Editor's Note: American Morning’s Wednesday audience strongly opposed Senator McCain’s remarks about the Iranian election, equating it to “asking the loser in the Super Bowl how to play a winning football game,” and calling him a hypocrite: [His] “newfound concern for the human rights of Iranians is laughably absurd – those are the very same humans he joked about Bomb-Bomb-Bombing, remember?”

• Monica: Senator McCain's newfound concern for the human rights of Iranians is laughably absurd – those are the very same humans he joked about Bomb-Bomb-Bombing, remember? CNN could have easily run that tape, and revealed the Senator as the opportunistic hypocrite he is.
• Omid: I think McCain's position on making statements on Iran showing "unequivocal support" for the protesters is proof of the monumental disaster his presidency would be. His blind devotion to making waves with the Iranian government will only cause more deaths and create more pain for the Iranians in the street who are fighting for their own country. Iranians want freedom – freedom from inside influence AND outside influence. It was international intervention, particularly American and British intervention, that swept the Islamic Revolution into power, and we can NOT afford to make that mistake again.
• Ralph: I disagree with Mr. McCain. We should mind our own business for now in Iran. His assertion that voting rights is a basic human right is wrong. Democracies don't work everywhere. When you have ethnic and religious fanaticism as the norm, democracies can't work. Besides, if people cared what McCain thought, they would have elected him.
• Joe: Asking John McCain how to handle the Iranian election situation is like asking the loser in the Super Bowl how to play a winning football game. McCain represents the worst of US arrogance and interference in the politics of sovereign nations. We had no right to invade Iraq and we have no right to meddle in Iran’s elections. president Obama is smart enough to know that, McCain is not. Please spare us the semi-coherent ramblings of a bitter, defeated old man.

How do you feel about Senator McCain’s comments regarding the Iranian election? Is he a “hypocrite” as one viewer suggests, or does he provide a deeper insight than has previously been addressed?

FULL POST

Editor's note: Tuesday’s American Morning audience remained divided regarding the Palin-Letterman ‘joke’ story, as Letterman apologized to the governor. Some felt his joke was in very poor taste and that he had a long history of such; others saw this as an opportunity for Governor Palin to use her family as a public relations tool.

• Ginger: Whether you are a liberal or a conservative women should not be subject to derogatory remarks. I am glad David Letterman apologized and even happier that the national organization for women came out to protest. All women no matter their party affiliation, race or religion must stand together and protest derogatory comments made towards any woman. It must stop for women to meet their full potentials. Otherwise we will never see a woman breaking that glass ceiling.
• Anonymous: I was raped at 5 years old, my sister was date-raped at 22, and my niece was date-raped AT 20. i applaud CNN for reporting the insensitive and crude jokes of David Letterman. I have enjoyed watching his show for many years, but will not again.
• Barbara: I just wish you would bring Letterman's long history of overt Bias that may have caused this flap to be the 'straw that broke the camel’s back '! When Hillary C. was running for NY senator, he covertly gave her the difficult statistic / facts questions in advance to make her look 'smart and knowledgeable ' about the state. It was discovered, but the parties shrugged it off, and, that thanks to 'news people' with the same bias, the unfairness never surfaced !! I think we all know, there is NO 'SORRY' on Letterman's part except he is starting to sweat the backlash against him !!! And the complaints to his sponsors !!
• Andre: Palin scores a victory over letterman. That is another three weeks of news attention for the dope.
• Al: Letterman – Palin. Don't you get it? Nobody cares.... This is just a gimmick to get Palin more media coverage.

What do you think of David Letterman’s apology to Governor Palin? Do you believe that he, as a comedian, needed to apologize for the joke, or was the governor using this as an opportunity to gain public attention? Comment here or follow the story at this link.

Editor's Note: Monday’s American Morning debate on heath care captivated the audience, especially guest Ron Paul.  Viewers expressed deep concern about Rep. Paul’s contention that socialized medicine was a questionable choice for Americans.  Many felt he was attacking such a system in favor of insurance and big pharmaceutical companies.

• Richard:  American companies are being put at a world wide disadvantage by the healthcare costs they have to carry.  Wouldn't a Medicare style plan shift the burden from our companies thereby making them more competitive and improving our economy and our trade deficit.
• Sandy:  Let's take healthcare reform really seriously.  Let's have the U.S. legislators have the same social security and medical coverage as everyone else.  How can they hold themselves above the rest of us while discussing such far reaching topics.  How can they be our "voice" and deem themselves qualified to provide for us one coverage while having such a deluxe package of benefits for themselves.  It doesn't ring sincere.
• Toronto Heart Attack Sufferer:  I'm tired of hearing U.S. lobby groups talk about the Canadian Healthcare System being broken, as you discuss the move to a government run National Healthcare System.  3 weeks ago I suffered a heart attack, and was seen in the emergency room almost immediately upon my arrival (I walked in under my own steam), had my blood tested, was seen by an array of various specialists, given medication and an angiogram (no damage thank god!) - all in less than 12 hours from the moment of my first arrival. I had my own room and a dedicated nurse round the clock - all at NO cost!!  I've never had to be in the Canadian Health System, as I've been healthy up to now, but I've never been more impressed.  Socialized medicine is not broken, except in the opinion of greedy U.S. (and some Canadian) doctors, and private healthcare insurance providers, who stand to lose their ability to bilk the public

FULL POST

American Morning’s Friday audience was predominantly concerned about the future of healthcare in the U.S., in response to John Roberts’ interview with Senator Tom Coburn. Senator Coburn’s remarks were not favorably received, as most found him to be completely unclear.

• P: i just saw john roberts interview sen. coburn on health care. Did even john understand the man's answers? i didn't and i have a PhD in biochemistry.
• John: The Republican Senator you interviewed this morning said that Medicare Administrative costs are 21%. A study in 2006 by Milliman, the actuarial firm, concluded that Medicare administrative cost are 5.2%. He needs to get his facts straight!
• Ernest: If you are going to present a critique of a "Public Health Care Component "to Universal Health Care, do you think you could have the integrity to present both sides? The "Lewin Group" which you "suggest" as an independent evaluator is owned, in totality by the "United Health Group. This "Group" owns United Health Care, Prescription Solutions, AmeriChoice,, Optum Health and other PRIVATE, for profit, health care offerings. Now, I wonder what conclusion the will come to? Do you inform the public that they are NOT an impartial arbitor? No. Then, you have the nerve to present Tom Coburn as a spokesperson, with no one to counterbalance his positions. He, a conservative senator and MD who is pro-life and threatened to block the 100 year commemoration of Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring" as "junk science". He is certainly not the "expert" that I want to listen to about public health care. Of course, you can invite him, but how about having someone like Howard Dean on at the same time? Are you, CNN, joining the greedy insurance companies to bring down universal health care coverage in the US once more? Where is your concern for the forty million plus citizens who have no health care or provisions to pay for medication? Where is your concern for the countless others who are going broke trying to pay their exorbitant premiums? Finally, if I hear one more journalist talk about the poor health care companies that may go out of business, I will send you all Kleenex. Make up your mind whether you believe in Darwinian capitalism or not. Do the CEO's of health care companies and HMO's need to make millions per year? A public component will keep whichever for-profit providers that survive, HONEST. I respectfully ask you for HONEST reporting.
• Dorothy: I am an RN/Family Nurse Practitioner (retired) and I was very interested in John Roberts' interview of the Senator who opposes including a public option in a health care reform plan. I would like to see additional information on this as much of the information presented by the Senator contradicts information from other sources. The figures presented by the Senator on the percentage of costs which are administrative in private health care plans (22%) are much lower than any I have ever heard. Also, he stated that Medicare costs are higher which is also something refuted by every source I have ever seen. Please present further information on this topic so that the American people can have appropriate information on which to base their decisions. Thank you for your attention.

What did you think of Senator Tom Coburn’s comments about President Obama’s health care plan? Do you believe that the “profit” motive should be completely removed from health care? How do you feel about insurance companies’ involvement in the process of determining health care legislation?

FULL POST

The bulk of the American Morning response revolved around the Holocaust Museum shooting and hate speech. Most believed the museum shooter received far too much coverage, while a minority felt that such exposure would prevent future hate groups from hiding on the Internet. Banishing “hate speech” was considered to be the solution for preventing further violence, while others voiced concern over “thought crime” legislation leading to a more “Orwellian” society.

• Dan: Like Blitzer yesterday, Roberts is asking what can be done about the haters and the violent extremists. Cohen gave you the answer....expose them, shine a light on them. These people are well known by groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center. Their bile is all over the Internet. It's the job of the media to expose these homegrown terrorists to the general public. You may not stop all their vile acts, but it's the best, and most necessary start. Get on it! And maybe we can stop the next attack.
• Jared: If there is one certain truth in world politics, I believe that one thing to be that true, real democracy is expensive. From time to time there have been occasional tragedies in our history as a nation, and my heart goes out the family of the officer killed, but it will not help democracy to invoke "thought crime" legislation; that is the stuff of George Orwell.
• Steve: RE: Hate Crimes. When I see these many hate crimes against Blacks, Hispanics, Gays, Jews, etc. I can't help remember the line from "America The Beautiful" – "And crown thy good with brotherhood from sea to shining sea". Unfortunately that's a bunch of hooey!
• Bernadette: Jim Acosta, Lit the fuse, not! The fuse has been at a low burn for years just awaiting the right opportunity to strike and explode!
• Darryl-pa: What about that hate group called librals and the way that the Palins are treated.

Will exposure for such hate crimes as the killing of Dr. Tiller and the shooting of the guard at the Holocaust Museum help to deter such hate crimes in the future, or will they incite others to follow in the hopes of gaining exposure for their personal causes? Is there an appropriate way for the U.S. to regulate “hate” speech without infringing on our First Amendment Rights to freely express our thoughts? How would you solve this dilemma?

American Morning’s Wednesday audience was horrified to see the alleged killer of Dr. Tiller being given prominent coverage for his views.

• Gabe: Why is the media bothering to pay attention to Dr. Tiller's killer? He is only a murderous, unrepentant fanatic, a man who thinks he's God. To shower him attention is to fan his self-importance and troubled views. It also comes as a moral slap to the memory of the man he killed in a temple of God. Why don't you try interviewing some of the women whose health and even life Tiller may have saved? In highlighting this murderer you are only pandering to pro-life views. Get your priorities straight. PS. I'm against abortion as such but support it when necessary.
• Carla: You really need to quit glorifying the terrorist Roeder and his terrorist agenda. Why don't you instead do some research and reporting on why women seek abortions, and/or why our society puts such shame and scorn on unwed mothers. I'm really sickened by seeing and hearing this deranged zealot murderer. The Christian Fundamentalist Terrorist Organization is alive, well, murdering, and still planning in America. Beware!
• Paul: I don't know about you're sentiment, but, as far as I'm concerned, life under those tali-baptist religious fanatics that killed Doctor Tiller would likely be no better than life under the murderous tali-ban. Damn all fanatics!!

What do you think about Dr. Tiller’s alleged murderer being given media attention? Would such an action trigger “copy-cat” murders? Should the alleged killer be considered a “terrorist” as suggested by one viewer? Should he be given the right to voice his opinion or should others who are official “spokespersons” be the ones to express themselves?

FULL POST