Why do you think our government isn't asking us to make any sacrifices?
Politicians in my lifetime have become just the ultimate panderers. They don't believe, I think, that in this country the citizens would accept it. Jimmy Carter asked us to put on a sweater and we almost lynched him. Somewhere along the way it became very un-American to ask for sacrifice.
The other reason is special interests. Our government is so beholden to the oil industry it's not going to be out front telling us to curtail our dependence on oil. To blame it on drug users -- the fact that they run those ads saying drug use supports terrorism and the media doesn't leap on that -- shows how much they're asleep at the switch, too. What a huge lie that is. Let's blame it on the smokers next.
You say that the war on terrorism isn't going well on the domestic front. What are your specific criticisms? Some would argue that there's been some success, at least, in that we haven't sustained another attack.
Ay-yay-yay. Did you read the Hart-Rudman report? The recent one, not the first one. The first one back in January 2001, predicting a major attack on our country, we all ignored, we were all asleep then, fine, but this one was in the newspaper on Oct. 26, 2002. It basically said that they were predicting a catastrophic terrorist attack, that one was virtually certain to occur. They accused Washington of only taking symbolic actions, they accused the nation of becoming complacent about terrorism. They said that we're almost as vulnerable today -- in our seaports, railways, airports. Gary Hart said he felt outraged. The report is called "America: Still Unprepared and Still in Danger." And it wasn't just Hart and Rudman on this commission, it was two former secretaries of state and two defense secretaries and others like that. It's a serious report.
But you'd be hard pressed to find people in the media who are aware of it. I mean, I could see this sort of thing happening with the first one -- but the second one? But of course you're all writing the big "Bush at war" stories, so it all gets swept under the rug.
Speaking of which, do you have any reaction to recent questions about our alliance with the Saudis?
I just wonder at what point the administration will stop stonewalling. I heard Ari Fleischer just saying today, "We think the Saudis are a very good ally." Yeah, right -- and drugs fund terrorism. The war just made these guys bigger liars than they were before. Drugs don't fund terrorism, SUVs fund terrorism. Where does bin Laden get his money? Like everybody -- from his family. His brethren. Not from Swedish people or drug dealers. But from places like Saudi Arabia, especially Saudi Arabia.
In 1998, you told Mother Jones that "Clinton was the right president because he's full of shit and we're full of shit. We claim we want one thing but we really don't. Or we claim we want two things that are diametrically opposed, like cutting taxes and saving entitlements. Short of a war, I don't know how it will be remedied. I don't think it will be." Well, we're in a war now. Any hope for America?
In the book, one of the posters shows the Pentagon being hit and it says, "What has to happen?" In the essay, I write, I think we need to change the old saying that we need a building to fall on us, because two did and we still don't get it. People were willing to change for those first few months, but the government never asked. I've been saying for the past year 9/11 changed nothing. I don't think it did. People went back to the way we were. The questions "Why do they hate us?" and "What can we do?" went away. We're back to exactly what we were and we say that therefore they didn't win! That's faux patriotism.
Did you vote last November?
Nope. I'm not a big champion of voting. I think too many people vote. I'm starting to think what we need to shake up the system is to have really low turnout. I don't think it's low enough.
Are there any politicians you like?
I like John McCain. Colin Powell. I love Barney Frank -- not, y'know, let's not even go there. But I think he's the smartest guy in Congress. Lots of people we had on our show. I like Arlen Specter. I like Representative Jack Kingston. I like Rumsfeld. Oh, I love him -- he's completely politically incorrect. He's always like, "No, I don't think they have the bomb, but yeah, they might" -- he just doesn't give a fuck, this guy.
So would you have voted for McCain if he had gotten the nomination? I know you voted for Ralph Nader for president.
It was kind of a protest vote, which I do not regret in the least. But McCain? Sure, if -- and it's a big if -- if he didn't move away from his early positions, which sometimes happens when you get on a ticket, and he is a politician, after all. So I don't know. We'd see what would happen if Mr. McCain found himself in such a position, would he stick to what he believes. That's the reason the Democrats lost so badly last November, they don't stand for anything, and when they do they get demonized and they run away from it. Their opponents run attack ads calling them "too liberal." And they go, "OK, then, I won't be liberal."
It's not like they don't have ideas. I mean, Al Gore had ideas -- he's an idea man. He had an idea in his book, to phase out the internal combustion engine in 25 years. That's a real idea, and by the way, it's a great idea. But does he defend it? No. So screw him. I don't blame people for voting for the Republicans last time. If I was a swing voter and I had a choice between a real Republican and a fake Republican I'd vote for the real one, too.
You know, when Bush accepted the nomination, in his acceptance speech, which was brilliantly written, he said, "They haven't led. We will." I didn't think it was true at the time, about the Clinton administration, but to me that was a prophecy. Since he got into office, especially since the war, he's been right about the Democrats -- they haven't led.
Next page: The problem with Jay Leno, the virtues of Hugh Hefner