American Morning

Tune in at 6am Eastern for all the news you need to start your day.
April 15th, 2010
04:00 PM ET

We Listen – Your comments 4/15/10

Editor's Note: On Tax Day Thursday, many of American Morning viewers were aghast at the Tea Party protests, remarking that Tea Party leaders were interested only in “lining their pockets” and ignoring global importance of such issues as universal health care. Some were frustrated that this group continued to garner so much media attention, noting that organizations with opposing viewpoints were ignored by the mainstream media.

  • Jerry; Tea Party: I just have one thing to add to the Tea Party and that is to say that I feel that to some of their leaders are only using the followers to line their pockets. All they want is to make all the money they can and the election dose not make any difference to them. Just look at Sarah Palin, she could not run her state, she quit and now she is telling people how to run our country. She even has trouble running her family. Wake up people.
  • Chris: I have hard time to keep up my job let alone to go to town to town to do my demonstration to have a limited government and fiscal responsibility. In the mean time have government to protect social security, Medicare, Medicaid and $690 b defense budget. USA is the biggest, used to be the richest country in the whole world and it doesn't have universal health care. It tells me that the GOP likes to kill people not to cure or heal people. It is a narrow minded if you don't think global any more. How luck you have Obama to step in the crisis to save USA.
  • Charlotte: Is the media so corporate-driven that they insist on focusing on the Tea-Baggers? To the same degree or rather, please focus on Progressive Democrats of America and their programs, e.g. “Healthcare not Warfare.” One reason they are not as viable an election choice is that the media has, for the most part, shelved them. Also, please focus on ANSWER, CODE PINK and Tikkun, and so many more progressive organizations to the degree that “Tea Party” is presented. If only the media really knew that most of America believes in the tenets of the Progressive Democrats of America; however, the media is occupied in telling us what a conservative country we are – which is a lot of hogwash. If any poll reflects this “conservatism,” one main reason is that the public has not been educated by the media about the viable options, such as the organizations stated in the message. We are looking to the media to elevate and expand our knowledge of our many political choices. Please try a greater degree to fulfill the responsibility of the Fourth Estate. Thomas Jefferson and our other great patriots (who were once called insurgents by the colonial power of the time, i.e. the British Empire) are depending on you.

What do you think of the Tax Day Tea Party protests? Continue the conversation below.

Filed under: We Listen
April 14th, 2010
03:00 PM ET

We Listen – Your comments 4/14/10

Editor's Note: Carol Costello’s report on “Male Studies” generated varied opinion from Wednesday’s American Morning audience. Some were unconvinced that such a program would be of any value, others provided a more historical perspective, noting that “throughout human history, the world's social pendulum has swung between male dominated society and female dominated society.”

  • Al: Regarding males living in a woman's world, throughout human history, the world's social pendulum has swung between male dominated society and female dominated society. That is, at least in part, how the pantheon of gods and goddesses came to be. In male dominated societies, the deities were male, symbolizing the fact that males should be in charge, because the gods were male. In female dominated societies, the deities' sexes were changed to female for the same basic reasons. We are just witnessing the transitional phase of the pendulum's current cycle.
  • Dean: It would be great if Male Studies and other efforts reduced male bashing and "dumb guy commercials" and clarify the distortions expressed in books like "Who Stole Feminism?" For example, where is the data to support the "fact" that "it isn't about sex; it is about power and control." Ask any horndog sniffing around any environment; It is about sex! Or do the data show that most men explain that pleading and begging for sex is to make them feel powerful?
  • Wes: Regarding Carol Costello's report on masculinity, I suggest she check out the book, "Knights Without Armor: A Guide to the Inner Lives of Men" by Aaron Kipnis, Ph.D.
  • Ron: It is true that men are not men like it once was and that is in part due to NOW and the men let it happen. Mother's want girls and when they have boys they treat them like girls. Thus, we have boys that are not boys, plain and simple.

How do you feel about the idea of a “Male Studies” academic program? Continue the conversation below.

Filed under: We Listen
April 13th, 2010
03:00 PM ET

We Listen – Your comments 4/13/10

Editor's Note: Tuesday’s American Morning audience debated the spanking study from Tulane University that found children who were spanked frequently at 3-years-old were 50 percent more likely to become aggressive by the age of five. While the majority opinion favored spanking as a form of discipline, some equated the act with abuse.

  • Raymond: Joking about spanking – child abuse – is far, far, far from funny. Spanking, child abuse, is domestic violence and plants the seeds that perpetuate a vicious cycle of battery. Would you joke about a battered spouse? I was a victim and thoroughly resent your employees making light of such a serious issue. It impacts my life to this day and is no joking matter I can assure you.
  • Cindy: about spanking...i have raised 2 girls and 2 boys and now helping with 8 grands. if you spank only when needed at a young age you establish a healthy fear of consequence. none of my kids are violent they are wonderful citizens. and my grands know i am the alpha-dog of discipline who loves them enough to spank. if you do it at the right age you won't have to do it very often. i got one spanking my whole life and turned great. Thanks
  • Bruce: I am a 48 year old from Toronto, Canada. I was the recipient of a few spankings in my younger days; but never without a just reason. That was just the way parenting was done in those days. As a recovering alcoholic and addict now, when I reflect on those days I feel that it actually prevented me from becoming aggressive. Instead I became meek and lacking in self confidence. Obviously, since I am in recovery, I rebelled when I was quite a bit older. I would be interested in hearing your experts opinion on this.
  • Bill: I do not agree with the theory that spanking creates violent adults. all people my age (68) were spanked, we had no gangs no school shootings and very little crime. Children today need more discipline not less. Many of my friends quit because they could no longer discipline students, Today, my mother could be put in jail for the way she raised me. I have never been in trouble.
  • Phillip: spanking : defined is the NON VIOLENT way to show a TAP OR STING to ones child. it represents DISCIPLINE. A NON VIOLENT MEANS TO LET A CHILD UNDERSTAND THAT THE BEHAVIOR ON GOING IS NOT TOLERABLE. spanking is not is not is not : a violent act. One who can use physical violence to hit a child is clearly not spanking. DONOT DEFINE SPANKING WITH THE MEANS BY WHICH ONE USES HITTING A VERY VIOLENT MARRING FORM OF HATE AND ANGER TO DEFINE AN ACT OF DISCIPLINE. " CORPORAL PUNISHMENT IS MORE TO THIS DEFINED ACT OF HITTING." spanking is an old well defined means to get a child to understand that violence and bad temper get one sent to " the room" .and with a TAP of love causing a child to become alerted to this stinging pain. AGAIN THIS IS NOT AN ACT OF AGRESSIVE VIOLENCE. today both the interviewers and the person being interviewed used " spanking and hitting as if these words were synonymous with each other. clearly they are not."

What do you think of spanking? Continue the conversation below.

Filed under: We Listen
April 12th, 2010
02:00 PM ET

We Listen – Your comments 4/12/10

Editor's Note: Monday’s American Morning audience was disturbed by the story of the adopted Russian boy returned to the country by his adoptive parents.

  • Eileen: What a monster this family was. I don't care if the kid was "Damien" he is a child, a seven year old child. They adopted this child; they are his legal parents, with all the rights and "responsibilities." Not only was it cruel, it was reckless endangerment of a child and these people must be brought to justice. The poor child. I wouldn't care what he said, he was probably defending himself out of his unfortunate fearful past. No doubt these people abused him for him to make those threats. Russia is right, it was a monstrous act and they need to be held accountable. The poor precious child, what he must have endured. I hope that our Country and Russia will reach out to this wonderful kid and see to it that his wounded life is healed and he is allowed to be a child, a happy one.
  • Charles C: Adoption of the Russia returned child, it's not the fault of the child did parent have a chance to get spend time and know the child, we have many children in the U.S.A. that need to be adopted, I hate that people are going to foreign country like an exploited animal.
  • Anna Lee: In the story regarding the 7 year old sent back to Russia, the response by John and Carin was so weak, almost uncaring. What airline would transport this American Citizen without question. Should criminal charges be looked into for a mother who would do this. Where did the child end up and where are Federal reps that should be looking after his rights. More investigation should be taken, and probably would be if this child was not disabled. Who will speak for him. I hope it will be CNN.

What do you think? Continue the conversation below.

Filed under: We Listen
April 9th, 2010
02:00 PM ET

We Listen – Your comments 4/9/10

Editor's Note: Friday’s American Morning audience defended Tiger Woods’ return to golf, noting their disinterest in his personal life, but great desire to watch him play at the Masters in August, GA.

  • William: Tiger Woods........ Carol, love 'ya dearly, but on this issue you are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG ! Do you really think that golfers & Golf Fans sit around reading Gossip Mags (Rags) ? No, they want to see the best golfer perform his stuff on the links...That's where the interest lies.....
  • Donald: ...I just simply don't understand what all this interest about Tiger's sex life is about. Sure, he's a lousy husband; but what does that have to do with his sporting ability? People argue he's a role model. He's not. He's a multi-million dollar athlete paid to do what he's good at. His marital woes should have absolutely nothing to do with his job-which he does very well. It's NOT OUR BUSINESS!!!
  • Dorothy: I don't play golf and never watch golf tournaments, and I tuned in only because I think Tiger Woods is repulsive. Amazed!

What do you think? Has the Tiger Woods scandal made him more or less popular? Continue the conversation below.

Filed under: We Listen
April 1st, 2010
03:00 PM ET

We Listen – Your comments 4/1/2010

Editor's Note: As more parents and students spoke openly about bullying and its negative effects, Thursday’s American Morning audience shared potential solutions to the problem. One former teacher suggested that other states emulate Vermont, making schools legally requited to “deal with the problem.”

  • Mary: If Massachusetts wants to get serious about bullying in schools, I suggest it look to its neighbor–Vermont. A Vermont bullying law was put into law after the suicide of 13-year old Ryan Patrick Halligan. If Massachusetts had such a law, prosecution might be much easier. But, most importantly, the level of awareness amongst students and teachers escalates. The Vermont law requires schools to deal with the problem. I recently retired from teaching and during my last ten years, I was part of a concentrated staff development effort & participated in developing bullying policies as both a teacher and a school board member. Not one school...not one principal...not one teacher in Vermont can stand by and allow bullying. All know that there is a legal price to pay. When the level of awareness increases, the amount of bullying decreases. Ryan's dad was the driving force for the law. Google Ryan's name and you can read his tragic story on-line. His dad travels to schools talking to students and teachers about the events that led to his son's suicide. I know for a fact, that he has been in schools in Massachusetts. It would behoove you to refer to Vermont's law in your reports.
  • Tameka: bullies are a group of cowards .like a scary dog that barks real loud, but when u stomp at them they run behind master. i suggest standing up to them. best to catch that person alone, and talk to them. if anyone noticed that a bully mostly run in a pack, not alone.
  • Joe: In your coverage of the teen who [hanged] herself over bullying, you hold the school administration responsible for what a group of teenagers did. Where and when do you hold the parents of these teens responsible? If a parent, who has only 2 or 3 children in their home, cannot prevent their child from bullying, how is a school teacher, with up to 100 students, or a principal, with up to 2000, supposed to keep track of what is going on? No wonder our students are not achieving well on tests if we expect schools to do it all. Parents should parent, schools should teach.

Who should be held accountable in bullying cases? What suggestions would you have to address this issue?

Filed under: We Listen
« older posts