Skip to main content

tv   Erin Burnett Out Front  CNN  September 26, 2013 2:00am-3:00am EDT

2:00 am
bought it, wasteful. basically, it's the beginning of the week for seven days. usually, we have better ways. >> keep living the dream. we cannot wait to see what you come up with next. that it. ac 360 later is coming up next. lynchings. iran's president talked about the holocaust with christiane amanpour. and dr. drew pinsky's surprising revelation about his battle with prostate cancer. had he joins us tonight we begin with senator ted cruz's take no prisoners debate on obamacare. he brought the senate to a halt for 21 hours to prevent obamacare funding that the spending bill cut. this is distilled to about a minute.
2:01 am
>> madam president, i rise today in opposition to obamacare. you go to the 1940s. nazi germany. look, we saw in britain, neville chamberlain who told the british people "accept the nazis. yes, they'll dominate the continent of europe. but that's not our problem." i'm a big fan of eating white castle burgers. you do not like grown eggs and ham? i do not like them, sam i am. they did not like obamacare in a box with a fox in a house or with a mouse. obamacare is the opposite of listening to the people. i can tell you as i said at 2:30 in the afternoon yesterday they intend to stand against obamacare as long as i'm able to stand. and at this point i feel confident that at 9:00 a.m. i will still be able to stand. there will come a point when that is no longer the case. but we have not yet reached that point.
quote
2:02 am
>> cruz's marathon speech drew cheers from his tea party supporters and fundraising appeals but also brought some of his fellow lawmakers to the boiling point including a lot of republicans. at the table tonight christiane amanpour and -- great to have you. you wrote about cruz just recently. >> i did. he's sort of irresistible. >> what did you make of his 21-hour marathon? >> i think he accomplished what he wanted to in a certain sense, which is we just watched a whole reel of him. >> you think that's what it really was about? >> i think it was about the visibility of ted cruz. it wasn't about stopping obamacare because it's not going to stop obamacare. late into the day i was starting to see comparisons of his folabuster. there are a lot of comparisons to him and wendy davis and like why did the media frown on her
2:03 am
and make her an heroine. she wasn't trying to embarrass her party, she wasn't setting a standard of purity for her party colleagues they can't live up to. ted cruz has made a mark for himself but also in the process embarrassed a lot of his colleagues. he's rallied a lot of conservative groups running for re-election. he's doing this on the backs of his own colleagues. in the long run -- >> he hasn't embarrassed all his party. >> you can only get so far in politics if nobody likes you. he's got a serious affection problem. >> i just spoke to senator peter king, a republican, who calls him a fraud and who is furious at him. a lot of republicans who are. >> he's finally exposed truly the ridiculousness of what's going on. the dysfunction in this country. we just heard president clinton give a really interesting talk about how it's now the politics of division, how nobody can get anything done, how obviously when people actually work together you can actually get things done and fix things.
2:04 am
and i come from outside the -- have a great respect for america's fantastic democratic system. this is laughable. it's risible this. you come from the parliament in england. great debates. >> yelling at each other like we don't do here. >> thank god. [ overlapping speakers ] >> flourish you don't have here. this was theater and bad theater. it was never designed to be effective. >> nazi germany? >> he knows going into it. this is not a dumb guy. this is somebody who understands there was a parliamentary way that they were going to stop him. this was all to fire up his demographic. >> i completely disagree with what he's doing. i don't like it at all. i feel like that woman from the infomercial, the weight loss infomercial, susan powers, stop the insanity. that being said -- >> i love you bringing up susan powers who i haven't heard from in several years. >> do stop the insanity. come on. we're going to shut down the
2:05 am
government? seriously, guys? >> that's not going to happen. i mean, he's doing this for one reason and one reason only, to raise his profile. and that's what it is. and he succeeded and we're talking about it as the lead story. >> it may happen. maybe it will. >> let's bring in our senior congressional correspondent dana bash. she's standing by. is this going to happen? there is going to be a shutdown? what are you hearing reaction to what cruz did among republicans on the hill today? >> reporter: it depends who you ask. the vast majority everybody at the table is right think that this is just crazy. because not only is it a losing proposition, it is so hard to explain. it is so mired in procedural book. explaining it on television is impossible. explaining it for them is very, very difficult. that is a big problem when you can't communicate your message. will the government shut down? tonight we heard that the senate is probably going to have a final vote friday or saturday.
2:06 am
the house is probably at this point going to send something back that the senate can stomach. so it looks like it's going to be avoided but i've stopped predicting with this congress. >> dana, can you tell us about the republican lunch? i read something today about what happened with senator boozman. i'm wondering if you heard anything about that. >> i know there was a lot of derision inside the republican lunch and that is definitely part of the big problem here. the last thing that republicans want to do right now when they're looking ahead to the next election, particularly in the senate, 2014, they desperately want to get back control of the senate. is to be divided and not be able to get out there and have a message that they think is really going to help them. because the senate as everybody knows is very different from the house when you talk about demographics. talking about whole states and not just districts which tend to be very conservative when republicans are representing them right now. it's very, very difficult. and it is an ugly chapter right now inside the republican party.
2:07 am
and that is exactly what ted cruz is happy about, i think, because this is why he came in, to rage against the man and rage against the establishment. >> but it's interesting. frank, i was reading twitter and reading eric eriksson and sarah palin on twitter, who are supporting what ted cruz is doing. they say he is standing up for principle, trying to make washington listen. you don't buy that? >> i don't understand what the principle is here. he's not going to stop obamacare by doing this. if you listen to that speech and the one on monday, he's saying a lot of of things that are entirely untrue. he's making it sound like the public has never got an chance to weigh in on obamacare. they did in the most recent congressional elections. they did in the presidential election. the public has gotten to weigh in on obamacare through whom they've decided to elect or not re-elect. they chose barack obama over mitt romney, gave control of the senate to democrats. he pretends that obamacare has come along and proven to be a failure. [ overlapping speakers ] >> that's why i think what's happening right now in the senate is in my view
2:08 am
counterproductive. if you look at the newspapers every day right now there is a different story of the negative impact that obamacare is going to have. instead of us focusing on that we are focusing on this spectacle. >> it's counterproductive from republicans' standpoint. it's actually been very productive for not shutting down the government because he's polarized your party. >> thank you for pointing that out, mark. i thought i hadn't noticed. >> i think he's pushed a lot of the people who may have been stand shoulder to shoulder before he kind of did the dr. seuss thing today, and now i think they're going to do the right thing. >> on the senate floor, compare those who in the republican party who don't agree with him to appeasers before world war ii. that's inappropriate. >> it's outrageous. >> it is a very flawed law. and we're seeing each day ways in which it's flawed as many laws are. but we don't yet know really how
2:09 am
it's going to play out. and there are ways to roll it back or overturn it. there are legislative ways to do it that follow tradition. and then there are gimmicks and threats and brinksmanship like this. >> rand paul said today, you guys, we want to overturn this. we want to fix this. the way to do it is through election. rand paul i don't know dana if you find this as interesting as i do, but he seems to be straddling the fence here and trying to be on all sides. what do you make of that? potential 2016 candidates, two. >> reporter: three potential 2016 candidates. it was fascinating to watch the dynamic with him and marco rubio, who you might know a little bit, anna. and also rand paul trying to sort of one up each other in reaching out to this very important base. and i know that we're talking about sort of the fools errand that maybe when it comes to vote counts that ted cruz is on. but maybe he'll be laughing all the way to iowa and to new hampshire and to south carolina. because this is incredibly
2:10 am
important. this group of republicans are incredibly important. when it comes -- >> and to the bank. >> reporter: to the bank, right. >> all of this is constantly cast, perhaps i'm naive to think it wouldn't be, constantly cast in the horse race. what about getting things done for the american people? what about the politics of disagreeing but nonetheless being able to get things done? what about politicians actually having to answer to their constituents? their constituents don't want this. poll after poll after poll shows the american people want politicians to actually work together to get things done. rather than to be extremists like this whether it's on the left or the right. >> the problem is is his constituency right now is a very discrete number of what are called tea party or hard line people. >> right. >> that's who he's appealing to. >> this is being used as a fundraiser appeal. >> horse race instead of getting the job done. >> very effective on both sides. >> all sides do this when there's this kind of filibuster.
2:11 am
>> wendy davis on her marathon. >> dana, thanks for joining us. as we head to the break, something for the panel. the ceo of aig, the big insurance giant said in an interview the criticism of outsized bonuses to company executives on wall street the aftermath of financial meltdown was akin to the lynchings that happened in the south. really? talk about that coming up. when we made our commitment to the gulf, bp had two big goals: help the gulf recover and learn from what happened so we could be a better, safer energy company. i can tell you - safety is at the heart of everything we do. we've added cutting-edge technology, like a new deepwater well cap and a state-of-the-art monitoring center, where experts watch over all drilling activity twenty-four-seven. and we're sharing what we've learned, so we can all produce energy more safely. our commitment has never been stronger.
2:12 am
2:13 am
♪ [ male announcer ] the parking lot helps by letting us know who's coming. the carts keep everyone on the right track. the power tools introduce themselves. all the bits and bulbs keep themselves stocked. and the doors even handle the checkout so we can work on that thing that's stuck in the thing. [ female announcer ] today, cisco is connecting the internet of everything. so everyone goes home happy.
2:14 am
2:15 am
some of your tweets there. thanks very much for tweeting with us and watching us. is it possible that some wall street executives are so clueless they don't understand when the financial industry nearly wrecked the economy five years ago and received tax funded bailouts the people on main street why justifiably angry when they learned many executives still received huge bonuses. robert benmochey told the "wall street journal" this week that criticism of those bonuses was ignorant and that it was intended to stir public age for get everybody out there with their pitch forks and hangmen nooses and all of that, sort of like what we did in the deep south decades ago. i think it was just as bad and just as wrong what he said. he's comparing criticism to outsized bonuses to lynching, a time in this country when people mostly african-american men were hanged from trees by angry mobs. with me my panel is back and we're joined by matt taibbe,
2:16 am
current contributing editor at rolling stone. his article "losing the pension funds" is in the current issue. not the article of miley cyrus. what do you make of these comments? >> i think this goes straight to the top of the clueless post crash ceo comments pyramid you. had lloyd blankfein of goldman sachs who said he was doing god's work. the guy who said people in foreclosure should suck anytime and cope. this us worse than that. this is probably the most clueless thing. >> chapter one of public speaking for dummies is, do not use painful events as metaphors and comparisons. you stay away from the holocaust, you stay away from rape, you stay away from slavery, you stay away from lynching. this is just ridiculous. >> ted cruz comparing obamacare to naziism. we live in the era of analogy blows.
2:17 am
>> joe biden told a group of black audience they want to put you back in chains. this is something that -- >> that's a clueless statement as well. >> insensitivity is not partisan. >> there's something ridiculous about people using the nazi analogy all the time. nazis are nazis. you don't talk about nazis. >> there should be a letterman top ten list of metaphors you cannot go to ever. >> here's another thing you can't go. to no white person can ever go where ben moshe went with these comments. a millionaire who makes $13 million a year as a ceo of essentially a tax-subsidized company and he's nailing himself to the cross of black victimhood in front of the "wall street journal." that's the ultimate no no. >> while the butler is at the top of the box office. >> exactly. >> somebody who periodically soothes insurance companies, they are so tone deaf.
2:18 am
this is not unusual. you put these guys on the stand and you see them testify. they have no clue. jurors look at them like they're alien beings. they don't understand. they're in their own insular world. >> i don't think anybody of any color should go there. we just saw recently russell simmons who took on our colleague, don lemmon, called him a slave on twitter and then did something like upload a very offensive video of an african-american heroine in their history. our history, the u.s. history. he got a lot of backlash from that. he had to take it back. so it's not color. to me it's not color sensitive. it is rationale. >> it is freedom first amendment freedom. >> it is first amendment freedom. but at the same time, you're going to take the backlash when you get it an it's well deserved. >> in the meantime it on secures the real facts. fifth anniversary of lehman crash. too big to fail is not resolved.
2:19 am
in the recovery 95% of the income gains went to 1% of the gap keeps getting wider and wider and wider. and these are real issues we have to focus on. >> have we learned any lessons from what happened? has wall street learned any lessons? >> some lessons. >> wall street hasn't learned any lessons at all. >> you don't believe they have? >> i think that's the news value in these comments, that these guys are still completely clueless. they genuinely i think what's so interesting they genuinely see themselves as the victims in this whole scenario. they feel put upon really. >> they think the idea of taking taxpayer money and then being restricted, they think that is somehow violative of capitalistic principles. >> it's that sense that the haves don't understand what the have notes are going through and even feel besieged themselves. >> like i say, i've just come from the perspective of being in
2:20 am
courtrooms. you see this class kind of distinction and this class warfare played out almost every day in civil courtrooms where people are fighting about money all the time. >> you write about this all the time. could it all happen again? the same kind of thing? >> absolutely. what was our solution to the crash in 2008? we took all these corrupt failing companies and instead of breaking them up or letting them go out of business we merged them together into even bigger and more dangerous companies. so aig was sort of the exception because it was essentially taken over by the government. but the rest of them were sort of shotgun wedded to each other. and we have this sort of constellation of too big to fail companies that are even more dangerous and unstable than they were before. >> because they're so much bigger. >> they're so much bigger and more too big to failure than they were before. >> so in the first two blocks we've told our viewers that government's dysfunctional and wall street is dysfunctional.
2:21 am
are you all feeling very optimistic about america right now? have a drink. >> well, people know. look, you see the polls over and over again. people don't want this. people do not want what their elected officials are giving them. they want something different. they want -- they don't want these extremes. they don't want this polarization. they don't want this whatever it is that leads people into the echo chamber and just all listening to themselves. >> 24-hour filibusters are not going to get us out of this. >> they want people to get together and work despite their differences. >> all-time high, there's that pressure just as an individual investor to feel like, well, you got to get back -- got to get back into it. >> as soon as the individual investor gets back into it then you'll see a crash. so that's the scam that is the stock market. >> but the stock market going up is actually kind of representative of this dichotomy that we have. everybody in wall street is doing great. it's the rest of america, the people who are out there living in real cities, they're the ones who are having trouble getting real jobs. >> this stock market is run up
2:22 am
at the same time that all the people who had their pension funds obliterated in 2008 have been afraid to get back in it. and when they all come back in it is when this thing will crash again. >> unemployment has dipped below 8% it's still not at a number that anyone should be happy about. it's almost like people are breathing a sigh of of relief it's gone this that direction. it's still pretty high. >> for hispanics, women, african-americans, it's still high. >> the prime minister of italy told me his nightmare is the exodus of young people from italy trying to find a better job somewhere. the brain drain in spain is the same thing. just a catastrophe. >> how many people actually went to jail in the wake of -- >> bernie madoff. but he had no connection -- >> how many bankers? i mean, they didn't prosecute anybody at a certain level or above. nobody. i mean, the guys who were getting prosecuted are guys who are checking the wrong boxes on loan applications and u.s.
2:23 am
attorneys are picking up the low-hanging fruit. i mean, the idea that you couldn't prosecute. i could give you case after case where they could have prosecuted, they could have convicted. they don't do it. >> why? >> they just refused to. well, the department of justice and lane any brewer who i liked and i've known for years were afraid to lose. that was kind of their trepidation about all of this. because clearly there were numerous people, numerous people in the banks who were foreclosing on, for instance, people who were in iraq. well, that's a crime under the current state of the law. did anybody get prosecuted for that? no. not a single one. >> even worse situations. robo signing, hfbc. here's a bank that admitted laundering $880 million for a couple of central and south american drug gangs. >> they got fined. >> they got fined. nobody did one day in jail. we have people on rikers island right across the river here doing time in jail for grabbing
2:24 am
a joint. >> i've had clients who thought it was a good deal in situations like that if they could just get less than 18 months on just putting out an application on a loan that was not true but they paid the loan back. so there was no loss. it was kind of the old no harm no foul. yet they can't come up with a way to prosecute some banker who's orchestrating all this and the derivatives and everything else? it's nonsense. >> we've got to take another break. matt, great to have you here. everybody else on the table stick around next. christiane's interview with the iran president. she asked him about the holocaust. we'll get to that next. [ male announcer ] campbell's angus beef & dumplings. hearty cheeseburger. creamy thai style chicken with rice. mexican-style chicken tortilla. if you think campbell's 26 new soups sound good, imagine how they taste.
2:25 am
m'm! m'm! good!
2:26 am
i've got a big date, but my sinuses are acting up. it's time for advil cold and sinus. [ male announcer ] truth is that won't relieve all your symptoms. new alka seltzer plus-d relieves more sinus symptoms than any other behind the counter liquid gel. oh what a relief it is.
2:27 am
2:28 am
welcome back. there's a lot to talk about. christiane amanpour's ground-breaking interview with iran's new president. two talked yesterday after the president rouhani addressed the u.n. general assembly. he said the holocaust did happen. some iranians today in the news agencies there said he actually didn't say what he said. before we get to why they're saying that, here's the exchange from the interview. you can hear for yourself. >> one of the things your predecessor used to do from this very platform was deny the holocaust and pretend thought was a myth. i want to know you, your position on the holocaust. do you accept what it was? and what was it?
2:29 am
>> translator: i have said before that i am not a historian and that when it comes to speaking of the dimensions of the holocaust it is the historians that should reflect on it. but in general, i can tell you that any crime that happens in history against humanity, including the crime the nazis created towards the jews, is reprehensible and condemnable. whatever criminality they committed against the jews, we condemn. the taking of human life is contemptible. it makes no difference whether that life is jewish life, christian or muslim. for us it is the same. the taking of human life is something our religion rejects. but this does not mean that on the other hand you can say nazis committed crimes against a group, now therefore they must usurp the land of another group and occupy it. this too is an act that should be condemned. there should be an even-handed discussion. >> christiane is back with us as
2:30 am
well as the rest of our panel. so far as iran's news agency said american news channel cnn fabricated the remarks made by iranian president in response the network's question about the holocaust cnn aired its interview the news channel added to or changed parts of his remarks when christiane amanpour asked him about the holocaust. >> piffle. ridiculous. >> is that a british term? >> what i can say is that we put the entire transcript out online. we've got the entire 56-minute interview if anybody at fars cares to read it. we have his translator. i speak prussian. i know what he said. it's ridiculous. but it does actually show -- frankly this happens all the time. by the way, fars is always busy making up complete fabrications about what other world leaders say. it does show how difficult, how very very difficult it will be for rouhani to thread this needle, walk this tight rope, come to the united states to negotiate to make a chart a different course. >> what is the difficulty he faces?
2:31 am
>> the difficulty is this. that the hard liners just don't want it to happen. and there is still a group of very, very powerful hard liners for whom resisting the great satan, resisting the united states, is their raison detre. they don't realize that time has passed them by and the iranian people do not want this. the majority of the iranian people want exactly what rouhani is saying. moderation, a relationship with the west, freedom at home. all of that kind of thing. obviously they want much more than what he's saying. >> another thing he said he has the approval of the supreme leader. >> absolutely. >> a lot of people don't realize there's a supreme religious leader that's the real power. >> he's given him the power to negotiate on the nuclear issue and negotiate directly with the united states. it is not a small thing that he's named his american educated foreign minister, first of all naming that man as foreign minister is pretty dramatic. and he has put him in charge of
2:32 am
the nuclear file and other negotiations. president obama announced he's put secretary kerry in charge. so the two will be talking in their group meetings. but fars wants to discredit rouhani. >> piers asked former president clinton about what he said. i just want to play that. >> and he compared to the interview they did with mahmoud ahmadinejad last year struck a much more conciliatory tone particularly in the fact he admitted there had been a holocaust, which is nothing mahmoud ahmadinejad would admit to. what do you think of that concession? >> first of all, i think it's an interesting commentary on the world in which we're living that admitting that the holocaust occurred qualifies as being a moderate. >> of course president clinton is right. i mean, the holocaust happened. and the kind of stuff that the iranian president mahmoud ahmadinejad did over the last eight years, bringing holocaust
2:33 am
deniers, having these ridiculous conferences in iran, standing here at the united nations doing that. but it's not the majority of the people who believe that. >> and this is my kind of maybe out of left field comment about the holocaust deniers and everything else. our greatest ally there is turkey. in that region. yet turkey denies the armenian genocide. to the point where obama as a candidate would talk about it as when i'm in office i will recognize it. and i'll recognize the genocide. and he's been completely stultified when he's here. so there is a political dynamic here that's at play, i think, that is a little hypocritical. >> let me ask you this. i read later today that he had had -- that rouhani had an off the record meeting with a number of journalists. >> an informal meeting, yes. >> informal where he basically reiterated what he said to you yesterday. >> he did. >> those journalists pressed for it to be on the record.
2:34 am
so i'm wondering timing-wise was that before or after -- >> after what he said to me. >> no, no, no. was that before or after fars came out? >> that i don't know. but here's the thing. what he said is what he said. what fars wants to do is discredit him. as you know, there are hard liners on both sides that do not want to see in their own different ways approachment between the united states and iran. and that's what's going to happen. that's going to be the big big -- [ overlapping speakers ] >> your point is great. and you should elaborate on it. fars spends all of their time misinterpreting what world leaders say. >> a lot of their time. >> the last two days we have seen that he couldn't shake president obama's hand yesterday because it was too complicated. and now they are clarifying, denying what he said regarding the holocaust. it is a reality check as to hearing just what this rapprochement is all about. >> for both sides. as ugly and as painful and as bitter as it might be, unless this side can also give some in
2:35 am
negotiations, these so-called moderates are going to go back home without anything and then that window is going to close. this is what i've come to the conclusion. if the nuclear crisis, the nuclear issue is going to be resolved between the west and iran without force and without war, which i don't believe the united states wants or anybody wants, then it has to be negotiations. if there's going to be negotiations, that's not a capitulation. you can't demand surrender. you have to figure out compromise. as you know, compromise requires both sides of compromise. so iran has to do its maximum, obviously, to provide transparency. >> got to take a quick break. during the break i have to figure out what piffle means. just ahead, dr. drew pinsky joins us to talk about his bat well prostate cancer he's talking about publicly for the first time, how it was found, how he beat it. what you need to know. we'll be right back.
2:36 am
♪ we got the ball rolling. in cities across the country, coca-cola joined with communities and local leaders to roll out a summer filled with activity. from atlanta to l.a., people all over found that getting moving can be fun. in fact, it can be a day at the beach! all in all, we inspired three million people
2:37 am
to rediscover the joy of being active. now, let's keep it going all year long and make a difference... together.
2:38 am
2:39 am
welcome to "ac 360 later." thanks for joining us.
2:40 am
dr. drew pinsky revealed yesterday he's recently battled prostate cancer. he had surgery in july to remove the tumor. his doctors caught it before it spread. he wrote about how his cancer was found and how he credits his wife for saving his life. more than 200,000 men in the united states are diagnosed with prostate cancer every year, but for most of them it's a very private matter. dr. drew joins me now along with christiane amanpour, and my panel. dr. drew, why did you decide to talk about it and what do you hope it accomplishes? >> there really were three reasons. one was there were some bizarre rumors starting to swirl about me. i thought i needed to set the record straight. number two it is prostate awareness month. this is a common condition number three my story was so illustrative of the complexities of what goes on with this condition i thought i really wanted to try to raise awareness about it and teach men about prostate cancer. before i get into that i got to tell you one of the first people i saw five days after my surgery, mark geragos. >> you guys are lifelong friends. >> we are. and our sons are very close as well. his triplets and my youngest, jacob.
2:41 am
but you should see in the set here, drew, they've got these pictures of susan, your beautiful and lovely wife. and the biggest part of this story is that somehow this story never made it out with susan knowing about it. >> is that right? >> and to be fair, mark, it was you and her wife, your wife, they're good friends. the both of them kept the see secret. >> i know more about your sex life post operation. >> that's one of the most important messages. i had a robotic prostate-ectomy. you can look forward to urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction. this surgery it won't happen. prostate cancer you can wait on it. it's complicated and my message is for other men, if you get diagnosed and many men will, work with your physician to
2:42 am
figure out what's the best timing for you based on your grade, tumor and position. >> when do you actually get checked? or when should you? >> i suspect you have been checked. i just suspect. i'm just saying. that's a big part of the check. >> i think i would remember that at the doctor's office to be honest. >> it's a blood test. >> it's a blood test? >> psa. >> so what do you recommend? >> it's actually very controversial. the american your logical society is -- if you don't have prostate cancer in your family they're questioning whether psas should over be done. when i first arrived at my active surveillance program they said you shouldn't have been biopsied. turns out i should have been. we couldn't see it at the time i was diagnosed. it was the judgment and intuition of my physicians that led to this being taken out exactly the time it needed to be
2:43 am
taken out before i would have been in real serious trouble. 50 is clearly where screening needs to begin for sure. whether you do psa, digital rectal exam or both is between you and your physician. the fear is if we do too much screening too much expensive intervention, too much mortality from all the surgeries. i am a big fan of the screening. my professional organization, the american college of physician, is a little more aggressive with screening than the your logical society. >> was there a fear you had at all in talk about this? sort of embarrassment for a guy to talk about this it's not something you hear every day. >> yeah. you know, as a physician it didn't bother me, hasn't bothered me at all. doesn't bother mark geragos clearly to talk about my sex life and prostate. it didn't bother me because it's simply another organ system. something that afflicts many millions of men. it's a common condition. we should be talking about it very matter of factually. the problem is most men are fearful even getting into screening for fear something is
2:44 am
going to be found, because in their mind it means the end of their sexual relationship, urinary difficulties. we live in a day and age where technology has progressed to the point you don't have to worry about those consequences really so much at all. >> i just had a question. i'm a little confused about the screening thing. ry i remember reading the news stories last year federal recommendations we do less screenings. do you think those were hasty? >> raised the age. >> absolutely. had i been screened specifically by the guidelines i would be dead. specifically. >> really? >> and people -- again it's like the ford pinto guys. people tried to judge what the cost effective ratio is of screening. and in fact, had i done it by the guidelines of the various societies, i would have been in big trouble. my society because my father and uncle had prostate cancer says i should have been screened. by the way when i went to biopsy i still had a normal psa. it just had progressed rapidly. it was the intuition of my physician i needed to go doctor personally i thought they were
2:45 am
going too far. >> you think that less screening message was the wrong one? >> well, it depends on what the goals are. if it's saving an individual's life, it's not. it's the wrong one. but if it's being cost effective medicine which is really the way we practice medicine these days it is the right message. we're always very concerned about over doing intervention. >> it wasn't cost effectiveness if i remember correctly but about false positives, treatments that were unnecessary. >> that's exactly right. >> obviously same thing about mammograms. the two ladies at the table. all this controversy a few years ago about oh, no, you shouldn't actually be tested this many times at this age, et cetera. and there was a big controversy over it. >> and it was exactly the same as he's been saying. survivors of this, i have many, many friends breast cancer survivors including people in congress talk about this very strongly. and got some of that pushed back. >> the bottom line, drew, is i would assume you're saying is to
2:46 am
have that conversation with your doctor. i mean on a one on one basis. >> exactly. >> not just use national statistics. >> these are guidelines. they're guidelines. they're screening guidelines. your specific genetic circumstance needs to be sorted out between you and your doctor. again, i thought they were going too aggressively with me. turns out they were not. there was a tributary of my tumor heading towards the surface of my prostate. had we gone a few more months i could have been in big trouble. based on their judgment -- by the way my wife's intuition to go get a physical which i was fighting off as well. i just thought everyone's making too much of everything. they were all correct. it was you can't be objective about your own health care. you need an individual sitting there thinking about this and applying their judgment and objectivity. >> sounds like she saved your life. >> she did. >> i'm hoping you gave her a lot of jewelry. >> susan's not jewelry challenged. [ laughter ] >> good shot.
2:47 am
>> right. >> dr. drew, i'm glad you're doing all right. and speaking out on this. thank you so much, dr. drew. great to have you. up next, cracking down on fake online reviews. have you ever gone and yelled for one of these web sites to check out a review? why you can't believe every glowing review you read on sites like yelp or even negative reviews. we'll talk about it ahead. so i can reach ally bank 24/7, but there are no branches? 24/7. i'm sorry, i'm just really reluctant to try new things. really? what's wrong with trying new things? look! mommy's new vacuum! (cat screech) you feel that in your muscles? i do... drink water. it's a long story. well, not having branches let's us give you great rates and service.
2:48 am
i'd like that. a new way to bank. a better way to save. ally bank. your money needs an ally. trust your instincts to make the call. to treat my low testosterone, my doctor and i went with axiron, the only underarm low t treatment. axiron can restore t levels to normal in about 2 weeks in most men. axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18 or men with prostate or breast cancer. women, especially those who are or who may become pregnant and children should avoid contact where axiron is applied as unexpected signs of puberty in children or changes in body hair or increased acne in women may occur. report these symptoms to your doctor. tell your doctor about all medical conditions and medications. serious side effects could include increased risk of prostate cancer; worsening prostate symptoms; decreased sperm count; ankle, feet or body swelling; enlarged or painful breasts; problems breathing while sleeping; and blood clots in the legs. common side effects include skin redness or irritation where applied, increased red blood cell count, headache, diarrhea, vomiting, and increase in psa.
2:49 am
ask your doctor about the only underarm low t treatment, axiron.
2:50 am
just by talking to a helmet. it grabbed the patient's record before we even picked him up. it found out the doctor we needed was at st. anne's. wiggle your toes. [ driver ] and it got his okay on treatment from miles away. it even pulled strings with the stoplights. my ambulance talks with smoke alarms and pilots and stadiums. but, of course, it's a good listener too. [ female announcer ] today cisco is connecting the internet of everything. so everything works like never before.
2:51 am
we've all heard the saying do not believe everything you read. maybe now it should be don't believe anything you read. like on yelp, review sites many are not written by customers but by others including companies that actually sell fake reviews. new york's attorney general is cracking down on false online reviews, settling cases with 19 companies so far after a sting operation. we're back with our panel. you've done restaurant reviews. i mean, a, are you surprised by this at all? >> not surprised. when i left that gig and did a bunch of q&as with people the
2:52 am
most common question i got would yelp put formal reviewers out of business? i said no they won't because what people already know and will learn more and more over time you cannot trust those. we want to think of the internet as word of mouth at large. but word of mouth is from mouths you know. you know if they've got conflicts or vested interest. the internet you don't know when you're reading something if that rave about a restaurant is a chef's mother or the guy who's flirting with you is really named carlos danger [ laughter ] >> the internet is a realm of masks and scams. >> same thing with hotel reviews. they're wildly all over the place. and so much of it is about -- i've always looked at it from the flip side. my partner owns bars in the city. and one aggrieved customer who can be a very rude person can put a review up on these things and destroy a small business. >> or get her friends to do it. >> vengeance. >> it's a matter of trusting
2:53 am
your brand. >> has anyone offered to pay you to write a good review? >> only once. >> you have to trust people. it's where you get your news from. you have to trust your newscasters. reviews. frank bruney and our own own anthony bourdain. >> when i go to a new city call lee shriner or go to sagetz online. >> what about that? >> that's more believable but it has its own flaws. i think the smart person triangulates. when i'm traveling somewhere and i want to know where to eat i go and ask people i know and where the reviews are. when you look at the overlaps of all the sets is you're in a zone that's trustworthy. when you're just using the internet, as the attorney general's report shows, you really don't know where raves or pans are coming from.
2:54 am
>> you can get competitors who are going to try and torch your place, or you've got somebody who just got fired. >> a lot of cousins. >> the anonymity of the internet. you see this on twitter, in all sorts of online forums, that's allows people to just say things they would never say in real life. >> which is why you purposely shame people on twitter. >> i'd like to shame -- >> you do like to shame. >> i like to read somebody's twitter history and respond with specific suggestions to them. >> but internet is all -- >> if we compare hate tweets, we might be pretty even. >> you also don't know there's one thing we haven't touched on, you don't know what that person's experience or authority is. i've read raves on the internet about restaurants and probably the person went there and had one burger. didn't try other things on the menu. i've read screeds and the person probably went there and had one meal on one night when maybe the
2:55 am
chef was sick. >> when you were doing reviews of restaurants, how many dishes would you try? >> like all of them. >> really? >> if i can give a shout out to "the times" and our current critic pete wells. if you're giving a restaurant a review you go back at least three times. you go with other people so you can fan out across the menu, try things more than once. it's never going to be scientific. but these things have enormous economic consequence againsts. you have to be responsible about them. the times is lucky even in this horrible journalistic economy we still are funded well enough we can do this. >> did you have to hide your identity? did you never want to be photographed or recognized? >> i wouldn't have been on a show like this. >> really? >> you wouldn't go in in your name. >> why is this about me all of a sudden? >> this is about yelp. >> you wouldn't have gone in under bruney, right? >> no. >> you covered politics the can -- the vatican and a food critic. how does that happen in one lifetime?
2:56 am
>> my brother says i'm not a journalist i have attention deficit disorder. >> thanks so much for being here on the table tonight. it was fun. good discussion. i want to thank everyone on the panel as well. thanks for watching and tweeting us as well. as long as you're real person and not a fake person. that's all the time we have for "ac 360 later." we'll see you tomorrow night at 10:00. have a great night. bye bye. anncr: expedia is giving away a trip every day. where would you go? woman: 'greece.' woman 2: 'i want to go to bora bora.' man: 'i'd always like to go to china.' anncr: download the expedia app and your next trip could be on us. expedia, find yours. nascar is about excitement. but tracking all the action
2:57 am
and hearing everything from our marketing partners, the media and millions of fans on social media can be a challenge. that's why we partnered with hp to build the new nascar fan and media engagement center. hp's technology helps us turn millions of tweets, posts and stories into real-time business insights that help nascar win with our fans. google, glossophobia,ophobia? or speech anxiety, is the fear of public speaking. ♪ this is preeminently the time to speak the truth frankly and boldly.
2:58 am
this is no unsolvable problem if we face it wisely and courageously. let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is... fear itself. (clapping) ♪
2:59 am

202 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on