[ BACK ]
Transcript from the Stephanie
- first hour
Host: Talk Radio 102.3 Birmingham is the show. Stephanie Birmingham. And
welcome to you. 1:00 to 3:00 Monday through Friday we talk about
whatever is on my mind. And the minds of my guests and I do have some
guests today. We're going to get to that. And to everybody who's watched
the whole show today has known about President Clinton and yes, I'm
anxiously awaiting the results of his testimony. It's supposed to get
started any minute now -- well, it's 1:08; he was supposed to testify at
1:00. So it's probably getting underway right now. There have been so
many things [inaudible] that I am past speculation. And you know with
this Clinton thing, I, for the longest time, really, really got upset at
everybody's apathy about it. And I'm really not apathetic about it. I'm
really starting to understand it. It has gone on so, so, so far too
long. Hopefully today is gonna be the beginning of the close of it,
either way, although I doubt it. I'm not even going to speculate, not
even going to do it. I didn't think he was going to testify, so
there. I said I'd eat crow if I was wrong; apparently I'm wrong. No word
yet that he's testified, but apparently he's going to, so I'll just
chalk one up for my being wrong there. See? I am wrong every now and
then. I can admit it when I'm wrong. So apparently he's gonna testify.
In USA Today we have comments from everybody from Anita Hill to
DeeDee Myers. Patricia Ireland, President of NOW, Senator Orrin Hatch,
special counsel Lanny Davis also has made some comments. And everybody's
got their idea of what he should do, what he might do, when they think
he's gonna do, what Americans are gonna do. And it's all "word weave" --
if he says this, but he doesn't say this, but he doesn't cut this too
thin, but he gets over to here, and says he's sorry for this, but
doesn't say this and he didn't technically lie -- tell the truth. That's
all there is to it. Answer all the questions completely and truthfully
and maybe we can get this behind us and go on about the business of the
country, taking care of the country. That's what I'm hoping is going to
happen today We'll have further updates on that a little later on.
267-1023, 1888-779 TALK. That's how you get in touch with us.
(Host: spoken advertisement)
Host: Before we get to the guests, I'll talk to you. How're you doing?
Caller 1: You know, we're not gonna talk about it. But you know what? I
was telling my daughter, I'm tensely waiting. And I think --- this is a
Host: It is.
Caller 1: And I'm thinking, his wife has been ---- strategy --- well at
1:00 he will come on and tell us a miracle. You know what? It is time to
Host: I agree, it has been time to pray.
Caller 1: Thank you.
Host: I appreciate your call. Can't disagree with that. I have a couple
of guests today, as a matter of fact. You ever heard of the Rightgrrls?
Rightgrrls, kind of a growly g-r-r-l-s. I don't know if that's the
reason they did that or not, I'm gonna ask them in a minute. But the
founders of Rightgrrl, Carolyn Gargaro, Stephanie Herman, you with me?
Host: How're you doing?
Carolyn: We're doing good.
Host: Stephanie, is that you?
Stephanie: That was Carolyn.
Host: OK, Carolyn, you on there, too?
Carolyn: Right here.
Host: Good, got everybody in here. Appreciate you guys being here today.
Rightgrrls, R-i-g-h-t-g-r-r-l is that a growl?
Carolyn: A little bit, yeah. It's grrls, grrls is spelled g-r-r-l-s --
Host: A growly grrl?
Carolyn: -- that's an independent, opinionated woman. That's why we used
Host: OK, well I like it. Tell me what Rightgrrl is. I was directed to
your website by a friend of mine who was a featured Rightgrrl on your
website, Patty Neill. She's been on the show before; she talked about
trafficking number for all public officials. All public officials get
this federal ID that's supposed to be a great idea. So she wrote about
it, had some super response to it. She was on here. So tell me about
Rightgrrl. What got you started?
Stephanie: Well, Carolyn and I met up on the internet about two years
ago and were happy to discover that we shared opinions on just about
everything, mainly conservative politics and the pro-life issue, and we
wanted to create a site together that wasn't just going to be a personal
conservative homepage, but that might draw in other conservative women
who are pro-life. Before we met each other, it seemed to me, anyway, and
I'll let Carolyn speak on this too, that I just felt like I was sort of
living in a vacuum. And I didn't know any, many other conservative,
young, pro-life women. And so we just figured together that maybe we
could draw some of those younger, c, pro-life women together if there
was a site that could do that. So that's why we started Rightgrrl.
Host: And you put together the website.
Host: And you and Carolyn are in two different states.
Stephanie: That's right.
Host: So when you put together the website, do you have meetings,
Carolyn: Well, we discuss things online. We don't have regular meetings
of any sort. Stephanie and I just email each other on a regular basis.
In fact, the first time I ever spoke to her on the phone was just maybe
a month or two ago that I finally actually talked to her on the phone.
We had set all of this up through just email, regular email contact.
Stephanie: And we are together today, and this weekend is the first time
that we've met face to face.
Host: How interesting. How long has the website been going on?
Carolyn: It started, I guess we actually just put the very basic site up
in March of 1997. We didn't really get it going until April, so we
consider April the first actual full month of Rightgrrl. So it's been a
little over a year, it's been going on.
Host: OK. I do have some more questions, a couple of phone calls are
pending. So, hello there.
Caller 2: I found a website that says Miss Gargaro is running for
president. Is that Carolyn?
Carolyn: OK, yes that site was set up by a very good friend of mine.
He's a friend of mine online and he likes what Stephanie and I are doing
on the internet for conservative issues. And he made that -- I'm not
really running. It's sort of like a fun site, it's like a joke in a way.
But people say, Oh I wish you could be president. But I'm not really
Stephanie: He did that as a surprise. He didn't tell Carolyn he was
going to do that. She just sort of discovered it one day. It was a big
Host: Discovered for herself that she was running for president. But
she's not really?
Caller 2: I'd vote for her.
Host: Yeah, I'd vote for her, too. I like that, thanks for calling.
Appreciate it. So the Rightgrrls, conservative girls, pro-life. A lot of
people would say that's one and the same; I would say it's probably not.
But you do make a distinction.
Stephanie: Yeah, it's really not one and the same. When you're talking
about people being on the left or the right you're generally talking
about broader political issues than abortion. You're talking about the
spectrum between socialism and individualism, is what it really boils
down to. There are many arguments from a socialist perspective; the
pro-life argument fits right in there. It's also very possible to be a
strong individualist and to be on both sides of this issue. Certain
libertarian pro-choice people would argue that a true individualist
would be overly concerned about the rights of the mother, and if you
bring the federal government in on abortion that you are trampling those
individual rights. Whereas an individualist pro-life person would say,
Well, it's perfectly possible to be staunchly individualist if you
consider the fetus an individual.
Host: Yeah, I agree with you. And I hear that all the time. People ask
me, people call into the show and say, You believe in freedom for
everybody. Everybody makes their own decisions; everybody has
responsibility for themselves, yet you would have the government
interfere on abortion. I think they think they trap me with that
question but my answer would be what yours is, your obvious answer and a
very easy answer , and that is: yes, a woman has a right to do what she
wants to do with her body. There are some things that are prohibited by
law for her to do with her body, but frankly, if she wants to do
whatever in the privacy of her own home, violating no one, in my opinion
that's her business. But abortion is not her body. Medically, it's not
Stephanie: So we do make that distinction because abortion just fails as
a litmus test for either side of the political aisle. So we do make the
distinction on our site that we are conservative and pro-life.
Host: I was talking to some feminists the other day and a lot of times
you'll hear "feminist" and you assume that means "on the left,"
Democrat. They all seem to flow together, right or wrong. But there are
several organizations, one of them is Feminists for Life, pro-life
feminist organization and they certainly don't call themselves
Carolyn: No, they come from a point of view that often isn't expressed.
And that is that abortion is not pro-woman. They see it as an
infringement of the rights of unborn women and also that it hurts women
in society, born women. In fact, Feminists for Life was started
by some women who were basically ostracized from the National
Organization for Women for their pro-life views. And they are very
pro-woman and they are very much for women's rights and for women's
freedom and for women to be able to do what they want to do. However,
they believe, as we do, that women's rights and women being empowered
does not mean you have to infringe on the rights of an unborn child. So
they often will show the harm that abortion has done to some women, why
it's not a good thing, why a lot of women are pressured into having
abortions, and how that is not a pro-woman thing to do. And they also
cite more options for women and hopefully eliminate the need for
abortion sometimes so it's not even an issue.
Host: I've always thought of the "left," if you want to call it that,
the liberals as some people refer to them, as being the group who is,
quote-unquote, the tolerant people. Who could tolerate everything and
everybody and everything's OK. As long as you agree with them, they'll
tolerate you. But you just said that they were ostracized from the
National Organization for Women because of their stance on abortion?
Carolyn: Yes, those women were and that's what got them interested in
starting Feminists for Life. I have been told that I cannot be a
feminist because I am pro-life. They say that is an oxymoron; you can't
be a feminist and be pro-life.
Host: This came up on the show Friday, this very thing came up on the
show Friday, when I talked about a girlfriend of mine who was in a
women's studies class. And she'll call herself a conservative, but she
wants to be a feminist and she'd ask her professor, and her professor
told her (and I'm sure this is not how every person who calls themself a
"feminist" believes) but her professor told her that unless she
supported abortion and bisexuality that she could not be a feminist.
Another feminist called in and said, Not so. Not all feminists feel that
way, and I'm sure they don't.
Carolyn: That's really narrowing down the definition of feminism.
Feminism really has a very broad definition and people have different
definitions for it. And to make it such a specific group of people
really narrows the number of women who are feminists. It's really
strange -- they want women to be empowered, all women to be
empowered, and all women to have equality, yet they define feminism
(some people, not all people) define it in such narrow terms that it
can't include a good portion of women.
Stephanie: And Carolyn is a pro-life feminist and she makes that claim
on the site. But I do not claim to be a feminist.
Host: I want to talk about that. That was a question I wanted to ask you
right after the break. Hold that thought -- coming right back to you. ~~
Carolyn Gargaro, Stephanie Herman, the Rightgrrls our guests today on
Birmingham the Show. Good afternoon to you; thanks for listening.
Host: Talk Radio 102.3 Stephanie Birmingham; the show is Birmingham ~~
My guests joining me via telephone way up north are Stephanie Herman and
Carolyn Gargaro. They are the Rightgrrls. You know the Rightgrrls?
That's what we're talking about now. Rightgrrl is a website that is by
and for conservative women. Now we were talking about feminism; I want
to get into that right after I take this phone call; we've got a couple
questions for y'all. Hello caller.
Caller 3: Yes, ladies. I have a comment about abortion. One thing that
irks me -- I'm against it. And I'm in conversations with people that
were for it. They said, Well, you know, it can't live outside, it's not
viable. But to me, OK, it is growing; is that not correct?
Host: Yes, constantly.
Caller 3: Constantly. And in my definition, if something's growing, is
it alive or dead?
Host: Well, it's certainly alive and by my definition, or, the question
I always ask is, Are you stopping a life? And the answer is always Yes.
You can't get away from the fact that you are stopping a life.
Caller 3: That's true. And another thing I always like to ask them,
which they don't have too much to say, is they're always talking about
"pro-choice." Well, the one that has the most to lose has no choice.
Host: True. Absolutely true.
Caller 3: I just wanted to bring up those couple items, if I may, to
y'all... those things I like to use to people who say it's a woman's
right to do what she wants to with her body...
Host: Yes, I agree that it is. But not with the body that is not her
Caller 3: I appreciate it.
Host: Thank you for the call; I appreciate you. Carolyn, Stephanie, I'm
sure you get these questions all the time, all the time. So my question
is, we can go with the abortion issue again or I could just ask you the
question, How often do you really change somebody's mind on abortion?
I've had a hard time doing it. Usually it's a difficult thing to sway
Carolyn: I don't know if I've actually changed anybody's mind. I never
expect to change someone who is staunchly pro-choice; I never expect to
change their mind. I seek to educate people who have not defined it
strongly either way. There are times when people have said that I've
influenced their opinion on it a great deal. I don't think I've ever
changed anybody's mind who wasn't already leaning towards one way,
towards the pro-life viewpoint a little bit. What we have been able to
do is educate some people on some issues and also many people who are
uncomfortable to speak out about their views on it, because if they say
they find our site they feel like I'm not the only person. Sometimes you
feel like the only one with your views.
Host: Oh, yes.
Stephanie: But I do think that we have that hope. That, one of the focus
areas of Rightgrrl is that we want to make some arguments against
abortion that aren't made everyday. Most of the arguments against it are
based on Biblical reasoning, and there's nothing wrong with that, but
that's the only argument that ever gets any press.
Host: What's an argument that you would make that's off the course, off
the usual course?
Host: Like what would be an example?
Stephanie: Oh, well actually what we hope to do in the future is look
into the legality behind Roe v. Wade where there's a lot of questionable
law that occurred.
Host: It seems to me that there's a lot of questionable law regarding
Carolyn: Yes, in fact, Roe v. Wade technically is unconstitutional
because it really took away -- it gave power to the federal government
that should not be given to the federal government, should be at least
given to the states. And the whole premise for Roe v. Wade was based on
the implied right to privacy in the constitution. And there is no such
right to privacy in the constitution. They just, kind of made it up,
Host: Very interesting. I asked you a minute ago, we were talking about
feminism, and you said, Carolyn you said you are a feminist, a pro-life
Host: So tell me why you are a feminist, and Stephanie I want to know
why you're not a feminist.
Carolyn: OK, I call myself a feminist because I am very much for human
equality. I'm very much for women being able to have the same
opportunities as men. And if they can do the job as well as a man, they
should have that opportunity. I'm not saying women have to work; if they
feel that they want to stay home and take care of children, that is
great. But women, if they want to work, should have that opportunity,
and we do. But I'm also very much for women being strong and being
opinionated and being independent. And not always relying on somebody
else. So I call myself a feminist because I don't know how else to
define that type of view. So that's how I refer to myself.
Host: So do you get a lot of questions about being a conservative and
calling yourself a feminist also?
Carolyn: Yes, I get people saying, How can you call yourself a feminist
if you're not pro-choice or you're not liberal? And I have other people
saying, It's really nice to see a feminist that doesn't fit the
stereotype. And other people say, Well you're not really a feminist;
you're just a strong-willed woman and that you shouldn't call yourself a
feminist because "feminist" is defined as liberal and pro-choice. Like I
said, I use the term feminist because I don't know how else to describe
that point of view, really.
Host: I can see it would be a little bit confusing because it does have
a stereotype, an imagined stereotype. Well, a real or imagined
stereotype of certainly those who fit, and certainly those like
yourself, who don't fit. The way I see it, if you want to call yourself
a feminist, you can. I think it means probably whatever it means to you.
Carolyn: A lot of people are just defining feminism in different ways.
So there is no strict definition for a feminist.
Host: And Stephanie says she's not a feminist.
Stephanie: Yeah, and I think the difference between Carolyn and I boils
down really to a technicality. I agree with Carolyn as far as how I view
women's rights. I also believe that they should have every opportunity
that a man should have. But I call that common sense; I don't think that
that position needs an -ism moniker.
Host: Well, that makes sense to me. That makes sense to me. So the
website works anyway. There doesn't seem to be a lot of challenge
between you two. It's worked anyway; it's done a good job. You've had
some really neat featured Rightgrrls on there. You have a really neat
one coming up in September, too, don't you?
Stephanie: Sure do.
Host: Yeah, that would be me.
Carolyn: Yes, you are one of our featured Rightgrrls coming up.
Host: Yeah, that's neat; I appreciate that. I want to give the website
several times so everybody can know where to find you, so do you want to
do that, the URL?
Carolyn: The URL is www.rightgrrl.com, spelled R-I-G-H-T-G-R-R-L.
Host: OK. Rightgrrl.com. And that's got several different links to it.
It's got many essays that have been written by women. It's got links to
places you wouldn't expect to see links. You really do need to check it
out for yourself; it's a very interesting website. And, I guess I said
we weren't gonna talk the whole show about Clinton/Lewinsky, but it's
almost inevitable to bring it up. I'm sure that it's been the topic of
conversation on the website and other people who frequent your website,
so what's going on with you guys about Clinton and Lewinsky? What kind
of questions are you getting?
Carolyn: We haven't had a whole lot of people asking us too many
questions about it. Mostly what we find is disbelief, really. If you
want to look at it from a "feminist" point of view, yesterday I heard
Patricia Ireland say on TV, somebody asked her, If it comes out that he
did lie, that Clinton lied about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky,
how would you view that? And she said, Well, it's almost a given -- she
said something to the effect that, It's almost a given that men will
cheat and that -- it's a private matter between him and his wife and we
really shouldn't look into it.
Host: So, again, we're reducing the whole issue to sex.
Carolyn: Right, and that's not the issue. The issue is, Did he commit
perjury? There's no new law that says it's OK to lie under oath if it's
about sex. There's no new law that says it's OK to obstruct justice if
it's about sex. And they want to make it some new law that, well, if you
lie about sex, it's understandable. And we're not just talking about
lying about sex. We're talking about lying about sex under oath. There's
a big difference.
Host: Once again, I'll say what I've said a million times. Next time
you're in court for any reason, why don't you tell the judge it's none
of his business.
Host: Just give it a shot and see what happens. Yeah, Patricia Ireland
in USA Today, "Last Minute Advice" is the title of the little article.
And she said it may be inappropriate, "but after four years and all of
this money, they've got nothing on the Clinton's and Whitewater,"
evading the issue.
Carolyn: And that's not true. They've made 15 indictments in Whitewater.
Host: Yeah, "Whitewater, Filegate, Travelgate -- the best that Starr
apparently has is consensual sex. Consensual sex with a 21-year-old may
be inappropriate, OK, but is certainly not impeachable. And I think if
Congress is going to take any action, the only people who should be
allowed to vote are the ones who never lied about their sex life." And
this is supposedly an intelligent woman, who is the head of the National
Organization for Women, who's gonna come out with something like this.
Carolyn: She doesn't even address the issue.
Host: Of course not.
Carolyn: What about the issue of obstructing justice? What about -- if
it is proven -- if he lied in the Paula Jones deposition, what about
Paula Jones' right to a fair trail? Was it fair for him to try and not
have her get a fair trial by lying in a deposition?
Host: Well, Paula Jones' suit was dismissed by Judge Susan Webber Wright
who was, incidentally, a student of Clinton's. Would it have been
dismissed if all this had come out? Does this change everything in the
Paula Jones suit?
Stephanie: It's beginning to look that way, but of course, we don't know
for sure. But what a lot of the people engaged in spin are trying to say
about that is that, the fact that the Paula Jones case was dismissed
somehow negates what Clinton did in his deposition on that case. As if
it negates his perjury and his attempt to obstruct justice. It doesn't
negate it; it substantiates it.
Host: Yes, and I think a lot of people are actually, believe it or not,
starting to think for themselves on this. Prime example: the media. The
big media. When this first came out, you know, like they do with
anything else, in my opinion, that goes against the liberal stream, you
push it to the side and use even inflection in their voice, use certain
words to discredit whatever has -- would go on that would try to
discredit the president. And it's happened many, many times; they're not
doing that anymore. They're not doing it at all anymore. It's almost a
given -- listen to ABC, listen to any news -- it's almost a given that
we accept now, regardless of what we said or he said, that the president
had some form of sexual relations with Lewinsky. And they're not even
buying into the old technically...
Stephanie: ... there are certain cues that you can take watching this
whole scenario unfold. For one thing, Clinton has not said much past his
initial denial back in January and people like Rush and other
conservatives have called upon Clinton to come out and really give us
the story. If Clinton or his advisors were really thinking, they would
have come out and said, Hey, how can we prove a negative? I can't prove
that I didn't do these things. But by saying that, they would
then be placing the burden of proof on Ken Starr. They would say, I
can't prove I didn't do it; you prove I did do it. Why haven't they done
that? Well, the most obvious assumption to make is that there probably
is evidence out there that Ken Starr could use to prove it, and
so they have just lied very, very low.
Host: Well, and that is what we've seen happen. And I don't think it's
rushing to judgment. I think that it is perhaps trying to rush to
justice. Bob Starr [sic], who's been the one who's been weighted down
with the 40 million dollar price tag and that it's been his fault, but I
haven't seen Bob Starr [sic] as the one dragging his feet. I haven't
seen Bob Starr as the one doing all the spins and all the, We've gotta
wait, and the, We've gotta hold on, and eleventh-hour stabs at trying to
get somebody to please stop this. And we're finally here today. And
again, I'm not gonna speculate. Really I can't, I have no clue at this
point what's gonna happen, but I'm very interested to find out.
267-1023. Hello, caller.
Caller 4: Hello, Stephanie.
Host: Hi there.
Caller 4: How are you today?
Host: I'm fine, thank you, ma'am.
Caller 4: You were talking about Clinton and the media, and this morning
-- it was so funny -- they were talking on the news: Yeah, President
Clinton's going to go in front of the Grand Jury today. He's not even
going to go into a courtroom.
Caller 4: He's going into the Map Room. And it's like, they're making it
out like it's some big trial and it's not. It's a joke. He's like linked
up to this satellite to the jurors, and there was something [inaudible]
that if they had a question about one of the answers or something, they
could call the judge. What kind of jury is that? What kind of court is
that? It's a joke!
Host: Yeah, yeah.
Caller 4: I mean, wouldn't it be nice to sit in your living room and
like, via satellite, talk about --
Host: And pick and choose whichever questions you want to answer. I said
I wouldn't speculate, but I lied. I changed my mind. I didn't lie; I
changed my mind. I really think that what's gonna happen is, instead of
getting answers, it's gonna be a lot of, I don't recall or, I'm not
gonna answer that, and it's just gonna be prolonged. That would be, if I
had to speculate, that's what I would say is gonna happen today.
Caller 4: Exactly. And if he's telling the truth, and this is my
[inaudible], if he were going in there to tell the truth, why would he
have to rehearse with his attorney? Wouldn't he just go in there and
say, I did it, or I didn't do it. Reduce the phrase that he did or he
didn't and have it over with. Why is he reading with his attorney and
going over all the things he's gonna say?
Host: I think that it's because of the way that he is known to answer,
and answer leaving himself a technical out. But for some reason the
American people buy it. No, I take that back. I don't believe they do
buy it. I believe they don't buy it and act like they do, which is so
much worse. But he always leaves himself a technical out, a technicality
in the answers. But I think that the questions by Ken Starr are going to
have to be so specific and so graphic that what's gonna happen -- well,
I'm sure that they're gonna be called inappropriate questions. But I
think that Ken Starr has no choice, at this point in time, to ask, quote
unquote, inappropriate questions. I certainly don't think they are
inappropriate, but they're -- I imagine they'll be called that. A
none-of-your-business type thing is gonna go on today because they are
-- the papers and the media has made hints about, He may choose not to
answer some questions that are very personal in nature. They're gonna
have to get very, very personal, very direct, very graphic in order to
find the truth. Or else it's gonna be another one of these, I did not
have sexual relations... well, what I meant was: we did this, but we
didn't do that.
Caller 4: See, the whole thing that really grinds me is how he can evade
going to court, he can get linked up to these satellite things. The
thing that grinds me about it is the whole principle. We can't do it.
Nobody else that I know can do that, except for the president.
Host: That's right. You bet.
Caller 4: If I'm in court and an attorney asks me a question, I could
not say, I plead the Fifth, because then, it's almost an admission of
guilt. But if he somehow says, Well, I don't know or I plead the Fifth,
or he makes some rigamarole to say, then somehow it's gonna be OK. It's
the whole principle of it. If he -- if we elect him to be our president,
then whatever he can do I think we should be able to do.
Host: I certainly agree with you. I certainly agree with you. We've
gotta take a break. We do have an update from ABC News coming up during
this break so pay attention to it. Thank you for calling.
Caller 4: Thank you.
Host: I appreciate you. Got the Rightgrrls today; got Carolyn Gargaro,
Stephanie Herman -- they're on Birmingham, the Show. 267-1023. Thanks
for listening today.
[commercial break / news update ]
Host: Newstalk Radio 102.3 Birmingham, the name of the show. I've got
the Rightgrrls on with me today, the Rightgrrls website by and for
conservative women. Carolyn Gargaro, Stephanie Herman, both on the line
with me today. Thank you, girls, for being with us.
Stephanie: Our pleasure.
Host: Certainly do appreciate you. Once again, can you give me the URL,
the website for the Rightgrrls?
Carolyn: It's www.rightgrrl.com and "rightgrrl" is spelled
Host: There's no "I" in "grrl," an extra "R."
Carolyn: Nope, it's "grrrrrrl."
Host: "Grrrrrrrl." OK, I got it. Hello caller.
Caller 4: Hello, Stephanie.
Host: Hi there.
Caller 5: I wanted to make a point about the Paula Jones decision. That
case was dismissed not because of -- she couldn't prove that Clinton
sexually harassed her. It was dismissed because she could not prove that
she had been injured in any way --
Caller 5: -- you know, not being able to be promoted or, you know,
caused problems on her job because she said, "No."
Host: So what are you saying, sexual harassment is OK as long as it
doesn't injure your job?
Caller 5: Well, no, I'm just saying that you and your guests seem to
think that, you know, that was the point of the dismissal. I'm not
saying that it was OK.
Host: Well, no actually --
Caller 5: -- [inaudible] I'm gonna think about what you're saying about
the reasons that it was dismissed.
Host: I've said for a long time the very same thing. I have asked the
same question. But, you know, why -- how was she harmed? Was her job in
danger? Was she actually threatened? Was she physically forced to do
anything? And the answer to those, perhaps, is no. So I have raised the
Caller 5: Well that's what I pretty much said at this end. Somebody's
paid millions of dollars for her lawyer. Somebody's paid millions of
dollars for her to have a nose job.
Host: A million-dollar nose job? Hmm.
Carolyn: I'd like to address a couple points on that issue. And the
caller made a quick point that one reason that the case was dismissed
was because the judge did not believe that she was -- that what
President Clinton allegedly did was sexual harassment. That does not
make him not telling the truth in a deposition OK, but that was one
point that it does decide that a woman can be called into what is really
her superior's office and he can touch her and drop his pants and that's
OK and that's not harassing.
Host: So why would she say that if Clinton denied it?
Carolyn: That's right. Actually, to make a summary judgment, as the
judge did, she had to assume that the allegations were true, which is
actually ironic. I do want to also address the caller's pointing out
about the millions of dollars spent for Paula Jones' legal funds and for
the millions of dollars for the nose job, etc. There's been quite a lot
of money spent on the Clinton fund also. The money spent for Paula Jones
has been -- a lot of the work has been done pro bono from the lawyers. A
lot of the money was donated. In fact, the reason she got a nose job was
somebody anonymously donated the money. And everybody wants to seem to
like fly away from the issue and say, Oh she's just getting all this
money. She's not getting all this money. And people want to focus on
that rather than the fact that this woman could have been sexually
harassed. Just like people want to get away from the fact that Clinton
might have committed perjury -- they want to say, Oh well, it's all
about sex. It's not.
Caller 5: All I know is the lady come out with a big nice condo and a
Carolyn: She lives in a condo with her husband and children.
Caller 5: She doesn't make that much money.
Host: What does she do for a living?
Carolyn: If she has a condo, does that mean that what was done to her is
Caller 5: No, it's not OK. But every woman that I know and I am 50 years
old and I have been in the work force for a lot of years. And I know of
no woman that has not had to put up with sexual harassment.
Carolyn: But does that make it OK?
Caller 5: It does not make it OK --
Carolyn: My mother has been in the work force --
Caller 5: -- but when you profit from it --
Carolyn: -- for just as probably as long as you have and she's told me
stories of times when people made inappropriate comments, and right,
yes, people have put up with it. But does that make it right? And has
every woman gone into the boss's office and had him expose himself to
her? There's a difference between people joking and people making
comments and someone dropping his pants.
Caller 5: Well, number one, he wasn't her boss.
Carolyn: He was like the elected CEO of a company. It's not her direct
but he worked for the Arkansas government. He was the governor. He was
her, really, her top boss -- not her direct boss, but her top boss. So
if a CEO called a lower-level female employee into his office and did
what Clinton allegedly did, is that OK?
Caller 5: I didn't say and I never have said, and I do not approve of
it, but it happens. And regardless of what Paula Jones has done with her
case, regardless of what the Supreme Court says about sexual harassment,
it's a part of life that women will have to live with and they will
always have to live with.
Host: Well, and I agree with you on one thing --
Caller 5: -- [inaudible] should profit from --
Carolyn: And you should not -- if someone makes an inappropriate comment
you shouldn't go have a fit. You need to be strong and you have to deal
with that thing. But there is a point where you need to take a stand and
say, This is not appropriate. She has a right to a trial and that is
what she did and a lot of people seem to have a problem with the fact
that she, you know, brought this up. And I really don't see why she has
any less of a right to a trial than anybody else.
Host: I agree with you. And when we say that it's something that women
are gonna have to live with I agree that it's something that women --
well, and people -- are gonna have to live with, but don't you think
that we can maybe try to start taking some steps to stop it, starting
with the President, if he did it? Because it's like she said, the judge
would have to be actually conceding that the allegations are true for
her to have done the summary judgment that she did.
Caller 5: Well I, you know, I'm not saying that I don't think that
Clinton did that.
Host: Are you upset because she's living in a nice place and driving a
nice car? I mean, I don't know where she got it. I don't know if people
are just handing her money. Maybe her husband works hard for a living
and they have a nice car and have a nice home. They said about her nose
job that was an anonymous donor who did that for her. That wasn't money
that she pulled --
Caller 5: The last I read her husband doesn't even have a job.
Host: Well I don't know. I can't back that up either way because I don't
Carolyn: I honestly don't know. At this point, I have not followed the
case closely in the last few weeks. I don't know either.
Host: I think Anita Hill has profited wildly from what happened to her.
Carolyn: She makes a lot of money for speaking engagements.
Host: Oh, you bet. She's wined and dined all over the country, gets huge
sums of money. She's gonna be OK for the rest of her life, Anita Hill
is, because of what she did. Yet I don't hear people screaming about
Anita Hill. Could it be because the person she accused was a Republican?
It just depends -- people, they can choose who they're going to back,
for the same thing, sexual harassment. They'll back one but they won't
back another simply depending on who did the harassing, and you know
Caller 5: Well, I agree with you on that. But Anita Hill was already
doing speaking engagements and was already like a top-level person
before all that took place.
Host: Well, you may be right. I appreciate you phoning in.
Caller 5: Thank you.
Host: Thank you. 267-1023. 1-888-779-TALK. I'm on with the Rightgrrls,
URL www.rightgrrl -- and that's spelled R-I-G-H-T-G-R-R-L -- .com,
www.rightgrrl.com. We've got Carolyn Gargaro, Stephanie Herman, we'll be
Host: It is Birmingham the show, Talk Radio 102.3. We are with the
Rightgrrls today. Carolyn Gargaro, Stephanie Herman. They are the
founders of Rightgrrl's their organization. It's for conservative women,
the website that you can go to, www.rightgrrl.com. You need to go visit
it and ladies I do have some more questions for you but we've got packed
phones right now and I want to go to these people before the break OK?
Still with me?
Carolyn: Yes we are.
Host: OK. Hello caller, how're you doing?
Caller 6: I'm doing fine. Anybody ever notice he already lied?
Host: Oh yeah.
Caller 6: I mean, it's like isn't the most obvious thing that he said
that he didn't have anything going on with Gennifer Flowers and then he
had to retract that when he was deposed for Paula Jones?
Caller 6: So, he's already lied about having had sex with somebody --
Host: But you're not supposed to think that. You're supposed to think
that all the women are lying.
Caller 6: No, no, no, no, no. I'm fat and homely and whatever else and I
had a boss years ago who was good friends with my mother, about the same
age, who thought it was cool to come up when I was at the copier and run
his hand down my back.
Host: Oh cute.
Caller 6: He's real lucky that my mother was working for the company and
needed to be able to retire in peace and quiet or I'da decked the
Caller 6: Also, let's face it: Hillary Clinton, "I'm not some
Host: I remember that.
Caller 6: Excuse me? If she wasn't, then the minute he'd said, Yes, I
was screwing around with Gennifer Flowers, she'da walked.
Host: Well, we're going to dispel that big rumor right now. Certainly,
I'm not inside the home of the President and the First Lady, but if
anybody calls one more time and says, Well that's between the President
and Hillary and if she really thought he was doing it she'da kicked him
out, you need to wake up. You need to wake up.
Caller 6: No, I'm not saying --
Host: No, no, I'm not talking to you.
Caller 6: Oh, OK.
Host: I'm talking to everybody else. Calm down. I just mean people who
say that, people who call in and say this is their issue: Hillary
obviously doesn't believe it because she woulda kicked him out. Oh,
bullcrap. She wouldn't have kicked him out for that.
Caller 6: No, she's got a power thing.
Host: You bet.
Caller 6: She's got a power thing, which is why she's putting up with
it. But the thing that I'm reminded of with all of this is when one
James Earl Carter was interviewed for Playboy and he admitted to
having lusted in his heart and everybody laughed. And this guy was about
as honest and straightforward and all the rest of it as you want. I
mean, he was mister boy scout. And now, in retrospect, he's being looked
at as one of the most exemplary examples of a president we've ever had.
Why can't we see about finding somebody else of that caliber of moral --
Host: I agree with you. I'm not crazy about what I know -- I can't
really remember Carter's presidency. It was just the novelty of somebody
being from the south and his daughter was about my age. But as far as
that I don't remember except what I read. But what I do know is that
when people say name a president who hasn't been a philanderer I
frequently -- I think Carter was. I can't swear to it.
Caller 6: I believe he was and you know, I look at Roslyn Carter and I
get the feeling that she would've thrown him out because she wasn't on a
Host: She very well may have. I don't think Reagan was.
Caller 6: I don't think Reagan was -- I also don't think Truman was, but
Host: Well, we don't know. I appreciate the call.
Caller 6: Take care.
Host: Yeah, thanks a lot. Talk Radio 102.3, hello caller.
Caller 7: I wonder how he got the name "Slick Willie."
Host: I don't know.
Caller 7: I tell you what. Anybody believes that it's normal for another
man to butt-slam another man and I believe that's what Clinton does to
Al Gore. I'll always believe that. And I hope and I assure you he's
gonna come out as "Slick Willie."
Host: Well, I'm thinking there's about a 50 percent chance that you're
Caller 7: Everybody's gonna learn how he got his name "Slick Willie."
Host: I appreciate your call. Thanks for calling. Talk Radio 102.3.
We're on with the Rightgrrls. Taking a break and we'll be right back.
[news break, top of the hour]