and we had not dramatically lowered tariffs, I don't think we would see Americans doing better. I don't think we would see the middle class being stronger. Very few economists would say that trade has been the primary cause of our troubles or that there's some option that government has had throughout to reject trade and therefore make life better for the rest of us. There is not free international trade. These are very complex trade deals. But where we do have free trade is within the 50 states in the U.S. Do you think your life would be better off if your home state had set up tariff laws with neighboring states - if you couldn't sell your goods and services freely to other states and you couldn't buy goods and services from other states? So the crude language of rejecting trade or trade has been the problem or that the U.S. government had some simple alternative option that would have been clearly better for everybody - that is just ridiculous. It's unsupported by any evidence.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: But to your example, you know, would our lives be better if individual states erected tariffs that impeded trade between states? I mean, Donald Trump would say that's ridiculous because we are the United States of America, and we don't have the level of competition between states as we do between nation-states. And nation-states have their own self-interests. And he argues it is in America's self-interest to establish higher tariffs, that that would somehow create an opening for American manufacturers to get more competitive. Is there anything to that?</s>ADAM DAVIDSON: There is literally nothing to that.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Why? Why doesn't that make sense?</s>ADAM DAVIDSON: First of all, the idea that raising tariffs will benefit a broad group of Americans is utterly rejected by the economics profession. It's simply not a political idea. It's an economic-illiterate idea. There was a poll, for example, several years ago when 97 percent of economists said tariffs are dangerous and not good policy. And I set out on a mission to find those 3 percent who said tariffs are a good idea. And the only ones I could find said yes, tariffs are a good idea for poor, developing nations. But I could not find a single economist - and I talked to very left-wing ones, very right-wing ones, centrist ones - I have never found a single economist who supports tariffs. And that's for the simple reason that tariffs are an incredibly crude tool. They enrich exactly who you don't want to enrich, the owners of less competitive, less efficient businesses. The higher cost of a tariff does not directly go to wages. It does not directly go to increasing employment. It simply goes to basically failed businesspeople - businesspeople who have not been able to compete in the economy.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: If you've just told us that free trade is unequivocally better for the American economy, again, why do you think so many voters from both parties feel otherwise? Is it just they're looking for something to explain their economic reality? I mean, they expected more from the economic recovery and didn't get it and so they can assign blame to free trade?</s>ADAM DAVIDSON: To be clear, trade overall is better for the country as a whole. It is not better for every individual. And our country is filled with millions of people. Their lives are permanently worse because of trade. There's no question. They do get the benefits. They get to buy cheaper goods and stuff imported. But overall, their wages have fallen so much, or they've simply become unemployable. And so there are lots of people for whom, individually, trade is bad. I would argue, and most would argue that overall, more Americans benefit than lose. But the benefits are very diffuse and dispersed. If you look around your house and kind of think, wow, everything I own was a little bit cheaper 'cause of trade. It was a little easier to afford. My lifestyle's a little bit better 'cause of trade. But that's not something you're going to vote on. You're not going to vote because your microwave costs $5 less. But if you lost your job and you lost your livelihood, you're definitely going to vote.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Adam Davidson, he writes about the economy for the New York Times. He's also the co-host of the podcast "Surprisingly Awesome." Adam, thanks so much for talking with us and breaking all this down for us.</s>ADAM DAVIDSON: Thank you, Rachel. |
Egypt's government is more repressive than it has ever been. NPR's Leila Fadel speaks with Rachel Martin about the government's heavy handed tactics, and the increased suppression of civil society. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: It was the spring of 2011. The Arab Spring protests in Cairo deposed longtime strongman Hosni Mubarak from power. After that, there was talk of change in Egypt, a new political opening that would lead to real democracy. Now, five years later, many Egyptians say that opening has slammed shut under the leadership of the new president Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. Most notably, anyone who speaks out against the government risks going to prison. Last week, a prominent lawyer in Cairo who represents imprisoned or missing Egyptians himself went missing. To talk about all this, we're joined now by NPR's Leila Fadel from Cairo. Thanks for being with us, Leila.</s>LEILA FADEL, BYLINE: Thank you.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: We mentioned this human rights lawyer who was - who has disappeared along with hundreds of other Egyptians. Why is this happening? Why are people being arrested?</s>LEILA FADEL, BYLINE: Analysts are talking about a government in a state that seems to feel out of control. They're trying to keep control at the time where the country's in a financial crisis. They're dealing with an insurgency in Sinai. And so the answer is to keep people in line through this type of political repression that we're seeing, these mass arrests, these mass sentencings in court and the many cases of security forces basically disappearing Egyptians.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: I imagine this has got to have a broader chilling effect, even on just daily life there.</s>LEILA FADEL, BYLINE: Yeah, I mean, you definitely feel a difference in the city. Cairo was always a very lively, fun city, chaotic. And even under Mubarak, who was an authoritarian leader, there were always known red lines - what you could say and what you couldn't say. And nowadays, that's really changed. People don't really know what they can and can't say anymore. And one of the biggest examples of that was the death and torture of an Italian Ph.D. student here who was found on the side of the road with stab wounds and cigarette burns on his body, signs of awful torture. And that is being attributed to security forces. And it's not unusual to have people disappear and then show up dead. But it is unusual for it to happen to a foreigner from a country that's closely allied with the Egyptian government. And so people just don't know where the red lines are now.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: What's the government's explanation for this crackdown? Do they give one?</s>LEILA FADEL, BYLINE: Yeah, I mean, the government says that this is a time of instability. They don't want Egypt to become like Syria, like Libya. And people are very afraid of becoming like Syria or Libya. And so that is what is said every time there's any type of crackdown - that this is what's best for Egypt. But I think that excuse is starting to run dry a little bit. For the first time, there's what feels like a moment happening in Egypt where there is more people speaking out despite the risks.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Is it better or worse, daily life in Egypt, than it was under Hosni Mubarak before the Arab Spring?</s>LEILA FADEL, BYLINE: I think it's unquestionably worse. That's what you hear from observers and people who live here. And so not only are you seeing mass arrests, mass death sentences, police repression, but you're also seeing a country that has a major financial crisis. There's no foreign currency really available for Egyptians. Their purchasing power is down. And so life is worse without the benefits of the stability of what they thought an authoritarian regime would bring.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: NPR's Leila Fadel in Cairo. Thanks so much, Leila.</s>LEILA FADEL, BYLINE: Thank you. |
Think you've gone gray from stress? Scientists say they've identified the first gene for gray hair. It accounts for about 30 percent of grays, mostly in lighter colored hair. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: If you're worried that this political season is causing your hair to turn prematurely gray, well, raucous debate language notwithstanding, that might not be the reason - because just last week, scientists identified the first gene for gray hair. The gene is called IRF4 and researchers say it's responsible for light hair color in people of European origin. This is the first time that they've linked it to gray hair. So, blondes might have more fun, but they're going to go gray a little faster. The good news for salon junkies is that therapies might now come along that can prevent grays from sprouting at all, and you can save on that base color. Plus, scientists identified a couple other hairy variants - the balding gene, curly heads and, if Ernie wants Bert to do more personal grooming above the eyes, Bert can blame it on his DNA because there's also a gene for unibrows. |
Ohio voters head to the polls on Tuesday. Rick Kepler, a retired union worker in Ohio, tells NPR's Rachel Martin why he plans to vote for Bernie Sanders. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Democrats are also in Ohio campaigning. Senator Bernie Sanders is feeling some momentum after his surprise victory over Hillary Clinton in Michigan. Now, he heads to Ohio where some of the same economic issues are driving the conversation there. We're going to hear from one Ohio voter now. He's 66-year-old Rick Kepler, a retired teamster organizer. He told us one of his local unions recently held a mock election. Half of the members supported Donald Trump. The other half, 2 to 1, backed Bernie Sanders. I asked him why Sanders has his vote.</s>RICK KEPLER: For the first time in my life, I heard a presidential candidate say that it's not the Russians or the Islamists or debt or some other thing that's causing the problems of the working people of this country. He came right out and said what it is. He said it's corporate America. It's Wall Street. It's the 1 percent.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: And you don't feel that Hillary Clinton is on the same page.</s>RICK KEPLER: Well, Bill Clinton was not a very good friend of labor - all those trade agreements, the Glass-Steagall Act and other things that Bill Clinton did. I knew then that they had created a right turn on the Democratic Party, what we call the corporate wing of the Democratic Party. She's campaigning to the left, as all the establishment Democrats do, but I believe that once she's in office, she too will then govern according to the needs of Wall Street before she takes care of the people on Main Street.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Bernie Sanders has been in the halls of Congress for a long time. Have you seen evidence that these are issues he has moved the needle on?</s>RICK KEPLER: He's been consistently principled on his positions whether it's in foreign affairs or, you know, what he talked about the last debate about what happened in - when Reagan was attacking the common folks in Latin America. And so I think as a Democratic socialist, he's a lot closer to the ideas that I believe in. We do need Medicare for all. It should be a right in this country and not a commodity that can be sold.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: But let me ask you about that because this country went through a pretty vicious fight over Obamacare. And the House has repeatedly tried to get it rolled back. So what makes you think a candidate who wants a single-payer system could win in a general election on that kind of platform?</s>RICK KEPLER: What he's doing is making us take a look at issues the corporate media just hides under the rug. What he's saying is - if you want to see these changes, you better have this political revolution and start talking about this. Don't forget Occupy. They're the first ones who drew attention to the 1 percent, and then they got crushed. But he's resurrected it.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Let me ask you, though. You clearly know the issues. You study the political map, I'm sure, so you know that Bernie Sanders has a tough path to the nomination right now.</s>RICK KEPLER: Absolutely.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Let's say Hillary Clinton wins the nomination and she's running against Donald Trump. What does that internal calculus look like for you?</s>RICK KEPLER: We have to support that. We have to make sure Trump does not grab the presidency of the United States of America. Won't be no full-fledged, boy, let's get Hillary in and things will change because we've got a few social issues that she'll stand up for. But when it comes to challenging Wall Street, nope, that's not going to happen.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Rick Kepler, he joined us on the line from his home outside of Akron, Ohio. He is a supporter of Senator Bernie Sanders. Rick, thanks so much for sharing your thoughts with us.</s>RICK KEPLER: Rachel, thanks for the opportunity. |
In her quest to be the Democratic nominee for president, the Clinton badly needed the win after losing to Sanders big in New Hampshire. But Sanders is still claiming momentum. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: There is no hangover in Las Vegas this morning for Hillary Clinton, who beat Bernie Sanders by 5 percentage points in the Nevada Democratic caucuses. NPR's Tamara Keith reports both candidates are already campaigning in the states that will vote next.</s>TAMARA KEITH, BYLINE: This was Hillary Clinton's first real victory speech of 2016, the first time she could stand before her supporters with the race called and say...</s>HILLARY CLINTON: Some may have doubted us, but we never doubted each other.</s>HILLARY CLINTON: And this one's for you.</s>TAMARA KEITH, BYLINE: Clinton was supposed to be the inevitable nominee, but Sanders did better than expected in Iowa and won New Hampshire overwhelmingly. Clinton needed a win to quiet the doubters, and she got it.</s>HILLARY CLINTON: Tens of thousands of men and women with kids to raise, bills to pay and dreams that won't die - this is your campaign. And it is...</s>HILLARY CLINTON: It is a campaign to break down every barrier that holds you back.</s>TAMARA KEITH, BYLINE: Those men and women showed up at caucus sites all over Nevada, including one at Caesars Palace casino.</s>UNIDENTIFIED CLINTON SUPPORTERS: Hillary, Hillary, Hillary...</s>UNIDENTIFIED CLINTON SUPPORTERS: Bernie, Bernie, Bernie...</s>TAMARA KEITH, BYLINE: There, people in housekeeping uniforms, chef's coats and cocktail dresses came straight from work. Clara Jauregui is a housekeeper at Caesars who came out to support Clinton. Her coworker Dora Montanez helped translate.</s>CLARA JAUREGUI: Because she - (speaking Spanish).</s>DORA MONTANEZ: She's running to go for equality between women and men, so she likes that about it (laughter).</s>CLARA JAUREGUI: Yeah. I hope it's better.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MAN: 153, 154, 155, 156, 157...</s>TAMARA KEITH, BYLINE: Once the caucus got underway, it was clear Caesars Palace was Clinton country.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MAN: After final math, Secretary Clinton gets 28 delegates. Senator Sanders gets 12 delegates.</s>TAMARA KEITH, BYLINE: Clinton actually won all of the caucuses held at casinos on the Las Vegas Strip, and she worked hard for those wins, making frequent stops at casino lunchrooms in recent days, even visiting workers doing laundry on an overnight shift. But Vermont senator Bernie Sanders saw a win in the results as well.</s>BERNIE SANDERS: You know, five weeks ago, we were 25 points behind in the polls.</s>BERNIE SANDERS: And we have made some real progress.</s>TAMARA KEITH, BYLINE: Sanders gave his speech about an hour and a half earlier than scheduled in a fairly empty stadium in the city of Henderson. Sanders told supporters, taking on the establishment is not easy.</s>BERNIE SANDERS: We have come a very long way in nine months. It is clear to me - and I think most observers - that the wind is at our backs. We have the momentum.</s>TAMARA KEITH, BYLINE: And with that, Sanders was off to South Carolina, which votes next. Polls show Clinton with a significant lead in that state, driven by strong support among African-Americans. As for Clinton, she flew to Texas.</s>HILLARY CLINTON: Hello, Houston.</s>TAMARA KEITH, BYLINE: Texas is the biggest prize on March 1, Super Tuesday.</s>TAMARA KEITH, BYLINE: Tamara Keith, NPR News, Las Vegas. |
French police have targeted and fired tear gas on makeshift homes where 3,500 refugees live in Calais. NPR's Rachel Martin talks to aid worker Clare Moseley from Care4Calais about the scene. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: There is chaos in the French refugee camp that has come to be known as the Jungle. In an effort to dismantle the camp, riot police in Calais have directed bulldozers and fired tear gas and water cannons at the refugees, and some aid workers have been caught in the crossfire. Clare Moseley is co-founder of the aid group Care4Calais, and she joins us now on the line from Calais. Thanks so much for being with us.</s>CLARE MOSELEY: Hi, Rachel.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: This sounds like a horrible scene. Can you just describe what happened when the demolition began?</s>CLARE MOSELEY: Yes. It has been unbelievably horrific and traumatic for the refugees, and not at all in line with what we were expecting after hearing French officials talk about it being done in a humane and dignified manner. They came in very forcefully. They told the refugees they had one hour to leave their houses or they would be arrested. And the minute the refugees were out of the houses, they stepped in and begin demolishing them with axes and hand tools and carting all the remains away with bulldozers.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Are these structures that were already there, that were uninhabited, or were houses built for them?</s>CLARE MOSELEY: This camp has been around since March 2015. And originally, all the refugees were just living in tents. And over the last six months, we've had a massive project with volunteers from all over Europe coming in and building little shelters. These are tiny, little, one-room wooden shacks.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: The French interior minister said that the French government has set up over 100 shelters across the country for migrants as an alternative to this camp. Are you seeing any evidence that those people are finding their way to those shelters?</s>CLARE MOSELEY: Well, some people are, but the government has nowhere near enough accommodation for the refugees that are going to be displaced. If it was about re-housing them, they would be taking them out, putting them on buses, taking them to find their new homes, putting them in places, and then maybe in a few weeks, they'd come back and dismantle the site. But what we're seeing is the minute a refugee steps away from his home, they come literally rushing in with the axes, with the bulldozers, desperate to get those shelters dismantled as fast as possible. Nobody's even looking to see which direction the refugees are walking in. No one's checking to see they get a better home. This exercise is about dismantling the camp.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: How have the refugees responded? I mean, have they just fled, or have any stayed in protest?</s>CLARE MOSELEY: The legal advice we'd been given was that they have a human right to accommodation. They're in Europe, and they have human rights now, so they were advised that they should be able to stay in their homes. So some of them tried to do a sit-in protest in the houses, but they were forcibly removed by the police. And then in the last few days, we've seen this absolutely shocking and awful protest by the Iranians who are sewing their mouths together to symbolize the fact that they've got not voice. They've refused food, they're on hunger strike, and I just - I cannot even explain to you how awful it is to see people driven to these kind of desperate measures when the law has failed them, the aid workers can't help them, and there's just nothing else they can do. It's heartbreaking.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Clare Moseley is a co-founder of the aid group Care4Calais. She joined us on the line from Calais, France. Thanks so much for talking with us.</s>CLARE MOSELEY: Thank you very much. |
Rachel Martin speaks with Christy Delafield of Mercy Corps about the struggle to get humanitarian aid into Syria, even during the current pause in fighting. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: The gun and mortar fire are supposed to have stopped in Syria, at least for the most part and for the time being. There is now in place what's called a cessation of hostilities. It was agreed to by the U.S., Russia Bashar al-Assad's regime and many of his enemies. The U.N. says it offers the most hope for peace in Syria after five years of civil war. And for humanitarian organizations, it's a chance to get aid flowing into the country. Christy Delafield is with Mercy Corps. She was just at the Turkish border with Syria, where refugees have massed. She joins me now from Istanbul. Thanks so much for being with us.</s>CHRISTY DELAFIELD: Thanks for having me.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: What have you seen, Christy? Have you been able to discern whether or not the fighting has really stopped?</s>CHRISTY DELAFIELD: We have observed a cessation of some of the fighting for the moment. Of course, it's - you know, it's still early. In the coming days, we'll keep watching things and see how it develops. What we're really focused on as humanitarians is the second part of that agreement, this notion that there would be an opportunity for increased humanitarian access.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So what are you getting in terms of more access? Can you get to where you need to go and deliver the aid?</s>CHRISTY DELAFIELD: Well, at this point, that's the big question. NGOs like Mercy Corps are not included in this agreement. This is a negotiation to allow United Nations aid convoys into certain areas that are considered to be besieged. But the number of people that they're able to help, those aid convoys last week reached about 80,000 people. And in Syria overall, there are 13.5 million that are in urgent need of assistance.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So it's still too dangerous for your organization to get into Syria to do any humanitarian work.</s>CHRISTY DELAFIELD: And in this past week, we haven't seen an increase in areas that we're able to access.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Christy Delafield of Mercy Corps. She's senior global communications officer. Thanks so much, Christy.</s>CHRISTY DELAFIELD: Thank you. |
After failing to gain any traction in the GOP presidential race, Jeb Bush has ended his run for the White House. NPR's Rachel Martin speaks to Mark McKinnon, a former Republican media strategist. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: As we heard, Jeb Bush suspended his presidential campaign after another loss, in South Carolina this time. Here's a bit of his speech to his supporters last night.</s>JEB BUSH: I thank all of the Jeb alumni, many of them who are here, that have been going door to door all across the country, who have put their lives on hold for this cause. And I want to thank my mom and brother who came here to South Carolina. America truly loves them and respects them, and so do I.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: We're going to turn now to Mark McKinnon for his perspective on the Republican presidential race and the Bush family legacy. McKinnon served as the former chief media adviser to John McCain and George W. Bush.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Thanks so much for being with us, Mark.</s>MARK MCKINNON: Hey, thanks for having me. Good morning.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Jeb Bush had the money. He had the name recognition. He had the resume. What happened?</s>MARK MCKINNON: Well, he's part of a political establishment that's been in politics for about 50 years, and that's the last thing Republican voters want right now. I mean, they are angry and mad. And they don't want to see anything that they've seen before, so they overthrew the dynasty and voted (laughter) for a guy who took on the Vatican this week.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Did the Bush campaign just see the writing on the wall? Or do you think the Republican National Committee exerted some pressure to get him to drop out so voters can coalesce around other candidates?</s>MARK MCKINNON: Oh, no. I think it was quite clear to Jeb and the rest of the campaign. They knew they had to do well coming out of South Carolina. Otherwise, there was no rationale for donors to carry on beyond South Carolina.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Do you think Donald Trump is on his way to becoming the nominee?</s>MARK MCKINNON: Pretty good chance. I mean, he comes out with a significant victory out of South Carolina. He's shown now that he's won two out of three states. (Laughter) You know, in order to get the nomination, you have to win states, and he's now won two. And he also benefits from the fact that he has a divided field now between Cruz and Rubio. They're going to divide up votes and - which allows him to coalesce the rest of those votes and have a good chance going into Super Tuesday and the larger states in the South.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So do you think there are conversations among some so-called establishment Republican Party leaders who are saying we have to get one of these two men to leave the race? There must be one established alternative to Donald Trump.</s>MARK MCKINNON: Well, the problem with that is that Ted Cruz is not an establishment candidate. I mean, he - although he's been in the Senate, there's been nobody that's been more antiestablishment than Ted Cruz. So there's not going to be any deals between the Cruz and Rubio supporters at all, which makes it problematic for them, and it benefits Donald Trump.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: What are you learning about the Republican Party in this election that you didn't know before?</s>MARK MCKINNON: Well, it makes me think about 1992 when Ross Perot ran. You know, you looked at the - sort of what the country was going through at that time, and people felt pretty bad about politics and the direction of the country. And so it created a huge opening for a businessman outsider. Well, if you look at those fundamentals today, they're, like, 10 times worse than they were in 1992. So you know, the fact that the country's in the shape that it's in - it really shouldn't be a surprise that a businessman outsider's having such an appeal to Republican and independent voters. So you know, it says that the Republicans - you know, I think the Democrats - with Hillary Clinton winning - are, you know, they're on their way to probably a coronation and, you know, a third term for Obama. What the Republicans want is a revolution.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Lastly, just briefly - final thoughts on what this means for Jeb Bush and his family and that legacy?</s>MARK MCKINNON: You know, it's - it was bittersweet last night. I mean, it was great to see my former boss 43 (laughter), George W. Bush, come out and Barbara Bush come out and the whole family come out. You know, it's a great political family. And I think even if you disagree with their politics, there's just a lot of goodwill for the Bush family. And it was hard to see somebody go through what Jeb went through. But he was - you know, he was very dignified last night. And I think he goes out with a lot of goodwill, although not a win.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Mark McKinnon is a GOP strategist and the co-executive producer and co-host of a weekly documentary series about the election. It's called "The Circus." It airs on Showtime. Mark, thanks so much.</s>MARK MCKINNON: Thanks, Rachel. |
Despite peace talks, Syria and its Russian allies continue their bombing campaign in northern Syria. Correspondent Alice Fordham speaks to NPR's Rachel Martin about the situation on the Turkey border. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: International wrangling to pull together a cease-fire for Syria continues. Today, Secretary of State John Kerry said a, quote, "provisional agreement" has been reached to stop the fighting. No details were released, but he did say a pause in the fighting could begin in the next few days. NPR's Alice Fordham is on the northern Syrian border, reporting from the Turkish side. She joins me now. Hi, Alice.</s>ALICE FORDHAM, BYLINE: Good morning.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Does this news of a possible cease-fire seem likely to actually halt fighting in Syria?</s>ALICE FORDHAM, BYLINE: Well, Kerry chose his words very carefully. He didn't say cease-fire. He said cessation of hostilities. Now honestly, I'm not sure what the difference is. But I think the careful choice of words is meant to convey that some military activity will continue.</s>ALICE FORDHAM, BYLINE: The various parties have said previously that military action against ISIS won't stop under a cease-fire. And Russia says its airstrikes are targeting ISIS. So that could mean that Russia intends to continue strikes under a cease-fire. And for most of the forces on the ground that we're talking to, that rules out any stopping of fighting for them. Plus, once again, there was no Syrian presence at these talks, and Assad has made many defiant statements about his conditions for a cease-fire.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: As you have said, bombing raids continue. The Syrian army stepped up its air campaign with help from Russia in recent days. Any idea how much ground they gained?</s>ALICE FORDHAM, BYLINE: Well, we know that the forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad are pushing forward in the traditional center of his support near the coast and in the rebellious areas around the city of Aleppo. This is propelled by an air campaign that is not led by Russian planes. And many people think this is connected to the ongoing peace talks - trying to ensure that Assad and his allies control as much ground as possible to give them leverage in those talks. It's a victory in the sense of Assad controlling most of Syria's territory is still a distant prospect. And the people that are really squeezed in all of this are the fighters who originally took up arms against Assad, who, despite allegations that there is extremism in their ranks, still insist that they are, you know, moderate or mainstream rebels.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: And these are the fighters who we knew as the Free Syrian Army, right?</s>ALICE FORDHAM, BYLINE: Right, exactly. I've been speaking to a few of their representatives and commanders here and over the border in Turkey. And their mood is just grim and pessimistic. They are seeing advances from Russian-backed, ethnically Kurdish-led forces on one side; from ISIS on the other side and from the regime of Bashar al-Assad on the other. And they say - you know, if they don't some sort of international help, they'll be defeated in a few months between these three opponents that they're battling.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So is that likely? Are they likely to get that international help?</s>ALICE FORDHAM, BYLINE: They're not expecting any, really. They say Assad's friends prove to be better friends. They're talking about Assad's allies from the governments of Russia and Iran and other people who have poured blood and treasure into his side of the war. The Free Syrian Army feel very betrayed by the United States and the West, in general, who supported them in principle but whose concrete actions to support them was more limited.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Meanwhile, there's been a huge humanitarian impact of all of this. We see these pictures of tens of thousands of people fleeing the violence. Have you heard anything on that very important issue?</s>ALICE FORDHAM, BYLINE: Yeah. There's tens of thousands of people who are freshly displaced by this fighting. Many of them had been displaced several times before. It's got harder to cross into safety in Turkey, so a lot of them are sleeping rough or in very overcrowded camps. Aid is not getting in as easily as it used to to these areas around the city of Aleppo. There's one last road that it's getting in through, and there's fears that the forces of Bashar al-Assad may even take that road, in which case hundreds of thousands of people would be cut off from help.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: NPR's Alice Fordham, speaking to us from the Turkish-Syrian border. Thanks so much, Alice.</s>ALICE FORDHAM, BYLINE: You're quite welcome, Rachel. |
Political endorsements sometimes make a splash. How do candidates go about getting them? Rachel Martin asks political consultant Bill Burton. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: On Friday, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie came out and endorsed Republican front-runner Donald Trump. So how does this happen? How do candidates and their staff get people to endorse their campaigns? We're joined now by a man who knows, Bill Burton. He's a former deputy White House spokesman under President Obama. He now works as a political consultant. Bill, thanks for being with us.</s>BILL BURTON: Thank you so much for having me.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: First off, Donald Trump endorsed by Governor Christie. What do you make of that?</s>BILL BURTON: It's probably the only New York Times breaking news alert that I got on my phone where I actually exclaimed out loud when I saw it. I was shocked to see it. But when you think about it, it actually makes a lot of sense. This is his way to still be relevant in the world and not have to just be governor of New Jersey, where he's not widely loved.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Let's unpack this a little bit. What do each of these men get, the endorser and the endorsee, specific to this Trump-Christie thing but also generally speaking?</s>BILL BURTON: Well, in this case, Trump came off of a battering in the debate. So having a big-name endorser like Chris Christie come on board gives him control of the news cycle. And for Chris Christie, it gives him an opportunity to be involved in the campaign. Now generally, endorsements I don't think necessarily matter. Every once in a while, they'll give you a great news cycle, which Marco Rubio got when Nikki Haley, governor of South Carolina, endorsed him. But it didn't actually help him on the polls in South Carolina in any significant way. But when Ted Kennedy endorsed then-Senator Obama, you know, that was a monumental event that was important for the campaign in the sense that people all across the Democratic Party were given permission by Uncle Teddy to get behind this upstart candidate from Illinois who was doing politics in a different way than we had seen in a - ever, really.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So endorsements don't matter unless they do.</s>BILL BURTON: You know, when Jeffrey Katzenberg endorsed President Obama, that was particularly meaningful because once he put his mind to it, he raised a great deal of money for President Obama. So that has meaningful and material impact. Other endorsements are, you know, Steve King endorsed Ted Cruz in Iowa. I don't know that that had any real meaning behind it. But I - you know, I don't think that, for the most part, congressional endorsements are that meaningful.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: And finally, how much stagecraft is considered when you think about how to unroll a particular endorsement? I mean, Chris Christie, this is, like, coming as kind of a surprise. He's on stage. Other endorsements - Eric Garner's daughter endorsed Bernie Sanders. It was a YouTube highly-produced video. I imagine there are real conversations within campaigns about, all right, now we've got this endorsement; how do we get our most bang for the buck in unrolling it?</s>BILL BURTON: Well, yeah. Every endorsement that's considered to be significant, there's a lot of time spent at the campaign figuring out how exactly you're going to roll it out. But then sometimes people just come out and endorse you and you have no idea it's coming.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: (Laughter).</s>BILL BURTON: For example - (laughter) - for example, Bill Maher announced on his show that he was cutting a million-dollar check to Priorities, our super PAC. And I found out about it on Twitter. Like, I was just out on a Friday night. And people started tweeting about it. And so I bought that night.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: That's Bill Burton. He's a Democratic political consultant and former deputy White House spokesman for President Obama. He's also currently raising money for Hillary Clinton. |
NPR's Sarah McCammon talks with New York Rep. Eliot Engel, Chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. He is pledging to hold hearings looking into accusations that President Trump hid details of his meetings with Russian President Vladimir Putin from the public and his own staff. | SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Two reports over the weekend raised new questions about President Trump's relationship with Russia. Last night, The Washington Post reported that President Trump sought to conceal details of his meetings with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The Post said that on one occasion, Trump took away the notes of his interpreter and instructed the linguist not to discuss what had transpired with other administration officials.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Earlier, The New York Times reported that the FBI opened a counterintelligence investigation into the president to determine if he was acting on Russia's behalf. On Twitter and in a Fox News interview, the president dismissed the reports and again called special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation nonsense.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Members of Congress want to know more. The Democratic chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Eliot Engel of New York, says he will be holding hearings on what he called mysteries swirling around Trump's bizarre relationship with Putin and his cronies. And Congressman Engel joins me now.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Welcome.</s>ELIOT ENGEL: Thank you.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: What was your reaction to seeing this weekend's reports?</s>ELIOT ENGEL: You know, part of it was shock. But part of it is we're so numb that we're not shocked by anything we hear anymore. I mean, I just think that ever since the presidential election in 2016, when it became apparent that the Russians were interfering in our election, the question was, was the Trump campaign in collusion with the Russians? We really still don't have the answer to that. The president had a meeting with Putin in Helsinki many, many months ago. Nobody knows, as far as I know - I certainly don't know - what happened there, what they discussed. I mean, Putin is not a friendly person.</s>ELIOT ENGEL: And from the beginning of the presidency, President Trump has seemed to hold Putin in high regard. It's just absolutely amazing. So I think that it's very important that the Congress - and I always point this out - we're not subservient to the president or the chief executive. And I think that it's important enough that we try to get to the bottom of it.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: And, Congressman, you've said your committee, the Foreign Affairs Committee, will hold hearings to investigate the president's relationship with Russia and Putin. What witnesses do you expect to call?</s>ELIOT ENGEL: Well, we haven't really decided on it because the committees are a little bit late - all the committees - in getting organized. So we don't yet know all the members on our committee. So we're going to wait until we can constitute the whole committee, which should be a matter of days, I hope. And then we're going to move.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: As you noted, after the president met with Putin in Helsinki this summer, the administration didn't give very much information about what was discussed. U.S. officials appeared to be in the dark themselves. There was talk about having the American interpreter at that summit testify before Congress. Might you subpoena her?</s>ELIOT ENGEL: Well, I would do that really as a last resort. We don't want to really get into a situation where it becomes a precedent for interpreters to give in their notes. I would hope we wouldn't have to do that.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Whoever you call to your committee, Congressman, are you worried about hitting a wall if the White House decides to cite executive privilege and prevent administration officials from testifying or complying?</s>ELIOT ENGEL: Well, I think if we hit a wall, and it became obvious that the administration was stalling, I would let the American people be the judge. I would hope, if there's nothing to hide, that they would care about Congress doing its job.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: And finally, Congressman, do you have any worries that constant oversight hearings in the House might feed into the president's narrative that Democrats are just out to get him because they're angry that he won the 2016 election?</s>ELIOT ENGEL: Well, I know he's said that before. But that's really nonsense. I mean, the narrative from the White House or from the president has always been that the Democrats just want impeachment. And I can tell you that's not the truth. My attitude is, let Mueller do his work. Impeachment is certainly not a goal of mine. It's a last resort. Of course, one of the ways we could avoid even any talk of that is if the president cooperated with Congress and didn't try to block everything that Congress wants to do. And, you know, it just - it doesn't pass the smell test. The Putin-Trump connection - it just makes you scratch your head. We're going to get to the bottom of it.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: That's New York Congressman Eliot Engel, now chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Thank you.</s>ELIOT ENGEL: Thank you. |
Lawyer Harry Litman worked under Attorney General William Barr in the early '90s. He tells NPR's Sarah McCammon why, despite some reservations, he thinks Barr's a good choice to lead the Justice Department again. | SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: The Senate Judiciary Committee, meanwhile, opens hearings Tuesday on President Trump's nomination of William Barr as attorney general. Democrats want Barr to commit to protecting special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation. Lawyer Harry Litman has some reassuring words for them. He worked in the Justice Department when Barr first served as attorney general in the early '90s. I asked Litman why he wrote a Washington Post op-ed under the headline, "Count Me As One Democrat Who Thinks Trump Made An Excellent Choice In William Barr."</s>HARRY LITMAN: Well, first of all, I think he is a huge step up from the current unstable and, I would say, dangerous situation of having the acting attorney general, Matt Whitaker, who is both not very qualified and, more importantly, seems to be in the pocket of Trump himself - you know, whose main qualification is being the eyes and ears of the president. That would never be Bill Barr. He's a institutionalist. He understands the important values of the Department of Justice. He has integrity. He has stature. He's nobody's toady.</s>HARRY LITMAN: That's my sense in particular from having worked for him. I was a Democrat in the department, and I can attest that he was apolitical in the way he ran things, and it was about the department's law enforcement mission. And that's, I think, what you need.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Now, two weeks after your first article, you wrote a second op-ed expressing alarm at what you called a constitutionally dubious memo that Barr wrote to the Justice Department. In that memo, Barr criticized Mueller's investigation into possible obstruction of justice by President Trump. What do you think Barr's motivation was in writing the memo? And do you worry that Barr would fire Mueller?</s>HARRY LITMAN: Right - two parts. I think his motivation was really to just lay out his views. I don't think - I know people are concerned about this - that it was some kind of audition for the job or anything that indicates he, you know, would put his thumb on the scale. What worried me wasn't even the main analysis in the memo but rather, along the way, he articulated some constitutional views of executive power that were really very expansive and might suggest - you know, I'm not sure. The Senate should ask about this on Tuesday - but might suggest that a president can't obstruct justice if he's exercising enumerated powers - appointment, removal, pardon. And that, I think, would be wrong and worrisome if that, indeed, is his view.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Should Barr recuse himself from oversight of the Mueller investigation because of this memo?</s>HARRY LITMAN: Yeah, it's a really good question. And, you know, Whitaker faced it. Sessions faced it. So I think the right thing to do is to serve it up to the professional staff in the Department of Justice. And my best guess would be Bill Barr would think that and do that. That's going to be one of the first questions to ask him on Tuesday - whether he would - not commit to recusing. I think he could really say, look, I've expressed views. That happens a lot. That doesn't mean you have to recuse. But the question is, would there be appearance of partiality? And I think they should ask him if he will commit to abiding by the recommendation of the professional staff.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Barr has written that he's been in the dark about many of the facts of the Mueller probe. If he were to learn that there is serious evidence against the president - and, of course, that's not something that we know right now. But if that turns out to be the case, based on what you know of William Barr, would he stand up to Donald Trump?</s>HARRY LITMAN: Yeah, I think so. And this is sort of reason number one that I'm bullish, you know, overall, notwithstanding my skittishness about his constitutional views. Barr is a grownup - and not simply because he's been around before. But he's just a strong person of principle. I think he would have no hesitation in telling the president, this is the law, and this is how it's going to be, and, if it came to it, resigning before knuckling under to a view that he saw as against the law.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: That's Harry Litman, former U.S. attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania who also worked for the Justice Department under attorney general nominee William Barr. He's now an attorney in California with the firm Constantine Cannon.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Thank you.</s>HARRY LITMAN: Thanks for having me. |
Eric Garner died after being put in a chokehold by NYPD officers. His mother has endorsed Hillary Clinton and his daughter, Bernie Sanders. Rachel Martin asks Erica Garner why she chose Sanders. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Much has been said about the generational divide in this presidential election, especially in the Democratic primary. On college campuses across the country at this moment, students are more likely to feel the Bern than they are to say they're with her. This generational split is also playing out with African-American voters, obviously, another important voting block for Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Our Sam Sanders is in South Carolina, the first primary state with lots of black voters. He will join us in a moment - but first, the Garner family. You know the name. Eric Garner was the black man who died at the hands of police in New York in 2014. His last words - I can't breathe - became a rallying cry for the Black Lives Matter movement. His mother and daughter both became activists, speaking out against institutional racism and police brutality.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Last month, Eric Garner's mother Gwen Carr endorsed Hillary Clinton. This past week, Eric Garner's daughter, Erica, endorsed Bernie Sanders. Here's a bit of that video.</s>ERICA GARNER: I'm behind anyone who's going to listen and speak up for us. And I think we need to believe in a leader like Bernie Sanders.</s>BERNIE SANDERS: It is not acceptable to me...</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Erica Garner joins me now. Thanks so much for talking with us, Erica.</s>ERICA GARNER: Thank you for having me.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have talked about the need to reform the country's criminal justice system and to shine a light on police brutality. What is Bernie Sanders doing or saying that makes him your candidate over Hillary Clinton?</s>ERICA GARNER: It's not really about what he's saying. It's about his record. He's been, basically, a protester his whole career. He's not scared to go up against the systematic racism that exists in America today.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Do you understand why your grandmother is supporting Hillary Clinton? I mean, do the two of you talk about it?</s>ERICA GARNER: No. No. But my main concern is Bernie and getting people to fully understand his history and have a open mind. A lot of people know Hillary because she's popular. And Bernie Sanders stood with black people when it wasn't popular. He marched with Martin Luther King. I can't speak on the behalf of my grandmother. But I know that once I did my research on Bernie Sanders, I wanted to support him.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Have you noticed a generational divide? Have you noticed older generations supporting Hillary Clinton and younger people supporting Bernie Sanders?</s>ERICA GARNER: Somewhat. But also, that's why I'm out here. I want our young people, especially our protesters that's putting they bodies on the line to bring racial issues to the forefront, to know that their vote matters.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Although Hillary Clinton has positioned herself as the candidate who can extend the legacy of Barack Obama, that she is best positioned to carry on his policies - you don't see it that way?</s>ERICA GARNER: If you look at her track record, she's been all over the place. And you look at Bernie Sanders, he's been consistent throughout his whole life.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Erica Garner, an activist with the Black Lives Matter movement. Thanks so much for talking with us.</s>ERICA GARNER: Thank you. |
During the longest government shutdown in history, essential federal employees are still working without pay. We hear how one family has been affected. | SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Now we turn to the government shutdown. We're on Day 23, making it the longest in American history. Today, we're going to hear from Kami of Texas. She's asking that we don't use her last name because of the nature of her husband's job. He's an essential federal employee and is currently working without pay.</s>KAMI: We've used whatever we had in our bank account to pay our last mortgage payment and our last car payment and our last utilities payment and, of course, to go to the grocery store and stuff. So we're just - it's the stress right now. In the week after the shutdown started, I had to have an HVAC repair person come out because our heater quit working, and that was $500 we didn't see having to spend. So hopefully, nothing like that will come up again while this is going on.</s>KAMI: A couple days ago, we sent off paperwork to borrow some out of his retirement to cover ourselves since we don't know when this shutdown will end. We will be penalized. In the past, I believe they've offered a penalty-free withdrawal. We haven't seen that letter come across yet. And we're withdrawing 11,000 at this point. I work for our local school district, and my income alone cannot support our entire family.</s>KAMI: Our kids - we have an older son who understands what's going on. We have a younger son who doesn't really understand. And, unfortunately, he's overheard me on the phone leaving messages for members of Congress. And he twisted what I said in his head, and he was worried that he mentioned to a friend of mine that we weren't going to have food to eat. And that made me more upset. So we just really need a resolution.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: That was Kami talking about how the government shutdown was affecting her family. |
NPR Legal Affairs Correspondent Nina Totenberg remembers Scalia's life and legal legacy. Editor's note: The audio for this story of Justice Antonin Scalia from the bench was provided by Oyez, a free law project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: President Obama called Antonin Scalia one of the towering legal figures of our time. Chief Justice John Roberts called his passing a great loss to the court and the country he so loyally served. Justice Antonin Scalia was 79. He died this weekend in West Texas. Here's NPR's Nina Totenberg.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: For decades, Antonin Scalia railed against the Supreme Court's rulings on abortion, affirmative action, gay rights and religion. He lived to see many of the decisions he so reviled trimmed and even overturned after President Bush replaced two conservative justices with even more conservative justices. But Scalia remained impatient with the pace of change. His influence continued, not by brokering consensus, but by goading his colleagues with biting dissents. He was, as solicitor general and former law clerk Paul Clement acknowledges, a fundamentalist in both his faith and his constitutional interpretation.</s>PAUL CLEMENT: I think that he looks for bright lines in the Constitution wherever he can. I think he thinks that his faith provides him clear answers, and you know, I think that's sufficient unto him in most areas.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: A fine example of that was Scalia's landmark 2008 decision, declaring that the Constitution confers on individuals a right to own a gun. The decision was greeted with cheers by gun enthusiasts, but denounced by police chiefs and big-city mayors.</s>ANTONIN SCALIA: We hold that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to have and use arms for self-defense in the home and that the District's handgun ban violates that right.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: Antonin Scalia was born in 1936, the only child of a Sicilian immigrant and a first-generation Italian-American mother. Scalia, whose parents were both teachers, was educated largely at Catholic schools until he went to Harvard Law School, where he became editor of the Law Review. At Harvard, he met Maureen McCarthy, a feisty Radcliffe student with views as conservative as his. The two married and had nine children.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: In the days after law school, Scalia at first practiced law then taught it. But his love was politics and government, and he soon became a force to be reckoned with in Republican administrations. Shortly after Nixon resigned in the Watergate scandal, President Ford assigned then-Assistant Attorney General Scalia the task of determining who owned the infamous Nixon tapes and papers. Scalia decided in favor of Nixon, a reflection of his belief in a strong executive. But the Supreme Court ruled otherwise and, by a unanimous vote, declared that the tapes and papers belonged to the government and the public.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: Scalia returned to academic life when the Democrats won the presidency. But when Ronald Reagan was elected, Scalia was appointed first to the federal appeals court in Washington, and four years later, he was appointed to fill the Supreme Court seat being vacated by William Rehnquist, who was being promoted to chief justice. The pairing turned out to be a lucky break for Scalia. Democrats in the minority in the Senate could only fight one battle. Rehnquist's conservatism was well-known while Scalia had only a four-year record, not to mention the fact that Italian-Americans were ecstatic about their first Supreme Court nominee. So opposition focused on Rehnquist, and Scalia skated to confirmation by a unanimous vote.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: Once on the Supreme Court, Scalia almost immediately began pounding the table far more forcefully than the very conservative Chief Justice Rehnquist, particularly on hot-button social questions, while Rehnquist, for example, consistently sought to overturn the court's abortion decision, Roe versus Wade. He sided with those who sought a buffer zone at abortion clinics to protect women from being harassed. Scalia vehemently disagreed.</s>ANTONIN SCALIA: Does the deck seems stacked? You bet. The decision in the present case is not an isolated distortion of our traditional constitutional principles, but is merely the latest of many aggressively pro-abortion novelties announced by the court in recent years.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: Scalia was a staunch advocate of free speech in general, surprising many when he provided the fifth vote to strike down laws banning flag burning. Over the years, he wrote many important majority decisions on the First Amendment and other topics - from property rights to environmental questions, gun control and states' rights.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: But as one-time law professor Cass Sunstein observes, like the great Oliver Wendell Holmes, Scalia will likely be remembered most for his dissents.</s>CASS SUNSTEIN: The thing to remember about Scalia is he was one of the greatest writers in the court's history.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: When the court struck down a state law that made private homosexual conduct a crime, Scalia was outraged.</s>ANTONIN SCALIA: It is clear from this that the court has taken sides in the culture war, and in particular in that battle of the culture war that concerns whether there should be any moral opprobrium attached to homosexual conduct.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: Although the court's majority decision specifically denied any support for gay marriage, Scalia was dismissive.</s>ANTONIN SCALIA: Do not believe it. Today's opinion dismantles the structure of constitutional law that has permitted a distinction to be made between heterosexual and homosexual unions.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: Cass Sunstein, an avid Scalia admirer, says dissents like this one are illustrative of Scalia's Achilles' heel.</s>CASS SUNSTEIN: He was a hysteric in the cases that he cared most about.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: Scalia wrote with a sure pen. When the court, for instance, upheld the independent counsel law, Scalia alone dissented, declaring that the law would lead to unrestrained and politically driven prosecutions, a prediction that both Democrats and Republicans came to agree with when they refused to renew the law after the Clinton impeachment.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: On questions of separation of church and state, Scalia was a consistent voice for accommodation between the two and against erecting a high wall of separation. When the court, by a 7-to-2 vote, struck down a Louisiana law that mandated the teaching of creationism in school if evolution is taught, Scalia was dismissive of evolution, calling it merely a, quote, "guess, and a very bad guess at that."</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: And when the court struck down a spoken prayer at a public school graduation, Scalia angrily dissented. The founding fathers, he said, viewed nonsectarian public prayers like this one as a mechanism for breeding tolerance and unifying people of diverse religious backgrounds.</s>ANTONIN SCALIA: To deprive our society of that important unifying mechanism in order to spare the nonbeliever, what seems to me, the minimal inconvenience of standing or even sitting in respectful nonparticipation is as senseless in policy as it is unsupported in law.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: On death penalty questions, Scalia consistently dissented from decisions limiting its use, as he did when the court ruled unconstitutional the execution of the retarded.</s>ANTONIN SCALIA: The principle question is - who is to decide whether execution of the retarded is permissible or desirable? The justices of this court or the traditions and current practices of the American people? Today's opinion says very clearly, the former.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: When the court struck down the death penalty for juveniles and pointed to what other countries do as evidence of what's considered cruel and unusual punishment, he dissented again.</s>ANTONIN SCALIA: The underlying thesis that American law should conform to the laws of the rest of the world is indefensible. It is our Constitution that this court is charged with expounding. The laws of foreign nations and treaties to which this nation has not subscribed should have no bearing upon that exercise.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: His concept of constitutional interpretation became the focus a huge debates on the court and in the legal community. Is the Constitution a living document that adapts to the times so that, for example, punishments once accepted could now be viewed as unconstitutionally cruel and unusual?</s>ANTONIN SCALIA: The Constitution that I interpret and apply is not living, but dead, or as I prefer to call it, enduring. It means, today, not what current society, much less the court, thinks it ought to mean, but what it meant when it was adopted.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: And since the death penalty existed when the Constitution was adopted, for instance, Scalia believed it could hardly be viewed as cruel and unusual punishment. But Scalia's critics contend that there were some issues on which the justice ignored the plain meaning of the times. For example, on the question of affirmative action, proponents note that the framers of the 14th Amendment specifically approved measures that helped the newly freed slaves and not similarly situated white people.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: Scalia, however, maintained he was a textualist, that in constitutional matters, as in interpreting statutes, legislative history is immaterial. All that matters is the words on the page.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: More than anything else, Scalia was an advocate for bright lines in the law, lines that everyone could follow easily. He disdained the balancing tests advocated by justices like Harlan, Powell and O'Connor.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: That meant that in some criminal cases, he sided with defendants. For example, in several cases involving the defendant's constitutional right to confront accusers, Scalia said that meant videos and earlier recorded statements could not be substituted for real live witnesses being cross-examined in front of a defendant at trial.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: And in a terrorism case testing whether the Bush administration could, without congressional action, imprison an American citizen indefinitely without charge, again, Scalia said no without qualification, rejecting a more equivocal approach advocated by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.</s>ANTONIN SCALIA: If civil rights are to be curtailed during wartime, it must be done openly and democratically as the Constitution requires, rather than by silent erosion through an opinion of this court.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: Such unexpected liberal moments, however, were rare. Scalia's aggressive conservatism, even when it failed to prevail, often framed the debate. And justices once considered centrists came to be viewed as liberals compared to Scalia.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: Scalia changed more than legal doctrine. When he came to the court, the justices asked few questions during oral argument. And Scalia, the junior justice, jumped in, pummeling lawyers relentlessly with questions. Soon other justices took a more active approach to questioning, so that most lawyers could get less than a sentence out of their mouths before being interrupted.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: Witty and sometimes savagely funny, Scalia could also be bombastic and impolitic, to the point of offending colleagues on the court. In 1989, when fellow Reagan appointee Sandra Day O'Connor deprived conservatives of a fifth vote to overturn Roe versus Wade, Scalia attacked her opinion as one that, quote, "cannot be taken seriously."</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: Comments like that lessened his influence, but Scalia happily observed he liked to push the envelope - that if he had a 6-to-3 majority, he hadn't pushed hard enough. Sometimes when he pushed, his views prevailed. When they didn't, he took the fight to the printed page, knowing that his carefully crafted words would live to fight on long after he was gone.</s>NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: Nina Totenberg, NPR News, Washington. [POST-BROADCAST CLARIFICATION: The audio for this story of Justice Antonin Scalia from the bench was provided by Oyez, a free law project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law.] |
Parliament plans to vote Tuesday on PM Theresa May's plan for the U.K.'s exit from the EU. All indications are that her plan will be defeated, and no one seems sure about what will happen after that. | SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: On Tuesday, the British Parliament will cast one of its biggest votes in decades - the decision whether to support Prime Minister Theresa May's deeply unpopular deal to leave the European Union or reject it, as expected, and risk plunging the United Kingdom into political chaos or more chaos than it's already in. For more on the vote and the stakes, we turn now to NPR's Frank Langfitt in London. Hi, Frank. Thanks for joining us.</s>FRANK LANGFITT, BYLINE: Hi, Sarah.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: So remind us why is the prime minister's Brexit divorce agreement expected to fail?</s>FRANK LANGFITT, BYLINE: Well Sarah, most members of Parliament are against it. And the biggest reason is that it could keep the United Kingdom closely aligned, practically, in some ways, in the European Union for years to come and prevent the U.K. from moving forward. Now, the reason May has had to cut this deal is because the European Union says it can't leave until it solves the biggest sort of conundrum, which is how to avoid a border on the island of Ireland.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: And if the deal does fail, what's likely to happen next?</s>FRANK LANGFITT, BYLINE: You know, it really depends on the size of the defeat and their whole range of possibilities, which is what makes this so uncertain and risky. If it's 20 to 30 votes, May is hoping that the EU might offer some words of assurance that the U.K. won't be trapped inside the EU for years. But that's unlikely to win over many members of Parliament. If it's a big loss, Jeremy Corbyn - he's the head of the opposition Labour Party. He could call for a vote of no confidence in the U.K. government - in May's government. And what he wants to do is force a general election, try to topple May and her Conservative Party.</s>FRANK LANGFITT, BYLINE: Now, Parliament could also move to seize control of the whole Brexit process and hold what are called nonbinding votes on what's next. And that could include everything from another type of deal with the EU, a vote to delay Brexit or even a call for second referendum.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: So what is the likelihood that voters in the U.K. will get a second chance to vote on Brexit?</s>FRANK LANGFITT, BYLINE: It's probably more possible now than it's been before because the U.K. political system could be headed for paralysis, and it appears there's almost no majority in Parliament for anything else. Many people, though, would be wary about taking this back to a popular vote. Now, on Friday, I was in this place called Lowestoft. It's a town on the east coast of England. I was talking to Peter Aldous. He's a member of Parliament and May's Conservative Party who represents the area. And he actually voted to remain in the EU in 2016. But he told me a second referendum could really undermine faith in the democratic system.</s>PETER ALDOUS: To suddenly turn around within 2 1/2, 3 years and say, we're not going to do this, I think a lot of people will be seriously aggrieved and will say, what is that about? What is democracy about? We voted for that? It didn't happen.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: OK. So he's kind of getting out that between-a-rock-and-a-hard-place feeling.</s>FRANK LANGFITT, BYLINE: And, also, Sarah, the idea that, you know, with democracy, you don't get do-overs on votes you don't like.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Right. And there is talk - right? - of just the U.K. walking away from the European Union on the Brexit deadline at the end of March with no future agreement as to what comes next. What's the likelihood of that happening? And what would that even mean?</s>FRANK LANGFITT, BYLINE: You know, Sarah, that's the one thing that most of Parliament can actually agree on because it would be seen as a self-inflicted economic wound. You could get tariffs, customs checks, health checks popping up on the border with Europe for the first time in decades because, up until now, it's been seamless trade - could get miles of trucks lined up at the Port of Dover to get across the channel. And they could really damage U.K. and European businesses. Now, I was talking to a guy named James Hookham. He's with the U.K. Freight Transport Association, and I asked him if the government or business were really prepared for what people call here a no-deal Brexit.</s>JAMES HOOKHAM: None of us are ready. Business isn't ready. The honest thing is government is ready, and it will be government agencies of one sort or another that will dictate what goes through the borders. We may well end up having to have a more formalized border arrangement. We would just like a little bit more time to get ready for it.</s>FRANK LANGFITT, BYLINE: And if that were to happen, Sarah, which I got to say does not seem likely, many here would see it as a complete failure of the British political system.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Well, Frank, thanks for following this. Thanks for talking with us.</s>FRANK LANGFITT, BYLINE: Happy to do it, Sarah. |
Rachel Martin speaks with Rod Nordland about his new book, "The Lovers: Afghanistan's Romeo and Juliet," the true story of a love affair between a boy and a girl of different backgrounds. | RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: We now bring you a love story.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: A boy and a girl from different backgrounds meet. They fall in love. Their parents don't approve. And that's the part that fells familiar, even universal. But this true story takes place in Afghanistan, where falling in love with someone from a different religion or ethnicity can get you killed, especially if you're a woman.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: That's the story reporter Rod Nordland found himself right in the middle of. He's the Kabul bureau chief for The New York Times. And he's written a new book called "The Lovers: Afghanistan's Romeo and Juliet." He joins me in our studios for, we should say, our first live book interview. And if you have a question you'd like to ask Rod during our conversation, you can tweet me right now @rachelnpr.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Rod Nordland, thanks so much for joining us.</s>ROD NORDLAND: My pleasure.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: The subtitle of your book says this is the true story of how this couple, quote, "defied their families and escaped an honor killing," which says a lot right off the bat. If you don't mind, could you just start by introducing us to these two young people? Who are they? How'd they meet?</s>ROD NORDLAND: Well, they grew up together, actually, in villages side-by-side. And they worked in fields that adjoined one another. Their families had fields right next to each other. They're both from potato farming families. And so they knew each other all their lives until she reached puberty and then was separated from all men that she was related to. And then they began a secret courtship that went on for a couple years before they finally got together.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: And it had to be secret because she is Tajik. He is Hazara. These are different ethnic groups, and they're from different sects of Islam.</s>ROD NORDLAND: That's right. And even - they did actually arrange for his father to ask her father in a formal way, but he rejected the idea on those grounds. And then they carried on secretly and eventually tried to get together for real. And she had to flee and was put in a women's shelter for her protection, which is where I found her.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So, as you say, they - she gets put in this women's shelter. They have to essentially escape - take some major risks and flee - run away from their families because their families don't approve. Her family, in particular, has threatened her life.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: How did you catch wind of this, and what was your first interaction with them?</s>ROD NORDLAND: Well, the first story I did for the Times was when she was in the shelter, and I interviewed her there and then interviewed Ali, her lover, separately. And I thought that was going to be end of it. They would just be - you know, eventually she'd be given back to her family. The judges were trying to get her out of the shelter anyway - and even though her family, in open court, had threatened to kill her for what she was doing. And - but she surprised everybody by escaping the shelter, eloping with Ali and running off into the mountains. And Afghanistan's not a great to hide if you're, like, two young people with very little resources. And it was pretty clear they - after a couple weeks, they'd be found. And so I kind of went looking for them as well. And...</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: And what were your motives for looking for them?</s>ROD NORDLAND: There was a great story at that point, just a great story. And readers - the first story I did on them had kind of touched a chord, and I was deluged with reader mail. And then when I finally caught up to them and wrote about that and their continued flight - plus, we had video and pictures of them together and they were very kind of photogenic as well. I think that helped. And we were just deluged with interest. I've never been - had so much reaction to a story I've worked on ever.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: You write about this a lot in the book, the conflict that you faced because you became personally involved with these two. They needed help. They didn't seemingly have anyone. At what point in your relationship with them did you start to think - I have gotten too personally involved?</s>ROD NORDLAND: Yeah. They kind of - they were kind of a touching couple. They're really kind of sweet kids - 18 and 21 and completely clueless, you know. All they had going for them is that they knew that they loved each other, and that was it. And they were just running on love and empty, you know, no money or anything else. And that was just very touching. And then also, because I was pursuing them myself and because I'm a foreigner, I needed an entourage of people for my protection. And we also had a video crew with us as well as a photographer. We were this big kind of traveling roadshow...</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Yeah.</s>ROD NORDLAND: ...That was drawing the attention of everybody around. And it was pretty clear at some point that if I did find them, I was going to help other people find them because it wouldn't take long for people to figure out what some foreigner was doing in this area that hadn't seen a foreigner in a year. And this...</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: So the more attention you paid to them, there was a risk that you were...</s>ROD NORDLAND: Very much so.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: ...Exposing them.</s>ROD NORDLAND: It was really a conundrum. And then I did catch up to them. And they were - I caught up to them just as they were being evicted from the house they were hiding in. The owner wanted them to go. They had no car, no means. And, you know, I was pretty much their only option at that point.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: You ended up even donating money. You were donating money from listener - from your viewers who felt invested in their story. But you yourself ended up giving them cash.</s>ROD NORDLAND: Yeah. Readers were begging me to give the money to help them and to do whatever we possibly could. And - but that money hadn't reached me at that point because I was trying to find a way for them to do that in a, you know, sort of regular way like a women's group that could receive the money or something. So at that point, I just gave them some money out of my own pocket and put them in my car and gave them a getaway car, basically, and stepped way over the line of, you know, journalist and participant.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: At one point in the book, you say that there's a connection here between helping Ali and Zakia - there's a parallel between the Western aid that flooded into Afghanistan after the U.S. invasion. You write both just weren't sustainable. Did you worry that you were unfairly raising their expectations for what you could do?</s>ROD NORDLAND: I did. But on the other hand, you know, they would have been dead long before if I hadn't intervened. And I think that's so - she would have definitely, and I think that's pretty clear. So yes, that's true. And I've been criticized for that, and I think, you know, it's a fair point. But it overlooks the fact that they had no other prospects. There weren't any Afghans who were going to step in and save them, you know, at that point...</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Yeah.</s>ROD NORDLAND: ...Or who had the capacity to. But I had the capacity to. And you know, I kind of felt like you might feel if you're a photographer and you happened on a car crash scene, you know. Are you going to render first aid first or take the picture first? And I think there's only one thing that you can do as a human being in cases like that. You just have to put aside those journalistic scruples.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Yeah. We're getting some questions in through Twitter. Obviously, people want to know - where are they now? And what is the relationship like with their families?</s>ROD NORDLAND: Yeah. They're still in hiding in Bamiyan. They tried unsuccessfully to flee the country then she got pregnant. So they decided it wasn't worth trying to flee the country while she was pregnant. They went back to Bamiyan. They're pretty much in hiding in the family home. I mean, people know where they are. But they don't go out at all because they're safe in their village probably. But if they went out, they'd be in trouble.</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Rod Nordland - he's the Kabul bureau chief for The New York Times - talking about his new book "The Lovers: Afghanistan's Romeo and Juliet."</s>RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Rod, thanks so much for sharing this story with us. We appreciate it.</s>ROD NORDLAND: My pleasure. |
NPR's Ari Shapiro speaks with political commentators Jonathan Capehart of The Washington Post, and Mary Katharine Ham of CNN, about the border wall, government shutdown and the likelihood of President Trump declaring a national emergency. | ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Well, as this shutdown approaches record length, we're going to talk now about the politics of the standoff with our Friday analysts Mary Katharine Ham of CNN and Jonathan Capehart of The Washington Post. Thanks to you both for being here in the studio today.</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: Thank you, Ari.</s>MARY KATHARINE HAM: Sure thing.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: OK, so when the clock strikes midnight, this will be the longest shutdown in history. And all three of us have been in Washington for other government shutdowns, but this is the only one I've ever seen where as the days and weeks go by, the two sides don't appear to get any closer together. So how do you each see this ending, Mary Katharine?</s>MARY KATHARINE HAM: Well, I think the national emergency solution - and I'm making air quotes (laughter) - is what would end it quickly. But I think - here's the problem - is that it's sort of a copout for both parties. Democrats could say, hey, we didn't give him any money for the wall, and Trump can say, hey, I got the wall. But it makes problem solving in the future so much harder. It's genuinely bad for society. Executive overreach will not help them solve problems in the future, and they need to be able to do that. I think in the end - and this - I think this is why Trump is backing off it. I think he thinks he has an edge here and that they - Democrats may come down and just have to relinquish their point on a little bit of physical barrier.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Jonathan, do you see that happening, and how would it happen without any actual negotiations?</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: Right. I see no end in sight. To your point, Ari, about being in this situation before, at least we knew that there were honest brokers on all sides and, despite the rhetoric coming out publicly, behind the scenes, they were all feverish - feverishly working to come to a solution but also working off the same set of facts. That's not what's happening here.</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: And so I think that as long as the president keeps saying that he wants a border - wants the border wall a - excuse me - a physical wall, that is going to be a problem for Democrats. If they are able to have a conversation about border security writ large, which Democrats are more than happy to have...</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: You're talking about a package of measures...</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: A package of...</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: ...Including staffing and...</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: Sure.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: ...Other - yeah.</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: And when you talk to the - when you talk to people on the House side, they will tell you, you know, the first bill that Speaker Pelosi passed was the old Senate bill that passed unanimously in the old Congress which had money for the wall, other border security things but also something dealing with other immigration issues.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: But it didn't have all the money for the wall that President Trump wanted.</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: Correct - not all the money that the president wanted, but it went down because the president at the last minute pulled the rug out from under it in the last Congress. That's the impasse that we're at here.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: So I...</s>MARY KATHARINE HAM: Well...</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Mary Katharine, yeah.</s>MARY KATHARINE HAM: Yeah, I mean, the reason that I think this is because if you look at the pure political calculus - and that's - political pressure is what ends these things...</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: Right.</s>MARY KATHARINE HAM: ...Donald Trump's pressure point is not federal workers being out of their paychecks. It's just not. I'm not taking a position on that morally, but that's not his pressure point. It is a pressure point...</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: Agreed.</s>MARY KATHARINE HAM: ...For Democrats. So if...</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: But we've also seen a few Republicans in Congress join Democrats in voting to reopen the government. Could those numbers grow as the shutdown stretches on?</s>MARY KATHARINE HAM: They could. I do think Trump is pretty dug in on this. On - I do think they - he has to get some sort of physical barrier money in a package. I think a package could work, but there has to be some give on the physical part of it.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: It could (laughter)...</s>MARY KATHARINE HAM: Although I have been wrong a thousand times before about Donald Trump, so...</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: Well, right.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Because president - go ahead, Jonathan.</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: Well, I was going to say here's the thing about his saying in the clip that you played he's not going to do it so fast, meaning declare a national emergency. If he were to - I am not convinced that he's not actually going to go through and do it.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Yeah. I want to ask about that because he has not totally ruled out declaring a national emergency. Let's listen for a moment to what both he and Nancy Pelosi have said about that this week.</s>PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: In many ways, it's the easy way out. But this is up to Congress, and it should be up to Congress, and they should do it.</s>NANCY PELOSI: I think he's going to have to answer to his own party on usurping that much power.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: That idea that Republicans would make him pay a price if he did that - how persuasive do you think that is to him, Mary Katharine? Do you think that's true?</s>MARY KATHARINE HAM: I don't think he cares that much about what many (laughter) Republicans think, as he has shown over and over again. And look; executive overreach is an issue, and it is the easy way out, but it is a short-term solution, and it is a long-term, very big problem. And it was, by the way, something that conservatives pointed out when Obama did the DACA action - would not actually solve that problem and is a problem moving forward.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: And Jonathan, would this then be a green light for a future Democratic president to declare a national emergency for something like climate change?</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: Something like climate change, something like gun safety. I mean, I don't think Republicans truly appreciate the Pandora's box that they are about to open up if they watch the president declare a national emergency and then don't scream with one unified voice, Mr. President, this is wrong.</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: And I don't take - I don't trust the president's words here that he won't actually do it. This is a man who has pushed the envelope on so many things that we thought would never happen. And yet he's done it, and he keeps pushing because there's never any consequence. There's never any - he's never held accountable for it. If he declares a national emergency and if Republicans on Capitol Hill believe that it is the wrong thing to do, it would be imperative upon them to say so.</s>MARY KATHARINE HAM: He also likes expediency, and he likes to be the person who made it happen. So I think that appeals to him.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: This week, the White House has staged so many events to try to sell this wall to the American people or to Republicans and Democrats in Congress. We've seen the president go to the border. We've seen him have congressional leaders to the White House and then walk out on them. He's had his first primetime Oval Office address. Do you think any of this has moved the needle at all?</s>MARY KATHARINE HAM: I - the primetime addresses were just the exact same arguments with no movement...</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: Right.</s>MARY KATHARINE HAM: ...On - and no new ideas whatsoever. So I'm not sure where that got us other than that we all had to watch the primetime addresses.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: (Laughter).</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: Right. It didn't move the needle, and - but this is all - it was theater. The Oval Office address was theater. The trip to the border was theater. And we know it's theater because reports have come out saying that the president thought that it was a waste of time and pointed to aides who were, he said, making him...</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: These people want me to do this.</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: These people...</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Yeah.</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: ...Want me to do this.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: We, every time there's a shutdown, talk about the political consequences, and it seems that every time an election rolls around, people have forgotten about the shutdown. So this time we're talking about whether Democrats or Republicans in Congress or the president will pay more of a political price. Do you think ultimately when this is said and done and it's time for another election two years from now, this will have long-term political consequences for anyone?</s>MARY KATHARINE HAM: I think it depends on how long it goes on. If it goes on for truly, like, even more dysfunctional amount of time than usual, than it may have some consequences. But frankly, each one has fewer consequences than the last, as we have seen moving through all of these.</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: Right. And then if you throw - I agree with Mary Katharine. And then if you throw in the X-factor, which could be a true national emergency, a natural disaster, something so cataclysmic that it requires the government to jump into action - and if the government is in shutdown and it can't jump into action and more Americans are impacted, that is when people's long-term memories will kick in.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Could this actually help a politician who wants to argue that government is broken; Washington is dysfunctional; here's exhibit A?</s>MARY KATHARINE HAM: I mean, that's how they will position. But many people are getting to a point where - and it covers both parties - where they say, like, this is just - you're not being grownups. No one there is being grownups. And I don't think this is helping that at all.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Jonathan, I feel like people have been saying that about Washington for a very long time now.</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: Right, but there's a difference between government is broken, which is the decades-old argument. And then there's the other argument that there is no governing happening. And I think that's where we are right now.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Jonathan Capehart of The Washington Post, thanks very much.</s>JONATHAN CAPEHART: Thank you, Ari.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: And Mary Katharine Ham of CNN, great to have you here.</s>MARY KATHARINE HAM: Appreciate it.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Have a great weekend to both of you. |
The case of a Saudi woman who took refuge in a Bangkok hotel room as she sought asylum in a third country has highlighted Thailand's checkered history of dealing with similar cases. | ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Australia's foreign minister, Marise Payne, has praised Thailand's government for its decision to allow a young Saudi woman fleeing her family to seek asylum in Australia instead of deporting her as originally planned. But Payne also made it clear that Australia wants to see the release of a Bahraini soccer player granted asylum in Australia currently in a Thai jail. Michael Sullivan reports on Thailand's mixed record when it comes to asylum-seekers and refugees.</s>MICHAEL SULLIVAN, BYLINE: Hakeem Al-Araibi is a Bahraini football player granted asylum in Australia two years ago. Late last year, he got married, got a visa and got on a plane for Bangkok with his wife for their honeymoon.</s>NADTHASIRI BERGMAN: He was planning to go to Phuket to see a beautiful beach - you know, just take some time off from his football playing in Australia.</s>MICHAEL SULLIVAN, BYLINE: He didn't make it. His Thai lawyer Nadthasiri Bergman says when he stepped off the plane in Bangkok, Thai police were waiting for him.</s>NADTHASIRI BERGMAN: And a Thai authority told him that because he's wanted from another a country for an alleged crime, he was denied entering into Thailand.</s>MICHAEL SULLIVAN, BYLINE: He's been in jail awaiting possible extradition to Bahrain ever since. Never mind his refugee status in Australia. Never mind the crime he allegedly committed - vandalizing a police station - occurred at the same time he was finishing a live televised soccer match. Never mind his claims he was tortured in Bahrain before fleeing to Australia.</s>PHIL ROBERTSON: It's been a very, very bad four years for refugees and asylum-seekers in Thailand.</s>MICHAEL SULLIVAN, BYLINE: That's Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director for Human Rights Watch. He says the military government that seized power here in 2014 hasn't been shy about doing deals with authoritarian governments to send people back. Eighteen-year-old Saudi Rahaf Mohammed al-Qunun was headed in that direction before she seized the social media spotlight and created a PR nightmare for the Thai government. But he says others have fared much worse.</s>PHIL ROBERTSON: We have seen Uyghurs sent back to China. We saw an ethnic Han Chinese activist couple sent back to China despite the fact that Canada had already informed Thailand that they were going to be resettled to Canada. We've seen human rights activists who are registered with the U.N. Refugee Agency sent back to Cambodia, sent back to Vietnam.</s>MICHAEL SULLIVAN, BYLINE: And he's worried it won't stop. But the military doesn't get all the blame. Things weren't that great before the coup either.</s>MATTHEW SMITH: We have documented how the Thai authorities have not only failed to protect refugees but have in some cases bought and sold tens of thousands.</s>MICHAEL SULLIVAN, BYLINE: Matthew Smith of the human rights group Fortify Rights.</s>MATTHEW SMITH: The authorities were involved in the trafficking of huge numbers of Rohingya Muslims from Myanmar. And so protection for refugees has been a really serious issue in this country for a long time.</s>MICHAEL SULLIVAN, BYLINE: His colleague Puttanee Kangkun says there's a reason for that.</s>PUTTANEE KANGKUN: Thailand has - until now, still have no actual protection of the law. Let's say a law or policy that really gives protection to the refugees.</s>MICHAEL SULLIVAN, BYLINE: But rights groups also say Thailand deserves credit for taking in refugees at all in a neighborhood where many have fled their countries fearing for their safety. More than 100,000 from neighboring Myanmar are still in camps on the Thai-Myanmar border. Earlier waves included Vietnamese boat people, ethnic Hmong fleeing persecution in Laos and Cambodians trying to escape the Khmer Rouge - Matthew Smith of Fortify Rights.</s>MATTHEW SMITH: There are people in the government who want to do the right thing, and they want to protect refugees. But there's still a lot of work to do.</s>MICHAEL SULLIVAN, BYLINE: For NPR News, I'm Michael Sullivan in Bangkok. |
Many federal employees are working without pay during what's become longest-ever government shutdown. NPR's Sarah McCammon talks with Mike Gayzagian, a TSA worker and local American Federation of Government Employees president. | SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: We're going to turn back now to the partial government shutdown. And, as we mentioned, it's now the longest in U.S. history. For many federal workers, that means payday has come and gone with no check. Many of those workers belong to the American Federation of Government Employees, and a lot of them have been showing up to work for weeks now without pay. Mike Gayzagian is acting president of AFGE Local 2617. It covers hundreds of TSA workers in Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Maine. He's also a TSA agent at Logan International Airport in Boston, and he speaks to us now from Boston.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Welcome.</s>MIKE GAYZAGIAN: Thanks for having me.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: So up until now, federal workers have held out hope that the shutdown might end before they miss a paycheck. That did not happen. How are your members reacting?</s>MIKE GAYZAGIAN: Well, that hope has been dashed, and our members are very disappointed. Up in Boston now, I think the temperature outside is around 17 degrees, so we're all burning up gas and oil, and we don't have our paychecks to pay for it. It's a really unfortunate situation.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: What's the mood been like lately among TSA workers at Logan knowing that this might be coming?</s>MIKE GAYZAGIAN: Anxiety and frustration, mostly, a lot of the workers continuing to come to work. But, you know, people are very frustrated and very anxious and really, really disappointed in the way this whole thing has played out.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Who do they blame?</s>MIKE GAYZAGIAN: Both sides, really. I think that the Congress could probably get sufficient majorities to get together and make a deal and open this up, but they've decided they want to use us as political pawns. And now we've essentially become collateral damage in their battle. But I do want to say that we have gotten enormous support from the public.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: And if this shutdown does continue, what's your strategy for helping your members deal with those bills?</s>MIKE GAYZAGIAN: That's in the works. We're hoping this gets resolved before we have to get into that. But, you know, we are going to have to sit down, particularly with my executive board, and see what we can do.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: I mean, do you have thoughts on how you might advise them - you know, what kind of resources you might be able to pull together?</s>MIKE GAYZAGIAN: Really, I mean, particularly people with part-time jobs, I'm sure they're going to have to make a decision as to, you know, which job they're going to stay with. They're going to stay with the one that's paying them, or are they going to go to the one that's not? You know, the people who have been with the agency longer - they may be able to ride it out a little longer. But we're in uncharted territory at this point. And, really, we're kind of making it up as we go.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: We've heard some reports about TSA workers calling in sick instead of working during the shutdown. What are you telling members who might be thinking about doing that?</s>MIKE GAYZAGIAN: Don't do that. You're obligated to come in. This will end at some point. You know, what goes on at other airports I can't speak to, but I know that at our airports, that really isn't happening.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: And, finally, is there anything that you'd like to say to lawmakers, to the president who cannot seem to figure out a way to end this shutdown?</s>MIKE GAYZAGIAN: They're forcing a choice between aviation security and border security. I think it's 8 million people a day fly, and these 8 million people we are keeping safe. And by putting this kind of pressure on the front line of aviation security - god forbid, if something were to happen, who's going to take the blame for that? I mean, I can tell you that those who have presidential fantasies, if something were to happen, they can all stay home. The same thing with the professional politicians. They can't figure out a way to make a deal, and something were to happen, they're all going to be tossed out.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: That's Mike Gayzagian. He's a TSA agent and acting president of the American Federation of Government Employees Local 2617 from Boston.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Thanks so much.</s>MIKE GAYZAGIAN: Thanks for having me. |
While Border Patrol builds up its fences in San Diego to guard against a national security threat, Central American migrants waiting in Tijuana consider whether the journey was worth the effort. | AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: Let's check in on one of the busiest parts of the southern border between Tijuana, Mexico, and San Diego. Thousands who trekked north from Central America have spent about two months in Tijuana waiting to enter the U.S. and ask for asylum. NPR's John Burnett has this report from both sides of the border.</s>JOHN BURNETT, BYLINE: For Tijuana, the Central American caravans have become a humanitarian challenge. For the Trump administration, they're a potent and convenient symbol of why the United States needs stronger border security.</s>RODNEY SCOTT: We don't know who else is in that group. But statistically it would indicate to me that there are some people that want to do harm to this country, who are coming in not to claim asylum.</s>JOHN BURNETT, BYLINE: Rodney Scott is chief of the San Diego Border Patrol sector. In the weeks since the caravan arrived, hundreds of migrants have lost patience and illegally jumped the border fence. He says his agents have arrested more than 2,500 of them in the no man's land between border barriers.</s>RODNEY SCOTT: And the sheer numbers just statistically indicate there are nefarious people within that organization.</s>JOHN BURNETT, BYLINE: I cross into Tijuana through the well-guarded port of entry to meet some of the migrants, who look more bedraggled than nefarious. Their numbers have dropped dramatically from around 6,000 when they arrived in early November to under 2,000 today. They're staying in makeshift shelters throughout the city, waiting week after week to hear this announcement, which is made every morning in a small park near the U.S. port of entry.</s>UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: (Speaking Spanish).</s>JOHN BURNETT, BYLINE: On this day, number 1,627 comes forward to start the ragged line of caravan migrants who will cross the border and request asylum from U.S. immigration agents. Forty to 60 people every day are allowed in. Darling Adalid Mercado is a clean-cut 19 year old in a ball cap with a crucifix around his neck. He says he left his home in Ocotepeque, Honduras, three months ago to flee town thugs who wanted to recruit him. He's angry at volunteers who organized the caravan, who he says gave them bad advice.</s>DARLING ADALID MERCADO: (Through interpreter) Village Without Borders is an organization that told us to join the caravan, that everything is going to be easy. But then you're on the road, and it's really hard, really difficult. They deceive you. They say, we're going to the Mexico-U.S. border, and we'll all cross together. But the truth is you can't do this. It's illegal. Activists have urged me, come on, Darling; just jump the fence. But it's better to return to my country because that's against the law. They'll punish you. It's better to wait in line.</s>JOHN BURNETT, BYLINE: If he's not sent to a migrant detention facility, Darling Adalid Mercado wants to join his brother in San Antonio, Texas, and find work. Pueblo Sin Fronteras, a Mexico-based immigrant solidarity organization, posted a response to recent criticism of its actions on its Facebook page. They emphatically reject the, quote, "defamation of our work of accompanying the caravan." The group vows to continue to support and protect the human rights of Central American migrants in transit.</s>JOHN BURNETT, BYLINE: The waiting game in the squalid shelters in Tijuana is grating on everyone's nerves. Blanca Irias and her family from Tegucigalpa, Honduras, are cooling their heels at a shelter run by an evangelical church called the Ambassadors for Christ. She's a heavyset woman with weary eyes. They're staying in a camping tent set up in a church sanctuary.</s>BLANCA IRIAS: (Through interpreter) We're frustrated. We've been here a long time. We're discussing the possibility of staying here in Tijuana because there's work, and it pays well. But there are days when we also wonder if we should jump the fence. We don't know what we'll do.</s>JOHN BURNETT, BYLINE: More and more Hondurans who came in the caravan are deciding to stay in Tijuana. Mexico has issued more than 2,000 humanitarian visas that allow them to work in this booming border city on the Pacific coast. Foreign-owned assembly plants, construction sites, fruit vendors - they're all hiring. Santos Favian Gomez, who says he fled marauding gangs in Choluteca, Honduras, has taken a job washing dishes for a humanitarian group, World Central Kitchen, that prepares hundreds of meals for the migrants daily.</s>SANTOS FAVIAN GOMEZ: (Through interpreter) I'll remain in Tijuana because I hear if you cross into the United States, they put you in jail. It's better to work here than to be a prisoner over there.</s>JOHN BURNETT, BYLINE: Favian Gomez says he traveled alone. He'll save a little money to send home to his wife. He'll try to find a house to move out of the crowded shelter, and he'll make his home in Tijuana.</s>SANTOS FAVIAN GOMEZ: (Speaking Spanish).</s>JOHN BURNETT, BYLINE: "It's pretty here," he says, scrubbing beans from a pan, "and the people are nice, and anything is better than returning to Honduras." John Burnett, NPR News, Tijuana. |
As President Trump began U.S. forces pullout from Syria, his secretary of state and national security advisers sent mixed signals about U.S. commitments in the Middle East as they toured the region. | SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Secretary of State Mike Pompeo continues his tour of the Middle East this weekend at a time when the Trump administration is sending some mixed signals about its intentions in the region. The Pentagon said yesterday the U.S. has begun withdrawing troops from Syria, as promised by President Trump.</s>PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: And we have won against ISIS. We've beaten them, and we've beaten them badly. We've taken back the land, and now it's time for our troops to come back home.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: But the announcement last month of plans to withdraw from Syria was followed by these messages from national security adviser John Bolton, Secretary of State Pompeo and the president himself.</s>JOHN BOLTON: We're going to be discussing the president's decision to withdraw but to do so from northeast Syria in a way that makes sure that ISIS is defeated. And...</s>MIKE POMPEO: Let me be clear - America will not retreat until the terror fight is over.</s>PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: We are pulling back in Syria. We're going to be removing our troops. I never said we're doing it that quickly.</s>MIKE POMPEO: There's no contradiction whatsoever.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: If you're confused, well, so are others, including our next guest. He's Lawrence Wilkerson, a retired Army colonel and former chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Welcome.</s>LAWRENCE WILKERSON: Good to be here.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: So Secretary of State Mike Pompeo gave a speech in Cairo this week which was billed as a major address on the Trump administration's Middle East policy. You issued a critical statement in response. You cited a lack of policy consistency. What's the impact both on our allies and our foes of what seemed to be mixed signals from the president and his administration?</s>LAWRENCE WILKERSON: That's a good question. Pompeo's attempt to stitch together what has become very clearly a disorganized, even in shambles foreign policy with regard to the Middle East was not successful. One of the things that he did and that he's going to do again in a ministerial in Poland 13 and 14 February, accordingly - the State Department released a statement yesterday - is go after Iran, which is becoming the focus, as John Bolton might say he wanted it to be, of U.S. foreign policy in the region.</s>LAWRENCE WILKERSON: And it's absurd. We're looking at, for example, Pompeo saying things about Iran that are true about Saudi Arabia - in fact, more true about Saudi Arabia than they are about Iran. Furthermore, he didn't even mention the bloodiest, most brutal war we have in the region in a long time in Yemen which the United States is complicit in along with Saudi Arabia, Egypt, his host, the UAE and others in the coalition. And the complicity there is Saudi Arabia, not Iran. In fact, Iran was not even in Yemen before Saudi Arabia attacked the Houthi.</s>LAWRENCE WILKERSON: So focusing on Iran is debilitating. It's subtracting, detracting from our ability to have a coherent policy. And, ultimately, it is becoming the end all and be all for the Trump administration with regard to this region.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Where should the focus be?</s>MIKE POMPEO: The focus should be on stability and a return to stability after the U.S. destabilized the whole region in the greatest strategic mistake the U.S. has made in this century. And that is the invasion of Iraq in 2003. And, frankly, I'm no fan of Donald Trump, but his decision to withdraw the 2,000-some odd U.S. ground forces from Syria was a good decision, not a bad one. And now we're looking at John Bolton trying to pull that decision back and others too, and Pompeo caught in the middle trying to stitch it all together.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: You said you think that withdrawing U.S. troops from Syria is a good move. But there is concern that with the absence of U.S. troops, ISIS could return. We saw a similar return in Iraq after the U.S. pullback there. Why do you think that wouldn't happen in Syria?</s>LAWRENCE WILKERSON: First of all, ISIS has been pretty roundly defeated in most areas and in composite. Second, I think the real reason for ISIS's resurgence, as it were, in the previous occasion was because the government in Baghdad was treating the Sunnis so badly post our withdrawal. So we have a different government in Baghdad now. So I don't think we have the incentive for ISIS to resurrect itself other than as an Islamic Jihadist organization. If that can't be defeated by four and a half, five million men and women under arms in the region, then they don't deserve the United States to try and help them. I don't think ISIS will be resurrected. If it is, the - it'll be defeated by the local troops.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: You referred earlier to the widely acknowledged failures of the Iraq war, including intelligence failures. I think a lot of people who remember that war will remember that you helped Secretary Powell make the case for going to war against Saddam Hussein to keep him from using weapons of mass destruction - which, of course, was later regarded as a major intelligence failure. How does that experience affect your thinking now?</s>LAWRENCE WILKERSON: Well, guilty as charged. First of all, one of the lowest moments of my life. I think it's - I could say for Colin Powell, it probably was a low moment, too. It affects my thinking now in that I see the very same thing happening with regard to Iran. I see a collection of intelligence being orchestrated, engineered and then cherry-picked to be - to lead us to ultimately a regime change in Tehran, just as we did in 2003. And that - I've written op-eds in The New York Times, I've talked about on radio and TV. I think that is the last straw for the Middle East if we get involved in a war with Iran in terms of U.S. policy. We'll never be able to go back there again.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: That's retired Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson. He was chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell and currently serves as an advisory board member for an advocacy group called Foreign Policy for America.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Thanks so much.</s>LAWRENCE WILKERSON: Thanks for having me. |
This week, President Trump flew to the border city of McAllen, Texas. NPR's Sarah McCammon speaks with the city's mayor, Jim Darling, about his reactions to the president's visit. | SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: We want to turn now to a city that's becoming a growing symbol of the partial government shutdown and the fight over a border wall. On Thursday, President Trump visited the border city of McAllen, Texas. And just yesterday, he tweeted that the situation there is worse than almost anyone could understand. We wanted to learn a bit more about the city and the situation there, so we called Jim Darling. He's the mayor of McAllen, Texas.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Mayor Darling, thank you for joining us.</s>JIM DARLING: You're welcome. Good afternoon.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: So what did you make of President Trump's visit and his reaction?</s>JIM DARLING: I've got to tell you, you know, when the president went through our city, it was pretty well half and half people saying build the wall and that are saying we don't want a wall. And it's much more complicated than that. The president said two things this week. He said it was a humanitarian crisis. And I think he was referring to the asylum seekers. And, of course, the crisis is whatever conditions are in the country making them want to leave and then the trip through Mexico. And I've always said since 2014, the crisis kind of ends for them when they get to the United States - at least, until they have a deportation hearing, and they have to get sent back. But, until that happens, the crisis is over for them.</s>JIM DARLING: The other thing that he said that we thought was important - it's not just a wall. It's border protection. It's more boots on the ground, more Border Patrol men, more technology, roads that they need, etc. And I think if you ask the average person, instead of saying, do you want a wall or not, but you want enhanced border protection along with some immigration reform, I can't imagine anybody would say no, we don't want that because that's really what's needed.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Recently, you spoke with our colleagues at Weekend Edition and mentioned that you didn't think a wall across the whole Mexican border is the right answer for added security. So what do you think is the answer?</s>JIM DARLING: The way the river is situated in our area for hundreds of miles is it meanders all over the place. So the wall or the fence or whatever we're going to call it is not right on the river. So if the idea of a wall stopping the number of illegal aliens is what we're trying to accomplish, it doesn't work because those people are trying to get apprehended. And they - as soon as they cross the river, they're in the United States and are eligible. So they're north of the river, eligible for asylum south of the wall.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: But you're saying that because of variations and in the physical terrain there in places like your city, McAllen, Texas, that border wall from sea to shining sea is just not practical, if I'm not - if I'm understanding you.</s>JIM DARLING: That's correct. I think it - the barrier or the border wall makes sense where the Border Patrol thinks it makes sense, where you have local government input. Just throwing up walls to have walls would not meet the national security criteria, I think.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: You mentioned division of people supporting the wall and opposing the wall when President Trump came to visit your area. I mean, as you talk to residents of your community, Mayor, what do you hear about this debate and about the asylum seekers that are coming through your region?</s>JIM DARLING: Yeah. When you went down the street, there was clearly divided and was divided on one word called the wall. And I think that's a problem in Washington because nobody's accomplishing anything. We're not accomplishing immigration reform, which we need. We have 800,000 people waiting for hearings, etc. That number is not decreasing. And, on the other hand, you know, border security needs to be - there's no question - more efficient. And it should be more efficient from a national security standpoint. But because we're hung up on a word, and you're either for or against it, and people are getting elected on that basis, we're not accomplishing anything in Washington.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: That's Jim Darling, mayor of McAllen, Texas near the U.S.-Mexico border.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Mayor Darling, thank you for speaking with us.</s>JIM DARLING: You're welcome. |
A robotic sex toy for women was pulled from the Consumer Electronics Show. NPR's Sarah McCammon speaks with Wired's Emily Dreyfuss about the controversy. | SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: The Consumer Electronics Show, or CES, just wrapped up this week in Las Vegas. It featured the usual assortment of virtual reality goggles, smart cars, next generation smartphones. But arguably, the biggest buzz was about a product geared toward women that was conspicuously absent from the showroom floor. And here's where we want to mention that the conversation we're about to have may not be appropriate for younger listeners. For more, we turn now to Emily Dreyfuss, a senior staff writer for Wired.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Emily, thanks for joining us.</s>EMILY DREYFUSS: Thanks for having me.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: OK, so here's the big reveal, now that hopefully all the little ones are out of the room. The banned product was a robotic vibrator. And before it was banned, it actually won an innovation award. For those who haven't been following this story, Emily, can you tell us what all went down?</s>EMILY DREYFUSS: Yes. So the product is called the Ose, and it's a vibrator that uses micro-robotics and biomimicry. Now, the creators of this device, Lora DiCarlo, had submitted this to CES robotics category, into which it was accepted, and then they actually gave it an innovation award. And that's an award that is given by a jury of experts before you show up to the show.</s>EMILY DREYFUSS: But then, before the company was able to show up to exhibit at CES in Las Vegas, CTA, who are the leadership behind CBS, changed their mind, sent the company an email saying that actually, they had decided that this device did not fit into the robotics category and, in fact, was going to be excluded from the show floor because it was deemed to be either immoral, obscene, indecent or profane.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: And that has struck people as a sexist move, right, given that one of the most talked about products at last year's CES was, to put it bluntly, a sex robot. And virtual reality pornography has been featured in the past as well. What do you make of all this?</s>EMILY DREYFUSS: Exactly. I think that the hypocrisy is one of the biggest reasons why this has gotten so much attention. They have gone out of their way over the years to not be a sex device show. It's not like every year there are tons of sex gadgets. But they have over the years had some, especially if they had some sort of interesting technology to offer, which this device clearly does. It has, you know, a lot of interesting 3D printing and rapid prototyping that went into it that really does justify it as a technology device.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: The health category at CES includes lots of products geared toward pregnancy, motherhood, early parenthood. I mean, how much of the blowback here is about what was allowed in the show compared to what was actually banned?</s>EMILY DREYFUSS: Yeah. So I think that's another double standard. You know, five years ago, you really wouldn't have found hardly any devices that were specifically tailored to women. But now there has been this change. You know, the market has recognized that mothers and new parents represent a very lucrative category for innovation. This year, there were all sorts of devices catering specifically to women as mothers. And that's on the one hand wonderful.</s>EMILY DREYFUSS: But, on the other hand, the double standard that there were breast massagers on the show floor this year that were geared toward treating women who are breastfeeding and experiencing mastitis, which is a absolutely legitimate and important device - that is allowable, whereas a device that gives pleasure is not allowable. It really does just play into existing stereotypes. Shows like this have the ability to legitimize a topic so that scientific grants can give money toward the study of female sexuality and venture capitalists feel comfortable giving money to companies that are geared toward women and their pleasure.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Emily Dreyfuss, senior writer for Wired.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: Thank you so much.</s>EMILY DREYFUSS: Thank you.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: And we should add, Emily Dreyfuss tells us the Consumer Technology Association, which runs the CES, did not respond to her requests for comment.</s>SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: This is NPR News. |
Season Three of the HBO anthology series True Detective premieres Jan. 13. This season stars Mahershala Ali and comes after a poorly received second season and an acclaimed first season. | ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: The third season of HBO's anthology crime drama "True Detective" debuts on Sunday. NPR TV critic Eric Deggans says the latest installment might not completely redeem the series' reputation, but it's a very good start.</s>ERIC DEGGANS, BYLINE: The strongest reason to watch HBO's latest installment of "True Detective" is Oscar-winning star Mahershala Ali. He's playing Arkansas State Police Detective Wayne Hays, a black man in the Ozarks struggling for fulfillment. It's a trippy tale from creator Nic Pizzolatto, who tells the story in three different time periods. In 1980, Hays is trying to find two kids - brother and sister - who disappeared from a poor neighborhood in the Ozarks, but he fears superiors aren't listening to him because of his race. He complains to his partner, a white man named Roland West, played by Stephen Dorff.</s>MAHERSHALA ALI: (As Detective Wayne Hays) I knew they wouldn't listen to me, but you should have stopped that.</s>STEPHEN DORFF: (As Roland West) What am I supposed to do?</s>MAHERSHALA ALI: (As Detective Wayne Hays) I talk, it don't mean anything - don't matter if I'm right. You at least, you talk, it means something to them.</s>ERIC DEGGANS, BYLINE: Ten years later, the case is reopened. Hays' career is sidelined, and he's filled with bitterness, trying to decide if he'll join a task force run by his former partner who's been promoted to try closing the case.</s>MAHERSHALA ALI: (As Detective Wayne Hays) That promotion for merit or did it come with the pigmentation?</s>STEPHEN DORFF: (As Roland West) Well, I think, unlike some others, I lack the big mouth. Hell, with affirmative action, you could have been my boss by now.</s>ERIC DEGGANS, BYLINE: A quarter-century after that, a true crime TV producer interviewed Hays while reinvestigating the case, but he now suffers from dementia, having conversations with his dead wife.</s>MAHERSHALA ALI: (As Detective Wayne Hays) Please, God. I don't deserve this. Whatever happened, I don't deserve this.</s>CARMEN EJOGO: (As Amelia Reardon) No, you don't, but it's happening anyway.</s>MAHERSHALA ALI: (As Detective Wayne Hays) How much do I have to lose?</s>CARMEN EJOGO: (As Amelia Reardon) Everything, same as everybody else.</s>ERIC DEGGANS, BYLINE: Ali's Wayne Hays is a taciturn man, so his more talkative partner, Dorff's Roland West, tells other cops - and the audience - why Hays is sometimes so emotionally shut down and why he's so good at tracking people.</s>STEPHEN DORFF: (As Roland West) The man was a LRRP in 'Nam. You know what that is? Long-range reconnaissance. Drop him in the jungle alone, come out two or three weeks later with scalps. He's like a pathfinder, tracks wild boar for fun.</s>ERIC DEGGANS, BYLINE: Mahershala Ali has said that producers initially wanted to cast him Dorff's role, but he insisted on the lead part. That change saved this season, giving audiences a type of anti-hero we've rarely seen on TV. There's lots of themes here, like the struggle of proud men to return home from war with a quiet prejudice of small towns. It's a bleak, sometimes too deliberate story that recalls the promise of the show's blockbuster first season in 2014 with Woody Harrelson and Matthew McConaughey.</s>ERIC DEGGANS, BYLINE: Frankly, I thought "True Detective" was dead in 2015 after a disastrous second season starring Colin Farrell. But there's life in this show yet, so long as the story's tied to a mesmerizing performance by a master actor playing a singular character. I'm Eric Deggans. |
Brady Singer recently joined the Kansas City Royals and received a $4.25 million signing bonus. He wrote his parents a holiday letter and told them he would be paying off all their debts. | DAVID GREENE, HOST: Good morning. I'm David Greene. After pitcher Brady Singer signed with the Kansas City Royals, he wrote his parents a letter this holiday. He posted video of them reading it.</s>JACQUELYN SINGER: I love you, Mom and Dad.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: The Kansas City Star reports Singer used his $4 million signing bonus to thank mom and dad for their support and all the travel to games.</s>JACQUELYN SINGER: I am paying off the loan from the bank. Also, I paid off all your debt, as well. What?</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: You're listening to MORNING EDITION. |
Bernice Sandler, who had a major hand in creating and helping pass Title IX legislation, has died at 90. The landmark federal civil rights law ensures gender equality in education and athletics. | AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: We're going to take the next few minutes to remember the woman being called the godmother of Title IX. Bernice Sandler died this past weekend at the age of 90. She was the catalyst for the landmark civil rights legislation that made it illegal for schools receiving federal funds to discriminate on the basis of sex. NPR's Tom Goldman reports.</s>TOM GOLDMAN, BYLINE: Title IX was passed in 1972, but the seed for that momentous law was planted about 40 years earlier in an elementary school in Brooklyn. That's when young Bernice Sandler was offended by the way the boys got to do all the classroom activities.</s>MARTY LANGELAN: For example, running a slide projector.</s>TOM GOLDMAN, BYLINE: Marty Langelan was Sandler's friend and colleague for nearly 50 years.</s>MARTY LANGELAN: You know, I mean, simple everyday things. You know, oh, we'll have the boys do this. If it was important, the boys did it. And she told her mother back then when she was a schoolgirl that she was going to change the world, that this was wrong. And, boy, she sure did.</s>TOM GOLDMAN, BYLINE: But not until the late 1960s. Sandler was teaching part time at the University of Maryland and was told she wouldn't be considered for a full-time position because she came on too strong for a woman. Langelan says Sandler decided this had to be illegal. But back then, discrimination in education was rampant - departments refusing to hire women, grad programs denying admission to women, scholarships for men only. Sandler was a meticulous person, and so she started doing research and found presidential Executive Order 11246. It prohibited federal contractors from discriminating in employment on the basis of race and nationality.</s>MARTY LANGELAN: And then she found a footnote that said it had been amended by President Johnson in 1968 to include discrimination based on sex. She literally yelled, eureka, eureka - because most colleges had federal contracts.</s>TOM GOLDMAN, BYLINE: Over the next two years, Sandler filed around 250 complaints demanding the government enforce its regulations. This led to dramatic congressional hearings and, ultimately, the signing by President Richard Nixon of Title IX. The law's initial focus was on academic hiring and admissions, but Title IX's impact spread to all areas of discrimination - to sexual harassment on campus, and its most visible manifestation, sports. I interviewed Sandler in 2012, and she laughed about how she never really thought about causing a sea change in athletics.</s>BERNICE SANDLER: And I remember saying, isn't this great news? On field day or play day, that's a day when schools cancel classes and they have athletic relays and games and stuff while outside. And I'm saying, on field day, there's gonna be more activities for girls. Isn't that nice?</s>TOM GOLDMAN, BYLINE: Marty Langelan says when she first met Sandler in the early 1970s, she was struck by this little, tiny person who was incredibly cheerful. Langelan says she never saw Sandler angry at anyone, but she had moral anger about injustice. Langelan says, near the end of her life, Sandler recognized she'd lived up to her schoolgirl promise. Bernice Bunny Sandler leaves behind two daughters, three grandkids and countless girls and women in sports and academia forever indebted. Tom Goldman, NPR News. |
NPR's Ari Shapiro speaks with Richard LeBaron, a former ambassador to Kuwait, about how the diplomatic vacancies in the region affect a mission such as Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's this week. | ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Now we're going to talk about a glaring absence in the secretary of state's Middle East tour. Of the nine countries Secretary Pompeo was visiting this week, five don't have a Senate-confirmed U.S. ambassador. We're talking about countries that are crucial to U.S. foreign policy like Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Former U.S. Ambassador to Kuwait Richard LeBaron spent decades as a diplomat mostly in the Middle East, and he's now with the Atlantic Council. Welcome to ALL THINGS CONSIDERED.</s>RICHARD LEBARON: Thank you, Ari.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Begin by explaining why it matters whether any given country has a Senate-confirmed U.S. ambassador or not. The White House often says that, in these countries, a highly qualified career diplomat is serving as acting ambassador. So what's the difference?</s>RICHARD LEBARON: Well, Ari, there are several factors at play. I think it's good to keep in mind that ambassadors are the president's personal representatives. They're appointed by the president, given consent by the Senate, and the absence of them just removes a tool for any president's foreign policy. Secondly, when there's not an ambassador in place, sure, there's a very capable staff at our U.S. embassies. And I've been a charge, so I don't want to diminish the importance of a charge in the field.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Charge is the term of art for the acting ambassador, the career diplomat.</s>RICHARD LEBARON: Yes, it is. And that's the person who is in charge when no ambassador's around. But that person almost inevitably doesn't have quite the influence of an ambassador because he or she is not the president's personal representative. Thus, the host government tends to look upon that person as a lesser interlocutor. And that person may not have the same level of access to information and to people as a sitting ambassador. So that's really important.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: So let's take a specific example - Saudi Arabia. There's been a lot of U.S.-Saudi diplomacy about the killing of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, about the war in Yemen. In that specific example, how might things go differently if there were a Senate-confirmed U.S. ambassador in that post?</s>RICHARD LEBARON: Well, I think one thing that might be different is that an ambassador would be able to interpret for the Saudis just how seriously we take some of these irresponsible actions by the Saudi government. If he has or she has the authority of the president behind them, that might make the Saudis take another look at some of these policies. I can't guarantee that. And much of the relationship with the Saudis is directly with Washington. But I think it does make a difference to have an empowered representative of the president on the ground, not only to represent his views but to inform the president and the secretary of state of what's going on at the highest levels of government in Saudi Arabia.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Can you tell how much of this is a result of the White House failing to nominate people versus the Senate not acting to confirm people once they're nominated?</s>RICHARD LEBARON: Well, I don't want to assign blame, but the administration is two years in. So it seems to me that there are a disproportionate number of vacancies. And it reflects, I think, a certain attitude on the part of the president that he doesn't need help. That's unfortunate because there are - these ambassadors are perfectly willing and able to help him succeed in his policy.</s>RICHARD LEBARON: And I would add that this is a president who wants the United States to do less in the Middle East. And in that case, ambassadors need to do more because they need to convince other countries in that region to take on more of the burden themselves. So there's a role here that's unique to this administration as well.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: This problem started when Rex Tillerson was secretary of state, and Pompeo was asked about it during his confirmation hearings. He said he would address the large number of vacancies. Why do you think that hasn't happened?</s>RICHARD LEBARON: Well, I think secretaries of state tend to get caught up in policy matters. And he lacks some of the key appointments in the State Department that would help facilitate the appointment of ambassadors. But I can't really assign blame. I think it's just a matter of putting a priority on the matter of getting a full representation abroad.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Ambassador Richard LeBaron of the Atlantic Council, thanks for joining us today.</s>RICHARD LEBARON: My pleasure. |
As many federal workers are approaching a payday with no pay, they're asking relatives for loans and Congress for relief. Meanwhile, the Coast Guard in Boston is getting help from a food pantry. | ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Now that many federal workers are about to go without a paycheck, stress is growing. As NPR's Tovia Smith reports, there are also offers to help.</s>TOVIA SMITH, BYLINE: Rita Silva Martins thought she'd finally made it. After years working as a janitor, she landed an airport security job with the TSA. And she and her husband bought their first house outside Boston, where they squeezed in with four kids.</s>UNIDENTIFIED CHILD: What's these?</s>RITA SILVA MARTINS: Do you want some mac and cheese?</s>TOVIA SMITH, BYLINE: With her husband's job at a car dealership, Martins was managing to scrape by until the shutdown.</s>RITA SILVA MARTINS: It's weighing heavy, where I'm having panic attacks not knowing what's going to happen.</s>TOVIA SMITH, BYLINE: Martins is still working - overtime, actually. But if and when that pay comes, Martins worries it'd be too late for her next mortgage payment. And the little cushion she has will be spent.</s>RITA SILVA MARTINS: It's just going to get worse. I have no jewelry. I have nothing to pawn - nothing to just cash in.</s>TOVIA SMITH, BYLINE: Martins is looking for a second job. Her husband already took one, desperately trying to hold on to their house.</s>RITA SILVA MARTINS: It's your dream. You know, I'm 34 years old. I don't know when I'm going to be able to buy something else. How can I save if I'm living paycheck to paycheck right now?</s>UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Excuse me. He's coming through. Let him through.</s>TOVIA SMITH, BYLINE: At Logan Airport, TSA security officer Tom Dasher can relate. Both he and his wife are working for the TSA without pay.</s>TOM DASHER: You can see it in everyone's faces. It is hard.</s>TOVIA SMITH, BYLINE: To make ends meet, Dasher's using gift cards he got for Christmas. Then, it's savings. But even that won't last long with a 2-year-old in day care and a medical condition that means loads of doctor's bills.</s>TOM DASHER: It will eventually get ugly. The math will break down.</s>TOVIA SMITH, BYLINE: Their only option then, Dasher says, will be asking relatives for a loan.</s>TOM DASHER: It is very tough to even think about asking for any kind of handout. But, you know, it comes down to sucking up your pride and taking care of your family.</s>LORI TRAHAN: I so appreciate you coming in and sharing how hard it is on you all personally.</s>TOVIA SMITH, BYLINE: In Lowell this week, newly elected Massachusetts Congresswoman Lori Trahan met with EPA employees feeling the pinch. Even higher earners like Steve Calder are feeling it. It's not just cash flow issues, Calder says. He's borrowed against his retirement fund, and his loan payments come out of his paychecks. But if he's not getting paychecks...</s>STEVE CALDER: The loan becomes in default. It becomes income by IRS rules. And then there's also a 10 percent penalty associated with taking it out. So that's money that I would never see again.</s>LORI TRAHAN: You know what? That...</s>TOVIA SMITH, BYLINE: Trahan promises to help.</s>LORI TRAHAN: Certainly, if there are things that we can do to be helpful to kind of ward off the collectors, we'd like to do that.</s>STEVE CALDER: Right.</s>LORI TRAHAN: This is not your burden alone, and we want to be helpful.</s>TOVIA SMITH, BYLINE: In Boston, for the Coast Guard, the only military branch unpaid through the shutdown, help comes in the form of a new pop-up food pantry. Hundreds helped themselves this week to groceries, medicine and more brought in by the Massachusetts Military Support Foundation. And President Don Cox says an existing pantry on Cape Cod handed out more in two days than it usually does in a month.</s>DON COX: We've been hit hard with the baby food, the diapers - that reminds me I'm out of diapers again. So, I mean, it's just - it's a tidal wave.</s>JENNY JAMES: Honestly, I was really blown away because it's actually very relieving.</s>TOVIA SMITH, BYLINE: Jenny James, wife of a Coast Guardsman and mother of two, first came to the pantry a few days into the shutdown hoping to save her cash just in case. And she's been back several times.</s>JENNY JAMES: It's very comforting. A little bit of the weight's lifted off of me having to worry about putting the food on the table, especially when you don't really know what the future holds.</s>TOVIA SMITH, BYLINE: It's certainly more comforting than the advice recently posted on a Coast Guard employee assistance website. That suggested families try creative ways to make cash, like holding garage sales. Yesterday the Coast Guard pulled that offline, saying it, quote, "doesn't reflect current efforts to support its workforce." Tovia Smith, NPR News. |
As we do every year at about this time, we look back at some of the musicians who died. The 2018 song montage honors musicians from Aretha Franklin to Dolores O'Riordan to Roy Hargrove. | NOEL KING, HOST: As 2018 comes to a close, we're going to take a moment to remember some of the musicians we lost this year. Here is our annual musical montage.</s>ARETHA FRANKLIN: (Singing) What you want, baby, I got it. What you need, do you know I got it? All I'm askin' is for a little respect when you come home. Just a little bit.</s>D J FONTANA: (Playing drums).</s>BOB DOROUGH: (Singing) Three is a magic number. Yes, it is. It's a magic number.</s>HUGH MASEKELA: (Playing trumpet).</s>DENNIS EDWARDS: (Singing) Papa was a rolling stone, my son. Yeah. Wherever he laid his hat was his home. And when he died, all he left us was alone.</s>MAC MILLER: (Singing) I got all the time in the world so for now I'm just chillin' in oblivion. Yeah, yeah. In oblivion. Yeah, yeah.</s>CHARLES AZNAVOUR: (Singing in French).</s>CECIL TAYLOR: (Playing piano).</s>BUELL NEIDLINGER: (Playing bass).</s>RACHID TAHA: (Singing in Arabic).</s>DANNY KIRWAN: (Playing guitar).</s>JALAL MANSUR NURIDDIN: (Chanting) Freedom. Freedom by any means necessary. It's necessary to have freedom by any means necessary. And I'm beginning to hate with love and love with hate. This is madness.</s>JALAL MANSUR NURIDDIN: DOLORES O'RIORDAN: (Singing) Then I open up and see the person falling here is me. A different way to be.</s>PETE SHELLEY: (Singing) Ever fallen in love with someone, ever fallen in love, in love with someone? Ever fallen in love, in love with someone you shouldn't've fallen in love with?</s>RAY THOMAS: (Playing flute).</s>XXXTENTACION: (Rapping) Shorty, heard you bad, word. So profane, something like bad, word. Want your love. Call me when you can, girl. Going up, going down.</s>MARTY BALIN: (Singing) Today, I know what I want to do, but I don't know what for.</s>CYRIL PAHINUI: (Playing guitar).</s>EDWIN HAWKINS: (Singing) Oh, happy day. Oh, happy day. Oh, happy day.</s>RANDY WESTON: (Playing piano).</s>HAMIET BLUIETT: (Playing saxophone).</s>CHARLES NEVILLE: (Playing saxophone).</s>HENRY BUTLER: (Playing piano).</s>CRAIG MACK: (Rapping) I'm kickin' new flava in ya ear. Mack the brand-new flava in ya ear.</s>BIG JAY MCNEELY: (Playing saxophone).</s>MONTSERRAT CABALLE: (Singing in Italian).</s>CLARENCE FOUNTAIN: (Singing) I can see every, everybody's mother.</s>ROY HARGROVE: (Playing trumpet).</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Trumpeter Roy Hargrove concludes our montage tribute to some of the musicians we lost in 2018. |
In Cairo, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo made a stinging rebuke of the Obama administration's approach to the region. But the comments left some wondering what the Trump administration's strategy is. | AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: In Egypt today, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo issued a stinging rebuke of the Obama administration's approach to the Middle East. And he says the Trump administration is doing things differently. For one, says Pompeo, gone are the attempts to negotiate with Iran while allowing it to expand its influence, and the U.S. is committed to defeating ISIS even as it pulls out U.S. forces from Syria. NPR's Michele Kelemen has been traveling with the secretary and has our report.</s>MICHELE KELEMEN, BYLINE: In 2009, President Obama gave a speech in Cairo calling for a new beginning with the Muslim world. Secretary Pompeo chose the same city to deliver his rebuke, though the secretary of state pointedly didn't mention Obama by name.</s>MIKE POMPEO: It was here, here in this city that another American stood before you. He told you that radical Islamist terrorism does not stem from an ideology. He told you that 9/11 led my country to abandon its ideals, particularly in the Middle East.</s>MICHELE KELEMEN, BYLINE: When Obama spoke, it was in the wake of the U.S. invasion of Iraq and the revelations of torture at the Abu Ghraib detention center. He also proposed an economic revival for the region. Pompeo didn't mention any of that but argued the U.S. became too timid. He told the audience at the American University in Cairo that the previous administration allowed ISIS to gain ground and Iran to expand its influence in the region.</s>MIKE POMPEO: We learned that when America retreats, chaos often follows. When we neglect our friends, resentment builds. And when we partner with our enemies, they advance.</s>MICHELE KELEMEN, BYLINE: While Pompeo didn't lay out many clear policy plans, he says the Trump administration is reasserting America as a force for good in the region.</s>MIKE POMPEO: The good news is this. The age of self-inflicted American shame is over, and so are the policies that produced so much needless suffering. Now comes the real new beginning.</s>MICHELE KELEMEN, BYLINE: Secretary Pompeo is on a weeklong swing through the Middle East to shore up old alliances with Arab partners and put more pressure on Iran. But the visit comes at a time when the U.S. is withdrawing forces from Syria. And Nabil Fahmy, a former Egyptian foreign minister who was in the audience, took note of that.</s>NABIL FAHMY: So how exactly are you going to assist dealing with these major threats if you're not going to be there is a question.</s>MICHELE KELEMEN, BYLINE: Fahmy, the dean of the School of Global Affairs at the American University in Cairo, says he would have liked to have heard less domestic American politics and more about the Trump administration's approach to Egypt. Another missing piece of the speech, he says, was any serious talk about resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Fahmy says Pompeo barely mentioned that.</s>NABIL FAHMY: The longest ongoing conflict in the region is the Palestinian-Israeli one. It took less than 30 seconds. Iran took much longer. OK, I understand the message, but give us some more meat on the other things.</s>MICHELE KELEMEN, BYLINE: A former Obama administration official, Rob Malley, issued a statement describing the speech as a, quote, "self-congratulatory delusional depiction of the Trump administration's Middle East policy." He said it was like listening to someone from a parallel universe not mentioning Washington's complicity in the humanitarian catastrophe in Yemen or the administration's indifference to human rights abuses by allies.</s>MICHELE KELEMEN, BYLINE: Pompeo says he did raise human rights in his talks here in Egypt, where activists say there are tens of thousands of political prisoners. But he also praised Egypt's hardline president, Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi, for supporting Christians. Here's Pompeo touring a massive cathedral in the Egyptian capital.</s>MIKE POMPEO: You can see religious liberty, religious freedom at work in this special country. President Sissi clearly made a point by putting this, this largest cathedral in the Middle East, here in this place.</s>MICHELE KELEMEN, BYLINE: Pompeo, who started his speech by noting that he's an evangelical Christian and keeps a Bible open on his desk at the State Department, also visited a mosque nearby. He heads next to Arab Gulf countries where he's again likely to keep the focus on Iran. Michele Kelemen, NPR News, Cairo. |
It was this year when scientists ratcheted up their warnings about the effects of a warming climate on weather. And the weather itself showed that scientists' predictions are getting better. | NOEL KING, HOST: All right. Now a story about the science and the politics of climate change. The planet has been warming for decades. 2018 is on track to be one of the hottest years on record. This year we also saw a bunch of new and more precise predictions from scientists about what climate change is doing to the weather. The Trump administration questions that science. NPR's Christopher Joyce has the story.</s>CHRISTOPHER JOYCE, BYLINE: So are we stuck with climate change? You could ask the president, as reporters from Axios on HBO did.</s>PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Is there climate change? Yeah. Will it go back like this? I mean, will it change back? Probably. That's what I think.</s>CHRISTOPHER JOYCE, BYLINE: You could ask a senator about climate change, as a reporter did to Republican Ted Cruz from Texas when he was campaigning this fall.</s>TED CRUZ: Well, listen. Of course, the climate is changing. The climate has been changing from the dawn of time. The climate will change as long as we have a planet Earth.</s>CHRISTOPHER JOYCE, BYLINE: Or you could ask actual climate scientists what they think, like Martin Hoerling, who was attending the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union in December.</s>MARTIN HOERLING: We're not seeing cycles. We're not seeing things that are going to revert back.</s>CHRISTOPHER JOYCE, BYLINE: What about that idea that the climate is always changing? Here's climate scientist Stephanie Herring.</s>STEPHANIE HERRING: The current change that we're experiencing now is particularly alarming. And that is because in the history of human civilization, the climate has never changed this rapidly.</s>CHRISTOPHER JOYCE, BYLINE: Hoerling and Herring work for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. It was a big year for NOAA and other federal agencies that do science. The government issued a national climate assessment. It said climate change is real. Humans are causing it. And it's worse than ever. Earlier this year, the highly regarded Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change came to a similar conclusion. If the Earth warms up another half a degree Fahrenheit, which is very likely, the world's weather will change drastically. In fact, it's already changing. There was yet another study about extreme weather in 2017 - lots of huge rainstorms around the world, for example, and some very wet hurricanes. Martin Hoerling says it's all about warmer oceans.</s>MARTIN HOERLING: To have more water vapor in the air simply delivering heavier rain when it rains. The physics of what's driving heavier rains even when it's not a hurricane are virtually the same in many locations.</s>CHRISTOPHER JOYCE, BYLINE: The physics isn't complicated. Just heat water in a pot on your stove and watch as it evaporates and rises. It will come back down again. Just ask people who lived through hurricanes in Houston, Florida or Puerto Rico. The last two years have seen abnormally strong hurricane seasons in the Atlantic. The extreme weather report comes annually from the American Meteorological Society - scientists again, not politicians. It's all about so-called attribution science - determining when a big storm or fire or heat wave is normal or pumped up by a warmer climate. Hoerling says the science has improved. And it's revealing just what a warmer world means.</s>MARTIN HOERLING: With seven years of these reports, we're seeing more and more evidence building that heat waves are not only happening more often. Their magnitudes is off the charts.</s>CHRISTOPHER JOYCE, BYLINE: Scientists have also attributed bigger fires to climate change. Physics again - hotter, drier air turns vegetation into tinder. The stronger link between climate and weather makes it harder to question that the climate is changing. And it has people worried that they may be held liable if they don't plan for that - attorney Lindene Patton's clients, for example, people who build things.</s>LINDENE PATTON: You need to go in as a practicing architect or engineer and plan for a different environment, especially for long-lived assets.</s>CHRISTOPHER JOYCE, BYLINE: Things like...</s>LINDENE PATTON: Roads, buildings, homes. That's where this type of information that attribution science is generating is informing decision taking.</s>CHRISTOPHER JOYCE, BYLINE: So that you won't get sued for failing to build for a warmer world. Patton, who's with the firm Earth & Water Law Group, is also getting calls about climate liability from another group of worried people, politicians. Christopher Joyce, NPR News. |
Rev. Jerome LeDoux served the St. Augustine Catholic Church community in New Orleans as it successfully fought off closure after Hurricane Katrina. He died Monday at 88. | AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: Father Jerome LeDoux, one of the most beloved and colorful Catholic priests in New Orleans, has died at age 88. NPR's Karen Grigsby Bates met Father LeDoux when she visited the city a few months after Hurricane Katrina. She has this appreciation.</s>KAREN GRIGSBY BATES, BYLINE: Anyone who met Father Jerome LeDoux was going to get a history lesson. That was certainly the case if you visited him at St. Augustine, the nation's oldest black Catholic church. He'd proudly explain that when it was founded, St. Augustine began as an integrated space.</s>JEROME LEDOUX: We had one whole aisle of free people of color. They had bought those pews for their families to worship in on Sundays. They had also bought the short pews. They didn't need those, so they gave those to the slaves. And for the first time in their existence, the slaves had their own place of worship.</s>KAREN GRIGSBY BATES, BYLINE: Eventually, St. Augustine's became completely black and Creole, free and enslaved. And the service reflected the parishioners' African roots.</s>JEROME LEDOUX: They simply combined the Old Testament and the New Testament with their African ceremonies and chants. So the Old Testament came out with a new ring unheard of in the entire world. (Singing) When Israel was in Egypt land, let my people go.</s>KAREN GRIGSBY BATES, BYLINE: Father LeDoux opened St. Augustine's to whoever was in need. Sandra Johnson Gordon, a St. Augustine's parishioner since 1968, says Jerome LeDoux had a bedroom on the rectory's second floor. But he never used it.</s>SANDRA JOHNSON GORDON: Father LeDoux slept on a pallet on the first floor because so many people would come during the night because they knew he would give them shelter and food or whatever they need. And he slept on that pallet on the floor so he could be readily available to reach the door in a timely manner.</s>KAREN GRIGSBY BATES, BYLINE: His attachment to his parish was completely mutual. When the archbishop of New Orleans announced he was going to merge St. Augustine with another nearby black Catholic Church, the St. Augustine's congregation was up in arms. They waged a fierce campaign to keep St. Augustine's separate and open. Ultimately, they were successful, but at a cost. The archbishop removed Father LeDoux from the church, saying he'd reached mandatory retirement age. Parishioners saw this as a retribution for their victory.</s>KAREN GRIGSBY BATES, BYLINE: Sandra Johnson Gordon says Father LeDoux officiated at her marriage, christened her children and buried many of her family members. She says the charismatic priest never put himself first.</s>SANDRA JOHNSON GORDON: He was never first, second, third, fourth. He was 100th. He was fine with that. He will be greatly, greatly missed by so very many.</s>KAREN GRIGSBY BATES, BYLINE: Many celebrations of Father Jerome LeDoux's life will be next week, first in Opelousas, La., and then in Bay St. Louis, Miss., where he'll be buried. Karen Grigsby Bates, NPR News. |
Moscow's neighborhood libraries are having a moment as they've turned from shabby houses of Soviet learning to well-designed work spaces for MacBook-toting hipsters. | ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: One of the Soviet Union's lasting legacies in Moscow was a dense network of hundreds of public libraries. After Russia's rocky transition from communism and the rise of the Internet, the city's libraries looked like they were doomed to become relics of an analog past. But as NPR's Lucian Kim reports, Moscow's libraries are experiencing an unexpected revival.</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: Moscow is a noisy place, its boulevards jammed with impatient drivers. But it's still possible to find some peace and quiet.</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: I'm at the Dostoevsky Library in one of Moscow's hippest neighborhoods. The main reading hall has wooden floors, white walls and large windows facing the street. But what's most impressive is that every seat here is taken, and almost everybody looks like they're under the age of 35.</s>ALSU GORBATYUK: It's one of the best libraries here in Moscow just because it has changed so much.</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: Alsu Gorbatyuk is an English teacher and a frequent visitor.</s>ALSU GORBATYUK: I suppose that right now, Moscow is one of the centers of library culture.</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: The Dostoevsky Library is a showcase for the sweeping overhaul of Moscow's libraries from musty houses of Soviet learning into bustling workspaces for 21st century city dwellers. Andrei Akritov, an aspiring stand-up comedian from out of town, says he spent three to four hours a day in the library.</s>ANDREI AKRITOV: (Speaking Russian).</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: He says he lives in a hostel, so he appreciates the solitude to concentrate on his work. Russian designers based in the Netherlands were responsible for the library's renovation. Students and freelancers tap away on their laptops by day. Young professionals attend foreign language clubs, readings and lectures in the evenings. Maria Rogachyova, a 39-year-old musician by training, is the city official in charge of rejuvenating Moscow's libraries.</s>MARIA ROGACHYOVA: (Through interpreter) Our job is to develop the most democratic and accessible cultural locations for Muscovites. This isn't about libraries for the sake of libraries as it sometimes seemed in the past. We need to listen to what Muscovites' needs are so they start loving us.</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: Rogachyova says that's meant expanding opening hours to accommodate working people and families, putting catalogs online and even opening coffee shops on site. There were certainly employees who preferred knitting in empty libraries, she says. But most of the changes have taken place thanks to the initiative of the librarians themselves and not because of any extra funding.</s>MARIA ROGACHYOVA: (Speaking Russian).</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: Rogachyova says the rise of electronic media shouldn't spell the death of libraries as public spaces where people can experience, as she puts it, living literature.</s>MARIA ROGACHYOVA: (Through interpreter) We have a different idea from the way things used to be. A library can be a loud place. Of course there should be some quiet nooks where you focus on your reading, but our libraries also host a huge amount of loud events.</s>MARIA ROGACHYOVA: UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR #1: (As character, speaking Russian).</s>MARIA ROGACHYOVA: UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR #2: (As character, speaking Russian).</s>MARIA ROGACHYOVA: UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR #1: (As character, speaking Russian).</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: Back at the Dostoevsky Library, a theater group is rehearsing in one of the halls.</s>LIDIYA AREFYEVA: (Speaking Russian).</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: Actress Lidiya Arefyeva says the library is a wonderful location to practice because of its intimate atmosphere.</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR #3: (Vocalizing).</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: A few years ago, a boisterous rehearsal would have been unheard of in a Moscow library.</s>LUCIAN KIM, BYLINE: Now it's as normal as surfing the Internet, drinking a coffee or checking out a book. Lucian Kim, NPR News, Moscow. |
NPR's Audie Cornish talks with Elise Gould, senior economist with the Economic Policy Institute, about what exactly it means to be living paycheck to paycheck and how many Americans are doing so. | AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: This is the week that many government workers will miss their first paycheck. And as the shutdown has gone on, we've been hearing from a lot of them who say they are living from paycheck to paycheck. For some, the promise of back pay doesn't solve the problem of paying your phone bill or your mortgage or putting dinner on the table for your family today. We wanted to better understand why so many people live paycheck to paycheck in America, so we've called on Elise Gould of the Economic Policy Institute. She studies wages, poverty and inequality. Welcome to the program.</s>ELISE GOULD: Thank you so much.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: So for economists, what's the definition of living paycheck to paycheck?</s>ELISE GOULD: That's a great question. I would say there's not a uniform understanding among economists. But one thing I would say is that there's a Federal Reserve study that asked families whether or not they could cover an unexpected expense of $400. So if all of a sudden you had to pay $400, would you have enough money to be able to cover that? And 4 in 10 adults, if faced with an unexpected expense of $400, would either not be able to cover it or cover it by selling something or borrowing money, such as putting it on a credit card.</s>ELISE GOULD: So I think the idea that they don't have enough money to cover that, that is pretty widespread. So that suggests about 40 percent of Americans have that problem.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: We've been hearing from a lot of federal workers who are worried about missing a paycheck. And, you know, some of these people have good jobs, full-time work, long-term employment. Can you be middle class or even wealthy and still live paycheck to paycheck?</s>ELISE GOULD: Yes, absolutely. We know it costs a lot to get by across this country when you figure in things like housing costs, food, medical care, maybe child care, transportation. And every day, there are families that go without. But if you don't have that paycheck, that shock - it could be a paycheck, it could be a health shock, it could be a large car repair - any of those things can lead to total financial destabilization for many workers and their families. And we're not just talking about poor families. These are middle class families that could be destabilized by not having that paycheck.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: But you have the president touting the strength of the U.S. economy, right? The unemployment rate has been at a historic low. Why are so many people still running out of money every month?</s>ELISE GOULD: Well, it's really harder to saving the economy today because most workers haven't seen significant increases in their pay to be able to increase their standard of living, giving them any sort of cushion to save. So yes, it's true, we have seen the economy improve. And the statistics that I cited before, those are better than they were at the depths of the Great Recession.</s>ELISE GOULD: And so more people have jobs, and that's all great. More people are returning to the labor force. But we have seen stagnation in pay. We have seen that, you know, workers - they need both parents to support a family, right? Those are longer-term trends because we have seen stagnation in worker pay and in family incomes.</s>ELISE GOULD: So without additional resources to draw on, families often to have to resort to suboptimal solutions such as payday lending or going without recommended medical treatment or leaving school without a degree but racking up lots of debt. So these are lots of problems that middle class families face today.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: What's interesting about this is here we are all these years after the economic meltdown and that conversation about people needing to save and create a financial cushion, but you're saying it's actually harder to do that even if more Americans wanted to or tried?</s>ELISE GOULD: Yes, absolutely because people's pay is just barely enough to make ends meet, and for many people it's not enough to make ends meet. And so being able to afford child care, there's been a lot information about, you know, how expensive it is for many families. So that one expense can really make or break what it takes to, you know, put food on the table.</s>ELISE GOULD: So I think that there are a lot of things that are happening to families today. They're being stretched incredibly thin. And losing this paycheck for these federal workers - not just the federal workers, also the federal contractors, federal contractors that are out of work because of the partial government shutdown won't be getting that backpay.</s>ELISE GOULD: So it's not even a question of putting off getting that money. It's a question of never getting it in the first place.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: Elise Gould is a senior economist with the Economic Policy Institute. Thank you for speaking with us.</s>ELISE GOULD: Thank you so much for having this important conversation. |
As the year winds down, we're asking people about which song was their favorite from 2018. Bob Boilen, host of All Songs Considered shares his favorite song: "Night Shift" by Lucy Dacus. | DAVID GREENE, HOST: So what were the best songs of 2018? Well, not surprisingly, opinions vary wildly, but let's check out one favorite from a co-host of NPR's All Songs Considered.</s>BOB BOILEN, BYLINE: I'm Bob Boilen. Before the end of 2017, I knew I'd just heard my favorite song of 2018. I'd never been so sure. "Night Shift" from Lucy Dacus is a six-minute and 32-second post-breakup song that extends a hand of hope after a virtual scream into a pillow.</s>LUCY DACUS: (Singing) The first time I tasted somebody else's spit, I had a coughing fit.</s>BOB BOILEN, BYLINE: Lucy Dacus is a 23-year-old singer based in Richmond, Va. I was first attracted to her voice. It has a well-worn husk that adds heft to her stories of loss and death.</s>LUCY DACUS: (Singing) I'm doing fine trying to derail my one-track mind, regaining my self-worth in record time.</s>BOB BOILEN, BYLINE: If you listen, you can hear the song's quiet subtlety. But as the story unfolds, the tone of the tune goes from spellbinding to a sonic burst of guitars and more.</s>LUCY DACUS: (Singing) You got a nine-to-five so I'll take the night shift, and I'll never see you again if I can help it.</s>BOB BOILEN, BYLINE: Lucy Dacus told me that, for a long time, I didn't believe expressing this sort of negativity was productive, but it's less productive to resist the truths of a situation. And so she wrote "Night Shift." And as "Night Shift" nears its end and she imagines the years gone by, her look back on this bad relationship is hopeful. And that hopefulness is ever present, not just on "Night Shift," which is my favorite song of 2018, but on her album, "Historian," which is my favorite album of 2018.</s>LUCY DACUS: (Singing) You got a nine-to-five so I'll take the night shift.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: That was Bob Boilen from NPR Music giving us his favorite song of 2018, which is "Night Shift" by Lucy Dacus. |
President Trump makes his first trip to an active combat zone. The Department of Homeland Security promises changes to protect migrant children. Police In Sudan fire live ammunition at protesters. | NOEL KING, HOST: President Trump made his first trip to an active combat zone yesterday. That's nearly two years into his presidency.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: That's right. The president visited U.S. troops in Iraq. And his message there sounded, well, a lot like his message back home.</s>PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: We will honor your service by doing everything in our power to defend our homeland and to stop terrorists from entering American shores, and that includes strengthening of our borders. I don't know if you folks are aware of what's happening. We want to have strong borders in the United States, and Democrats don't want to let us have strong borders. Only for one reason - you know why? - because I want it.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: All right. NPR's White House correspondent Scott Horsley is with us now. Good morning, Scott.</s>SCOTT HORSLEY, BYLINE: Good morning, Noel.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: So this trip was a closely guarded secret because there are plenty of security risks. That's pretty normal. Do you have a sense of why President Trump went to Iraq now?</s>SCOTT HORSLEY, BYLINE: Well, this was in the works for some time. If you think back, the president was getting some criticism around Thanksgiving for not having gone to a combat zone during his first couple years in office. Both his predecessors, Barack Obama and George W. Bush, made multiple trips to Afghanistan and Iraq. So this was an opportunity for the commander in chief to wish those serving far from home a merry Christmas and to thank them for their service.</s>SCOTT HORSLEY, BYLINE: It was also a dramatic gesture for the president in the midst of this partial government shutdown. And, of course, it comes just days after Trump's own defense secretary had quit in protest of the president's decision to pull U.S. troops out of neighboring Syria.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Yeah. President Trump has made these choices recently that have led to the resignation of his secretary of defense and the head of the team that's charged with countering ISIS. Did he address that at all?</s>SCOTT HORSLEY, BYLINE: He did. In his remarks to the U.S. troops, the president gave sort of a reiteration of his "America First" approach to foreign policy. He defended those decisions to pull troops out of Syria and about half the U.S. forces out of Afghanistan. He said the U.S. wouldn't, quote, "be a sucker anymore," defending other countries without getting much in return to his way of thinking.</s>SCOTT HORSLEY, BYLINE: He also did tell reporters, including our own Tamara Keith, who's on this trip, that he's not planning to withdraw any of the 5,200 troops who are now serving in Iraq. Take a listen.</s>PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: No plans at all, no. In fact, we could use this as a base if we wanted to do something in Syria.</s>SCOTT HORSLEY, BYLINE: In that sense, he is acknowledging that while ISIS has been driven from most of its territory in Syria and Iraq, the group has not been wiped out of existence and has the potential to regroup.</s>SCOTT HORSLEY, BYLINE: I should say, Noel, the president also falsely claimed to the service members he was addressing that he'd given them their first pay raise in 10 years. In fact, the military's gotten a pay raise every year. That's a claim the president has made before and that has been widely debunked.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Scott, while the president was there, obviously, he met with U.S. troops, he took selfies - he and the first lady. Did he meet at all with Iraqi officials, because that seems like it would've been sort of a key move?</s>SCOTT HORSLEY, BYLINE: Not in person. And the White House press secretary Sarah Sanders blamed that on logistics. As you mentioned, the exact timing of this trip had been a closely guarded secret. And when it took place, the White House says there simply wasn't time for the Iraqi prime minister to make it to the Al Asad Military Base out there in Anbar province, where the president was visiting.</s>SCOTT HORSLEY, BYLINE: Now, Iraqi sources say they would've preferred to see the president come to Baghdad to meet the president the way that other foreign leaders have done. In any case, though, Trump and the prime minister did speak by telephone, and the president invited the prime minister to visit him in Washington.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: OK. NPR's White House correspondent Scott Horsley. Thanks, Scott.</s>SCOTT HORSLEY, BYLINE: Good to be with you.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: U.S. lawmakers are calling for better medical care for migrant kids in U.S. custody.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Yeah. This comes, of course, after the death of a second migrant child who was in the custody of U.S. immigration authorities. These deaths have prompted U.S. Customs and Border Protection to do new medical screenings for every child in its care, and it's looking for help from other federal agencies.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: NPR's Joel Rose has been following this story. Good morning, Joel.</s>JOEL ROSE, BYLINE: Hi, Noel.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: So first, Joel, I want to ask you what else we've learned about this little boy who died in custody this week.</s>JOEL ROSE, BYLINE: He's been identified as Felipe Alonzo Gomez (ph). He's was 8 years old, from Guatemala. He was apprehended after crossing the border illegally with his father outside of El Paso, Texas, on December 18. They were held in multiple processing facilities near the border, facilities run by Customs and Border Protection. They were moved, eventually, to a remote highway checkpoint north in New Mexico. That is where Alonzo Gomez got sick and died on Monday, on Christmas Eve.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: And why was this child held for so long in these facilities? What was happening there?</s>JOEL ROSE, BYLINE: Well, that's one of the big unanswered questions that we have about this, right? CBP is supposed to get children out of these processing centers as quickly as possible, ideally in less than 72 hours. But Alonzo Gomez was held for much longer than that. He was shuffled through multiple facilities in quick succession. And authorities haven't really said why. But they have said that CBP facilities in the region are at or near capacity.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: So they haven't exactly said what was going on in the case of this little boy. But what have they said more broadly - immigration authorities - because they are under a lot of pressure right now after the deaths of two children in less than a month?</s>JOEL ROSE, BYLINE: Right. You know, they've - there's been a reaction. You know, they've called this death a tragedy. They're investigating the cause. And until this month, they said there hadn't been a death of a child in CBP custody in over a decade. They say they've completed new medical screenings for children in their care, especially - for almost all of the children in their care, especially those who are under 10. And they're looking for help from other federal agencies, including the Centers for Disease Control.</s>JOEL ROSE, BYLINE: But immigration authorities say that they're facing a crisis because of record numbers of families and unaccompanied children who are showing up at the border and that Customs and Border Protection facilities just were not designed for this. Here's CBP spokesman Andrew Meehan.</s>ANDREW MEEHAN: Many of our facilities were built 20, 30 years ago. They are meant to handle single adults, mostly males. They were not designed to deal with this huge increase in families and kids.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: OK, that's interesting because they're essentially saying this is a logistical problem, and we haven't figured out a way to fix it yet. What are members of Congress saying about all this?</s>JOEL ROSE, BYLINE: Members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus got a tour of some CBP facilities in New Mexico last week after the death of another migrant child, also from Guatemala. And they were not happy about what they saw.</s>JOEL ROSE, BYLINE: Raul Ruiz is a Democratic lawmaker from California. Ruiz is also a doctor. And he says he's going to write legislation to establish some basic standards for care for migrant children that - he says what they saw in New Mexico is inhumane and substandard. Democratic representatives are calling for hearings on this. They want the Department of Homeland Security to ask for more money to improve the medical care there.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: NPR's Joel Rose. Joel, thank you so much.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: All right. This is what the past week has sounded like across Sudan, which is a massive country in Northeast Africa.</s>UNIDENTIFIED PROTESTERS: (Screaming).</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Yeah. Protesters in Sudan have taken to the streets by the thousands. They're demanding the ouster of an almost-three-decade-old regime. And the government, as we hear, has responded with violence. Human rights groups say at least 37 people have been killed.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: NPR's Eyder Peralta has been following this story, and he's with us now from the Kenyan capital, Nairobi. Good morning, Eyder.</s>EYDER PERALTA, BYLINE: Good morning, Noel.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: All right. So why have people taken to the streets of the capital, Khartoum and, in fact, other cities across Sudan, which is a very large country?</s>EYDER PERALTA, BYLINE: Yeah. So it started over the price of bread. The government decided to end subsidies, and the price of bread tripled. But this really speaks to the huge economic problems that Sudan is facing. The country, you know, has been facing huge inflation. People can't get money. They make hours' worth of lines for twenty dollars, and then they get to the stores and the shelves are bare.</s>EYDER PERALTA, BYLINE: But, look; today, I was speaking to Wael (ph), a protester who only wanted his first name used because he fears the government. And here's what he told me.</s>WAEL: It's not about economics. It's about - they are not going to improve the country. I am 25 years old. I cannot see my future here inside this country.</s>EYDER PERALTA, BYLINE: So life is hard is what he's saying, but he feels like the government has the resources, and they're just misusing it. They are just looking out for themselves, he says, so President Omar al-Bashir has to go.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: I mean, this is so interesting. You talked to a 25-year-old man who says he has no faith in the future of his country. His president has been in power longer than he's been alive. Bashir is a strongman ruler. He's a tough guy. Is this starting at all to look like a threat to his regime, or is this crackdown ultimately likely to prove, you know, just another crackdown in a country with a strong leader who's determined to hang on to power?</s>EYDER PERALTA, BYLINE: Let me play you something that will explain a lot.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Yeah.</s>UNIDENTIFIED PROTESTERS: (Chanting in foreign language).</s>EYDER PERALTA, BYLINE: So that is what people across Sudan are chanting, and it translates roughly to, the people demand the fall of the regime. And if you remember, that was a...</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Yeah.</s>EYDER PERALTA, BYLINE: ...Really popular chant during the Arab Spring. And the Sudanese took to the streets back then, too. And since 2011, they've taken to the streets many times. And every single time, the security forces have managed to tamp those protests down.</s>EYDER PERALTA, BYLINE: Analysts I've spoken to say this feels a little different. There's a lot more people on the streets. And this is an emboldened movement across the country. We've seen reports that protesters have attacked government buildings. And one thing to remember is that popular protest movements have brought down two governments in Sudan - once in 1964, and again in 1985.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Has the government said anything? I mean, they've sent troops into the streets. But have they said anything in response to this, particularly anything on how they might improve the economy, make people's lives better?</s>EYDER PERALTA, BYLINE: No. I mean, President Omar al-Bashir delivered a speech a few days ago, and he just blamed the protests on agents, mercenaries and infiltrators. One thing that we are watching is we've seen reports that some of the troops that have been sent to deal with protesters have instead sided with them. But in public, they issued a statement. The military said that they were 100 percent with President Bashir.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: NPR's Eyder Peralta in Nairobi watching this developing story in Sudan. Eyder, thanks so much.</s>EYDER PERALTA, BYLINE: Thank you, Noel. |
President Trump traveled to the border Thursday as he continues pushing to fund a wall, as a partial government shutdown nears the end of its third week. | ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: President Trump traveled to Texas today to keep making his case for a barrier on the southern border. His trip comes with Republicans and Democrats no closer to an agreement to end the partial government shutdown now in its 20th day. And its effects are even being felt at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: UNIDENTIFIED PERSON #1: Thank you for calling the White House comment line.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: UNIDENTIFIED PERSON #2: Due to the lack of appropriations - funding from Congress, the federal government has shut down.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: That's the message you get if you call the White House switchboard. With no end in sight, federal workers will officially miss their first paycheck on Friday. And Trump is warning Democrats to negotiate with him or he will try to build the barrier without Congress's approval. NPR's Ayesha Rascoe covers the White House and is here in the studio with us. Hi, Ayesha.</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: Hello.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: I'm tempted to ask what the state of play is on negotiations, but are there even negotiations happening at this point?</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: Well, there have been some negotiations, but things are really where they have been for the past few days or maybe even where they've been since the start of the shutdown. Basically, there seems to be no real movement toward some type of compromise right now. Vice President Mike Pence talked to reporters today. And he said at this point, the White House is not open to a big deal that would exchange some concessions on the so-called DREAMers, for money, for a wall or a barrier. And he also shot down the Democrats' plans to open parts of the government while lawmakers continue to debate how to handle border security. Pence said the White House will not agree to sign off on any bills in kind of a piecemeal fashion.</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: There was this little burst of activity with Republican Senator Lindsey Graham. He was trying to put together a bipartisan compromise. And Graham was in some talks with leadership today, but those talks quickly fell apart. And now Graham is urging Trump to use his emergency powers to build the wall. And with that, the Senate is adjourned for the week. So barring something extraordinary happening, this shutdown is going to drag into next week and on Saturday will be the longest shutdown ever.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: And President Trump took his message to the border today - to McAllen, Texas. What did he say there?</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: Well, he was really trying to drive home this idea that there is a crisis at the border and that a barrier is necessary to deal with it. He had a roundtable where he had family members, who had loved ones killed by someone in the country illegally, talking. And he really pushed back against the Democrats' arguments that this is a manufactured emergency.</s>PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: What is manufactured is the use of the word manufactured. It's manufactured by them - every single of the negatives. But they're not winning because it's common sense.</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: So at this roundtable, Trump had these firearms and bags of what looked like drugs and money. They were on display in front of him. I guess this was seemingly to represent the contraband that is being seized at the border. But it's worth noting that out - that government figures show that most of the heroin that comes across the border into the U.S. actually comes through legal ports of entry and not through parts of the border without barriers.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Just in our last minute, what about the possibility of declaring a national emergency and building the wall that way without congressional support?</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: So we don't really have a timeline on when that decision will be made, but it's still on the table. And Trump is making clear that this is the path he intends to take if he can't cut a deal with Congress. It would cause this legal and political firestorm, but Trump seems to kind of view this - or may seem to view this as a way for him to agree to reopen the government. And then he could still tell his base that, we're fighting for this war. He actually said it would be surprising if he doesn't - if he doesn't declare a national emergency if there's no compromise.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: NPR's Ayesha Rascoe. Thanks.</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: Thank you. |
Authorities in China have been conducting church raids and arresting prominent pastors that the government believes are a threat to the state. | DAVID GREENE, HOST: This month, Chinese authorities raided some of the country's most prominent independent churches, shutting them down and arresting their pastors. As NPR's Rob Schmitz reports, China's government has stepped up its campaign against Christianity, a religion it sees as having problematic foreign ties.</s>ROB SCHMITZ, BYLINE: Police raided the Early Rain Covenant Church on December 9, a Sunday evening, while congregants gathered for services. Video captured of the raid shows officers separating a child from her father as they detain 100 churchgoers.</s>UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: (Foreign language spoken).</s>ROB SCHMITZ, BYLINE: The church, based in the southwestern city of Chengdu, has 500 members and is one of several high-profile independent churches that have been raided by China's government this year for what it calls illegal religious activity.</s>IAN JOHNSON: I think the government sees religion as a double-edged sword.</s>ROB SCHMITZ, BYLINE: Ian Johnson is the author of "The Souls Of China: The Return Of Religion After Mao."</s>IAN JOHNSON: On the one hand, it is promoting some religions, like Buddhism and Taoism and folk religions. But in terms of these other religions that they think have too many foreign ties and can be influenced by outsiders taking a very hard-line approach, it's all part and parcel of a broader effort to control civil society.</s>ROB SCHMITZ, BYLINE: Johnson says Chinese authorities are cracking down on churches that are not officially sanctioned by the government. Nearly half of China's 60 million Christians attend these unregistered churches. The raid on Early Rain was preceded by a raid in September by Beijing police on that city's Zion church, which had 1,500 members. In his book, Johnson profiled Early Rain's pastor, Wang Yi.</s>WANG YI: (Foreign language spoken).</s>ROB SCHMITZ, BYLINE: At a sermon in September, Wang called Chinese leader Xi Jinping a sinner, while congregants answer with amen. It was this, Wang's increasing political activism, that Johnson says likely contributed to his arrest.</s>IAN JOHNSON: He's denounced Xi Jinping lifting the term limits on the presidency so that he could become president for life. He said that this was destroying the constitution and similar to creating a new Caesar.</s>ROB SCHMITZ, BYLINE: The 45-year-old pastor Wang Yi and his wife now face up to 15 years in prison on charges of subverting state power. His church remains sealed off to the public, and in the week following the raid, another prominent church in China's southern province of Guangdong has been raided by Chinese police, too. Rob Schmitz, NPR News, Shanghai. |
An 8-year-old Guatemalan boy dies in U.S. immigration custody. The standoff over the border wall continues and the government remains closed. Relations have been improving between the U.S. and Turkey. | DAVID GREENE, HOST: An 8-year-old boy from Guatemala died in U.S. immigration custody yesterday.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: That's right. The cause of his death hasn't been determined yet, but U.S. Customs and Border Protection say he'd been showing signs of sickness. Now, earlier this month, another child, a 7-year-old girl who was also from Guatemala, died while in the custody of border agents in New Mexico.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Reporter Monica Ortiz Uribe has been following many of the migrants who have been crossing the border, and she is on the line with us from El Paso, Texas.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Hi, Monica.</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: Hi. Good morning, David.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: So what do we know about this 8-year-old boy and what happened here?</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: Well, what we know so far is what Customs and Border Protection has put out in a statement, which is that the boy, who was 8 years old, died shortly after midnight on Christmas Day. He was hospitalized the day before, diagnosed with a common cold and released with ibuprofen and antibiotics. But he later returned to the hospital that evening after he began vomiting. And he died in a hospital in Alamogordo, N.M. Now, my colleague here in El Paso who reports for The Washington Post found out that the boy was held in a border patrol checkpoint a hundred miles north of El Paso due to overcrowding at the facilities here.</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: Now, these checkpoints are the small stations that travelers pass on highways as they move away from the border. They're not the kind of facilities equipped for long-term stays. The Post is also reporting that, as a result of these two deaths, the Border Patrol is now doing medical assessments on all 700 children in their custody within the El Paso sector, which also includes New Mexico.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: So does that suggest that they're acknowledging, perhaps, that these migrant children are at risk in U.S. custody right now if they're doing these assessments?</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: Well, yeah. Certainly. Two deaths in one month of young children under similar circumstances is a point of concern. And right now, DHS is doing internal investigations of the deaths vis-a-vis Office of Inspector General. But lawmakers have called for independent investigations, certainly in the case of the first death of the 7-year-old girl. And I have no doubt they'll do the same for this 8-year-old boy.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Monica, I want to ask you about another part of this story. U.S. authorities have been releasing a lot of migrants, as I understand it - many in El Paso - over the Christmas holiday. But it sounds like it's been very abrupt. Like, a lot of the volunteers who normally help with people who are being released weren't even warned that this was happening. You've been following this, right?</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: Yes, yes. So DHS, through the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, has been releasing migrants into communities like El Paso daily, sometimes a hundred, 200 a day. On Sunday and into Christmas Eve, they released large groups of mostly Central American families without warning the local shelter network here in El Paso to be prepared. So I talked with some of these migrants, some of them at the park a block away from the Greyhound station where they were dropped off in downtown El Paso. They had just been released from ICE custody, so that experience was front and center in their minds. One Guatemalan mother, she teared up describing it.</s>KENYA HERNANDEZ: (Speaking Spanish).</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: Yeah. She says that they stayed on a filthy floor and didn't get enough to eat or drink. Others told me they were in a windowless, crowded room where they couldn't tell whether it was day or night. I remember - yes. Yes, I remember seeing children still holding the paper-thin blankets that look like tinfoil. Some of them had no shoes. Now, imagine 400 people arriving in this state. Many of them had no money or any idea where they were.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: That really gives you a sense - a window into the experience of a lot of these migrants at the moment as they are being released. Well, I'm glad you're following that story. That's reporter Monica Ortiz Uribe in El Paso.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Thanks, Monica.</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: You're welcome.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: All right. In Washington, the standoff continues over a border wall and whether to fund it. And many parts of the federal government remain shut down this morning.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Yep. We've now hit Day 5 of the shutdown, and the president is showing no signs of backing down. Here he is talking to reporters yesterday.</s>PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: I can't tell you when the government's going to be open. I can tell you it's not going to be open until we have a wall, a fence, whatever they'd like to call it.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: All right. So what's it going to take to end this funding impasse?</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: NPR congressional correspondent Susan Davis is in our studio this morning.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Hi there, Sue.</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: Good morning, David.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: OK. So I'm just listening to the president there - a wall, a fence, whatever they want to call it. Is he giving a window to Democrats here, and are Democrats willing to budge? Are they hearing anything there that they might like?</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: I think the relationship right now between congressional Democrats, led by Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, and the president are actually in a really bad place. The most recent we've heard from Democratic leaders was a really stinging criticism of the president, saying everyone they talked to at the White House gives them a different answer, and there's no consistency coming from the president on what he will or will not sign. And everyone's waiting for him to cut this deal.</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: This is a criticism we've heard from Republicans, as well. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said that he's waiting for the president to cut a deal with Democrats and then to tell Republicans what it is he will sign when it gets to his desk. So I think there's been a little bit of a pause, honestly, because of the Christmas holiday, and they're going to be back soon. And there hasn't really been any progress.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: So sometimes you hear, like, the president say something in public, but there are these, you know, negotiations happening behind the scenes. We're not getting any sense that the White House has offered anything in terms of talks. I mean, there's just nothing moving here.</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: And again, if his Twitter feed is any indication, the president has been really erratic about this. And that, I think, has also made it harder to cut a deal - because he is saying these things very publicly and boxing himself in a little bit on what he can or can't sign. And Democrats don't know what he's going to do. And the fact that he had already told Republicans he would sign one bill and then changed his mind and decided he wouldn't, it's really hard. It's a very volatile situation, and it's hard to predict.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Is there a reason that both sides might, I mean, dig in so hard on this issue?</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: I mean, this has become a bit of a bedrock issue for both parties. This isn't really a serious policy argument we're having right now. This is a political fight. And immigration is why Donald Trump and the Republican Party believe he won the White House, in large part. And at the same time, Democrats are looking at an election in which they just won 40 seats, they picked up control of the House, and they won women, young people, minorities and independents - all groups of people who overwhelmingly oppose the border wall. So why, as their first act right now, would they choose to undermine the voters that just sent a message and put them into power?</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: So there is very little motivation among Democrats to compromise on this. And I think Republicans look at the president - and he's very sensitive to how it's - the response in conservative media. There's a lot of back channel between conservatives on Capitol Hill directly to the president, saying, you cannot give up this fight. This is - if you give up on this, it's going to undermine your presidency.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: All right. And so the partial shutdown likely goes on into the new year.</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: Very possible.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: NPR congressional correspondent Susan Davis.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Sue, thanks.</s>SUSAN DAVIS, BYLINE: You're welcome.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: All right. So no budget deal here in the United States at the moment - but President Trump does seem to be in kind of a deal-making mode when it comes to Turkey.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Yeah. Trump and Turkey's president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, have agreed to coordinate on the withdrawal of U.S. troops from northern Syria. Now, this would essentially hand the fight against ISIS in Syria over to Turkey. Turkey is now also threatening to attack Syrian Kurdish fighters who partnered with the U.S. in the fight against ISIS. And in the middle of all this, Erdogan has invited Trump to visit Turkey next year.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: And let's go to Turkey. NPR's Peter Kenyon is in Istanbul.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Hi, Peter.</s>PETER KENYON, BYLINE: Hi, David.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: All right. So Trump meeting Erdogan potentially - is this a new and improved relationship? I mean, we've been talking for so long about U.S.-Turkish tensions.</s>PETER KENYON, BYLINE: Yes. And there's obviously no date set for such a meeting between the two leaders. I wouldn't want to predict how long these apparently warmer ties will last, but there has been give-and-take on issues important to each side. I mean, not long ago, Turkey released an American pastor, Andrew Brunson. He was allowed to go home. And then much more recently, President Trump, of course, startled U.S. allies by abruptly announcing this pullout of U.S. forces from Syria in the coming months. Turkey's very happy to hear that. They've been praising the move. They now say their military will go on in, finish the fight against ISIS, and, at the same time, attack these Syrian Kurdish fighters that the Americans have been seeing as partners but the Turks see as terrorists.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Well, let me pause on that for a moment because that is such a dynamic here. I mean, you have these Kurdish fighters who have been so crucial in the fight against ISIS, working alongside the United states, then there's been this delicate balance - right? - that has prevented Turkey - I mean, for a time - from attacking them. And there was a Turkish official who now says, with the U.S. pulling out, they're going to bury these Kurdish fighters. I mean, what has stopped Turkey so far, and what does Donald Trump do about Turkey's desire to go after them?</s>PETER KENYON, BYLINE: Well, certainly there's a case to be made that these Kurdish fighters are being abandoned by the U.S. It was Turkey's defense minister who had that quote about the militants being buried in their ditches, by the way. And he also says they've got intense planning going on to move into at least two areas in northern Syria, east of the Euphrates River and also around the Syrian town of Manbij, Controlled by Syrian Kurdish fighters now, the ones Ankara opposes. Turkey equates them with other militants they've been fighting for decades.</s>PETER KENYON, BYLINE: But the latest reports from Manbij suggest there's another factor at play, regime forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. They have moved into a village near Manbij, we hear. That's raised speculation. Is there another fight coming with the Kurds, or will they try to reach some kind of accommodation? And meanwhile, there are the Turks just across the border.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: So looking at this broadly, I mean, is this is a moment when Turkey is really emboldened by this U.S. pullout?</s>PETER KENYON, BYLINE: I think, judging by the official comments we're hearing here, I'd say yes. I mean, President Erdogan's latest comments suggest Turkey may not wait until all U.S. troops have pulled out before acting. But you have to remember Syria remains very complicated. Expectations, of course, are that the Assad regime has the upper hand, will survive with the help of Russia and Iran. But there also still remains Israel. According to Syrian state media, an Israeli attack occurred just this morning. Israel's mostly concerned, of course, about Iran, and then they have French troops on the ground, as well. They're making noises. That's got Turkey very unhappy - so a lot of players with different agendas, despite the U.S. pullout.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: All right. NPR's correspondent in Istanbul, Peter Kenyon.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Peter, thanks.</s>PETER KENYON, BYLINE: Thanks, David. |
In the era of #Time'sUp and #MeToo, women continue to struggle in the world of country music. Many are taking matters into their own hands and bypassing the industry's gatekeepers. | DAVID GREENE, HOST: Many of the modern country stars who've had the broadest cultural impact have been women. Think about Shania Twain, the Dixie Chicks, Taylor Swift. But sometimes it could seem like the country music world is dominated by men, at least based on radio airplay. In early December, Billboard magazine announced that for the first time, its Country Airplay chart listed no women in the Top 20. But Jewly Hight reports that Nashville's enterprising young women are seeking out alternate routes to an audience.</s>JEWLY HIGHT, BYLINE: Kalie Shorr was so driven to pursue a country music career that she graduated high school early and worked two jobs to save up for her move to Nashville.</s>KALIE SHORR: (Singing) You're rocky terrain, but I know what I'm getting into. No need to explain everything that she did to you.</s>JEWLY HIGHT, BYLINE: When she arrived in Music City in 2012, she knew the drill - find co-writers, a band and a producer, land gigs and a deal with a song publisher.</s>KALIE SHORR: And then meet with record labels, and then you get signed to one. And then you release that song to radio, and then, boom, you're there. And that's a lot of people's path. But I had a little bit of a derailment right around those last three steps because I'm a woman. Yeah.</s>JEWLY HIGHT, BYLINE: Shorr learned that she wasn't alone. Decision makers seem more reluctant to take chances on young female singers and songwriters even when they showed talent. Three years into Shorr's Nashville tenure, a country radio consultant spelled out the gender bias in an interview with a food metaphor. He insisted it was best for radio ratings to treat songs by female artists as tomatoes garnishing an otherwise male salad.</s>KALIE SHORR: So when it happened, like, no one was surprised, but everyone was so [expletive] off. But then we were also excited because we were like, oh, great. We're talking about it. So it's going to - fix, right? And how many years has it been now?</s>JEWLY HIGHT, BYLINE: Tomatogate (ph) hadn't even happened when Leslie Fram, a senior vice president at Country Music Television, launched a promotional campaign called Next Women of Country. Shorr is among the dozens of artists that Fram has included in video premieres, web features, live showcases and tours over the last half-decade.</s>LESLIE FRAM: We recognized early on, but the fact that we're still having this conversation is shocking. I feel like we have to do more. We have to get more exposure for these artists outside of terrestrial radio, outside of play listing.</s>JEWLY HIGHT, BYLINE: Fram and a couple of other industry veterans also spearhead an advocacy group called Change the Conversation that spent the last four years hosting town hall meetings, presenting research on the marketing power of female stars and mentoring women. But since change has been slow to come, artists have taken on the issue themselves. Some use social media, a podcast or stage banter. Shorr and her collaborators have gotten buzz with topical songs.</s>SONG SUFFRAGETTES: (Singing) Time's up for the ruthless, the wicked and the vain. Time's up for the cheaters, 'cause now the game has changed. It's been a long time coming. There's a new day dawning, going to stop you running today. The wait's over for the patient, the humble and the brave.</s>JEWLY HIGHT, BYLINE: Along with fellow artist Savannah Keyes, Shorr recently agreed to co-host a daily radio Disney country segment on women that will reach listeners mostly through satellite and streaming.</s>KALIE SHORR: It's great because it does put me at the forefront of this conversation. I've gotten a lot of press from non-country outlets because they know that I'll be outspoken about it because I can be because I'm independent.</s>JEWLY HIGHT, BYLINE: This year, Shorr applied that attitude to the sound of her self-released music. She kept on writing catchy hooks, but worked in the emo guitar riffs she loves.</s>KALIE SHORR: (Singing) Well, I never knew how strong I was until I found me and I gave you up. What do you do when you're lost in space and nothing really seems to shine?</s>JEWLY HIGHT, BYLINE: And Shorr made it clear to fans that she was prioritizing being true to herself.</s>KALIE SHORR: I was like, I don't make music for rich people in suits. I make music for these people. And as long as they're happy with it and they connect to it and they're taking something away from it, I don't need a label.</s>JEWLY HIGHT, BYLINE: So most Monday nights, Shorr performs in a songwriters round called Song Suffragettes alongside a rotating cast of like-minded peers.</s>KALIE SHORR: Hey, guys. Oh, y'all look so beautiful tonight. My name is Kalie Shorr, and we are the Song Suffragettes. And we are so excited that y'all decided to spend your Monday with us. We started Songs Suffragettes after noticing that there was a pretty massive gender disparity in country music.</s>JEWLY HIGHT, BYLINE: Shorr's manager, Todd Cassetty, co-founded Song Suffragettes and says the fact that 1,400 writers have applied to join to date is a sign that it remains a much-needed outlet.</s>TODD CASSETTY: We started it almost five years ago with the hope that giving a platform, giving an opportunity would really help move the needle in a macro way - and in small ways, it has. You know, we've made a mark. A lot of our women have been able to score publishing deals or record deals.</s>JEWLY HIGHT, BYLINE: Chloe Gilligan signed with the publisher who saw her at one of those shows. While she figures out the next steps for her career, she leans on the solidarity of the group, as she explains backstage.</s>CHLOE GILLIGAN: This, to me, is a different type of community of songwriters where everyone's just so supportive. And it's not really competition necessarily, more like, if you win, then I win.</s>JEWLY HIGHT, BYLINE: Like a lot of Nashville's rising women, Gilligan fills her songs with intimate details and delivers them like she's allowing audiences into her imagination.</s>CHLOE GILLIGAN: I ended up writing a whole song in the corner of a club because I was mad and bored.</s>UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: That is the most on-brand Chloe Gilligan thing I've ever heard in my life, like go to the club, angrily type lyrics into your iPhone.</s>CHLOE GILLIGAN: Oh, and he knows it's about him, too. Like, there ain't no bones about it that the song's about this guy. So this is called "Blow Your Cover."</s>CHLOE GILLIGAN: (Singing) I can still taste the peppermint on my tongue. The bouncer said, have a good one.</s>JEWLY HIGHT, BYLINE: That's a fairly new development for mainstream country. The genre's stars often used to turn to professional songwriters for tunes that were broadly relatable in arena scale. Now that a lot of the old rules no longer seem to apply for women in country, more and more of them are exploring the potential of an individualized singer-songwriter approach, says Song Suffragette Reagan Stewart.</s>REGAN STEWART: You can tell that everyone's perspective now is changing to, like, OK, I'm going to be me, and that's going to work. And I'm going to make that work.</s>JEWLY HIGHT, BYLINE: For proof that it can work, both Stewart and Kalie Shorr look to what was accomplished this year by an artist who's been at this longer than they have. Kacey Musgraves took her latest album in a psychedelic and reflective direction without giving radio a moment's thought and was celebrated for it.</s>KALIE SHORR: I'd rather be Kacey Musgraves and, you know, be able to go on this world tour and get nominated for Album of the Year at the Grammys than have a No. 1 people forget about.</s>JEWLY HIGHT, BYLINE: Shorr and plenty of her counterparts are playing the long game. As Musgraves put it in a song...</s>KACEY MUSGRAVES: (Singing) I'm all right with a slow burn.</s>JEWLY HIGHT, BYLINE: For NPR News, I'm Jewly Hight in Nashville.</s>KACEY MUSGRAVES: (Singing) Taking my time, let the world turn. I'm going to do it my way. It'll be all right. If we burn it down... |
The North Pole is in international waters but now Canada is arguing that Santa Claus is definitely Canadian. CTV News reports various Canadian government departments and agencies cite proof. | DAVID GREENE, HOST: Good morning. I'm David Greene. The North Pole is in international waters. But now Canada is arguing its most famous resident is definitely Canadian. A Canadian tax official tells CTV News that Santa reports an income, including in the form of cookies and carrots. Santa files expenses for a lot of single-day travel. A Canadian immigration official pointed to Santa and Mrs. Claus' outfits as further proof, telling the news outlet that red and white sure is patriotic. |
An 8-year-old boy from Guatemala has died in government custody, U.S. Customs and Border Protection says. He is the second child reported to have died while in U.S. custody within a month. | NOEL KING, HOST: An 8-year-old migrant boy from Guatemala died in U.S. government custody on Monday night. Just a few weeks ago, a 7-year-old girl, also from Guatemala, died also after being apprehended by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Reporter Monica Ortiz Uribe has been covering the stories of migrants near the southern border, and she's on the line with me now from El Paso.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Good morning, Monica.</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: Hi, good morning.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: So what else do we know about this little Guatemalan boy who died?</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: Well, what we know is what Customs and Border Protection has put out now in a second statement since yesterday, which is that the boy, who was 8 years old, died shortly before midnight on Christmas Day. Earlier, they had said that he died shortly after midnight on Christmas Day. And we know from that statement that he was hospitalized the day before Christmas Eve with a cold, released after given ibuprofen and antibiotics. But he later returned to the hospital after he began vomiting and died there.</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: My colleague here in El Paso, who reports for The Washington Post, found out that the boy was held at a Border Patrol checkpoint a hundred miles north of El Paso, due to overcrowding at the facilities here. And these are checkpoints - they're small stations that travelers pass on the highway as they move away from the border, and they're not the kind of facilities equipped for long-term stays. CBP has also said that it's considering a, quote, "surge in medical assistance" for children in their custody and that they may seek help from other agencies like the Coast Guard, FEMA and Health and Human Services.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: That sounds like an acknowledgment that this tragedy needs to be addressed. I understand you've been in El Paso talking with families who've just been released from custody. But they were released without warning. So the local volunteers who would typically help them were caught unaware. What is the scene down there? What have people been telling you?</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: Sure. I talked with some of these migrants, most of them Central American families, in a park a block away from the Greyhound station in downtown El Paso. They had just been released from ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, custody. So that experience was front and center in their mind. I spoke with one Guatemalan mother. Her name was Kenya Hernandez (ph), and she teared up describing that experience.</s>KENYA HERNANDEZ: (Speaking Spanish).</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: She says they stayed on a filthy floor and didn't get enough to eat or drink. Others told me they were in a windowless, crowded room where they couldn't tell whether it was day or night. I saw children still holding the paper-thin blankets that look like tinfoil given to them by the authorities. Some had no shoes. One boy was feverish and had to be picked up by an ambulance. Now, imagine 400 people in this state. I recall a mother who was holding her infant child and looking up at a volunteer and asking - estamos libre? - which means, are we free?</s>NOEL KING, HOST: A lot down there seems like it needs to be worked out.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Reporter Monica Ortiz Uribe, thank you so much for following this for us.</s>MONICA ORTIZ URIBE, BYLINE: You're welcome. |
NPR's Isabel Lara lived close to the World Trade Center and after Sept. 11, she wasn't allowed to return home for a week. The only thing she could think about was one thing she left behind: a rosary. | NOEL KING, HOST: If you had to leave your home at a minute's notice, what would you take with you? Last month we brought you the story of a Jewish boy who escaped Nazi Germany with not much more than the clothes on his back, a little bag and a toy monkey. That doll led to the discovery years later of family he never knew he had. So we asked if others had any stories about one object that they could never leave behind, something that they took with them when fleeing conflict. We got a lot of responses, and we wanted to share some of the stories with you. This morning we have one that comes from inside NPR. Isabel Lara works in NPR's media relations department. She fled her home in Venezuela in 2001 as the country's economy deteriorated to attend grad school in New York City.</s>ISABEL LARA, BYLINE: When I left Venezuela, I didn't realize that I wasn't going to go back there. I thought that I was just going off to graduate school and I'd be back in a few years. But the situation of the country just kept getting worse and worse, and it's reached a point now where more than two million Venezuelans have left the country. I have this rosary that belonged to my grandmother that I took with me when I went off to graduate school in New York. My grandmother died in 1988. It was her kind of basic rosary that she kept with her that I took with me in 2001.</s>ISABEL LARA, BYLINE: I moved into my dorm, which was very near the World Trade Center. And a few days after I arrived there, 9/11 happened and the World Trade Center collapsed across the street, more or less.</s>ISABEL LARA, BYLINE: You know, I woke up to this loud noise and then, like, I looked out the window, and all these papers were flying from the towers and they looked like confetti in the very bright blue sky that morning. There was a heed to give blood. So I just grabbed my cellphone and my charger, and I took off. And then that night, I wasn't able to go back to my apartment in a week. And I remember at that moment, you know, I had to buy, like, you know, clothes and stuff for, like, that week. But I kept thinking, I left the rosary behind. And I was so concerned that I would lose it, I think that nothing else in that apartment mattered to me except the rosary.</s>ISABEL LARA, BYLINE: So then when I was able to come back, I just walked into my apartment and there was all this ash. It was so dirty. And right away, I went to see if the rosary was still there in my travel wallet, and it was.</s>ISABEL LARA, BYLINE: And I just felt relief that it had survived 9/11. And it kind of, like, you know, stayed with me for the rest of my life. The rosary reminds me of my grandmother and, in a way, of my childhood and of the country that I left behind and that simply doesn't exist anymore. And now, you know, when I look at news stories about children dying of hunger and not having basic medicine, it's just definitely not the country that I grew up in. I don't pray much, but when I do (laughter), I get out that rosary.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: That was Isabel Lara with the story of a most precious object in her life. We've compiled a number of the stories we've gotten on our website, npr.org. |
A product may be useful and appealing in its own right, but the brand name can make or break its success. In a piece for The New Yorker, staff writer John Colapinto profiles a firm, Lexicon, that's dedicated to matching new products with the right brand names. | NEAL CONAN, host: That BlackBerry in your pocket was not named a strawberry, and there's a reason - the word straw just sounded too slow. A lot of services or products would probably do just as well or badly under other names, but the right moniker can make a difference, and a few have helped brands to establish a kind of monopoly - think Kleenex. In a piece for The New Yorker, staff writer John Colapinto profiles Lexicon, a company that matches products and brand names. Their successes include Swiffer, Dasani and Pentium.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: If you dubbed a product or a service or a store, call us and tell us how you came up with the name. 800-989-8255 is our phone number. Email is: talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org, click on TALK OF THE NATION. John Colapinto joins us from our bureau in New York. Nice to have you with us today.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: Hi, Neal.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And I think probably the name that epitomizes the process and the success of this company was for a processor. Previously, processors went by numbers and were anonymous?</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: Absolutely. Yup. The Pentium chip invented by Intel, it was a better chip than had existed before. And back in those old days of the late '80s, the chipmakers all shared the blueprints for chips. And that was because Dell Computer, for instance, didn't want to have to rely on one supplier in case that one supplier went down for whatever reason. So all of these people cooperated, sharing the chip blueprints. And then, Intel very aggressive CEO in Andy Groves said, you know, let's make a better chip and then let's not share it. Let's build a whole bunch of factories, extra factories, so they don't have to fear that one of them will go down. And he then tried to trademark what was, I believe, it was either the 486 or the 586 at that point that had went before the courts.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: And it was discovered that, in fact, you could not trademark a generic number like that. So he turned to a naming - he didn't give up, let's put it that way. He turned to a naming company. By that time it was the 586 chip that was about to be named and this company then got to work trying to name it, and that was Lexicon.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And they went through this process, which is fascinating. A lot of a - well, it sounds like a lot of college sophomores sitting around up at night just shooting the breeze.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: Yeah. I mean it has that sort of impression when you sit in and listen to the creative team work on names, but it's actually - a lot more is going on there or so they'll tell you. You know, they actually do these kind of deep, sort of, subconscious analyses of what names and words and phonemes evoke in the brain and what would be triggered. And so it's a good deal less causal than it looks.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: And I think, I mean, some people question whether or not it really is necessary to do this, but certainly these naming companies will say that in a world where, you know, products have just proliferated at such a huge rate and they've gone around the world with the Internet and so on, you really have to come up with names that are unique and trademarkable, but that also push those little triggers, you know, that make us want to buy. And that's a complicated thing to get to. And watching this company do it was actually pretty jaw dropping.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: In fact, though, you went back and explain some of the process to the - that Pentium executive, that Intel executive and he said, boy, it's a good thing they didn't tell me that because I would have had second thoughts about this.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: Yes, it's interesting. The Pentium name was dreamed up through a bunch of different processes that they used. It was - they were actually directed by Intel to come up with something that sounded like an ingredient weirdly enough; because it's something that goes into the computer, it had to sound like an additive. Yeah. But it also had to sound rare and unique, and so they looked to the periodic table of the elements and had the word titanium, which sounded like something they could work it. And then they thought, well, hey, sodium is an additive in food as salt, so they like that suffix -ium.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: And they then put it into a computer, actually, these different prefixes and suffixes that they have in their computer software. And it churns out these lists of thousands of names. And you could only be a professional namer to be willing to look through names with these infinitesimal differences and actually A) be able to detect them, and B) not die, you know, of boredom.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: The head of the company happened to see the word Pentium in this list, and a couple of things occurred to him. It was this 586 chip that they were naming now, fifth generation penta, the Greek word for five. Also, it had, of course, the -ium ending, but it had something more unique. It had a -tium, T-I-U-M, which is not - it occurs very rarely in language, anywhere. And so we thought it'll have uniqueness. It'll have, maybe, trademarkability, to use a horrifying word.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: They had to go to their lawyers and look at - it was only later, Neal, in the sort of deeper linguistic analysis that one of their linguists said, look, you know, it's a powerful processor and it's got the powerful plosive of P at the beginning. It's got that strong plosive T in the middle. But it's got the M and the N that hums through the word Pentium. So you've got the power and you've got the uninterrupted hum of the of - well, when I quoted this back to Grove, who had OK'd the name many years ago, he just said, oh man, it's good they didn't tell that to me.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: You know, he's a no-nonsense kind of guy.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: He didn't want to hear that what they were trying to do is compose, in effect, a one-word poem.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: Yes. This is exactly the problem with naming. I mean, really, it is, in a way, what they're doing. I mean, I really sort of bought into this whole idea enough to believe that, indeed, there are certain words that have compressed within them this sort of euphony, the nice sounds that will stick in our minds and that are fun to say, but that also touch off associations in our mind. And that is an awful lot of what poetry does in a few stanzas or in a haiku, just a few lines. And I think that the best names, perhaps, are mini poems, one-word poems.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Give us an example of a one word poem aside from Pentium.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: Yeah. I mean, one of their really great and successful ones is Swiffer, the - that cleaning product. And what was interesting about that is that the word - I think the first time I ever saw Swiffer on the shelf, it seemed sort of familiar to me, and I think it had something to do with that word, which - actually, when you look at it, you realize, no, it's not saying swift. It seems to be, but it's not quite saying that. What it is doing is it's using certain parts of words that we think of when we mop up or clean. We sweep. We swipe.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: If we want to be a product that is supposedly easy to use and will clean up quickly, then we want that notion of swift that it will be over quickly. But that ER suggests that it is the Swiffer. I'm not the Swiffer. It's doing the work. I am merely using the Swiffer. And it was interesting how David Placek, the CEO of Lexicon, explained to me that the rival company to Procter & Gamble that decided it had to come up with another - something to compete with the Swiffer, they called theirs ReadyMop. No one's heard of the ReadyMop.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: And actually, one of Placek's main rules when they were naming this new electrostatic method of wiping things down was to avoid the word mop like the plague. You didn't want to evoke this drudgery. So instead, you've got this Swiffer name. And I just can't resist adding that his creative teams, when they were coming up with names, he gets them to think about things that are very different than the product. So he said, let's come up with the names of a party game, sort of like Twister. You remember that game where you put your foot here and your leg there?</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: So he actually had them dreaming up playful names to suggest, you know, this kind of playfulness, and then it would take away the drudgery of work. Now, if you think of all those associations and those word parts, put them all together, that's a one-word poem.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's see if we get some listeners in on the conversation. If you've ever named a product or a service or a store, give us a call. Tell us how you came up with your moniker. 800-989-8255. Email us: talk@npr.org. And we'll start with Scott, and Scott's with us from Saline in Michigan.</s>SCOTT: Yes. Hi. I just wanted to tell - explain how I named my small sanitary ware company in Saline, Michigan. It's called Blue Earth Ceramics. And the reason I named it that is because I was kind of a lefty-type person back in the '60s, and there's this catalog. It was called the Whole Earth Catalog, and...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Sure. It just had an anniversary. Yeah.</s>SCOTT: Yes. And it was, you know, that picture on the front of that catalog was the very first time anyone had ever seen a picture of the Earth, and it was blue. And so I kind of named my company after that.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And what does it have to do with ceramics?</s>SCOTT: Well, actually, nothing, it turns out. I just wanted a name that would be catchy. And it does turn out that there is actually a blue Earth ceramic made by the native American Indians, that if you do a Google search, you'll find that and - but it was just a coincidence. It was - I just was looking for a catchy name.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: OK.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: I can tell you, categorically, that you're on the cutting edge. When I was talking to Lexicon, they were telling me that blue is the new green. Everybody is sick of talking about green products and the green Earth and so on for environmental, you know, evocation. Now we're moving on to blue. So you were there already. So congratulations to you on that.</s>SCOTT: Well, thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And good luck with your company, Scott.</s>SCOTT: Thank you very much.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Here's an email from Dave in San Rafael. We named our new dog travel website dogtrekker.com because we feel it not only barks dogs, but as a verb it speaks travel, journey, walk, hike, hit the road, roam, et cetera, different than the simplicity of boring dog-friendly travel name and more simple and understandable, not to mention to spell, than the peripatetic pooch.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: Well, I know that Lexicon would actually have - maybe take issue with you a little bit because one of the things that I was told, actually repeatedly by different professional naming companies, was that you want to avoid anything that's actually too descriptive, that's just a label that says what you are. So Dog Trekker, I do actually think is kind of a good name because it's got certain things going for it.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: But, you know, they probably would've told you to call it Glitch or something bizarre, sort of like the way Google is a search thing instead of, you know, those things that they initially launched like Jeeves or, you know, Ask.com. Those things that seemed to be more readily something that was going to serve you, like Jeeves or Ask, that was going to give you - instead the one that won was Google, and who knows why.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking with John Colapinto of The New Yorker magazine. In his piece he visited a focus group which came up with names for cars called Hawkbat, Bustang, and the Killer Whale, and the head of the company watching the group through a one-way glass remarked, this is why we don't get consumers to name things.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And let's go next to Janie(ph) . Janie with us from Chillicothe in Ohio.</s>JANIE: Hi. How are you?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I'm good. Thanks.</s>JANIE: Thank you for taking my call. I developed a product for male dogs, and it's called - male dogs who mark or leg-lift indoors, and it's a serious problem. And we wanted to have a bit of a lighthearted approach and also name our product in such a way that people would know what it is. So we named it Tinkle Belts. So it's Tinkle Belts for boy dogs. And there's a bit of a sense of humor about it, a bit of lightheartedness, but people also really know what it is.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: John Colapinto, do puns work?</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: You know, puns are - they do work, but they can be overdone. They can be a little cutesy, and you know, your sort of present day - your kind of modern companies tend to be steering away, actually, a little bit from things like Tinkle Belts. Although I kind of like Tinkle Belts. How could you not?</s>JANIE: That's what I say.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: I mean, if it was something for, like, you know, male, like adults, human beings, I'd be disturbed by it. Like Depends, you know, the diaper for - you know what I mean? And it does - as long as there's a clear graphic on the package indicating that grandpa's not supposed to wear the Tinkle Belt, I think we're good to go.</s>JANIE: There is. There's a little dog on it wearing his Tinkle Belt.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: Ah, there you go.</s>JANIE: And we were able to trademark.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, congratulations. Thanks very much for the call.</s>JANIE: Thank you so much.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And I've been mispronouncing your name. I apologize. It's John Colapinto.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: I was going to point it out. I was going to say that - but that actually works in a naming program.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, it does, but it also speaks to one of the universal principles you pointed out of naming, which is shorter is better. You got too many syllables there.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: It's true. It is true.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's see if we get another caller in on the conversation. Let's go to - this is Chris, and Chris with us from Denver.</s>CHRIS: Hi. I find this process fascinating, and your guest has done such a good job of explaining the complexity. I know in my lifetime the world has become so much smaller and additional consideration in branding and naming include what happens when the product is sold in Mexico, and the name doesn't translate. Also, social media considerations, website considerations, and in some cases the transition of a brand name that is so great, like Kleenex, Google, Dixie Chicks, that become either a noun or a - or in some cases a verb because of overuse. Is that a good or a bad thing? I've thrown out several things, and I'll hang up and let you respond.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And I will put one word to you, John Colapinto, and that is Nova.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: Yes, Nova. And that, of course, was the name of a car here, and in Spanish it means no go, so that's not a good name. Although I have to say a branding professor that I spoke to named Bernd Schmitt said to me that, in fact, names are less important than these naming companies that are trying to make us think, and he insists that the no go, the Nova, sold very, very well, for instance, in Mexico. So I don't know if he's right. I confess I didn't fact check that because it didn't make it into my story. But it is held up as the ultimate example. There are also unbelievable - I think there's a drink in Japan called Pocari Sweat, which I think doesn't translate well here.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Probably would not so well here under that name, yeah. It is also the case - well, here's an email from Katie in Redwood City. I recently opened my own business, found my chosen name was only available as a URL for an exorbitant price. After a little bit of thought, I used thesaurus.com to find an appropriate word that fit my need and had a URL that was reasonably priced. I was a little disappointed at first but now thrilled with my business name, Bliss Concierge. It couldn't have worked out better. She did what Lexicon does. She did on a small scale what Lexicon does on a big scale.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: Absolutely. Having to, you know, check whether or not a name is in use. I mean, there are some sort of disaster stories of companies that didn't properly check. And you know, you really have to be careful of that because products are just proliferating around the globe.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Their enormous numbers are exploding, and finding names, getting more into the abstract, as John Colapinto points out in his article, "Famous Names," which runs in the October 3rd issue of The New Yorker Magazine. And the author was kind enough to join us from our bureau in New York. Thanks very much for being with us today.</s>JOHN COLAPINTO: Thanks, Neal.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: This is TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. I'm Neal Conan in Washington. |
Kevin Spacey's arraignment for allegedly sexually assaulting an 18-year-old is scheduled for Jan. 7. David Greene talks to Vox Film Critic Alissa Wilkinson. | NOEL KING, HOST: Actor Kevin Spacey is facing a felony charge for alleged sexual assault. He's accused of assaulting an 18-year-old man at a Nantucket restaurant in 2016. He's expected to be arraigned on January 7.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Now, right around the time that news broke yesterday, Spacey posted a video to YouTube. It seems like he's riffing on the character he once played, Frank Underwood from the Netflix series "House Of Cards." He talks directly to the camera, as Underwood did.</s>KEVIN SPACEY: So we're not done, no matter what anyone says. And besides, I know what you want. You want me back.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Spacey was cut from the show last year after other men accused him of sexual harassment and assault. Alissa Wilkinson is a film critic for Vox. She's been reporting on men in Hollywood who are accused of sexual misconduct. Good morning, Alissa.</s>ALISSA WILKINSON: Good morning.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: So we don't know if this video that Spacey posted is in response to the allegations, but it is bizarre. Can you describe what makes it so odd?</s>ALISSA WILKINSON: Yeah. I mean, Spacey has basically been off the radar since the accusations appeared last year, which is almost exactly a year ago, against him. And it was posted, then, about 15 minutes after the story broke about his coming arraignment in Nantucket. So that was very bizarre.</s>ALISSA WILKINSON: But I think what's even more strange is that the character that he's playing - the accent he's taken on is for this character who is sort of a supervillain. You know, Frank Underwood is the central character in "House Of Cards," but he's also a lying, conniving murderer who basically kills his way to the top and becomes president of the United States.</s>ALISSA WILKINSON: And the one thing you know about Frank Underwood if you've ever watched the show is that nobody can ever trust him to ever tell the truth, so it's a very odd choice, at minimum, to choose to use Frank Underwood's character to make what appears to be a defense of Spacey.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: How has Spacey tried to defend himself against allegations in the past, because there have been others?</s>ALISSA WILKINSON: There have, yeah. So the big one that came out last fall was Anthony Rapp, the Broadway actor, accused Spacey of unwanted sexual advancement when Rapp was 14. And in response, Spacey said on Twitter that he was going to, you know, take some time to reflect and be honest and that, as part of that, he was going to live as a gay man. That's where he put it - how he put it. He said, I want to deal with this openly and honestly, and that starts with examining my own behavior. And then that's kind of the last anyone heard of him.</s>ALISSA WILKINSON: But he came under criticism for that, you know, since the allegations weren't that he was gay or something like that, but rather that he had made these unwanted advances towards an underage person. So that was the last time that we saw him in public was trying to sort of deflect these allegations by doing something, you know, unrelated in response.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Alissa, you've looked at other cases of men in Hollywood who've tried unsuccessfully to diffuse allegations of misconduct. In the short time we have left, why did these attempts seem to fall short?</s>ALISSA WILKINSON: You know, it seems as if a lot of these men, for instance Harvey Weinstein, or maybe Louis C.K., have a sense of their own celebrity that's kind of inflated them from the reality of both the allegations and of the seriousness of them.</s>ALISSA WILKINSON: And, you know, if you look at a lot of apologies that have come out from different people who've been accused of things, they often don't really address the underlying issue, but rather try to go in a different direction. And it just sort of feels like they're completely out of touch with, you know, the seriousness of what they've done and why people are upset with them about it.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Film critic Alissa Wilkinson of Vox, thanks so much.</s>ALISSA WILKINSON: Thank you. |
The federal government is likely to remain partially shut down until after the new year. The death toll is expected to rise after a tsunami hit Indonesia. U.S. troops wind down their mission in Syria. | DAVID GREENE, HOST: The federal government remains partially shut down this morning. A quarter of the government - that's about 800,000 federal workers - have been impacted by this.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Here's how we got to this point. President Trump and his allies in the House are demanding $5 billion for a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border as part of any budget deal. Democrats say no. So now, 380,000 federal employees are on furlough and another 420,000 are working without pay.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: And it seems likely at this point that the shutdown is going to stretch into January. Let's bring in NPR White House correspondent Ayesha Rascoe, who is with us this morning. Hi, Ayesha.</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: Good morning.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: All right. So the Senate is in recess through the holidays, right? So, I mean, is anyone actually talking about ending this, or are we just pretty much accepting that this is going to go into the new year?</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: There are some talks going on, but it doesn't seem like they're making much progress at this point. Mick Mulvaney, who's the budget director and acting White House chief of staff, he kind of summed it up - kind of summed up the state of play, and he was not sounding too optimistic. Here he is on NBC's "Meet The Press" yesterday morning.</s>MICK MULVANEY: It's very possible that the shutdown will go beyond the 28 and into the new Congress.</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: So it does seem like there may be some room for negotiation on both sides and pretty much about the amount of money. The White House might be willing to come down on the $5 billion, and the Democrats might be willing to approve a bit more than the $1.6 billion they had offered earlier. But the main holdup is what the money will be spent on. At this point, Democrats are saying they won't give any money for a wall, steel slats, fence. Any type of barrier, whatever you call it, they don't want it (laughter).</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: OK.</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: But that is exactly what the White House is demanding, so that's the sticking point.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: I mean, that's been the sticking point for so long. It's like, what exactly does wall mean? And it seems like both sides can never actually come up with a firm definition, and so we go on with this. And we should say all this is happening when we've seen all of these departures from the Trump administration. So it is just giving this whole air of uncertainty in Washington.</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: Yeah. So you had - last week, you had Defense Secretary James Mattis resigning over President Trump's decision to withdraw U.S. troops from Syria. He was supposed to stay in this position - in his position through the end of February to kind of help ensure a smooth transition. But yesterday, Trump announced via Twitter that Patrick Shanahan, Mattis' deputy, will become acting defense secretary as of January 1. And at the same time, you have Brett McGurk - he was U.S. envoy for The Global Coalition To Defeat ISIS - also reportedly resigning over Trump's Syria decision.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Yeah, so a lot of new faces are going to be handling some very important troop withdrawals going forward. And I guess it's worth noting - I mean, just thinking about the list, you've got an acting attorney general now, as well in addition to this churn at the Pentagon, you've got an acting chief of staff, you've got an acting interior secretary and then soon acting defense secretary. I mean, does that mean a lot of the early part of 2019 is going to be tough confirmation fights for this president?</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: Basically. It's not clear how tough the fights will be because Republicans did gain two seats in the Senate in the midterms, but it's going to take a lot of time, a lot of resources and a lot of attention just to get officials into position to lead these agencies and departments. And so you're going to have a lot of the administration that's going to be without permanent leadership and kind of in limbo.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: And can I ask you one other question, Ayesha? There was this news from Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin about some conversations he was having with the heads of some of the country's biggest banks. Is that normal for those conversations to be happening? What was all this about?</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: Well, it seemed to be about trying to reassure banks that President Trump is not going to fire the Fed chairman, Jerome Powell. But in the statement, he said that he was assured that there was plenty of liquidity for banks, which kind of raised more questions than answers. So they were trying to calm the markets down.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: OK. NPR's Ayesha Rascoe, thanks so much.</s>AYESHA RASCOE, BYLINE: Thank you.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: All right. So late on Saturday night, this tsunami struck Indonesia.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: That's right. More than 200 people have been reported dead. Hundreds more people are missing or injured. Indonesian officials say the tsunami was triggered by underwater landslides that were caused by volcanic activity.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: And let's turn to NPR's Anthony Kuhn, who has been covering this. Anthony, what's the latest here?</s>ANTHONY KUHN, BYLINE: Some of the first casualties of the tsunami had their funerals and were buried today. And among those people were musicians from a local band who were performing onstage at a year-end party when this tsunami hit and, to the horror of the audience watching, were swept away and killed by the tsunami. Indonesia's president, Joko Widodo, flew into the disaster site by helicopter today to visit injured people in local hospitals and to direct rescue efforts. And some of Indonesia's neighbors around Asia, including Malaysia and Japan, sent their condolences to Indonesia and offered assistance if they need it.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: You know, when I heard about the tsunami, I mean, I immediately thought there must have been an earthquake. It's just an assumption I guess we make. But it's - this was volcanic activity. Is there risk of more of that? And could there be more tsunamis here?</s>ANTHONY KUHN, BYLINE: Yes. Authorities are telling residents that they need to stay inland on high ground and away from the beaches. And, you know, you could say that this landslide on the slope of a volcano was more deadly than an earthquake because nobody felt it. Nobody heard it. And so there really was no warning. And if you look at the video on the Internet of this volcano erupting, it is really a cataclysmic event. You just see massive plumes of smoke and lava. And, you know, there's concern that it's not finished. And Indonesia has since said that it has seismic activity detectors, but they weren't working. And so people are realizing that Indonesia is extremely vulnerable and poorly prepared to deal with such things in future.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: Well, can - you mentioned, I mean, the horrific scene with these musicians, but lots of other people who have been injured or, you know, killed in this - I mean, what do we know? Are emergency crews - have they been able to reach impacted communities so far?</s>ANTHONY KUHN, BYLINE: Some of them. You know, Indonesia is a really vast archipelago. But the areas that were hit by tsunami - by the tsunami are not so remote, Java and Sumatra, the two big islands. So they were able to send ambulances and other resources straight from the capital, Jakarta. The military's been mobilized to look for survivors and distribute aid. Over 11,000 people have been displaced by the tsunami. So a lot of those people are living in government buildings or camping out in tents outside hospitals. And a lot of them were holiday makers because the government has tried to turn the western tip of Java into a new tourist destination to rival the island of Bali. But that effort has been suspended after this disaster.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: All right. NPR's Anthony Kuhn. Thanks for your reporting here, Anthony.</s>ANTHONY KUHN, BYLINE: You bet, David.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: OK. We're going to move now to Syria where U.S. troops are supposed to be winding down their mission there.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Yeah. Last week, President Trump announced that he plans to pull U.S. ground troops out of Syria. He said, as his reasoning, that ISIS has been defeated. Now, his announcement surprised a lot of people, including his own military advisers. A day after his announcement, Secretary of Defense James Mattis resigned. The big question is, how do people inside Syria feel about all this?</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: And we're getting some answers because NPR's Ruth Sherlock is in northeastern Syria, which is the area of the country where U.S. troops have been operating. Hi there, Ruth.</s>RUTH SHERLOCK, BYLINE: Hello.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: What does it feel like there after this announcement, President Trump's decision to withdraw, I mean, some 2,000 troops who've been fighting alongside local Kurds in that region? What are people feeling like in the towns there?</s>RUTH SHERLOCK, BYLINE: Well, most people say they feel betrayed. You know, the U.S. is a visible presence here. As you drive across northeastern Syria, they - their military bases are clearly seen. They're these sprawling complexes with mud bank defenses and watchtowers. In one town near a base, we met Haji Haider (ph). He's a blacksmith by trade. He lived through all of the anti-ISIS offensive in this area. And he says people here feel angry that, now it's over, the U.S. is leaving. He feels that they've been used. The U.S.-backed Kurdish militia have essentially formed the ground force against ISIS. And they've lost thousands of men and women on the front lines. And talking to civilians here - you know, we've spoken to people that have lost relatives in the war. And they say ISIS isn't defeated yet. And so why are they leaving?</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: OK, so you're getting a sense from residents and civilians what they're feeling about this. Has there been official reaction from these militias, these groups that have been fighting alongside the U.S.?</s>RUTH SHERLOCK, BYLINE: Yeah. So these militias really are kind of reeling in shock. We've spoken to several senior military officials, Kurdish military officials and spokesmen, here and all of them tell us that they first learned about the news of the U.S. troop withdrawal on television, on the news. So we spoke with Kino Gabriel, a spokesman for one of the militia - for the U.S.-backed SDF. And he says, look; beyond being angry, there is also serious policy implications to this. He thinks that the U.S. withdrawing right now might leave this part of Syria exposed to new threats that they would have to redirect the troops to - that the Kurds would have to redirect their troops to. And that means stopping the fight against what's left of ISIS.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: And, Ruth, aren't the Kurds - I mean, these militias - couldn't they be threatened as well by Turkey? Because, I mean, of course, Turkey has wanted to go after these Kurdish militias for a long time. There was this delicate balance going on when the United States was fighting there. But, I mean, you've been reporting the Turkish government sounds ready to go after these Kurdish militias now if there's a vacuum.</s>RUTH SHERLOCK, BYLINE: And that is the main concern here. The focus right now of all these Kurdish militias is to try to find a way to ward off this offensive or build allies that could help them fight off this offensive. They've been digging in. They've been building defensive tunnels and trenches. But they've also been trying to reach out all sides. They've had been in talks with Western allies. They were in - the political win (ph) was in Paris recently. But they're also reaching out to the Syrian regime. This is an oil-rich part of the country, and the regime wants to take it back. So the Kurds think they might be able to strike a deal with the government. And military - Kurdish military officials have been telling us that they would be open to working together with the regime in a counter - in an offensive to counter Turkey should Turkey choose to attack.</s>DAVID GREENE, HOST: All right. Hearing there from NPR's Ruth Sherlock, who is reporting in northeastern Syria. |
It appears Jim Mattis' resignation Thursday was prompted by the president's order to pull U.S. forces from Syria, and reduce troop levels in Afghanistan. Mattis disagreed with both decisions. | NOEL KING, HOST: Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis resigned yesterday after President Trump's order to pull U.S. forces from Syria and reduce troop levels in Afghanistan. Mattis disagreed with both decisions. There were many conflicts between the retired Marine general and the commander in chief. NPR's David Welna looks back at some of them.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: Secretary Mattis sent his resignation letter to the man who, at a post-election rally in Cincinnati, boasted of having chosen him for defense secretary.</s>PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Mad Dog. He's great. He is great.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: That tough guy nickname for Mattis, which the retired general himself detests, seemed to captivate then President-elect Trump.</s>PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: They say he's the closest thing to General George Patton that we have, and it's about time. It's about time.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: Comparing Mattis' soft-spoken and well-read warrior-scholar to old blood and guts as Patton was known revealed just how little Trump actually knew about this man he'd never met before interviewing him to be defense secretary. So says Mara Karlin, who was a senior adviser to five other defense secretaries.</s>MARA KARLIN: If he didn't understand who Secretary Mattis is, then I have to assume he didn't spend a whole lot of time doing research on him.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: In one of the few extended interviews Mattis granted while defense secretary, he told CBS last year that he made it clear to Trump in that job interview how much he valued NATO, the multination defense alliance that Trump had repeatedly demeaned during his campaign.</s>SEC OF DEFENSE JIM MATTIS: He brought up his questions about NATO. And my response was that I thought that if we didn't have NATO, that he would want to create it because it's a defense our values. It's a defense of democracy. He was very open to that.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: Or so it may have seemed at the time. Trump, in fact, never stopped accusing other NATO members of being freeloaders. Here's Trump in an October interview on CBS's 60 Minutes when asked about Mattis' contention that the purpose of NATO is to prevent World War III.</s>PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: I like General Mattis. I think I know more about it than he does. And I know more about it from the standpoint of fairness - that I can tell you.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: This is not the first time Mattis has left a job early. His hawkish views on Iran cost him his post as head of the U.S. Central Command during the Obama administration. Still, Mattis defended one of Obama's biggest legacies last year when Maine independent Senator Angus King pressed him about the Iran nuclear deal, a pact known as the JCPOA, which Trump, as with NATO, had repeatedly derided.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: Do you believe it's in our national security interests, at the present time, to remain in the JCPOA? That's a yes or no question.</s>SEC OF DEFENSE JIM MATTIS: Mattis paused a full five seconds before answering.</s>SEC OF DEFENSE JIM MATTIS: Yes, Senator. I do.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: That was seven months before Trump pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal. Trump appears to have blindsided Mattis by announcing, unexpectedly, at his Singapore summit in June with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un that upcoming US military exercises would be suspended. By late August, Mattis seemed confident that this had simply been a one-off episode.</s>SEC OF DEFENSE JIM MATTIS: We have no plans at this time to suspend any more exercises.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: And yet another major military exercise was suspended in mid-October. Former Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel says Mattis has had little choice but to bow to Trump's wishes.</s>CHUCK HAGEL: You've got to, pretty generally, be on the same page with your commander in chief. That's the person you work for. Everyone is expendable except the president.</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: Mattis did try to insulate the Pentagon from Trump's America First agenda, and although he did order active duty troops to the border with Mexico as Trump had demanded, he kept up military alliances abroad. He prevailed for a time, persuading Trump that more U.S. forces were needed in Syria and Afghanistan. After Senator John McCain died in August, Mattis publicly and somewhat defiantly praised the former prisoner of war, whose heroism Trump had himself belittled.</s>SEC OF DEFENSE JIM MATTIS: Senator McCain never lost sight of our shared purpose in defense of freedom. For in his words - and I quote, "a shared purpose does not claim our identity. It enlarges. On the contrary, it enlarges your sense of self."</s>DAVID WELNA, BYLINE: Words that might well describe Mattis' own sense of mission in the job he is now leaving. David Welna, NPR News, Washington. |
NPR's new ombudsman, Edward Schumacher-Matos, has spent more than 30 years reporting and editing for some of the nation's most prestigious news outlets. He joins NPR's Neal Conan to talk about what it means to be a journalist and the role journalism plays in a democracy. | NEAL CONAN, host: And now, let me introduce NPR's new ombudsman, Edward Schumacher-Matos. If you're not familiar with that term, it's from the Norwegian, and it means the public's representative. He is, in other words, your advocate and responds to compliments and complaints about our coverage - mostly complaints, I suspect. He's been in the job for four months but in journalism for more than three decades. He also taught at Harvard, written a recent column - a weekly column for the Washington Post, and served as the ombudsman for the Miami Herald. He works in an environment where readers and listeners trust the media less than ever.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So what's a story that inspired or eroded your trust in the media? And yes, of course, we're including NPR in that: 800-989-8255. Email: talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org, click on TALK OF THE NATION. And Edward Schumacher-Matos, welcome to TALK OF THE NATION, and a belated welcome to NPR News.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: Hi, Neal. Great to be here.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And what do you every day as ombudsman?</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: Well, I'm having a lot of fun, to be honest with you. You know, I've got this dual role. On the one hand, it's like an extra set of eyes looking over the shoulders of the editors, trying to maintain NPR's already high standards. I have total independence. I have a three-year contract that says I can't be told what to write or what to say. You know, usually an ombudsman is some guy who's been around the block a long time, several times. In other words, they essentially find an old fart to do the job, and that's me.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: So I don't have to worry about being fired, and I can do what I want. The second thing, really, is to represent the audience, as you say; to listen to readers' complaints and listeners' complaints, and take it to the newsroom and get their response, and try to see if it's right or wrong. And in that way, the whole idea is to try to build up the trust of the audience, you know; to show people that somebody is listening to the listeners, or listening to the readers of the website.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And what have been people - have people been exercised about in your first months on the job?</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: Well, in the last few weeks, it's been the whole coverage of the Wall Street protests.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Occupy Wall Street.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: Yes, the Occupy Wall Street. Before that, we had a spate on abortion and before that, a spate on gay rights. And so it's been a lot of fun, I can say that.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: All quiet, demure issues where people, I'm sure, have been most respectful in all of their communications.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: Yeah, of course.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: How is this different, do you think, from the time you spent in Miami as the ombudsman?</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: Well, the issues here are much more national. I mean, we did hit some issues, national issues in Miami, but there were - a lot there that had to do with local concerns as well as regional concerns in Latin America, the Caribbean Basin, that type of thing. The NPR audience is such a smart, intelligent audience. It's a privilege to interact with this audience. And, you know - and then the NPR staff is just so talented that, you know, sometimes I think, you know, I don't know if I should be the one looking over their shoulder. They should be looking over my shoulder. So - but it's just an intellectual, you know, gem of a job every day.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Before those roles, tell us a little bit about your past. Among other things, you founded four Spanish newspapers in Texas.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: Yes. You know, I spent a decade at the New York Times and a decade at the Wall Street Journal. When you were at the Journal, all of a sudden, this sort of this entrepreneurial bug starts to bite you. And then - so I went out and started my own papers. I had headquarters in San Antonio and we publish in Houston, Austin and the Rio Grande Valley, too. They were dailies. It was a huge throw of the dice. We thought that by doing four papers at one time, we might really attract a lot of ads. We had tremendous fun, and it flopped.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And we were talking earlier, and you reminded that you were part of a team that won a Pulitzer Prize.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: Yes. When I was at the Philadelphia Inquirer, before joining the Times. It was on Three Mile Island.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: That's some time ago.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: Yes.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: You were just a copy boy at the time.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: I wish.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Newspaper is your first love?</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: Oh, I love them. I love them. I, you know, I didn't really set out to do that. But I served in the Army in Vietnam, and when I was there, I originally had thought I wanted to be a diplomat in life. And that just sort of - I got disenchanted with the concept of working for the government. And - but journalism looked to me like a way you can contribute to society but have your own independence.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And where did you have your - was it Philadelphia, your first job?</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: Well, no, no. I went back to graduate school up at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, and then started working part time with the Boston Globe, and then started as a reporter out at the Quincy Patriot Ledger, on the South Shore of - south of Boston.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We know you spent time there because you pronounced it correctly.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: You're right. You're right.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: People get exercised about all kinds of things. And I assume, being the ombudsman at NPR, you get many complaints about grammar and usage.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: We do. We get it on pronunciation, too.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: And Neal, and I'm not really a great grammarian, so I have to go back and check the stylebooks on these things myself.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We'd like to hear from you about which stories - since Edward Schumacher-Matos says his job is, in a way, to help inspire trust in what we do here at NPR News, what stories or what pieces of coverage have inspired trust on your part on the media - or the opposite, mistrust? Give us a call, 800-989-8255. Email us: talk@npr.org. And I wonder, looking back over - well, we've had a rocky year here at NPR, and not just NPR News but at NPR. And do you find that, in your correspondence with listeners, that they trust this organization less because of some of the things they've found out about it?</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: Well, I think NPR took a little bit - a hit. I think we all recognize that. But I think, you know, the listeners, the real listeners, the core audience are willing to cut NPR a little bit of slack and understand that anybody can make a mistake. And I think we've all seen that NPR has tried to self-correct, which is good. You know, I don't think anyone disagrees that mistakes were made. But through it all, what we've all seen is that the quality of the news has remained high.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Here is an email we have from Catherine(ph) in Bristol, New York. I do not trust the media - even NPR - when I hear so many of the stories about the new iPad. Features of the new iPad is not news. It's a commercial, and you guys spent a lot of time touting all kinds of products as if it's news. Please stop. And I guess the most recent was of the new iPhone, the 4S.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: Right. Right. Well, you know what? I don't know that I agree with that reader and listener because it's - I mean, it's a phenomenon in society. It's something new. It's something that's growing. It's something that we all - if we don't have one, we aspire to. It doesn't have to necessarily be that brand, but that whole concept of moving to the tablet from off of a - what were laptops and before that, the bigger desktops and so forth. And so it's a worthy thing to report. Is it overdone? That's a good question. I have to go back and take a look at it.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: OK. And some people say all the news we hear is about Google and Apple; we don't hear about anybody else.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: I think Google may be controlling our lives. That could be it.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's see if we get some callers in on the conversation. We'll start with Brian(ph). Brian with us from Charlotte.</s>BRIAN: Hi. I just have a quick comment with regard to reporting and the reporters' use of statistics. Often, they tend to blend causality and correlation when two things seem to align. In particular, there was a story on the national news last night about vitamins and mortality in seniors taking vitamins, and they implied a causality there when, in fact, I think they're really just correlated; that people taking vitamins may be more likely to take them if they're ill to begin with.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: When you say it was on the national news, you mean on NPR or somewhere else?</s>BRIAN: Yes, well, that was on NBC News last night, just as an example. But more often across the media as a whole, they cite statistics and imply this cause, where one thing causes another, as opposed to really digging deeper and showing that they just correlate, more often than not.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: I couldn't agree with you more on that causation and correlation. I spent the last four years up at Harvard teaching on migration policy, and spent a lot of time looking at a lot of economic analyses and studies and so forth. And that very issue of causation and correlation is key to anything you have to say about any kind of social science research. And I think most journalists understand the difference, but sometimes they do make that mistake. And I will say if you catch it at NPR, please let me know.</s>BRIAN: I will.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Brian, thanks for the call.</s>BRIAN: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Here's a tweet from Atchka(ph) - and I hope I'm pronouncing that correctly - pretty much all of NPR's coverage of obesity and health has completely disappointed me time and time again. No balance whatsoever. And I'm not sure which side she feels is unbalanced.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: Yeah, I think there's the issue: Which side does she feel unbalanced about on obesity versus health? That's a great issue, and that's going to be growing issue going forward, as we have a country and the world - not just the United States - becoming increasingly heavy, if not obese.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: And how to write about that is - and report about it is a sensitive issue because on the one hand, you have to be sensitive people and you have to recognize social trends about what's going. But on the other hand, we have to be concerned about people's health. Certainly, the emphasis has got to be on health and not on beauty.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's see if we go next to - this is Victor. Victor with us from Fort Myers.</s>VICTOR: Good afternoon, gentlemen. Thank you very much for taking my call and bringing up this subject. I've been disillusioned with the local NPR affiliate here. Usually, it's once a year. By trade, I'm a law-enforcement officer and any officer, no matter what part of the law-enforcement community you've been, is an officer. And there was an unfortunate incident where we lost a correctional law-enforcement female in the state prison system. And the one individual who does - I guess you could say her - your local person who sits in the chair, is basically calling this person a guard. That to me - and I call them, like, could you please have her - it's - this is an officer, sworn officer of the court, doing her duty. And every year in June, she calls her a guard. And it totally peeved me on that.</s>VICTOR: And you know, because of her I'm not - I didn't stop listening to it, but I've lost respect for her. I even know who she is. And I'm just like, you know what? If you can't call black as black and white as white, then I'm not going to respect your opinion. And I'll take whatever you have - comment off the air.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: Did you take that complaint to the local station?</s>VICTOR: Yes, I did. I actually called the local number. I called directly into the newsroom. I never spoke to the ombudsman there just because of the fact...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: They may not have one. It tends to be a job that's in larger organizations.</s>VICTOR: Right.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: But thank you very much for the call, Victor. And Edward Schumacher-Matos, does your writ extend to local stations coverage? Because a lot of the time, people can't distinguish what's NPR and what's the local station.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: You're right. That is a problem. No, it doesn't extend to local stations. And one of the things that I'm even thinking about is to what extent it should extend to shows like "The Diane Rehm Show," which are not produced by NPR but distributed by NPR.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: But distributed. Yeah. We're talking with the NPR ombudsman, Edward Schumacher-Matos. You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And let's see. This is an email from Robert in Santa Rosa. NPR, my most trusted news source - is my most trusted news source, yet too often I get the sense that NPR's pursuit of accurate and comprehensive journalism is blunted by fear of the liberal tag.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: Yeah. That is a growing complaint coming in. For the longest time, the criticism came from the right, that NPR was too liberal. But, you know, we're seeing - I'm seeing more and more, and particularly in these last couple of weeks with the Wall Street protest, that people saying just that, that NPR has become cowed by the criticism by the right and is not covering things as fully as it can.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: I even had this back and forth with Jay Rosen of New York University on, you know, how far NPR should go in drawing conclusions from its reporting. And he feels that NPR is just too cowardly. I don't agree with him but frankly, it's something I'm willing to follow much more closely.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So the question being: After you report the fact, should you draw a conclusion from there; therefore, we can see that X?</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: Yes. It's so seldom as a reporter that you can draw a firm, hard conclusion. If you do an investigation then, by all means, you should draw your conclusion. But if you're reporting something that's an ongoing event and there are different sides on this thing, you can't draw a conclusion so often, or so many things are ideological differences. What's the conclusion on the best way to create jobs in America, for example, or so many things like that? You know, listeners and website readers then rely on us to try to give them the unfettered positions of the different sides so that we can always decide for ourselves.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And present a variety of opinions.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: Present a variety of opinions and give analysis. There's a huge difference between analysis and opinion. It was the hardest thing for me to learn when I joined the New York Times - was that, you know, how do you write an analysis piece and not have it be opinion? And you do an analysis where you try and - analysis means you explain why and what and how. Opinion means should, which is very different.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We'll have you back. Thanks very much for being with us today.</s>EDWARD SCHUMACHER-MATOS: Thanks.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: NPR ombudsman Edward Schumacher-Matos, here with us in Studio 3A. |
Last week in New Jersey, quarterback Sam Darnold went undercover as a mall Santa. Kids asked for toys and pets. One young fan asked for a Saquon Barkley jersey. Barkley plays for the New York Giants. | NOEL KING, HOST: Good morning. I'm Noel King. New York Jets rookie quarterback Sam Darnold went undercover dressed in a red-and-white suit and a beard at a New Jersey mall last week. Kids asked him to bring them puppies and skateboards.</s>NOEL KING, HOST: And then, eek, two young football fans asked him for Saquon Barkley jerseys. Barkley plays for the Giants. Darnold slumped a little and asked one kid kind of sadly, Saquon?</s>NOEL KING, HOST: But when he revealed his true identity, a bunch of young Jets fans went nuts, and he seemed to cheer up. |
The number of Americans relying on food stamps has jumped 70 percent since 2007. As more people join the program, there's a growing debate over whether or not recipients should be able to use food stamps at fast food restaurants. Sherrie Tussler, executive director, Hunger Task Force of Milwaukee. Her piece, "Poor People Need Access, Dignity, Choices" ran in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. | JOHN DONVAN, host: So Sherrie Tussler asked a provocative question in a recent op-ed, and it was this: If somebody relies in food stamps, should they be allowed to use those food stamps at fast-food restaurants? Her answer is a clear yes. She says nobody should tell us what we can eat and what we can't eat. She says it's a matter of access and choice and dignity. And Sherrie Tussler will be joining us in a moment.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: But first of all, I want to ask you. If you are on food stamps or have used food stamps in the past, do you think you should be able to use them at a fast-food restaurant? Tell us why or why not. Our number is 800-989-8255. Our email address is talk@npr.org. And you can also join the conversation at our website and find a link to Sherrie Tussler's op-ed at npr.org, and click on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: So, Sherrie Tussler, you serve as executive director of Milwaukee's Hunger Task Force. Your piece ran in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. And you're now with us - joining us from the studios at Wisconsin Public Radio in Milwaukee. Thanks for joining us, Sherrie.</s>SHERRIE TUSSLER: Thanks for having me on.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: So, Sherrie, the argument about the fast-food restaurants, I think, goes like this, and we've heard it from people like Michael Pollan and Mark Bittman, who's the food columnist at The New York Times and others, who said that eating at a fast-food restaurant is not cheaper in the long run, and it's certainly not healthier than buying groceries and cooking at home. But in your piece, you say there's a lot more to the argument. What is that?</s>SHERRIE TUSSLER: Sure. The lot more to the argument, first of all, is federal regulation. It's the law. Food stamp regulation was promulgated in 1977. And under the law, people have the right under something called the (unintelligible) restaurant meal program to shop at fast-food restaurants or any restaurant for that matter as long as the state is willing to establish that opportunity. That opportunity only exists for people with disabilities, seniors and the homeless. And it only exists in five states.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: And you said - you call this whole issue a matter of dignity. Tell us about the dignity aspect of this.</s>SHERRIE TUSSLER: Sure. If you look all over the nation, you know, you can look here in Milwaukee, there are something called food deserts. There are people who have to travel long distances to be able to find food that is affordable. Sure, there's corner stores, but those corner stores will not have affordable food and they won't have fresh or healthy food. Yes, the fast-food store is right around the corner. Someone can go to a restaurant and pick up something from the dollar menu and eat that night, and so it's convenient for some people who have to travel long distances to get their food.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: Do you have a sense of how many people actually do - as a result of the conditions you're just describing, at least in your area, how many people actually do need to rely on fast-food restaurants? Is it a large number?</s>SHERRIE TUSSLER: It's not actually an option here in Wisconsin, and part of my piece indicated that. This option is only existing right now in California, Arizona, Michigan, Rhode Island, and it's a pilot in the state of Florida. But here in Wisconsin, we don't allow it.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: And what's the impact of that, not allowing? What happens?</s>SHERRIE TUSSLER: Well, here in Wisconsin, we've got almost 825,000 people using the food stamp program. In Milwaukee, more than a quarter of those people live in our borders, and those people are going to struggle. They may not be able to get to a store to purchase healthy and fresh foods. And although I totally respect the - everyone's desire for people to put healthy and fresh foods on their plate, not everyone has the luxury of being able to do that.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: You're saying the food stamp program is not the way to attack this question of people eating better quality food.</s>SHERRIE TUSSLER: Clearly not. I think, you know, we - the poor people have enough stuff riding on their backs already with all those judging them and making decisions about what they should or shouldn't eat.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: We've asked our listeners to call in and send in emails, and we have one from a Valerie Hughes(ph), an email, who tells us that she has been on food stamps and she has also worked in the fast-food industry. And she says, I'll read this: I do not believe food stamps should be used on fast food. She says, this is meant to encourage people to spend their money wisely and promote better nutrition. It's not a question of dignity. There is no less dignity in eating at home than in eating in fast food. And it's interesting to me that she makes that argument from inside, from having been inside the experience.</s>SHERRIE TUSSLER: Sure. And, you know, I've also had the experience, but I would suggest to Valerie that maybe she has a store nearby that she can afford to shop her food at. Lots of people don't.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: Let's take a call from Phil in Charlotte, North Carolina. Phil, you're on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>PHIL: You know, I've worked in the fast-food industry also, but I disagree. I raised children on a - as a single dad, and I had to have food stamps. And when the children were with me or not, I'd go - on the bus, I had to get fresh vegetables, I had to make my own baby food. I had to buy generic apple juice to water down and give to them for their baby juice. I managed McDonald's when I get out Marine Corps in '79, and they used really the best ingredients, but they're not healthy and they're not prepared healthy.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: But you sound like somebody who had the option to at least get to the store that provided that kind of food, and I think what Sherrie is saying is that not everybody has an option.</s>PHIL: Maybe I simplified by saying I got on the bus. There were several times if a neighbor or a friend was over, and then I'd hitchhike. I'd do whatever I had to get to the store, because I look around me and I couldn't afford to take the kid to the doctor for getting sick. And people - my neighbors on food stamps, they did the local thing and they were obese. It was disgusting and sick and scary. My children are healthy now and it was worth every minute of it. I think it's how much you care about yourself.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: All right. Sherrie, I don't think you necessarily have an argument with his decision. But...</s>SHERRIE TUSSLER: No, absolutely not. I think it's quite laudable that he would, you know, travel distances and get help from family and friends. Again, this particular restaurant meal program provision in the food stamp laws for elderly people, people with disabilities and the homeless, these are not people who get to hop on the bus. These are not people who are all that mobile, and they need an option that is within walking distance of their home.</s>PHIL: And the program needs to come up with something better, because we're going to kill them by eating fast food.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: What do you think is - Phil, what do you mean by something better? Do you have an idea?</s>PHIL: Meals on Wheels type situation. Doesn't have to be...</s>SHERRIE TUSSLER: Meals on wheels cost four, five dollars apiece. That's not even realistic.</s>PHIL: Sorry, but our country wastes so much more money on foreign bases. There's enough money to save our country. They just won't do it. That's what the 99 percent movement's all about.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: All right, Phil...</s>PHIL: Everybody, the poor people are working for the rich people, so are the middle class and everybody else. There's a waste everywhere and we see it.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: Phil, thanks for your call and...</s>PHIL: Great day(ph). Bye.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: Thanks. We're going to Mike in Wapakoneta, Ohio. I'm concerned, Mike, that I have mispronounced the name of your hometown.</s>MIKE: Hi. Thanks for taking my call.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: Where are you located?</s>MIKE: I'm in Wapakoneta, Ohio.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: Wapakoneta, okay.</s>MIKE: Home of Neil Armstrong, the first man to walk on the moon. Just a little plug there. I guess my question was, you know, in terms of the overall justice of the situation, I wonder if it's - since most supermarkets have delis, is it legal to take that same food stamp and go eat at the deli - as a supermarket, you know, I suspect it will be, you know, it would come up as food. And if so, then why not the choice for people on food stamps?</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: Sherrie?</s>SHERRIE TUSSLER: That is choice for people on food stamps, absolutely. Our UPP(ph) code...</s>MIKE: But then they don't have the choice to...</s>SHERRIE TUSSLER: ...basically says what food is.</s>MIKE: Yeah, yeah. And if they choose fast food, I think then that's their prerogative.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: All right. Mike, thanks for your call. Kim in Redding, California. You're on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>KIM: Hi. Thanks for taking my call. I work over at the welfare department in Redding, and we have a special program where we're trying to get people to go to the farmers' market with their food stamps. But I'm looking at the homeless people who have nowhere to cook their food. And would it be better if they went to Subway and got a healthier food? Would that be OK?</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: I don't know that that's actually a question you're seriously putting or more of statement that you're making. Are you looking an answer from Sherrie?</s>KIM: Well, yeah, because I'm saying are people upset because, what, the Big Mac has a lot of fat or what is it that they're upset about?</s>SHERRIE TUSSLER: Yeah, I think that people get upset about the health side of things, and Subway is definitely an option. We know it's a healthy option and it is one of the restaurants that is available in four of the five states.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: We have an email from Michelle Mayer(ph) - and thank you very much for your call. We have an email from Michelle Mayer, who says: My initial reaction to the question was heck no - and again, our question is: Should people be able to use food stamps at fast-food restaurants? She said heck no was her initial reaction. And then after some thought I realized that I myself have eaten a Happy Meal when money was tight and time was short. I realized that often our mom or dad has very limited time to prepare a meal and fast food is a good idea at times. I'm thinking that maybe item choices might be limited.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: So there, Sherrie, I'm saying that maybe you've changed a mind, but what I find interesting is the overwhelming number of our calls coming in so far are on the other side of this. What do you think that's about? What does that reflect?</s>SHERRIE TUSSLER: Well, I think a lot of times we're just concerned about the health, but other times we're just interested in judging how other people should spend their money. And I think we're living in a community and a nation right now that tends to judge and isn't really thinking about providing options to people and thinking about how - there should be dignity in how people received their food and people should have choices. And ultimately each one of us should be the person who decides what goes on our plate.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: I'm going to go to Eric(ph) in Columbus, Ohio. Eric, you're on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>ERIC: Hi there. Yeah, I just wanted to say I grew up on food stamps. My mom was raising a family of, you know, three kids. And if we wanted fast food or we wanted junk food or anything like that, we had to pay cash for it, so it was definitely a luxury. She wasn't going to allow us to go get fast food on food stamps. And I've been working since I was 14, and I'm putting back into the community, put back into the programs. And I think that the government should have a say on what people on food stamps get to eat. I don't think it should just be a free-for-all where you get to eat what you want to eat. It's not healthy. I agree with Phil on that. It's not healthy.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: All right. Thanks very much, Eric, for your call. Sherrie, when a shopper with food stamps goes into grocery stores, there are limitations on the kinds of foods, the categories of foods that can be purchased with food stamps. Are there not?</s>SHERRIE TUSSLER: They can only purchase food, and that's one of the challenges, is a lot of times we'll see somebody in the grocery store line picking out unhealthy foods, and it makes us angry. We're thinking about our tax dollars. We're thinking that we're subsidizing that person, and we're judging them for choosing foods that are unhealthy. They can't buy alcohol, cleaning products, tobacco products, but they can buy food.</s>SHERRIE TUSSLER: And when people sit back and think about the food industry and how we would like to think of, for instance, Cheetos or soda as food, what we should really be questioning is not which person is putting that in which grocery cart so much as why the, I guess, food producers of our nation think that it's OK to call that food.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: We're speaking with Sherrie Tussler. She is the executive director of the Hunger Task Force of Milwaukee. We're talking about the use of food stamps in fast food restaurants. Yes or no?</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: Sherrie, you've used the word dignity in your op-ed about this and mentioned it a few times here, but I want to get more to the core of what you're talking about, what do you mean by that, and again, given the rush of calls of listeners who disagree with you, to make another run at the dignity argument and tell us why that matters.</s>SHERRIE TUSSLER: It matters because each of us has the right to choose what we eat. And dignity is affirmed when we choose those items rather than we're given those items. Beggars can be choosy. All of us should choose healthy food, but at the same time all of us should first choose to eat before we go without.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: I mean, the program has been adjusted over time through technology in order to address part of that dignity issue, where it's not literally little slips of paper any longer but a swipe-able card. And so the fact that somebody's using food stamps is not necessarily going to be obvious to the people in the back of the line. Was that a dignity issue? Was that found to be - was that done to make people feel better about the process of using them? Or was there some other practical business reason involved in that?</s>SHERRIE TUSSLER: The practical business reason was to reduce fraud, and the elimination of the coupons reduced the fraud. Your coupons could be stolen. They could be transferred. Your debit card can only be used by you with a specific pin. And so although the debit card brought dignity in a lot of people in the advocacy community - we're really excited about that - it wasn't really intended for that purpose.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: Let's go to Union City, California, and we're speaking with Ashley(ph) on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>ASHLEY: Hi there. Thanks for having this conversation. I'm a father of two daughters, one's four and one's two. I'm currently on food stamps. I'm college educated, and I've gone in and out of careers where I've made substantial money. I was a mortgage broker. But right now I'm on food stamps.</s>ASHLEY: My statement is three-part, basically. Number one, I think, we need to separate between disabled people and elderly who don't have the ability to take care of themselves. I think that should be a separate conversation. The second part of it is that in California, I get the bulk of my money, $500 is only spendable at a grocery store. I get a supplement, or cash aid, which I can choose to use at a Kentucky Fried Chicken. But the bulk of my money goes to the food, so that's just how it is here.</s>ASHLEY: My opinion on the matter is that food stamps and welfare is not meant to be a lifetime thing. This is - I'm in transition now. In four months I'll be off because I'm working again. So this is supposed to get people up and moving and away. It's not supposed to be comfortable so we can all go eat a Happy Meal. So my basic opinion is, you know, my dad, he was so poor he ate (unintelligible) sandwiches in Lafayette(ph), Indiana . They were too poor to go on food stamps back then.</s>ASHLEY: I'm not too proud to do it, but what I will say is I don't believe in subsidizing a billion dollar fast food industry and making our people obese when over 50 percent of Americans are going to be that way with government money for year in and year out. I just think that's absurd.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: So, Ashley, even as somebody...</s>ASHLEY: Actually, on $20, it's not even cheaper.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: Ashley, let me just interrupt you for a second. Even if somebody then who has used the program, you do feel that the program should be able to tell you where you can eat and where you can't.</s>ASHLEY: Absolutely. Absolutely. And I'll tell you why. I mean, unless they're telling me I have to eat at fast food. As long as the default that they're telling you is you get what's natural, what's original, what (unintelligible)...</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: What about what Sherrie is - just a second. What about - I admire your passion. But what about what Sherrie is talking about communities where the store is just not there, you can't get to it?</s>ASHLEY: I think that - well, first of all, you know, everyone's heard of the story about their parents walking uphill both ways in the snow. We heard an earlier caller do that. Her answer to that was some people are disabled or are unable, blah, blah, blah. Like I said, there needs to be a separation between people who are disabled, you know, and people who are able-bodied. If you're able-bodied and you're feeding yourself and your children, you go to any lengths necessary. That means you got to work two-hour - two shifts, whatever you got to do, man. You got to take the bus. You got to walk it. You know, there are people who don't have this all over the world.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: All right. All right. Ashley, thank you for your call.</s>ASHLEY: So I'm blessed. I'm blessed I'm in a country where this is an opportunity. I went from making $200,000 a year in 2005. I'm 31 years old. I'm on food stamps.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: Ashley, I got to cut you off, and thank you for your call. Sherrie, would you like to respond to that rather strongly argued point of view?</s>SHERRIE TUSSLER: Well, I just think it's important to recognize that he's from a state that allows the program, and 45 of the 50 states don't allow the program. Where the program is allowed, again, it's allowed for the homeless, people with disabilities and seniors.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: OK. I think we have time for one more call. Oh, I'm sorry. We don't. In fact, I have to thank you very much for joining us.</s>SHERRIE TUSSLER: Too bad.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: And it was a little bit one-sided, but that's what happens when you get controversial. Sherrie Tussler is the executive director of the Hunger Task Force in Milwaukee. You can read her piece, "Yes: People Need Access." Go to npr.org, and click on TALK OF THE NATION. She joined us from Wisconsin Public Radio in Milwaukee. |
Jonathan Turley argues in a recent op-ed in the Los Angeles Times that "the election of Barack Obama may stand as one of the single most devastating events in our history for civil liberties." He says President Obama has continued many of the most controversial Bush administration programs. | JOHN DONVAN, host: And now, the Opinion Page. After eight years under President Bush, many civil libertarians were thrilled when Barack Obama won the 2008 election. What a difference a few years make. Law Professor Jonathan Turley argues in a recent op-ed that, quote, "the election of Barack Obama may stand as one of the single most devastating events in our history for civil liberties." Now, if you supported President Obama in the last election, we want to know: How important is this issue of civil liberties to you? Will it make or break your support for the president going forward? Give us a call: 800-989-8255. And our email address is talk@npr.org. And you can also join the conversation at our website and find a link to the Turley op-ed. Go to npr.org and click on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: So Jonathan Turley, he's a law professor at George Washington University. His piece, "Obama: A Disaster for Civil Liberties," ran last month in the Los Angeles Times, and he joins us now in Studio 3A. So you say of President Obama that his election may be one of the single most devastating events in our history for civil liberties? That is very, very strong language, Jonathan.</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: It is a strong language, but I think civil libertarians are coming to grips with what is really a building disaster for our movement, and it's been a rather difficult process. You know, I have a large civil liberties blog, and there's a lot of soul-searching among civil libertarians about what exactly happened. But we are engaging in a sense of collective denial when we deal with President Obama.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: You mean you're not talking about it publicly.</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: Yeah. And I think that's part of the purpose of this column, is to address the fact that President Obama is a perfect nightmare when it comes to civil liberties. He not only adopted most of President Bush's policies in the civil liberties areas when it comes to terrorism, but he actually expanded on them. He outdid George Bush.</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: And they range. His position on torture and refusing to have people investigated or prosecuted for torture, on privacy lawsuits. He pushed aggressively for the dismissal of dozens of lawsuits brought by private interest organizations. He's for immunity for people who engaged in warrantless surveillance. He has fought standing for people even to be able to get courts to review his programs, much like George Bush. He kept military tribunals and the authority to make the discretionary choice of sending some people to a real court, some people to a military tribunal. He has asserted the right to kill U.S. citizens based solely on his own discretion, that he believes them to be a threat to the country.</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: His administration has, once again, as with the Bush administration, cited secret law, that - and including a case of assassinating citizens - a law that we're not allowed to see, but we have to trust them.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: All right. Let me stop you there, Jonathan, because I, again, want to invite callers to weigh in on this subject, particularly if you were among those who supported the president in the last election. Is this issue a make-or-break issue for your? Our number is 800-989-8255. And, Jonathan, the way that you're talking about this as a supporter of civil liberties - which I know that you are from your track record - almost as an act of betrayal, that this was going to be your civil libertarian president. Is that the idea?</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: Well, certainly. I supported Barack Obama. I wasn't very quiet about my support. I thought he was going to be a refreshing change to George Bush. But what has happened is that we have an election that's become a single-issue election, and that issue is Barack Obama. And he's an icon to both sides. But what's happened to the civil liberties movement is that we generally have a pendulum swing back in favor of civil liberties, which we were building towards after the Bush administration.</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: Polls were showing that citizens were opposed to many of the abuses, that they wanted to see more protections, and Barack Obama really rowed that way. He portrayed himself as a civil libertarian. And then when he proved to adopt many of Bush's positions and adopt even worse positions in some regards, it split the base of the civil liberties movement. There are many people that frankly cannot get themselves to oppose Barack Obama. They make a lot of excuse for him.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: You mean emotionally they can't do it?</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: They can't emotionally, politically, personally. They just have a very difficult time opposing a man who's an icon and has made history - the first black president, but also the guy that replaced George Bush. And the result is something akin to the Stockholm syndrome, where you've got this identification with your captor. I mean, the Democratic Party is split, civil libertarians are split, and the Democratic Party itself is now viewed by most of libertarians as very hostile toward civil liberties.</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: Senators and members of the House, it turns out, were aware of many of these abuses and never informed people.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: Well, it's interesting one of the things you're saying is, in a sense, granting your point provisionally - that you're saying that he's getting away with it because it's just not enough of a hot issue toward the public at large. Or, if it is, people don't want to talk about it. I want to test that with some of our listeners and go to Aileen(ph) in Andover, Michigan. Aileen, you're on the air. And would you like to speak with Jonathan Turley?</s>AILEEN: Yes. Hi. It's Ann Arbor, Michigan (unintelligible). Yes, I want to say, first of all, that I respect Professor Turley very much. I enjoy watching him on Rachel Maddow and other shows. And as much as I respect his view - and I'm saying that he's wrong in and of itself, based on the facts. But I think that we, sometimes on the left, we can be very naive because obviously after he stopped being a campaigner and became the president and was privy to information that we do not see, he changed his mind on a number of issues, because his primary responsibility is to protect us.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: Let me bring that to Jonathan. It's a very interesting point, Ailene. Jonathan, Ailene, making the point that the president was sincere when he took those stands during the election campaign. But once elected to office, he found stuff out. He was better informed at what was going on behind the scenes and, as she put it, he changed his mind.</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: Well, that's an example of how hard many people are working to excuse something that is inexcusable. Let me give you an example in terms of torture. President Obama, as soon as he came into office, assured CIA employees that they would not be investigated or prosecuted for torture even though he admitted that waterboarding was, in fact, torture. We have treaties and laws that require us to investigate and prosecute people who commit torture. Whether or not they're guilty of it, we have an obligation to investigate.</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: All countries say that it's an inconvenient moment, that we don't want to divide the country. We want to come together. That's always what leaders say to avoid these investigations. The United States put - was put in the same category by Barack Obama as countries like Serbia in fighting investigations of torture. That was a political decision. It wasn't something that he had learned. It was because it would be politically costly for him to order investigation that he knew was likely to result in a prosecution of high-ranking Bush official.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: But if you say that as a nation we tend to correct swings of the pendulum away from civil liberties, why would he not enjoy the pendulum swing ride back in the direction in which he was riding it during the election? Why stop once he was elected to office?</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: Well, unfortunately, for civil libertarians, we're very familiar with this phenomenon. We tend to be the bridesmaid and never the bride at Democratic weddings. You know, they come and they offer us their fealty and we vote for them and then they abandon us once they get into power. And the reason is that Barack Obama clearly made the decision attack to the right to say that he was tough on terror, and that was rather overtly done. And many of these things, in terms of - he just knows things he doesn't, you know, he didn't know before - really doesn't fit with many of the policies that he had advanced, things like the assassination of U.S. citizens.</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: Barack Obama is now claiming the right to kill any U.S. citizen by writing his name on a list if he satisfy that he's a threat. They spent two years looking for Awlaki, who - few people in the passing of. But the point is that you don't have an outcry among Democratic citizens of the implications of what happens when a president can designate U.S. citizen - George Bush killed a U.S. citizen who is a collateral in an assassination of a drone. Barack Obama did him one better and actually intentionally killed a U.S. citizen and killed a second U.S. citizen in the process. But Democrats are completely silent because it's Barack Obama. And to me, that smacks a lot like occulted personality.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: I want to go Desnay(ph) in Aiken, South Carolina. Desnay, can you hear us all right?</s>DESNAY: Yeah, I'm here.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: Yeah, join us.</s>DESNAY: I am here. Not only did I vote for him, I held parties for him and I am extremely disturbed by the fact that he signed that executive order. And I have read Jonathan Turley's writing on the issue. I agree with him 100 percent. I can't wrap my head around supporting him.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: So for you, this actually is a make-or-break issue?</s>DESNAY: Yeah. All of what he's done - extending all of Bush's - The Patriot Act. Everything that he's done - I find it extremely disturbing that a constitutional lawyer doesn't know the Constitution. I don't care what color he is. I'm black too.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: Jonathan Turley, given that kind of attitude but at the same time pushing back with your argument that people aren't talking about this very much, do you think, going forward, that this is actually going to hurt the president's political prospects?</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: Well, I think it will. I think that the president flew past the fail safe point, on torture particularly. His administration didn't just promise not to prosecute people for torture, but it actually tore up founding principles from Nuremburg. You know, they argue, for example, that CIA employees can never be prosecuted for torture because they were following orders, that they were just doing what they were told to do. That's the exact argument the United States fought against in Nuremberg and said you cannot say that people are just following orders if they commit a war crime.</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: They also relieved responsibility of lawyers. They became circulated. They said, these people were following the advice of lawyers and then when we called for the discipline of lawyers, they said, well, they were just giving liquid advice. And this perfect circle was designed to avoid accountability for torture. And torture is one of those foundational principles that not just shocks the conscience, but it is very hard for any civil libertarian or for many civil libertarians to vote for someone who's in violation of the convention on torture.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: We're talking about President Obama's record on civil liberties since being in office. You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. We're talking with Jonathan Turley, who's written this quite sharp op-ed piece in The Los Angeles Times, suggesting that - not suggesting, accusing President Obama of having a worst record on civil liberties than his predecessor President Bush.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: And, Jonathan, you're making the argument that he's doing this for political reasons, to tact to the right in order to - I suppose your argument is to try to govern. Say he's elected to a second term and he doesn't have the re-election pressure again, what would your expectation be for the president?</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: Well, he has succeeded lowering my expectations, so I can only be pleasantly surprised. But the problem is that the Democratic Party itself is now heavily invested in these policies. One of the most shocking things that come out of the Bush administration was the knowledge that Democratic leaders were aware of the torture program. They were aware of the warrantless surveillance program. They never told voters when they were running of it. But they allowed those programs to continue without opposition. And he - so he has many of his own party that are very invested. The other problem with this is that we have basically come down to this that I guess the problem with the Bush administration was Bush, and the position seems to be, you can trust us. And when civil libertarians objected to President Obama saying he could kill any American citizen that he believes is a danger to the United States...</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: (Unintelligible) trust us.</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: ...that he can put him on a list to be hit, what came out were a bunch of civil libertarians that now work for the administration who said, well, don't worry, we were in the room. Trust us.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: Yeah. Yeah. Sam Knight(ph) sends us an email. He says: Yes, our civil liberties have become diminished - the cause is terrorism. Terrorists are not represented by a government. They do not wear uniforms. The person standing next to me at the grocery store can be a terrorist. Unfortunately, says Sam Knight, to protect us from the terrorists, some civil liberties will be lost or diminished. In other words, he's saying it's the price we have to pay.</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: Well, I think he makes the argument from civil liberties' standpoint. You're right. You'd be standing next to someone who's accused to be a terrorist. How do you know? That's the point. We have a country that's formed on principles, of checks and balances that we don't trust people to make these decisions. We have an entire legal system that has become virtually superfluous. It's almost Fellini-esque. We got a system that works hard to get the question of guilt right.</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: It takes years to execute someone to get it right, but the president can simply take that offline by writing a name on a piece of paper and say, I am confident. So it becomes a presidential prerogative to take the whole system offline. And he has done that also with military tribunals. We mocked Bush for saying that he could sit there Caesar-like and send one person to a military tribunal and one to a real court. Barack Obama endorsed the same policy. He claims the same power.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: Let's bring in Myer from Houston. Myer, you're on the air.</s>MYER: Well, I think it's a mixed bag. I think you're looking at a one situation issue. It's like rebutting for Ralph Nader. I don't think any Republican starting with Nixon who had a hit list, so to speak, would be any better on civil liberties. In fact, I think they would be worst no matter what your argument is. I think it's a very mixed bag. And I think that you are off base because you would allow us to elect someone who would probably do more harm than less harm. Thank you.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: You want to take that, Jonathan?</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: Well, first of all, it is very hard to imagine these policies getting worse because the president has endorsed absolute power, the same as Bush has, and now Democrats are invested in it. So if that's a Republican president, Democrats will be complete hypocrites if they object to the next president using these powers just as Barack Obama did. And it is very easy to say he is better than the next guy. Civil libertarians tend not to think that way. We owe a base responsibility to things like the Geneva Convention. And we are taught that civil liberties are things that don't become political playthings.</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: And what is left is that we look ridiculous. We came out today - they came out to say with a report that our Afghan allies are now torturing people in prison and that U.S. officials, NATO officials are looking into it. Imagine how ridiculous that meeting would be for an American official to say, you better investigate to people committing torture because we can't go forward. We've adopted a position that is the exact opposite, so we have this legal system that can be pointed to as a cathedral for hypocrisies(ph), much like, you know, "Macbeth" that's full of sound and fury, signifying nothing, if the president, on his prerogative, can take it all offline.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: Jonathan, last thing I want to ask you: As long as it's not our mail that's being opened and hour phones that are being tapped, and we have the perception that it's bad guys and terrorists and for our white people, is this something that just isn't going to settle down on the horizon of most Americans?</s>JONATHAN TURLEY: Well, unfortunately, most Americans are greeting this news with a yawn. The fact that they could be on the list is something that seems remote. And we have this collective national yawn that is quite disturbing.</s>JOHN DONVAN, host: Jonathan Turley is a law professor at George Washington University. Again, a link to his piece: Obama: A Disaster for Civil Liberties can be found in our website npr.org, click on TALK OF THE NATION. Thanks for joining us today. This is TALK OF THE NATION. I'm John Donvan in Washington. |
Early 20th-century preacher Father Divine saw himself as God on earth. We take a look at the life and times of the African-American spiritual leader with Princeton University religion professor Albert Raboteau. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: This is NEWS & NOTES. I'm Farai Chideya.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: In African-American culture, no one cuts a more striking image than the black preacher.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: A fisher of souls, spiritual guide, civil rights advocate. But the pulpit is no stranger to controversy either. At times, the black preacher has also been the keeper of the status quo, a voice corrupted by the power of the office, a patter of his own pockets. And sometimes, he may be all of the above at once.</s>Father Major JEALOUS DIVINE (Leader, Peace Mission Movement): That man might understand the abundance of the fullness is a living reality if they can and will concentrate on it.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: That's the voice of the extraordinary religious leader known as Father Major Jealous Divine. Here's a newsreel about Father Divine from 1936.</s>Unidentified Man: To his eager followers, Father Divine is God on Earth. And his headquarters shrill with the worship of his flock. No collections are taken, yet the father's income is as large as it is mysterious.</s>Professor ALBERT RABOTEAU (Religion, Princeton University): In his heyday in the '30s, he was quite influential.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: That's Professor Albert Raboteau. He's one of the nation's foremost scholars of African-American religious history.</s>Professor ALBERT RABOTEAU (Religion, Princeton University): His influence is measured by publicity, by interest. He was really notable, if not notorious, figure for many Americans.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Notable if not notorious. What do you mean by the notorious part?</s>Professor ALBERT RABOTEAU (Religion, Princeton University): Well, Father Divine, along with figures like Daddy Grace, to some extent Marcus Garvey, and others, who were popular leaders who were not in the mainstream, often were accused of being charlatans, of misusing people's funds, of really exploiting people.</s>Professor ALBERT RABOTEAU (Religion, Princeton University): And so they were often investigated by the FBI, as was Father Divine. They were attacked in the press, as was Father Divine by the Hearst newspapers, and they inspired a number of salacious biographies at the time. So in that sense: notorious.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So, in the early days of the 20th century, he adopted a philosophy called the New Thought Movement. And when you talk about him as someone who was constantly under scrutiny, why did this philosophy appeal to his flock, especially to struggling African-American men?</s>Professor ALBERT RABOTEAU (Religion, Princeton University): For example, he denied the binary categories of race that defined African-American status in this country. There was no such thing as black or white. These were our mental categories that could be overcome by applying mind power, by applying positive thinking.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: That was definitely revolutionary at the time.</s>Professor ALBERT RABOTEAU (Religion, Princeton University): It certainly was, and that is to try to attack the racial problem by denying the premises of the racial problem was certainly radical. He believed that the American race mind needed to be cleansed of any notions of race.</s>Professor ALBERT RABOTEAU (Religion, Princeton University): He, also, eventually, developed a political platform, the Father Divine Peace Mission Movement. Among the ideas that the Peace Mission Movement announced in the political platform in 1936 were things like the end of capital punishment, the repeal of laws that discriminated against people because of racial categories.</s>Professor ALBERT RABOTEAU (Religion, Princeton University): In the late '40s, the Peace Mission Movement mounted a campaign against lynching, in which they collected over 250,000 signatures on a petition to Congress. And they flooded Senator Bilbo from Mississippi's office with letters attacking lynching. So Father Divine's movement was one that was much more complicated than, I think, people have appreciated in the past.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: He also had a lot of money. And from what I understand, he flaunted it. Tell me about how he rolled - as we would say today - and whether or not that inspired some controversy.</s>Professor ALBERT RABOTEAU (Religion, Princeton University): It certainly did. Very early on, he started out with his first congregation in Valdosta, Georgia, and then moved to New York City to Brooklyn. And, through a communal organization - that is people who had joined the movement, and they would offer their labor - he would sometimes help them to find jobs, and then they would contribute from their work to the commune -to the community.</s>Professor ALBERT RABOTEAU (Religion, Princeton University): Eventually, they were able to, you know, save money and they moved out to a house in Sayville, Long Island, in an entirely white community. And the movement began to increase and people began to flock out to the house in Sayville, the neighbors began to be concerned.</s>Professor ALBERT RABOTEAU (Religion, Princeton University): And when Father Divine suddenly bought a Cadillac and parked it in the garage, they grew more concerned. And when they found out about these huge banquets, these Holy Communion banquets that he was holding, they grew more concerned.</s>Professor ALBERT RABOTEAU (Religion, Princeton University): So, the sense of these poor blacks as somehow having all of this money created a good deal of suspicion and led, eventually, to an attempt to force Father Divine out of Sayville.</s>Professor ALBERT RABOTEAU (Religion, Princeton University): In part, the prosperity Father Divine created caused suspicion, but they also served, symbolically, as an example of Father Divine's notion that one shouldn't wait for, you know, Heaven in the by-and-by, that Heaven should be made tangible in the here and the now.</s>Professor ALBERT RABOTEAU (Religion, Princeton University): And so to see somebody, you know, a black man with no formal education able to create this movement and to have all this conspicuous consumption, even in the depths of the Depression, and to be able to buy property, to be able to house folks, you know, was a puzzlement to many folks, but also to others was a sign that there was something of a social conscience going on here.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, you know, one thing that's fascinating about his case is that, I believe that his background is very mysterious. Tell me about that.</s>Professor ALBERT RABOTEAU (Religion, Princeton University): It is. In part, that was intentional. He once said to a would-be biographer that man cannot define God and cannot write a true history of Him. So he was always reluctant to talk about his past, thinking that it was unimportant and also, obviously, very cannily wanting to protect his reputation among his followers as being mysterious because of being divine.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, Professor Raboteau, thank you so much.</s>Professor ALBERT RABOTEAU (Religion, Princeton University): You're welcome. Good being with you.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Albert Raboteau is one of the nation's foremost scholars of African-American religious history. He is professor of religion at Princeton University.</s>Unidentified Man: The mystery man goes daily in his gleaming limousine. From all over the country, followers pour in by car and by special Divine-owned buses to pay homage to his name.</s>Father Major JEALOUS DIVINE (Leader, Peace Mission Movement): Peace, everyone.</s>Unidentified Group: Thank you, Father. |
Protesters' demands vary: Some want higher taxes on the rich, others protest the cost of the wars, corporate greed and other concerns. Some observers believe the protests mark the birth of a new liberal movement. Others question their staying power. Margot Adler, NPR correspondent Arun Venugopal, reporter, WNYC | NEAL CONAN, host: This is TALK OF THE NATION. I'm Neal Conan broadcasting today from Cincinnati Public Radio. For 20 days now, demonstrators have packed Zuccotti Park in Lower Manhattan in a protest they call Occupy Wall Street. They want someone, anyone, held accountable for the financial machinations that drove the country to the brink three years ago, the monetized mortgages, the exotic instruments or, as they put it, corporate greed.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: What's less clear is what they're for and whether a protest that's already swelled and spread can grow into a movement. Yesterday, some unions joined in. In some ways, that's the traditional left joining a less-well-organized, less-well-funded but much more spontaneous group.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: If you have questions about Occupy Wall Street, give us a call. If you participated, why? 800-989-8255. Email: talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION. Later in the program, Cincinnati's new police chief and the challenges of being an outsider.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: But first we begin with NPR correspondent Margot Adler, she joins us from our bureau in New York. Margot, always good to have you with us.</s>MARGOT ADLER: It's great to be back with you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: You were down there yesterday. What'd you see?</s>MARGOT ADLER: Well, yesterday was very interesting and very different from when I went there a couple of days ago, because I was at the big march, which was very much dominated by all kinds of people who had not been down in Zuccotti Park. So it was a lot of union members, it was a lot of community groups. There were probably more than 60 groups. I would say there were at least 5,000, maybe even 10,000 people there.</s>MARGOT ADLER: It was huge, absolutely huge - whereas what I saw in Zuccotti Park a couple of days before that is about 1,000 people kind of hanging out, much younger in general. This was a much older crowd, a much more, sort of, diverse crowd in some ways because it was mixed age, mixed ethnicity. Actually, there was mixed ethnicity there, too.</s>MARGOT ADLER: But yesterday's was very much, sort of, your traditional, you know, progressive people kind of marching down there and saying their support. What you saw down there was a much more spontaneous, a kind of gentle anarchy, things that reminded me of some of the - oh, everything from the Rainbow Gathering to Greenham Common to a lot of things that I experienced covering and participating in through the '60s and '70s.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Yeah, both of us, I think, Margot, more than a few lifetimes at covering demonstrations. Is this a conscious emulation of Tahrir Square, of the movement that occupied Tahrir Square and grew and grew and grew?</s>MARGOT ADLER: I don't really think so. People didn't mention - when I was talking to people, people were not mentioning Tahrir Square. Now what they were mentioning, I did talk to a woman who had come from Spain and had been at the huge demonstrations in Madrid that had taken place about the economy, and she felt it was a very similar movement that she was experiencing here.</s>MARGOT ADLER: I mean, what I did - I mean, what was interesting to me was I thought there was more focus than I thought there would be. If you looked around, the signs that you saw were all very much focused on the economy. There was - they were very much, you know, end corporate greed, end, you know, basically the 99 percent.</s>MARGOT ADLER: They weren't - you know, very often you'll go to a kind of traditional left demonstration, and there'll be 60,000 different causes. And I even saw a very weird thing while I was there. You know, they had this thing called the Human Microphone, where basically because they have no amplification, people repeat what everybody says.</s>MARGOT ADLER: So Peter Yarrow comes down there, from Peter, Paul & Mary, and he gets up on the stage, and he starts singing, and he also starts talking. And he is - in his talk, what I heard was the laundry list of every left cause. So he's talking about blacks in prison, he's talking about militarism, he's talking - and I'm listening to these people sort of parrot it back and, you know, just so everybody hears it.</s>MARGOT ADLER: And I realized it was completely different from what I was actually experiencing, that in a sense I thought he was off the mark.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: That's interesting. And yesterday, the arrival of union members, too, that, as mentioned, brings numbers, it brings organization, it brings money; but at the same time, might some of those people who had been down there the first three weeks wonder if they're about to be overwhelmed?</s>MARGOT ADLER: I don't think they think they're going to be overwhelmed. I mean, a lot of the quotes that I heard in the various stories that I read said we welcome them, but, you know, we're going about our business and doing our thing. And one of the most interesting things that I heard today on a program actually on WNYC was one of the quotes that was given was, you know, Wendell Berry, who's, you know, this environmental writer, very interesting.</s>MARGOT ADLER: And he says ask questions that go beyond the available answers. And I started thinking about that, because all the news media and all the people you - on the street that you - and all the people in my coffee klatch just say, well, what is their goal, what is their goal?</s>MARGOT ADLER: And when I think about some of the cultural changes that have happened in this country, let's say women's rights, let's say gay marriage - who would have ever thought that that would have happened - at the time that women were, let's say, protesting, there was goal. The ERA, it never happened. So it wasn't even relevant to what actually changed.</s>MARGOT ADLER: And so I'm beginning to think that maybe this whole notion that oh, let's have a goal, let's have a focus, maybe that's not the idea. Maybe we're really - you know, they're really trying to say let's change the conversation.</s>MARGOT ADLER: And let me tell you a story that really, sort of, is my symbol of this whole thing, if you have a minute or so to let me do this, it kind of takes a couple minutes.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I think we do, yes, go ahead.</s>MARGOT ADLER: Okay, so in 1983, I'm covering the Seneca Women's Encampment for Peace and Justice. It's in Upstate New York. It's a group of very, very radical women who have encamped, very much like Greenham Common. They basically are camping out, and they want to protest militarism.</s>MARGOT ADLER: And they're doing all these things that were sort of these cultural '70s civil disobedience things. So there was street theater, and there was chanting, and they were painting themselves green and black, and they were having die-ins. And I spent three days with these women, and it felt very interesting and very transformative, and very unusual, you know, and I felt really actually that a lot of stuff was happening.</s>MARGOT ADLER: And then there was this big march. And the big march was on July 4th, and it was on the military base, and I got into a little skirt and a blouse, and I went and stood with the townspeople and watched this march that I had been living with for three days.</s>MARGOT ADLER: And as they marched to the military base and to the town, I realized that from the point of view of the townspeople that I was among, they looked totally crazy. They looked like total - you know, I mean, they really looked weird, they looked bizarre. There was no understanding. They were painted black and green. They looked really crazy.</s>MARGOT ADLER: Now translate that to Wall Street, Occupy Wall Street, and what's different and what I really think is interesting about Occupy Wall Street, is that it's porous. So what you have in Occupy Wall Street is you have all these people milling around and hanging out, and you have free food, and you have some of the Wall Street guys in their suits and ties coming in and eating the free lunch and talking with the people.</s>MARGOT ADLER: And so you actually have more of an encounter that's actually changing, where those two sides sort of come together and see each other. And I think that's very interesting.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Greenham Common, which Margot mentioned, I think I did, too, that was a protest outside of an airbase in Britain called Greenham Common where American cruise missiles were set up. This was back in the 1980s, and women encamped outside the front gate and stayed there for some time.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Anyway, let's get some callers in on the conversation. If you want to know more about the Occupy Wall Street protest, give us a call. If you've participated, how come? 800-989-8255. Email talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION. And we'll start with Martin(ph) and Martin on the line with us from Charlotte.</s>MARTIN: Hey, how are you doing today?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Very well, thank you.</s>MARTIN: I was just calling because I got a flyer. I go to UNC Charlotte, and I got a flyer from some students that were handing them out yesterday. And there's an Occupy Charlotte on Trade Street on Saturday, and I'm planning on going there.</s>MARTIN: And I just want to go because I feel like the younger generation, right now, is just being totally left out of the - of everything. And, you know, there's so many people who are graduating right now. They don't know what to do. They can't get jobs. And, you know, it's horrible, like I heard these snippy Fox News people talking about the younger generation, we have no agenda, but, you know, we'll see how it all works out.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Charlotte, a major banking center, not exactly Wall Street but a major banking center. Margot, I wonder if those attitudes are reflected there on the actual Occupy Wall Street.</s>MARGOT ADLER: Which attitudes, the attitudes about the snarkiness of the media or...?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, there's that, yes.</s>MARGOT ADLER: Which we can talk about, which is very interesting. But I think that the attitudes are very much - you know, we have been left out. We have been left out. I mean, I think one of the most interesting chants, for example, even at this big march yesterday, was, you know, banks got bailed out, we got sold out. And that was over and over and over.</s>MARGOT ADLER: And I think there's just this sense that people feel left out of decision-making. They feel left out of the - they don't really feel that democracy kind of applies to them and that their vote means anything.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Martin, would you agree?</s>MARTIN: Exactly, and I'd like to make just one more point. I'm taking, actually, an American government course right now, and in that textbook, it makes a reference to right now the young voters are at the lowest, you know, all-time lowest, showing up to the polls.</s>MARTIN: But at the same time, we're at an all-time highest of, like, public volunteering and, you know, different charities, things like that. So it just shows that we - you know, we feel left out, and we don't feel like we can do anything about, you know, our vote isn't being heard, really. And so we're trying to help in other ways, which, you know, it shows how good I think our generation is. And, you know, a lot of people just look down their nose at us, so...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: All right, Martin, thanks very much for the call, appreciate it. The snarkiness of the media, Margot?</s>MARGOT ADLER: Well, I mean, I was starting to think about this because I had an experience - I think it even applies to NPR. I had an experience where someone, another reporter, said to me, well, you're going down to Occupy Wall Street, you have to make the joke. I said, well, what's the joke? He said, well, the joke is of course is that they're using McDonald's for the bathrooms, you know, that they can't get away from the corporate media.</s>MARGOT ADLER: And I actually did put a line in my piece about that. But what was interesting, when I actually asked that question to the people at Occupy Wall Street, they said look, you know, not only that, we use Verizon for our live stream. But that's the reality of 21st-century America that we live in contradictions.</s>MARGOT ADLER: So I mean, it wasn't a joke. It's something they've actually thought about. It's something that they actually are interested in thinking about as a larger question. And so I think there's a tendency for us because we want to be impartial, right, when we cover this. If we're doing an event, and there isn't another side to talk to, we then become the other side by becoming snarky.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: NPR's Margot Adler, who's with us from our bureau in New York. As our caller mentioned, the Occupy Wall Street protests have spread to other cities and other places and other times: Washington, D.C.; San Francisco; Portland, Oregon; as he mentioned Charlotte. If you're participating, why? And if you'd like to know more about what's going on, give us a call, 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. Stay with us. I'm Neal Conan. It's the TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: This is TALK OF THE NATION, from NPR News. I'm Neal Conan, broadcasting today from Cincinnati Public Radio. And we'd like to welcome the audience here in the studio that we're borrowing from CET, that's Cincinnati Public Television. Appreciate your coming today.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: After nearly three weeks, the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations in Manhattan appear to have caught the attention of the White House. Speaking at a news conference earlier today, President Obama said, quote, "it expresses the frustrations that the American people feel that we had the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression, huge collateral damage all throughout the country, all across Main Street, and yet you're still seeing some of the same folks who acted irresponsibly trying to fight efforts to crack down on abusive practices that got us into this problem in the first place."</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Several unions joined in the loosely organized protest yesterday, and while some argue we're seeing the birth of a movement, others question the staying power of a group with few, if any, defined goals. If you have questions about Occupy Wall Street, give us a call. If you participated, why? 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. You can join the conversation at our website. That's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: NPR correspondent Margot Adler has been covering these protests the past few weeks and joins us from New York. And with us now from Lower Manhattan is Arun Venugopal, he's a reporter for WNYC, our member station in New York. Arun, thanks very much for being with us.</s>ARUN VENUGOPAL: Hi, Neal.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And can you tell us what's going on there today?</s>ARUN VENUGOPAL: Well, it's very crowded out here in Zuccotti Park in Lower Manhattan. You have hundreds of people filling this square. Some of them are active protesters who have been drawn over the last two or three weeks. You also have a lot of tourists who might have been walking by to see ground zero, which is right next door, and they seem to be coming into the square in greater numbers.</s>ARUN VENUGOPAL: I think that all the media coverage has sort of maybe demystified what's happening here, all this kind of activism, which might have been a little strange to some in the last few days, but you see a lot of people coming in and engaging with the protesters, asking them questions, and seem really interested in what's happening here.</s>ARUN VENUGOPAL: I see all kinds of, you know, I guess signs of life, the camp life, in a sense that's been happening here. You see a compost bucket not too far from here where people are throwing in their food scraps because it's a very, I guess, ecologically-minded bunch of people.</s>MARGOT ADLER: Right next to me there is a sign that says private and municipal unions. There are people who are trying to draw in more union members. And then there's food in the center of the square, where people come and get free meals.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Free meals. What are they serving?</s>ARUN VENUGOPAL: I'm sorry?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: What are they serving?</s>ARUN VENUGOPAL: Well, let's see. Last I checked, they were - I think there's couscous, peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. It's largely vegetarian fare, but they also have cheese pizzas and whatnot. It's a pretty good spread, I must say.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We've asked you to get some people, gather some people who we might talk to. Is somebody there with you?</s>ARUN VENUGOPAL: That's right. One gentleman who is standing right next to me, his name is Walter Hildegast(ph), and he lives in Queens, New York. He's a plumber, and he's a member of the local plumber's union. And he's been laid off for the last two years.</s>ARUN VENUGOPAL: And his issue is that basically, you know, there hasn't been enough, I guess, focus on workers' rights. And I'm going to hand it off to him right now.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Okay.</s>WALTER HILDEGAST: Yes, hello.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Walter, nice to talk to you. You're live on the radio across the country on TALK OF THE NATION. Nice to have you with us today.</s>WALTER HILDEGAST: Yeah, you have to forgive me. It's unfortunately a little loud where I am. So I'm having a bit of a hard time hearing you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: All right, well, briefly, could you tell us why you're there?</s>WALTER HILDEGAST: Why I'm here? Essentially I'm here not just as a union worker. I'm here as a 9/11 first responder. I'm a construction worker who was a volunteer at the World Trade Center site September 12 through September 16, 2001, and because of my actions, I developed an auto-immune disease called sarcoidosis, which basically has attacked my lungs, you know, my muscles and my joints.</s>WALTER HILDEGAST: The reason why I'm here is because I'm fighting, you know, for my basic rights and health care. I was denied workers' compensation and Social Security Disability, which I'm engaged in a furious legal fight. What I'm seeing here, it's beyond me already. It's about everybody else who also recognizes that there's a serious issue with this country.</s>WALTER HILDEGAST: People are getting sick and tired of having to pay, you know, the fares. You know, the fares are being raised constantly to come back and forth to work, especially here in Manhattan. They're getting tired of having to pay these high rents. The cost of health care has gone up. It's just, it's enough already. I think enough people have gathered up to say, you know what? I'm tired of making this choice.</s>WALTER HILDEGAST: Do I either pay my rent to put a roof over my head, or do I put food on the table for myself and my family to eat. Those kind of choices you shouldn't have to make in a big country like this. You know, people have every right to have a roof over their head and have every right to eat in this country. It's not right, and it's got to stop.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Walter, thanks very much. Arun Venugopal has somebody else there with him, and I was wondering if he could hand the phone off to whoever that may be.</s>WALTER HILDEGAST: Yes, sir, thank you very much.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thanks very much, Walter, good luck to you.</s>ARUN VENUGOPAL: Hello?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Arun, is this you?</s>ARUN VENUGOPAL: Yeah, hi.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Is there someone else you've got for us?</s>ARUN VENUGOPAL: Well, actually he's wandered off because had to go to the bathroom. It's very difficult to find public facilities here, unfortunately. And so he's yet to come back.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, there are some issues that are even more urgent than speaking on the radio, I'll grant you that.</s>ARUN VENUGOPAL: Sorry, no control over his bodily functions.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Absolutely not. I wonder, this is an email we got, this is from Bruce in Michigan: Ask the people at the park where the iPhone, iPad, basic cell phone, sleeping bag, food, et cetera, came from. Are they willing to give all this up since they came from corporations? Side question for the next Republican debate is: Are the elected people's campaign paying their salaries when they're out campaigning? They're still on the dole.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: That first part, I think it speaks to the question that some people wonder if there's a bit of hypocrisy down there.</s>ARUN VENUGOPAL: Yeah, well, I mean, I would I guess run it to, you know, the individuals who are here. But my sense is many of them are not calling necessarily for an absolute overthrow of the capitalist system. There are people here, you know, who actually say they support capitalism. But they say that they think there has to be a little better - I guess sort of readjustment of the system, in a sense, that it's gone out of whack as too much in favor of corporations.</s>ARUN VENUGOPAL: When they say Occupy Wall Street, it's sort of a shorthand for Wall Street and the financial system but for I guess more broadly speaking what they think is a larger sense that the corporations and the wealthy who have too much control over the political system and that the middle class, what these people call 99 percent, the working class, that they need, I guess, a larger say in what happens and that income inequality has gone I guess to an extreme degree.</s>MARGOT ADLER: You know, I'll just jump in here. This is Margot. I think that there - you know, no one there is saying there should never be another corporation in the world. I think the question is if you went back 20, 30 years, you would see that the ratio, let's say, of profits that CEOs make to their workers, was, you know, a much smaller percentage and that there's just this feeling that things have gotten completely out of hand.</s>ARUN VENUGOPAL: Actually, Neal, if I can just insert Steve Panu(ph), he's the gentleman who's rejoined us here. He's come from Google, where he works as an engineering manager. He used to work on Wall Street, he said, some years ago. And he might serve as a good example of the kind of person who doesn't believe in an overthrow of capitalism. He said he supports capitalism. But I'm going to hand it off from him. He's come from San Francisco just last night.</s>STEVE PANU: Hi, Neal, good to talk to you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Steve, nice to talk to you. Why'd you come 3,000 miles to Occupy Wall Street?</s>STEVE PANU: Well, from my perspective, you know, I have an economics background and looking at sort of the GDP coefficient over the last 30 or 40 years, I think things have gone in the wrong direction. I also saw a pretty striking graph the other week that shows - in Mother Jones, I believe - that there's a strong link between declining economic progress and increase in the income inequality. So those are the factors that concern me the most.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: But that's a long way to come for an economic principle.</s>STEVE PANU: I probably am pretty feeling about this. But I'm really energized by the young folks here. They have some pretty radical ideas, ideas that I hadn't thought about. And from my perspective, that exchange has been pretty healthy, and I've learned a lot from them.</s>STEVE PANU: And I think, you know, they are really open to some of the things that I'm bringing up, as well. So I think a great sort of marketplace of ideas is coming about here.</s>MARGOT ADLER: Did you say you worked for Google?</s>STEVE PANU: I did say that.</s>MARGOT ADLER: And what are the attitudes at Google toward these kinds of things, your co-workers?</s>STEVE PANU: My phone is completely unusable right now because there's about I don't know how many text messages waiting for me, you know, asking me how it's going, I wish I was there, all those sort of, you know, great kind of support groups.</s>STEVE PANU: But, you know, it's a large company, and there's probably a large, you know, group of opinions. But in general I have a lot of support from my teammates.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: All right, thanks very much. Could you give the phone back to Arun please?</s>STEVE PANU: Great, thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And Arun Venugopal, we wanted to thank you very much for your time today, appreciate it.</s>ARUN VENUGOPAL: Great, thanks for having me on, Neal.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Okay, Arun Venugopal, a reporter for WNYC, our member station in New York down there at Zuccotti Park, where the Occupy Wall Street movement goes. Margot, I wanted to read you this email we got from Guy(ph) in Tucson: The goals of the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street line up very well together. Both are fed up with corruption in government and elsewhere, both are determined to stop the control of government by special interests, both want politicians to do the right thing for the country instead of doing whatever's necessary to stay in office.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We need jobs created by big business and small business and individuals alike. We need business to compete in the marketplace instead of rigging the marketplace. We need people's earnings tied to creation of wealth instead of just co-opting it like so often happens in government and on Wall Street.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: What the Tea Party correctly opposes in big government, Occupy justifiably opposes in big business. The goal of democracy is to divide power amongst the citizens, and that is incompatible with plutocratic control of government by a small group of moneyed people. Is there much comparison with the Tea Party going on?</s>MARGOT ADLER: I think that in the spontaneousness that the Tea Party originally was, absolutely. And there actually have been some people down there at Occupy Wall Street who have been, for example, Ron Paul people. I've seen them around, saying, you know, with their own campaigns, stop the Fed and all this kind of thing. So there - I mean, I do think that the original Tea Party came out as a very spontaneous movement. I think later, a lot of very big corporate interests and we might say conservative political groups did, in fact, pour huge amounts of money into the Tea Party. And so you might say that the Tea Party is no longer that kind of spontaneous movement that it was.</s>MARGOT ADLER: And then you have to ask, well, what's going to happen to Occupy Wall Street? Will the same thing happen? Or, in fact, will there be a - because - look - using these tools and they're really kind of trying to figure out another way of being, will they be able to get around that? I don't know. I don't think anybody knows whether this movement is going to have staying power or not.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's see if we can get another caller in. Let's go to George, George calling from San Francisco.</s>GEORGE: Hi. George, in San Francisco. You know, Margot, I think maybe taking off of your report, there's a kind of interpenetration of people at this location. And it's their life, and it's the circus. It's life lived in the open. And that - well, maybe we can agree that nobody has a particular corner on hypocrisy. We might draw up a list of objectives or principles. But that notwithstanding, there's a - I think the invitation of this camp - whether it's in New York City or Portland or any other central location - is to joins us, to live your life in the open. What is it that you're doing in there? What are you doing in those backrooms? What are you doing in those trades? And can you support that in terms of your life on this planet? If you came out here in the street, out in the open, where everybody's visible, could you continue business as usual?</s>MARGOT ADLER: You know, it's interesting, because a lot of what's going on down at Occupy Wall Street is a bunch of stuff that has actually been created over time through, you know, a lot of different kind of protests and alternative movements. And a lot of the times that the reporters don't even really know, don't even understand what they're covering. For example, all those papers that talk about the fact that they wiggle their fingers when they want to say approval, well, that's known as twinkling. It's been going on since the '70s. I mean, it's been in all the civil disobedience movements.</s>MARGOT ADLER: And one person I talked to said a very interesting thing. He basically said: We're standing on the shoulders of that whole civil disobedience movement, which is standing on the shoulders of the civil rights movement, which started, you know, with nonviolent civil disobedience and stuff. So there's a lot of stuff that they are - that is actually not new, but I think that they are trying to figure out a new way of doing it. Who knows? More power to them. Let's hope it happens.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: George, thanks very much for the call. NPR's Margot Adler, with us from our bureau in New York. We're talking about Occupy Wall Street. And you're listening to TALK OF THE NATION, coming to you from NPR News. And let's see if we can get - here's an email. By the way, we're getting a lot of emails. This one from Betsy, tweets: I will be taking our kids to Occupy Wall Street in St. Louis tonight because profits have to become - before the needs of the people.</s>MARGOT ADLER: This, an email from Kate: I'm 60 and upper-middle class. I'm going to go to the Occupy Denver demonstration on Saturday with my 25-year-old son. And there's somebody here in the audience in Cincinnati who told me there's going to be Occupy Wall Street here in Cincinnati come Saturday. It is spreading, Margot. It takes organization. It's spontaneous. It's interesting. But, well, what can happen? You need an organization, don't you?</s>MARGOT ADLER: I - you know, you certainly eventually need some kind of focus and organization. But I think what's happening here is they're trying to make it as inclusive, to make it as big as possible, at least at first. But what I thought was interesting - I had an experience last night that was very interesting, and that was not about Occupy Wall Street, but made me think that these issues are percolating around in a very interesting way, not always in an organized fashion. I went to see the new Robert Wilson Brooklyn Academy of Music "Threepenny Opera," which was just reviewed in The New York Times. It's got the Berliner Ensemble. And, of course, it's got these incredible words and ideas. It's very dark - very, very dark.</s>MARGOT ADLER: And it, basically, the - way it was stylized, the way the performers were on the stage, very painted in white, very stylized, they looked exactly like the zombie march at Zuccoti Park. They looked - they were - I mean, they really looked exactly like that. And there were lots of young people in the audience, and there are lots of references to economic inequality, to the banks, to everything like that. Whenever those references happen - and it was all done in German with - you could see the subtitles up above. And whenever you would see those words, the audience responded with a lot of chortles, a lot of applause, a lot laughter, as if, you know, even this theater performance, in some way, was having an effect that was somewhat similar to Occupy Wall Street.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Interesting. Here's an email from Anne: I'm certain that there's a Ph.D. thesis in comparing the group dynamics of the Occupy Wall Street group with that of Woodstock - which, I guess, is funny in a way, but it also reminds us that there have been other times where there's been a whole lot of energy and, well, some things never did get accomplished. A lot of goals were never met.</s>MARGOT ADLER: That is certainly true. And you could argue, I mean, many people argue that, for example, the huge energy that went around the '68 protest in Chicago at the Democratic Convention essentially led to a Republican victory, in fact, you know. So there are many people who would argue that not only do some huge energies dissipate, but sometimes they even go in a direction that the people who are doing them don't want them to go. On the other hand - and I think the real story is people are trying to put this in a little box, and it's too early.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: ..TEXT: ADLER: Yes, and I think that's actually - I remember a worldwide - an article in The Times that said, this is a worldwide phenomenon, actually, that people are less interested in the vote.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Margot, nice to talk to you.</s>MARGOT ADLER: Absolutely.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: NPR's Margot Adler joined us from our bureau in New York. Coming up, Cincinnati recently named James Craig as its new chief of police. What does a new police chief need to know - not just this one, but any top cop? Call us: 800-989-8255. Stay with us. I'm Neal Conan. It's the TALK OF THE NATION, from NPR News. |
In 1998, two teams of physicists looking at distant supernovae noticed something surprising—the supernovae were not only moving outwards but also accelerating. These observations have won three Americans the 2011 Nobel Prize in physics. Nobelist Adam Riess discusses how physicists are now looking at the universe. | IRA FLATOW, host: This year's Nobel Prize in Physics has just been awarded to three American astronomers for their unexpected discovery that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. Peering into the depths of our universe back in 1998 with the help of instruments like the Hubble, they were looking for exploding stars or supernovae that were around way before our sun ever existed, hoping to trace the early evolution of the cosmos.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Joining me now to talk about it is our new Nobel laureate, one of them, Dr. Adam Riess, professor of astronomy and physics at Johns Hopkins University, senior member of the science staff at the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore. Welcome back to SCIENCE FRIDAY, congratulations.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: Thank you, Ira, thank you.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: I want to play back, in 1998, that little - when you were on SCIENCE FRIDAY, and you first published these results, here's how unexpected the observations were, according to your own words.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: We fully expected that the expansion rate would be slowing down. I mean, that's what gravity does: It pulls on everything and causes something like the expansion to slow down. And we were very stunned to see that it actually appears to be speeding up, actually appears as though the universe is accelerating.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Did you know where you were headed with this, or that there was a Nobel in your future?</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: No. I sort of chuckle when I hear those words because - so that was March of 1998. It was when - just at the time we were submitting this paper, and it was a very nerve-wracking time. And I think when I went on your show, it was one of the first times that we were sort of admitting in public that this is what we were seeing in the data, and at that point there's sort of no going back.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: I feel for the guys who think that they've seen neutrinos faster than the speed of light.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: You feel for them. Do you believe it?</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: Well, I don't, and I don't think everybody believed us at the time. But what really helped, actually a big distinction I would draw between the two situations, is that there were two teams of astronomers competing with each other but coming to the same conclusion. And I think that all of us would love to see an independent measurement of the neutrinos.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Has anything changed in those years since you were on this show, anything about - any more ideas of what - maybe what all this dark energy might be?</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: Right, well, first of all, the evidence that something funny is going on has gotten much better. I mean, it's not just observations of supernovae. There are five or six very critical and independent observations, observations of the cosmic microwave background, of features in the large-scale structure of the universe, of clusters, of gravitational lensing.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: We have so many different tools in our toolkit now, and they all say the same thing, that it looks like there's something extra in the universe, that there's this 70-percent component that is dark energy. And we've even gone further than that.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: In the last decade we've begun to measure a key property of the dark energy, the technical term is equation of state, but you could think of it as the kind of strength of the dark energy.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: All right, I'm going to stop you there, and we'll get into that a little bit more, because we have to take a break, okay, so hang on. Everybody, we'll be right back talking more with Nobelist Dr. Riess here, who's going to come back and talk more about the dark energy, Adam Riess, astronomer and Nobel Prize winner. Stay with us. We'll be right back after this break.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: You're listening to SCIENCE FRIDAY. I'm Ira Flatow. We're talking with Dr. Adam Riess, who's just won the Nobel Prize, sharing the Nobel Prize in Physics for the discovery, I guess - would it be right to call it the discovery of dark energy?</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: No, it wouldn't.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Tell us what it really is.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: The Nobel Committee being, you know, wisely conservative, like a good court, took the sort of very narrowest statement that we can be confident is true, which is that these two teams of astronomers found that the universe is accelerating.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: Now, that seems to be the smoking gun of dark energy, but we still don't understand what dark energy is or even - there's the outside possibility that we don't quite understand the laws of gravity and that there really isn't this dark energy.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: So the fact that we see the university accelerating is really the tipoff that something interesting is going on, either on the gravity side or the content side of the universe. And so they stuck to what we could be sure about at this point.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Our number, 800-989-8255 if you'd like to talk about it, or you can tweet us, @scifri, @-S-C-I-F-R-I. Before the break, you were talking to me about the evidence getting stronger over the years.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: Right, so there's been a lot of independent evidence so that we're quite confident about our, I guess I should say our - we're confident about being not confident about what's going on, that there's something beyond either our simple understanding of even Einstein's theory of gravity or the less exotic components of the universe, that there's something like dark energy.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: But we've gone even further in the last decade by measuring a key property of the dark energy. We've begun ruling out some of the alternatives of what it could have been. It could have been a kind of a topological defect in space that whenever you create space, you create more of this topological defect.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: Right now it looks like, to within about 10 percent precision, it looks like just what Einstein had described back in 1917, that there could be what he called a cosmological constant, what we would call a sort of static vacuum energy.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And he called it the biggest blunder of his life, putting that constant in there.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: He did, but I guess it turns out even blunders for Einstein are still pretty good days for the rest of us.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: I remember discussing this with Steven Weinberg years ago, and he said one of the interesting things about the dark energy is that - one of the mysteries of it is that there should be a whole lot more of it, right?</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: Right, that's right.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And not only have you found it, but you didn't find enough of it.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: That's right. On the other hand, if we had found enough of it, we wouldn't be here to find it because it would have accelerated the universe apart long before structures like us and our planet formed.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: So you could say that the particle physicists always knew that there was a problem here, and we haven't - I wouldn't say we've made the problem - I would not say we've made the problem worse, but we've certainly shined a light, no pun intended, on this particular aspect.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Let's go to the phones, some interesting questions, to Kate(ph) in Chicago. Hi, Kate.</s>KATE: Yeah, hi, how are you doing? Thank you for taking my call. I think that I got my answer. I was going to ask if the dark energy was anything like aether that was discredited a while back.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: Right, well, that's a good question. You know, from time to time we do sort of imagine a kind of component out there in space that can do the trick of explaining a strange observation. We can't be sure, really, at this point that dark energy will always be with us, that, you know, it wouldn't eventually take on a sort of aether-like part of the story if in particular our understanding of gravity is wrong.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: But right now the smart money says that we see something like dark energy, and the particle physicist always knew that there ought to be something like dark energy, and so it's really about trying to understand how those two become the same.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Thanks for the call, very interesting. Let's go to another phone call, Mindy(ph) in Rochester, New York, hi, Mindy.</s>MINDY: Hi, thank you for taking my call. My question is: Is it possible that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate because there is dark - like a dark matter, like a halo surrounding the universe that is also pulling on the quasars so the quasars are expanding out faster because there's a gravitational pull by this halo surrounding our universe? Not only are they being propelled out by the dark energy within our universe, but they are also being gravitationally pulled by a dark halo surrounding our universe.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: That's a good question. Thanks, Mindy.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: Right, that is a really interesting question. You know, at some level we can't be sure because we don't really see the whole universe. So we can only see out as far as the age of the universe, which is about 14 billion years, times the speed of light. And so it's always possible that there's a great surprise beyond what we literally call the horizon.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: On the other hand, what we've seen of the universe, after a while it kind of looks like bad wallpaper. It repeats. We have seen the scale on which there are structures in the universe, and we haven't seen any kind of structure on the kinds of scales that your explanation for the acceleration would require. We haven't seen anything on the scale of a giant halo.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: So while we can't say that, after you look at this wallpaper for a while, that last piece or part that you can't see looks completely different, it seems very unlikely.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Is there - are there any good candidates for what it is?</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: Yes, well, you know, I think the best candidate remains our understanding of the vacuum in a sort of quantum mechanical sense, that there is what we call a zero-point energy to the vacuum, that is the energy - the vacuum is a much livelier and more interesting place than we learned about in high school chemistry - there are particles flitting in and out of existence - and that the sum energy associated with all those gives rise to, on a macroscopic scale, this thing we call dark energy.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: The problem with this explanation is you start out using quantum theory to think about the vacuum, and then you switch gears when you get to this macro scale and switch over to another theory of physics called general relativity, which describes how energy or matter bends space.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: And these two theories don't work together. We do not know how they interface. We treat them as sort of separate rulebooks. So what's so exciting about dark energy and this phenomenon is that this is getting to watch how the universe sort of works at that crossroads between these two theories of physics, and we hope it gives us a clue, it gives some bright person a clue on how to unify these.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And that's been sort of the holy grail of physics for the last...</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: Yeah.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Right? To unify the geometry concept of, as Einstein put it, the universe in a geometrical form, and you know, its curved space and things, with a quantum idea, which is just particles and stuff.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: That's right. So you've heard a lot of terms for this like quantized gravity or unifying gravity with the other forces, and string theory tries to do this as well. And, you know, all we're saying as sort of observers is we're just watching how the universe does this or how it operates in that regime, and we're hoping that that's a clue.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Wow, so it's great to talk about this stuff because it's fun to speculate, isn't it...</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: Yeah, it is.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Well, we wish you good luck on the prize ceremony.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: Okay, thank you. I want to give a sort of shout-out to my colleagues on the High-Z Supernova Team and the Supernova Cosmology Project, who have really enabled this work to be done.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And you're going to be heading to Stockholm when, December?</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: December.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: December? Make sure you take home some of the great chocolate coins they have.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: Oh, okay, I will.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: They've got pictures of Alfred Nobel on it. And where do you go from here? Anything that - you know, you're all theoretical physicists looking at stuff and thinking about it.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: Right, well, my fondest wish is that by generating these clues, we inspire, you know, sort of the next Einstein or, you know, really smart person to basically put all these pieces together. I mean, I think there are limitations to the degree to which observations can really, you know, crack this riddle, and it really does require a kind of theoretical synthesis that, you know, it's very hard to predict when that next great idea will come along.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Well, congratulations again to you, and good luck. We'll stay in touch.</s>Dr. ADAM RIESS: All right, thank you.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: You're welcome. Adam Riess was on SCIENCE FRIDAY back in 1998, when he talked about the discovery of the expansion forces, expansion of the universe, and he's now a new Nobel laureate. He's astronomer and physicist at the Johns Hopkins University, senior member of the science staff at the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore. |
Opportunity, one of two rovers launched in 2003, has traversed thirteen miles in the three years it's been on Mars. It's now at the lip of a 14-mile-wide crater named Endeavour. Project leader Steve Squyres discusses the rover's findings and what NASA hopes to learn. | IRA FLATOW, host: This is SCIENCE FRIDAY. I'm Ira Flatow. The Mars Rover Opportunity just keeps on going, seven years and 13 miles after a mission that was to last just a few months. The durable little robot has slowly crawled its way to the lip of a vast crater and has stumbled on a rock that looks like none yet discovered on Mars.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Steven Squyres is principal investigator of the Mars Exploration Rover Mission, professor of astronomy at Cornell University. Welcome back to SCIENCE FRIDAY, Dr. Squyres.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: Hi, Ira, it's nice to be back.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Nice to have you, Steve. Tell us what this crater is. It's a huge crater?</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: Yeah, it's big. It's named Endeavour Crater. It's named after James Cook's ship of exploration. And it's a big thing. It's, you know, 25 kilometers, 15 miles or so in diameter. The thing that makes it interesting is that it's really old. This thing is older than anything that we've been driving around on for the past seven-and-a-half years with the Opportunity Rover.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: And the rim of this crater is kind of sticking up through the rocks that we've been driving around on and exposes some much older and dramatically different materials. It's - it feels like a brand new mission. It feels to me like it's started all over again.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Wow, and so this is - you're getting to the bedrock, would that be right to say?</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: Yeah, this is the most ancient bedrock that we have seen on this side of the planet.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And so when you say it feels like a new mission, that's because you're finding stuff you hadn't seen before.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: Yeah, that's right. We're finding new materials. Now, I'll confess there's a way in which it doesn't feel like a new mission, and that's we've got a very old Rover now.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: This Rover is kind of old and tired and beat-up, and we're making do with it as best we can. But yeah, the science is dramatically different over here, and it's just - it's fun. It's exciting.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Yeah, what's fun about this new rock?</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: Well, you know, I'll be honest with you. We're kind of confused right now, and this is the way it always is when you get to some new material on Mars. We've experienced this several times now with both Rovers. We're still just kind of working this out.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: One thing that's clear is that we're seeing the signature of the big impact event that created this crater. These rocks clearly formed in a violent act. There was a big, big impact that formed, it broke rock up, it partially melted rock, it jumbled stuff together.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: We see rocks that are different from anything that we've seen with either Rover so far, but they're similar in some ways to rocks that have been seen, for example, on the moon, where you had a lot of cratering processes operate. The chemistry is different, though.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Anything similar to what we find on Earth?</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: Yeah, there are places, for example, there are places in some very ancient rocks in Canada, the part of Canada that geologists call the Canadian Shield. And there are places there where there are the remains of impact craters on Earth preserved, and we see rocks that just look like perfect dead ringers for some of the rocks that you see up there.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Yeah, so these rocks then are billions of years old.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: Yeah, yeah, we don't - you know, I wish I could tell you exactly how old they are, but we have no way of dating them. The only way to date them would be to bring them back. But they're really old. They are certainly the oldest ones we've seen with this Rover.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: I remember when Opportunity started on this trip. I think you were on the show.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: Yeah, yeah.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And you said, oh, it's going to take a little journey.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And I think I said: How long is it going to take? And you said, oh, a couple of years.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: You know, and I'm proud of that because that's almost exactly what it was. It was just about two years from when we - we were in this place called Victoria Crater, which seemed huge at the time, it was 800 meters across, you know, half-a-mile in diameter.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: And we made the decision to set out for Endeavour Crater, and it just seemed impossibly far away. And I've got to be honest with you. I mean, when I was on the show then, I said, yeah, a couple years, I was only moderately confident that we were going to make it. I mean, it's a long, long drive.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: Like you said, it was 13 miles to get from Victoria to Endeavour, and that was a long haul, and it's just - to me it's astonishing that we actually made it.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: I remember, we've been doing this over seven years now, so I remember surprises about the durability of the Rover. I remember saying, you know, its solar panels have cleaned themselves off or something. Remember, there was wind blowing them off - and are they still doing that?</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: Yeah, I mean, they don't clean themselves off; the wind does it. But we've had these lucky wind gusts that on multiple occasions have cleaned the vehicles off and particularly Opportunity. The place where Opportunity is exploring is just - it turns out it's a pretty breezy place. And so those solar arrays have gotten cleaned off a number of times.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: They're kind of dusty right now, but we're hanging in there.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And, you know, we keep seeing pictures from above, from the satellites going around. Is there any way the Rovers, or now this last Rover, can back up the speculation about water, you know, that they keep seeing? And can you see anything in the rocks that Rover, that Opportunity is roving about on?</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: Yeah, I mean, you're limited by the nature of your landing site, right. We can only look at the rocks that are where we are. And the evidence for water that we have found with Opportunity is compelling, but it's not modern water. It's not water today. It's water in the past.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: And the places on Mars where they have found from orbit what looks like fairly strong evidence for possible water today, thousands of kilometers from where we are.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And there's planned another mission in November, December?</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: Yeah, there's a mission called MSL, the Mars Science Laboratory Mission. The Rover's name is Curiosity. And it's going to launch just after Thanksgiving and get to Mars the following August. That's an exciting mission. That's a big Rover. It's nuclear-powered rather than solar-powered, so it won't have - you don't have to wait for a lucky wind gust to get your power fixed.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: That'll be nice. it's got some terrific science instruments on it. It's got the ability to look for organic molecules at the, you know, parts-per-gazillion level in the Martian rocks and soils and so forth. That's going to be a real exciting mission.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Given that it's seven years, you know, that these - these Rovers have been on - is there anything you learned from the construction or the composition of these machines that you could engineer back and say, oh, we should do this better?</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: Oh, well, wait a second. Okay, so you're asking me if I would do things differently? You're going to give me more time and more money than we had, or I've got to work with the budget I had?</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Well, yeah.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: Because if had to work with the exact budget we had, I wouldn't change a single wire or a single screw.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: No kidding.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: They've worked so much better than any of us anticipated, I wouldn't dare change a thing.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Well, so then is this new baby just a bigger version?</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: Oh no, no, no, this new baby learns from all of the things that we learned on this mission in terms of how to build it, how to operate it. But this new Rover has a very - has a bigger budget, longer schedule, much more time and money to develop a really capable vehicle. And so it's got all kinds of capabilities that Spirit and Opportunity never had.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: And where's the ideal place to set this down?</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: Well, the place that we're going with MSL is a place called Gale Crater. It's a terrific landing site. It's a big stack of layered sedimentary rocks. The rocks towards the top of the stack have a lot of sulfate salts. So they may have been produced when water evaporated away.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: The rocks at the bottom of the stack have a lot of clays in them, and clays form in the presence of water. And so these are - these are sedimentary materials that really tell a compelling story of water in the past on Mars.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: You know, when you pick a landing site on Mars, you've got a lot of things to consider. You've got to think about the science, but you've also got to think about the safety. I mean, if you don't land safely, you don't get any science at all. So the first thing is you've got to have a landing zone that's sufficiently smooth and flat that your landing system has a good chance of surviving.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: All right, it sounds exciting. We'll have to wait and see what happens. And there's no firm launch date yet, is there?</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: The launch date is going to be late November or maybe in early December.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Wow, all right, Steve, thanks for coming on, sounds exciting.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: Yeah, great to talk to you.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: We'll wait for the next launch. And hopefully, is this Rover, is Opportunity going anywhere next?</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: Opportunity, you know, I think we're going to spend the rest of the mission exploring Endeavour Crater, however long the rest of the mission is. Of course, I have no idea. It could be a week, it could be a year, it could be a decade, I don't have a clue.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Right, why push your luck?</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: No, it's a big crater. I mean, this thing's 25 kilometers in diameter. It's going to take us years to explore this.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: It's like the Grand Canyon, I would imagine.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: It is, it is, when you're a little Rover, it's very much like that.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: All right, Steve, thanks a lot.</s>STEVEN SQUYRES: Take care.</s>IRA FLATOW, host: Steve Squyres, principal investigator of the Mars Exploration Rover Mission and professor of astronomy at Cornell University. |
Getting ahead in life is as much about who you know as what you know. That's why the Thurgood Marshall College fund is changing its game; it gives scholarships to students at America's historically black colleges and universities. But now it also helps them network with top companies across the country, says Dwayne Ashley, president and CEO of the organization. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Getting ahead in life can be as much about who you know as what you know. That's why the Thurgood Marshall College fund is changing its game. The fund gives students at America's historically black colleges and universities scholarships. But now, it also helps them network. They get to hook up with top companies across the country.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Dwayne Ashley is president and CEO of the Thurgood Marshall College fund. Dwayne, thanks for coming on.</s>Mr. DWAYNE ASHLEY (President and CEO, Thurgood Marshall College Fund): How are you?</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: I'm doing great. So how important are contacts when it comes to leaving school and getting a job?</s>Mr. DWAYNE ASHLEY (President and CEO, Thurgood Marshall College Fund): Well, it's extremely important. I mean, we've learned over the last 20 years that scholarships alone are not enough to insure that young people have the opportunity to compete for those jobs because at the end of the day, when students have, you know, paid for that education, they want a job. And so you need to have contacts of people that can help you onboard into your career start.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now, how do you think African-American graduates, generally, are doing in the department of networking?</s>Mr. DWAYNE ASHLEY (President and CEO, Thurgood Marshall College Fund): Well, they're doing well. The challenge is, is that a lot of these companies and government agencies don't recruit as historically black colleges and universities. I don't think that that has anything to do with the fact that they don't think the schools are producing quality graduates but it's budgetary reasons often.</s>Mr. DWAYNE ASHLEY (President and CEO, Thurgood Marshall College Fund): And so our program now brings those students together where companies can access the talent at one place. And so when you've expended your budget, you can come to the Thurgood Marshall College Fund and we'll hook you up with more than 235,000 bright, talented, young men and women, who are just seeking opportunities.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So, what kind of companies have stepped up and are helping you really find the next generation of great talent?</s>Mr. DWAYNE ASHLEY (President and CEO, Thurgood Marshall College Fund): You've got retail management companies, Wall Street firms, banks. You've got government agencies that are working with us. I mean, we have a number of companies that represent various sectors that are looking for talent. So we think that this is a broad scope program that's going to appeal to every major employer who's dealing with succession planning, dealing with the fact that a large push of the baby boomer generation is going to be retiring and they're looking to replace that talent.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: You also work on retention. And it's really the case that a lot of people go in with the best of intentions to big companies and, for cultural reasons or family reasons or other reasons, they say this isn't for me. How do you really make it clear to people the choices that they have in deciding to stay at a big company or maybe reframing their decisions about work?</s>Mr. DWAYNE ASHLEY (President and CEO, Thurgood Marshall College Fund): Well, what's really unique about our program is the selection process. We really do a lot of pre-interviewing, making sure that we understand where the students' strengths are. The Gallup organization works very closely with us to do the strength finders so students can understand - you know, are my real strengths in being an engineer or might it be better if go into a career in communications?</s>Mr. DWAYNE ASHLEY (President and CEO, Thurgood Marshall College Fund): By doing a lot of the pre-counseling, the pre-screening, helping the students understand what kind of corporate or workplace culture they would best succeed in, that's where you get to the retention issue. If a young person understands the best environment to succeed in, they're going to onboard into that environment and have the chances for a much better career success than if they didn't do the pre-work in advance.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now, what about the big company versus the entrepreneurial spirit? There have been many African Americans, and in recent years, many black women particularly, who started their own businesses. A lot of those businesses, however, don't grow very large. So do you see yourself in opposition to the idea of entrepreneurship or do you see yourself in conjunction with it and why?</s>Mr. DWAYNE ASHLEY (President and CEO, Thurgood Marshall College Fund): Yeah. We complemented a number of our students interested in going into their own businesses. In fact, at our leadership institute we have a track that's focused on entrepreneurship for those young men and women who really want to look at starting their own businesses. We believe that the skills that we're teaching are transferable to whether you're going to be an entrepreneur, whether you're going to do in graduate school or whether you're going to start your career immediately. Our goal is to make sure that we compliment and augment what the universities are doing to help those young men and women be better prepared to enter into the workforce.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So when you look at people who've gone through your program, what do you see?</s>Mr. DWAYNE ASHLEY (President and CEO, Thurgood Marshall College Fund): We see talented young men and women, who have an average GPA of 3.58. To go into this program, you must have a 3.0 GPA. You must have proven leadership skills. You must have good communications and presentation skills. And if you're lacking in those areas, we work with you to get you prepared on to on-board with those skills into the workplace. But we see young men and women who are ready, who are determined, who are passionate about what they want to do. They really do embody the legacy of Thurgood Marshall himself. They know what they want to do. They just need the opportunities.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: What's the best story you've ever heard about someone who's taken advantage in what you do and then made it into their life?</s>Mr. DWAYNE ASHLEY (President and CEO, Thurgood Marshall College Fund): Well, there's a young man from Mississippi. He attended Mississippi Valley State University and was one of the first in his families to attend college and to graduate from college. He came to our leadership institute, secured an internship, worked at the company for two summers and on-boarded with that company after graduation. He then relocated his entire family to Connecticut to live where the company is based and be there with him. And so, it changed their whole economic status. And now, he's thriving. He's doing extremely well. And he credits the experiences that he had with the Thurgood Marshall College Fund that prepared him to on-board into that company, to develop those networks, to develop mentorships. And now, he's going back and helping to teach those same lessons to other students.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, Dwayne, thanks so much.</s>Mr. DWAYNE ASHLEY (President and CEO, Thurgood Marshall College Fund): Thank you.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Dwayne Ashley is the president and CEO of the Thurgood Marshall College Fund. They're linking HBCU students with Fortune 500 companies. |
For the latest news from the continent, NPR Africa Correspondent Ofeibea Quist-Arcton offers an update on Libya reacting to the release of several foreign medics who allegedly infected more than 400 children with HIV/AIDS; the continuing court battle between Nigeria and New York-based pharmaceutical giant Pfizer; France's new policy in Africa; and Kenya's version of The Simpsons. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: This is NEWS & NOTES. I'm Farai Chideya.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: It's time for Africa Update. Today, a court battle between Nigeria and New York-based pharmaceutical giant Pfizer, France's new policy in Africa and "The Simpsons" Kenyan style.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: First, NPR Africa correspondent Ofeibea Quist-Arcton has the latest on the release of several foreign medics in Libya. They were convicted of allegedly infecting more than 400 children with HIV/AIDS.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON: The five Bulgarian nurses and the Palestinian-born doctors, who is now a Bulgarian citizen, were alleged way back in 1999 of having infected 400 children - more than 400 children at the Benghazi Hospital in Libya with HIV/AIDS. Now, they have denied the charges all along. But they've been to court twice so far. They've had two trials. And the last time around, they were convicted again to the death penalty. But at the last minute, Libya's highest judicial body decided to commute that. And then after even more negotiations and last minute talks from the European Union and the French president's wife, the first lady of France, Cecilia Sarkozy, a whole lot of them were allowed out of jail very hurriedly in the middle of the night and back to Bulgaria. Now, Libya's foreign minister, Abdel-Rahman Shalqam, says what Libya's - he feels Libya has got out of this decision. Have a listen.</s>Mr. ABDEL-RAHMAN SHALQAM (Foreign Minister, Libya): While waiting for full partnership to the European Union (unintelligible) and our partners and the wisdom both of Libya and Sahara that will help us to protect our partners from illegal immigration and also scholarships for our students and cooperation and rehabilitation of the hospital of Benghazi.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON: Now, Benghazi Hospital is, of course, the one where the children were allegedly infected. But this is not the end of the story, because since Libya released the six foreign medics, Farai, now many people in Libya, including the children's families, are saying that it shouldn't have happened because as soon as the five nurses and the doctor hit Bulgarian soil, the president of Bulgaria pardoned them, which meant they were allowed to go free. The Libyans are now saying that's absolutely wrong. They should have served out some sort of prison sentences in Bulgaria while going through the judicial process if they were going to be pardoned by the Bulgarians.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: I want to move to a long running story that hasn't ended yet. Nigeria suing Pfizer, the New York drug giant for $7 billion. What's going on there?</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON: In a way, it's a similar, sort of, story. It's an African country again accusing foreign nationals of having caused the death and in this case, the disability of Nigerian children. This story also goes back to a decade ago when Pfizer apparently was trying out a new drug called Trovan, an antibiotic. And it was used during an outbreak of meningitis in northern Nigeria in the state of Kano.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON: Now both the state government in Kano and the federal government in Nigeria are suing Pfizer because they say it was an illegal trial, that Pfizer did not have the proper authority to try out this drug, and they're blaming Pfizer for having caused the deaths of a number Nigerian children and the disability of others. Pfizer has denied all wrongdoing. But that's not the end of the story because it's still continuing. Although the courts in Nigeria have decided that they are going to delay the trial until October.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON: And, Farai, just a last point, apparently, the U.S. FDA gave the green light for adult use of Trovan, this Pfizer drug, back in 1997. But the drug was not approved for use by children.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So, as you mentioned, you have this relationship between Senegal and France that goes back for centuries. And there is a French president. We just referenced his wife in relationship to the issue of the Bulgarians in Libya. What's the mood between Paris and Dakar?</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON: Hah, it really depends who you are. The Senegalese are actually feeling quite offended by President Nicolas Sarkozy's visit because he gave his speech to the youth at the University of Cheikh Anta Diop in Dakar last Thursday. And it was in a way a lyrical speech, in a way a bit of a mystical speech. Many Senegalese say a very insulting speech.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON: He touched on slavery. He touched on colonialism. He said he wasn't coming to teach the Senegalese and the African youth any lessons. But they say that he then proceeded to pontificate and to lecture them for 50 minutes - preaching and telling them what to do. Have a listen to these young Senegalese and their reaction to French-African relations.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON: Unidentified Man #1: As usual, French presidents, you know, are here for themselves. I think that we have to reconsider our cooperation with France. The policy and the system that prevailed previously, we have the same - which doesn't profit to us.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON: Unidentified Man #2: His policy is not good because Senegalese population - the younger generation need to go abroad. But Sarkozy now is against this. And it's not normal.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON: Unidentified Man #3: Okay, our relationship between Senegal and France. They can be helpful towards us.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And the President Sarkozy visited Libya, Senegal and Gibbon. What did he have to say there?</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON: Well, everybody was expecting him to come out with a sort of policy statement on French-African relations. And when he was a presidential candidate before he actually won the elections in France, Nicolas Sarkozy had said he wanted to - well, everybody in Africa is interpreting it as cherry picking from Africa's educated elite.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON: He said wanted selective immigration. And everybody understands that to mean that he doesn't want people who are going to sweep the streets of Paris and you have Malians, Senegalese, Guineans, all sorts of Franco and Africans working in France - and they have been doing for years. But he wanted only to have Africans who are highly educated.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON: But all the people say, but that's just going to exacerbate the brain drain from Africa. And that President Sarkozy just wanted the best and wanted to leave those who were looking for a better future for themselves and their family is completely out of the equation. So I don't think he left this continent very much more popular than he arrived here. And he probably lost, I would say, a few friends, definitely.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And now we have something entirely different.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Unidentified Man #3 (Voice Talent): (As unidentified character) When disaster threatens our world.</s>Ms. JULIE KAVNER (Voice Talent): (As Marge Simpson) They're going to destroy Springfield.</s>Ms. YEARDLEY SMITH (Voice Talent): (As Lisa Simpson) Dad, do something.</s>Mr. DAN CASTELLANETA (Voice Talent): (As Homer Simpson) This book doesn't have any answers.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Yeah, you've guessed. That's a clip from the new full-length " The Simpsons Movie." Well, America's well-loved animated characters have shown up at a rather unlikely location in western Kenya. Ofeibea, what's the story with that?</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON: Yes, Farai. "The Simpsons" have apparently surfaced in the small Kenyan village of Tabaka. And it's the Tabaka classic carvers who are carving soapstone characters. "The Simpsons" in soapstone. And they're being exported all over to the U.S., to Italy, to Britain, we're told. And yet most of these carvers have never even watched "The Simpsons" on television, let alone the movie that's due out. Listen to Daniel Oikumugundei(ph). He's the chief carver and he describes how the work started.</s>Mr. DANIEL OIKUMUGUNDEI (Chief Carver, Tabaka, Kenya): I made a full Homer Simpson, which was very heavy. I've seen it once in television. I carved Maggie, Simpson head, son, Bart, Homer, Otto and the Chief Wiggum.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON: I'll tell you what, they look gorgeous. I'm not as familiar with "The Simpsons" as you are, but these carvers say they have become so familiar with the characters that they can almost carve them out of this beautiful soapstone with their eyes closed.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON: Farai, what is actually most important is that from before when they were getting about a dollar a piece for their carvings, they're now getting six dollars a piece for each Simpson character that they carve. So the Tabaka classic carvers in their Kisii soapstone are beginning to earn a better living because of "The Simpsons." That's got to be a good story surely.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Absolutely. Globalization gone wild. Well, Ofeibea, thank you.</s>OFEIBEA QUIST-ARCTON: Always a pleasure.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Ofeibea Quist-Arcton is the NPR correspondent in West Africa. She joined us from her base in Senegal. |
News & Notes contributor Julianne Malveaux breaks down the Dow Jones Industrial Average and answers some financial questions from our listeners. Dr. Malveaux is an author, economist, and president of Bennett College. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: From NPR News, this is NEWS & NOTES. I'm Farai Chideya.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: The stock market took a wild ride this month. The DOW Jones Industrial Average topped 14,000 for the first time in history then dropped more than four percent, and the Standard & Poor's 500 index dropped to a five-year low. So what does this mean for the majority of Americans, who may own a few stocks, may be even a 401(k), but don't speak the language of Wall Street?</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: For more, we've got Julianne Malveaux, author, economist and president of Bennett College. Julianne, welcome.</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): Good to be with you, Farai.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So how was it that the DOW can set a record and then, a few days later, drop nearly six months worth of growth?</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): Well, the DOW Jones Industrial Average is 30 stock. It's not all stock. It's 30. My portfolio happened to go up. Thank you, Lord. And in many ways, it's something of a gamble. Here's the thing, we should not be covering day-to-day fluctuations like they were scores in a football game. At the end of the day, by and large, the DOW, over the course of the year, will average in a tenure period, about six or seven percent growth.</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): So when you focus on a week or two weeks or a month, you have a tendency to get something of a distorted picture. And for the average worker, who may or may not hold stock, it's immaterial. Half of all Americans don't hold any stock at all. If you have a 401(k), a pension fund, something like that, of course, it's important. But if you look down six months down the road and these are not the stock you're trying to sell tomorrow, it does not matter.</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): What did that fluctuation mean? It was seedling(ph) a series of weaknesses, housing prices falling, crude prices going up, business investments showing some weaknesses, just any number of things in addition to the whole issue of credit, which has been a concern for a very long time. And so that volatility occurs and unless it continuous to occur - if you tell me a month from now that we've gone from 14,000 back down to 13,000, I'm concerned. If you tell me that we lost four percent in a couple of days, I'm really not.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Let me put this in the context of something that happened a few years ago. There was the dot com boom and then the dot bust. A lot of people who didn't know very much about stocks put a lot of money into the market and then had no idea that there was going to be something that falls. Should you invest directly if you really aren't sure what you're doing?</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): If you don't know what you're doing, make it monopoly money. Mutual fund is a much better way to go. You hear - have how people, who pick up an issue of Fortune or Forbes magazine or they're watching CNBC, and they hear that blank - and I'm not even going to say what blank is because someone will go and do it - is the latest hot thing. And they go put money in it. And would have bust, they're angry. Well, this is not necessarily a sure thing. Certainly, investing lots of money in one stock is a gamble.</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): That was the problem with Enron, Farai, and when people are in pension funds, they are wholly invested in their parent corporation, they need to be careful about that, and make sure that they know what happens. We all have very busy lives, and people don't have time, really, to follow stock market fluctuations.</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): And so, when you don't know what you're doing but you want to follow trends, it makes a whole lot of sense to have a mutual fund. It makes a lot of sense to, perhaps, have an index fund. But if you had an index fund, you lost money last week, and maybe you'll gain some next week.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: I want to move on. We have been asking our listeners to submit money questions for you on our blog. We've been getting some great ones. Kanisha Reingold(ph) is not thinking about buying stocks. She's worrying about how she's going to pay off her student loans. Julianne, she writes, I'm a recent graduate from law school. I have federal loans and private loans, which amount to over $100,000. I don't have any credit card debt. But I'd like to know how to manage the federal loans versus the private loans, which it seems I'll be paying off until I die. So a bit of gallows humor there, what do think she should do or know?</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): Well first thing, Kanisha gets high props for not having any credit card debt. More than half of all students graduate with some of that as well. She should manage her loans so that she's paying the least average percentage rate possible, which means her private loans should take priority over her federal loans. She also has the opportunity to consolidate her federal loans depending on whether they were Stafford loans or other loans. And she should consolidate them down if she can. The third thing she must aware of is -depending on her income - she can deduct up to $2,500 a year on the interest on her loans - her student loans, as long as they were taken out for educational purposes. It seems very daunting and, certainly, it is. But she has the advantage of not having credit card debt. She should not go into that debt. And she should do any consolidation that she can.</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): The feds do have some possibilities for advisement and there are websites. I had one and I lost it, unfortunately. I was bringing it with me. But I will be happy to send that to you, Farai, to put on the Web site.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: We will definitely put it on News and Views and newsandnotes.org. Let me go back to something, thought, when you say consolidate, do you mean consolidate the federal loans with the private loans, or consolidate within federal loans and within private loans?</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): No. No. She should consolidate within her federal loans. There's a program with - in six months of graduation, you can consolidate your federal loans. There is a provision that you should never have to pay more than 15 percent of your income on loans because, obviously, then what do you live on? So, consolidating her federal loans may bring her payments down a bit. She should look at that. However, make sure that you can consolidate in a way that lowers your APR, not increases it. In other words, if you have a Stafford at five percent, and another loan at 6.8 percent, don't consolidate. But if you can save yourself some money, do that.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Hundred thousand dollars, that is a lot of money. Is that unusual for people who've gone to graduate school? Or is this just par for the course these days?</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): These days, it's par for the course. Farai, the average undergraduate student graduates with about $20,000 in student loan debt. And the average undergraduate African American, with about a 50 percent premium, that's so may be 30 percent, $30,000 rather. We know what the story is. A wonderful piece of legislation that we talked about last week was passed and we're all applauding it. But it really only gives students another $300,000 -$300 - oh, wish it was 300,000.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Yeah, I remember $300.</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): Three hundred dollars a year in Pell and that is income-dependent. So we've switched from a policy perspective, from a time when we felt that an educated workforce was a public good, to a time we felt that if you want to be educated, do your own thing. I would suggest that those who are listening and concerned about this, first of all, work on their personal situation. But secondly, and importantly, work with those of us who are concerned about the public policy around how we finance higher education.</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): But, you know, if, indeed, you start out with the third - let's say $30,000 in undergraduate debt, when you go to graduate school, people believe that you're going to be a lawyer, if you're going to be a doctor, you're going to be making a lot of money. So there's not a lot of loan money or grant money available for you. And if there's not grant money, you've got to take the loan out.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, I want to move…</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): What students - who are listening, this - one quick second.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Sure.</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): What student who are listening should hear is that the better your grades, the more opportunities you have to get subsidies. So a lot of folks say, oh, I don't care whether I get a B or C. Well, your pocketbook said you care in five years.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: That's good to know. And we have another letter from listener, Ken Haywood(ph). He writes, and this a lot of questions, we can tick them off one by one as we go. I need life insurance. I refuse to pay for life insurance once retired, so I'll only settle for whole life annuity, which after 15 years must be able to pay its own premium and provide cash to me in case of emergency for the rest of my life. I figure I can get a $100,0000 policy at age 42 for around $210 monthly. Any advise here?</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So first of all, explain what a whole life annuity is and how it would pay its own premium.</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): Well, you would invest essentially in an annuity fund. You're putting money in and you're going to get the interest out is what the whole life annuity would do.</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): But this listener had a whole lot of questions that I would have a lot of questions for him. First, what's his status? Is he married? Is he single? How many children does he have? Why does he feel a need for life insurance as opposed with another form of investment? If he isn't - if he has no encumbrances, it's not sure that that annuity is the best thing for him to do.</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): Secondly, what does his job offer in the way of insurance? Most - if he works for a corporation, most corporations - colleges, universities, you know, fortune 500 companies, and even smaller companies offer some form of life insurance. So he needs to be looking into that. It seems to me - and he set a bigger - bigger set of questions that he does need to deal with some issues of financial planning, and to look at where he is financially.</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): Because this is a brother who said, I don't have any money, essentially, and he's looking at life insurance - that is not the answer to his challenge. Life insurance certainly makes a lot of sense for certain people. And I always say to people, if you have neither chick nor child, you don't need life insurance. You know, you need to…</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: What about the whole idea of life insurance versus disability insurance? Because one thing I've heard from some people in finances that life insurance is great if you die. But if you continue to live, and you've hit disability, that actually is something that you should be more aware of and provide against in the future.</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): Well, his whole notion of the whole life annuity makes sense if he is looking to get a stream of income back. Disability insurance is very important if you don't have yourself covered. The question everyone asks himself is what would you do if you could work? What if tomorrow you woke up and you could not work? How do you support yourself? Who would support you? What kind of programs are there for you? You know, there would be some social security, but it will be minimal - under $1000 a month, depending on what your income was, but it would be minimal.</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): There might be some things that your employer would provide. But if you are concerned about that, disability insurance makes a lot of sense. Long-term care insurances makes sense for some older people who are looking at what would happen to me if I were disabled and I don't have any children. Who's going to take care of me? How would I pay for, you know, a nursing home or some kind of managed care?</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): People have to look at that in total, and some of the better financial services companies, Wachovia, HSBC in particular, have great Web sites that can walk you through some of these kind of things. I would encourage him…</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: We will be looking for that.</s>Dr. JULIANNE MALVEAUX (Author; Economist; President, Bennett College): Yeah, I see those links, but I encourage people to start with those, but then if you really have a dilemma, and again, I think that Ken really needs to sit down with a financial planner, someone that he pays a couple of hundred dollars an hour for a limited amount of time to look at his entire situation because it is complex.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Julianne, well thank you so much. And Julianne Malveaux is an author, economist and president of Bennett College. She was at WFDD in Greensborough, North Carolina. You can always go to our blog, nprnewsandnotes or - that's the Web site - blognprnewsandviews.org. Ask our economist a question. And just ahead, making an interfaith marriage work and the magic behind the perfect church sermon. |
There's a groundbreaking new magazine that celebrates African style. Called "Karama Umuntu," the publication is dedicated to African hairstyles and fashion and will launch this fall in the United Kingdom. Florence Abwoyo, its creator and publisher, explains the magazine's significance. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now to a groundbreaking new magazine that celebrates African style. A new African hair and fashion magazine, Karama Umuntu, will launch this fall in the United Kingdom. It's a brainchild of Ugandan-born Florence Abwoyo. Here's how she explains the magazine's title.</s>Ms. FLORENCE ABWOYO (Ugandan-Australian Actress and Model): Karama means celebration and umuntu means a person. So a celebration of African people.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now that's obviously very positive. What do you want the vibe or the experience to be when people check out your magazine?</s>Ms. FLORENCE ABWOYO (Ugandan-Australian Actress and Model): Basically, what I want people to do is just to learn about Africa and then, of course, thinks about Africa that it's normally not portrayed in our mass media. And you know…</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Like what?</s>Ms. FLORENCE ABWOYO (Ugandan-Australian Actress and Model): I mean, African achievements around the world. I mean, we have a lot of African business that are not really highlighted in most places. And that's what we are trying to bring out, you know, the art of Africa. Whether they are based in Africa or based abroad. So we are dealing with the whole Africa as a whole.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So when you have this magazine, do you consider it a fashion magazine? A lifestyle magazine? How would you describe it?</s>Ms. FLORENCE ABWOYO (Ugandan-Australian Actress and Model): It's more of a lifestyle magazine because our main aim is just to portray a positive Africa and inspire the young Africans who are brought up in Africa just to follow their dreams.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Why don't you tell us how you actually put this together in the sense of did you go about raising money? Did you find investors? How did you actually make this a reality?</s>Ms. FLORENCE ABWOYO (Ugandan-Australian Actress and Model): I mean, I worked in the fashion industry. I'm a hairdresser, a make-up artist and then I do a lot - I have a lot to do with beauty. So, I mean, I own a hairdressing salon for four years. And in the course of four years, I met a lot of African people. And the idea came to me of, you know, putting all the African countries together, just uniting them under one umbrella.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Do you think there's a conflict right now in African fashion between that more generous curves of the traditional African beauty and the thinner body of the Western model?</s>Ms. FLORENCE ABWOYO (Ugandan-Australian Actress and Model): I just - I mean, I grew up in Britain. So to me, to say there's a conflict would be wrong because, I think, everybody looks at their own life in the way they want to. I mean, there is nothing that is so African in body shape because I - my models are from size six to size 16. So, really, that sense, there is no what to describe that African girls are either very curvy shapes or they are very skinny. So I think - I believe that, you know, everybody's got, you know, their own sizes.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: You've mentioned that you grew up in the U.K. Did you ever feel that in the U.K., there was not enough representation of African women as beautiful? How were you brought up in terms of your ability to see yourself in the media, and how did that affect how you grew up in the choices you made?</s>Ms. FLORENCE ABWOYO (Ugandan-Australian Actress and Model): I think when you look at the media is what you want to take from the media. I mean, it's up to the Africans to put themselves forward and show the world that they're beautiful as well, and that's what I'm trying to do. So in that sense, I would say the only thing that we lack in the U.K. is the exposure of African magazine that, you know, explain our culture. Being a British-African, I've never seen a magazine that explains what Africa is. Normally, regional magazines from east to west to south is never been a complete African magazine with the whole continent.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: What's your goal in the long run for yourself personally?</s>Ms. FLORENCE ABWOYO (Ugandan-Australian Actress and Model): I think my main goal is just to inspire as many people as possible, young people, whether them being Africans or not Africans, because I solely believe that my purpose in this life is, you know, I should live my life in a way that I can inspire anybody that's around me.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, Florence, thank you so much for your time. We wish you good luck.</s>Ms. FLORENCE ABWOYO (Ugandan-Australian Actress and Model): Thank you very much.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Florence Abwoyo is the creator and publisher of Karama Umuntu magazine. It debuts this fall. |
Interfaith marriages have been on the rise for years, but that doesn't mean they've gotten easier. Interfaith couples still face a range of challenges both before and after they say their vows. The Rev. Susanna Stefanachi Macomb, a New York-based interfaith minister and author of Joining Hands and Hearts, explains her approach. Susanna Macomb | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: This is NEWS & NOTES. I'm Farai Chideya.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: The numbers of people who marry someone from another faith have been rising for years. But interfaith couples still face hurdles from friends, family even communities. Continuing our religion series, we've got Reverend Susanna Stefanachi Macomb. She's a New York-based ordained interfaith minister and the author of "Joining Hands and Hearts." Welcome.</s>Reverend SUSANNA STEFANACHI MACOMB (Author, "Joining Hands and Hearts"): It's wonderful to be here.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So describe what interfaith actually means.</s>Reverend SUSANNA STEFANACHI MACOMB (Author, "Joining Hands and Hearts"): Well, interfaith is not a religion. It walks among the religions. It begins when we create a bridge between one set of beliefs and traditions and another. It's no you versus me, no us versus them. It's rooted in love and the spiritual principles that unite all of us. You know, the foundations, the basis of interfaith is rooted in respect, tolerance and understanding. But to build the bridge, you need love. In the words of Martin Luther King: Hate cannot drive out hate. Only love can do that.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Take me into a moment when you have performed an interfaith ceremony and what were some of the things you did to make it work?</s>Reverend SUSANNA STEFANACHI MACOMB (Author, "Joining Hands and Hearts"): Well first, you have to begin with a lot of sensitivity. You have to get to know the couple, the families. You're not just dealing with the couple and their issues, it's the families that's often the greatest concern -obstacle. I need to find out what they believe, what their desires, what their wishes are. What are the sensitive issues between them and their families? And you have to be a little creative. I mean, for example, I did this Jewish - American-Jewish African-American Baptist wedding and we had the huppah, and underneath we did the tasting of spices. But we incorporated some horseradish in reminiscence of Passover.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now let's slow that down a little bit. I have been to Jewish weddings. The huppah is a sort of tent. It is a part…</s>Reverend SUSANNA STEFANACHI MACOMB (Author, "Joining Hands and Hearts"): It is a wedding canopy.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Yeah.</s>Reverend SUSANNA STEFANACHI MACOMB (Author, "Joining Hands and Hearts"): And it's sacred. So we've honored the…</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And what's the tasting of the spices?</s>Reverend SUSANNA STEFANACHI MACOMB (Author, "Joining Hands and Hearts"): Well, this couple - she was raised Baptist, but she was practicing Jewish. She came to me and she said, you know I'm practicing my - I'm leaning towards my African tradition. So I said, you're Rubin(ph) and she said, yes. I said, well, we could do that. We can do some of the African tasting of the spices and there are various spices. And often that you wouldn't (unintelligible) we feed them with a spoon but what I encourage is they feed each other.</s>Reverend SUSANNA STEFANACHI MACOMB (Author, "Joining Hands and Hearts"): So, there's water for purity. Coal and that's for strength, there's salt, and in the end if they endure all these things, there's honey for sweetness. So, we added horseradish instead of Cayenne pepper. Reminiscing a Passover which commemorates the, you know, the freedom of bondage, and which, sadly, is relevant to both traditions. Then they jump the broom and on to a glass.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now, that's sounds, both interfaith and athletic.</s>Reverend SUSANNA STEFANACHI MACOMB (Author, "Joining Hands and Hearts"): And difficult. It was. It was. I kept saying you sure you can do this?</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Judaism, jumping the - I mean excuse me, jumping the broom African-American. Judaism…</s>Reverend SUSANNA STEFANACHI MACOMB (Author, "Joining Hands and Hearts"): African-American, Judaism breaking the breaking glass.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Glass.</s>Reverend SUSANNA STEFANACHI MACOMB (Author, "Joining Hands and Hearts"): They key in interfaith - intercultural union as I explain what it means. Often, if it's just one tradition you just do it and, you know, it's assumed that everybody knows what it is. But, for example - and also language has to be adapted. Like for example in Judaism, the breaking of glass - if you go to a conservative temple, they will tell you that it commemorates the destruction of the temple of Israel.</s>Reverend SUSANNA STEFANACHI MACOMB (Author, "Joining Hands and Hearts"): I give my couples several interpretations based on conservative tradition over foreign tradition they choose. And one that my couples like very much is that this - the breaking of the glass signifies that marriage is a transformative experience, leaving the couple forever changed and forever united. And the glass is broken with implied prayer, may you stay together until all the broken pieces come back together again.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: How does creating a good ceremony lead to the start of a good marriage?</s>Reverend SUSANNA STEFANACHI MACOMB (Author, "Joining Hands and Hearts"): Well, weddings (unintelligible) ever gotten married, you realized emotions are heightened to begin with. I tell these couples, whatever you love about your family will be heightened 10 times if not 100 times, and whatever you don't like about your family is going to come out 10 times or 100 times.</s>Reverend SUSANNA STEFANACHI MACOMB (Author, "Joining Hands and Hearts"): So, what you are giving your families and the world is a message of how you're going to portray this union to the rest of the world. So I tell them, this is the birthday of your marriage. So, how you - you know, are you just going to have one clergy member do it? Both clergy member? Sometimes is not possible. For example, if you have a Jewish-Muslim, you know, that's very difficulty sometimes, you can't find an officiant. Are you have an interfaith minister? Are you going to have a humanist minister? Are you going to have a judge? Is it religious, non-religious?</s>Reverend SUSANNA STEFANACHI MACOMB (Author, "Joining Hands and Hearts"): In an interfaith ceremony, I find the best is to focus on the spiritual principles that unite all of us. Language has to be adapted very often, so that no one winces, no feels uncomfortable, in fact, everyone is united. And for example, we include both sides of the family. If you're doing the Christian unity candle, have both sides of the families do it. If you're standing on the hoop of both sides of the family, when we jump the broom, both sides of the -you know, both grandmothers come and put the broom to the ground.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: But reverend, finally, what if some people just don't want to play ball, and they're like this is terrible, you know, our kids can't marry cross faiths. What do you do then?</s>Reverend SUSANNA STEFANACHI MACOMB (Author, "Joining Hands and Hearts"): I do a lot of counseling before and I often meet with the parents and even grandparents. But I will tell you, sadly, tragically, I've helped many person or even both sides that been disowned by their family. But we've prevented a lot of that as well.</s>Reverend SUSANNA STEFANACHI MACOMB (Author, "Joining Hands and Hearts"): I had one couple, she was from the deep debutante south. He was an African-American northerner from a middle class family. After talking with the families - at first, they weren't going to come wedding, they came. Then he wasn't going to walk her down the aisle, they did. And now they're very accepting, and that's the gift of my job. When that happens, it's so much - there's so much joy.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, reverend, thank you so much.</s>Reverend SUSANNA STEFANACHI MACOMB (Author, "Joining Hands and Hearts"): Thank you.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: That's the Reverend Susanna Stefanachi Macomb. She's a New York based ordained interfaith minister and the author of "Joining Hands and Hearts: Interfaith, Intercultural Wedding Celebrations - A Practical Guide for Couples." |
News & Notes concludes a monthlong series on religion in black America with a look at the artful ways sermons are constructed. Theologian Anthea Butler guides us through the various styles of some of black America's most popular preachers. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: I'm Farai Chideya, and this is NEWS & NOTES.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: In the late 19th century, the famed sociologist W.E.B. DuBois heard a sermon given by a country preacher. He wrote about it in his book, "The Souls of Black Folk."</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Mr. W.E.B. DUBOIS (Founder, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People): (Reading) The black and massive form of the preacher swayed and quivered as the words crowded to his lips and flew at us in singular eloquence. The people moaned and fluttered, and then the gaunt-cheeked brown woman beside me suddenly leaped straight into the air and shrieked like a lost soul, while around about came wail and groan and outcry, and a scene of human passion such as I had never conceived before.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: In the final installment of our month-long religion series, we asked what makes a good sermon? For an answer, we turned to theologian Anthea Butler.</s>Dr. ANTHEA BUTLER (Assistant Professor of Religion, University of Rochester): In "The Souls of Black Folks", W.E.B. DuBois talks about the preacher, the music and the frenzy. And I think this is an excellent way to sort of look at what we want to do when we start to pull apart the setting of the black sermon. I mean, what is that sermon what made up of? There's the preacher, obviously, who's up front and commanding the attention whoever that might be.</s>Dr. ANTHEA BUTLER (Assistant Professor of Religion, University of Rochester): Now, there's a certain cadence in which that person might speak. It may be in a clipped cadence so depending how you preaches, if Baptist preachers, you might reach deep down into your throat and get that gutter old sound. Or you may say certain things throughout that sermon that call things.</s>Dr. ANTHEA BUTLER (Assistant Professor of Religion, University of Rochester): There's another element in the sermon that usually, as I like to call it the organ or what we call or maybe the Pentecostal tradition. The running music, everybody knows those chords, dat-dat-dat(ph), and you hear the chord and you know that that's building up part of the sermon. But you don't have a really good sermon, even if you have a great cadence or music until you have a good text.</s>Dr. ANTHEA BUTLER (Assistant Professor of Religion, University of Rochester): Mr. G. E. PATTERSON (Former Presiding Bishop, Church of God in Christ): (Singing) I just want you tell somebody…</s>Dr. ANTHEA BUTLER (Assistant Professor of Religion, University of Rochester): This is G. E. Patterson.</s>Mr. PATTERSON: (Singing) …you're being well get ready. You'll turn around is on the way. The Almighty is on the way.</s>Dr. ANTHEA BUTLER (Assistant Professor of Religion, University of Rochester): G.E. Patterson, the former presiding bishop of the Church of God in Christ who passed away in March of 2007, is what I call the quintessential black preacher. And it's because he had basically a strong a, always a strong sermon text, be a really great professional, strong, black preachings, Tommy(ph).</s>Dr. ANTHEA BUTLER (Assistant Professor of Religion, University of Rochester): He knew how to put the cadence in force. He also sang towards the end of all of his sermons and this is an example of the kind of black preaching that I believe is going away, a style of preaching in which we can blend sort of the old slay tradition with the post-reconstruction and civil rights tradition, but that we don't quite hear anymore in the pulpits of today.</s>Mr. DUBOIS: Thank you, Lord. Anybody here believe he's getting ready to turn some things around?</s>Mr. DUBOIS: Unidentified Man #1: Are you too tired to dream? Or are you too weary to let your mind wander over distant hills?</s>Dr. ANTHEA BUTLER (Assistant Professor of Religion, University of Rochester): It's also important when we talk about this aesthetic to talk about those black preachers who are really teachers. Someone like a Howard Thurman who could be really quiet but get out a powerful message at the same time. We often think of a frenzy as being the emotionality, the shouting, the dancing, all this stuff. But there's another kind of intense preaching that draw something out of people, which gets the call in response. But it may not get the physicality or the movement of the congregation, but it's still powerful preaching just the same.</s>Dr. ANTHEA BUTLER (Assistant Professor of Religion, University of Rochester): Unidentified Man #1: For as long as a man has a dream in his heart, he cannot lose the significance of living.</s>Mr. MARTIN LUTHER KING (Clergyman, Civil Rights Activist): No, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty, stream.</s>Dr. ANTHEA BUTLER (Assistant Professor of Religion, University of Rochester): Martin Luther King also has a very interesting approach. He will always make you see a picture.</s>Mr. MARTIN LUTHER KING (Clergyman, Civil Rights Activist): And let's not wallow in the valley of despair.</s>Dr. ANTHEA BUTLER (Assistant Professor of Religion, University of Rochester): You know, you see justice rolling down like waters, every biblical scripture that he sort of picks has an image to go with it. So not only is he bringing it out an emotion, you see something. It's very visual what he does. And I think that's an important piece of King's expertise as a black preacher.</s>Mr. MARTIN LUTHER KING (Clergyman, Civil Rights Activist): …of today and tomorrow. I still have a dream.</s>Dr. JUANITA BYNUM (Preacher): And when God (unintelligible),that take Abraham to another level, he has something (unintelligible). Can I (unintelligible)? He had to buy a ticket. He had to get a hotel room.</s>Dr. ANTHEA BUTLER (Assistant Professor of Religion, University of Rochester): I think Juanita Bynum is very interesting way to look at African-American women preachers. In part because when she started in ministry, she was very masculinized. She preached like a black male preacher and stand up in the pulpit, flatfooted and could, you know, howl with the best of them. Now, she's a little different. She's a little more feminized. It's a softer message, but still very powerful. And I think you can hear this in her voice as she preaches.</s>Dr. JUANITA BYNUM (Preacher): And I've never tried to pull the wool over the people of God's head. I feel like…</s>Dr. JUANITA BYNUM (Preacher): …the best preach that anybody can ever have is their life.</s>Pastor THOMAS DEXTER JAKES (Televangelist): I'm not talking to the people who got ordinary trouble. I'm not talking to the people who got trouble…</s>Dr. ANTHEA BUTLER (Assistant Professor of Religion, University of Rochester): Well, if you look in the older parts of T.D. Jake's ministry before he had a mega church, this is really great where he starts to act out certain parts of the biblical story. And in that acting out, you draw people in to what that particular biblical character might be feeling. And that's also another way to invite people in.</s>Pastor THOMAS DEXTER JAKES (Televangelist): Why am I going to this storm? Why am I dealing with trouble? Why am I dealing with stress? I'm going to tell you why. It's because God is getting ready to use you like you've never been used before.</s>Dr. ANTHEA BUTLER (Assistant Professor of Religion, University of Rochester): Especially with the frenzy if the preacher is skilled at what he does, he knows how to elicit that response now. In a lot of the church traditions they'll say, well, this is just the Holy Ghost. There's anointing(ph) on somebody's preaching. But I think, many times, there are preachers know how to look out in the audience, especially if you know to look at the church mother who's either sitting on the side of the pulpit on the front row. She will be the one that if it's a good sermon, she will start to respond, and then the rest of the congregation responds.</s>Pastor THOMAS DEXTER JAKES (Televangelist): It was my enemies that made me recognize that I must be a force or you wouldn't be fighting me like you're fighting. Thank God. Let's take a minute and thank God for your enemies.</s>Dr. ANTHEA BUTLER (Assistant Professor of Religion, University of Rochester): One of the great classic texts about historical black preacher: John Jasper, who preached the sun do move. It was as though when people heard him preach, that the sun actually moved. And so that's the kind of aesthetic that the black preacher wants to give. You want to be able to put people into that biblical text. If it's Joshua, or if it's Moses, that preacher is able to bring you there, and the music and the accompanying call in response. When the preacher says something good, the audience may say, amen, or the congregation says, amen. When somebody will say, preach it, brother, and he comes out at you. Those are the elements that make for a good black sermon.</s>Pastor THOMAS DEXTER JAKES (Televangelist): Thank God for my enemies. He prepared a table before me in the presence of my enemies. He anointed my head with oil because of my enemies. My cups runs over because of my enemy. Let's thank God for our enemies.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Anthea Butler is assistant professor of religion at the University of Rochester in New York. |
A glut of foreclosed homes is driving down U.S. home prices at record rates. Madeleine Brand talks with Bob Moon about why buyer interest in foreclosed homes could dictate how long the market stays in a slump. | MADELEINE BRAND, host: From NPR News, this is Day to Day. Housing prices are still plummeting. A new survey shows that over the last year prices are down by the biggest margin in more than 20 years. The Standard and Poor's/Case-Shiller Index tracks the prices of homes in big metro areas across the U.S. Marketplace's Bob Moon has been studying the numbers. He's here now. Bob, it sounds pretty bleak. Which parts of the country are being hit the hardest?</s>BOB MOON: Well, you know, just the overall number is bad enough, and the 20 major U.S. Metro areas that are tracked by this index, prices have plunged 10.7 percent over the past year. But as you suggest, the damage is a lot worse in certain areas. It's gotten really painful if you're a homeowner in Los Vegas and Miami. Those prices have fallen the most of any region by 19.3 percent year over year, and double digit drops have also been recorded in Phoenix, San Diego, and here in Los Angeles.</s>MADELEINE BRAND, host: Yesterday, though, there was a bit of optimism. There was report that showed that home sales actually increased last month.</s>BOB MOON: Yeah, and some of the experts say that we can expect that there will be an uptick in sales, particularly of these existing homes, because prices are going down now, and that's going to reflect some interest on the part of buyers. On the other hand, it's going to take a long time to work through this backlog, this oversupply of homes that we have. And that's been going up more and more as we've seen more foreclosures put more homes back on the market. Lehman Brothers Holdings is among the investment banks that are forecasting home prices as measured by this index are going to decline another 10 percent, and it predicts new home sales will bottom out in the middle of this year. Existing home sales and housing starts, they're going to reach a trough maybe in the third quarter of this year. Now, it's not all bad news, I have to say here. We've been seeing interest rates decline, and when I spoke to Greg McBride over at bankright.com, he's hopeful that's going to mean fewer foreclosures than there might have been.</s>Mr. GREG MC BRIDE (Financial Analyst, Bankright.com): The biggest beneficiaries of the Federal Reserves repeated interest rate cuts will be home owners that have adjustable rate mortgages due to reset in 2008.</s>BOB MOON: He says some monthly payments that might have gone up as much as 400 dollars a month that they reset last year, may go up only 50 bucks a month on say a 200,000 dollar loan that's resetting.</s>MADELEINE BRAND, host: OK, so, not all bad. This particular survey, the Standard and Poor's/Case-Shiller Index, does that one give any sign that the housing market would be recovering this year or anytime soon?</s>BOB MOON: It doesn't, as a matter of fact. The author of this study says that it shows that we're still very deep in this housing correction.</s>MADELEINE BRAND, host: OK, thank you Bob. That's Bob Moon of Public Radio's daily business show, Marketplace. |
Pepperdine University law school professor Douglas Kmiec is a well-known conservative scholar. So why has he pledged support to Democrat Barack Obama? Alex Chadwick talks with Kmiec about the endorsement and how he went from a Mitt Romney supporter to an Obama believer. | MADELEINE BRAND, host: This is Day to Day. In the few minutes an African jazz guitarist far from his homeland in West Africa plays some songs for us in New York City. I'm Madeleine Brand.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: I'm Alex Chadwick. First, let me read you something I came across on slate.com this week. Today, I endorse Barack Obama for president of the United States. I believe him to be a person of integrity, intelligence, and genuine good will. These are not really surprising words in this presidential season, a lot of endorsements. But this one, this one is from Doug Kmiec, he's a law professor at Pepperdine University and a well-known conservative. He served as the head of the Office of Legal Counsel for Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush, which means he advised them on the Constitution. He joins us now from Pepperdine University in Malibu, where he teaches law. Professor Kmiec, welcome back to Day to Day, and what led you to this decision?</s>Dr. DOUGLAS KMIEC (Professor of Law, Pepperdine University): It was a difficult decision because, of course, it's not my natural home to be seeking out candidates in the Democratic Party, but there's no question but that Senator Obama is a person of great leadership ability and an inspiring communicator. This is obvious to anyone who's been following the presidential campaign, but those are qualities that, of course, drew me originally to government when I came to work for someone whose memory I greatly cherish, that of Ronald Reagan. And Ronald Reagan told me more than once, and told all of us more than once, that his proudest achievement was making America feel good about itself again. And I have reached the conclusion that Senator Obama is genuinely trying to give us reason to have that feeling again, and that he's capable of doing it.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: Why not just vote for him? Why come out publicly and say, hey, I am for this guy?</s>Dr. DOUGLAS KMIEC (Professor of Law, Pepperdine University): I have to tell you, Alex, I have been teaching for close to 38 years now, and I have not seen students more inspired, more energized, and interested in the political process, and I attribute most of that, if not all of that, to Senator Obama. So there are reasons, very positive reasons to speak out and affirm the message that Senator Obama has campaigned upon.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: You write about your faith in this piece. You're a devout Catholic. You clearly disagree with Senator Obama on some things that are quite important. He is pro-choice. You are pro-life. Isn't that a pretty difficult hurdle to get over for you?</s>Dr. DOUGLAS KMIEC (Professor of Law, Pepperdine University): Difficult understates it. And I want to be clear. And I have, I think, been clear in the writing I've done with respect to Senator Obama, that I do see abortion as a grave moral evil that can't be justified. And I know Senator Obama sees matters differently. But I take him at his word that we can find common ground, that we can get beyond these intractable divisive problems. That one, Alex, was the toughest for me. And it's one that - I'm not changing my spots, and I don't think Senator Obama would expect me to.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: You did support Senator McCain eight years ago when he was running for president.</s>Dr. DOUGLAS KMIEC (Professor of Law, Pepperdine University): I did.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: Have you heard from anyone on his campaign staff or other supporters of his, friends of yours, since this piece has come out?</s>Dr. DOUGLAS KMIEC (Professor of Law, Pepperdine University): Well, I have. And they point out, repeatedly, that the Senator Obama whose campaigning has a record that is much different than the things that he's saying on the campaign. I'm taking Senator Obama on his - at his word, that he is not going to be the partisan-elected official. He's going to be the president that will keep the presidential covenants that he's making with us as he's traveling across the country. With respect to my friends in the McCain campaign, I, as I say, I don't in anyway disrespect the contribution that Senator McCain has made. And I think my intervention and the intervention of others who still support a limited government, who support the values of a judiciary that is not an activist judiciary and all the things that Republicans are associated with will take to heart the need to speak with a clearer voice, and that's a message that I hope the McCain campaign takes to heart.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: Doug Kmiec is a Professor of Constitutional Law at Pepperdine University in Malibu and a conservative legal scholar who this week endorsed Senator Barack Obama for president. Doug Kmiec, thank you.</s>Dr. DOUGLAS KMIEC (Professor of Law, Pepperdine University): Good to be with you.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: And there's more just ahead on Day to Day from NPR News. |
News & Notes Web producer Geoffrey Bennett talks about reaction on our blog, "News & Views," to the interview with Rep. Tom Tancredo and weighs in on the other stories getting attention on the Internet. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: This is NEWS & NOTES. I'm Farai Chideya.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: In just a minute, we've got our weekly Bloggers' Roundtable. But first, a quick look at what you, our listeners, are posting on our News & Views blog.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Here to help out is Web producer Geoffrey Bennett. Hey, Geoff.</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: Hey, Farai.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So what are our listeners talking about online?</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: Well, they're talking about your interview with Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: I saw that.</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: Yeah. You know, and though he was the first Republican candidate to answer the show's call for an interview that didn't win him any sympathy with our listeners. I mean, people are finding fault with Tancredo's views in immigration, multiculturalism, and his overall vision for America.</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: There's also some talk in the blog about the legal problems of pro football player Michael Vick who is mixed up in this dogfighting allegations.</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: There's some mention of the recent CNN/YouTube debate, and we continue this talk about soccer player David Beckham embracing black culture, you know. Some in the U.K. consider him a, quote, "honorary black man." And though we hashed that issued out in the blog, and our listeners aren't buying it.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: No matter how many times he cornrows his hair…</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: Yeah.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: …which is now short, I guess he just doesn't fit.</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: Right.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now, we've been asking listeners for questions about topics we cover on the show like news from Africa and personal finance. How's the response been?</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: Well, we got a number of good questions. We got one this week from a guy who was interested in climbing out of credit card debt. And we asked Dr. Julianne Malveaux to weigh in. She gave us some sound advice so the call for questions still stands, and people can go to our blog and find out how to give us more.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now, for the uninitiated, what exactly can folks find on our blog, and I should mention that I love posting video.</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: Yeah.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And why should listeners who've never blogged before check it out.</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: Well, for a lot of the stories that we cover on the show, we continue that conversation online. We also have a daily roundup of headlines of news and issues that affect black life. And there are behind the scenes accounts from people who produce live segments that are heard on the show. But most importantly, it's a meeting place for our listeners to interact, to weigh in about the news of day and to tell us what they think of the show. And starting…</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And folks can be some harsh critics, let me tell you.</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: They definitely can, but we appreciate all the comments, good and bad.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Absolutely.</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: And in addition to the blog, we're going to be starting a newsletter. So it's All Things NEWS & NOTES sent to people's inboxes every day.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So how do folks sign up for the newsletter?</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: It's really, really simple actually. They can go to our blog, nprnewsandviews.org. You'll see a box at the top right of the page. Type in your e-mail address, hit submit and that's all there is to it, really.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: All right. Well, I expect everyone to sign up for the newsletter because it will be very exciting. Thanks, Geoff.</s>GEOFFREY BENNETT: Thank you.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Geoff Bennett is the Web producer for NEWS & NOTES. |
Senior Producer Deb Clark and Alex Chadwick read comments about our coverage of the Iraq War anniversary and Barack Obama's speech on race. | ALEX COHEN, host: This is DAY TO DAY from NPR News. I'm Alex Cohen.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: And I'm Alex Chadwick, and senior producer Deborah Clark(ph) is here to help sort through your letters from the last week or so. Deborah, welcome.</s>DEBORAH CLARK: Thank you, Alex. So we've had a lot of reaction to our coverage of the fifth anniversary of the war, the violence in Tibet, and of course Barack Obama's big speech on race this week.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: Okay, so where do we start?</s>DEBORAH CLARK: Well, I always like it when we get completely opposite reactions to things. It just shows how different everyone is. Obama's speech is a case in point. Emily Robeson(ph) of Media, Pennsylvania wrote in to praise the substance of what he said. It has been a very long time, she writes, since a public figure has come out to speak so honestly and proactively about the issue of race in our country with an intent to open up dialogue and bring us together. This has been so desperately needed.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: But here's another letter you have from Susan Fredericks(ph) of Encino, California. She thought the speech dodged the main issue, in her mind. Quote: No one can deny Obama gives great speeches, but if he's such a great uniter, why did he choose to go to a segregated church in the first place? She goes on to say: Obama seems like someone who has studied how to manipulate people with words.</s>DEBORAH CLARK: We've also been doing a lot of coverage this week about the fifth anniversary of the start of the war in Iraq. On the actual anniversary, we began the program with excerpts from the president's speech, an interview with General David Petraeus, who's the commander of U.S. an coalition forces in Iraq, and a conversation with an Iraqi refugee who's now living in Washington, D.C. We asked her if she had supported the invasion of her country by U.S. troops.</s>Unidentified Woman (Iraqi Refugee): I was enthusiast, because Saddam was our enemy. For our family, Saddam was our enemy. I hate him. He killed my uncle. He was English teacher. He took my aunt to the prison because she was veiled. This was her crime. So how could I love Saddam?</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: So hearing that interview with the interview with General Petraeus irked Jason Hoden(ph) of Seattle, Washington. He thought our coverage very pro-war. Quote: That's when I changed the channel, he writes. This is pathetically unbalanced coverage, doing a great disservice to your listeners. You should be ashamed.</s>DEBORAH CLARK: We're sorry we lost Jason that day, especially since later in the program we did have a long interview with Marine Rudy Reyes. He's part of the upcoming HBO mini-series "Generation Kill." He's deployed once to Afghanistan, twice to Iraq, and now he's actually very critical of the war effort.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: But let me note as well that other listeners also wrote in about the General Petraeus interview, also pretty critical.</s>DEBORAH CLARK: Well, I'd like to end with this item, Alex. Remember your vacation last week?</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: I do, vaguely.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: Well, we called you up for a story we did about physical fitness as gauged by how many push-ups one can do.</s>MADELEINE BRAND: Okay, how many push-ups do you think you can do?</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: I'm not sure, actually.</s>MADELEINE BRAND: Well get down. Drop and give me 10.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: Ten, okay. Hold on just a second.</s>MADELEINE BRAND: Okay.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: Ready, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, 10. Okay.</s>DEBORAH CLARK: Steve Wideman(ph) of Grand Haven, Michigan wrote in to say that based on the speed, there was no way you were doing full push-ups. You must have only been doing half ones and then relying on momentum. So, Alex?</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: You know, Steve, you're absolutely correct, based on the radio time that you heard. But a producer here on this show, he thought you couldn't stand to hear my lengthy push-ups. They shortened it.</s>DEBORAH CLARK: I see, so real push-ups, fake radio production.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: One last thing, let's get our listeners' help on this. On Monday I'm planning to talk with Slate's Double-X Factor columnists, Emily Bazelon and Dahlia Lithwick. They write for this column, which is women writing about the news at Slate. We've heard a lot this month about marital infidelities in public. New York Governor Eliot Spitzer resigned after his high-profile dalliances with a call girl.</s>DEBORAH CLARK: And of course the man who succeeded him has already had to acknowledge marital infidelities. Here's now-Governor David Patterson shortly after being sworn in.</s>Governor DAVID PATTERSON (Democrat, New York): My fear was that at some point, just when things seemed to have settled down, that something about me might come out, and not only that, I was approached about it. If I denied it, then I'd be lying.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: So here's what the Double-X Factor is asking next week: Does Hillary Clinton now need to give the husband speech?</s>DEBORAH CLARK: So that's the question the Double-X Factor will consider Monday. We'd love to hear your views as well. Write to us at npr.org, DAY TO DAY, and put Hillary in the subject line.</s>ALEX CHADWICK, host: Deborah Clark, thank you.</s>DEBORAH CLARK: Carry on. |
Mark Jordan Legan discusses what the critics are saying about this week's new movies. Up for review: The Grand, Drillbit Taylor and Shutter. | ALEX COHEN, host: This weekend is Easter, making today Good Friday, and here at DAY TO DAY, we try to make every Friday good by bringing you the latest on the new movie releases. This weekend's films include poker and power tools. Here's Mark Jordan Legan with Slate's Summary Judgment.</s>MARK JORDAN LEGAN: Well, I guess it was just a matter of time until someone made a mockumentary on poker. Televised poker tournaments are, for some inexplicable reason, incredibly popular. So in the spirit of such improv comedies as "Waiting for Guffman" and "This is Spinal Tap," everyone from Jason Alexander to Ray Romano to Woody Harrelson appear in "The Grand," where six players compete in a high-stakes tournament.</s>MARK JORDAN LEGAN: Unidentified Man #1 (Actor): (As character) I make it a point to know my employees just like Grandpa Lucky did.</s>MARK JORDAN LEGAN: Unidentified Man #2 (Actor): (As character) I want to make a point to know this one for sure.</s>MARK JORDAN LEGAN: Unidentified Man #3 (Actor): (As character) Hey, Toni. How long you been working here?</s>Ms. SHANNON ELIZABETH (Actress): (As Toni): Nine years. We were married.</s>MARK JORDAN LEGAN: Critics pretty much say deal me in. New York Magazine chuckles: The setting is remarkably fertile, and the actors are a treat. TV Guide promises plenty of sharply funny moments, and the Hollywood Reporter says what "The Grand" lacks in originality it more than makes up for with its high percentage of funny moments.</s>MARK JORDAN LEGAN: And it almost wouldn't be a Friday without some American remake of an Asian horror film. This time around the 2004 hit shocker from Thailand, "Shutter," has been remade and is opening in wide release. The plot revolves around a pair of newlyweds who after a tragic accident see evidence of a supernatural world in their photos. They got off easy. In all my honeymoon photos all I see is that stupid haircut I got in Verona.</s>MARK JORDAN LEGAN: Unidentified Man #4 (Actor): (As character) That's me in the photo. It was taken after my mother had passed away.</s>MARK JORDAN LEGAN: Unidentified Woman #1 (Actress): (As character) But that's just one picture.</s>MARK JORDAN LEGAN: Unidentified Man #4: (As character) Come on, I want to show you something.</s>MARK JORDAN LEGAN: Really? You want to show us something? It can't be the reviews, because "Shutter" was not made available to the critics for any advance screenings. Hmm, the studios must have seen bad reviews in the publicity stills.</s>MARK JORDAN LEGAN: And the Seth Rogan comedy machine just keeps on chugging along. This time Rogan is the co-writer of the raucous comedy "Drillbit Taylor," where Owen Wilson plays a soldier of fortune down on his luck, so down on his luck that he agrees to be a bodyguard to three teenage geeks trying to survive freshman year in high school.</s>Mr. OWEN WILSON (Actor): (As DrillBit Taylor) Well, first I'm going to need some supplies. I want to go in and get...</s>Mr. OWEN WILSON (Actor): Unidentified Man #5 (Actor): (As character) Like numchucks?</s>Mr. OWEN WILSON (Actor): (As Taylor) Maybe, but a lot of stuff I'll just get from just what's laying around the house. You'd be surprised. Anything can be turned into a weapon of mayhem or destruction.</s>Mr. OWEN WILSON (Actor): Unidentified Man #6 (Actor): (As character) Even a puppy?</s>Mr. OWEN WILSON (Actor): (As Taylor) Especially a puppy.</s>MARK JORDAN LEGAN: The critics feel a bit let down by Drillbit. The Washington Post shrugs: Wilson phones it in, a by-the-numbers teen comedy. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer simply calls it a mess, and USA Today finds Drillbit Taylor as clunky and humorless as its title.</s>MARK JORDAN LEGAN: Hey, if you don't like the movie, fine, but don't mess with the title. That one tested better than Needle-Nose Pliers Benson or Phillips Screwdriver Phillips. See actually, Drillbit reminds me of some of the cool nicknames we have around here at DAY TO DAY. Just ask Crescent Wrench Chadwick or Circular Saw Cohen.</s>ALEX COHEN, host: Mark Jordan Legan - wait, make that Duct Tape Jordan Legan - is a writer living in Los Angeles. |
The U.S. naval base at Port Chicago, Calif., went up in flames after a munitions explosion during World War II. Most of the 320 men who died were black Americans. Today, the site may become a part of the national parks system. Rep. George Miller (D-CA), who is working to preserve the site, explains its significance. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: From NPR News, this is NEWS & NOTES. I'm Farai Chideya.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Last weekend, a large crowd gathered at Port Chicago in Northern California. They came to honor the 320 U.S. sailors who died there in ammunitions explosion during World War II. The vast majority of those casualties were African-American. In addition, 50 African-American men were court-martialed in the days that followed the explosion. They were charged with mutiny because they refused to load any more ammunitions. The incident itself and the racial tension that followed have largely faded from public memory. But this week, a bill was introduced in Congress that would change that. The measure would give a portion of Port Chicago a national park status. It was brought by Democrat George Miller of California.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Congressman, welcome.</s>Representative GEORGE MILLER (Democrat, California): Thank you.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So we're going to talk more about the explosion itself in a moment. But why did you decide to throw your weight behind this bill and now?</s>Representative GEORGE MILLER (Democrat, California): Well, I think it's almost the (unintelligible) bill to enhance the memorial. It's growing - it's drawing more and more attention. People are becoming aware of the sense of it in American history, certainly as people review the home front and what was taking place. In the United States, here was this massive explosion that very few people know about that changed the history of, certainly, of the Navy and of the country.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So as I understand it, there's already a monument on the site commemorating those who died. What would your measure add?</s>Representative GEORGE MILLER (Democrat, California): Well, we would - we want to provide for better accessibility to the site. It was part of the Naval Weapons Station that has been closed down. And as that is transferred for public use, we would like to make sure that we have the ability to provide for visitor services to the memorial, general access to the memorial, with all of it that's very difficult today. But we think that the increased interest in the site now justify that.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: The men that were court-martialed in the days that followed the explosion, is there any will, is there any desire to have them exonerated posthumously?</s>Representative GEORGE MILLER (Democrat, California): Well, we've have that discussion and I think that we will probably make a decision about that, you know, in the coming months. We did work on the pardon and successfully got the pardon for Freddie Meeks, who was surviving at the time. I had the chance to meet with him and to talk to one or two others. People felt that, at that time, his pardon was symbolic of the rest of the individuals. But there has been people who wanted to go forth and to see whether or not we could get a pardon for the rest of them posthumously, recognizing their role in history.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Why, specifically, did you get involved? What's in your heart that makes this important to you?</s>Representative GEORGE MILLER (Democrat, California): Well, this is an event that took place now in my congressional district, not very far from my home. I heard about it as a child. I only heard about it as people discuss the awe, the explosion, and the size of the explosion, and what happened in the community as a result of the explosion in terms of how people responded to it.</s>Representative GEORGE MILLER (Democrat, California): Never did I hear until I was in Congress many, many years later that this was an explosion that killed a significant number of people, these 320 sailors. But it were then an incredible story with huge racial overtones about what happened after the explosion, why those men might have been killed, what situation they were put in. And then later, the sailors who refused to go back to work before they could be assured that there were safety procedures in place and therefore they were prosecuted. And that part of the story was never part of the general discussion as the history of the explosion in the community where I've lived in Martinez, next door to Port Chicago.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, Congressman Miller, thanks so much for your time.</s>Representative GEORGE MILLER (Democrat, California): Thank you.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: That was Congressman George Miller of California. He introduced a bill this week that would turn much of Port Chicago into a national park. |
The discussion about the disaster at Port Chicago continues with historian Robert Allen, author of the book The Port Chicago Mutiny: The Story of the Largest Mass Mutiny Trial in U.S. Naval History. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: For the history behind the tragedy of Port Chicago, we turn to Robert Allen. He authored a book call "The Port Chicago Mutiny."</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Professor, welcome.</s>Professor ROBERT ALLEN (Author, "The Port Chicago Mutiny"): I'm glad to join you.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: In some ways, this is a story about military segregation. And how did that affect the working conditions before the explosion and during the mutiny?</s>Professor ROBERT ALLEN (Author, "The Port Chicago Mutiny"): Well, the conditions there were really terrible. They - keep in mind that this was a segregated base; only African-Americans were assigned to loading the ammunition. No African-American could become an officer. All of the officers are white. And so it's the classic segregated situation there as it was at other military bases at the time.</s>Professor ROBERT ALLEN (Author, "The Port Chicago Mutiny"): And the sailors who had been trained - and these sailors were young, we're talking about 17, 18, 19 years of age - teenagers, basically - had no training in handling ammunition. Even though they had been trained at Great Lakes Naval Training Station, they were not given any training in handling ammunition, and neither were the officers. It was a sort of catch-us-catch-can, literally, unfortunately, a situation there where the men were simply expected to learn from watching others.</s>Professor ROBERT ALLEN (Author, "The Port Chicago Mutiny"): So you had the situation then of racial discrimination. Only African-Americans were assigned to this dangerous and backbreaking work. And at the same time, there was improper or lack of, entirely, training. And the behavior of the officers contributed to the problem.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: What do you mean by that?</s>Professor ROBERT ALLEN (Author, "The Port Chicago Mutiny"): Well, the officers forced the black working divisions there to race against each other in loading ammunition. They encouraged competition and racing. And the officers actually bet on the outcome. And this is - it was totally insane because, of course, it contributed then to the danger of the work and the likelihood of a disaster there.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So what exactly happened with the explosion?</s>Professor ROBERT ALLEN (Author, "The Port Chicago Mutiny"): Well, it was the night of July 17, 1944, and they were loading two ships there at the base. One was almost fully loaded with some 5,000 tons of high explosives. And at about 10:18 that night - they worked around the clock, by the way, three shifts. And at 10:18 that night, something went wrong. And there was a terrible explosion as the ship that was fully loaded blew up like one gigantic bomb.</s>Professor ROBERT ALLEN (Author, "The Port Chicago Mutiny"): In fact, it was the biggest human-made explosion up until that time. And the only thing that would be larger would be the atomic bomb. Anyway, this destroyed, of course, the ships, the base. Three hundred and twenty men were killed, most of them African-Americans, 202 of them African-American. And no one who was close enough to see the precise cause lived to tell about it because they were all killed.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: How did the survivors of this tragedy, where 320 sailors were killed, react afterwards?</s>Professor ROBERT ALLEN (Author, "The Port Chicago Mutiny"): They were horrified. They were traumatized. They were in a state of shock. They had lost - all of them had lost, of course, friends in the disaster. And then in the aftermath of this terrible tragedy, the survivors were required to go out and pick up the remains, which were literally bits and pieces of their friends, whatever could be found. Very few bodies were found intact. The ships were literally vaporized. And the - so, it was a horrible situation afterwards to be working in the cleanup, in addition to the trauma of the explosion itself. And the men never knew what was the cause - that is the survivors never knew what was the cause of the explosion; they were not told anything by the officers. They were just left in a state of trauma. There was, of course, no counseling or anything like that.</s>Professor ROBERT ALLEN (Author, "The Port Chicago Mutiny"): For several days after the explosion, not knowing what had happened, not knowing what would happen to them, hoping that maybe there would be a change of conditions there at the base in terms of the officers and the working conditions and so on. But none of that would happen. Instead, they would be - ordered to go back to work, loading ammunition again under the same officers and the same conditions.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So what did they do?</s>Professor ROBERT ALLEN (Author, "The Port Chicago Mutiny"): Some of them like Joe Small, who was accused of being the ringleader of the so-called mutiny and, basically, made up his own mind that he was not going back to work under those conditions. Many of the others did not actually make a real - a conscious decision there, but they were in such a state that when the work stoppage took place everybody departed it. And…</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now the Navy reacted quite severely what happened in that day.</s>Professor ROBERT ALLEN (Author, "The Port Chicago Mutiny"): The Navy - the reaction was just out of all proportion. The - there was no - that was a work stoppage. It was a peaceful protest. There was no violence. There was no - nothing of that sort. And the men obeyed all of the orders.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So what happened in the trial?</s>Professor ROBERT ALLEN (Author, "The Port Chicago Mutiny"): Well, the trial was a mockery. They were tried, you know, en masse. The defense, who - had military shrouds, so they did not have (unintelligible) and attorneys, they had military attorneys who is themselves, of course, under the control of the military. Thurgood Marshall was able to observe the trial, but not to participate as a civilian.</s>Professor ROBERT ALLEN (Author, "The Port Chicago Mutiny"): And the men(ph) were basically railroaded. All of them were found guilty of mutiny after only 80 minutes of deliberation by the court, which means, as Thurgood Marshall pointed out, about a minute and a half of deliberation (unintelligible).</s>Professor ROBERT ALLEN (Author, "The Port Chicago Mutiny"): So that tells you something about the quality and the court-martial proceedings. So basically, the men were railroaded and scapegoated by the conditions that the Navy allowed to exist at that base.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: What was their sentence?</s>Professor ROBERT ALLEN (Author, "The Port Chicago Mutiny"): They were, ultimately, they did - all sentenced to 15 years of hard labor, initially. Subsequently, some of the sentences were reduced because there was a real public expression of outrage. I found in the files, literally, hundreds of letters, thousands of names on petition from people all over the country, (unintelligible), saying that these mutiny convictions were outrageous. And also asking why is it that only black men were being assigned to doing this work. And there was this public campaign, public pressure, I think, that really compelled the Navy to begin the process of desegregation, introducing white troops, white sailors to do the work of loading ammunitions. But later on, (unintelligible) beginning to desegregate the training facilities and the ship as well.</s>Professor ROBERT ALLEN (Author, "The Port Chicago Mutiny"): This is what comes out and that, the terrible situation there, the beginning of the process of desegregation in the U.S. Navy.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Robert Allen, thank you so much.</s>Professor ROBERT ALLEN (Author, "The Port Chicago Mutiny"): Thank you.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Robert Allen is a professor of African-American and Ethnic Studies at the University of California, Berkeley. He's also the author of "The Port Chicago Mutiny," the story of the largest mass mutiny trial in U.S. naval history. |
Earl White is a Kansas-born priest of the African religion called Ifa. He talks about the origin and philosophies of Ifa and his personal journey in the faith. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And now, from teaching religion to the practice of faith. Religions like voodoo and Santeria got a bad rap in America, especially for their rituals and ceremonies that may look strange to the uninitiated. But those faiths have rich histories that stretch back all the way to Africa. They spring in part from an ancient belief system called Ifa, based in Nigeria. When enslaved Africans came West, many mixed Ifa with Christianity in order to mask and preserve their traditional faith.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now some black Americans are reconnecting with African religions like Ifa. Earl White is a Kansas native who became an Ifa priest about eight years ago. His name in the Ifa faith is Babalawo Fa'Lokun Fashegun(ph). And he's with me now in our NPR West studio. Welcome.</s>Mr. EARL WHITE (Priest, Ifa Faith): Thank you.</s>Mr. EARL WHITE (Priest, Ifa Faith): Alasya(ph)means peace and health.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Oh.</s>Mr. EARL WHITE (Priest, Ifa Faith): So I greet you with alasya.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Thank you very much.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So let me ask you about your name, your priestly name.</s>Mr. EARL WHITE (Priest, Ifa Faith): Fa'Lokun - the first name is Fa'Lokun; the second name is Fa'Shegun. When you see Fa, in the Ifa religion that relates to Ifa. Olokun(ph) is the ocean. So when you see Fa'Lokun, it means that - it says that Ifa is as deep as the ocean, the wisdom of Ifa is as deep as the ocean. It's also saying in some respects that this is a person who took Ifa from Africa across the ocean. Fa'Shegun - Shegun means victory. So when we say Fa'Shegun it's saying that Ifa will give me victory in my life over those things that I need to overcome, whether they're mental, physical or spiritual.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: You seemed very centered in you faith, but there was a time when you were a practicing Christian. How did you make the transition and why?</s>Mr. EARL WHITE (Priest, Ifa Faith): As a child, my family - my mother's father was a Pentecostal minister. And as a young child, I had many questions about religion and spirituality, and there was always this question of Africa. And growing up in the - well, in the African-American community, we always heard negative things about Africa. So from the time - I can remember - 6, 7 years old - there was this quest that I was on to find out more about my African culture. And Ifa - I began to study from - I'd say the time I was 10 years old.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: When you walk into a room full of strangers, whether it's a work context, a cocktail party and someone asks you about religion or it comes up, what do you tell them about Ifa? What do you tell them about what you believe, how you practice?</s>Mr. EARL WHITE (Priest, Ifa Faith): Well, the first thing I do to break the ice is I always make it very clear that we have a belief in one God, and the God we call Olodumare. Underneath Olodumare, we have the Orishas, which are forces in nature. So they would relate to angels. And we also have a belief in ancestors, a very strong part in all African traditions. Ancestor reverence is very strong, and we also practice that as well.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So when you practice or worship, how do you do it? And perhaps - you brought some objects into the studio. Perhaps you can visually explain what they are and how they're used.</s>Mr. EARL WHITE (Priest, Ifa Faith): Okay. One of them - the main things in Ifa is that we have - when someone is born - we believe that everyone has their own destiny, which we call Ori. And when a child is born, there's a ceremony called the Esentaye(ph). It means you step into the universe. And divination is a big part - plays a big part in Ifa. We call it Dafa. It means to throw, cast Ifa.</s>Mr. EARL WHITE (Priest, Ifa Faith): There's a tray that I have here. It's a circular tray and I have a small one that we use for traveling. The tray is a - it's a divination tray. And when the child is born, it's three to seven days after his birth, what we're trying to figure out is what the child brings to the earth, good or bad. And we use the divination to figure that out. So that's a big, big part of that. And this tray is called the opon Ifa.</s>Mr. EARL WHITE (Priest, Ifa Faith): Now, what happens is in divination, we make markings on the tray that gives us a particular scripture what we call the Odu. A lot of people don't know that Ifa has scripture. We call it the Odu Ifa. And what happens is when we're doing the divination, we come up with eight markings, which give us the scripture and it's basically giving the - I use the - an astrology sign for the child. It's a blueprint of his life, of their history in the world.</s>Mr. EARL WHITE (Priest, Ifa Faith): There's many forms of divination. These are the major forms and these are only done by what's called a babalawo. Baba is father, awo means secret, Father of the Secrets. If it's a female, it's Iyanifa. Iya means mother of Ifa.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Let me stop you for one second. You are a babalawo.</s>Mr. EARL WHITE (Priest, Ifa Faith): Yes.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: What did you have to do to reach that point in your practice?</s>Mr. EARL WHITE (Priest, Ifa Faith): Well, the Orishas choose you. You don't choose them. We always - that's something that's known and it's a tradition and I have a lot of stories about that. But on the journey, the certain levels of initiation that you go through, and if it's chosen for your in divination, your elder or a Babalawo or your Iyanifa will do the divination for you. And we have to see if the priesthood is on your past. It's not on everyone's past. It happened to be on my past. And I had to go to Africa and I was initiated there. And it was a - for a babalawo, it's a seven-day ritual that's done. And some of the things I can't speak about, this part of awo, the mystery and the secret.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Do you ever feel that there's a pressure on you to remain in the background or do other practitioners feel that they may not be able to converse with people of other faiths and have them understand?</s>Mr. EARL WHITE (Priest, Ifa Faith): Yes. I - in my own personal experience, I don't hide anything. I'm very proud of this tradition. It's basically saved my life.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: What do you mean by that?</s>Mr. EARL WHITE (Priest, Ifa Faith): Well, there was a time when I was going with a lot anger issues. And we have an Orisha, an Ifa called Ogun(ph). Ogun represents the warrior side of nature, the spirit of iron. And as a child, I had all this anger and I got into a lot fight. I found myself being in situations where I could have possibly -well, I had been shot at. I've had guns put on me. And as I got involved in the tradition, I was receiving readings trying to figure out what was going on in my life. And the priests that were reading me were telling me that I'm a child of Ogun, which explained a lot of the aggression that I had, the anger that I had. But it wasn't channeled properly.</s>Mr. EARL WHITE (Priest, Ifa Faith): It's not saying that Ogun is an aggressive Orisha, but that energy is hot and it represents war. And if it's out of balance, it can become negative. When it's in balance, it's very positive. So this helped me deal with a lot of my anger issues and issues around pain, of growing up and, you know, not having a father in my life. And also I've been involved in the martial arts for over 30 years. So that was another way that Ogun was appeared to me through the martial arts and helped heal some of those wounds and some of the anger that I had in growing up as a child.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, thank you so much for joining us.</s>Mr. EARL WHITE (Priest, Ifa Faith): Thank you.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Earl White is a babalawo, or priest, of the Ifa religion. He's also a kung fu master who teaches in Los Angeles. You can see a video of Earl showing me some of the religious objects from his faith and discussing Ifa. Just go to our Web site, nprnews¬es.org.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And remember that you're an integral part of what we do online and on air. Be sure to tell us what you thought of this story and our religion series. And remember we have plenty of chances for you to ask questions of our experts. |
Doctors often advise men facing surgery for prostate cancer that a full recovery is the norm. As many learn, it's not true. A recent study shows that among men who reported good sex lives before treatment, fewer than half said they were able to achieve normal erections two years after surgery. Tara Parker-Pope, editor, New York Times Well blog Dr. Jason Engel, clinical associate professor and director of urologic robotic surgery, George Washington University Hospital | NEAL CONAN, host: This is TALK OF THE NATION. I'm Neal Conan in Washington. And we want to warn those of you with children in earshot that we're going to conduct an adult conversation about treatment for prostate cancer that will include frank discussion of bodily functions.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Every year, more than 240,000 men get the sobering diagnosis of prostate cancer. Then many get good news. Treatment is both effective and safe. In fact, they're told over 90 percent enjoy a normal sex life afterwards. New research confirms what too many patients already knew: After surgery and radiation treatment, for many sex will never be normal.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that for those who reported good sex lives before cancer, fewer than half could achieve normal erections two years afterwards. The study also shows how doctors can better predict the outcome by using a variety of factors, including a patient's age, the extent of his cancer, and the type of treatment.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Prostate patients, call and tell us about your life after treatment. Our phone number is 800-989-8255. Email talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation at our website - that's at npr.org - and click on TALK OF THE NATION. Later in the program, we'll talk with TV journalist Angela Kocherga about her experience covering the border drug wars.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: But first, life after prostate cancer treatment. Tara Parker-Pope is the editor of the Well blog at the New York Times. She's written several pieces about prostate cancer treatment and joins us now from a studio in Philadelphia. Nice to have you back.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: Thanks for having me.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And you wrote in one of your pieces: Open discussion of sobering statistics is rare, partly because doctors worry that a man might decide to forego treatment rather than risk his sex life.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: It's true, and I think that what happens, though, the consequence of that is that men are really surprised and depressed and shocked by what happens after treatment. And you know, I think it's time that the medical establishment started treating men as grown-ups, and giving them the option to have all the information.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: And what men say consistently on my blog and, you know, in emails is that, if I had known what to expect, it just would have been easier. I probably would have made the same decision, but I feel like I should have at least been told what my life was going to be like in the next couple years.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And Tara Parker-Pope, the decision, of course, it's not just about your sex life, it's about your life.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: Well, it is your whole life. I mean, there is a recovery process to being treated for prostate cancer. Some men have incontinence issues after prostate cancer. But I also think part of the issue here is that we tend to act as if a normal, healthy sex life is not really an important factor in a person's overall health and well-being.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: And you hear this a lot, particularly from women, I must say. They say: Oh, I just want my husband to survive. I just want him alive. It doesn't really matter. But it does matter. I mean, people need to feel like, you know, a whole, you know, functioning human being. And I think that we saw this with women and breast cancer, in that women were being given radical mastectomies at just a crazy rate.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: And women said no, this is not acceptable. Our breasts are important. And there was a lot of research and interest in doing less invasive treatment for those women. And this is a very similar issue, I think.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Similar yet - and similar because the, well, the prognosis for breast cancer is more dire than for prostate cancer.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: Not always. It depends on - you know, if you're diagnosed at the early stages, women have a very good outcome. But there was certainly a time when women were given a mastectomy without any other consideration for what their personal situation was.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: And I think the same is true with prostate cancer. You know, there are certainly men who should be treated, and I think that's just - you know, that is a very thorny discussion with prostate cancer because we really don't know all the time if the men that are being treated should be treated.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: You know, there are certain cases that are obvious that the men should be treated, and there's even cases where it's pretty - it's a pretty easy decision not to treat. But there's a whole lot of men in the middle, and those men have the most difficult choices.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: And I think those are the men who often aren't given all the information because, you know, prostate cancer is a business as well, and there are people - doctors and radiation centers - competing for their business. And it's - it can often be very difficult for a man to get - you know - really, a clear picture of what his options are and what he should do.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: You wrote about one of them, Paul Nelson(ph) of New Canaan, Connecticut. Tell us about him.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: You'll have to remind me: Is he the wine - he's, no, tell me about Paul Nelson.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: He was - learned he had prostate cancer at the age of 46 and opted for robotic prostotectomy - I don't know if I'm pronouncing that correctly - with a famous New York surgeon who played down the worries of erectile dysfunction.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: Yeah, I'm sorry. I've talked to so many men about this since the story. I just - there's so many that have stories to tell. And what's interesting about Paul Nelson is that he - you know, he sat down with a doctor, a very respected surgeon, who gave him very promising statistics: 98 percent of men do fine after surgery.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: And he went in and had surgery, and he wasn't fine. He had erectile function problems after surgery, as the majority of men will have, and when he tried to talk to his surgeon about it, you know, the response was: Well, you must just have something. You know, it's an anxiety issue. You've got your own set of problems. And he was kind of abandoned by this surgeon.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: He decided to start, you know, basically a support group for men to talk about these issues because, as he discovered, that most men - there were more men like him than those that the doctor was talking about, that 98 percent success rate - which when you really get behind the numbers, what you learn is that that's a very specific, select group of patients under a very sort of specific set of circumstances.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: And while that is real - those are real data, those aren't data that apply to the average man who's diagnosed with prostate cancer.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, we want to hear from those of you who have undergone treatment for prostate cancer, and talk about what your life has been afterwards. Give us a call, 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. But first, we'll talk with Dr. Jason Engel, director of urologic robotic surgery at George Washington University Hospital here in Washington. And he joins us here in Studio 3A. Nice to have you with us today.</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: Nice to be here.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And you're a prostate cancer surgeon. What do you tell your patients?</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: I'm almost ashamed to say I'm a prostate cancer surgeon after that. It sounds like I'm one of the bad guys. But I do agree with Tara in the sense that those interactions with the surgeon and the patient, they're very different - it's a different interaction based on each - different situation.</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: My approach, I think, has been different than probably many of the patients that have called Tara and told them her story, in the sense that the recent article in JAMA that came out, that outlined some of the outcomes and woke people up as to the reality after prostate cancer treatments in general, are things that I have been telling my patients for years, really.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So this is not really news, what was in JAMA.</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: It's not really news to the majority of urologists. And I would say that we have to really differentiate between the urologist that takes the approach of saying, I'm going to be the one following you later, I'm going to be the one helping you later and looking you in the face later and helping you through this time; from places, maybe larger centers, that have a different model, where patients are going to travel to them, not necessarily see them again. And the patient also is looking for a different thing from that surgeon. They're expecting better outcomes, in a large part.</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: So although I agree with Tara, with much of what she's saying, it's not fully one-sided in the sense that although certainly this is a business, and under certain circumstances maybe they're worried about losing a patient if they're honest about what they're going to go through afterwards, sometimes it's the patient, also, that's seeking that type of advice, or looking for that certain center where they have that level of confidence in them such that they receive that answer - or perceive that answer.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So there are large facilities that do these surgeries a lot, and those are the places that are often recommended, and somebody might travel to New York City, for example, and get the surgery there.</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: Yeah, and I think that has a lot to do with Tara's experience. You know, what I do - you asked me about my approach. I have a different approach. I will generally counsel the patient and his partner for well over an hour, sometimes two hours. I won't operate on anybody where the partner's not present.</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: And I make it very clear that erectile dysfunction is not going to be something that might happen to you. Regardless of whether you have radiation or surgery, it's something that is going to be part of the recovery of this, and it's all about management of expectation.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's see if we can get a caller in on the conversation, and let's go to Ray(ph), Ray's on the line with us from Eagle River in Wisconsin.</s>RAY: Hello?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Hi, Ray, you're on the air, go ahead, please.</s>RAY: Yes, I had another - I had prostate cancer. I had a 10.55 PSA, which is dangerously high. I had three choices: I could get the radiation, I could have it cut out, or I could have my prostate frozen. That's called cryotherapy. It's a therapy that's been out for at least five-plus years. It's been very successful, very little side effects biophysically, in relation to a lot of other things.</s>RAY: But yes, my sex life did change. I was fully informed of the odds of me having a functional physical relationship afterwards, the variations, because of my PSA, the degree on the operation and how it was performed. So my surgeon was very good and very honest with me.</s>RAY: And my fiancee was sitting in with us all the time. He wanted it – he approached this on a partnership level. I felt he looked at the whole gamut of my feelings and everything else. He didn't guarantee anything except the fact that I would have a good chance of not having the prostate cancer spread and - even though it was that serious.</s>RAY: And so, yeah, he treated me very, very, extremely well. He was very informational, and he was very honest. Not once did I feel like I was being railroaded, or I wasn't given good information. It was an amazing experience to me and actually, it's a miracle because I've had three check-ups now, my PSA is very low, extremely low, miracle-ly low, and I have other things I can do in life.</s>RAY: But yeah, I am dealing with some of these sexual things and stuff - who wouldn't? - the physical and the mental here and there. But I'm 60. You know, I have a chance to live for another 10, 20 years, possibly, and there's other things in life. So - but I do understand how this would affect people more and more in different ways and etc., etc., but each person has to look at what's important to them, and only they can make that decision.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Obviously...</s>RAY: All in all - but all in all, the treatment, the honesty, the surgeon I had, it's a miracle I had this person.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Tara Parker-Pope, if more people got the information that Ray got, they would not be surprised and disappointed, even crushed by what happens afterwards.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: Well, I think it's a really good example of what we're talking about, that this really is an issue of communication. And I don't want to give anybody the impression that I think these surgeons are bad people. I mean, 33,000 men die each year of prostate cancer. You know, it's a serious disease, and these surgeons do save lives, certainly.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: It's an issue of communication. It's an issue of how practices are set up. Often a surgeon - it's not like Dr. Engel's practice, where he sees the patient after the surgery. Some of these patients see their surgeon for 15 or 20 minutes - and that's it; that is truly it. They move on after the surgery and see somebody else.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: So I think this is an issue of communication. I mean, there are data showing that most men are happy with their choice. But there are a large percentage of men who just wish they'd had more information.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking about the reality of life after prostate surgery. Prostate patients, call and tell us about your life after treatment, 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. Stay with us. I'm Neal Conan. It's the TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: This is TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. I'm Neal Conan. For years, many men with prostate cancer heard similar stories from surgeons: Treatment is possible; risks and side effects are few. Research published last month shows that too often, doctors gloss over the likelihood of side effects, including sexual dysfunction and incontinence.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Many patients say they would make the same decisions about surgery but would have been better prepared had they known that a high percentage of men suffer side effects. So prostate patients, call and tell us about your life after treatment, 800-989-8255. Email talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Our guests are Tara Parker-Pope, she edits the New York Times' Well blog, and wrote two pieces for the paper on life after prostate surgery. You can find links to those at npr.org. Again, just click on TALK OF THE NATION. Also with us, Dr. Jason Engel, clinical associate professor, and director of urologic robotic surgery, at George Washington University Hospital.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And Dr. Engel, I wanted to ask you: The predicting effect, with the patient's age, if you factor that in, the type of cancer that they have - according to the JAMA article, you can predict much more accurately what their experience afterward is going to be like.</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: Yeah, I couldn't really agree with that more. Anyone who does a lot of this - whether it's radiation or surgery - will tell you, really, what's stated in this paper. This is a great paper and patients all - it should be part of everyone's educational process, to see this.</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: What it's basically stating is that there are things other than, for instance, the skill of the surgeon and even the experience level of the surgeon - both, clearly, important - that are probably more important in being able to say whether you will get your erections back. And the thing that you saw in every parameter in the paper was that their erections beforehand were by far the biggest predictor of how well they would do after.</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: And I would add to that, something they couldn't measure in this paper that I've said for a long time - which is, really, the patient's motivation, the patient's partner's motivation, their relationship and how sexually active they were before surgery, very much are stronger indicators than some of the biological or surgical things we can offer them.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And what - Tara Parker-Pope was mentioning earlier the different types of prostate cancers. Again, there are some that are very aggressive and that must be dealt with somehow. There are others that you're going to die with and not from.</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: Absolutely. Where that plays into this discussion - and it is very similar to breast cancer in that regard, in that they also have a wide spectrum; some are less aggressive, some more. These days, an important discussion to have with a patient is whether to be treated at all - that was in the editorial of this paper - or not.</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: Generally, if a patient goes out to say OK, I understand I'm likely to be cured, so what I'm going to focus mostly on is minimization of side effects, they tend to gravitate to places that say well, I can provide that for you 96 percent of the time.</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: But if they had this type of information in front of them, as I give to my patients, they may think twice about that. They may be willing to wait to be treated, and follow what we call an expectant management protocol. Not right for everybody, but probably right for more patients than use it right now.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's go to Craig(ph), Craig on the line with us from Phoenix.</s>CRAIG: Yes, the reason I was calling is, I just recently was also diagnosed with prostate cancer at 5.7 and a Stage 2. But once -upon doing my own research - because I didn't feel I was really getting research on incontinence and impotence - that I decided to wait. And so I sort of challenged my doctor, and he agreed to do a process by which I periodically go in, get retested, potentially another biopsy.</s>CRAIG: But quality of life is incredibly important to me. And that means, you know, a full life, and so I have decided to back off. Now, two things happened real quickly. Number one, I recognized when I was first told, the fear of just hearing the word - you have cancer - and it was like my immediate reaction was, get it out of my body.</s>CRAIG: But then as I started doing my research, I began to say, wait a minute, I need to slow down here because there's lots of things that need to be considered.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Tara Parker-Pope, that initial reaction, that's everybody's reaction. Cancer is a pretty nasty word.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: Exactly, and I think this caller makes such an important point about prostate cancer. I mean, it is hard to hear the words "you have cancer," and sometimes you do have to act very quickly, depending on the type of cancer you have. But prostate cancer is different, and Dr. Engel can talk about this. You are not on a deadline. You are not super-rushed. You have time to take a deep breath. You have time to get more than one opinion, to get a lot of information.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: You don't have to panic at that moment. You have time to gather information and to get a second, third or fourth opinion, and make the decision that's right for you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Craig, good luck.</s>CRAIG: Thank you very much.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's see if we can go next to - this is Jason(ph), Jason with us from Cheyenne, Wyoming.</s>JASON: Hi, I'm actually a family doc in Cheyenne, and I have had a prostotectomy. I was diagnosed at age 46 with a prostate cancer that, you know, there was some question on whether or not to do waitful watching or not. I was certainly aware of complications, and did an extensive search of literature. But at the time, it was very difficult to find the kinds of conclusions that are seen -evidenced in the current JAMA article.</s>JASON: One of the things that colored my decision to go ahead and be treated was the experience of taking care of people who had already had metastases to the bone, and taking care of them in hospice situations. And that might have made me move where I might not have otherwise moved, when I made my decision.</s>JASON: But in fact, what I had was an aggressive form because it had gone from being entirely within the gland to extending to the surgical border beyond the gland within a period of 30 days, from the time of biopsy to removal. Yes, I've had incontinence, and I think incontinence and erectile problems are inextricably interrelated, and people sometimes don't understand that.</s>JASON: But if I had to make the decision all over again, I would despite the fact that physically, I felt like I had aged 20 years overnight.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I'm just seeing Dr. Engel nod his head in agreement with what you've been saying.</s>JASON: I think this program - the one fear I have about it is that it should not scare people off from getting diagnosed or treated. And these decisions have to be made with the realistic understanding that the consequence of treatment has to be weighed against the consequence of not treating it. And that's an incredibly individualized and personalized decision that has to be made.</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: This is always the danger. I had brought up that notion, of saying hey, we know about what was in this article and some of these outcome - this outcome data. The problem is, is it's so often that we see the backlash from something like this. Patients with more serious prostate cancers will then tend to say, I'm not going to be treated at all; or, I'm going to do something that is probably less appropriate.</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: These types of data oftentimes promote patients not to be treated, and that will come back to burn some people. So it's wise to understand what you're getting into. It's wise to challenge the doctor and to think about, am I a candidate for not being treated? - as the one caller. On the flipside, it's probably better to take an approach - if treatment is required, at least to go into it fully with a realistic expectation.</s>JASON: Because I can draw on my own experience, there's a certain level of empathy from - I can extend to those who I initially diagnosed as being likely as having prostate cancer - I tend to have them see a urologist that I would trust for myself or any member of my own family. And I tell them: If you're uncomfortable with it, ask any questions, get a second opinion; get a third opinion, if you need.</s>JASON: Some of them have sought fourth and fifth opinions. But the one thing that has come back is, they have always re-contacted me afterwards and said, you know, here's what my decision is, and I really appreciate the time taken to allow me to have options and make an important choice without anyone candy-coating anything.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, Tara Parker-Pope, one of the problems you presented in your piece is that time is not provided in too many cases.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: Well, it really depends on the doctor and the situation. And I think some men do seek out these very high-volume surgeons - as I think they should. I mean, I think by definition, Dr. Engel is a high-volume surgeon. But he has structured his practice in a way where he does more than just the surgery. He told me in my article that, you know, the hard part is really after surgery.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: The surgery is, you know, pretty straightforward. But it's the part after surgery, where you need to stick with the patient and really help his recovery, that is the challenge. And so many practices aren't set up that way. So I think that, you know, I was kind of surprised, to be honest. I mean, I know that when I go into a physician or a pediatrician appointment or whatever, it's pretty fast; you don't spend a lot of time with your doctor.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: But I would've thought on a big decision like this, you might spend 40 minutes, you know, something like that. And so many men said their visits were really brief, and I was surprised by that. But I think that's just the nature, sometimes, of medical practice in this country, of billing, of - you know, if you're a high-volume surgeon, you're really busy; you don't have tons of time. So I think, you know, in this desire to communicate better with men and create more information, there has to be a way for these practices to set up, you know, a better structure for men so they do get all the information, they get all their questions answered. Because that's usually what I hear - I hear the men who are unhappy.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: Dr. Engel is going to have a totally different set of patients that he deals with. But the people that end up calling a newspaper reporter, the people that end up posting on blogs, calling radio stations up - and these are people who have just had a different experience. And they weren't heard, they weren't listened to, and they didn't get their questions answered. And that's why they are reaching out to other places.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Jason, thanks very much for the call.</s>JASON: You're welcome, sir.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Here's email from Calvin: My life will never be as great as it was before surgery four years ago. Incontinence is a daily battle. As for intercourse, I now think I know what a eunuch must feel like - not much. I regret having the surgery.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And I wonder, is that the reaction you've gotten from some people, Tara Parker-Pope?</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: You know, it's very heartbreaking. I do get a lot of emails like that. I should say, I get a lot of emails from men who are also relieved and happy with their decision. So, you know, these are anecdotes, and you can't make your decision about how you approach prostate cancer based on one man's experience. But I think that it's just so important to know - the question I would have for this person who emailed is, how much, you know, how prepared was he for what to expect, and how much information did he have before he, you know, made the decisions about treatment?</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: I think for a lot of these men, what I hear from them is, if I had only known; I just wish I had been told. And, you know, I think if they had been actively working with somebody, to work on some of these problems, you know, early on, right after treatment, you know, would their outcome be different? I don't know. But they would, I think, maybe not feel so helpless and so victimized by the process.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Email from Julia in Iowa City: Is it typical for a man with untreated prostate cancer to have normal sexual function? Dr. Engel?</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: Well, that's - that also is a big star and a big conclusion that you can get from the paper here. If you look at the paper, you might see that even those patients that were seeking surgery had erectile dysfunction 30 percent of the time, and 50 percent of the radiation patients did. So prostate cancer doesn't, in itself, doesn't affect your erections. It's the treatment that affects them. But a large part of talking to patients beforehand about their expectation is being very honest. It's a troubled conversation.</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: It's one that usually is tense between the husband and wife when they've been married for 20 to 30 years. I probably spend - the hour or two that I spend with patients being a couples' counselor, more than anything, in terms of really getting it out on the table as to, do you want to have intercourse with your husband? You know, that's something - the answer, sometimes, is no, actually. So a lot of this has to do with understanding the patient's relationship, and that kind of thing. But prostate cancer in itself doesn't cause erectile dysfunction.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: If you ask, do you have erectile dysfunction? do, sometimes, the different partners have different answers?</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: Absolutely. So I actually - I've had this happen several times just in the last month. A patient would come in and say, I'd like to treat me. I'd like you to do surgery on me. But they're here alone. They're not here with their wife. And I will never offer them treatment. I'll say, I want you to come back with your wife, and we'll have that discussion together. There's always an enormous disparity. As well as postoperatively, there's an enormous disparity. The husband will say, you know, I don't have good erections. It's three or six months after my surgery. It may be my patient, where we've talked about it over and over, but they didn't want to hear that beforehand. So...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: All they heard was cancer.</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: They heard cancer. They heard that yes, patients have trouble here, but they uniformly - men uniformly think that they have a more ravenous sexual appetite than the next man. The wife being there will remind them of things and usually will say no, you're getting much better erections than you think you are. So yes, there's a big disparity.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking with Dr. Jason Engel, who's the clinical associate professor, director of urologic robotic surgery at George Washington University Hospital. Also with us is Tara Parker-Pope, editor of the New York Times Well blog. You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. And let's see if we have this - this is from a concerned wife: I'm 31 married to a 41-year-old man. My husband was diagnosed with prostate cancer this year. He's having a robotic radical prost - one of those things - removed later this year. Does your guest have any advice or resources, where we can go, or who we can talk with, about our sex life after surgery?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: One thing we don't hear much about - my husband and I have not had kids yet. I focused on my education and career, and had no idea we'd be facing this at this time in our lives.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I don't think anybody has any expectation that they're facing this. Different questions to different people. Support groups, Tara Parker-Pope?</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: Well, I think Dr. Engel probably has some very good information for this patient. But I'm surprised by the question, that there has not been a discussion about fertility, about family planning. I'm sort of surprised by that. I'm interested what Dr. Engel has to say.</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: They - so let's just pretend this was my patient sitting in front of me. I mean, these people would need a lot of counseling. That's a 31-year-old woman, this is an active sexual relationship. She'd be - I would be telling her very frankly, your husband is about to be impotent, and we need to talk about that. They would go into the surgery understanding that, just as the article predicts. He's 41, he probably has no co-morbidities, he's probably not obese, he probably has interest - from him and his spouse. So the likelihood of him getting erections back at two years would be probably 85 percent, even as predicted on the pessimistic data in this article.</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: But certainly, they would have to understand, what will your options be for children afterwards? Should you be doing sperm banking now? Or, will you be willing to simply commit - do you have the funds to commit to a fertility center doing in vitro fertilization, which you can do after prostatectomy. But that somebody, I would spend a long time with. This is exactly the type of patient where it is - if they have the funds available to travel and to get many opinions, they are the type that would, typically, be looking for more - someone to say, everything is going to be OK. It's a 41-year-old man that may not want to hear you say: You're going to be impotent. And if I was giving those people that talk, I would perhaps lose this patient because of the frankness of that discussion. But that's a discussion they need to have, probably with more than one physician.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Tara Parker-Pope, just briefly, we've been talking, as he suggests, the people who write to blogs, and the people who call radio stations, are the people who've had problems. A lot of the time, this does work out.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: Yes. I mean, I think there are a number of men who find that life after a prostate cancer treatment is different, but it's still a good life. And it's still one that they're happy to have and to be relatively healthy. I remember interviewing one man who said that, you know, during sex, he still hears the orchestra, but he just doesn't hear the trumpet section anymore. I thought that was sort of a nice way to put it. He still enjoys sex, and he still enjoys his wife and his life, and everything that it has to offer. But that's a man who, I think, is happy with his situation because he had all the information going in, and he knew what to expect.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Tara Parker-Pope, editor of The New York Times Well blog, thanks very much for your time today.</s>TARA PARKER-POPE: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And our thanks as well to Dr. Jason Engel, of the George Washington University Hospital, who joined us here in Studio 3A. Thanks very much.</s>Dr. JASON ENGEL: Thank you very much.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Up next: The drug wars in Mexico. Few U.S. reporters cross the border regularly to cover the violence and the victims. Angela Kocherga is an exception. She'll join us next to tell us what she's seen. Stay with us. It's the TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. |
David Attenborough has produced dozens of shows and books about how plants and animals live. But his latest, Flying Monsters 3D, takes a look at creatures that have been extinct for around 65 million years—pterosaurs, or flying reptiles—and examines why they may have evolved to fly. | IRA FLATOW, Host: This is SCIENCE FRIDAY. I'm Ira Flatow. Sir David Attenborough really needs no introduction. He's been your guide for 50 years, showing and explaining the natural world around the globe. He got and gets to go everywhere. You've seen "Life on Earth," "The Private Life of Plants" or "Planet Earth." Now in a new big-screen film, he's dialing back the clock, showing us fossils and 3-D renderings of creatures no one has ever seen.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: They have been extinct for 65 million years, the pterosaurs, giant flying reptiles. The film is "Flying Monsters 3-D," and it opens next week at science centers and museums around the country, and if you'd like to talk with Sir David, our number is 1-800-989-8255, 1-800-989-TALK. You can tweet us @scifri, @-S-C-I-F-R-I. Go to our Facebook page or our website at sciencefriday.com.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: As I say, Sir David Attenborough is the writer and narrator of the new giant-screen film "Flying Monsters 3-D." Welcome to SCIENCE FRIDAY, Sir David.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Thank you very much indeed.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: You know, it seems like nobody ever talks about the pterosaurs. What got you interested in them?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Well, I think just that really. I mean, everybody goes on about the dinosaurs, and they were stunning and marvelous, and I never understand why they don't also talk about those huge creatures with 40-foot wingspan, with hairy, skinny wings that were flapping above the heads of the dinosaurs. I think they're the most remarkable of creatures. Certainly nothing else has ever paralleled them in terms of flying.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Of course there was that science-fiction movie called "Rodan" back in the late '50s, where, I think, we got a brief look at one of them.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Well, you occasionally see them.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Well, you occasionally see them. I mean, in the films about the lost world, they always flap about. And if you remember, in that story, Professor Challenger found the nest of one. So that was one - certainly one of the times when they did appear. But by and large, they've been overshadowed by the dinosaur, and I don't think that's fair.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Well, were they flying dinosaurs, or were they flying reptiles? What exactly were they?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: They were flying reptiles. They were - they belonged to the same huge group as the dinosaurs, but they're quite different from them. I mean, they're as different as, what, I don't know, carnivores are from - like tigers are from elephants.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: And in "Flying Monsters," you talk about how pterosaurs evolved over tens of millions of years. It sort of makes human evolution like a sliver of time compared to that.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Yeah, they started off like lizards, with long tales and skinny, flapping wings, which were formed of skin attached to the side of the body and down towards the knees and the ankles. And they started off quite small, but over the millions of years, they got a bit bigger, and then they started to improve their flying techniques.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: And very surprisingly perhaps, they actually reduced and finally lost the tail, and that enabled them to get much more aerobatic in the sky but required much more complex controls, which they nevertheless achieved.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: You said one of the key reasons for the evolution of their body structure is that the early pterosaurs could not walk very well.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Well, they had the back of the wing - I mean, birds have feathers, which are really remarkable structures. They're very rigid on the wings. So they provide an aerofoil, a surface which holds the air and keeps them suspended in the air.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Pterosaurs didn't have that. They developed skin, which ran from their wrists down to their ankles, and if it's attached to the ankles, when you get on the ground, well of course then it's rather an impediment trying to get around if you've got a great gown, as it were, tied to your ankles.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: There's a really cool scene in the movie where a fossil comes alive using computer animation that puts the pieces of the fossil together. It's one where you're at the bottom of the steps with that fossil. You know, you've been making films for a long time. This is the kind of stuff you just could never do before, could you?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: It's quite true that the computer generated images, CGI, have improved hugely over the last decade. I mean, 20 years ago, the animations that you saw of dinosaurs and other extinct creatures were sort of slightly clumsy. They were - you know, you thought you didn't really believe them. They were kind of things from the nursery, almost.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: But over the years, animations have got better and better and better, and now the animation of the pterosaurs I think is the most spectacular animation I've ever seen. I can say that because it's got nothing to do with me. I mean, it's done by a team of hugely gifted artists who are artists in computer imaging.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: And it's very instructive on how to look at a fossil, you know, and put it together in the right order. All these bones lying around, and the animation shows you how to piece it together. I thought that was really neat.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Well, I'm glad you did. I mean, I think that it's only too easy to turn the dinosaurs or the pterosaurs into, I don't know, dreamlike creatures. And it's - the exciting thing to me about them is how you can look at a fossil, a bit of bone in a rock and look at it in such a way that enables you to reconstruct an animal in quite considerable detail.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: That's the remarkable thing, as far as I'm concerned. I enjoy that. Then I really believe that what I'm looking at really did exist.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: And you were instrumental in writing and producing this film?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: I wrote it, yes.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: And it was very well-done. And in one segment, which I knew nothing about because I'm not - you know, as I say, I don't think people know very much about the pterosaurs. You talk about a 19th-century woman named Mary Anning, who lived in the southern coast of England, a great fossil hunter and, sort of, the person who started this whole thing off. Tell us about her.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: She was one of the very earliest, and she was also one of the earliest who were finding things, the great swimming reptiles, the seagoing reptiles, the ichthyosaurs and the plesiosaurs. She collected all those, too. In fact, it is - she also collected one of the - well, she collected the very first pterosaur that was found in Britain.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: There was one found earlier, slightly earlier, in Germany, but Mary Anning was one of the great pioneer paleontologists.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Now, in the film, you talk about birds with feathers supplanting, being more successful than the pterosaurs. Is there some controversy about whether they actually lived at the same time?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Yes, I mean, you could never prove it one way or the other, really, but the fact remains that towards the end of their reign, the pterosaurs began to reduce in type and number. And at the same time, there were birds around which were increasing in type and number.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Now, it's dangerous to say - it didn't necessarily prove that this and that were - because they happened at the same time, necessarily caused that at the same time. But nonetheless, you can see quite reasons why that could be the case.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Talking with Sir David Attenborough, whose new film "Flying Monsters 3-D" will be opening soon at a science center near you. Let's go to Chicago. Kate(ph), hi, welcome to SCIENCE FRIDAY.</s>KATE: Hi, thank you. Hello, Sir Attenborough and Mr. Flatow. Thank you very much for taking my call. I have a question on the size of these flying reptiles. I always thought there was a limit to the size of birds that could fly. How could they fly if they were so large?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Very good question. The - we can find all sorts of theoretical answers to that, but what we do know is that they certainly did. When they first found the bone of these huge things, the 40-foot wingspan ones, which were found down in Texas some 40 years ago, quite a lot of paleontologists said impossible, it couldn't be true because they didn't find - at that stage, they didn't find the whole wing. They just found some of the bones of the wrist, which were three, four, five, six, seven times bigger than any other pterosaur bone known of that kind.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: And so there were lots of arguments from people saying no, you can't scale up in that way. But since then, we have found a lot of complete skeletons of these huge, giant creatures. And the fact, it does cause a great problem, as you say, about how, to an aeronautical engineer, about how they did it.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Well, one of the things that we're pretty sure they did is that they actually were gliders more than flappers. They could flap but not very effectively, and the - they probably lived on cliffs and launched themselves into the air, and once there, like an albatross, they could keep going, going from thermal to thermal, for tens if not hundreds of miles.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: And you speculate - and you're up there in a glider with one, so to speak, that...</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: So to speak, yes.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: That they could have flown over 1,000 miles, glided across oceans, perhaps.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Well, we know that like an albatross, an albatross is able to glide for thousands of miles just taking advantage of the upward currents bouncing off the surface of a turbulent sea. And so we know that that is a possibility, and it seems quite possible that those huge pterosaurs, the most famous of which is one that's called quetzalcoatlas, after the reptile dragon god of the Aztec people.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: And we know - we can be pretty sure that it certainly glided for very long distances.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Yeah, have complete fossils been found of that one yet?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Yes, pretty well.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: And it's really impressive. You said it had a 40-foot wingspan?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Yeah.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: And the bones, as you show in the film, the bones were - it was something - looking like something you'd see in a land dinosaur.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Yeah, it's very interesting how much you can tell from the structure of a bone. The pressure of the bone of a pterosaur, like the pressure in the bone of a bird, is to reduce weight because as we all know, weight takes a lot of energy in flying.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: So the pterosaur bone is very, very thin and hollow, but it is supported in certain areas by struts, and where there are a lot of struts, you can be pretty sure that that's where there was the greatest pressure, so to resist the pressures, that's why the struts are there. So you can know that what - where the stresses were on any particular bone. And that has led us to be able to deduce that the animals actually catapulted themselves off the ground in the end using all four limbs.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Wow. I have to take a break. Sir David, stay with us, we're going to take a break. Our number, 1-800-989-8255, talking with Sir David Attenborough, writer and narrator of "Flying Monsters 3-D." We'll be right back after this break.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: I'm Ira Flatow. This is SCIENCE FRIDAY from NPR.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: I'm Ira Flatow. This is SCIENCE FRIDAY from NPR.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: You're listening to SCIENCE FRIDAY. I'm Ira Flatow. We're talking with Sir David Attenborough, writer and narrator of the new giant-screen film "Flying Monsters 3-D." Our number, 1-800-989-8255. Sir David, when did you first get interested in nature and going around the world searching for it?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Well, I grew up in the Midlands of England, and in an area where the rocks are of the same age, the Jurassic rocks, as the dinosaurs were found in and pterosaurs were found in. The rocks where I lived didn't contain dinosaur bones because they were laid down in rather deep sea, but they contained called ammonites and belemnites, which were a sort of shellfish, and one was a shellfish, the other was a squid-like creature.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: And I collected those as a kid, and I flattered myself, I knew the names of most of the species that were around my hometown. And that led me to a curiosity about life in general and about animals in general but also particularly about animals of the past.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: You have been just about everywhere in the world. Is there a place you haven't been to yet that you'd still like to go to?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Oh, a heck of a lot, but I suppose if someone said where would you like to go, I would go to the Gobi Desert, I think. I haven't spent much - I've been on the fringes of it. I haven't spent much time there because there aren't many animals that live - they're few and far between.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: And so to someone whose job it is to make programs about animals, that's not the obvious place to go because you get very little film for an awful lot of travel. But that's - so I wouldn't mind going there without having to make a film and with just a hammer, having a look at fossils, dinosaurs. There are wonderful dinosaurs in the Gobi.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Yeah, and yeah, we've seen them. A lot of the bird-type of dinosaurs.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: That's right, ornithomimus.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Yeah, and let's talk about birds, then. Why did birds survive and these giant pterosaurs die out?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Well, it's anybody's guess, and nobody can give you the definitive answer, but if you ask me to make what I hope is an informed guess, I would say it's because - not because of the way they fly but because of the way they behaved on the ground.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Birds with their wings, which are quite independent from their legs, can run around very fast indeed. So it doesn't matter whether they are pattering about on a seashore or a lake or (unintelligible) the bush or plucking seeds off of trees. They are very, very agile.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Pterosaurs had their skinny wings attached to their thighs, to begin with actually to their ankles but in later forms to their knees and to their thighs, and that hobbled them so that in a race to get to a shellfish, a bit of food on the edge of the sea or in a lake, they were slower.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: There's not - I don't think there's any doubt about that, and so birds beat them to it every time. And that in the end meant that the birds won out.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Let's go to the phones. Pat(ph) in Denver, hi, welcome to SCIENCE FRIDAY.</s>PAT: Hi, such an honor to talk to both of you. Thanks for taking my call. Anyway, my question is: Would you say that productions like this are aimed at increasing the public's interest in science, or is it more targeted at just people that are kind of already interested in this stuff?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Well, how can people be interested in anything that they don't know existed? As soon as they come and are told about pterosaurs or see a reconstruction of a pterosaur in a museum, they are very interested, certainly they are. So all we're doing is putting them in front of you.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: My view is if you start viewing it, and you're not interested, then I've made a bad film. I hope that just two minutes in, you ought to be interested. If you're not, it's my fault because they are fabulous animals.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: All right, Pat, thanks for calling. Hope to go see this one, huh?</s>PAT: Absolutely, thank you.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Yeah, you're welcome. Your first big wildlife documentary was called "Zoo Quest," back in 1954, was it not?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: That's correct, yeah.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Was anyone else making natural history programs back then? Here in the United States we had Mutual of Omaha's "Wild Kingdom" and mostly zoo sort of stories like that.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Yeah, that's right. And they were great programs, but they specialized very much in the big game area of natural history. I was - the first films I made were about termites and small birds and snakes and other areas of the natural world other than those that you normally see in zoos. But certainly that "Wild Kingdom" was a great series, Marlin Perkins, I believe.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Right, he'd have his - I can't think of his name, his assistant, would be wrestling the alligator while he was talking about it.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: That's right. Well, it was very much - his programs are very much man battling with the beasts. The programs I was making were rather different with a rather different emphasis. They were simply what the beasts were like before man started to wrestle with them.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Now you have - as I say, you have gone all over the world, from Antarctica to Rwanda, Sierra Leone. In all the 50-plus years that you have traveled, do you see a lot of change since the first time you've seen these places?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: I've seen a lot of things, yeah.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: I mean, has the world, has the environment changed? Can you see changes in these natural places?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Oh, they've changed hugely, yeah. I mean, I'm going back to Borneo next week to look at some of the places that I first filmed in the late '50s, where I know what I shall find, and I shall find that whole areas of rainforest have been totally destroyed and replaced by oil palm plantations and that places that I once knew 50 years ago, little islands I knew 50 years ago, which were then the back of beyond, and in those ages, when you didn't have any telephones of any kind, let along emails and so on, when you went out there, you were out there and out of touch from the rest of your family and from anybody else.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: You were in a canoe. You went upriver, and you might not come down for a couple of months, and nobody would know or have any way of knowing where you were. So it was a very different world.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: In 2009, you worked on a BBC program about Darwin, "Tree of Life." How do you respond to readers and viewers who ask about creationism?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Well, what I say is that if look at the world's societies the world round, human societies, everyone, everyone has had a need to have stories about how human beings began. And if you went to Australia, they would say that the human beings, first human beings were coughed up by a giant python, which you see in - that's a rainbow in the sky.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: If you went to Cambodia, they would say that the first human beings were coagulated out of a sea of milk by churning it, by putting it on the tail of a great snake. And if you went to people in the Middle East 2,000 years ago, they would say no, the first man was formed by mud when God blew into a model of a man by a - made out of mud. And then in order to get the first woman, he took a rib from the woman's side and turned it into a woman.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: So they all have different versions. How are you to judge between these? Are you to assume that just because you are born in this particular society that is the right answer?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Well, there's another way of doing it other than listening to the stories that you are told at your parent's knee, and that is to go and look for the evidence. And it's all out there. And when you do, when you look at the rocks, and you look at fossils, and you can decipher them all and see it for yourself, the answer is all the same.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: It comes from that evidence. And that's the one that I believe in.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: That doesn't mean to say that you don't believe in God. It's just that the creation story is the one the evidence of which is in the rocks.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: One last question, and I'll let you go. What's on your plate next?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Well, it's going back to some of the places I was in half-a-century ago and seeing how they've changed and how our understanding of them has changed. And the first one is going to be in Borneo.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Taking your film crew with you? Are you taking your film crew, or is this...</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Oh sure.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Do you ever talk about retiring at all?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: I would rather - if I can do something, I would rather do something than nothing.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Yeah, well did you have someone whose style that you emulated when you were young and growing up, as a presenter?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Not really, you know. I mean, television was in its infancy 50 years ago, 60 years ago. And we didn't see - there wasn't anybody else who was actually going out there and making films about anything other than big game. So I didn't really have anybody to follow.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Did you know Jacob Bronowski at all?</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: Certainly did.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Yeah. He was - I'd say you two are probably the old deans of science presenters, and I want to thank you for taking time to be with us today.</s>DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: You're very kind.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Sir David Attenborough is writer and narrator of the new giant-screen film "Flying Monsters 3-D." It's terrific. I recommend you go take a look at it. He's also a longtime producer, host of BBC documentaries, including "The Life" series. |
James Dorn, director of the Cato Institute's annual monetary conference and editor of the Cato Journal, says the minimum wage increase will leave small businesses feeling the pinch. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And for a different take on the minimum wage increase, we've got James Dorn, editor of the Cato Journal at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank. Dorn is also director of the group's annual monetary conference. Thanks for coming on.</s>Mr. JAMES DORN (Editor, Cato Journal, Cato Institute): You're welcome.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So, what effect do you think this new policy will have on the economy?</s>Mr. JAMES DORN (Editor, Cato Journal, Cato Institute): Well, it would be wonderful if the Congress could just wave a wand and pass a high minimum wage law and eliminate poverty, but unfortunately that's not the case. In fact, studies has shown that the net effect of a minimum wage is actually to slightly increase poverty because people in the lowest skill brackets are the ones that usually lose their jobs first if the minimum wage is increased, especially in low-income states in the South. Also…</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: One second - can you explain exactly how that happens? Who was replacing these workers or are jobs eliminated?</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, jobs are typically eliminated, not initially but over the longer period of time. Now, of course, the minimum wage hasn't been increased for 10 years so market wages typically exceed minimum wages. So this law probably won't have much of a negative effect on employment but it could over time if it's continually increased or if it's indexed.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: The problem is, is that the cause of poverty is not a low-wage rate. That's true by definition. The cause of poverty is low productivity due to inadequate education or possibly dysfunctional family life or high crime rates so businesses won't move into the inner city and so on. And the minimum wage does nothing to change a person's education. A person's productivity does nothing to change the underlying causes of poverty. So there are alternatives that I think are much superior to a minimum wage, which simply interferes with the freedom of contract between the worker and the employer.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: You talk about a freedom of contracts, but one of the issues that we talk about here on NEWS & NOTES - and I'm sure that you study - is the fact that there's 11 million undocumented workers in the country. Couldn't that also be a cause of how wage stagnation happens for lower-income Americans?</s>Mr. JAMES DORN (Editor, Cato Journal, Cato Institute): Well, I think what - increase in the legal minimum wage will actually do is increase the demand for illegal immigrants because they will work for less than the minimum wage. And then nobody's forcing them to do that, and the employers are breaking the law if they hire them, but there's an incentive for this to occur. And I think this increase will simply foster that type of activity.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now, there's a tax relief provision for small businesses that's part of this. The Democrats say it's going to help companies that might feel a pinch from the wage hike. What do you think about that aspect?</s>Mr. JAMES DORN (Editor, Cato Journal, Cato Institute): Well, that's a plausible argument. The firms that are hurt the most by the minimum wage hike are small businesses. Your McDonald's and Wal-Marts and so forth are paying more than the minimum wage anyhow, and you're going to find that small businesses in rural areas are harmed the most. So if they get a tax break, it might make the effect less onerous.</s>Mr. JAMES DORN (Editor, Cato Journal, Cato Institute): Also, the numbers that the congresswoman gave, that 12 million people would benefit are highly inflated. The Labor Department, a couple of years ago, estimated about a half million people would benefit, who are now at the 5.15 wage. A lot of the people that are below 5.15 are exempt from the minimum wage. For example, farm workers, waiters, and so on. So I think the positive effects are highly exaggerated.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Very briefly, super briefly, what do you recommend then?</s>Mr. JAMES DORN (Editor, Cato Journal, Cato Institute): Well, what I'd recommend is like Hong Kong has no minimum wage. The market set the wage rates. If the minimum wage is too high, people are going to lose their jobs, so why fool around with the wage rate. People's incomes are low because their productivity is low. So I think we need to focus on education, more open markets, and other things that individuals or families or churches or the private community can do to help improve the atmosphere for businesses to work in the inner city.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: James, thanks so much.</s>Mr. JAMES DORN (Editor, Cato Journal, Cato Institute): You're welcome.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: James Dorn is editor of the Cato Journal at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank based in Washington, D.C. |
For the latest news from the continent, NPR East Africa Correspondent Gwen Thompkins talks about the release of 38 political prisoners in Ethiopia, Mungiki gang activity in Kenya and the latest on an African Union peacekeeping force in Darfur. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: This is NEWS & NOTES. I'm Farai Chideya.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: It's time for Africa update. This week, we'll run through headlines from the eastern part of the continent including political prisoners released in Ethiopia and an update on the brutal Mungiki gang in Kenya. But let's start in Sudan where President Omar al-Bashir made an unusual trip to Darfur over the weekend. Negotiations over who gets to keep the peace have hit a snag. Darfur's residents are still under threat of raids by militias and also face disease and starvation. Will a possible U.N.-African Union force get to go ahead to watch over the region?</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: NPR's east Africa correspondent Gwen Thompkins has the latest.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: President Bashir went to Darfur for a three-day appearance. This is highly unusual. He never goes there. He attended an extraordinary meeting of the cabinet there. And the order of the day was to discuss infrastructural plans and problems in Darfur. Now you have to realize that Darfur has - it's, you know, the size of France, and yet it has very, very little by way of infrastructure. There are no roads, there are very few public services or public facilities.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: If the cabinet and Mr. Bashir wanted to talk about infrastructure in Darfur, they could actually be there until doomsday. In fact, it was frustration over lack of infrastructure and any other kinds of public facilities - that prompted black militia groups four years ago to start a rebellion against the government in Khartoum. And that's the rebellion that has escalated into what the Bush administration calls genocide - government-sponsored genocide - 200,000 people dead, two and a half million people displaced.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: The African Union and the United Nations are planning peace talks in Tanzania next month. And then now, as you mentioned, the African Union and the United Nations are experiencing a new glitch in their plans for a 26,000 strong peace keeping force in Darfur because the government in Khartoum is now saying we don't want this force to be able to use force when they're on the ground in Darfur. The AU soldiers who were there right now are under constant attack. They've been losing their lives in Darfur for the past several months.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: So if you bring in 26,000 people and tell them that they can't shoot back or that they can't use force to disarm any of the people who are already on the ground in Darfur, then that's trouble. So it will be very interesting to see how this is going to unfold or whether this glitch is actually going to stall the process even longer.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So, Gwen, you have news from Ethiopia, the government releasing political prisoners. What's going on with that?</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Well, on the surface, this looks like a very magnanimous gesture on the part of the Ethiopian government. There are 38 political prisoners. Many of them were sentenced to life in prison and other stiff penalties for their activism, really, against the Ethiopian government. And the government has pardoned these folks. Their incarceration began about two years ago during the last round of elections in Ethiopia. These folks were, for all intentional(ph) purposes, guilty of no wrongdoing.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: They were rounded up, beaten up, paraded through the streets of (unintelligible) as a warning to others to not defy the government or challenge the government and they were put in jail. There are many, many more than the 38 who were just pardoned, who are still in jail, languishing. And there have been many people who have been picked up since then as political opponents of the government and who are in jail and no one knows really anything about them.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Now, this is the underside really of the Ethiopian government, which is an ally of the United States and is thought to be a very dependable ally in the U.S. sponsored war on terror in East Africa.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So, Gwen, just to make it clear, when you talk about these political prisoners being rounded up largely without cause, what exactly do you mean by that?</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Well, the 38 political prisoners were political activists as well as seat holders in parliament. These are folks who were outspoken opponents of the government that is led by Meles Zenawi. And they were doing what political opponents do during election season, speaking out against the government, holding public rallies. And the government, which has a very repressive side and is very jealous of its authority, moved to catch these people during the elections and in the aftermath of the elections two years ago.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, let's move on to another topic and actually revisit a subject we talked about a couple of weeks ago - it's the Mungiki gang violence in Kenya. Give us an update.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Well, this is the scary story of Kenya, actually - the Mungiki, which is an important engine behind organized crime here. They have purportedly been at war with thousands of bus drivers from whom they extort thousands and, well actually, from whom they extort millions of dollars per year. They've also been at war with the police in Kenya, and reportedly, they've been at war with themselves. There's reportedly dissension within the group.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Now, the Mungiki had been relatively quiet in recent days. It's the police who were making headlines here because they're reportedly killing a lot of young men who've been associated with the gang. And some of the police have been disciplined for their actions and others are under questioning for their conduct, you know, a series of really deadly slum raids.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: You also interviewed one of the founders of the Mungiki and he's now a minister?</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: That's right. Ndura Waruinge is now a minister. He's an evangelical minister. He told me that the recent surging Mungiki related violence has only helped him in recent months. Here's a clip of tape from that interview.</s>Mr. NDURA WARUINGE (Founder, Mungiki): (Unintelligible). Wherever I go, I wish I would walk with you around the streets. People respecting me because they fear me.</s>Mr. NDURA WARUINGE (Founder, Mungiki): So, whatever they are doing now works for me completely. And I see that's God's.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Now, Waruinge is also running for a parliamentary seat in the upcoming elections here. And he says he has aspirations of creating a nationwide Mungiki organization that will concentrate on what he calls developing young people. And he says that Christianity is a good vehicle -that's his word - a good vehicle for achieving that goal.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: People respect me because they fear me. Very interesting. Well, one last topic. NPR is running a worldwide series on climate change. And this month, the network is focusing on Africa. Now, I understand, you're just back from a region in northwestern Kenya called Turkana and tell us what you saw.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Well, northwestern Kenya is home to an ongoing feud between cattle rustlers. Now, the cattle rustlers are of different ethnic groups. One is called the Turkana, the other called the Phukot(ph). And if this sounds like a movie western, it should because the story has a lot of parallels with the Old West.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: But the climate is changing here, Farai, in East Africa. It's getting drier. The water is getting more scarce. Rain is getting more unpredictable. And so that has serious implications for people who keep cattle, who keep herds of camels, of goats, of cows. And so this is also creating a desperate situation among the people who are living in northwestern Kenya. They are raiding each other's herds in order to replenish their own, in order to amass wealth or is sometimes just for feuding purposes, just for revenge. So many people are killed each year due to these cattle raids.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: And I actually have some cape of one Turkana man called John Mark Edan(ph) who runs a non-profit organization called Realm-Realm(ph), promoting peace between the ethnic groups, between the cattle rustlers. In this clip, he is remembering a raid that he experienced near the Ugandan border back in 2000.</s>Mr. JOHN MARK EDAN (Founder, Realm-Realm): Around 5:00 in the morning we heard the first gunshots. There were lots of pandemonium and called the young men and the middle aged men had to run out and form a ring around their cattle. Shooting, defending, shooting and (unintelligible) of continuous gunfire.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Now, Farai, you know, these raids are going on, on a daily basis in some areas of northwestern Kenya and more are expected.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, Gwen, thank you so much for that update. Fascinating story.</s>GWEN THOMPKINS: Thank you, Farai.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: NPR East Africa correspondent Gwen Thompkins, speaking with us from Nairobi, Kenya. |
He opposed renewing the Voting Rights Act and has called for an end both to the Congressional Black Caucus and "multiculturalism" entirely. Farai Chideya talks with controversial Colorado Congressman and Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: From NPR News, this is NEWS & NOTES. I'm Farai Chideya.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Two weeks ago, the NAACP held its annual convention in Detroit. Only Democratic presidential candidates showed up, but the Republican stage looked very different. Only one man stood among the empty podiums - Congressman Tom Tancredo of Colorado. Tancredo is also the first and only Republican to accept our invitation to share his vision for America with you, the NEWS & NOTES listeners. He is opposed to renewing the Voting Rights Act. He has called for an end to the Congressional Black Caucus.</s>So I started off with this simple question: Why in the world would he go to an NAACP forum?</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): I went because I was asked.</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): And I wanted to go because there is an issue that I care about greatly - and I speak of that often - and it is the impact of illegal immigration in the country. People who are coming here as illegal immigrants and taking the jobs that, quote, "No American wants or will do," unquote, I - well, I think, that's first of all, a fallacy, sort of an insult to even say something like that.</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): But I think that when people do come here illegally - low-skilled, low-wage workers - they take a lot of jobs that would be taken by people who are here, who are working at the lowest rung of the economic ladder and who are having a hard time working their way out of poverty because wage rates stay depressed. And I just felt that it was something - an issue that we have that I could find some resonation there. And there was - it was there. They certainly did. They -well, they gave me a standing ovation when I came in, but I assume that that was just simply because I showed up.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, you know…</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): One, because I showed up and the other one was because I was leaving, I'm not so sure. But they gave me standing ovation. But there were a lot of things that we agreed upon and I was very pleased by it. It is true that within the African-American community, you cannot say it's monolithic about this issue. There are different points of view. And you've got a very political aspect of this. To a lot of folks who are in the Democratic Party, they look at massive immigration as a source of votes, potential and real votes. I mean, some of the - as you know, there's a lot of voter fraud that goes on.</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): And that was another thing that - by the way, we did talk about - was voter fraud, but there's also the need to act so that we can make sure people have their votes counted. I know that technology has gotten us to the point where we should be totally trusting of all electronic devices, but I personally would like to have a paper backup for - especially the things as important as a vote. And there were certainly a good response from them on that.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, let me jump in here for a second.</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): Yeah.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: You mentioned voter fraud. You mentioned also wanting to make sure that every vote is counted, but you voted against the renewal of the Voting Rights Act, and that was one of these things where a flood of congresspeople from both sides of the aisle really did vote for it. It's near and dear to the hearts of African-Americans, why did you vote against the renewal of the act?</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): Well, there are a couple of provisions that I thought were just, that I could not compromise on. And one was the mandation of the continuation of bilingual ballots. Also the construction of districts based on racial lines. I have to tell you, I find that that in and of itself is sort of - I mean, there was time, I think, in America when, you know, we had to do some extraordinary things in order to make sure that people got their vote counted. And I think to a large extent, we have dealt with it. There are still pockets of it that we have to be concerned about it.</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): But I don't believe it's good for America to construct congressional districts on racial lines. I don't think it's good to have a thing called the black caucus or a Hispanic caucus. I certainly would not want a thing called the white caucus. I constantly find myself being confronted by people who suggest that my motives are other than pure when it comes to this issue of immigration.</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): And I tell you, from the bottom of my heart, that what worries me the most is the fact that what is happening to us is that we are vulcanizing and separating America rather than finding things where we have common interests and coming together, especially, of course, the English language being a very important part of that.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Before I ask you, congressman, about the English language, which is a big part of how you operate in the political world, I want to go into a little family history. Your grandparents emigrated from Italy. I presume - and correct me if I'm wrong - that they continued to speak Italian once they came, and that those very linguistic issues just out of pure necessity, as people were learning the English language, you had Italian neighborhoods and Polish neighborhoods and Irish neighborhoods. I grew up in Baltimore and in addition to having black and white, you had every ethnicity represented. How does that differ from what you're talking about today?</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): My grandparents were intent upon doing one thing and it was a big issue with them. Even I remember, distinctly, I remember so clearly them saying to my parents, they were who - they would not let speak Italian, by the way. Even when, you know, there was - here is our tradition on every Sunday. I pick them up, go to mass, take a ride and go to the Dairy Queen. We end up there about 2:00 in the afternoon when - by the time we got there my grandparents, my mom's parents, were also almost in an argument in the back of the car. And my grandfather would lapse into Italian and my grandmother would yell at him - speak American, darn it.</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): And she meant - and that they used to about becoming quote, "Americanized." Yes, they came in to Italian ghettos, Polish ghettos, Jewish ghettos. But what happened at that time is that there was tremendous amount of pressure to become Americans and not just in word, but in thought and in your loyalty. They meant to cut the ties that connected them to the past and adopt the new ones.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: What does American - sorry to interrupt you.</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): That's all right.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: When you say American, what does American mean to you?</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): It means someone who had - whose first loyalty is to this country, and they have a desire to learn the language of the country. You know, in Webster's dictionary, a nation is defined as a place on the planet where people speak the same language. Language is important because it is the glue that holds us together because we come from so many diverse backgrounds. You need something that connects us together.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, Congressman Tancredo, you have said in Iowa - you've been campaigning nonstop - that you want an end to multiculturalism.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: I want to take us back to a moment in American history where you had vibrant Japanese American communities. They ended up being interned because there was this presumption that because they were in their own communities that they were anti-American, and yet there were many valiant people who served in the U.S. Army, using their skills speaking Japanese to actually serve America. Do you think in a certain way that when you talk about the end of multiculturalism, you could be undercutting things like our war on terror?</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): I think it's just the opposite. And here is why. Lao-Tzu is often, you know, quoted because he was a brilliant tactician and philosopher and he talked about the fact that what you need to confront an enemy and to be successful and he said there are two things really that are important.</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): One is to know exactly who the enemy is. And our case, I think we still wrestle with that. I mean, we are trying to figure out whether we're really dealing with quote, "terrorists," or radical Islam. And I think it's the latter.</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): On the other hand, you have to know who you are, he says. And I agree that we have to know who we are as a society. What we does Western civilization represent? Are there ideas and ideals that we all hold in common?</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): And so I think that it is enormously important for us all to connect to the concept of America, the principles of Western civilization in order to be successful in this war with radical Islam because that is the entity, I think, with which we are at war, not terrorism, which is a tactic. You can't be at war with terrorism. It's a tactic. It's not the thing you go to war with. So I just think both of those things are very important to know, who's the enemy and who you are.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: You referenced radical Islam, one what is it to you and two, how do you fight it?</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): What is - it's a portion of the Muslim population in the world that believes in the extension of the caliphate throughout the world and the imposition of Sharia law, and will go to whatever extremes are necessary in order to bring that about. It is certainly not the majority - thank God - of the Muslim population in this world, but it is a significant enough portion so as to make it a very dangerous thing when you combine it with the technology that we, today, have that allows relatively few people to do some very bad things. So you combat it.</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): Well, there's a whole slug(ph) of ways you have to do it. One will be the force of arms periodically. I happen to not agree, by the way, with our position in Iraq. I did not support the surge. I hope it works because we're there, but I do not support it. I believe that we have to disengage in Iraq. I believe that we cannot withdraw from the region entirely, but we have to use diplomatic, economic, sometimes the use of force but more often than not force of ideas.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Congressman, you frame this around of the Iraq war and to bring it back home, you have been known for breaking ranks with your party. In fact, presidential adviser Karl Rove reportedly told you to, quote, "never darken the door of the White House again."</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): Yes, he did. In fact, he used those exact words.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Okay.</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): I remember it distinctly.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, have you had a chance to discuss your stance on the war with the President? If you haven't, what would you tell him? Tell us what you would've told him.</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): I would tell him that we cannot be the policemen in Iraq that the United States military is constructed for a single purpose and that is to win the war. It has done it. It performed admirably. We cannot be a police force especially in a country like Iraq - a different culture, language and all the rest that make it very difficult to be the cop on the beat.</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): The Iraqis, you tell me, have 120,000 people who have in - who are now capable? This is the number of people in the army that they claimed to be capable of combat duty? Good. I want them patrolling Baghdad. I want them in the Humvees that are driving up and down those streets. And I want American soldiers out of there. And I will tell you another thing, Mr. President. I do not want to send one more American soldier into harm's way, being hampered by these rules of engagement, written by some lawyer some place and in order to protect that higher echelon in the military and not the guy or the gal that is standing out there being shot at. I am furious with these rules of engagement. I would say, Mr. President, never send another American into harm's way while you simultaneously tie their hands. So you know, we'd have quite a conversation, which is maybe one reason why I never get invited.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: On that note, Congressman, thank you so much for joining us.</s>Representative TOM TANCREDO (Republican, Colorado): It's been a pleasure.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Republican Congressman and presidential candidate Tom Tancredo. To tell us what you thought of the interview and of the Congressman's vision for America, go to our blog, nprnewsandviews.org.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: In the weeks ahead, we hope to bring you the rest of the current presidential candidates. |
The federal minimum wage increases by 70 cents today. Farai Chideya talks with Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick (D-MI), chairperson of the Congressional Black Caucus, which supports the increase. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: From NPR News, this is NEWS & NOTES. I'm Farai Chideya.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Ten years ago, President Clinton signed a bill into law upping the federal minimum wage to $5.15 an hour. And that's where it stayed until today. The federal minimum wage officially goes up today by 70 cents, and it will increase annually for three years until 2009. Then it will hit $7.25 an hour.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: In a moment, we'll hear from a woman directly affected by this new measure. But first, we've got Democratic Congresswoman Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick of Michigan. She's also chairperson of the Congressional Black Caucus.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Congresswoman, great to have you on.</s>Representative CAROLYN CHEEKS KILPATRICK (Democrat, Michigan): Good to be with you. How are you?</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: I'm great.</s>Representative CAROLYN CHEEKS KILPATRICK (Democrat, Michigan): Good.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So tell us what this legislation means.</s>Representative CAROLYN CHEEKS KILPATRICK (Democrat, Michigan): You know, first of all, it's what it could have been. When Democrats controlled the House and the Senate and the presidency, we passed on two different occasion, a clean bill and the president would not sign a bill that would take it to 7.25 today. This is a phase-in, as you mentioned, and this is what we could get to vote for, and we're happy to have gotten this. Twenty states will be effect and some 13 million Americans will see, as of today July 24th, of a minimum wage increase, as you said, over three years to $7.25.</s>Representative CAROLYN CHEEKS KILPATRICK (Democrat, Michigan): We hope that when we get a new president we can come back and revisit this and make it even better. If the minimum wage had gone up like the cost of living over the last 10 years, our minimum wage will be over $11 today. So we're still behind but it's the best we can get, and we're happy for the 13 million Americans who will benefit, and many of those are women with children, raising families.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Does earning a minimum wage salary puts you at the poverty line, above or below if you're a head of household?</s>Representative CAROLYN CHEEKS KILPATRICK (Democrat, Michigan): And it just depends on whether you're a head of household with children, are - you're still at poverty line? In some instance, are below depending on where you live in the country - cost of living vary in various parts of the country. So it just depends. What we're saying, as we raise this, it's not enough. We've got to go back. We've got to make families and women particularly - 33 percent of those on the minimum wage are raising children at this level. So it is not adequate.</s>Representative CAROLYN CHEEKS KILPATRICK (Democrat, Michigan): It is a first step and I'm proud to say that the Democratic House here in Congress and the Democratic Senate were able - after putting the bill in a supplemental, I might add - we try to get it to him straight across, he would not sign it, but he did sign it because we put it as a part of a supplemental bill to his war funding. The minimum wage was in there and the only way he get his war funding is that he would sign the package with the minimum wage in it. Is it adequate? No. Does it begin to help? Yes.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: What do you hope will happen in the future? You mentioned this was not quite the bill that you wanted. It's incremental and it goes until 2009 in terms of increases. What do you hope to happen in the future as the Democrats do control Congress?</s>Representative CAROLYN CHEEKS KILPATRICK (Democrat, Michigan): We hope that we'll have a more progressive House and Senate in '08. We all run for reelection in the House and a third of the Senate. So we'll have a new House and hopefully Democrats will continue to control the House and have a stronger Senate, whereby we can have a Democratic president who will sign an adequate minimum wage for millions of families in America.</s>Representative CAROLYN CHEEKS KILPATRICK (Democrat, Michigan): So we're going to continue to work on it. It will be one of the first bills draft in the new session, and we'll continue to work. This is the best that we can get under this administration. And it is, again - not since President Clinton 10 years ago - had we had a raise in the minimum wage.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Congresswoman, thank you so much.</s>Representative CAROLYN CHEEKS KILPATRICK (Democrat, Michigan): Thank you very much.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Congresswoman Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick of Michigan is chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus. |
Playwright David E. Talbert is on a star hunt for the next big actors in black urban theater. And he's taking that search to TV in the new reality series, Stage Black. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Some artists use music to spread their message and playwright David E. Talbert uses theatre - specifically urban theatre. And now, he's leaping from the stage to the small screen in the reality series "Stage Black." David, welcome.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Mr. DAVID E. TALBERT (Playwright; Producer, "Stage Black"): Hey, good to be here. Good to be here.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So why don't you start out by telling us a little bit about what you do and what you've done. You know, your plays are a blend of many different strains of themes and they've toured it all across the country, right?</s>Mr. TALBERT: Yeah. Since I started in '91. It had been toured in place, 12 of them have toured across the country. And they are, you know, it's like I'm like the black Neil Simon, you know. It's using comedy to show different slices of life and love and the human condition, and wrapping them in a package that can be inspirational also at the same time.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Absolutely. Well, what about "Stage Black?" What inspired you to…</s>Mr. TALBERT: Did I say Neil Diamond?</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: No, you did not. You said Neil Simon.</s>Mr. TALBERT: I said Neil Simon because I don't want to be a black Neil Diamond.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: You are cracking me up.</s>Mr. TALBERT: (Unintelligible) I didn't say I was a black Neil Diamond.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: You are cracking me up. It must be that drive from the valley that's got you punching.</s>Mr. TALBERT: That's what it is because I just want to make sure. Make sure that I pout the right information and that thing in the universe.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So what made you go into this TV project? And you've got some powerful allies - Tracey Edmonds and Blair Underwood who we had on recently.</s>Mr. TALBERT: Yeah. Morris Chestnut. You know, I was on tour with my latest play, "Love in the Nick of Tyme," starring Morris Chestnut and Avant. And Tracey and I got together. My wife and I came up with the concept for the reality show and then Tracey and I got together. We've done some work before on another play. And we put it all together, and then Blair came on board, Morris was in the play so he hung out with me and did the auditions and everything. And, of course, half of the women got - came to from fainting after seeing him, you know…</s>Mr. TALBERT: You could really get some auditions going on.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So it's an audition for eternal fame and fortune.</s>Mr. TALBERT: Oh my.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: People are trying to get into your work. So let's listen to a young woman who made the cut in your L.A. auditions.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Unidentified Woman #1: (Singing) Don't waste your time trying to label or define me because I'm not what I was 10 years ago, or 10 minutes ago. I'm all that and then some. And whereas I can't live inside yesterday's pain, I can't live without it.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Unidentified Man #1: That's what I thought.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Unidentified Man #2: That's why I'm screaming.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So what makes - what gives her the juice?</s>Mr. TALBERT: Well, certain amount of confidence, stage presence, articulation, she opened her eyes. A lot of singers…</s>Mr. TALBERT: A lot of singers - I don't know, I don't know who taught this but a lot of singers, they close their eyes when they sing, you know. And in theatre, the eyes, we are taught, are the windows to the soul. And so, she opened her eyes, which was very important, you know. And she had a bright smile and a charming personality. So I say come on tour.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: That's fantastic. Now, let's listen to someone in Detroit who did not make the cut.</s>Mr. TALBERT: Uh-oh.</s>Mr. TALBERT: Unidentified Woman #2: To be or not to be that was the question until I asked Romeo where he was at last night because I didn't see him. And he claimed that he was all up in love with me but that is not the question because I know he's not in love because I'm that deal.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now, that's a little Shakespeare in the blender.</s>Mr. TALBERT: Shakespeare on the corner of Jefferson and flosses(ph).</s>Mr. TALBERT: I don't know. South central version of Shakespeare.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So what made you veto her and what mistakes do you think she made?</s>Mr. TALBERT: Well, I think she was - I think she was creative. And I think she is creative, you know, you know, it's a certain magic that happens when you have enough confidence to alter something that's a classic. So, you know, I take my hat off to her but she just wasn't the right mix that I was looking for.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Tell us a little bit more - I mean, this is a series. Tell us a little bit more about where folks are headed. I know you don't want to give away the suspense but what exactly do folks get once they make it through the gauntlet?</s>Mr. TALBERT: Well, you know, I've started in a non-traditional route of theater, you know. I went to school, Morgan State, for - and I have a marketing degree. And I was on the radio.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Yehay(ph), Morgan.</s>Mr. TALBERT: Yes. So you know, I didn't go through the traditional routes. So I wanted the show to be open to folks that have talent but they don't necessarily - either, they don't know their traditional routes or they're not interested in traveling through them. So we got 10 people that, you know, sing in showers, or sing in the choir or sing on a street corner, whatever, and class clowns or whatever. And we gave them an opportunity to go across the country with "Love in the Nick of Tyme."</s>Mr. TALBERT: And ultimately, I'm going to pick one man, one woman. They're going to be stars in my upcoming production. I'll tour across the country. So they get a chance to do that - big stages, 4,000 seats venues. And they get some cash and they get a network deal on TV One. And they get free Southwest Airlines flights for years and all that good stuff.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Do they get the drink tickets with it?</s>Mr. TALBERT: They get the drink tickets. Two drink, minimum. Two drink, minimum.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Before we let you go, I want ask you about the movie.</s>Mr. TALBERT: Yes. I'm fortunate to have directed my first feature film with a great group of actors. It's called the "First Sunday." And it is with Sony/Screen Gems. It's coming out in January. And it's starring Ice Cube, Tracy Morgan, Katt Williams, Loretta Devine, Keith David, Regina Hall, Malinda Williams, Michael Beach, Olivia Cole.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Fabulous.</s>Mr. TALBERT: I mean, it's got wonderful - Terry Lewis and Jimmy Jam, they're doing some of the music for me. But it's a wonderful group of actors.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: When do you think it'll hit theaters?</s>Mr. TALBERT: In January. In January.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Oh, wow.</s>Mr. TALBERT: Yeah. We're editing it now.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Boy, you are…</s>Mr. TALBERT: I'm right down to the street form you.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: You're on the march.</s>Mr. TALBERT: Yeah. Yeah.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: That's fantastic.</s>Mr. TALBERT: We're getting it going.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, David, thank you so much.</s>Mr. TALBERT: Good to be here. Good to be here.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: David E. Talbert is an award-winning playwright. His reality series, "Stage Black," airs Sundays on the cable channel TV One. |
Irene Cole is a single mom with two teenage boys earning minimum wage in Atlanta, Ga. She says the wage increase, while welcomed, won't help her bottom line. | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: And now we've got a personal story. Irene Cole is a single mom with two teenage boys. She lives on the minimum wage in Atlanta, Georgia.</s>Ms. IRENE COLE (Atlanta, Georgia): I work with a company called Ace Hospitality. I'm a hostess/server sometimes.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: How steady is the work in terms of how many hours a week do you get and how much do you make an hour?</s>Ms. IRENE COLE (Atlanta, Georgia): It varies from place to place. I can make anywhere from minimum wage to maybe $9 an hour.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So do you get any health insurance or any benefits and also, do you get any help from the government like food stamps or housing assistance?</s>Ms. IRENE COLE (Atlanta, Georgia): No. I don't get any of that. I don't qualify for any of that. At this point, as far as medical benefits, no, I don't have any medical benefits because we just switched over to start getting medical benefit.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: You've been working mainly for minimum wage without medical benefits for how long now?</s>Ms. IRENE COLE (Atlanta, Georgia): Oh, about three years.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So, Irene, how have you been able to deal with issues like medical care?</s>Ms. IRENE COLE (Atlanta, Georgia): Well medical care - we have a local hospital, which is a state hospital and the hospital's name is Grady Memorial. And it services the Atlanta area as far as people who have no coverage - medical coverage. And because of the medical cuts recently, they found their self in a medical difficulty. So once they - if they closed their doors, we're going to be set with a plight where we're not going to have anybody to go to as far as health care.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Irene, you've got two teenage kids. Tell me what a typical week is like for you trying to put food on the table, trying to make sure that you have time for them, trying to pay the rent.</s>Ms. IRENE COLE (Atlanta, Georgia): Well, my typical day reflects of - we get up early in the morning. And then I'm off to work around 12, 1 o'clock in the afternoon. And I don't get back until probably about 11 o'clock at night - 12 sometimes. And during the day, they'll call me and speak to me. We'll discuss whatever is going on and basic - most of the time is on the phone at this point. Other than that, typically, I'll get the bills paid while I'm in transit going to work. And on my lunch break or during a break time, I'll go and run out to pay a bill or something in that nature.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: When you think about what can really help you at this point in time, do you think that raising the minimum wage is really what helps you most or could the government - whether it's a state government or the federal government do other things for you that might make your life easier and it might even make it easier for you to pursue your education?</s>Ms. IRENE COLE (Atlanta, Georgia): Well, what I think should happen is - I mean, yeah, we're going to get a minimum wage increase, but it won't even make a bit of difference one way or the other because the increase is - as far as the utilities and food is so astronomical that by the time I probably feel it, I still feel like I'm in the same predicament.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, Irene, thanks so much for talking to us.</s>Ms. IRENE COLE (Atlanta, Georgia): You are so welcome. I appreciate this time that I had on your broadcast.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Irene Cole is a single mother earning minimum wage in Atlanta, Georgia. |
The Atlanta-based soul singer Donnie talks about his latest release, "The Daily News," and the spiritual side of R&B music. The cover of Donnie's earlier release, "The Colored Section." The cover of "The Daily News" | FARAI CHIDEYA, host: I'm Farai Chideya and this is NEWS & NOTES.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: R&B singer Donnie traces his artistic roots to southern soul. Like many R&B singers, Donnie got his earliest taste in music in the black churches of Kentucky and Atlanta. When that city's modern soul scene started taking off, Donnie was right on board with the debut album "The Colored Section."</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Donnie's old school vocal styles earned comparisons to legends like Marvin Gaye and Stevie Wonder. For his new album, "The Daily News," Donnie reached down to his soul roots and pulled in artist who played with Stevie Wonder - Rufus and Earth, Wind and Fire. Donnie joins me now to talk about his new disc. Welcome.</s>Donnie: Thank you.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So, I mentioned before that you have some roots in the southern black church and that's where many of the greatest singers come from. When and how did you break with just singing in church and how did you move on to secular music?</s>DONNIE: I mean, well, I moved on to secular music, you know, when I left the church and left home - really was at the same time, you know. You know, my mother had to push me out, you know, one night and I just started singing in the clubs around Atlanta, you know, doing covered tunes, you know, and making my money that way to feed myself.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: When you say had to push me out, what do you mean specifically?</s>DONNIE: I mean, you know, you grow to a certain point where, you know, I was getting rebellious. You know, getting too much mouth and just, you know, to be living in - under, you know, my dad and my mother's roof you have to, you know, respect them. You know, that time was running out. I was feeling myself or smelling myself as they say.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So when you look back on those hard times, what does it bring to your music?</s>DONNIE: Basically, I guess, it just (unintelligible). Like in church they say - like gold, like metal, you know. It's just makes it more precious - more precious, and just makes you more refined, you know. You can, I guess, brink off emotion and song (unintelligible) because you've been through something.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Now, when you talk about the nature of you voice, whether it's bringing out the experiences that you've had or the lyrics that you create, you have been compared vocally to singers like Stevie Wonder and Donny Hathaway. That is a huge set of influences to live up to. How does it make you feel and does that put pressure on you?</s>DONNIE: Well, it does put pressure on me. It makes me feel honored, you know. I do want to take it further, though. You know what I mean? You know, I don't want to be them always, or be compared to them always. I want to, you know, Donnie, I-E, to have a style of his own.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: So this is your second album. Give us a track that you have done on this album and why it speaks to you not just because you made it, but because you recognize something in it that maybe is universal.</s>DONNIE: 911. You know, of course I dedicate it to our fellow citizens who died in the 9/11 tragedy. You know, I was there. I just need to get some stuff off of my chest.</s>DONNIE: And I just, you know, I wrote it because I want to get rid of all of those isms and schism in my life.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, that's the perfect time to ask about something that you did recently. You were in L.A. to perform at the L.A. Black Pride celebration. It's a big event for African-American, gays and lesbians. Folks come from all over the country to attend. And you spent some time with journalist Jasmine Cannick who we have on our show regularly, and you talked to her about being a gay black man, which you don't always discuss in public. Let me ask you about it, though, now. How has your sexuality change the path that you have been able to walk as an artist and in the music industry?</s>DONNIE: Well, I put it like this. It has freed me. You know, I'm not in - I'm not a fearing that somebody will come out with a story or, you know, I don't fear it in my music. I really don't even talk about it in my music as far as the sexuality part, you know. But - I don't know. It helps me to do what I need to do and just let go of that burden of being scared.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: We had a hip-hop series and we talked about how gays and lesbians and hip-hop were - still for the most part - scarce and isolated, and how people were trying to change that. R&B music has traditionally been what some folks call baby-making music, very heterosexual, very much steeped in a tradition of courtship. How does your approach to it have to change? Or does it change?</s>DONNIE: It doesn't really change because I'm in a tradition of making music -message music, you know, which is soul music, which is basically, I say the bridge between the secular and sacred world.</s>DONNIE: You know. So, it doesn't talk about that heavy sex and, you know, courtship and all that type of stuff, it doesn't do that. So I'm really free to do what I do.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Well, Donnie, thank you so much for joining us.</s>DONNIE: Thank you so much, Farai.</s>FARAI CHIDEYA, host: Soul singer Donnie. His new album is titled "The Daily News." |
An American drone flying over Yemen fired a missile that killed Anwar al-Awlaki, an al-Qaida operative and U.S. citizen. Many hailed the elimination of a man implicated in several terrorist plots. Others wonder how any American citizen can be placed on a death list based on secret intelligence. | NEAL CONAN, host: And now, the Opinion Page. On Friday, an American drone flying over Yemen fired a missile that killed Anwar al-Awlaki, a senior official of al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula and an American citizen. Many hailed the elimination of a man implicated in several plots to attack the United States. We are at war with al-Qaida, the argument goes, an attack to kill an enemy commander is entirely justified. Others wonder how the president of the United States can put any American citizen on a death list on the basis of secret intelligence with no opportunity to challenge the evidence and no judicial review.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We want to hear your thoughts on the legality and wisdom of the drone attack that killed Anwar al-Awlaki. Our phone number is 800-989-8255. The email address is talk@npr.org. And you can join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION. We're also going to read excerpts from several op-eds, and there's a list of those at our website. Again, that's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION. This email from Faye(ph) in New Bern, North Carolina.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I am disgusted to think that people are defending the civil liberties of the likes of Anwar al-Awlaki just because he's an American. American criminals are put to death here in this country from time to time. If a criminal is fleeing from a crime scene, are not the police allowed to warn, halt or I shoot? Is it not killing in self-defense considered legal? I've just cited three precedents for killing American citizens. The man was a known criminal. He hated America and did his best to see us undone. Why should his civil liberties be protected? Why isn't killing him a form of self-defense?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And this email - this is from Dave in Madison. The president I voted for took an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. He has willfully violated his oath by denying the protection of the Fifth Amendment to al-Awlaki and Samir Khan. These citizens were not even enemy combatants as styled by the Bush administration. There is no American battlefield in Yemen. Murder most foul. I call for impeachment.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And as we mentioned, we wanted to read some op-eds. And this is from Mary Eileen(ph) O'Connell on CNN. She's a professor of law and research professor of international dispute resolution at the University of Notre Dame Law School. How could we, she wrote. Killing in war is justifiable morally and legally because of the extraordinary situation of real hostilities. In the limited zones on the planet where two or more contending armed forces fight for territorial control, people are on notice of the danger. In such zones, the necessity to kill without warning is understood. Still, even in combat, there are rules.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Civilians may not be directly targeted; principles of necessity and humanity restrain. When no such armed fighting is occurring, killing is only justified to save a human life immediately. Peacetime human rights and criminal law prevail. The actual facts of fighting determine which rules govern killing. The president has no override authority. Nor should he want it. These rules apply globally. The U.S. should not weaken them, providing a basis for Russia, Iran, China or Pakistan to declare war against opponents, killing them anywhere with missiles and bombs. And what about within the U.S.? If the president can target suspects in Yemen, why not here?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And let's see if we can get another caller on the line. Again, it's 800-989-8255. Email, talk@npr.org. We'll start with Al. Al with us in Minneapolis. Hello, Al.</s>AL: (Unintelligible).</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, I guess, he's not with us in Minneapolis. Let's see - we go to Jessie(ph). Jessie with us from Grand Junction.</s>JESSIE: Hi. Thanks for taking my call.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Grand Junction, Colorado, of course. Go ahead, please.</s>JESSIE: Hi. I just have a quick point. I know I haven't looked at to - the were saying that they didn't violate the Geneva Convention, and I wasn't really sure the specifics of it. But I have seen some documentation that Obama had signed saying that in situations like this, this can work around that, and it doesn't apply to it. So my only concern with that is basically is, you know, what extent are we willing to work around these international conventions, you know, how big of much of a power we're giving ourselves by doing that?</s>JESSIE: And can we really trust ourselves to have that power? I mean, I'd love to trust our government. I'd love to trust the intelligence that we have, but I mean that seems like a slippery slope to be going down.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I hear your argument. The opposite argument is this is an enemy commander. He has conducted war against the United States, declared himself to be at war with the United States, renounced his citizenship, and you have an opportunity, a fleeting opportunity to shoot - to kill him, as the opportunity presented itself in the Second World War to kill the commander of the Japanese combined fleet.</s>JESSE: Exactly. Yeah. I agree on both sides of the spectrum. I think it's just one of those issues that's a little bit hard to deal with because both sides have really strong points on it, and it's - on the end of it, it kind of goes into a matter of trust and what kind of trust we have and...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: All right, Jesse. Thanks very much for the call. Appreciate it.</s>JESSE: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: This is an editorial from The Daily Beast by Richard Miniter: For the first time since the days of Abraham Lincoln, an American president has ordered the killing of a U.S. citizen, far from any battlefield or courtroom. And like Abraham Lincoln, Obama has saved the Constitution and the country by defending it against a nihilistic and narrow reading of the Constitution that would prevent the country from protecting itself.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Awlaki was an imminent threat to the lives of Americans and our allies. Based on Awlaki's links to two 9/11 hijackers, to the leadership of al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula and to jihad in America, there's no doubt he posed a continuing and urgent threat. As evidence accumulated of Awlaki's links to Major Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood shooter, and Umar Farouq Abdulmutallab, the so-called underpants bomber, who planned to down a Detroit-based jet on Christmas day, and to the Times Square bomber, these developments only confirmed Obama's view that Awlaki was a clear and present danger.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: The government of Yemen was not going to arrest him. And unlike bin Laden - excuse me, just a turning a page here. Unlike bin Laden, he moved constantly, meaning the Special Forces team would be going into a location they knew little about. And while Awlaki's protectors were numerous, hardened and well-trained, these those two factors increased the odds of a deadly failure, nor was there any reliable way to lure Awlaki to a place where he might easily be captured. The president was left with two hard options: ignore Awlaki or kill him in a way that minimizes civilian and American casualties.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's see if we get another caller on the line. Let's go to Patricia, Patricia with us from Syracuse.</s>PATRICIA: Thanks for taking my call. So we have this guy who's tie has been confirmed as having his hand in all these acts of what, I think, are called treason. Isn't that treatable with the death penalty? And I'll take your comments off the air.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, thanks, Patricia. You left the air before I could tell - say, of course, yes, the Constitution does call for the death penalty for treason, but that would call a trial for treason, and that's the point that a lot of writers, op-ed writers mentioned.</s>This is from the Los Angeles Times: If Awlaki was, in fact, the architect of terrorism attacks inside the United States, as officials maintain he was, then perhaps his demise is to be welcomed, but we don't really know, do we? There was no transparent, legal, reviewable process by which he was placed on the list of those targeted for killing by the U.S. government. There was no judicial procedure, nor any public airing of the charges against him. He had no opportunity to respond to specific allegations.</s>This is from the Los Angeles Times: Even in wartime, the killing of a U.S. citizen or anyone else who poses no immediate danger is morally obnoxious. It also is impossible to harmonize with the U.S. Constitution. The Fifth Amendment says that no citizen should be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. If Awlaki had been arrested in America rather than assassinated in Yemen, he would have had an incontestable right to a trial.</s>This is from the Los Angeles Times: We understand the government's conundrum. In this dangerous new world, our enemies don't wear uniforms; threats cross national borders, and an order given abroad can quickly lead to devastation at home. The U.S. has struggled for a decade with how to safeguard people without crossing moral lines or violating individual rights. But if the U.S. is going to continue down the troubling road of state-sponsored assassination, the government should, at the very least, provide a clear understanding of the criteria used to decide who should be placed on the target list.</s>This is from the Los Angeles Times: This is from an email. This is from Ed. In the 18th century, the British Army was confounded by the guerrilla tactics of American revolutionaries. Their inability to adapt to this new method of war led to their defeat. In the 21st century, Lower Manhattan has become the battlefield. Commercial airliners and vans loaded with improvised explosives are the new weapons. We can either cling to our traditional notions of warfare, or we can adapt to these new methods of war. Our nation's security requires the latter.</s>This is from the Los Angeles Times: And this is an email from Louis(ph) in Denver. Although every American citizen, good or bad, has a right to trial to confront his or her accusers, the killing of al-Awlaki without trial shows I was wrong. Apparently, only some American citizens have the right to trial.</s>This is from the Los Angeles Times: And this is from an editorial that was published in The New York Time, an op-ed piece. This is from Yasir Qadhi, an American Muslim cleric. And he writes that, by the killing of al-Awlaki, you create a martyr. Mr. Awlaki's ideas were dangerous, he writes. His message that one cannot be a good Muslim and an American at the same time was insulting to nearly all Muslim Americans. His views about the permissibility of killing Americans indiscriminately were completely at odds with those of mainstream Muslim clerics around the world. He needed to be refuted, and that is why many people, myself included, were extremely vocal in doing just that.</s>This is from the Los Angeles Times: Mr. Awlaki needed to be challenged, not assassinated. By killing him, America has once again blurred the lines between its own tactics and the tactics of its enemies. In silencing Mr. Awlaki's voice, not only did America fail to live up to its ideals, but it gave Mr. Awlaki's dangerous message a life and power of its own. And these two facts make the job of refuting that message now even more difficult.</s>This is from the Los Angeles Times: Let's see if we can go next to - this is Al. Al is now on the line from Minneapolis. Nice to have you back. Al, are you there? Evidently Al's still not there. I apologize for that. Let's go instead to Rufus, Rufus with us from Orlando.</s>RUFUS: Yes. I want to say that when this gentleman stated explicitly his intention against the United States government, against - but he would be - what would be fellow citizens of the United States government, at that point, he forfeited any right to a fair hearing by a trial. He forfeited any kind of reasonable effort that could be used to detain him to have a judiciary hearing of that effect. And I totally support what the president did, and I think this clearly is indicative of his being tough on terrorism and being an American that will uphold the Constitution of the United States.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Though an American, any American is - if presented secret evidence, no judicial review whatsoever, the president can just put him on the list and say, if you see this person anywhere in the world, you can kill him.</s>RUFUS: You know, that's a slippery slope that we go down with this. And quite frankly, that's why I trust this president, that his people would weigh the evidence, vet it to the degree that it would not go to other extreme as you've just outlined there. But that's a slippery slope that we face with this kind of war that we are in, and, you know, those are some of the powers that we will give to the commander in chief when we put him or her in office to protect our life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Rufus, thanks very much for the phone call. Appreciate it. We're collecting opinions on the drone attack that killed an al-Qaida operative and an American citizen, Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen on Friday. You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And this is Micki(ph), Micki with u from Dexter, Michigan.</s>MICKI: Hello.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Hi, Micki. Go ahead, please.</s>MICKI: Well, now I have two comments based on what the last caller has said. Based on what he said, you know, I heard several referenced to the slippery slope, a and my opinion is, if you're going to get on that slippery slope and cohort with al-Qaida operatives, then you're putting yourself in danger. And I can't but applaud Obama for this action and potential in saving thousands of American lives. If you're going to get in bed with al-Qaida, then you'll face the same consequences as they do.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Micki, thanks very much for the call.</s>MICKI: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Email from Wayne in San Mateo. Our government has just demonstrated it has the capacity and will kill with impunity any Americans suspected of undesirable activity without due process and in violation of our individual rights simply for expediency.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And this email from Carl(ph) in Cincinnati - excuse me, Earl in Cincinnati. Having never been in indicted for an actual crime, he could not have given himself up and claims his rights to be tried. Also, no hard evidence or specific direction he gave anyone has ever been provided to the public or even had an attributable on-the-record government source name attached to it. He was a citizen killed with no specific charges on the bases of no specific evidence. How could he be considered a fugitive from justice, rather than the subject of summary education.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And this editorial was from the Wall Street Journal by former Justice Department official, John Yoo. Today's critics wish to return the United States to the pre-9/11 world of fighting terrorism only with the criminal justice system. Worse yet, they get the rights of a nation at war terribly wrong. Awlaki's killing in no way violates a prohibition on assassination first declared by executive order during the Ford administration.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: As American government officials have long concluded, assassination is an act of murder for political purposes. Killing Martin Luther King Jr. or John F. Kennedy is assassination. Shooting an enemy soldier in wartime is not. In World War II, the United States did not carry out an assassination when it sent long-range fighters to shoot down an air transport carrying the Japanese admiral Isoroku Yamamoto. American citizens who join the enemy do not enjoy a roving legal force field that immunizes them from military reprisal.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's see if we can go next to - this is Bruce, and Bruce is on the line with us from Golden, Colorado.</s>BRUCE: Good afternoon. I think the problem - what happened is problematic from the constitutional point of view that I don't believe we have a constitutional declaration of war. Therefore, all the citations of justification saying that this wartime act are - that's the weak link, I think.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Without a - so every American soldier who fired a weapon at - in Vietnam or Korea was committing an act of...</s>BRUCE: Let's - the issue here is that an American citizen was targeted and you have no declaration of war from a constitutional standpoint, and you have the Fifth Amendment that says that the United States will not deprive life, liberty, so on and so forth.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Though Congress did pass a law saying the United States - the commander in chief was authorized to go anywhere in pursuit of al-Qaida.</s>BRUCE: That is not a constitutional declaration of war.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: All right. Bruce...</s>BRUCE: The point being is, I think, it is - it will be interesting to hear court arguments on this.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: The court did hear an argument, by the way, from - in a suit brought by Mr. Awlaki's father when he was placed, reportedly, on this list, and the judge threw the case out.</s>BRUCE: And now we've taken the next step of eliminating. By the way, I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing that he has stopped being a participant in the land of the breathing.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: All right. Bruce, thanks very much for the call. We will end with this email from Joe in Minneapolis. I'm glad Mr. Awlaki is gone. He's a clear and present danger to the U.S. Salman Rushdie really - he stated the man is clearly guilty of treason against his country, a capital offense, according to the Constitution. I'd like to see some sort of authorizing warrant for Mr. Awlaki's hit from a member of the independent judicial branch that would have enabled the balance of power to prevent any branch from singlehandedly overstepping its constitutional bound without oversight from one of its peer branches.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And we'd like to thank all of you who emailed and called, and we're sorry we could not get to all of your calls. And again, if you go to our website at npr.org, click on TALK OF THE NATION, you can find the full text of the editorials from which we quoted earlier today.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Tomorrow, we'll look at what's behind a growing number of drug shortages, not just for cancer drugs but other drugs, too, around the country, and about decisions over who gets what once supplies are short. This is TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. I'm Neal Conan in Washington. |
Somalia has been hard hit by East Africa's worst drought in decades. The United Nations warns that 750,000 Somalis could soon starve to death. Jeffrey Gettleman of The New York Times provides an update on the famine and the ongoing conflict that has made Somalis even more vulnerable. | NEAL CONAN, host: In The New York Times, East Africa bureau chief Jeffrey Gettleman wrote: A drought-induced famine is steadily creeping across Somalia, and tens of thousands of people have already died. The Islamist militant group the Shabab is blocking most aid agencies from accessing the regions it controls. And in the next few months, three quarters of a million people could run out of food. And Jeffrey Gettleman asked a question: Is the world about to watch 750,000 Somalis starve to death?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: If you have family or friends in the region, what are you hearing from them? Give us a call, 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. Jeffrey Gettleman joins us now from his home in Nairobi. Nice to have you with us today.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: Glad to be here.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And let me put your own question to you. Is the world going to intervene or watch?</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: Well, we've seen a real reluctance to intervene in the way the world did in 1992, 1993, and that's what's interesting about this famine is that it's very similar to what happened in the early '90s, which provoked this massive response - tens of thousands of American troops, big U.N. peacekeeping mission, billions of dollars spent to break the grip of warlords who were blocking food aid at the time and allow food to be delivered to starving people.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: It's a very similar situation right now. There is a drought across all of the Horn of Africa - Kenya, Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Djibouti. But the only places that there is a famine where people are dying in great numbers are in the Shabab-controlled areas, where these Islamic militants will not allow Western groups to deliver food aid. So the question is what's the world going to do about that? But it seems like there's a lot of reluctance to go back in a big way. And therefore, you know, are these aid groups going to be able to get into these areas and deliver food? It's an open question.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And as the situation worsens in those areas, you noted that most aid agencies are unable to be allowed into those regions controlled by the Shabab but not all.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: That's right. I mean, the Shabab is a very mercurial group. It's a hodgepodge of different Islamic leaders in Somalia. There are some foreign elements, people that have come from Afghanistan, the Arab world, even the United States to fight a holy war in Somalia. So you have a very pixilated picture of who's in control of the Shabab. And some Shabab leaders have let in a few aid groups. But the real big ones, like the World Food Programme, and let's say the American government, USAID, those ones are being prevented from accessing the drought areas. So while there are a few Western NGOs, like Save the Children, there's another one called CONCERN, they do work in these areas but in a very limited way. We're relying on local partners, and that's not going to be enough. Everybody agrees with that.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Last week, the Ethiopian prime minister, Meles Zenawi, proposed to establish a humanitarian corridor so food aid could be delivered. Isn't that along the lines of Somalia 1992?</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: That's exactly right. And that received a really cool reception. Most people did not think it was a good idea for a few reasons. One, Ethiopia is not a trusted partner in Somalia. They came in in 2006, stormed into the country, fought the Islamist forces at the time, and that just created a worse insurgency and really was a recruiting boost for the Shabab Islamic group.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: And also, you know, this isn't 1992. It's a different world. The United States government is stretched very thin between, you know, the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, and they don't have the manpower or the helicopters to mount another big peacekeeping or military intervention in Somalia.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: And I think, you know, let's not forget what happened in Somalia. In 1993, the U.S. was engaged in street battles with warlords in Mogadishu, the capital, and 18 servicemen were killed, a couple of helicopters were shot down, and that created this shadow over Somalia that nobody has really wanted to lift again.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Indeed, nobody even wants to answer the problems on land that lead to the widespread piracy from parts of Somalia.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: That's right. And, you know, it's really the same cause. It's the failure of the central government, and it explains both the famine and the pirates and the Islamic militancy. It's all the same root cause. Somalia is very unique in that regard, that it's been now 20 years and there's no central government. You know, different parts of world like Afghanistan or Iraq or Lebanon have slipped into stages of anarchy, but they've always emerged from them to have some type of government. Even if it wasn't, you know, 100 percent solid in every corner of the country, there was a functioning government to some degree. Somalia doesn't have that.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: And the piracy thing, I've been writing about this in the last, you know, few weeks. The pirates recently launched an attack inside Kenya, where they came up in a speedboat to a fancy resort in northern Kenya and kidnapped a British woman after shooting her husband and spirited her back into Somalia. So the lesson here is that the failed - that the problems in failed states become everybody's problems. They can't be contained, and that's what we're seeing in Somalia.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's get a caller in on the conversation. We're talking with Jeffrey Gettleman, the East Africa bureau for The New York Times. 800-989-8255, email: talk@npr.org. Troy is calling from Iowa City.</s>TROY (Caller): Yes. My question is, is when will other members of U.N. step up, like, we'll just say China, the Soviet Union, South Africa, Chad maybe. When will they step up and take a role to fix these African problems?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Soviet Union has not been a country for 20 years, but Russia.</s>TROY (Caller): OK...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Yeah. Well, it's just not accurate. It's not whether I like it or not. Jeffrey Gettleman?</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: It's a good - listen. It's a valid question. You know, the whole world shouldn't be totally relying on the U.S. to solve all these problems, you know, in the different parts of the globe. But what we've seen in Somalia is this - some Muslim countries, Turkey especially, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, are trying to supply food aid to starving people. And the Islamic militants in control of some of these drought areas are a little more receptive to their, you know, Muslim brethren, but the problem is they don't have the experience. You know, Saudi Arabia had never mounted a huge billion-dollar aid mission. Sudan, I mean Sudan gets a lot of aid.</s>TROY (Caller): But it's about time they do, isn't it?</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: Is it about time that they do mount an operation? Maybe, but...</s>TROY (Caller): They have the money to do it, they should take the initiative to fix this problem.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: Listen, I think a lot of people would agree with you. They definitely have the money to do it, but they don't have the experience. So if this was a, you know, what I've seen in Somalia, it's not just about money and about food. It's about experience. There are, you know, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of children who are starving to death. They are too sick now to be fed. I've seen them myself in the hospitals and the refugee camps, you know, trudging along the roads with their families, and these kids need to be hospitalized. You can't feed them. So what you need are, you know, a team of doctors. You need field hospitals. You need experts, and there are just not many places that can provide that right now.</s>TROY (Caller): I think Saudi Arabia has doctors. I think people...</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: Of course...</s>TROY (Caller): ...I think other countries have doctors and those resources. You're talking about military resources. We're talking humanitarian resources which all of these countries have. They should step up and do this job.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Troy, thanks very much for the call. Appreciate it. Let's see if we can go next to - this is Tom, Tom with us from El Cerrito in California.</s>TOM (Caller): Hello.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Hi. Go ahead, please.</s>TOM (Caller): Yeah. I'm just back. I live in Somalia for two and a half years in the late '60s with the Peace Corps and just back from Peace Corps reunion in Washington, D.C., where we specifically talked about Somalia, collected about $10,000 to send to relief organizations. And there are couples that go through the backdoor, as it were, to get relief into the various camps and to people who need it. One is called The Africa Future, and it's theafricanfuture.org. Another is the Amoud Foundation, A-M-O-U-D, www.amoudfoundation.com. There's also the Anglo-Somali Society. These seem to get money directly to starving and sick people who need it, and I would strongly urge people to contact them and send them...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Are they going to be able to provide assistance on the scale that we're talking about?</s>TOM (Caller): Oh, absolutely. Absolutely, and...</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: Do you believe that's accurate, Jeffrey Gettleman?</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: You know, I don't think so. I mean, everything I've been told is that, you know, there are millions of people who need food, and it is very complicated to bring food into Somalia. There's a million security issues. There's logistics. The World Food Programme can't even bring ships directly from the United States or Brazil or Asia that are carrying the food into Somalia because the port has been so dilapidated over the years that it doesn't have the capacity. So they have to offload the ships, which, you know, delays the whole operation, put the food on smaller ships that will fit in the Mogadishu port, and then try to distribute it in this landscape that's inhabited by warlords, militants, bandits, you name it. So that's just the food distribution.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: And then there are these other issues like I was talking about, where children need to be hospitalized and diagnosed and, you know, treated very intensively to save their lives. So I don't think it's a simple aid operation. And everybody I've talked to says you need the big groups that have worked in Darfur, that have worked in Congo, that have worked in other crises that have the experience and the manpower and what they called the surge capacity to go into Somalia fast, because we're talking - you know, we're talking about millions of lives, you know, in, you know, hanging in the balance in the next few months. The U.N. says 750,000 people will starve to death, you know, very soon. So it's not a time to learn on the job. You need people that have done this before.</s>TOM (Caller): Well, these seem to be organizations that have done the job already or are in the process of doing the job and partly made up of Somali people who, you know, are very, very familiar with the situation, and has seemed to have been able to circumvent some of the very problems that you are addressing and, you know, to get people fed and cared very, very directly. Never enough, it's never enough, but it's always better than nothing and better than talk.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Tom, thanks very much for the call. Appreciate it.</s>TOM (Caller): Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And briefly, Jeffrey Gettleman, Shabab pulled out of Mogadishu for the most part a little while ago. That situation seems, though, more chaotic than ever.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: Yeah, exactly. I mean, this gets to this government issue. The Shabab has left Mogadishu. They are struggling. They're losing fighters. They don't have a lot of resources, and they gave up their claims to Mogadishu for the first time in years, which handed the government, this transitional government in Mogadishu, an opportunity. But instead of seizing that opportunity, it looks like they're squandering it. Government forces had been looting food aid. They've killed starving people on riots over food aid. Parts of the city are very insecure, so it's not purely about the Shabad.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: It's about this deeper issue of a lack of a functioning government and what that breeds, this kind of chaos and anarchy and war profiteering, and that's been the story in Somalia since the '90s, since the U.S. and the U.N. abruptly pulled out after the Black Hawk Down. The whole country just, you know, sank into this anarchy and it's still in many ways there in that same spot.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: Jeffrey Gettleman, thanks for your time today.</s>JEFFREY GETTLEMAN: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Jeffrey Gettleman, East Africa bureau chief for The New York Times, with us on the line from Nairobi in Kenya. You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. |
The race for the GOP presidential nomination continues. How do candidates plan for such a long primary with multiple straw polls, debates, caucuses and votes? NPR's Ken Rudin and former Mike Huckabee campaign manager Chip Saltsman discuss how candidates can best weather the grueling races. | NEAL CONAN, host: This is TALK OF THE NATION. I'm Neal Conan in Washington. Governor Perry stumbles in Florida; Governor Christie is flattered, just not ready; and President Obama embraces class warfare. It's Wednesday and time for a...</s>President BARACK OBAMA: It's about time...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: ...edition of the Political Junkie.</s>President RONALD REAGAN: There you go again.</s>Vice President WALTER MONDALE: When I hear your new ideas, I'm reminded of that ad: Where's the beef?</s>Senator BARRY GOLDWATER: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.</s>Senator LLOYD BENTSON: Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy.</s>President RICHARD NIXON: You don't have Nixon to kick around anymore.</s>SARAH PALIN: Lipstick.</s>President GEORGE BUSH: But I'm the decider.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Every Wednesday, Political Junkie Ken Rudin joins us to recap the week in politics. Herman Cain takes the Florida straw poll, but just as interesting, who loses. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie still not in but not exactly out either. Republicans debate immigration, another government shutdown showdown, and congressional maps in Utah and Ohio make life lots tougher for Democrats.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: In a few minutes we'll speak with Mike Huckabee's former campaign manager, Chip Saltsman, about straw polls, debates, the war of expectations and how the primary calendar affect your tactics. And later in the program we'll speak with Henry Cisneros about immigration and integration. But first, Political Junkie Ken Rudin joins us here in Studio 3A. And as always, we begin with a trivia question. Hey, Ken.</s>KEN RUDIN: Hi, Neal. I think when President Obama said it's about time, I think he was talking about the trivia question.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: He was? Yeah, maybe.</s>KEN RUDIN: But maybe not this one.</s>KEN RUDIN: Okay, here's another one that you're going to roll your eyes at. 2004 was a great year for Republicans, right? George W. Bush was re-elected president. Republicans retained control of the House and Senate, and several future presidential candidates, including Barack Obama, also won that year. But one future presidential candidate was defeated in 2004 as well. Who was it?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: This was - it's only been - there was 2008 and this time.</s>KEN RUDIN: So basically it's every four years we have a presidential race.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: How about that?</s>KEN RUDIN: I think people turn on this radio show to learn that.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: They probably know that. If you think you know the answer to this week's trivia question, the future presidential candidate who lost an election in 19-- in 2004, give us a call, 800-989-8255. Email talk@npr.org. The winner, of course, gets a fabulous no-prize T-shirt.</s>KEN RUDIN: By the way, listeners, Neal is making that face again. Just wanted to let you know that.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And was there a ScuttleButton winner this week?</s>KEN RUDIN: There was, as a matter of fact. The winner was Michelle Halls(ph) of Minneapolis, Minnesota, that Minneapolis. And the three buttons were - there was a button of Congressman Bill Green, there was a button of Senator Jim Exon of Nebraska, and there was a Hamilton Fish button. So when you add Bill Green, Senator Jim Exon and Hamilton Fish, you get Green Exon Ham.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Okay, yeah, you get green eggs and ham. Anyway, there will be a ScuttleButton puzzle up this week too.</s>KEN RUDIN: Today.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Anyway, I hear Godfather's Pizza is delicious in Florida.</s>KEN RUDIN: Well, yes. That was a big, big surprise. The fact is that Rick Perry, the erstwhile frontrunner who expended a lot of time and effort into this straw poll, and we could always talk about - and we will talk about the importance of straw polls - but Rick Perry finished a disappointing second.</s>KEN RUDIN: Herman Cain was the big winner, Herman Cain the former Godfather's Pizza executive, you know, with his nine-nine-nine plan. Some people think of it as six-six-six, but that's a different thing completely.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: That's a different story completely, yes.</s>KEN RUDIN: But anyway, so, you know, he's crowd-pleasing. He gets the folks on their feet, and do I think he has a chance for the nomination? Absolutely not. Do I think he has a chance for anything? No, and yet he won overwhelmingly, which makes you wonder, either - maybe the voters know something that I don't know, or the straw polls are meaningless.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: There is also a - well, probably less significant straw poll in Michigan over the weekend too.</s>KEN RUDIN: Right, and that was Mitt Romney, of course, coming from - born in Michigan. His father was George Romney, a multi-term governor of Michigan who also ran for president in 1968. Mitt Romney was a big winner in the straw poll there, not much of a surprise. The Herman Cain thing was a big surprise.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: But part of that also attributed to Rick Perry's performances in the recent debates, especially the one in Orlando just before this, and this is, well, Rick Perry having some difficulty.</s>Governor RICK PERRY: Is it the Mitt Romney that was on the side of - against the Second Amendment before he was for the Second Amendment? Was it - was it before he was before the social programs from the standpoint of he was for - standing up for Roe vs. Wade before he was against verse - Roe vs. Wade?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: That's painful.</s>KEN RUDIN: Wait, was this the "Saturday Night Live" bit, or--? This was the actual debate.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: The real deal.</s>KEN RUDIN: You have to see last week's "Saturday Night Live" and their spoof of the debate because it's so strange. You know, Rick Perry was going to be the Republican savior. There was clearly dissatisfaction with Mitt Romney. So they begged, they pleaded, they cajoled Rick Perry into the race, and you know that there's some things that a new candidate has to bone up on before he handles these debates, and yet this is the third debate in a row, and I think it's gotten successively worse for Rick Perry, unable to coherently answer a bunch of questions.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: In the meantime, he's being hit by those on his right who say that he's not conservative enough, including Mitt Romney hitting him on his immigration policies, where he supported the DREAM Act, which allows the children of illegal aliens, who may be illegal themselves, the equivalent of in-state tuition at Texas universities, public universities.</s>MITT ROMNEY: Do you know how much that is? It's $22,000 a year. Four years of college, you're almost $100,000 discount if you're an illegal alien to go to the University of Texas.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And Rick Perry this time fired right back.</s>Governor RICK PERRY: If you say that we should not educate children who have come into our state for no other reason than they've been brought there by no fault of their own, I don't think you have a heart.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So Rick Perry defending that position, which was not popular.</s>KEN RUDIN: Yes, and you also cut out the boos that followed that, and that's unfortunate. I mean, you think of - whatever you think about Rick Perry, this is a popular position in Hispanic-heavy Texas. It may also be a popular position in the country, but it's not a popular position in the Republican Party that is the party of anti-illegal immigration. It's a hot-button issue that there's no, you know, no compromise on, and it's not going to do Perry good in a process that has Iowa, South Carolina, states that have a conservative electorate.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And meantime, there is another candidate who's coming into the race, maybe, maybe not. This is, of course, the governor of New Jersey speaking last night at the Ronald Reagan Library, a high-profile venue, a high-profile event, and he again declined to enter the race, but he didn't rule it out completely. But if he does enter the race, this is a clip of tape that he may hear over and over and over again.</s>Governor CHRIS CHRISTIE: First you have to - in your heart you've got to want it more than anything else, more than anything else. I don't want it that badly. Secondly, you've got to believe in your heart that you are ready to walk into the Oval Office and to lead the nation, and I don't feel like I'm ready.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I don't feel like I'm ready. His opponents could make some hay with that.</s>KEN RUDIN: Well, you know, who is ready or who are ready are the cable news shows. I was sitting at my desk this morning, and all three cable TV news programs had Chris Christie speculation all over the screen, and to me that was astounding.</s>KEN RUDIN: First of all, he's not the conservative savior that conservatives think, and we can talk about all his issues...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Immigration for one.</s>KEN RUDIN: Immigration, gun control, the previous comments about, you know, different things. But also at the same time it just shows that, you know - look, they weren't happy with Mitt Romney, so they needed somebody to save them. Conservatives needed Rick Perry. Suddenly Rick Perry is not conservative enough because of the in-state tuition for the illegal...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And the HPV virus vaccine.</s>KEN RUDIN: Right, exactly. And so, you know, we keep wishing for these things, but look, Chris Christie has said 9,000 times - I think he even said like over my dead body or something like that - he said he's not running.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: A hundred percent, yeah.</s>KEN RUDIN: Right, I take him at his word, and yet the speculation goes on because clearly there's a dissatisfaction with Rick Perry now.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We have some people on the line who think they know the answer to this week's trivia question, and again, it is the future presidential candidate who lost an election in 2004, 800-989-8255. Email is talk@npr.org. And we'll start with Ana(ph), Ana with us from Fayetteville in Arkansas.</s>ANA: Hi, thank you for having me on.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Go ahead, please.</s>ANA: Was it Joe Lieberman?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Joe Lieberman, the independent, now, senator from Connecticut.</s>KEN RUDIN: Joe Lieberman did lose a primary for the Senate, for re-election to the Senate, but that was in 2006. And actually, he ran for president in 2004. So he wasn't a future presidential candidate, he was a current presidential candidate.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: But Ana, very good guess.</s>ANA: Thank you, thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thanks very much, let's see if we can go next to Brent(ph) and Brent with us from Kansas City.</s>BRENT: Would it be Ron Paul?</s>KEN RUDIN: No, Ron Paul, I mean, the only time he lost, of course, is when he ran as a Libertarian Party candidate in 1988. He was out of Congress by then. But in 2004, Ron Paul, along with Barack Obama, were elected that year of 2004.</s>BRENT: Okay, thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thanks very much, Brent. Let's go to - this is Milner(ph), Milner with us from Lynchburg in Virginia.</s>MILNER: Was it Rick Santorum in Pennsylvania?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Who was defeated for the United States Senate.</s>KEN RUDIN: In 2006. So it wasn't Rick Santorum. He lost in 2006.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thanks very much, Milner, good guess. Here's an email answer from Mark(ph) in Evanston, Illinois: Herman Cain.</s>KEN RUDIN: Herman Cain is the correct answer.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Ding, ding, ding.</s>KEN RUDIN: People don't remember this - of course we do - but anyway...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: You do.</s>KEN RUDIN: In 2004, in the Republican primary in Georgia for the U.S. Senate, he was defeated by Johnny Isakson in the Republican primary.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So we have your particulars and your email address. We will get in touch with you and send you a political no-prize, Political Junkie no-prize T-shirt in exchange for your promise for a digital picture of yourself wearing it that we can put on our wall of shame.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Ken, in the meantime, there has been sort of a revival of - the old Barack Obama seems to have come out from hiding, and this is one of his more feisty appearances in recent, well, years, as he told the Congressional Black Caucus to fall into place and quit complaining.</s>President BARACK OBAMA: Take off your bedroom slippers, put on your marching shoes, shake it off, stop complainin', stop grumblin', stop cryin'. We are gonna press on. We've got work to do, CBC.</s>KEN RUDIN: That's the Congressional Black Caucus, of course, and you know, it's kind of interesting. I mean, for - the black community has been, from the beginning, President Obama's most loyal constituency. They provided an unbelievable amount of votes in 2008. But they have been hurt. I mean, we talk about 9.1 percent unemployment, but the African-American unemployment is like 17 percent. Forty percent of young blacks are living in poverty.</s>KEN RUDIN: So to say stop complaining and, you know, just, you know, just brush it off, I mean, it's a little infuriating, I would think, to many in the African-American community, given the fact that there have been bailouts that help corporations, bailouts that help banks, and things like that.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Congresswoman Maxine Waters of California pointed out on MSNBC that she was not exactly thrilled with the president's remarks.</s>Representative MAXINE WATERS: He has an office for Excellence in Hispanic Education right in the White House. They are still pushing him. He certainly didn't tell them to stop complaining. And he would never say that to the gay and lesbian community, who really pushed him on "don't ask, don't tell," or even in a speech to AIPAC, he would never say to the Jewish community, stop complaining about Israel.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And the president, well, a lot of people appreciated his - on the left, appreciated his saying sign me up for class warfare. He may have gotten into some trouble here.</s>KEN RUDIN: Well, he did, but you're right. There is a new tone coming from the president. We saw for the longest time he was busy trying to work out compromises with the Republicans. And most of the Republicans will never compromise with him anyway.</s>KEN RUDIN: So, you know, remember, for years we always talked about the new Nixon. This is the new Obama, the more feisty Obama, but whether it's just a campaign mode or whether it's a real change of heart, we'll see.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: The '68 Nixon, he's different this year. Political Junkie Ken Rudin is with us, and when we come back, Mike Huckabee's former campaign manager, Chip Saltsman, tells us how the long primary calendar affects a candidate's tactics. Stay with us. I'm Neal Conan. It's the TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News.</s>ROGER MCGUINN: (Singing) ...And take over this beautiful land. And take over this beautiful land...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: This is TALK OF THE NATION, from NPR News. I'm Neal Conan. It's Wednesday, and political junkie Ken Rudin is with us. If you think he's funny on the radio, check out his column on our website. There's also a sinister side to Ken, which comes out in his devious ScuttleButton puzzle. You can find both of those at npr.org/junkie.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Any political junkie can tell you that candidates need to pace themselves for the long primary schedule. There are debates, straw polls, bus tours, fundraisers, and, finally for those who hang on, caucuses and votes. Last month, the Iowa straw poll forced former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty out of the GOP race for president and boosted the campaign of Congresswoman Michele Bachmann - at least temporarily.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: This past weekend, businessman Herman Cain won the Florida straw poll, which most predicted was Rick Perry's to lose. Talking on NBC's "Today" show after his win, Cain said that in a primary campaign, the message is more important than the money.</s>HERMAN CAIN: I rented a bus and went all over the state talking to people, sharing my message. That's what made the difference.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're taking the long view on the primaries today and look at the tactics candidates need to win and the moments that can make or break a primary campaign. What sign do you look for that shows your candidate can win? Our phone number, 800-989-8255. Email talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Joining us now by phone from his office in Tennessee is Chip Saltsman, former campaign manager for Mike Huckabee's presidential bid, now chief of staff to Republican Congressman Chuck Fleischmann of Tennessee. And Chip Saltsman, nice to have you back on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: Good to be with you, as always.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And Mitt Romney won the Iowa straw poll in 2008. You boss Mike Huckabee won the Iowa caucuses. Do these straw polls matter?</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: Well, for us they did. As you may remember, we had a very surprising second-place finish that got most of the buzz and kind of gave us enough oxygen to keep going. You know, it's important - these campaigns are marathons, and it's important to stay in the game and keep it your race, your pace, no matter what it is, whether you're the frontrunner with all the money or somebody in third or fourth with just enough to survive.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: And my favorite quote comes from Senator Lamar Alexander when he was running for president. He said presidential campaigns don't lose, they run out of money. So your number one job is don't run out of money, keep yourself in the game, and you're going to have some opportunities along the way, like a Herman Cain did this weekend down in Florida, like my guess is somebody else in Iowa is going to pop before we get to January.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: You just keep it - there are ebbs and flows in every campaign, and your number one job is to stay in it and keep your pace.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And when you say oxygen enough to keep going, oxygen in political terms is money.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: Money and national media, as well. We got a little burst of national media from our straw poll second-place finish in the summer of 2007, and that really gave us oh, my God, Huckabee is real. And it gave people a chance to get a second look at us.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: We had enough money to survive the day after the Iowa straw poll if we didn't do well. So we put everything on the line there. But then we made sure we kept small enough that we were not going to run ourselves out of money before the caucus because we knew that if we could get to the caucus, we could make a case; there's 100,000 people that go vote in the caucus.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: We'd been there for a year. We knew we'd made a case with enough people to get a pretty good showing no matter what, and if something happened, like it did, we knew we could win.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So not only you won the battle of expectations in the Iowa straw poll, then you have to sort of reduce everybody's expectations for places where you're not going to invest that time and money.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: There's no question. I spent as much of my time trying to do good things in Iowa and New Hampshire and South Carolina as explaining to other people in the other 47 states why I couldn't afford anything.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: And in the Huckabee campaign, we ran a pretty shoestring campaign, and that's where you get in trouble. When you pop early, like a Michele Bachmann did, all of a sudden everybody in the country wants you. They want you to start spending money, time, effort, energy in all these other states, and at the end of the day, it just matters in those early primary states what you're going to do in January.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: It's pretty exciting to be the frontrunner in March and April; I'd much rather be the frontrunner in January and February because those are the folks that usually win the nomination.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Ken?</s>KEN RUDIN: Chip, in the old days, and I always refer to the old days, but back in 1984, Gary Hart finished a strong second or a surprising second in Iowa, and then tons of money came in, enough - and he actually wound up winning the New Hampshire over Walter Mondale in an upset. But that was weeks and weeks later.</s>KEN RUDIN: Now with Florida about to announce their primary schedule, a primary date for January 31, it looks like Iowa and New Hampshire are going to be early January, if you don't have the money now, if you're just getting in the race or if you're somebody like, you know, Chris Christie with two months to go, how do you raise all that money to be competitive in the January caucuses and the primaries?</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: We spent $1.6 million total, total in Iowa over a year to win the Iowa caucuses. So you don't have to spend a crazy amount of money. I think Governor Romney probably spent 10. So it was at least 10 to one.</s>KEN RUDIN: And when did you get that money? When did that money come in for you?</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: Well, we kept - we raised $300,000 our first quarter, but we saved a lot of it. We didn't spend as much as other people. We didn't have a big staff. We didn't have a big travel budget. I always used to joke, everybody says I was a genius for keeping Governor Huckabee in Iowa so long, and the truth of it was that we had enough money to fly him to Iowa, we just didn't have enough money to fly him back home. So we kept him there.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: And so you make those frugal decisions, and then about October happened, and he did very well in the voter value straw poll. He did - he got a little pop on TV. We had the Chuck Norris endorsement that we made a kind of a fun little ad that kind of got a lot of encouragement. Started getting a lot more $100, $50 checks and then, you know, started about December all of a sudden we were second in the polls. We were close to first, and that's when the money online came in. The Internet's changed the game. You can get money instantly now. You have a good debate performance, and boom, the - your - the online lights up, and you can bank $100,000 overnight for some of these guys like a Herman Cain.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: My guess is he had a pretty good day online the day after he won the Florida straw poll. The key is don't spend that money now. Save it for when it matters, which is for Herman Cain, I assume that's going to be in Iowa or South Carolina or somewhere along those lines.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking with Chip Saltsman, who managed Mike Huckabee's presidential campaign four years ago, and we'd like to hear what signs you look for to see that your candidate can win amid this season of straw polls and debates as we head up towards caucuses and primaries. Give us a call, 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. And we'll start with David, and David's on the line with us from Tucson.</s>DAVID: Yes, hi, thank you for taking my call. I'm a big fan.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thank you.</s>DAVID: Well, as, you know, you were mentioning earlier, one of the big important turnouts that we've noticed is that how big the Internet has become in these elections. And, you know, seeing the last presidential election, I think that it boosted the amount of reach that the candidates had. And for me that's a big sign.</s>DAVID: If you're able to mobilize your base financially, I think that increases exponentially your reach toward the community.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Chip Saltsman, he's making the same point you are, money. And it's interesting to see all the candidates scrambling at all these fundraisers in the past few days to try to get their figures up for the third-quarter number because we'll come out in a couple of weeks when those figures are given to us and say this is the money primary, this is how much these people have raised.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: Absolutely, and that will be the story that dominates the day or two - October 15th when those numbers come out. The media loves to talk about process: who's raised the most money, who doesn't have much cash on hand, who spent too much money, how much did this person raise or spend? And that dominates the media for a couple of days.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: So it's important to have - we never had any good fundraising figures, compared to John McCain or Mitt Romney or anybody else. But what we were able to make or do, say look, you're right, we didn't raise a third of the money that anybody else did, but we didn't spend as much, either. And we've got enough money to compete in Iowa. You need - we said we needed a million dollars to compete in Iowa. We had that cash on hand going into Iowa.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: So you've got to make that case for each individual case. For instance, I think Rick Santorum could make a move in Iowa. He's going to have to prove in the third quarter he's got enough money to compete there. He doesn't need 10 million dollars, but he needs, you know, probably a million dollars, and if he's been able to save that, then he can be a real factor in Iowa.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: So each candidate has their own path. All of them are different, but, you know, Mitt Romney needs to raise the most money by a big number. Rick Perry needs to put a big number on the board, let's say 10 million dollars, to prove that he is a national candidate that everybody's kind of getting behind. Everybody's got a story to tell.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thanks very much, David.</s>DAVID: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Ken?</s>KEN RUDIN: Chip, you make a very romantic case that anybody could win this thing, but if the media are fixated on let's say two candidates, Mitt Romney and Rick Perry...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Just to pick two names out of a hat.</s>KEN RUDIN: Well, I'm just saying that.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: Randomly pick two people, Ken, you junkie, you.</s>KEN RUDIN: No, no, no, no. I'm just saying, look, this is reality, and the polls show the same thing. So how do the Herman Cains and the Michele Bachmanns and the Rick Santorums, the Newt Gingrich, how do they break out of the pack - Jon Huntsman - how do they break out of the pack given the fact that they have to raise this ton of money because not only is Iowa going to probably be January 3rd, but eight days later, it'll be New Hampshire, then a week later it'll be Nevada, then South Carolina?</s>KEN RUDIN: The old days, you had time to raise money in between. Now it all comes at once.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: Ken, there's no question you're right. But I still - I've got TB. I'm a true believer. And I don't run these campaigns because somebody pays me, I run them because I believe in the candidate and work for them.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: I went to work for Mike Huckabee not because that was the smart thing to do, it's just that I went to Arkansas and fell in love with the guy and said this guy needs to be part of the conversation.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: Nobody thought he could win, including most of the people in my family, but I knew that he needed to be a part of the conversation.</s>And I will say this: Mitt Romney and Rick Perry, no question, raised the most money. Those are the two folks probably will have the best chance to be nominee. I wouldn't bet against either one of them. But somebody else is going to pop along the way. It's the nature of the beast. I think Jon Huntsman will start to move in New Hampshire just because it's the nature of the beast, because Mitt Romney's going to be out in 49 other states trying to figure out if he's going to participate in Iowa, trying to raise money. And Huntsman's going to be in one: New Hampshire.</s>And I will say this: Somebody's going to pop in Iowa. We've seen Michele Bachmann go up and down. We've seen Rick Perry go up and down. I think a Rick Santorum could move up a little bit along the way. There's three or four people in Iowa that could win Iowa. It could really change the deal if Rick Perry doesn't participate. And you could see Mitt Romney come back to Iowa and play there. There was a poll today showing him winning Iowa.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I just saw that on (unintelligible).</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: So, it is - this is the most wide-open primary that I've seen in a while. And you've got your two nominal frontrunners - and I'm a fan of both - on two separate tracks. Rick Perry and Mitt Romney are on two completely set of tracks to win the nomination, one through New Hampshire, the other one through Iowa and South Carolina. They may or may not meet in Florida, I guess, if they move up on the 31st and put, you know, probably $6 million is the minimum investment it takes to play in Florida, but somebody else can come.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: So, Ken, yes, I do believe anybody can win this nomination. I am a true believer, and I don't think everybody should just be with Mitt Romney and Rick Perry because they think they're the frontrunners and they're going to win. They should pick the candidates they believe in the most and do everything they can every day to elect that person.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's go next to Wes, and Wes is on the line from Naples, in Florida.</s>WES: Yeah. My big question is, you know, this thing is fixed. If it were a prizefight, they would put the referee in jail. Every time we have a debate, you put two guys up there, Perry and Romney. The lighting's good. The rest of them get about six minutes on the debates. Those two get most of the media, and the same thing is true today. Ron Paul got - carried California on the straw poll. I haven't heard him mentioned by you guys. He's leading the nation in straw polls. I haven't heard you mention that. The military is behind him almost 100 percent. I haven't heard you mention that. Most military people are behind him. You just leave him out as if he weren't even there. Is someone from up in the top telling you guys to do that, or are you doing it on your own?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Wes, we...</s>WES: I'm just curious.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We have you on the radio telling us, so thanks very much for the phone call.</s>KEN RUDIN: You know, but in fairness, we...</s>WES: I'm a big voice, aren't I?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Yeah.</s>KEN RUDIN: No. But, Wes, in fairness, we did have Ron Paul on the show a few weeks ago, and we're writing about him. We're talking about him constantly. We did not have him in this conversation, though, thus far, but we've had him on this show several times, and we've always talked about how well he did in the Iowa straw poll, things like that.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thanks for the call, Wes.</s>WES: Ah!</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: And I would add to that, guys, that in 2008, Governor Huckabee was in that position. Nobody talked about him. Nobody gave him a chance. We got about two and a half minutes of each debate. At least in these debates, they're letting Dr. Paul had the chance to make his case and asking him questions.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking with Chip Saltsman, who ran the Huckabee campaign four years ago. And you're listening to TALK OF THE NATION, from NPR News. And here's an email question from Amy in Tulsa: I listen and look for what people in the opposite party are saying, which candidate they see is the biggest threat, which candidate they could accept as president and the gold standard, if they could actually vote for somebody outside their party. Somebody who might be electable, I think, is what she's talking about, Chip Saltsman.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: Yeah. I think that's right. And when you see - for instance, if you really go back to 2004, the Bush White House obviously thought Howard Dean was the candidate they wanted to run against, and they were saying nice things about him. I think, for the most part, though - and I think the White House has been saying - attacking Governor Romney a couple of times and Rick Perry, I think that has a lot less impact on our nominating process. I think it's kind of more political fun for the White House to kind of take a shot at our few candidates.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: But they're also testing messages: Which messages, which attacks will stick to these people? They're going to float a couple of those out. They'll let the Democratic National Committee take a few shots at all these candidates along the way. They're just kind of testing messages along the way, and I don't think really affects, too much, our nomination process.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So the line about we've got a climate denier whose state is on fire, that sort of thing.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: Correct.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Yeah. OK. Finally, when do you know to pull the plug? I mean, some of these people are running for different reasons, to send their messages or maybe to get ready for four years from now. But when do you decide to pull the plug?</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: It's a great question. Most people pull the plug when they can't make payroll.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: That's usually a good reason not to. And, you know, you saw Governor Pawlenty pull out after the straw poll. He had put a pretty good flag in the ground, saying he must do well in Iowa - although I would have made a case. I think Pawlenty could have stayed in if he would have maybe had some more money, but it's a very personal decision. Governor Huckabee, the night we won - the night we lost Texas, Senator McCain mathematically had enough votes to be the nominee. That's what we had said publicly, the reason we were still in the race, until somebody's the nominee. John McCain became the nominee that night. Governor Huckabee walked up on stage, gave probably the best speech I'd ever give him - seen him give. It was an inspirational, passionate endorsement of John McCain that night. He knew in his heart once McCain had the delegates, he was going to endorse him and be 100 percent behind him.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: Each one is different for each candidate. You're right. Some are out there talking about their issues. They want to stay in as long as they can. So for them, most of it is as long as they can afford it. If it's Mitt Romney, he's either going to be the nominee, or he's going to get out once that can't happen. Same with Governor Perry, and I think some of the other folks. It's very personal. You make that decision. I think each candidate knows in their heart when that is, and I hope they listen to their hearts, not their consultants, because they know when it's time to get out.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Chip Saltsman, thanks very much for your time today. We appreciate it.</s>CHIP SALTSMAN: Always a pleasure.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Chip Saltsman, chief of staff now for Tennessee Republican Chuck Fleischmann, and he joined us on the line from down there in Tennessee. Ken Rudin, before we go: Florida lost Claudius Maximus.</s>KEN RUDIN: Right. Claude Kirk, a very colorful, flamboyant figure, first Republican governor ever elected since Reconstruction in Florida, married, I think, three times, twice to the same woman. He was - he ran for president as a Democrat, a Republican. I think he ran for vice president. But he was a character. He died today at 85 years old.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And actual votes next Tuesday in West Virginia.</s>KEN RUDIN: That's right, a special election for governor, for the gubernatorial race, as I would like to say, the next gubernor(ph) will be either Earl Ray Tomblin, who is the current acting governor because Joe Manchin left to take Robert Byrd's Senate seat. And the Republican candidate is Bill Maloney. Unlike the other three governor races this year, West Virginia is thought to be pretty close, but the Democrats are favored.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Ken Rudin, thanks very much for your time, as always.</s>KEN RUDIN: Thank you, Neal.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Political Junkie Ken Rudin will be back next week for another edition. In the meantime, his latest column is online, and you can try the hand - your hand at the ScuttleButton puzzle. That's all at npr.org/junkie. Coming up, former Housing Secretary Henry Cisneros has a new model for integrating Latinos into American society and culture. He'll tell us about his program Bridges and Pathways next. Stay with us. I'm Neal Conan. It's the TALK OF THE NATION, from NPR News. |
Harvard physicist Lisa Randall talks about her new book, Knocking On Heaven's Door, an examination of the latest findings in cosmology and the history of scientific thought, and discusses a report that suggests neutrinos can travel faster than the speed of light. | IRA FLATOW, Host: Next up, last week, physicists reported that they've seen evidence for subatomic particles - neutrinos - zipping through the Earth at speeds slightly faster than the speed of light, which is considered the speed limit of the universe, according to Einstein's theories. How is that possible? Could it just be an error in measurement? We are after all talking about just billionths of a second. But if those measurements are correct, might time travel be possible? And is there an alternative theory to explain this?</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: A good question for my next guest. She's an expert on the subatomic world, the tiny building blocks of matter, like neutrinos and quarks and bosons, and how these things interact with each other - or should, at least according to theory. Her new book "Knocking On Heaven's Door" gives an update on some of the latest ideas in cosmology and particle physics, including a look at what's going on at the Large Hadron Collider and the search for the Higgs boson.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: But it's not all that teeny tiny stuff she's talking about. She takes a deep look back at scientific thinking, how scientists, like herself, decide which questions to ask and why they often disagree and how science itself plods ahead one study at a time. Dr. Lisa Randall is the author of "Knocking On Heaven's Door" and a professor of theoretical physics at Harvard University in Cambridge. She joins us from Minnesota Public Radio. Welcome back to SCIENCE FRIDAY.</s>LISA RANDALL: Thank you. Thank you for having me here.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: How are you?</s>LISA RANDALL: Oh, I'm quite well. Thank you. It's been an interesting time. These new stories do kind of raise a lot of curiosity as to just hearing about what's going on in science today. It's pretty exciting.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: You know, today is actually a landmark day in science and physics. Today, the Tevatron in Batavia shuts down.</s>LISA RANDALL: Yeah. It's so sudden...</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Tell us about what was so important about that machine.</s>LISA RANDALL: Well, the Tevatron was the premier high-energy particle accelerator. What does that mean? Well, I do theoretical particle physics. We're trying to understand the most basic structure of matter. And the way you do that is you have to look at really small distances. And to get to small distances, you need high energies. So, basically, the Tevatron reached the highest energy of any machine there was until the Large Hadron Collider in - near Geneva started to run. And it was really was the premier machine. It got to very high energy. It discovered the top quark, the heaviest quark and completing in some sense the standard model of particle physics, telling us that matter is the most basic...</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: I'm Ira Flatow.</s>LISA RANDALL: ...element's interaction.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: I'm sorry. I'm Ira Flatow. This is SCIENCE FRIDAY from NPR. Talking with Lisa Randall, author of the new book "Knocking On Heaven's Door." Let's talk a bit about this new neutrino going faster than the speed of light. Do you believe it?</s>LISA RANDALL: I don't think I believe it and probably most physicists don't believe it and probably even the people who presented the results were rather uncertain, and they presented it in a very fair and balanced way in the sense of saying, look, we don't know what's going on. We'd like to see if anyone else can verify this or figure out what's happening. I think it's really part of the story. I mean, it's interesting in the context of the more general story of how science develops.</s>LISA RANDALL: You have principles. You test them as accurately as you can. Eventually, they might break down. And so people presented a story a lot of the time in the context of Einstein's theory of breaking down. But even, even if this result turned out to be true, I mean, Einstein's theory has been very successful over a large range of parameters, and it clearly will still be a useful theory. The question is whether when you do a sufficiently accurate measurement, you can see something where it breaks down.</s>LISA RANDALL: In this case, I do think it's very unlikely, but I also think that the interpretation that's been given to it of time travel is probably the least likely interpretation, even if it does turn out to be right. It would probably - more likely mean that the underlying assumptions of Einstein's theory, the underlying fundamental assumptions break down at some level.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: That would be...</s>LISA RANDALL: And at that time...</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: ...pretty major, would it not?</s>LISA RANDALL: Of course, it would be very major. But, again, it doesn't mean that everything we've done using Einstein's theory is wrong. It doesn't mean it wouldn't be a useful theory. It would mean, if it were true, that there would be these extenuating circumstances when you get to these limits of precision where a new theory might take over. And there's nothing that says Einstein's theory will be the ultimate underlying theory for - that applies to arbitrary accuracy. We know it applies over a large range, and that's pretty good.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: As Carl Sagan used to say, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So...</s>LISA RANDALL: I don't think anyone disagrees with that.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: So...</s>LISA RANDALL: I think most people are looking at it pretty skeptically, but it's been interesting, because even among the physics community, it's, you know, had us think about things we wouldn't otherwise think about and to consider how such measurement would be made.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: What about the failure to find the Higgs boson so far at the Large Hadron Collider?</s>LISA RANDALL: Yeah. People really focus in on it as a failure to find it. So what really - if you would ask people, say, a few years ago, before the Large Hadron Collider was running, what is the most likely - and when I say people I mean theoretical physicists. If you ask them what they felt was the most likely value for the Higgs boson mass, it would be a value that has not yet been ruled out. It would be a value that has not yet been tested. It might be tested within this year, but it has not been.</s>LISA RANDALL: So basically, what the experiment has done - and it's very impressive. We have to keep in mind the Large Hadron Collider is not running at full capacity yet. It's only running at half energy, and it's not running at full intensity. Yet it's put significant bounds on what the Higgs boson mass could be, if it is a simple single-particle Higgs boson. And so what it's done in some sense is remove some sort of cushion of saying, well, we think it's this value, but maybe it's all of these.</s>LISA RANDALL: I mean, now, we know it's in a very range if it is this fundamental Higgs boson that people have assumed it is. It could be, though, that - I mean, really all we know - and when I say know, there's pretty strong theoretical evidence that there's something called the Higgs mechanism. Higgs is, by the way, refers to Peter Higgs, the physicist who had the idea of how particles acquire their mass. And the thing is we want experimental evidence of this mechanism, other than the fact that particles have mass. And that evidence in the simplest version of the theory would be this single Higgs boson that we can make predictions about.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: And the...</s>LISA RANDALL: If, however, it turns out to be something different, it means that there's another more complicated Higgs factor. And actually, I talk about what possibly it might be.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Yeah. It's quite interesting. I'm talking with Lisa Randall, author of "Knocking On Heaven's Door," which you wonder why lyrics from a (unintelligible)?</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: We'll ask...</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: ...we're going to take a break.</s>LISA RANDALL: Everyone wants to know about the title.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: The title, yeah.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Well, our number, 1-800-989-8255. Maybe she went to a concert (unintelligible). 1-800-989-8255. You could tweet us at @scifri, @-S-C-I-F-R-I. Or go to our website at sciencefriday.com/scifri or on our website and leave us a note there. Don't go away. We'll be right back with Dr. Lisa Randall on talking about her book "Knocking On Heaven's Door" after this break. Stay with us.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: I'm Ira Flatow. This is SCIENCE FRIDAY from NPR.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: You're listening to SCIENCE FRIDAY. I'm Ira Flatow. We're talking this hour about physics, cosmology, particles, all kinds of great cool physical things with Lisa Randall, author of "Knocking On Heaven's Door." She's also a professor of theoretical physics at Harvard University in Cambridge. Our number, 1-800-989-8255. And because she's been asked the question so many times, why did she name her book "Knocking On Heaven's Door," I'm not going to ask that question. No, of course, I'm going to ask that question to you.</s>LISA RANDALL: Well, I'll explain anyway. So what I really wanted was to somehow convey how science advances. We have this core of knowledge, this body of knowledge that's pretty well-established. We have this very clean picture of science, you know, these well-established rules with which we make predictions. But when you're really doing science, when you're doing research, you're at the edge of what we know. And so what I wanted to convey was something that sort of said how do we get beyond, how do we get to the sort of things that are tantalizing us but just beyond in the edges both technologically and theoretically of what we know today.</s>LISA RANDALL: So - and as anyone who read my first book knows, I have song lyrics that go around my head, which I can't help sometimes when I think about something. So these are the ones that came to my head. So - but I thought it conveyed the idea very nicely...</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: If you...</s>LISA RANDALL: ...if you interpret it the right way.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Yeah. Do you think scientists have a responsibility to speak out when science is trashed?</s>LISA RANDALL: Well, I think no one - I mean, every individual can make their own choice. I mean, we certainly want people who are just doing science if that's what they want to do and if that's what they're good at. But I do think there is an overall sense that it is important. I would say it's important for scientists to speak out when they can and when they can be listened to. I think that it's not just when science is being trashed. I mean, I think the more general point that I'm trying to make in my book is that the kind of thinking that scientists do has even broader applicability just in ways of thinking about problems and asking questions.</s>LISA RANDALL: They can just be very useful. And, of course, there's all sorts of other considerations that come in, political and otherwise. And it will only be listened to a little bit in many cases. But I do think it's important that some people are out there just saying what they know.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Yeah. You actually get into a bit of Wall Street there, talking about how that might benefit from doing things more with critical thinking in mind, science (unintelligible).</s>LISA RANDALL: Well, I'm sure some people think I overstepped, but really, when I was writing this book, you know, this crisis was unfolding. And, you know, there was this kind of irony of people worrying about black holes that they'd all like to see. When, you know, we're pretty well-established. I mean, it's perfectly fine to ask the question. But we've pretty well-established there's no problem there. But, meanwhile, all these other risks that are surrounding us, and I really was trying to think how could it be that these are being missed when, you know, there seemed to be some pretty obvious indicators.</s>LISA RANDALL: And so one of the things that science teaches you is how to ask questions and how to categorize by different scales. So one of the issues that comes up is just when you're asked about risks, for example, it matters the scale of who you're asking about risks for and on what timescale are you asking about it.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: 1-800-989-8255 is our number. What is the state of theoretical physics today? Give us a brief thumbnails sketch of what we're - what are the big questions that we're still wondering about?</s>LISA RANDALL: Well, there are sort of two different categories of questions. There are questions that we think we have a real chance of answering immediately, you know, in the next few years with experiments. And there's some sort of deeper questions that might take a long time to unfold, that are more purely theoretical. The state of particle physics is that we have something called the standard model of particle physics, which really does describe matter's most basic elements and interactions.</s>LISA RANDALL: It works really well. It's been very well tested. And - but there are some clues that it is not the whole story. One is that we actually don't know this question I mentioned earlier, how particles acquire their mass. And although that sounds odd, you think of mass as an intrinsic property. It turns out that if you - particles just had mass from the get-go, you would make nonsensical predictions, like interactions, probabilities greater than one. So we know there has to be something around that accounts for it.</s>LISA RANDALL: And that's probably this Higgs mechanism. So one of the questions is what is it that provides this Higgs? What is it that accounts for particles' mass? But there's a second question that comes with that, which is why do particles have the mass they do? It seems like if you actually just made a prediction for what they should be based on the theoretical principles we know using quantum mechanics and special relativity, you would think they should be enormously bigger than they are, 16 orders of magnitude bigger.</s>LISA RANDALL: So it's only by - if you don't have anything else in the theory, it's only by a - what we call fine-tuning that you can account for masses. Now, we don't believe that. But then when you actually go down that rabbit hole and try to solve that problem, you find really amazing things that could be the - account for it. It could be an extension of symmetries of space, time, extensions of, say, rotational symmetry, which says physics looks the same in every direction.</s>LISA RANDALL: It could even be an extension of space itself, another dimension. So it seems that the answers to that could really lead to deep insights on both into particle physics and maybe even to the nature of space.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: And those are the questions you don't think we'll answer in the near future?</s>LISA RANDALL: Those are the questions that I do think - I mean that's what's so exciting about the Large Hadron Collider. I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear. What's so exciting is that it really does have the energy which we think those questions should be answered. Another thing we should be able to answer, hopefully, is the nature of dark matter. That depends on if it interacts in certain ways. But there are indications that dark matter could even be produced at the Large Hadron Collider or in dark matter experiments today.</s>LISA RANDALL: The kinds of questions that are more theoretical have to do with distances that are even smaller. The LHC, the Large Hadron Collider, is studying 10 to the minus 19th meters. It's questions that have to do with many orders of magnitude smaller than that, 10 to the minus 33 centimeters, where you start getting into questions about quantum gravity and the nature of gravity itself.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: And how do you answer critics who say, why should we spend our money building these things? They're even talking about building the next collider, right, that might go out - go back to Batavia, a linear collider - and could cost billions and billions of dollars?</s>LISA RANDALL: Well, you know, these are difficult questions to answer, and it is difficult to evaluate. But if you do look at places where we have invested in science, we've always come out ahead. We've come out ahead, not only through reasons that we could predict. And it could be even very theoretical research. I mean, what's so amazing to me is even quantum mechanics, which seems like the most theoretical type of idea we've had, actually, entered into semiconductor industry, which is responsible for the electronics that we have now, I mean, when people found electricity.</s>LISA RANDALL: So it's very, very hard to say this is what will come out of it. What you know you do get is, first of all, information about the universe and the world we live in. You get an educated populace. You get interested. You get technology. So it just seems, overall, the benefit is great. And when you think about the savings, you have - I mean, although billions of dollars sounds like a lot, I mean, it isn't really that big a fraction of a budget. And that's not to say we should take it lightly. We should choose our projects wisely. But I think of it as an investment in the future. And it is not clear. It's not a clear investment, but that's why it's so important. It's a long-term investment in sort of education, but also science and knowledge.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Hmm. Let's go to the phones. To Jeff(ph) in Jacksonville, Florida. Hi, Jeff, welcome to SCIENCE FRIDAY.</s>JEFF: Thank you very much.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Hi there.</s>JEFF: Pleasure to talk to you. I got two questions, actually, one I started more than the initial one. One, how does it did you know, can you describe how they actually measured the neutrinos? What was the detection method that they used? And second question, about five or 10 years ago, I was reading an article on the quantization of space. And I - has anything been done with that? Just the actual - that space itself has a quantized size to it? And I'll take my answer off the air.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: OK. Thanks for calling.</s>LISA RANDALL: So let me talk about the first - the second question first. The quantization of space - so that's sort of the end of the story of scale. I mean, I talk a lot about scale in physics in my book, in part because I think it's very important to categorize sort of where we are and to get some intuition for these different things, but also to realize how we've advanced in scale. So this limit - there's probably a limit to distance scale, and I say probably because we actually don't know, even in principle, how we would study distances smaller than what's called the Planck's length, this 10 to minus 35 meters that I mentioned a moment ago.</s>LISA RANDALL: And part of the reason is if you had enough energy to probe it, you would actually be making a black hole. And then you add more energy, it gets bigger. So it really does seem that space might break down, the notion of space that we have, might break down. We don't know that for sure, but there's theoretical arguments that say that. But again, this is well beyond what we can do for (unintelligible)...</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: What do you mean the notion of space might break down? It's hard for us to wrap our mind around that idea.</s>LISA RANDALL: That's right. And it's happening at a scale so distant that it really doesn't matter to us. I mean, 10 to the minus 35 meters, it's not a scale that we encounter, and it's a scale that we're readily averaging over all the time, which is really how physics proceeds. So you don't need to know the most fundamental. You don't need to know if space is ultimately quantized. It works pretty fine to say the smooth space and general relativity applies to it. But it could be that at very distant scales, scales that are not affecting our daily lives, scales that aren't even affecting experiments at the highest energies we could do, there could be more radical and remarkable things that happen.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: So space would not be smooth. It would be a little quanta of particles of space?</s>LISA RANDALL: Space is almost certainly not smooth at those scales. You just work out what quantum mechanical fluctuations would be. It's very unlikely that space is smooth the way we are familiar with it at those scales. But, you know, that's the kind of thing that we see a more immediate example, where we see classical physics going over to quantum physics. I mean, the laws of physics that apply in an atom look very different than Newton's laws, but that doesn't mean Newton's laws break down, and it doesn't mean we have trouble predicting where a ball will land when we use Newton's laws.</s>LISA RANDALL: Even though there is this more fundamental structure, it doesn't matter the level at which you can make measurements when you're doing, where you're saying where a ball lands. And in that same way, it could be even something like space might break down. But it's, again, instead of very distant scale where it doesn't matter to kinds of things we're doing today.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Call the space tow truck once it breaks down.</s>LISA RANDALL: Although, of course, it's a really important theoretical question.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: 1-800-989-8255 is our number. What about - you mentioned dark matter. What about even spookier dark energy? Do we have any idea what that might...</s>LISA RANDALL: Dark energy sounds like a spooky name.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Start bringing the "Twilight Zone" music when I say that, but...</s>LISA RANDALL: Dark energy is mysterious. The dark matter - let me just put it context. I mean, first of all, people know I think at this point that the matter we see, the matter we experience is only about 4 percent of the energy in the universe. So another basically 25 percent is dark matter, and another some - around 70 percent is what's called dark energy. Now, dark matter isn't that hard, I think, to wrap your head around. I mean, people get very disturbed by this first, but really it's just matter that doesn't interact with light. It's matter. It clumps. It interacts gravitationally. It's stuff.</s>LISA RANDALL: And so, you know, it's not so presumptuous to - it would be a little presumptuous to think everything in the universe was just like us and interacted just like the stuff we're made of. So it's not that crazy to think that there could be other forms of matter out there. What is actually really interesting, and one the things I'm researching these days, is the fact that the amount of energy in dark matter is actually so close to the amount of energy in matter. In principle, they could have been very, very different.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: And dark energy (unintelligible)...</s>LISA RANDALL: So the (unintelligible). But then, dark energy - I'm getting there.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Well, I'm running out of time, so (unintelligible)...</s>LISA RANDALL: So dark energy is not matter. It's just energy that's permeating the universe. It just fills up space. It doesn't clump. It just fills up space. And the real mystery about dark energy is, again, I mean, there's no reason it shouldn't be there. It's perfectly allowed. But why is it so similar in size to the other energies we know about? What is it that sets it - and in that sense, we don't know where it came from.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: And some people say there should be a lot more of it if it's going to be there, right?</s>LISA RANDALL: That's right. And in fact, 120 orders of magnitude more, so that's the real mystery.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Wow. And there are a lot of great mysteries in Lisa Randall's new book "Knocking On Heaven's Door," little song going around in our head when she wrote the book.</s>LISA RANDALL: It's very cheering.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: It is.</s>LISA RANDALL: It's not a cheering song, but it is very cheering, the lyrics there.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: And it's got - it covers the whole waterfront, if I might call, the universe: "How Physics and Scientific Thinking Illuminate the Universe and the Modern World." Lisa, thank you for taking time to be with us today. And good luck, as always.</s>LISA RANDALL: Thank you very much.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Lisa Randall, author of "Knocking On Heaven's Door" and a professor of theoretical physics at Harvard University in Cambridge. I'm Ira Flatow. This is SCIENCE FRIDAY from NPR. |
China launched an experimental spacecraft from the Gobi desert this week. The unmanned Tiangong-1 (which means "Heavenly Palace-1") is expected to orbit Earth for two years. Journalist Miles O'Brien discusses planned docking missions for the craft and China's space program. | IRA FLATOW, Host: This is SCIENCE FRIDAY. I'm Ira Flatow. China launched its first space laboratory this week. The unmanned Tiangong-1, or Heavenly Palace-1, left the Gobi Desert yesterday, entered Earth orbit. China plans to launch another unmanned craft, and according to a Chinese state media statement, to, quote, experiment in rendezvous and docking and to eventually develop a space station. Sounds very familiar.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: So will China one day have its own version of the International Space Station complete with astronauts? Maybe it's a step in going to the moon. Joining me now to talk more about it is my guest, Miles O'Brien. He's a journalist who's been covering aviation, space and science for 30 years. He's a science correspondent for "The News Hour" on PBS. Welcome to SCIENCE FRIDAY, Miles.</s>MILES O: Ira, it's a pleasure.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: My joy. What do you know about this spacecraft here?</s>BRIEN: Well, it's - you wouldn't call it a space race, would you, because the Chinese - I guess if you were measuring it in geological timeframes, yes, but they move in a very plodding way, a methodical way. And those who would suggest that there is some sort of new space race underway, frankly, I think, say so a bit wistfully, hoping there'll be another space race because, after all, it fueled a lot of expense and spending on this side to go to the moon.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Well, so they're not in a race with anybody, but they're going to be making progress, doing something, I would imagine.</s>BRIEN: Yeah, this is a key thing. To call this a space station is a bit of a stretch. It's not designed to keep people up there indefinitely, as the International Space Station does, now more than a decade, of course, in that case.</s>BRIEN: In this case, as time goes on, and as they add to it, they will tend it for longer periods of time. What's really crucial about this, Ira, is this will demonstrate to them and to the world that they can rendezvous and dock at a target. That's a significant piece of the space puzzle.</s>BRIEN: If you're really going to be a player in space, you have to solve the rendezvous and docking problem, and that is not a simple problem. And so this is their target, if nothing else, to dock to. They'll fly a couple of unmanned missions to do that, and then at the end of 2012, the plan is to send some Jap(ph) - excuse me, Chinese taikonauts to spend a shorter period of time but eventually longer periods of time for later crews at this tended object.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Have they not expressed their desire to go to the moon someday?</s>BRIEN: Yeah, we've heard that. We've heard, you know, talk about maybe one day going to Mars. There's all kinds of grand aspirations there. They just have moved in a very slow way. Their first manned flight was back in 2003. They've flown three manned missions. Last one was in 2008. So they're moving in a slow process, but I guess in the context of Chinese history, it's a perfectly appropriate timescale, right?</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Well, you know, the obvious question is we don't have a spacecraft to go to the International Space Station. The Russians don't have one now either. Why not ask the Chinese?</s>BRIEN: Why shouldn't we hedge our bets? Why shouldn't we be able to hail another taxi, as it were, right?</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Exactly, exactly.</s>BRIEN: And this is - this gets into a lot of geopolitics, as you can imagine. The Chinese space program is pretty opaque to the rest of the world, to say the least. There are a lot of political considerations in play when you start partnering with the Chinese. The concern, of course, is that U.S. technology would be borrowed and not returned, so to speak, by the Chinese, and so there is reluctance to create the kinds of partnerships that you would need in order to have a Chinese spacecraft docking at the International Space Station.</s>BRIEN: Now, they haven't even proved they can dock yet. Now, we'll see. If they start docking at this tended object, and they succeed, maybe that will change. But the politics may not.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: And I understand that on this space station are some International Space Station flags that were brought onboard.</s>BRIEN: Yeah, I mean, I think the Chinese, frankly, they would like to be a part of the International Space Station, if they had their druthers. But right now the politics don't work so well. The Chinese have a long and fruitful relationship with the Russian space program.</s>BRIEN: If you look at their manned capsule, the Shenzhou, it looks just like a Soyuz rocket. It's not a complete knockoff, it's a little bit larger, and the inside is modified to their liking, but the truth is the Russians and the Chinese have worked together. When I was in Star City years ago, there were some Chinese taikonauts there at the time. I was told to look the other way. It was kind of unofficial at that time.</s>BRIEN: And so they had this strong relationship. I think if the Russians were calling the shots, the Chinese might be part of the space station, but of course the U.S. has a say-so in that.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: CCTV, the Chinese TV, released a video animation of the craft. And playing behind in the background was "America the Beautiful." How can that be a mistake?</s>BRIEN: That is either some really strange irony, or somebody's in deep trouble today, Ira, and is in a cell right next to the Tiananmen Square tank guy or something. I don't know.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: It was very funny. We were watching it on the Internet. So they're going to launch this second ship, something, as you say, to prove they can rendezvous with the space vehicle. No people will be onboard this one either. But this seems to be saying, if I hear you correctly, sort of planting a flag into a next generation of space travel.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: They're saying we're here, we're not only eating your lunch in production of consumable goods, we're now getting into the space business.</s>BRIEN: Yeah, you know, you say the next generation, but in a way what they're doing seems to be a bit of an anachronism of another era. You knw, we sort of have been there and done this. But this is also, this is part of - the big picture here is Chinese, their view of superpower status and supremacy in the world.</s>BRIEN: And it is their view, I've talked to them over the years, trying to get in the door there and do some work there, it's kind of hard to get in, it is their view that this is a big part of, if nothing else, the geopolitics, the soft power that space exerts in the world.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Of course, they showed us some of their power years ago when they blew up a satellite, did they not?</s>BRIEN: And this is what gives people a little pause in the West. In 2007, the Chinese had a defunct weather satellite. For reasons no one fully really understands outside of the Chinese military - and it is a military-controlled program, let's not forget that - in any case, they lobbed a ballistic missile at their own defunct satellite and obliterated it, to prove they could do it.</s>BRIEN: But what was - the consequence of this was it created just thousands and thousands of piece of hazardous space junk in low-Earth orbit, and it also made an interesting statement about the Chinese program, how much is it a militaristic - how much is it about Star Wars, how much of it is about, you know, the space shuttle and the space station.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Of course all our astronauts were military people to begin with also.</s>BRIEN: Well, you know, I mean we make - of course Eisenhower was very clear when he created NASA, let's make it a civilian program. But it was populated by military people. So that might have been a difference without a distinction to the rest of the world, including the Chinese.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Well, Miles, thank you very much.</s>BRIEN: It was a pleasure, Ira.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: For taking time to be with us. Miles O'Brien, who you can see on PBS, he's a correspondent for PBS and a science journalist, been on - on 30 years or so. You'll see his reports on "The News Hour" on PBS.</s>BRIEN: When dinosaurs roamed the Earth. |
Humans have long suffered from epilepsy, the neurological disorder hallmarked by sudden seizures. Medical historian Howard Markel discusses the condition's names through the millenia, from the "sacred disease" of ancient texts to its description as "the falling sickness" in Shakespeare's Julius Caesar. | IRA FLATOW, Host: Up next, it's time for our monthly episode of Science Diction, where we explore the origins of scientific words with Howard Markel, professor of the history of medicine at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. Welcome to SCIENCE FRIDAY. Welcome back.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: Hello, Ira.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Tell us what the word is today. Is it...</s>HOWARD MARKEL: The word today is epilepsy.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Epilepsy.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: A very odd word. It's - as we know today, of course, it's an abnormal firing of neurons in the brain that leads to some abnormal movements of one part of the body or another, depending on what part of the brain is affected. But for a long time, that disease was terribly feared, and many people thought it was a sacred disease, that somehow people were struck by either a god or a devil to have this uncontrollable movement. And it's very frightening to watch, actually, and so people were very nervous when they saw other people seize.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Mmm. It seems like, at one point or another, Hippocrates described every disease and disorder out there.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: He did. You could always rely on Hippocrates. You know, there is a Greek - word - there's always, there's many Greek words, actually.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: But this one, epilambanem - in len, there's epilepsia - and that literally means to seize or to be taken hold of. And Hippocrates wrote a wonderful treatise called "On the Sacred Diseases." And he said, you know, he described epilepsy to a T because he was such a good observer, but he said this disease is no more sacred than any other disease.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: It's affecting some part of the brain, and he explained it in the way he understood the body in terms of four bodily humors and so on. But he was the first one to actually strike out against it being a part of evil or doing bad or a weakness of character or something like that. And he did not like that name. Later on, it became the falling sickness, and that's what it was called for millennia. And, really, even in the English language, for a long time it was referred to as the falling sickness, but that all changed around 1578.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Mm-hmm. I'm Ira Flatow. This is SCIENCE FRIDAY from NPR, talking with Howard Markel about the definition of the word epilepsy. When did anybody - you say it's a falling sickness. Is that because they were able to define it as a real illness?</s>HOWARD MARKEL: Well, yeah. I mean, now epilepsy, we know, is really many disorders...</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Right.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: ...40 or 50 disorders that include seizures. But when people suffered from what used to be called grand mal seizures or, you know, generalized seizures, they would often fall down. And it struck them, and they fell down or they started seizing. And it was not a bad name. But Henry Lyte in 1578 - he was a famous British botanist - translated another botanist book called "Cruydeboeck" by Rembert Dodoens. He was a Flemish botanist. And there were some recipes of how to treat seizures in there. And Lyte preferred the word epilepsy to falling sickness, and so he used that translation. But, you know, it took another couple of decades.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: And it wasn't - of course, you know, if you talk about the Greeks and the Bible, then you have to have Shakespeare. Shakespeare described epilepsy in 1599 in his famous play "Julius Caesar." Now, Julius Caesar did have epilepsy, and Cassius describes him as having, quote, "the falling sickness." But what's really neat is, about a few years later in 1603, in "Othello," Shakespeare describes him as raging and foaming as if he has fallen into epilepsy. And, again, the following year in 1604, in "King Lear," Kent talks to Oswald and says, a plague upon your epileptic visage. That would be a good thing in the playground to say to someone you don't like. But after that, epilepsy really took hold, and it became the way we describe this falling sickness.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Yeah. And a lot of famous historical people had it.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: Yeah, epilepsy, or at least seizures. You know, there was Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Dostoyevsky, my favorite - one of my favorite novelists. And, in fact, he gave his character Raskolnikov in "Crime and Punishment" epilepsy, as well. And probably the most humorous if you're an Abbott and Costello fan, Bud Abbott had epilepsy.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Had no idea.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: Yeah. He was not on first when it came to that problem.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: I'm glad you said it and I didn't, because I would have.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Do we know, actually, what causes epilepsy?</s>HOWARD MARKEL: Well, it depends on what type of epilepsy you have and what part of the brain has been affected. There are a number of causes. For example, if you injure your brain, say you hit your head against something or - and you caused some scarring of the brain tissue, that could be a cause. But so, too, can tumors or metabolic disorders. There are a number of causes that cause the syndrome of epilepsy.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Is it an easy word to research?</s>HOWARD MARKEL: Well, yeah, it is. I mean, you know, you start with the Oxford English Dictionary, as I always do, and then you work your way back, and then you start finding out who these people are. So, Hippocrates is easy, and I had known...</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Yeah.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: ..."On the Sacred Diseases" for my days in graduate school. But I got to meet Henry Lyte along the way, and it's always a great excuse to read Shakespeare.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Yeah. And it's interesting that Shakespeare did incorporate it.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: He did. And there's so many, I mean, he was such a wonderful observer of human nature and things that affected human beings. And so there's lots of medicine and science to be described in the plays of Shakespeare.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Yeah. Well, Howard, once again, you've done it again.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: Well, thank you, Ira.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: When you figure out what that is, you let me know.</s>HOWARD MARKEL: Yeah. We'll see who's on first then, huh?</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: All right. Have a good weekend. Howard Markel is professor of the history of medicine at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, also director of the Center for the History of Medicine there. And if you want to read more about epilepsy, check out our website. It's sciencefriday.com. And we'll give you a whole bunch of stuff there. |
Kevin Shea is a retired New York City firefighter with an unorthodox home. He lives in a 93,000 cubic-foot-geodesic dome, equipped with solar panels, a wind turbine, and a geothermal system. The home is on the grid, but outside the box. | IRA FLATOW, Host: Up next, Flora Lichtman is here with our Video Pick of the Week. Hi, Flora.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Hi, Ira.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: What have you got going for us today?</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: We are not in your backyard. This is a home tour like you've never seen before...</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: All right.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: ...I'm pretty sure. We go to Long Island, Calverton, Long Island, which is near Riverhead and visit Kevin Shea, who built himself a geodesic dome to live in. This dome is a home.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: A dome home. And he built it out of a kit, is that right?</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Yeah, he built it out of a kit. So he's...</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Is that the way you...</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: In 1993, he says, he is thumbing through Popular Science magazine and he gets to the back, and there are these ads in the back. And he sees an ad for a geodesic dome kit.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Right.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: And for $11,000, you can build a dome that is 44 feet tall, 70 feet in diameter, and that's like 93,000 cubic feet. It's huge. It's very hard to get a sense of the scale until you actually see him climb the rope that he has going from the floor to the ceiling in the middle of the dome, which you can see on our website.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: At SCIENCE FRIDAY. Go to our website. There's a Video Pick of the Week at sciencefriday.com. His neighbors were not very happy.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: His neighbors were not happy. I mean, he's - the best part is we drive in with Kevin down his driveway. And that before we turn in, it's just - it looks like regular sort of white picket fence suburbia. And then you get to his driveway and it's this kind of mushroom-shaped, forest green, windowless, from the back anyway, dome. And they were, ,you know, this house does not belong here was the vibe from the neighbors.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: But - and he's also made it very energy efficient, right?</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: I mean, Kevin Shea amazed me. You - he takes green to another level. So we've got here a solar array, a wind turbine, geothermal system inside he's brewing biodiesel in a shed in the backyard. There wasn't even time to get into that.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Wow.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: And then, you know, just he reuses materials. He's got a garden made of 800 tires and fiber optic cables crushed up and turned into an artificial lake. He's really come up with these neat solutions and neat uses of stuff.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Unless you think he was some sciencey geek, he was a firefighter for 20 years, right? New York City firefighter?</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Yeah. I mean, this is the makings of a full-length feature, I think. But he's a firefighter in New York City and when - and was injured in 9/11 and so ended up retiring. And actually, his firefighter buddies helped him build this. And he said, you know, the interesting thing about getting a kit for a geodesic home is it's made of these triangles, right? So if any of the wood is slightly off, warped, you have a big problem once you get around to the other end of the circle.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Oh, yeah. I'm thinking about this.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: So they have like tons of people sort of pulling things in line. It sounded like a dramatic construction process.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: You need a lot of buddies to help out on this.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Yeah. And a lot of strong firefighters it sounds like.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: And it's beautiful because you have all that inside space that's open to work with it, right, once you get it done?</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: It's huge. It's like being in the - it's like living in omnimax. I mean, it's just this kind of really, really open space, and he uses it with - he's got a swing inside.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: That's right. You could swing from side to side. You could - yeah.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: Which he does.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Yeah. You could see all of this in our Video Pick of the Week. It's Flora Lichtman's, got it up there on our website at sciencefriday.com. You can also download it on our podcast on iTunes. And it's up there on the left side. And this guy, you see him swinging on his rope, climbing up the roof.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: It's really - it's worth watching. And also, I'm looking for other people who are living in sort of unconventional homes and doing things in a DIY green way because Kevin really has figured out how to do this on his own.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: Right.</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: So if you know of anybody, shoot me an email. I put my email address on our website by the video.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: And you asked one - you asked a couple of weeks ago for mushroom pictures, right? And we got all kinds of mushroom...</s>FLORA LICHTMAN: The mushroom pictures have flooded in. Check out the Facebook page. They're really beautiful. And we've got long, sort of, threads going on about what they are. I can't identify them, but our listeners are doing a good job.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: All right. Flora Lichtman, our Video Pick of the Week.</s>IRA FLATOW, Host: I'm Ira Flatow in New York. |
President Trump will make a prime-time speech Tuesday night on border security, making the case for funding a border wall. That demand has triggered a partial government shutdown, in its third week. | AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: President Trump will do something tonight he has not done before. With a partial government shutdown in its third week over his demands for a border wall, the president is making a national address from the Oval Office. Democratic leaders have demanded equal time. They'll respond after the president speaks.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: NPR national political correspondent Mara Liasson joins us now for a preview. Mara, what is the president trying to accomplish with this Oval Office speech?</s>MARA LIASSON, BYLINE: The president's goal is to convince voters beyond his base of supporters that shutting down the government in order to get funding for a wall is the right thing to do. That's the only way that he can put pressure on Democrats to accommodate him. He has to convince people outside of his hardcore base.</s>MARA LIASSON, BYLINE: So to do that, the White House has been expanding the justification for the wall. Instead of just talking about rapists and drugs and criminals coming across the border, they're also making the argument that women and children are being hurt.</s>MARA LIASSON, BYLINE: So if the president can convince enough people that it's a border security and humanitarian issue, he could win this fight. But if it's just a debate about whether it's worth shutting down the government to build a wall, he'll lose.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: As of right now, where do the negotiations stand between the White House and Congress?</s>MARA LIASSON, BYLINE: What's been happening is instead of moving towards the Democrats, the president has been asking for more and more money for the wall than he did a few weeks ago. In the latest ask from the White House, they're requesting $5.7 billion for 234 miles of new steel wall. That's in addition to other money for detention centers and judges and technology, things that are not that controversial.</s>MARA LIASSON, BYLINE: But what's interesting about this is that supporters of the president point out that in the last continuing resolution that the president signed, where Democrats agreed to $1.6 billion in steel fencing while they explicitly ruled out a concrete wall, the president's supporters are saying that the materials should make a difference. Democrats agree - agreed to steel fencing in the past. They don't want concrete. But that so far is not moving Democrats.</s>MARA LIASSON, BYLINE: And the other problem is because the president has made the wall such a potent symbol of his presidency - his kind of No. 1 issue - it makes it harder for Democrats to compromise because they have a base, too, and those base voters - Democratic base voters see the wall as a symbol of everything they hate about Donald Trump.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: Now, the president has been suggesting that one way out of this is to declare a national emergency, maybe use military funds to build the wall. Any chance that will come up tonight?</s>MARA LIASSON, BYLINE: It might come up, but I haven't talked to anyone who predicts that the president will actually call for a national emergency tonight. He does have the power to declare a national emergency, to do an end run around Congress.</s>MARA LIASSON, BYLINE: But the people I've talked to, including former advisers of the president, say he could do that. But it's too soon to do it. He first has to convince the public that the Democrats are unreasonable and won't negotiate because he's the one who initiated this shutdown. A national emergency has to be a last resort. Otherwise, it would look like a political stunt.</s>MARA LIASSON, BYLINE: Now, some members of Congress would be just as happy for the president to do that because it gets the problem off their plate at a moment when Republicans are worried about some of their members abandoning ship and starting to vote with Democrats to open the government. Other Republicans feel very strongly about congressional powers of the purse. They say Trump would be usurping Congress's power to appropriate funds and act unilaterally on immigration policy - something they didn't like when Obama did it.</s>MARA LIASSON, BYLINE: But the reason it's so appealing to some members of Congress - it would end the shutdown. And this strategy of declaring a national emergency, which is being pushed by some of the president's advisers, is, it allows the president to act his own - act on his own, using his legal authority and showing his supporters that he did everything he could to build the wall even if he ultimately loses in court. And believe me. There would be a court battle on this.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: That's NPR's Mara Liasson at the White House. Mara, thank you.</s>MARA LIASSON, BYLINE: Thank you. |
NPR's Ari Shapiro speaks with Nicholas Rasmussen, the former director of the National Counterterrorism Center, about national security and the U.S.-Mexico border. | ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: One argument the Trump administration has made is that a wall on the southern border would keep out terrorists. The argument has changed over time. Here was White House press secretary Sarah Sanders speaking with Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday.</s>SARAH SANDERS: We know that, roughly, nearly 4,000 known or suspected terrorists come into our country illegally. And we know that our most vulnerable point of entry is at our southern border.</s>CHRIS WALLACE: Wait. Wait, 'cause I know this statistic.</s>SARAH SANDERS: Yeah.</s>CHRIS WALLACE: I didn't know if you were going to use it, but I studied up on this. Do you know where those 4,000 people come - or where they're captured? The airports.</s>SARAH SANDERS: Not always...</s>CHRIS WALLACE: At airports.</s>SARAH SANDERS: ...But certainly a large number.</s>CHRIS WALLACE: The State Department says there hasn't been any terrorist that they've found...</s>SARAH SANDERS: Certainly it's...</s>CHRIS WALLACE: ...Coming across the southern border of Mexico.</s>SARAH SANDERS: It's by air. It's by land, and it's by sea.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: NBC then reported that the actual number of suspected terrorists detained at the border was six, not thousands, according to data that Customs and Border Protection gave Congress for the first half of fiscal year 2018. Presidential adviser Kellyanne Conway then said the press secretary had made a misstatement.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Well, our next guest has firsthand knowledge of the terrorist threat and whether it is centered at the border, airports or someplace else altogether. Nick Rasmussen ran the government's National Counterterrorism Center for three years through 2017. Welcome.</s>NICK RASMUSSEN: Thanks for having me, Ari.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: So you briefed top government officials up to and including the president on the state of the terrorist threat. Did the southern border factor into those briefings?</s>NICK RASMUSSEN: It did, but only episodically and not in a really prominent way. It was a logical question for people to be asking, Ari, you know, given the concerns about vulnerability at the southern border. There were often members of Congress or other senior officials who would ask, hey, how are terrorists thinking about the southern border? Are they trying to infiltrate operatives? Are people traveling across the southern border who are of terrorism concern?</s>NICK RASMUSSEN: And what we would say in the intelligence community is, to the best of our knowledge, the answer is largely no, they're not. It is certainly a concern. It is certainly a potential vulnerability. But it was a vulnerability that was not translating into actual numbers of terrorists crossing into the country and certainly not the kind of volume that you've been hearing administration officials refer to.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: One detail I found interesting in that document that Customs and Border Protection provided to Congress is that last year, more suspected terrorists were apprehended on the northern border with Canada than the southern border with Mexico.</s>NICK RASMUSSEN: And again, it just goes to the problem that we've seen in terms of marshalling facts and supportive arguments here because, again, the facts would suggest that we don't face a crisis at the southern border in terms of terrorists trying to cross into the United States.</s>NICK RASMUSSEN: We have an effective watchlisting system. It can always improve, but it's not as if we are somehow at the mercy of terrorist organizations and that there are large numbers of terrorists at the southern border crossing into the United States or waiting to do so. It just simply isn't the case.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: So when you look at where the threat actually is today, what is the weakest point, and where would you funnel money to address that?</s>NICK RASMUSSEN: Well, as my colleagues in government and in the intelligence community have said in public testimony, the most serious threat we face from a terrorism perspective here in the United States right now comes from homegrown violent extremists. And those homegrown violent extremists tend to be individuals who've been here for a long time in the United States. They may even have been born here. They have become radicalized or potentially attracted to terrorist ideologies over time, but it's not something that attaches to their particular immigration status or when they arrived or something like that.</s>NICK RASMUSSEN: That homegrown piece of it is really the piece we should be funneling resources at, working with communities to try to find ways to reach vulnerable individuals before they become radicalized, before they become a potential terrorist in a community somewhere here in the United States. That's not a border security problem. That's more of a community policing and a community resilience problem.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: It's an interesting conclusion that al-Qaida, ISIS and other similar groups have found it is easier to radicalize people who are already in the country than it is to get people into the country - says something about the strength of the border and airports already in the present day.</s>NICK RASMUSSEN: And again, you know, I'm not here to tell you that our border security is perfect from a terrorism or counterterrorism perspective. And there's always ways we can improve and get better.</s>NICK RASMUSSEN: But the degree of progress that we've made since 9/11 in making our borders more secure is something that's not to be understated and certainly shouldn't be - shouldn't be thrown around in political debate in a way that somehow undermines the American public's confidence in our border security. At least with respect to terrorism, it just simply isn't the case that we are vulnerable at the southern border in the way that - that some officials are describing.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: That's Nick Rasmussen, former head of the National Counterterrorism Center, who worked in counterterrorism under three administrations. Thanks for joining us today.</s>NICK RASMUSSEN: Thanks very much, Ari. |
Claire Danes' latest role has her hunting terrorists in the Showtime series Homeland. Troubled CIA analyst Carrie Mathison believes an Iraqi war hero might be part of an Al Qaeda plot. Danes explains why the role appealed to her, and what she hopes the series can accomplish. | NEAL CONAN, host: Haunted by 9/11, the CIA's Carrie Mathison debriefs an American hero, a U.S. Marine who's just been rescued after eight years as a prisoner of al-Qaida.</s>CLAIRE DANES: (as Carrie Mathison) As you know, the first 72 hours after a soldier's capture are critical. What he knows can be used by the enemy during that period to devastating effect. The point is Sergeant Brody stopped being a source of actionable intelligence fairly quickly, and yet, he was kept alive for almost eight more years. I'd like to ask him if he knows why.</s>DAMIAN LEWIS: (as Nicholas Brody) I often wondered that myself.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Claire Danes and Damian Lewis in a scene from the first episode of "Homeland," which debuts on Showtime Sunday night. It's produced by some of the people responsible for "24" and focuses on the agent's beliefs that the Marine may be al-Qaida's man now. Is she right? Is she crazy? Or both? If you'd like to talk with Claire Danes about this part or her earlier work, give us a call, 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. And Claire Danes joins us from our bureau in New York. Nice to have you with us today.</s>CLAIRE DANES: Thanks so much...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And...</s>CLAIRE DANES: ...and it's great to be here.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thank you.</s>CLAIRE DANES: Yeah. Yeah. Home for a second, in and out.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: "Homeland" centers on counterterrorism like "24" did, but if I may say so, you're no Jack Bauer.</s>CLAIRE DANES: Well, do you know what? I've actually never seen "24." It's a horrible confession given the company that I'm keeping currently, but, yeah, I - in a way, it's kind of nice to be ignorant of that just because I know, there's - that's - that has a lot of weight.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, let me put it this way. Jack Bauer did not have a lot of doubts.</s>CLAIRE DANES: No. OK. Well, yes, Carrie is - she doesn't have many either, but a lot of other people have them for her.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Because she is obsessed with the idea that this Marine who spent all that time as a prisoner of war has been turned, has become an al-Qaida agent.</s>CLAIRE DANES: She's pretty sure about it. The problem is that she is the only one who is at all remotely sure about it, so, yeah.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And I don't mean to be giving anything away, but we see flashbacks of his time in Iraq, and it sure looks to us, the viewers, as if he's an agent.</s>CLAIRE DANES: Well, I'm, you know, I'm biased because I'm playing Carrie, but I have to say, I'm on her side.</s>CLAIRE DANES: No. I think, you know, it's an interesting show because there - it's wildly complex and full of ambiguity, and it's a cat-and-mouse game, and no one is entirely clear who's the cat or the mouse at any given moment. So the perspective shifts and, you know, but, hopefully, she will reign victorious.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: She is described by one of her colleagues early on as intense. Later, we learn that she's taking in antipsychotic and, indeed, has more than a mood disorder that she tries to pass off. This is an aspect of the character that makes - it adds a considerable part to people's doubts.</s>CLAIRE DANES: Yeah. She is the ultimate unreliable narrator, really. And I'm interested in the show because her personal experience of monitoring this condition is serious, and she can never take her own well-being or her own safety for granted, and that extends to her relationship to the country at large. So she's in a constant state of emergency, personally and professionally speaking, and, you know, other people can afford be more casual.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: You - we got to know you in series television, most of us, "My So-Called Life," and then you went off and made movies. And what brought you back to series television?</s>CLAIRE DANES: Well, I think television is on fire right now. It's a really exciting medium at the moment, and I've gotten really turned on by it in the last 10 years. And I was - I loved "The Wire." I loved the original "Office." I think "Breaking Bad" is incredible. "Mad Men" is wonderful. You know, there are these really imaginative series that have captured all of our imaginations. So I think, you know, I wanted to be a part of that Renaissance. That's kind of an exaggerated term, but I think there's something to that. But more specifically, I, you know, I'm always in pursuit of interesting storytelling, and I don't really care what medium it finds itself in. And I wasn't actively pursuing a series necessarily, but this script came up and this character appeared, and she was incredibly seductive.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Carrie's mentor at the CIA is Saul, played by Mandy Patinkin, and there's a scene - I just wanted to play this part from another excerpt from the first episode. She sets up her private monitoring operation, installs cameras and microphones in the Marine's house, and then arrives home one day about to monitor the barbecue that he's holding for his buddies and finds Mandy Patinkin's character sitting on the couch.</s>MANDY PATINKIN: (as Saul Berenson) And get a lawyer because you're going to need one when you report to the (unintelligible) first thing in the morning.</s>CLAIRE DANES: (as Carrie Mathison) Saul, please.</s>MANDY PATINKIN: (as Saul Berenson) I don't have anything to say.</s>CLAIRE DANES: (as Carrie Mathison) I'm just making sure we don't get hit again.</s>MANDY PATINKIN: (as Saul Berenson) I'm glad someone is looking out for the country, Carrie.</s>CLAIRE DANES: (as Carrie Mathison) I'm serious. I missed something once before. I won't - I can't let that happen again.</s>MANDY PATINKIN: (as Saul Berenson) It was 10 years ago. Everyone missed something that day.</s>CLAIRE DANES: (as Carrie Mathison) Yeah. Everyone is not me.</s>MANDY PATINKIN: (as Saul Berenson) I understand that. I doubt a grand jury will.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And one thing your character does have in common with Jack Bauer I will say: Stop at nothing to protect - do what she thinks is right for the country.</s>CLAIRE DANES: She's committed. She may be committed.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: She's certainly running, doing things that are highly illegal. As a reporter, if I found somebody from the CIA doing that, it would be front page news.</s>CLAIRE DANES: Yeah. And, yeah, for - that's for sure. Yeah.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's see if we get a caller in on the conversation. Our guest is Claire Danes. 800-989-8255. Email us: talk@npr.org. And let's get Jenny(ph) on the line. Jenny is calling from Ann Arbor.</s>JENNY: Hello. Hi.</s>CLAIRE DANES: Hi, Jenny.</s>JENNY: Hi. Thanks for taking my call. Hey, Claire. First of all, I just wanted to say you're a wonderful, wonderful actress...</s>CLAIRE DANES: Thank you.</s>JENNY: ...especially for your role as Temple Grandin. It was beautiful.</s>CLAIRE DANES: Oh, thank you very much. Thank you.</s>JENNY: And I wonder, did you have a connection with autism because you played that role so magnificently? And also, I saw your husband's film where he played a young man with an Asperger's. I didn't know if you both experienced autism in a personal way.</s>CLAIRE DANES: That was just a wild coincidence. Yeah. We still kind of marvel at that. He did that movie about six months before I became aware of "Temple Grandin," and I got so spoiled because, you know, he - our library was already stacked with the necessary reading. No. Neither of us had a particular awareness of autism, but we certainly developed one. And, you know, I - the current character that I'm playing is not, I mean, she's obviously very different, but she's also wired in a very different way from most people, and I find that very interesting.</s>CLAIRE DANES: And I don't like thinking about these people who are different as - I don't like that they're often marginalized or dismissed. And I think that, yes, there are real perils of those conditions, but there are also real advantages that they have. You know, they do have a certain insight that we don't have and, you know, so I empathize with them, and I'm interested in them.</s>JENNY: Well, thank you. You're just a wonderful actor. Thanks a lot for just giving Temple humanity. I really appreciated that.</s>CLAIRE DANES: Thank you. You know what, I mean, she had it in abundance. I mean</s>CLAIRE DANES: I'm just so glad that people connected with it, that movie got made. And - but thank you. I'm glad. I'm really glad you liked it.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thanks, Jenny.</s>JENNY: Thanks a lot. Take care.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking to Claire Danes. You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. And I meant to ask you, you're getting Temple Grandin's motions right, her physicality right, the way she hold her face, that had to be different from anything you'd ever done.</s>CLAIRE DANES: Yes, it was. I mean, I'd never played somebody - I mean, I kind of sort of played a living person actually when I did "Shopgirl" because that was loosely modeled on a woman that Steve Martin had been with, but it was really very fictionalized and, you know, but I felt a certain responsibility, you know, but this is on a whole different level. And, you know, Temple is so idiosyncratic. I mean, I started thinking of her as a culture-of-one and, you know, it was kind of wonderful to draw from life in that way, and she was so generous and so permissive, you know.</s>CLAIRE DANES: And she was really very gracious about being represented by this person she didn't know. But, yeah, you know, I mean, I worked with a woman who's a friend of mine who's a choreographer and I had danced in the past and, you know, that was the first thing I did, was recruit another set of eyes so that we could study her together and think about how autism manifests itself physically.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's get another caller on. This is Zian(ph), Zian with us from Hartford, Connecticut.</s>ZIAN: Hello?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: You're on the air. Go ahead, please.</s>ZIAN: Hi. I just wanted to say hi to Ms. Claire Danes.</s>CLAIRE DANES: Hi.</s>ZIAN: Just to let you know that I am a huge, huge fan.</s>CLAIRE DANES: Oh, thank you.</s>ZIAN: I've watched, I think, everything you've been in.</s>CLAIRE DANES: Oh, thank you very much.</s>ZIAN: And I'm really excited to see you get into television because I don't really watch much television. I'm more of a movie watcher.</s>CLAIRE DANES: Mm-hmm.</s>ZIAN: But with, you know, the movie - the shows that you started naming like "Breaking Bad" and "Mad Men," you know, it's kind of bringing me back to television. And with this new show - like me, myself, I'm in the military, so I'm excited to see you take on this role of - and this, you know, this story.</s>CLAIRE DANES: Oh, wow. Well, then you know more about it than I do, but I hope you like it. I mean, I'm really excited about the scripts that are coming in. I mean, I'm in the process of filming the first season, so it's still kind of unfurling. I'm still kind of discovering what it is, but, you know, I think it's exciting. So I hope we don't disappoint you.</s>ZIAN: Oh, trust me, as long as you're in it I think I'll be fine.</s>CLAIRE DANES: Oh, you're so sweet. Thank you.</s>ZIAN: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Zian, thanks very much for the call. Your character appears to live in an apartment complex in Washington, D.C. that my nephew actually lives in.</s>CLAIRE DANES: Really?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: So I was pretty interested to see that.</s>CLAIRE DANES: I moved in with your nephew. You didn't know that?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Didn't know that. His wife is going to be a surprised.</s>CLAIRE DANES: Oh. OK.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Here's an email we have from April. I hate to bring up the "My So-Called Life" thing, but I just wanted to tell Claire what an everlasting effect that wonderful, short-lived show had on her peers. My friends and I are all around Claire's age and also that of her character, Angela Chase. We still talk about how we were an Angela or a Rayanne, and Jordan Catalano is still the epitome of the unattainable boy. I've also noticed that the show is being embraced by a new generation of girls by being available on Netflix, which is proof of the show's timeless voice. I do have a question for Claire. What does she think that Angela and the other characters would be doing now?</s>CLAIRE DANES: Well, that's a fair question and it's one that I don't have an easy answer for. I kind of think she would be a writer of some form, and I'm probably saying because I associate her so strongly with Winnie Holzman, the writer of the show. I mean, she really was an alter ego of hers - Winnie, whom I'm still very, very close with and love dearly. But, yeah, I don't know what form that would have taken, but I definitely see her as being a writer.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: A writer of what, fiction?</s>CLAIRE DANES: I don't know. Maybe a journalist, but I'm totally making that up. You know what, we would have to ask the writer herself. We'd have to call Winnie and ask.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's do that.</s>CLAIRE DANES: OK.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We'll get her - no, actually, we're out of time, but</s>CLAIRE DANES: OK.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: ...next time you're on.</s>CLAIRE DANES: OK.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Claire Danes, thanks very much and good luck with the show.</s>CLAIRE DANES: Thank you very much.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Claire Danes, star of the new Showtime drama "Homeland," which premiers this Sunday night, and she was kind enough to join us from our bureau in New York.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: On Monday, the latest accusations against Pakistan's intelligence service. We'll profile the ISI, plus the Opinion Page. Join us for that. This is TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. I'm Neal Conan in Washington. |
NPR's Audie Cornish speaks with Washington Post reporter Craig Timberg about a group called Project Birmingham that spread misinformation in the 2017 Alabama Senate election. | AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: It was a stunning upset in a deeply red state. Democrat Doug Jones beat his Republican opponent, Roy Moore, in the 2017 Alabama Senate race, a special election held to fill former Attorney General Jeff Sessions' seat. The contest drew national attention after Republican candidate Roy Moore was accused of sexual assault and misconduct with teenage girls. Now, reporting following the race has focused on the controversial strategy used by one pro-Jones group called Project Birmingham.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: The Washington Post's Craig Timberg has been looking into this. He joins me now. Welcome to the program.</s>CRAIG TIMBERG: Thank you.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: In a nutshell, can you describe exactly what is Project Birmingham?</s>CRAIG TIMBERG: This was a disinformation campaign that really resembled some of the tactics that were used by the Russians in 2016 involving fake Facebook messages. Twitter was used as well. And the idea was to undermine the support for Roy Moore and to bolster the support for Doug Jones using social media in a way that was, frankly, quite deceptive.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: Can you give a description of the more controversial approaches that the group allegedly used?</s>CRAIG TIMBERG: So the definitive account of this, at least as far as we've been able to turn up, is a document that was handed out at a secret meeting here in Washington back in September. And what they were trying to do is figure out, you know, what would make people vote either for Jones or against Roy Moore? For example, arguably the most controversial tactic that's in the document speaks about creating fake evidence - what they call a false flag - that Russian bots were supporting Roy Moore.</s>CRAIG TIMBERG: So they put out some sort of hints about this on Twitter. There are some tweets out there that have Cyrillic characters - the Russian language - suggesting that they were Russian, and then it was spread around. It actually generated some headlines at the time. A couple of news organizations bit on this and reported that Roy Moore was being supported by Russian bots.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: As this reporting has come out, what have we learned about any kind of relationship between this group and the Jones campaign or Democrats in Alabama?</s>CRAIG TIMBERG: There's no evidence of a relationship with Senator Jones or, really, with any Democrats in Alabama that would be found. What we do know is that the money for this - about a hundred thousand dollars - came from the Internet billionaire Reid Hoffman. He, like the other people who have any affiliation with this, say they had no idea that his money was being used in this way.</s>CRAIG TIMBERG: The other key actors are a Democratic operative here in Washington named Mikey Dickerson. He is best known for fixing the healthcare.gov web portal. He also says that he didn't know what was going on. And then there is a security company called New Knowledge based down in Texas. And they've acknowledged some limited experimentation with these kinds of tactics but says that they didn't do the stuff that's described in the document that we have.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: All of these guys, though, are saying, look, I didn't know where the money was going. I didn't know what was going on. Does that sound realistic?</s>CRAIG TIMBERG: Well, it certainly seems like somebody isn't telling the truth. It's very hard to square the various denials we've gotten from the people who acknowledged playing some kind of role in this with the denials of the other people who have acknowledged playing a role in this. There's been a lot of finger-pointing. There's been a lot of - let's just say lack of clarity about who did what. It's clear nobody wants to own Project Birmingham at this point.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: Is there any way to know what kind of effect it had on the election? I mean, that race in particular, given the allegations about Roy Moore, had a lot going on.</s>CRAIG TIMBERG: Indeed. And as political scientists have pointed out to us, Roy Moore was an incredibly well-known character with some incredibly well-known weaknesses as a candidate. It's clear that whoever, you know, was pushing Project Birmingham was attempting to push on those issues. They talk about - in the document - trying to provoke disgust among evangelical Christians, for example, over those allegations of sexual misconduct.</s>CRAIG TIMBERG: But in the end, we don't know what effect it had in the same way we don't really know what effect the Russian disinformation had in 2016. There's no way to run these elections again. And that's what's so troubling in a way, right? Like, once it's happened, how do we keep it from happening again?</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: Craig Timberg covers technology for The Washington Post. Thank you for sharing your reporting with us.</s>CRAIG TIMBERG: It's my pleasure. |
Many little girls aspire to be fashion models when they grow up. But the lives of models are often far less glamorous than they appear. Fashion model-turned sociologist Ashley Mears shares her stories of the real nitty-gritty of modeling. Ashley Mears is the author of Pricing Beauty: The Making of a Fashion Model. | NEAL CONAN, host: This is TALK OF THE NATION. I'm Neal Conan in Washington. They have little job security, work freelance in an industry that makes billions, yet their daily pay may be a free lunch. They don't get health coverage, they experience constant criticism and rejection, some wind up in debt to their employers, and they're too old at 24.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: They're models who turn out, do grueling work in an industry glutted with glamorous competition. For every Gisele who earns millions, dozens of girls and young women get paid in clothes or in free lunch or $150 for a day-long shoot, which may remind you more of Dickens than glamour.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Today we'll look at an industry and understand why understanding it is important. If you've had experience in the fashion industry as a model, an agent or as a mother, call and tell us your story. Our phone number is 800-989-8255. Email talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. Go to npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Later in the program, musician Stephan Said's campaign to move from a message to a movement. But first, Ashley Mears joins us from member station WBUR in Boston. She's an assistant professor of sociology at Boston University, and she studied models by becoming one. Nice to have you with us today.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Hi, Neal, thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And we tend to think of models as those glamorous creatures traveling by limo who party back - party with their quarterback boyfriends. Give us a snapshot of what the life is actually like.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Well, there's a lot of misleading conceptions about what the modeling life is like. In part that's due to the nature of the job. It's what we would call a winner-take-all industry, meaning that you have a handful of winners at the top of the hierarchy who are making very visible and very lucrative rewards, and we see that all the time celebrated in the popular press.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: However, there's an enormous pile of people who are struggling to make ends meet or just getting by, that are hoping for their chance to become winners as well. And so when we de-center those winners, and we don't look at them, but rather we look at all the invisible people that are trying to become them, we get a pretty different picture, exactly the opposite of what most people think modeling is like.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: It is technically what a sociologist would call - it's structurally a bad job, meaning that it's precarious work.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: That's a technical term?</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Right, yeah. No, we would say this is a bad job. It's like nonstandard employment or jobs in the informal economy, in which you don't know when your next paycheck is coming. It's uncertain work. It's unpredictable, it's insecure, and you don't get benefits like health care or a retirement package.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Tell us the story of a model you described in your book as Liz.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: So Liz is an interesting case. When I was doing the work, I was actually working as a model, I met her at a casting, and we talked, and I interviewed her several times and kept in touch with her over the course of several years. And we were in much the same position, that we were new faces, or as they're called fresh faces, in the industry. And we were being sent out to quite a few castings every day.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Imagine that your job is going on a series of job interviews every day, and this is how we met. And she was doing well in the sense that she was working for magazines and testing for photographers, developing her portfolio, as every new model needs to do, but not getting paid very well for it.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: She was at the time going to a university in New York, and she ended up dropping out of the university to pursue commercial work in L.A., where it's a market that she had been told models could make a lot of money in commercial jobs, in television commercials, for instance.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: And she did well. She went to L.A., and she was really - she hit a high streak. She booked a couple of lucrative jobs that paid her very well and had residuals with TV commercials. But after a few years, her earnings ran completely dry because she ended up getting sick, and without health insurance she had to pay out of pocket for some pretty straightforward procedures that were very costly.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: And so she wound up broke again, back in New York, living with her family.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And that's - there are a couple of important things to draw out from that story. One of them is that it is a very uncertain and unpredictable life, and you don't have a lot of safety net to fall back on. The other is the distinction you drew between an elite model, I think they're called editorial models, and commercial.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Yes, yes. This is a really important distinction. The modeling market is not a singular entity, but in fact very different spheres of different types of modeling work. And the spheres loosely cohere into two categories, the editorial and the commercial.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: And they have different logics and different amounts of prestige and pay. So in the editorial world, these are the jobs that are considered more high-end. They're like your fashion week catwalks, your editorial spreads in a magazine, a high-end magazine, for instance, as opposed to a more commercial magazine.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Commercial work are jobs like catalogs, jobs that are considered the bread and butter of any modeling agency. They also include showroom work, which is really interesting, a really interesting segment of the industry because showroom models really don't get any visibility. They literally are behind the scenes with designers who use their bodies to mold garments upon them.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: So showroom work, catalog work, that stuff is really lucrative. If you get in with a showroom, you can make 200 to 500 dollars an hour, and you're working repeatedly, you know, many hours over many days. This is very lucrative work; however, it's very low prestige kind of work, that you don't become a supermodel from working in showrooms. You might become super-rich from working in showrooms.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: However, the more editorial end of the market, this is high prestige. Walking for one of these Fashion Week shows, you know, like coming up in Paris, the right designers, can really boost your profile. However, this work tends not to pay very well.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: So shooting for a high-end editorial magazine may pay you a flat rate of $150 a day. It may pay you nothing. It may pay you in lunch. Similarly, some of the catwalk shows, they might be fantastic for your image, but you might not get paid in cash. You might be paid in what's known as trade. So when you're paid in trade, you get to take home some clothes.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: So it's kind of funny because often people think, oh, if you're a model, you know, how great, you get to keep the clothes. But actually, when you're a model, and you're doing editorial work, you're forgoing the economic payment, the cash, for a gift of clothing and for enough prestige that hopefully, the bet is, it's a risky bet, that prestige can accumulate up and land you a high-end campaign like a fragrance campaign or a multi-year, multi-million-dollar contract with, say, Calvin Klein.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking with Ashley Mears, an assistant professor of sociology at Boston University, who immersed herself in the modeling industry by becoming one so she could write about it and learn about people's lives. 800-989-8255 if you have experience in that business. Email us, talk@npr.org. We'll start with Gary, Gary with us from Buffalo.</s>GARY: Hello, can you hear me?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: You're on the air, go ahead, please.</s>GARY: Okay. I am - I'm in Buffalo, and my daughter, who is now 22 and a college graduate, had a fairly successful teen modeling career for a number of years. My former wife and I, when we were married, we took her to New York and they liked her. She got an agent, and things went well.</s>GARY: She had a few magazine covers, some European covers that were shot in New York and so forth. But some of the things that happened along the way were strange. At one point, my former wife took her to New York for a shoot when she was like 14, and the photographer said: Oh, I love your daughter. Please leave her with me. I will take good care of her - which is kind of creepy when you think about that.</s>GARY: And then when she was 16 or 17, she had a modeling gig in Toronto, one of these gatherings, and at that point we realized that she was an athlete. She was captain of the volleyball team in high school. She played softball. She ran track. She was a trained dancer. She was well-muscled, and muscle, of course, weighs more than fat.</s>GARY: And even though she looked like a bean pole, she hit a certain weight where they said to her, you're too heavy now, you have to be a plus-size model. And I would look at her, and it didn't look like she was any thicker than my arm. And she cried all the way back from Toronto to Buffalo. And I just said, that's it, you're done, this is crazy. This is an insane circumstance.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Right, well, those are definitely hard things for a teenage girl to hear, and yet, as I documented, pretty ubiquitous and not necessarily said with malice either. When I was working in the market, and, you know, using - taking field notes and analyzing all of this data of what it's like to be a model, I definitely saw lots of the kind of things that you are talking about, creepy things, insulting things, things that can make you want to cry and feel really bad about your body.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: And when I did interviews with modeling agents, I learned, quite interestingly, that they are also very uncomfortable with having to tell people, young girls especially, that they need to lose weight, that this is an uncomfortable thing for them to do, because they're not jerks.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: And they abide by norms of politeness, and yet the industry, in order to be a successful model at the editorial end of the market, that is a size zero through four for a woman. This is a kind of body size that lends itself well to an adolescent girl, not so well as she gets older.</s>GARY: Uh-huh. Well, I'm happy to say she's a college graduate with a degree in public relations and is employed and doing well.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Nice, fantastic.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Glad to hear that, Gary.</s>GARY: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thanks very much for the call. These - creepy, that part of it - that's part of it too.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Yes, that is a part of it. What's - aside from individual instances in which people may hear creepy things like, you know, hearing what may have been a pass from a photographer to a young girl, that sure, those things can happen, those things can happen in lots of different kinds of arenas.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: What makes it problematic in modeling is that you have a lot of young people that are the labor force, young girls especially. And you have young girls that don't necessarily have their parents with them. Modeling agents prefer to have models who are at least 16 years old. However, certainly they can start much younger, and they do start much younger.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: At the time that I was in New York, I learned that one of the models that was in a fashion show was a 13-year-old with me, and she had her mother with her. But it's plausible that maybe she wouldn't, she would have maybe a supervisor from the agency come with her.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: So that means that you have a vulnerable child labor population, basically. The other creepy part about it is that there are not such great insight - or not such great regulations or oversight built into the market, that if you run into a problematic problem, you might have to work it out on your own.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking about the world of modeling, the real world of real fashion models, with Ashley Mears, who's walked those runways herself and wrote about the experience in her book "Pricing Beauty: The Making of a Fashion Model." If you've had experience in the fashion industry, as a model, agent, or as a parent, give us a call, 800-989-8255. Stay with us. I'm Neal Conan. It's the TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: This is TALK OF THE NATION. I'm Neal Conan, NPR News. When you flip through the pages of fashion magazines and catalogs, chances are you don't think a lot about the lives of the models you're looking at. The glamour in the glossies is often far outweighed by the demands to be thin, intense schedules and criticism, and lousy pay, if there's any pay at all.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Ashley Mears knows all this firsthand. Her book, "Pricing Beauty: The Making of a Fashion Model," tells her own story of life as a model. She's now an assistant professor of sociology at Boston University.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: If you've had experience in the fashion industry, tell us your story, 800-989-8255. Email talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And let's go next to Jay(ph), and Jay's on the line with us from New York.</s>JAY: Hi, how are you doing?</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Go ahead, please.</s>JAY: Yes, I work in production, actually, in commercials and in - mostly in catalog here in the city.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And yes, go ahead.</s>JAY: Oh, so basically what my point is that - that this sort of problem that - this sort of disparity is, I think, it's industry-wide. Put it this way, like I work, you know, basically bringing furniture onto set, doing props, that sort of thing, and I'm - you know, my day rate is possibly a fourth or a third, even, of their rate, and my day can be a 12 or 13-hour day or longer.</s>JAY: And there's a sort of similar dynamic in terms of it's freelance. I don't have any health insurance. It's - I think it's an industry-wide problem.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Right, no, definitely. Thank you, Jay, and it's culture industries as a whole. It's not just fashion modeling, of course, it's the people that are working in production, on the sets. It's people that work in fields like publishing, artists, music, graphic design, journalism, that in all these different kinds of fields you have vast inequalities, of people who have hit the jackpot and have like a selling book or a selling piece of art, and they do great, but most people are scraping by a living.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: And they are largely freelance jobs that...</s>JAY: Absolutely, absolutely.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Yeah, precarious labor.</s>JAY: I've gotten - at one point at one job I got heat exhaustion, and they put me on the train and sent me home.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Wow, wow, right. And so this goes back also to the last caller, who mentioned that, you know, various creepy things can happen. When you work in these kinds of fields, you're on an individualistic basis.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: So in the modeling market, you have an agency, but the agency, technically you hire them, and they just work as an intermediary to put you in touch and kind of play matchmaker to clients, which means that if you have a problem with a client, if a job goes badly, if something creepy happens to you, you have to work that out on your own. You can't go to the head of HR and file a complaint with a company because you're on your own.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Jay...</s>JAY: There's times I've had to chase after money for four and five months for, you know, six or seven hundred dollars that, you know, I need to pay my rent.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And the other part of that, Jay, at least in modeling, there's the lottery chance of huge success. Is there that in your line of work?</s>JAY: No.</s>JAY: I mean, for most people I know, it's a means to an end, to get the rent paid, to try to move on to do something else. Usually, you know, it tends to be creative folks, but not necessarily. You know, I don't want to, you know, carry furniture for a living necessarily. That's not what my vocation is. I want to do something creative. So this is - you know, at least I'm not in a, you know, a warehouse in the suburbs somewhere, where I grew up.</s>JAY: So that's how I sort of keep in perspective the sort of - the petty indignities that the industry puts on us.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Right, and I found that with models too, that a lot of models are realistic about their chances. Once they get into the market, they realize the superstar structure and the poor chances that they will become superstars. So they readjust accordingly. They take from it what they can, networking, for instance.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: These kinds of fields are fantastic in order to build your store of connections that you can transfer out into other kinds of cultural work that hopefully might have insurance with it.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Jay, good luck, thanks for your call.</s>JAY: Thank you.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Thanks.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's go next to Elizabeth(ph) and Elizabeth on the line from St. Louis.</s>ELIZABETH: Hi, I'm a model that's done some like freelance and agencied work in the St. Louis market and just with a small agency but trying to branch out and get into more major markets. I found just real prejudice against me being a Caucasian woman that has larger hips. Like a Latino woman or an African-American woman with larger hips, they almost have a better chance in the market. I just wanted to comment on that, see what your perspective was.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Right, well, that's really interesting. So offhand, I think that that's problematic in itself, right, the assumption that certain kinds of bodies make more sense with certain kinds of ethnicities, that, you know, reproduces all kinds of stereotypes, as it is.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: And yet there is a difference in local markets versus large fashion cities markets. So in New York, a modeling agency, they're trying to take on girls - and I don't say girls in a kind of unaware sense, I mean people who are very young and therefore girls - that will do well in the editorial market and the commercial market.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: They're looking for models that can both secure the money and make all the prestige, which is good for the agency and potentially also, you know, really great for the model if she hits it big. And those models are very thin, and they tend to be very white as well.</s>ELIZABETH: I just, you know, definitely felt prejudiced against because I'm Caucasian and have larger hips. So I just kind of come to that realization that maybe that's not my future, and I'm kind of getting behind the scenes in the fashion design aspect. So thank you.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Oh, that's really good.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Good luck with that, Elizabeth.</s>ELIZABETH: Thank you.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: You know, I do just want to add, though, one thing about that. I didn't interview very many non-white women or men for the book in terms of models, but the ones that I did, they also struggled very much with their hip measurements or with their body sizes. Most of the women that I interviewed had problems trying to keep in line with a very narrow set of requirements for their bodies.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Jockeys are required to keep weight too. It's a...</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Right, athletes, lots of different types of athletes, exactly. And there's similar kinds of mechanisms for keeping bodies in line. So different types of athletes - boxers, rowers, for instance - they go through weigh-ins, which, you know, if you don't make weight, then this is a failure of all sorts of different varieties.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: And similarly for modeling, we don't have weigh-ins, but models are constantly being measured or asked to change clothes, try on sample-size clothing, which, you know, might be nice and roomy or might be incredibly tight and embarrassing to try to fit into.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: You talked about the majority of models, at least in New York, being white. There's also a large influx of girls from - and again, I'm using the word girls and young women - from overseas.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Yes, so you see a large increase of people that are coming from places like Brazil and from Eastern Europe and post-Soviet societies, and this is due to the increasing proliferation of model scouts around the world, with Internet technology, digital photography, and just the ease of travel, that it's quite easy now for models to be scouted in, say, rural Siberia and then have their images go around the world, and they can wind up in a city like New York.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: So there's been this huge, enormous increase of people who want to be models and who are available labor supply of models around the world. But when I say that they go to Brazil, you know, Brazil is a majority mestizo or African heritage country, but they're going to the whitest parts of Brazil. They're going into the southern parts of Brazil, where there's a history of German immigration. So models who are - the people there tend to be blonde hair, blue eyes, looking like Gisele Bundchen, for instance.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: So there is a preference for young girls and for fair, light-skinned girls as well.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's go next to Rob, and Rob's on the line with us from Omaha.</s>ROB: Hi, thanks for taking my call.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Sure.</s>ROB: Yeah, I'm a 47-year-old male model in - part-time here in the Midwest in a relatively small market. But I just wanted to suggest that I know a lot of the clients of my agency, the models and stuff, they try it on a very part-time basis while they're getting their full-time - like I have a full-time job. So I just do it when I can and have vacations so I can do it and get paid for my job too.</s>ROB: So a lot of people, if they want to venture into the modeling, they - I know I did it with my kids, and they do it periodically, when they have time. You can do it on a part-time basis and then, you know, build your full-time life. And then I know that my agency just took one of their clients to Ford in Chicago and got her signed. So you do have those shots if you have the right connections and stuff.</s>ROB: So it doesn't necessarily have to be all or nothing, but you can have fun with it, so...</s>ASHLEY MEARS: No, absolutely, absolutely. And I try to do that in the book, to cover the range, I mean the kind of structural instabilities that are inherent in the labor arrangements, but also, you know, working within those labor arrangements, people make of it what they will.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Some people see it as a fantastic opportunity, amazing travel, as you put it quite nicely, the various connections that you don't know where they're going to lead, that people can take all kinds of different approaches to entering these arrangements, as they do in lots of different fields like music or, you know, writing your novel or being a journalist.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: You can try it out and then readjust your life accordingly.</s>ROB: Exactly, because $125 an hour with a two-hour minimum in this economy is fantastic for me, even if I do it a couple of times a month.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Right. Right.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Rob, congratulations. Thanks very much.</s>ROB: Anyway, thanks to you. Thanks for your time.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Yeah. Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: It raises, though, an issue. Again, back in New York at that elite level, the editorial level, are men treated the same as women?</s>ASHLEY MEARS: No, not at all. So gender obviously matters when we're talking about fashion and fashion modeling, but it matters in pretty interesting ways. When you look at modeling as a labor market, there's this incredible gender paradox, that it's one of the few fields in which women have greater opportunities, and they earn significantly more money than their male counterparts. Significantly more money. I mean, on occasion I documented instances in which women were earning two to three - five times more than the men for equal work. So we're not talking about - you know, obviously there's - you probably can't name that many male supermodels off the top of your head...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: No.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: ...I'm guessing. OK. So, you know...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I'm better on quarterbacks, to tell you the truth.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Right, right. And that would be the appropriate, you know, field - in athletics - that we would see - you know, men triumph in athletics, and they get paid more, generally, in athletics than women do.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: In tennis, for example, where the, yeah, men make a lot more money.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Right. Right. Where, until quite recently, some of the major tennis tournaments had unequal prize monies for the women's competitions than the men's. Right. So in modeling, there's this - like in sports, you would say, that's a traditional gender wage gap. In modeling, we see an inverse - an inverted gender wage gap. We see it also in other fields like sex work, prostitution, pornography performing, for instance.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: So when - what was interesting was when I interviewed agents and clients about where this wage gap comes from, about what - you know, why is it that you pay the women so much more than the men, it was a kind of - default explanations would be along the lines of, well, this is a women's business, or, you know, women are better models, women are better suited to the work, that men, you know, they're in it part-time or for other reasons, or we just don't get that excited about male models.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: And what I argue in the book and what I try to show is that the prices for a model's time come down to the negotiations that the agents can make with the clients. Central to those negotiations is the amount of excitement or buzz that can be generated around a model. But people are not very excited about male models, that bookers fight not as hard as they would for men, or that it's already a taken-for-granted assumption that if a man and a woman are both in a fashion job together, that she will be making more. And then agents will use the woman's rate as a basis in order to - or they will use the man's rate as a basis in order to increase the woman's rate if, for instance, there was going to be pay parity. Yes.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking with Ashley Mears about the world of modeling. You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. Buzz. Buzz is that intangible quality that suddenly takes one of these young women and makes her a star.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Yes.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: How does one rise above the rest?</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Yeah. It's the central question I tried to formulate an answer in my research. But it's something that, you know, the agents and the clients and the models themselves don't know. When I spoke to people, they would often attribute it to timing or luck, which is indeed important, and yet it's not a purely random or chance event for someone to make it to the top. Top model careers are made out of the editorial end of the market. Yes, you need to secure enough visibility in the magazine pages or in Fashion Week in order to land those mega campaigns that indeed can make you a star. But in order to get to that level, you need certain types of people to sanction you in the editorial market.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: What I found in the editorial market is that what everybody is looking for, the kind of look that they value, is something that they call edgy, which is yet another fluid, fuzzy term. An edgy look is something that is not so mainstream, that it's a little bit different, and you can't put your finger on it, but it appeals to high-end editorial tastemakers. So this edgy look is incredibly uncertain, that it's very hard to nail down.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: When you have a market situation in which there's a lot of uncertainty, you find that people look to each other for signals of what to do. What model do we choose if they're all similarly qualified and beautiful and young and thin? Well, we look to what other people are choosing. And they look especially to what other high-status clients are choosing. So you're looking for the people that work for Vogue or the Prada shows, for instance, you know, or Chanel. Whatever they're choosing is a good sign of what is the appropriately edgy look.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Now, trying to get in with a high-status client, that's quite - there is where your arbitrariness comes in. They like you at this moment, or they don't like you at that moment. That's where a lot of the luck comes in, is securing a place under the sponsorship of a high-status client. But the bookers - sorry, modeling agents are known as bookers.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Uh-huh.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: The bookers know this. They know that their best chances of success for any single model is to get her in with a high-status client. So they strategize accordingly. They try to build relationships with the right kinds of clients. They try to build trust with them. They try to work on their own ability to sell, to figure out what is the taste of this high-end tastemaker in order to deliver that look.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And, again, like ball players, do they sometimes lie about their age?</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Yes. And especially lately with the press coverage about the under 16-year-old models, despite Diane von Furstenberg - her endorsement for the industry to use people that are above the age of 16 indicates that she herself had a 15-year-old walk in her show. So people are lying about their ages in both directions; for women, especially, because they start so young. But people may be uncomfortable hiring a 13-year-old for - to model women's wear, for instance. So they may lie about her age and say that she's 16. It can also work the opposite direction that in the editorial look, what they're looking for is something that's very fashionable. They're looking for the next fresh face. If you are already, say, 22, 23, this means that you're no longer a fresh face, that, you know, people have probably seen you. They've passed up on you. Why would somebody take a chance on you? So if you're 22, 23, you might be advised to lie about your age as, say, you're 20 or 19 if you can get away with it.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: OK. Ashley Mears got away with it. She lied about her age when she was researching for her dissertation, which became her book "Pricing Beauty: The Making of a Fashion Model." She joined us today from member station WBUR in Boston. Thanks very much for your time.</s>ASHLEY MEARS: Great. Thank you, Neal.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Up next, making music with a message and the difficulty of reaching a wider audience. Iraqi-American singer Stephan Said will join us. Stay with us. I'm Neal Conan. It's the TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. |
Writer Dave Eggers argues the best way to attract great teachers is to pay them more. Eggers and activist Ninive Calegari co-founded the Teacher Salary Project, to raise awareness about the low salaries that they say drive many teachers from the classroom. | NEAL CONAN, host: A new documentary focuses on four public school teachers, and on a part of their job that's often accepted as a given: long hours and low pay.</s>RHENA JASEY: You know, nobody would question a doctor being paid or a lawyer being paid or, you know, somebody working in consulting being paid. And I think the skill set required to be a teacher is at least as complex, if not more complex.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Rhena Jasey in an excerpt from the documentary "American Teacher," which is part of the Teacher Salary Project, which hopes to raise the pay and the stature of the profession, so bright and talented teachers will stay on. Few will argue with that aspiration. But as federal, state and local government all face cuts, where would the money come from? Our phone number: 800-989-8255. Email us: talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Two of the principals behind the Teacher Salary Project join us now from KQED, our member station in San Francisco, writer Dave Eggers, whose books include "A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius." Nice to have you with us today.</s>DAVE EGGERS: Thank you. Nice to be here.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And teacher, writer and activist Ninive Calegari, thanks very much for coming in.</s>NINIVE CALEGARI: Thanks for having us.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And the numbers may be different now because of the economy, but one survey of teachers in 2007 showed half of the new teachers gave up teaching in the first five years. Was that due, do you think, largely to salary?</s>NINIVE CALEGARI: It's in part - this is Ninive. It's in part because of salary, but teachers also want a better quality of life and better conditions, and I think 62 percent of teachers having second jobs is really dramatic and something that we can work to change. The salary absolutely impacts the strain and drain of the job. But when you ask teachers what they want, they also have other ideas of, you know, having strong leadership, beautiful campuses, resources. So there's a portfolio of things that need to change in order for teachers to be able to stay and thrive.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And, Dave Eggers, one of your books is titled "Teachers Have it Easy." That's, I think, tongue-in-cheek?</s>DAVE EGGERS: Yeah. The subtitle is "The Big Sacrifices and Small Salaries of America's Teachers," and Ninive and I wrote that with another teacher, Daniel Moulthrop. Then that's where the movie came out of. Those were the stories of dozens of public school teachers from around the country, telling their stories and their sacrifices and problems and conditions that could have been better. And you had all these incredibly gifted and dedicated educators, but they were really pushed to the brink too often. And they want to teach and they desperately want to stay in the profession, but sometimes, societally, we make it incredibly difficult for them to do so.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And Ninive Calegari, that - should pay be commensurate with lawyers and doctors?</s>NINIVE CALEGARI: Well, I think it's really important to recognize that teachers get paid a lot less than other professions with the same amount of training and the same college degrees and master's degrees. One thing has changed really dramatically. In 1970, if you were a starting teacher in New York, you were earning only a couple thousand dollars less than a starting attorney. And, today, a starting teacher in New York still earns around $45,000, and a starting attorney earns $160,000.</s>NINIVE CALEGARI: And so I do think we need to mastermind a better plan so that the salaries do stay up with accountants and engineers. And you see successful countries that focus on teachers, their governments ensure that those salaries stay the same so that the salary doesn't become a disincentive. I think when you ask college students if they care about salaries, they do. And so we have to address this.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I would point out the attorneys who work for the city don't make that kind of money. The people work in the district attorney's office, and they're starting out. And, of course, teachers generally work, in New York, for the city.</s>NINIVE CALEGARI: Well, and I think that's true. And I think even the starting salaries of many professions aren't as dire. For example - I mean, that's not where the tender area is. For example, starting architects, starting publishers, starting doctors when they're doing their residency, they don't earn a lot of money. I think the hard thing for teachers is that they don't ever have the opportunity to earn more money.</s>DAVE EGGERS: It's the - a lot of teachers that we talk to, it's not necessarily the starting salary that's the real disincentive. It's the ending salary, because the average ending salary for a teacher that might have worked 25 years now in the U.S. is $67,000. So that doesn't at all keep pace with dozens of similar professions in terms of the education requirement and the complexity and the intellectual weight of the job.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And we could only accept your argument. Teachers are underpaid. They're the future, because they train the next generation. Of course they should have a greater status and greater pay. But, Dave Eggers, we all read the papers, too. People are cutting back. Where is the money going to come from?</s>DAVE EGGERS: Well, we've done a lot of interesting stimulus packages on a federal level, and even on local levels. And, you know, there's - by one estimate, we could double all teacher pay for what it cost for the Cash for Clunkers program. You know, we're at a point where, globally, we need to educate our youth so that they compete - they can compete, you know, 10, 15 years from now. And right now, we're falling behind a lot of other countries.</s>DAVE EGGERS: And, you know, the countries that have really fantastic education systems really are organized, and they have a plan, and they invest heavily in every aspect of education, starting with teacher training and preparation and compensation. And so it's incredibly short-sighted of us on a national level to sort of see this as some, you know, optional thing, or to put it aside. We need a plan. We need an educational stimulus package.</s>NINIVE CALEGARI: And think - sorry to cut you off, but Linda Darling-Hammond talks about how we're going to need to teach our way out of this economic crisis. And I think if we're going to be borrowing money from our grandchildren, I think this is the only excusable place to borrow it. I would also say that within school budgets, one thing that we need to look at is teachers just need a bigger piece of the pie, and I think that there is - there - the onus can also be on educators and principals and school board members to look within their budgets and look what - where the opportunities are.</s>NINIVE CALEGARI: For example, the textbook industry is $8 billion. The professional development industry is $3 billion, with mixed results. So I'm not saying that those are two perfect answers, but I am saying that we can look within school budgets and say: Teachers need a bigger piece of the pie. The research is saying teachers are the most important school-based factor. We have to make sure that we keep the good ones, and we have to make sure that college students will want this job, so we have to be creative, and we have to redistribute.</s>DAVE EGGERS: And I - Neal, I should just add that, you know, the cost of our turnover - 46 percent of the teachers leaving the fourth, the fifth year - that costs us $7 billion a year. So the price of our current system is higher than it would be if we were to reward and retain these teachers.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We want to hear ideas for where the money would come from. 800-989-8255. Email us: talk@npr.org. Matthew's on the line, calling from Vernon in New Jersey. Matthew, are you there?</s>MATTHEW: Yes, I'm here. Hi. Thank you for taking my call.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Sure. Go ahead.</s>MATTHEW: First-time caller. I'd like to just - I wonder if - what the relevance of, you know, creating more positions for teachers. Being that I am a graduate with an exercise science degree and I'm trying to be a phys-ed teacher, but I - it's impossible for me to find a job. So I'm actually working making prescription optics right now. I, you know, I completely agree that it should be a higher-paying job, but I'm more concerned on not having enough money to fill new positions and whatnot, overcrowding classrooms and all that stuff. I completely agree, though, that, you know, salaries should be raised, considering we are raising our future.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, Ninive Calegari, the - I think if there was going to be more money for education, it would be used to hire more teachers rather than specifically to raise teachers' salaries.</s>NINIVE CALEGARI: I think sometimes people want us to choose one or the other, you know? When we were on NBC, Al Roker said to us: Do you think teachers want respect or salary? And I just think we need to sometimes blend to these things. We, of course, need to have - principals need to be able to decide how many teachers they need, and they need to be able to hire those. And at the same time, those teachers need to be well paid so they can stay on the job. So it's not an either/or, and I think it's not respect or salary. I think it's not conditions or salary.</s>NINIVE CALEGARI: We need to look at all of those things and create a profession that college students stay up awake at night worrying if they can possibly be a teacher the way they worry about being in medical school. So it's a long-range plan. I think there are four - I'll just put it out there for the callers. I think there are four very tender areas in our country where reasonable people disagree. And I think the budget crisis is obviously one, where we need to be creative and we need to scratch our heads.</s>NINIVE CALEGARI: Another area is the unions and their role in moving forward working with them. Another area is teacher evaluation, and another area is poverty. And so I think that those are four areas that really smart people who are well informed don't necessarily always draw the same conclusion. And so I'd love to also hear what callers think about all of those areas, as well.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thanks for the call, Matthew.</s>MATTHEW: Thank you so much. I appreciate it.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And good luck finding work. Here's an email that we have. This coming in from Amy in Austin: There is no free lunch, she writes in capital letters. You want good schools? You, the taxpayer, will have to pay. Thanks to the Californians, the whole Proposition 13 thing, citizens of our country has swallowed the lie that they can have something for nothing. That is the notion that needs to be pushed into the trash bin of history where it belongs.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Proposition 13, basically, was - capped the tax increases in California and reduced them and reduced the amount of money available for the budget for all kinds of things, including teachers. Now, Dave Eggers, what do you think?</s>DAVE EGGERS: Well, I agree. I think that, for a long time, we've wanted an excellent, world-class education system, and we're unwilling to pay for it. People are - want it on the cheap. And it's a very strange cognitive dissonance that's going on on a national level. We value education. We say we value teachers. We know how crucial they are. We know that they are, you know, central in our children's lives, but we don't seem to mind when we see them working a second job at Circuit City or driving a forklift, which is on the weekends, which one of our teachers in our documentary does to make ends meet. And I think we really need to change that mentality. And, you know, the point of the movie is just to see teachers' lives and to really get inside their world and know what they're up against, and I think most people come away thinking we have to do better.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking with Dave Eggers and with Ninive Calegari. They're the producers of the documentary "American Teachers" and part of the Teacher Salary Project.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION, from NPR News.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's see if we can go next to - this is Scott, Scott with us from Ashland in Oregon.</s>SCOTT: Hi. I am sorry. I can't solve where the money is going to come from, but I have a perception, as someone who has taught college for the last - in - of the last 10 years in four different colleges across the country. And yours guest can feel free to shoot me down if they think I'm wrong. But I've taught in music departments and, of course, music departments are churning out way too many musicians. They - we could do with half the number of music schools.</s>SCOTT: But the same thing seems - I think is happening in education, because a lot of our music students, especially the ones that are kind of near the bottom, not all of them, but a lot of them tend to go into education by default. And it's my perception that across the country, there are too many education majors being turned out. I remember a few years ago, it could've been about 15 or - 10 or 15 years ago, when there were some states that had teacher shortages, and they were paying bonuses to try to lure them from other states. And even in spite of the unions, I'm wondering if we cut down on the number of education majors, thus raising the quality at the same time, because we'd be more competitive...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Or creating more demand, and supply and demand.</s>SCOTT: ...would that help to drive up salaries?</s>NINIVE CALEGARI: Well, I don't know if it would help to drive up salaries, but I do know that the governments that are more successful, they absolutely make sure that the supply and demand is balanced such that somebody who's applying to be a teacher is basically guaranteed a job. And the other that's successful...</s>SCOTT: Well, this wasn't the case with the young man that just called in who said, oh, I can't get work, you know. Well, what do I have to do?</s>NINIVE CALEGARI: Exactly. Exactly. He should have a job if, you know, he's been well prepared and the government has invested. In fact, the other thing that successful governments do is they pay for their training. You know, I'm still paying my monthly graduate school, and teachers pay for their credentials. And I remember being in the classroom in my 20s thinking, you know, I work for the American government. If I were working for the military, my training would be paid for.</s>NINIVE CALEGARI: And so I think not only do we, you know, not only do we undervalue them with salaries, but then we actually ask them to pay for all their own professional development, their credentials, and then, of course, classroom supplies. Over 90 percent of teachers buy their own classroom supplies, as well. So it's not a pretty picture.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Scott, thanks very much for the call.</s>SCOTT: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: There is also a perception that teachers have it easy because they are not required to work year-round, for the most part.</s>NINIVE CALEGARI: Well, I think, you know, people also think that the job is from 9:00 to 3:00, and that's one of the things we debunk in the film. I really want to make sure that people are enticed to see the film. Some of the things that we wanted to draw in the film is some of the absurdities of teachers working, you know, late into the night, grading papers and not finding places - this is a reference that you'll have to go and see the film in order to understand - but not being able to find places to pump milk when you're nursing your baby.</s>NINIVE CALEGARI: So there's all kinds of different things where we hope to really bring in some of the absurdities and make people laugh and make people connect to the humans in the film so that we could have a more informed policy discussion. But the film is warm, and it's really about these four human beings and what they experience.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's see if we get one more caller in. Michael's on the line, calling from Buffalo.</s>MICHAEL: Hi. How do you do? Well, I've called before. Thank you very much for taking it. I'm a parent of two teachers in the Buffalo, New York, area, here. And the biggest problem that we have is - in New York State especially, is the very high concentration of school districts, not countywide. But, you know, in one local area here in Cheektowaga, there are six different school districts to feed one community.</s>MICHAEL: So you have a very high bureaucracy, administration, stealing money from the classroom and putting it in an administrative level that serves no purpose in the classroom, and then with the budget problems we've had, what do they cut? Teachers. So you get less teachers, more students, but they don't cut the bureaucracy.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Dave Eggers, is that one possible answer?</s>DAVE EGGERS: I'm sitting here in the studio pointing to Ninive, because she's better informed about this because she's been up against these things as a public school teacher herself. But - so I'll bounce it to Ninive.</s>NINIVE CALEGARI: I'll say that I've taught in districts where there's an incredibly slim bureaucracy at the, you know, superintendent's office, and that's when I taught in Marin. And the superintendent actually knew us, and he had three staffers, and everything was unbelievably clean and simple. And then I've also taught in San Francisco, where there's an enormous office.</s>NINIVE CALEGARI: And so I have seen the differences in terms of how you can balloon out the bureaucracy, and I think we have to figure out where all of our opportunities are to cut so that we can emphasize teachers' salaries. And it sounds like New York could do some exploring to make sure that teachers' salaries are emphasized.</s>MICHAEL: The outgoing superintendent had doubled his administrative staff since he took office, adding more superintendents that are being paid upwards of 150 to $200,000 a year, while at the same time they slash teachers and aides in the schools.</s>DAVE EGGERS: And I, you know, that's such a good point. And one of the things that we know, because we run a writing and tutoring center here in San Francisco, is that schools are very delicate ecologies. And when a beloved teacher leaves or is fired or laid off, that affects everything, and that affects the students and it affects their education. So we need to better continuity. We need better stability, and we need to keep the great teachers in the classroom.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Dave Eggers and Ninive Calegari, thank you very much for your time.</s>DAVE EGGERS: Thank you so much.</s>NINIVE CALEGARI: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And good luck with the Teacher Salary Project.</s>NINIVE CALEGARI: Thank you.</s>DAVE EGGERS: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: On Monday: What men can expect after prostate surgery, plus a U.S. journalist who covers the murder - murder capital of Mexico. Join us for that.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: This is TALK OF THE NATION, from NPR News. |
As unemployment and economic malaise persist, many Americans say they're frustrated with Congress and the president. On the right, the Tea Party and other groups give voice to that frustration, but that level of national mobilization is all but unseen on the left. Michael Kazin, co-editor, Dissent Magazine Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor and publisher, The Nation | NEAL CONAN, host: This is TALK OF THE NATION. I'm Neal Conan in Washington. The economy stinks. Unemployment hovers above nine percent, banks foreclose on more and more houses, the income gap continues to widen as the rich get richer, and too many in the middle class slip down the economic ladder.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: People are frustrated and angry, and nearly all the political energy comes from the right. The other side mounted protests in Wisconsin earlier this year, civil disobedience at the White House over the XL Pipeline, and rallies continue on Wall Street, but there's a difference between protests and a movement.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Conservatives have shifted the middle, and they dominate the dialogue. What happened to the left? If your views shifted, what changed for you? Give us a call, 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Later in the program, New York Times East Africa bureau chief Jeffrey Gettleman on the famine and fighting in Somalia. But first, what happened to the American left? History professor Michael Kazin tackled that question in a piece in the New York Times Sunday Review and he joins us here in Studio 3A. Nice to have you back on the program.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: Thank you, Neal, good to be here.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And your argument is that the conservatives' current position did not arise suddenly, it's the result of 30 or 40 years of developing ideas and institutions.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: Yes, in many ways, I think at least since the 1970s, since the famous tax revolt in California that resulted in Proposition 13 out there, conservatives have really dominated discussion about the economy, about what government should do and shouldn't do, about taxes.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: And so this is the run-up to the Great Recession, I think, that when the banks began to fail, when auto companies looked like they were going out of business, a lot of people were ready to believe conservative analysis of what was going on, that big government was the problem, or at least big government coddling corporations, perhaps, was the problem.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: And so liberals, radicals were not really ready with an alternative analysis that was very convincing.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And the same thing, the same decades of preparation, went - started back after the Civil War and led to, eventually, the New Deal.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: Yes, very much. In many ways, you know, there was what I call the anti-monopoly coalition, which really began after the Civil War, involved labor unions, involved small farmers, involved a lot of settlement house workers like Jane Addams, people we now think of as great progressives of the turn of the 20th century.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: And they really made an argument that big business was too big, that it needed to be more socially responsible, that it was exploiting workers and small business people, and that argument helped to fuel the New Deal of the 1930s. So preparation really matters when it comes to social movements.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And indeed you argue that after the Second World War, the left was, to some degree, a victim of its own success.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: Yes, I mean, the New Deal and Harry Truman's Fair Deal, a certain degree Lyndon Johnson's Great Society, were successful in producing a limited welfare state and making labor unions more powerful than they'd ever been before in American society, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, various environmental laws.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: In many ways, the great American middle class was built with the help of these originally sort of left-wing social programs and economic programs. And that began - America's economic health began to wane in the 1970s, as we know, but the left didn't really adjust to that fact.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And you describe it going on to other fights, in fact, not centering on the economy but fights over minority rights, gay rights, the environment, things like that.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: And those are very important fights, and they resulted in tremendous victories: civil rights laws, laws about women's rights, sexual harassment laws, the increasing popularity of gay marriage, for example. But at the same time, the left got identified with those issues more than it did with economic equity.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We want some callers in on the conversation. If your views shifted, what changed for you? Give us a call, 800-989-8255. Email talk@npr.org. Tom's on the line from Circleville in Ohio.</s>TOM (Caller): Hi, thanks for having - I listen all the time. I think you have a great program.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Thank you.</s>TOM (Caller): My confidence has really been shaken in the American political process, that one group of people can take control of the whole process and bring it to a stop because the other group tries to compromise with them, and the other group says either my way or the highway.</s>TOM (Caller): And I also believe that our government has now been bought and paid for by the major corporations, and we are no longer the United States of America, we are the Corporate States of America.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And I hear your views. What shifted for you? How did you change?</s>TOM (Caller): How did I change? Just look around you. I have been working since I've been 11 years old with a paper route. Then I went into the military, got training, came out of the military in the worst possible time, that was 1979. Everybody couldn't get a job. I walked into a business, asked for the manager, and I said I want a job. I'll wash windows, I'll sweep floors, I'll do anything to get a job. He hired me.</s>TOM (Caller): All right, every time training has come up, I've taken training. But my pay since the beginning of the '80s has steadily declined because they say there is no business, and it seems like the people that have the power have the money, and they're not letting go of it.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: All right, well...</s>TOM (Caller): Also, the only reason that I have the insurance that I have - and I'm non-union - but our company is half-union, but the only reason I have the pension coming, and the insurance that I have and job security that I have now, is because of the union.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: All right, Tom, thanks very much for the call, appreciate it.</s>TOM (Caller): You're welcome.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's bring another voice into the conversation. Katrina vanden Heuvel joins us from our bureau in New York. She's editor and publisher of The Nation. Her book "The Change I Believe In" comes out next month, and nice to have you with us today.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: Thank you, Neal.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And in a recent piece in The Nation, you concluded that the right does - you obviously disagree with them on a lot of what they argue, but that they have marshaled their arguments incredibly well.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: Well, let me just say I edit a magazine which was founded by the abolitionists, a group Michael Kazin writes so beautifully about in his book, committed to a moral vision of this country's politics and who fought so hard to end slavery.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: I believe, like Michael I believe does, that large, sustained, independent movements in organizing are what bring about fundamental change in our country, and it is the case that despite continued mass unemployment, the economic pain in this country, the right has dominated the debate about so many issues and what kind of economy is going to emerge out of the ditch.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: But there are progressives, left thinkers, activists, working in this country not only to reset the economic narrative but also are out there organizing, demonstrating for jobs, for a different kind of country. And part of what is going on, it seems to me, from my stance, is that these efforts have received shamefully little media attention.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: And it seems to me that if people don't know, they don't care, and if they don't care, they won't act. And what is so important is a journalism that takes activists and activism and ideas seriously and not only covers people in power and pretends the difference between Republicans and Democrats constitute the entirety of the debate but understands that there are people in motion.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: People in Wisconsin, for example, who were fighting to defend their rights, short-term defeat, but that is part of what the left's history is about. So I think as people - you know, people are gathering October 3 for this movement I write about in The Nation, beginning to emerge as a movement, it's a collective of labor movements, progressive organizations called The American Dream Movement.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I wanted to ask you about your point about - conservatives often complained about shamefully poor coverage in the mainstream media, as well. And one of the interesting points that Michael Kazin made in his article in the New York Times is that in fact they developed their own media access and resources to rally their cause, including talk radio and magazines of various types and television channels. Is the left doing the same thing? Obviously The Nation is one magazine, too.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: The Nation is one magazine. Dissent is another. Yes, I mean, Michael alluded to the right-wing infrastructure that has been built up over these last 40 years, and there is a progressive left infrastructure, and within that, there is media. But it is not at the scale, it is not at the strength of the right wing for a variety of reasons.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: But the other factor I might - you know, we saw a CNN-Tea Party debate just a week or two ago. Would you ever see the CNN-nurses' union debate or the CNN-teachers' union debate? Or think about 1,000 people - as you talked about, Neal, at the top of the show - arrested in front of the White House a couple weeks ago on the tar sands environmental issue, hardly any coverage of this.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: So I do think, as I came back to, if people are going to take the leap and remember that working together, what used to be called collective action, solidarity, can make a change in their lives, their real lives, if they don't see that, they're not going to make that leap. That's why to me Wisconsin was so important.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: And when teachers, students, firefighters join union members for days on days, went to their square, as Egyptians went to Tahrir Square, there was coverage but not enough. So I think we do need to create our own institutions. They are under fire because, as Michael I think mentioned, the right has been intent on destroying the very foundations of progressive left political activism as they work to repeal the New Deal, the Great Society, I would argue even going back now to pre-Civil War, to the Enlightenment and to reason and science.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Michael Kazin, I want to bring you back in. There are some who would argue that some of the institutions of the left, the infrastructure that Katrina vanden Heuvel was just talking about, including labor unions, including some of those institutions, have run out of gas a little bit.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: Well, obviously it's no news that labor unions have been in decline for some time now. And even the, I think...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And they're not coming back.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: Well, I'm not sure about that. There are still 15 million people in labor unions, and actually, a lot of young activists, as Katrina knows, including people who have been my students at Georgetown University, when they think about what they want to do after college, they go and work for labor unions.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: But obviously labor unions fighting on the defensive, unlike the 1930s, when the labor unions were fighting on the offensive and were growing, is a very different kind of thing.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: But I think one of the things I stress in - both in my book "American Dreamers" and also in the article in the Times last Sunday, is the kind of institutions that people on the left need to build are institutions which really get out to what we call ordinary Americans, average Americans.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: You know, I'm struck whenever I go to Iowa, Nebraska, that you turn on AM radio or even most FM radio, and you hear mostly evangelical stations, country stations and religious stations. I love country music, but, you know, you don't hear a left point of view there, and you don't have people who are, you know, left-wing activists who for the most part are really active in those areas.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Air America was not a great success.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: Nope.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: We're talking about what happened to the American left. If your views shifted, what changed for you? Give us a call, 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. Stay with us. I'm Neal Conan. It's the TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: This is TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. I'm Neal Conan. There's no question many Americans are frustrated at the economy, at Congress, at the president. The frustration fuels national political movements on the right. We're talking today about what happened to the political left. It's a question addressed in the cover story in the September edition of The Nation.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: The right has spent decades training the members of its choir, it begins. They know the gospel. They can sing the words to the songs. Progressives have done less well, particularly on core economic issues. No movement can grow unless citizens are convinced there's a better way.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: The piece was co-written by Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor and publisher of The Nation. She is with us today. Her forthcoming book is called "The Change I Believe In: Fighting For Progress in the Age of Obama." Also with us, Michael Kazin, professor of history at Georgetown and co-author - co-editor of Dissent magazine. He also wrote the book "American Dreamers: How the Left Changed a Nation."</s>NEAL CONAN, host: If your views shifted, what changed for you? Give us a call, 800-989-8255. Email talk@npr.org. David's(ph) on the line, David calling from Hot Springs in Arkansas.</s>DAVID (Caller): Good afternoon, everyone. I would like to say that, you know, my views shifted when I approached a mayor of a small town recently with a plan of action, a solution that I believe would affect the nation and how business is done. And this gentleman wanted to know who I was, the good old boys' network I was connected in, because I'd moved from out of state.</s>DAVID (Caller): Okay, and I've been working on some stuff in Santa Fe, New Mexico, and now in Hot Springs, Arkansas, for about five years, okay, in economic development. And I've recently just pretty much given up, okay, because I hear the right, the left.</s>DAVID (Caller): Well, to me, there's the right, the left, the forward, the behind, the above and the below.</s>DAVID (Caller): Okay, they want to politicize economics, and that - you know, I don't agree with that. Economics, we're in class warfare throughout the world.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I hear what you're saying, but economics has been political since the word was invented.</s>DAVID (Caller): Well, we need to look at the word. That's what I'm saying. Look at the words we use. Okay, when I used to sell advertising, I would hear from an executive, I can't. You know, whether you can, you say you can or you can't, either way, you're right. It's all about linguistics and how we define our reality. And the reality is, the - you know, things won't shift until the upper class are disturbed, their investments are failing.</s>DAVID (Caller): We're seeing that occur on Wall Street, and why? Well, we can bring it back to the transcendental - the greed, you know, the envy, the jealousy, the keeping up with the Joneses, and everything is spinning its wheels for what, to buy and consume more.</s>DAVID (Caller): You know, with society and with technology advancing, our communities are going to be becoming smaller and smaller. We read about that many years ago when nanotechnology came out on the scene and trying to incorporate new technology. The military has a lot of these...</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: (Unintelligible) caller...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: David, thanks very much, appreciate it. It's interesting, Arkansas used to be a solidly Democratic state. It is now a solidly Republican state. It's almost inconceivable that a Democrat, a left, could carry Arkansas.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: I think that's true. I think the legislature is still Democratic, but that's one of the few sort of legislatures that...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Statewide level, yeah.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: It's also a bastion of populism and, to a degree, actually the Socialist Party, believe it or not, 100 years ago.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: And so were parts of - when you look at North Dakota, which is the only state I believe that has a state bank in this country, and which, for that reason, escaped some of the great disaster of this financial crisis, there are - there's a populist tradition. I hesitate to say that with the great Professor Kazin on the horn here, but - he knows more about it.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: But I was listening to your caller, and what interested me, Neal, is that, you know, there is a sense that it's not left-right, but it's top down, and you will be surprised to hear this, but Sarah Palin's speech of a few weeks ago was very interesting to me about corporate cronyism and the sort of elite establishment that seems to have rigged the system against ordinary people in this country.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: The problem is, her ideas as to what to do about it in my mind just compound and strengthen that elite and that establishment. But I think there is a coalition to be built among people who have called in on your program today who feel terribly frustrated, who feel that they want to give up on our politics as they see it, that Washington is rigged against them, dominated by insiders, corporate money, when in fact it would be a grave mistake to give up on government. It's time to clean it up and rebuild a fair economy, but that needs to be driven out there by a movement with, as Michael said, a connection to the real-life experiences of people in this country.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: I think both callers today in different ways voice a real frustration and, you know, a sense that things aren't working right, that people at the top have too much power, but it's not quite clear what can be done about that. And that gives the left, which I think that term makes some sense, a real opportunity.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: And this is not just happening in this country. This is happening in Europe as well, and Japan as well, some other parts of the world. So, you know, this is an economic crisis that's worldwide, but it's also kind of a crisis of confidence in the political insiders in the world, and that means that there's opportunity and danger at the same time.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I was interested in your piece, Michael Kazin, when you wrote that the more conservative colleges are presenting a more coherent narrative to their students.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: Yeah, I'm not sure it's the job of universities or colleges to present a narrative to their students. You know, I teach at a fairly liberal Catholic college, Georgetown, and I don't feel like I want to organize my students to believe one certain thing or another, but it's clear that conservative Christian colleges especially believe in a certain point of view about the Bible, about morality generally, and also about politics.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: And Wal-Mart years ago began to help to fund chairs of free enterprise at some conservative colleges, and it's pretty clear what they meant by free enterprise. It wasn't let's have a dialogue about socialism and capitalism.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: I mean, Michael's book in many ways touches on this larger point about the need for an animating vision, and in some ways the politics of the left is about shifting, and in this case reshifting the nation's moral compass and once again expanding its sense of political possibilities, unshackling the imagination.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: It is very tough to do in a time like this, but it's also very possible because of the crisis we face, as Michael said, not just here but around the world, where there's a sense of the failure and the illegitimacy of governments.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: I was struck by a Rasmussen poll of just a few weeks ago where the view of the legitimacy of the government is at its lowest point I think in decades...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Well, Michael Kazin, in your piece you said that may be due to the fact that politicians made promises and not delivered.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: Yeah, and that's part of - unfortunately, that's also helped the rise of the Tea Party, because the Tea Party is reacting against both conservative administration of George W. Bush and what they see as the liberal administration of Barack Obama both failing to solve the nation's problems.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: I mean, the one thing, Michael, in your piece, I was struck, is you do make the right point, that progressives achieved success in the past - whether organizing unions or fighting for equal rights, they seldom bet their future on politicians. What would our moment have been like in these last two years if President Obama had not been in the White House? Because I think when you have a Democratic president in the White House, so often, particularly in those first months, so many on the left progressive community are unwilling to challenge and to move as they need to. As we know from our history, change comes from that sustained movement from below, allied with an enlightened president, not just a president alone.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's go next to Jonathan(ph), Jonathan with us from Amherst in Massachusetts.</s>JONATHAN (Caller): Yeah, I'm right here. I would say the Wisconsin thing revived my sense about the labor movement, which is what I've been most interested in. And I picked up a book that had come out 20 years ago and reread it, and it was the same, we're in the same exact thing. It's a book called "Which Side Are You On?: Trying to Be For Labor When It's Flat On Its Back."</s>JONATHAN (Caller): And it came out - I read it originally in the early '90s, and it was incredible how it was still the same thing, that, you know, labor had gotten really screwed a long time ago, and basically I still believe that the way to get past the fragmentation and the hard-line qualities that the left often create is through a revived labor movement.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: Amen. That author is - wrote our lead cover story this week, "All We Are Saying is Give Keynes a Chance."</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: Tom Geoghegan, his name is, yeah.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: Tom Geoghegan, forgive me.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: He's a very good labor lawyer in Chicago, yeah.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: I just wanted to read an email with an opposite point of view, this from Sean(ph) in Corvallis, Oregon: My simple point of view, having once been a member of a national labor union, is that unions are failing because they've priced themselves out of the market. The simple fact is that ordinary people and small business cannot afford to hire union labor, and small business is the backbone of the economy.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: If the left wants to create a revival, it must return to its basic message of fairness and equity and compassion and reason, and it must leave the unions behind. My construction union in Hawaii was well-known to be run by organized crime. This is not proper company for the left to be keeping.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: Unions clearly are not pure, virtuous institutions all the time, or even perhaps ever. But unfortunately or fortunately, there's still no institution which can help workers to get some sort of say on the job, some sort of democratic decision-making process set up, and also can, if they're successful, provide a kind of economic insurance policy for them.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: So, you know, around the world we have successful economies, very successful economies - in Scandinavia, for example, where there's much stronger unions, much stronger union density, percentage of workers in unions, than there are in this country.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: And so if you look at it internationally, usually the problem with an economy is not the unions. It's usually the kind of development, the kind of industries you have. Of course there's always a Jimmy Hoffa and little Jimmy Hoffas in the world. But that's not the real story of unions, pro or con.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: And when you have an economy that's really, you know, broken for all but the wealthy, really working best for the wealthy, it's just countervailing power. It's what built this country post-World War II with all the flaws. But it had a sense of, you know, you had government. You had business. You had labor. You had civil society in a sense. And that's important for the balance of this country, whether you're left or right. And that has been shattered.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Let's go next to Michelle(ph). Michelle with us from Oklahoma City.</s>MICHELLE (Caller): Yes. Thank you for having my call. I think part of the problem with our movement with just being a Democrat and being on the left is that it is so closely associated with moral issues. And across the nation, we all have different religious and different belief systems. And because we're so associated with being certain moral issues, I think it's hard for more conservative religious individuals to support all of the many ideas what are within our own party. It's difficult to support everything wholeheartedly and be engaged and be excited about those things that are associated with moral issues...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And you're talking...</s>MICHELLE (Caller): ...as a...</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Are you talking about gay marriage and abortion, primarily?</s>MICHELLE (Caller): Yes, sir. Yes, sir. I'm wholeheartedly a Democrat. But when it comes to supporting candidates, unfortunately now, I can't just automatically vote Democrat. I have to look to see, OK, what are their actual true beliefs? Are they - and that is - I think that hurts our party that that moral compass actually comes into play. I think that's part of the lack of enthusiasm by some regions of the country.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And that is part of the argument that conservatives have made considerable ground on, Michael Kazin, over the past several decades.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: Yes. Yes. And, you know, I'm a strong believer in the importance of religion in American history and politics. And most Americans, whether they go to church or not, do derive a sense of their morality from religion, whether people who don't have much religion, like I, agree with that or not. And I think the caller is putting her finger on a very important element. We can disagree about a lot of issues, I think. And I'm very much pro-choice and pro-gay marriage. But I think to have a large coalition to solve economic problems in this country in a progressive direction, I think, we have to put those issues not behind us but at least agree to disagree.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: Because otherwise, you're not going to put together the kind of broad coalition that Katrina is talking about. And in fact, you know, there have been times in American history, back in the 1890s, for example, the people's party, the Populists were mostly evangelical Protestants, but they were very much on the left.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And, Katrina vanden Heuvel, the coalition that was elected that had those huge Democratic majorities in 2008, well, that included a lot of so-called Blue Dogs who a lot of people said weren't real Democrats.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: It did. Though I think the defining factor for some of those Blue Dogs, I'm thinking like Heath Shuler, was a populist economic vision. And I come back to what Michael said about the importance of a broad coalition for economic fairness and justice in this country. I think the left over these last decades has too often been unwilling to work toward a larger goal while disagreeing on other issues, where the right has been more disciplined. And that I think has set back the left in its broader cause.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: I might just add we haven't talked about the demographic shifts this country will be facing. I mean, and it has been - one could argue, and I think Pat Buchanan did at one point, that the left in some ways won the culture wars - we could disagree about that - but has lost on the broader trend of inequality in economic justice in this country. And that's the fight. But we see a more socially tolerant younger generation in many arenas - on gay rights, gay marriage. And where that heads will be very important for this country's future. And I think it's stoking anxiety among, for example, the Tea Party, where you look at their demographics: older, whiter.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And we're talking with Katrina vanden Heuvel of The Nation and Michael Kazin, professor of history at Georgetown University. Whatever happened to the American left? You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. And this email from Tony(ph) in San Antonio. I regarded myself as mid-left and now to the right of center. Why? One, the population is aging, and as people age, they tend more to the right. And two, the science of global warming has moved me firmly to the right.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: The quote, unquote science, as he puts it in his email. Despite the evidence for and against global warming, the planned disruption to the U.S. economy by the ultra-left nutcase lobby - he puts in quotations - is extreme. It seems like the left has moved further left to the ultra radical. The right has still some allowance for the people in the center, and the left doesn't.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And this gets back, Katrina vanden Heuvel, to the argument over the XL Pipeline. Some say there's an awful lot of oil there in nice politically safe Canada. Why aren't we shipping it to the refineries in Texas?</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: You know, but he begins his - your emailer, with the idea that the science isn't settled on climate change. And I think I come back to what we're witnessing in these last Republican debates is a rejection of science, and I would argue of reason. And I do think there is a legitimate debate about how we secure our energy future. But that in many ways has people on the conservative end understanding we need to be more secure by liberating ourselves from fossil fuels and other investments in green energy. So it's - to me, again, it's not so much right-left. I think there's been a lot of bunk about climate change, and the right has done a very good job in funding a lot of scientists and research to muddy what should be clear at this stage in our history.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: I think it's also true that in economic hard times, environmentalism or conservation or - it's gone by different names - always has a difficult time. People are afraid that their jobs won't be there; they'll go away. The environmental movement really began in a major way--</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And those green jobs everybody talked about, they're not emerging.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: Well, not emerging partly because you need government to help to jump-start them. And Republicans have not wanted to do that. But, you know, as you know, our, quote, "industrial competitors," especially China, are investing lots of money in green jobs.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: And in coal-burning power plants, too.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: Yeah. Well, yeah, in everything, exactly. But, you know, the left, obviously, has to be associated with economic growth. As long as we have a growing population in the world, we're going to need more economic growth. And - but the kind of growth is what we should be arguing about, not for growth or for killing the economy. That's a false argument.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Michael Kazin, thanks very much for your time today. Appreciate it. Interesting piece.</s>MICHAEL KAZIN: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Michael Kazin is a professor of history at Georgetown, co-editor of Dissent Magazine and author of the book "American Dreamers: How the Left Changed a Nation." Katrina vanden Heuvel, thank you very much for coming in.</s>KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: Thank you.</s>NEAL CONAN, host: Katrina vanden Heuvel is editor and publisher of The Nation, and her forthcoming book is called "The Change I Believe In: Fighting For Progress in the Age of Obama." Up next, the United Nations warns that without immediate help, three quarters of a million people could soon starve to death in Somalia. Jeffrey Gettleman of The New York Times asks will we stand by and watch? Stay with us. I'm Neal Conan. It's the TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. |
As William Barr meets with senators on Capitol hill, it's clear the guard is changing at the Justice Department. But what does that mean for the Russia investigation? | ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: President Trump's choice to be attorney general was on Capitol Hill today. He met with senators who will preside over his confirmation hearing next week. William Barr is getting ready to lead the Justice Department, just as Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein is preparing to exit. To talk through the changes at Justice and what they mean for the Russia investigation, NPR's Carrie Johnson's here in the studio with us. Hey, Carrie.</s>CARRIE JOHNSON, BYLINE: Hi, Ari.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: What kind of reception did William Barr get from senators today?</s>CARRIE JOHNSON, BYLINE: Mostly a warm one. Bill Barr met with Republican lawmakers, including Lindsey Graham, the incoming chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Lindsey Graham told reporters he asked Barr a lot of questions about the Russia investigation and the man leading it, Special Counsel Robert Mueller.</s>CARRIE JOHNSON, BYLINE: Barr and Mueller are apparently good friends. Mueller attended the weddings of Barr's children. And Lindsey Graham says Barr told him Mueller is not on a witch hunt, and Barr said he would make sure Mueller can finish the job. And according to Graham, Barr also said he would, quote, "lean on the side of transparency" in terms of releasing any public report that Mueller prepares. All this new information may be coming out now to make Barr's nomination more attractive to Democrats.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: OK. So it's clear what the central tension point in this confirmation fight will be, given that the Justice Department is changing leaders in the middle of this contentious investigation. Will his confirmation really be that easy?</s>CARRIE JOHNSON, BYLINE: You know, there are a few complicating factors here. Whether or not these guys socialize with each other, Barr has been critical of some parts of this Russia probe. Democrats have been asking Bill Barr to recuse himself from overseeing it. That's because he wrote a memo last year to the Justice Department arguing that obstruction of justice should be out of bounds when it comes to Trump's firing of former FBI director Jim Comey. In that memo, Bill Barr essentially said the firing was within the president's power, not a crime.</s>CARRIE JOHNSON, BYLINE: But Barr has not agreed to recuse himself. In fact, it's hard to imagine why he would do that and take this job. Remember, President Trump had a vendetta against the guy who used to be attorney general, Jeff Sessions, for recusing himself and leaving the Russia probe in the hands of the deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: And there is news about Rod Rosenstein's future today. Tell us the latest there.</s>CARRIE JOHNSON, BYLINE: NPR's confirmed Rosenstein plans to leave the Justice Department sometime after Bill Barr is confirmed. By that time, Rosenstein will have been on the job nearly two years. That's a long tenure for a deputy AG. It's probably the hardest job in the department in normal times. These are not normal times.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Yeah.</s>CARRIE JOHNSON, BYLINE: I'm told Rosenstein's leaving on his own terms. He's not being pushed, even though the writing's kind of been on the wall since the New York Times reported last year at one point he had discussed wiring President Trump. Rosenstein says he was being sarcastic. They never went ahead with that idea.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: As long as you're in the studio, I want to ask you about a development in the case against President Trump's former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort. This looks like some self-inflicted damage perpetrated by his own legal team.</s>CARRIE JOHNSON, BYLINE: Yeah. Paul Manafort's lawyers filed papers in court this week, but the parts they tried to redact were visible if you cut and pasted them into a new document. And guess what? A lot of people did.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: Yeah, I did it (laughter).</s>CARRIE JOHNSON, BYLINE: (Laughter) Yeah. Those parts told us prosecutors suspect that Paul Manafort shared Trump campaign polling data during the campaign with a business associate of his. The special counsel has linked that man, that business associate, to Russian intelligence. Manafort also allegedly lied to prosecutors about a meeting he had with that business associate in Madrid where these two men supposedly discussed a peace plan for Ukraine, which has interests relevant to Russia.</s>CARRIE JOHNSON, BYLINE: The bottom line is Manafort may have lied about his contacts with a figure linked to Russian intelligence both during the campaign and after the election. That's a pretty big fact for people investigating whether anyone in the Trump inner circle coordinated with Russia. What we don't know right now, Ari, is what candidate Donald Trump knew about all this at the time, what was in his head, his intent.</s>ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: NPR Justice correspondent Carrie Johnson, thank you.</s>CARRIE JOHNSON, BYLINE: My pleasure. |
NPR's Audie Cornish speaks with Republican Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, who broke ranks and voted with Democrats to keep the government open. | AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: When House Democrats brought up a stopgap funding bill last week to end the partial government shutdown, the vote fell mostly along party lines. But seven Republicans broke ranks to side with Democrats in favor of the bill. One of them was Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania. He joins us now from his Capitol Hill office. Welcome to ALL THINGS CONSIDERED.</s>BRIAN FITZPATRICK: Thanks Audie. How are you?</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: So the bill you voted for did not contain funding for a border wall. Do you still support the president's desire to build a wall?</s>BRIAN FITZPATRICK: Well, what I support, Audie, is robust border security. I don't like the term wall. I think it's become a very toxic and divisive term. I think there are a group of centrist lawmakers in our Problem Solvers Caucus - our bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus - centrist Democrats, centrist Republicans who have come up with an immigration plan last year, which we still would like to see get advanced. And it includes both robust border security. That's smart. That's...</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: So you're making the case that just because you voted with Democrats just to open the government, it doesn't mean you're against the wall itself.</s>BRIAN FITZPATRICK: Well, I'm a - I don't like the term wall, Audie, because it conjures up images of a, you know, brick-and-mortar structure across all 1,900 miles of the border, which I don't think is appropriate.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: But for the sake this discussion, you know, President Trump has spoken about declaring a national emergency, so he might be able to bypass Congress or use the Defense Department funds for a wall. Is that something you would support?</s>BRIAN FITZPATRICK: Well, there's two issues there. Number one, can he legally? And number two, should he? As far as it can goes, that's a question under Article 2 of the Constitution and Title 50 of the U.S. Code, and that's a matter of constitutional law. I personally think that if he went that path, it would get tied up in litigation.</s>BRIAN FITZPATRICK: As far as should he, I think this decision should be made by Congress. I think we are the ones that - we need to reopen the government, number one. And we need to solve the immigration issue once and for all. And that includes not only border security but also dealing with the DACA issue and protecting our DACA kids. We had a piece of legislation that was on the floor of the House about six months ago that could not get enough votes to pass the House, and it included - it was a compromise provision that included both protection for our DACA kids and robust border security.</s>BRIAN FITZPATRICK: And border security, by the way, Audie - that's smart. It's not a brick-and-mortar structure across 1,900 miles of the border. What it is is it gives the funding and the flexibility to DHS, to the Coast Guard, to CBP and the Border Patrol, the three entities that are responsible for border security, to make decisions based on the sector and based on the terrain. So in certain stretches, physical barriers make sense. In other stretches, technology makes sense - infrared, heat sensors, motion detectors. In some other sectors, aerial surveillance makes sense. But it gives them...</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: I want to jump in here because I think you are speaking to an issue about security itself and what makes sense if you want to keep this perimeter secure. Vice President Mike Pence went on TV today to explain the White House's stance. Here's some of what he said to NBC.</s>VICE PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE: The American people want us to address this issue. It is a matter of national security. It is a matter of addressing human trafficking, the flow of narcotics into our country.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: What is your response to that argument?</s>BRIAN FITZPATRICK: I think that's an argument for robust border security, but I think the differentiator here is, what do we mean by that, and how do we define it? The way I define border security is providing the funding and also the flexibility, and that second piece is key, Audie, because the Border Patrol agents, the CBP officers and the Coast Guard know what they need during what sectors and what stretches of the terrain.</s>BRIAN FITZPATRICK: A big stretch of the of the southern border is waterways including the Rio Grande river. A big stretch is desert. A big stretch is mountainous terrain. Physical structures don't make sense along those sectors. There are other places - for example, the southern Texas border - where it does make more sense. But what we can't talk about, you know, intelligently unfortunately around here is how to best secure the border. And operational control of the border is the issue. It's not...</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: Let me jump in because we have just a few seconds left. What are you...</s>BRIAN FITZPATRICK: Sure.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: ...Hoping to hear from the president tonight?</s>BRIAN FITZPATRICK: Well, I'm hoping that he's honest, and I hope that he's willing to compromise. You know, every single functioning relationship that we have in our lives, Audie, is a product of consensus building and compromise, and Congress should be no different. People need to come to the table. Nobody is going to get everything of what they want, but everybody's got to give up a little in order to get this government open.</s>AUDIE CORNISH, HOST: Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, thank you for your time.</s>BRIAN FITZPATRICK: Thank you so much. |
New York Times columnist David Leonhardt added his name to a list of people calling for President Trump's impeachment. He tells NPR's Michel Martin why he's writing this now. | MICHEL MARTIN, HOST: We're going to turn now to what may or may not be a new third rail in the new Congress. It is the question of impeachment. Congressman Brad Sherman quietly reintroduced articles of impeachment against the president, while the president and some Republicans seized on newly-elected Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib's ad-libbed call for impeachment at a reception where she was speaking to lambaste the Democrats as unserious and uncouth.</s>MICHEL MARTIN, HOST: Meanwhile, Democratic leaders are advocating a cautious approach. Today on "CBS Sunday Morning," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Congress needs to wait to see what comes out of special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation.</s>NANCY PELOSI: If and when the time comes for impeachment, it will have to be something that has such a crescendo in a bipartisan way.</s>MICHEL MARTIN, HOST: Yesterday, though, New York Times columnist David Leonhardt added his name to the list of those calling for impeachment - or at least for the Democrats to hold aggressive hearings to make the public case for it. In a lengthy op-ed he wrote that, quote, "waiting to remove President Trump from office is too dangerous and that the cost of removing a president from office is smaller than the cost of allowing this president to remain" - unquote. And David Leonhardt is with us now.</s>MICHEL MARTIN, HOST: Welcome. Thank you so much for talking with us.</s>DAVID LEONHARDT: Thank you for having me.</s>MICHEL MARTIN, HOST: As I said, it's a lengthy piece, and we don't have time to discuss all of the details of it. But it addresses two issues - why impeachment and why now. So I'm going to start by asking you, why now?</s>DAVID LEONHARDT: I think the answer to why now is that the dangers that President Trump presents to the country are growing. You can see that the moderating influences in his administration like Gen. Mattis are leaving. You can see him acting on more of his impulses, like pulling troops out or shutting down the government. And so we have long known that he is unfit for office, but Republicans are starting to have a sense for the political costs he creates for their party.</s>MICHEL MARTIN, HOST: And, as you know, that this isn't going anywhere without congressional Republicans getting on board, either publicly or privately. So what's your evidence that a focus on - I mean, for you, this is a matter of substance. This is a matter of fact. But for other people, you know, whether or not it is a matter of fact, it's a matter of facts that they can or cannot explain to their supporters, right? So what is your evidence that congressional Republicans would be amenable to these facts as you understand them?</s>DAVID LEONHARDT: Yeah. So, in the end, politicians almost always act in their own personal self-interest (laughter), their political self-interest. And I think that when Republicans look at the reality - they just lost the popular vote in the House midterms by almost 9 percentage points. President Trump's approval rating is just 40 percent. And maybe it's not going to go a lot lower, but it shows no evidence of going higher. And so I just think that if Democrats are able to keep - try to keep some attention on how unpopular his agenda is and how corrupt he and his administration have been and the many ways he is acting like no president before him, I think there is a significant chance. It's not guaranteed, but I think there's a significant chance that his support starts to weaken.</s>DAVID LEONHARDT: And the only other thing I'd add to that is that he already has less support from his own party in Congress than any other president in memory. So Republicans have not defied him the way I wish they would, the way I think it's their patriotic duty to do. But they have also not supported him the way Obama or Bush or Clinton or Bush or Reagan - and I could go on - were supported by members of their own party. I think his support right now is broad but shallow, and it would not shock me if he struggles to keep that support as Robert Mueller issues his report and as the year goes on.</s>MICHEL MARTIN, HOST: And, finally, many Democrats and many other outspoken individuals like, for example, the former FBI director, James Comey, who is no fan of this president, you know, obviously...</s>DAVID LEONHARDT: Yeah.</s>MICHEL MARTIN, HOST: ...Have argued that, you know, impeachment is a distraction from credible opponents to get themselves sorted out in advance of the 2020 election, including some of your own colleagues on the New York Times editorial board. Why are they wrong?</s>DAVID LEONHARDT: Well, I'm sympathetic to a couple of parts of their argument. I agree with the idea that impeachment right now would be a distraction. I think that impeachment right now would be a mistake. But I think Democrats should continue making the case for removal from office. The reason why I don't think it's OK just to wait for 2020 - I think people are underestimating the potential for a true crisis. Imagine if there were a war somewhere in the world, and the United States had to decide whether to get involved. It would be really irresponsible to leave Trump in office knowing he is unfit for the presidency.</s>DAVID LEONHARDT: The second reason why I don't think we should just passively wait for 2020 is the precedent. He, again, has acted the way no president in our lifetimes has. He's treated the presidency as a branding opportunity. He's broken campaign finance law. He's obstructed justice. I don't think that we want to set a precedent that as long as you win election, you're allowed to complete your term no matter what.</s>MICHEL MARTIN, HOST: That was New York Times op-ed columnist David Leonhardt talking to us about his piece, "The People Vs. Donald J. Trump."</s>MICHEL MARTIN, HOST: David Leonhardt, thanks so much for talking to us.</s>DAVID LEONHARDT: Thank you very much for having me. |
As Pennsylvania farmers gather for the state's annual farm show, some are feeling a pinch from the partial shutdown of the federal government. | ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: People who don't work for the federal government are also noticing the impact of the shutdown. We sent NPR's Jeff Brady to the Pennsylvania Farm Show to talk with people there about the government closures, the border wall and President Trump's Oval Office speech tonight.</s>JEFF BRADY, BYLINE: The Farm Show is a big deal in Pennsylvania. And one of the popular events is the livestock auction.</s>UNIDENTIFIED AUCTIONEER: OK, folks, it's auction time at the Harrisburg Farm Show.</s>JEFF BRADY, BYLINE: Behind the auctioneer is a barn where animals wait in pens.</s>JEFF BRADY, BYLINE: Katie Hutton of Mechanicsburg, Pa., is a stay-at-home mom and is holding one of her children. She says the shutdown hasn't affected her personally, but...</s>KATIE HUTTON: I have seen a lot of the effects as far as the national parks go, and it's disappointing. Like, if we wanted to take the kids to D.C., I know that we couldn't go to any of the museums or the zoo. And that's disappointing for us, but really for everybody that - all the workers that have been affected.</s>JEFF BRADY, BYLINE: Hutton is a Democrat and not a fan of President Trump. She thinks he should begin his address tonight with an apology for the shutdown. The effects of the shutdown are less of a concern for President Trump's base in Pennsylvania, though.</s>DAVE ARNDT: My opinion about the wall is it probably should be built.</s>JEFF BRADY, BYLINE: Republican Dave Arndt is retired and echoes the arguments the president and his supporters concerned about immigration often mention.</s>DAVE ARNDT: I look at it like they're coming in here, taking the American people - or the citizens especially, taking their jobs and costing us money. I think the president needs to hold his ground.</s>JEFF BRADY, BYLINE: Nearby, Sharon Marsteller says she also supports the president. Still, when he addresses the nation tonight, she wants a message of compromise that will lead to an end to the shutdown.</s>SHARON MARSTELLER: I would like to hear him say that the Democrats and him are working together, and it's going to be resolved soon.</s>JEFF BRADY, BYLINE: And what would you like to hear from people in Congress then? Because that's kind of...</s>SHARON MARSTELLER: I would like to hear people in Congress say, we recognize that it is important to have a secure border, and we will work with the president.</s>JEFF BRADY, BYLINE: For some here, the immigration issue is secondary. One couple didn't want to talk on the air. They're federal workers on furlough and say they just want to get back to work. They were among the few here who say they're personally affected by the shutdown. Still, nearly everyone hopes it will end soon.</s>KAYLA JONAS: I'm Kayla Jonas. I'm from Wayne County. And here I am today with Brutus, my pig.</s>JEFF BRADY, BYLINE: Jonas is waiting to take Brutus to the auction. She doesn't seem at all squeamish about what's going to happen to Brutus soon. But ask her about the president's wall proposal and immigrants at the border, and her concern is obvious.</s>KAYLA JONAS: I don't think it's a good idea. I think we're all put on this earth to all - as a community and everyone - to love each other, and we're all just trying to make a living in the world, our family. So I think that that's something that shouldn't even be done to begin with.</s>JEFF BRADY, BYLINE: Jonas also says she's concerned about federal employees who aren't receiving paychecks. Our conversation is interrupted when the announcer calls her name.</s>UNIDENTIFIED ANNOUNCER: Kayla Jonas.</s>JEFF BRADY, BYLINE: And with that, Jonas is off to the auction arena with Brutus.</s>JEFF BRADY, BYLINE: Good luck.</s>KAYLA JONAS: Thank you.</s>JEFF BRADY, BYLINE: Jeff Brady, NPR News, Harrisburg, Pa. |
Subsets and Splits