Steroid scandal damaging baseball?
FROM Jack Cafferty:
Roger Kahn dubbed them "The Boys of Summer" in one of the finest books ever written about American sports.
Baseball has long been the great escape in America. An afternoon at any major league park watching wholesome, fresh-faced young kids playing a truly great game at its highest level provided the perfect escape from the tedium of the job, the drudgery of the commute, the tensions of the marriage and the problems with the children.
A hot dog, a cold drink and the cry of "play ball," was always a lot better and a lot cheaper than spending an hour on some shrink's couch.
But they had to go and ruin it for us.
When Mark McGwire, with a neck the size of a tree trunk, was shattering home run records and waving his bat around at home plate like a toothpick, we should have known something was up. And it was.
Now comes the depressing news that a bunch of our heroes were jerking us around and have been linked in a 20-month investigation to performance-enhancing drugs: Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Jason Giambi, Lenny Dykstra, Andy Pettitte, Mo Vaughn, Gary Sheffield... It's a long list, with dozens of names on it, according to George Mitchell's investigation.
This is a betrayal on a massive scale. The behavior is every bit as criminal as any politician who betrays the public trust. We came to watch you guys play baseball and you've let us down.
Here’s my question to you: How much damage will a massive steroid scandal ultimately do to Major League Baseball?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Corporations influencing energy policy?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
How long have we been listening to the politicians talk about our need to reduce our dependence on Middle East oil?
Well, the House actually passed an energy bill last week that would mandate the first major increase in fuel economy standards in more than 30 years. It would require automakers to raise their "corporate average fuel economy" or CAFE standard by 40 percent to 35 miles per gallon by 2020. That bill is now pending in the Senate.
Supporters say it would save the U.S. 1.1 million barrels of oil a day... that's about half the oil that we import from the Persian Gulf region.
Enter the lobbyists for big oil and car companies. They are working overtime to kill the bill. The White House is threatening to veto it. The New York Times says President Bush is echoing a position taken by the auto manufacturers and a coalition of industry groups including the oil companies. They say they're concerned about who would regulate the new 35 mile per gallon standard.
How hollow does that sound? The government can create massive, ineffective bureaucracies at the drop of a hat…ever heard of the Department of Homeland Security? But they're threatening to veto the first meaningful energy bill in 30 years because they don't know who will enforce the standards?
Our dependence on Middle East oil is at the heart of so many of our current problems. But, like everything else, the big corporations have a stranglehold on the federal government
Here’s my question to you:How much influence should corporations have over energy legislation?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Advice for Hillary Clinton?
FROM Jack Cafferty:
In the beginning it was a juggernaut. The caucuses and primaries were seen as little more than an inconvenience on the road to Hillary Clinton becoming the first woman president of the United States. But something bad is happening on the yellow brick road.
At one time Clinton had a 6 point lead over Barack Obama in Iowa. Today, Obama is ahead by 3 points.
In New Hampshire, Clinton had a 19 point lead earlier this fall. As of today, that's gone. In fact, Barack Obama is statistically tied with her according to a new "CNN/WMUR New Hampshire Presidential Primary Poll Conducted by The University of New Hampshire."
It's hard to tell exactly when things began to unravel. But it seemed from the beginning that Hillary was more focused on being elected President than on doing the things necessary to secure her party's nomination.
And when somebody asked a mundane question about driver's licenses for illegal aliens, reality slammed into her like an oncoming truck. In fact, she got run over that night. And if the poll numbers in Iowa and New Hampshire aren't enough to keep her and Bubba awake at night, consider this: in virtually every hypothetical match-up against the leading Republican candidates, it's not Hillary finishing first among the Democrats, it's John Edwards.
Here’s my question to you: If you were running Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign, what would you advise?
To see the Cafferty File video click here
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Huckabee taking fire for Mormon comments?
FROM Jack Cafferty:
Mike Huckabee declined to answer when asked if Mormonism is a cult earlier this month. Maybe he was better off not responding to the question.
In an upcoming New York Times Magazine article, the former Arkansas governor is quoted as asking: "Don't Mormons believe that Jesus and the devil are brothers?" unquote. This after telling the reporter he thought Mormonism was a religion, but admitting he doesn't know much about it.
Rival Republican candidate Mitt Romney, who is a Mormon, says he thinks quote "Attacking someone's religion is really going too far. It's not the American way."
Huckabee's campaign insists his comments were taken out of context, that he wasn't bashing the religion but instead was "illustrating his unwillingness to answer questions about Mormonism and to avoid addressing theological questions during this campaign." Sure Mike. Nice try.
Huckabee has been making big gains recently, taking the lead in Iowa and getting closer to Rudy Giuliani in national polls. He and Romney are also duking it out for support from evangelicals.
Here’s my question to you:What’s your reaction to Mike Huckabee’s saying, quote: "Don't Mormons believe that Jesus and the devil are brothers?"
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Airlines blocking passenger Bill of Rights?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Apparently the airlines would rather you wait…and wait…and wait…for as long as it takes. And no whining.
"USA Today" reports that the airlines are going to try to block a law that would punish them for stranding passengers on airplanes without certain necessities.
That's right. The airline's main trade group is going to federal court next week to contest New York State’s airline passenger bill of rights.
The law, which would be the first of its kind and is set to take effect January first, would require airlines to provide food, water, electricity and waste removal when a flight leaving from a New York airport waits more than three hours to take off.
It allows New York to fine the airlines up to one-thousand dollars per passenger if they don't comply.
But the "Air Transport Association" wants to stop the law from taking effect. They say only federal authorities can regulate airline service. Their lawyers argue that airlines would be hurt if other legislatures pass laws that vary from state to state.
Come on. Remember last year when some flights were delayed up to ten hours and beyond, and passengers just had to sit there? There was a lot of complaining, but the airlines haven't improved much. In fact, they've gotten worse. The Bureau of Transportation reports the number of flights waiting more than three hours to take off from U.S. airports is up about 25 percent since this time last year.
Here’s my question to you: What’s the message when no Republican candidate gets a 50% approval rating from his own party?
GOP voters looking for inspiration?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
It looks like Republicans are searching for a little inspiration.
A new poll shows that with just three weeks to go before the Iowa caucuses, an overwhelming majority of Republican voters across the country say they haven't made a final decision yet about who to support.
It's ugly out there. The New York Times/CBS News poll suggests that none of the Republican candidates is viewed favorably by even half of Republican voters.
Rudy Giuliani gets a 41% favorable rating. John McCain is viewed favorably by 37%, Mitt Romney by 36%, and Mike Huckabee by 30%.
According to the poll, 76% of Republicans say they could still change their mind about who to support, compared with 23% who say their minds are made up.
The Democrats, on the other hand, appear more satisfied with their candidates, and more settled in their decisions. Hillary Clinton retains a strong lead nationally. Also, Democrats see her as far more electable in the general election than Barack Obama and John Edwards and they think she'd do a better job at bringing the country together than Obama.
Here’s my question to you: What’s the message when no Republican candidate gets a 50% approval rating from his own party?
Watch the Cafferty File video here
Is waterboarding ever OK?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
A former CIA officer says that waterboarding has "probably saved lives" but he now considers the tactic torture.
John Kiriakou participated in the capture and questioning of Abu Zabaydah, the first al Qaeda suspect who was waterboarded. Kiriakou says he didn't witness the waterboarding, but described Abu Zabaydah as defiant and uncooperative until the day it happened. He says after just 35 seconds of waterboarding, the terror suspect broke down and the next day told his American captors he'd tell them whatever they wanted.
Kiriakou says the technique probably disrupted "dozens" of planned al Qaeda attacks, led to the capture of other suspects and indirectly led to the capture of Khalid Sheikh Muhammed. But now he has mixed feelings about it, telling the Washington Post quote:
"Americans are better than that… Maybe that's inconsistent, but that's how I feel. It was an ugly little episode that was perhaps necessary at that time. But we've moved beyond that." unquote.
Meanwhile, CIA chief Michael Hayden is appearing before congressional intelligence committees today and tomorrow to answer questions about the agency's destruction of those videotapes showing the use of so-called "alternative" interrogation techniques of two al Qaeda suspects.
The New York Times reports that CIA lawyers gave written approval in advance for the destruction in 2005 of hundreds of hours of these videotapes.
Here’s my question to you: Are there any circumstances under which waterboarding or enhanced interrogation techniques are justified?
Interested to know which ones made it on air:
Whom do you trust on Iran’s nukes?
FROM Jack Cafferty:
Israel isn't buying into the new U.S. intelligence report on Iran.
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert says the conclusion that Iran has given up its nuclear weapons program will not change Israel's view that Iran is still trying to develop
Olmert apparently told a closed meeting of his Security Cabinet that Israel has no reason to change what it's believed all along... that Iran continues to pursue nuclear weapons, is developing weapons and rockets, and enriching uranium.
For years, Israel has been calling on the international community to act to stop Iran's nuclear program. This has led some to believe that Israel might attack Iran's nuclear facilities. Keep in mind, although Iran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for Israel to be "wiped off the map."
Olmert says Israel would work with the International Atomic Energy Agency to expose Iran's plan to develop nuclear weapons.
Meanwhile, the chairman of the U.S. joint chiefs of staff Michael Mullen, is in Israel for talks with leaders there. No surprise that Iran is among the subjects expected to be discussed.
Here’s the question: When it comes to Iran's nuclear program, whom do you believe: Israel or the U.S.?
Here’s my question to you: When it comes to Iran's nuclear program, whom do you believe: Israel or the U.S.?
“Tension in Hillaryland grows?”
FROM Jack Cafferty:
Watch Cafferty File video here
"Things are tense in Hillaryland these days.”
That's according to a piece on Bloomberg by Albert Hunt that focuses on the situation in which Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton now finds herself.
It describes a focus group of 11 Democrats in Philadelphia. After talking with the participants, a Democratic pollster found concerns about Clinton included that she is devious, calculating and a divisive figure in American politics. They also said that as president, Clinton would be demanding, difficult, maybe even a little scary.
Meanwhile, Clinton's once-commanding advantage over Barack Obama in Iowa and New Hampshire is evaporating.
An average of polls taken in Iowa in mid-to-late November now shows Obama appears to be leading Clinton 28% to 25%.
In New Hampshire, an average of polls shows Clinton leading Obama by 10 points which is down from a 19 point lead she had earlier this fall.
The Bloomberg article suggests there are some political strains with Hillary's greatest asset, Bill. Top campaign officials were apparently furious at the former president when he was quoted as saying he had opposed the Iraq war from the beginning. Also, one close associate says he's been bouncing off the walls at her campaign's ineptitude in the past few weeks.
Here’s my question to you: With 3 1/2 weeks until the first votes are cast in Iowa, what should Hillary Clinton’s campaign do to stop the bleeding?
Giuliani’s security questions?
FROM Jack Cafferty:
Rudy Giuliani says that it was New York City police who decided that his then-mistress Judith Nathan needed security escorts on the taxpayers' dime.
The Republican presidential candidate said on NBC's Meet the Press: "I did not make the judgment, I did not ask for it, Judith didn't particularly want it. But it was done because [police] took the view that it was serious and it had to be done that way. And it was done the way they wanted to do it."
The former New York mayor seemed defensive when Tim Russert asked him if a hypothetical presidential mistress should get Secret Service protection, saying it "would not be appropriate" in the absence of a credible threat.
Giuliani didn't name a specific incident that led police to create a full threat assessment for Nathan. However he said he had been the target of several death threats.
Giuliani has faced questions recently about the accounting of his security expenses when he was mayor, that charges were shifted around to obscure city agencies. He says that allegation is inaccurate and that all expenses were ultimately paid by the New York Police Department.
Here’s my question to you: When it comes to Rudy Giuliani’s time as New York mayor, are you satisfied that nothing improper was done with regard to security for him and his then girlfriend, Judith Nathan?
@jackcafferty on Twitter
Recent Comments