The Chris Cuomo Project - Bob Costas (Part 1), Queen Elizabeth, George Carlin

Episode Date: September 13, 2022

In this episode of The Chris Cuomo Project, Chris explores the need to end the stigma surrounding mental health issues, draws lessons that Americans can learn from Queen Elizabeth II, and celebrates George Carlin’s legacy.  Bob Costas, renowned sports broadcaster and host of HBO’s “Back On the Record with Bob Costas,” joins Chris for part one of an extended, in-depth conversation about his career, the state of U.S. politics, and, of course, baseball. Follow and subscribe to The Chris Cuomo Project on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube for new episodes every Tuesday. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Thank you so much for all the support. I appreciate you. Remember, we're going to show you on the screen to subscribe or follow to the project. Keep spreading the word because this is so important because it's organic. Okay. And yes, I am a free agent. I'm wearing the project. Keep spreading the word because this is so important because it's organic. Okay. And yes, I am a free agent. I'm wearing the gear. I screwed it up when I washed it and I got this thing burned in. It's a defective one. Maybe I'll give it away. Listen, if you take the time to buy any of this, remember, I'm putting the money together to figure out collectively who we can give it to. All right, so that's what this is about. It's not like just some pocket filler for Cuomo,

although I should have probably trademarked free agent. It's pretty cool. Open mind, open heart, willing to listen to what you disagree with, okay? Not owned by any team or tribe. This represents who most of us identify with. That's who most of us are. Why do you think one in three overall, two in five under the age of 55 say, no Democrat,

no Republican, not for me, thanks. I don't want anything to do with that game. Most of us are not who you hear on Twitter. Twitter is not reality. It is an exaggerated crucible. Most of us are not who you hear on Twitter. Twitter is not reality. It is an exaggerated crucible. And we need to understand that and start to regard it more as our mindset. The media doesn't help us in this regard, but you know how I feel about the media. It's a signature blessing in our democracy.

And it is a mirror. It is a reflection. It is an echo. You want to know who you are? Watch the media. And that's what resonates. And you'll say, I don't a reflection. It is an echo. You want to know who you are. Watch the media. And that's what resonates. And you'll say, I don't like it. I don't like it. Now, where are you right? You're right that it also occurs as an exaggeration. Why? Because the media has made the same mistake that many of our institutions and our cultural aspects has.

same mistake that many of our institutions and our cultural aspects has. What is that mistake? It relies on social media as a measure for relevance, for what we used to call Vox Populi. So free agents break free of that game, okay? And the more you do, the more you say you don't want it, you'll see the media change and start to give you what you want because that is the job of the media. Remember, they work for you. So if you show that you want something, it'll start to be there. Oh, no, they have a duty to just report. Wake up. OK, there's a business involved there also. And no business is going to do what its customer base doesn't want.

But you should want the right things. That's why there's responsibility for all of us. So I thank you for the support here and specifically for the couch confession. I'm glad it resonated the way it did. Now I'm okay. And I'm okay because I am a free agent and I am post the stigma. I am post the judgment. I literally have a huge helping of IDGAF when it comes to people having an opinion about me. You want to have an opinion about what I say, about what's going on and what my basis is? Fine. That's the job. That's criticism. Criticism is good. Helps you learn, helps you appreciate. But about me personally, I've got to hold myself to my own standard. I have to deal with my own.

I cannot be constantly worried about what everybody else thinks. Messes with your head. No good for the head, for the heart, for the soul. So I'm in a position where I am comfortable talking about these things. I'm working on my health. It would be no different for you if I were to say, I am off today. I'm going to be really stuttery when I'm saying this. My blood pressure is really high. Something's off. You'd be like, oh, poor guy. Hope it figures out. But if I were to say that I were a little off because I'm dealing with a little bit of a chemical imbalance, I'm trying to get my meds right.

and said, I'm trying to get my meds right. Whoa, he's crazy. We got to get past it. And I know it's not easy because we've been this way for a long time. I actually made notes today because there's so many important things that I want to make sure I get across. There are too many people who are not in my position, okay?

They are worried about the stigma. They will be judged. And again, if they were to say, oh, I feel terrible today. I have COVID or kidney stones or IBS or I have my period. I'm out of sorts. People would understand. But if they were to say, I have some other hormone or mental or emotional situation going on, people don't understand. They judge. And you know I'm right. And that's one of the reasons this resonated so well. And it's one of the reasons I called out the second wave, the second batch of nasties, because I told you they would come as well. the second batch of nasties because I told you they would come as well. Now, they fall under the category

in large part of the bless your heart. Do you know that expression? Generally hear it in the South. Bless your heart. It's a Southern hospitality way of saying to people who are doing things that you really have contempt for. And that's about ignorance.

Sometimes arrogance. And that's a really tough combination. When you put ignorance and arrogance together, you have someone who's tough to deal with. And that's that second batch. We make fun of people when they talk about their mental health. We judge people.

We see them as less than. We otherize them when they talk about it. And it's been going on for a long time. That's why the entire universe of possibility about your emotional and mental health gets thrown in the same basket as crazy. We don't do that with anything to do with health of the body, right? If it's cancer, it's not sickly. It's cancer. If it's diabetes, it's not, you know, oh, it's sickly. It's all the same. No, we differentiate more and more all the time as we take it more seriously. This has to be part of that, that holistic thinking. Thinking about why I drink and how

much I drink does not make me an addict. Makes me a headline. Why? Clickbait. Cuomo says mental health, physical health, no difference. Not so catchy. Cuomo talks about his drinking and mental health. You see what I'm saying? The media plays the same game and headlines are always salacious. It's always about clickbait, but you got to call it all out. If you want to change the game, you've got to change the game and call it out everywhere you see it. It's not about a particular outlet. I'm not looking to beat up on anybody. Lord knows we got enough of that. But you got to see the game so you can change the game. That's what we're about. And there are more of us than there are of anything else. We're just co-opted by the fringe because we bought into this social media mechanism as a feedback mechanism and it isn't. It isn't. It is the extreme. It is a magnification of a minority. That's why so many of you feel out of step with what's going on. Now, if I were to tell you that I was going to therapy to get the scar tissue in my repaired right knee worked out,

and it's really causing me some swelling and some pain, I can barely squat 400 pounds. That's right. You would say, oh, good for him. Good, good. You would say, oh, good for him. Good, good. Now, if I tell you that I'm working in therapy on scar tissue that is emotional, that is causing me some problems in this relationship or that, would you judge it the same way? No.

It's a good test. You should. We have to see it all as the same thing. I'm going to keep talking about this. I'm going to have experts come on who talk about different maladies and different treatments and our expanded understanding of what depression is and hormones and chemicals and how they work in the body and what medication and different drug treatments and different types of treatment. Not everything is a pill away from you being better. In fact, very few things are, but we have to talk about it. What do we see in the events around us that

give us a bigger instruction? All regards to the royal family with the loss of the queen. Queen Elizabeth is gone. What does it mean for us? Okay. I am not here to celebrate monarchy. America was created as anathema to a monarchy. OK, we don't believe in that here. I have always been surprised by how many Anglophiles there are in our society. And I am not a royal watcher, to say the least. And yet and yet and yet there is an instruction in the queen's life. Now, listen, when I say that, I don't want to get into some debate about whether the monarchy should be gone.

There are enough people who believe it in the UK that it still exists, okay? So that's what we know. I'm not here to debate that. I'm not about monarchies. I'm an American. But, but the queen mattered. And there is a lesson for us in her life. There are many lessons. And I think that history will bear her out well. But for us here in America, the dignity, the dignity that the queen made manifest in her words and actions all these many, many years. confessed in her words and actions all these many, many years, she did that as a reflection of the importance of her office or station in her case. She gave respect for the office and

she let herself be seen and heard as a reflection of that dignity, that integrity. Now, I don't care what you think about the monarchy. I'm not here to argue for it. I'm here to argue for that kind of leadership. That is the lesson for us here. Too many of you, Democrats, Republicans, right, left, independent, whatever. Politicians are scum. They're all liars. They're all on the take. They all go on there to get rich and edit it. Stop. And I'll tell you why I know it feels good, but it's not true. It's not true. I was raised by a man who was never about himself. All right. This is a guy who turned down the Supreme Court, wouldn't get on the plane to go and go to New Hampshire

and get into the presidential race because he didn't think he was good enough. OK, and you're not going to tell me that he was some example. And I'm going to tell you he wasn't an anomaly. There are good men and women who deal with a world of shit to serve their communities. shit to serve their communities. Being in public service these days sucks. They are hyper scrutinized on the worst bases of gotcha and sex life and private life and family life. I can't believe people want to get involved. And yet many do, and they do it for the right reasons. Do some politicians suck? Of course. Some of everything sucks, right? You know the expression, a few bad apples ruin the bunch apples have worms in them, which makes you suspicious of the entire bunch. That's what we don't want to do. You don't cast out all politicians because some suck. Now, you do call them out when they're quiet in the face of the others sucking, but that gets complicated also.

So here's my suggestion. the others sucking, but that gets complicated also. So here's my suggestion. And it was brought into relief and more perspective with the passing of the queen. Expect more, expect better. Don't just be what you oppose. Just don't call out the negatives. Just don't measure who's worse. Don't just call out what's bad all the time. Recognize what's good and have expectations of better. My father had an expression. I don't know that it was his. I know it. In fact, it was not his, but it worked. Whether you think you will or you won't, you're right. OK, if you keep putting it out there that all politicians are going to suck. They're going to suck because they'll be meeting your expectations. That's the standard. Change the game. Change the standard. That's why I say shame campaign on Congress. You want to be negative? Great.

Just do it for the right reason. Get them to put in term limits. Congress has to do it. Shame them into doing it. They're in no hurry to do it. Make them. Say you want it. Shame campaign. Get states to start apportioning their electors. Boy, would that change the presidential game because you're never getting a constitutional amendment. I don't know how we got 27.

Most interesting one in our amendment history, prohibition. You mess with booze, the country will come back at you. Can you imagine that? 14 years after they passed prohibition, they repealed it. That's how important alcohol is in our society. If you set the standard, they'll meet it. Term limits, apportion the electors, rank choice voting. You see how the right is coming out to attack rank choice voting? voting. You see how the right is coming out to attack rank choice voting. It is not inherently set up to benefit any party. It's math. It's about preference. OK, and it's about crowdsourcing so that you get somebody who is more of a consensus choice. What's so wrong with that? We have to keep talking about it. Is it a perfect system? No. But why not? Let's discuss. Don't just let people make

it a boogeyman because they don't like that Sarah Palin didn't get elected. Well, then why did the Democrat get elected if it's fair? It was 60 percent voter Republican. Yeah, but how did they rank Palin? How many of them first ranked her? The math commands our understanding that obviously many were putting her second or third. Not all Republicans are the same. Not all Democrats are the same. But boy, are they being forced to become more and more like their own group with this toxic twosome. That's why I believe more parties.

Now, expect more from your leaders. Call out when you see good leadership and you'll get more good leadership from leaders i believe in that and in fact we know this from the soft science of behavior the best way to change someone's behavior the best way to change a child's behavior easy beat their ass no may. May have been culturally relevant to you. May have been done to you. Does not work as well. The science is clear. All that does works in the moment, but it gets that person, that child to find a way around you to do the same thing the next time, to avoid the beating. What does work? Positive reinforcement. That is

the best way to change behavior in child or adult. Why don't we do that in our politics? Why are we so obsessed with the negative? Feels good. Feels good. Politics is about feel over fact. Nine times out of 10. Most ads are negative. Why? They work better than positive ads. That's the reality. But there's a lesson in the queen's passing. Now, final point. Do yourself a favor and watch the documentary. It's two episodes on George Carlin. I am a huge Carlin fan. I always have been. He was one of the people in my life that I would look at and say, God, I wish I could be more like him in terms of how he thinks and what he approaches and how. His entire act from the 80s, now he was in it from like the 50s, you know, he's gone now, may rest in peace, but his act in the 60s was different than the 70s, but it was really growing and evolving into what he really was in the 80s and beyond. It would work and hit just as well today, if not better.

He was against orthodoxy on both sides. Now, you guys have a both sides problem. Now, you say, no, you have the both sides problem. No, I don't. The only way to do the analysis is both sides. That doesn't mean they're equal. That doesn't mean every time that Donald Trump says something or does something, I have to say Joe Biden said something, did something. That's false equivalency. That's not balance. That's forced balance. I don't do that.

I don't believe in that. But you don't ignore the problems of one side and think that you're going to build consensus. And that's what I want to do. I don't want to emphasize one of these two. I don't want to be on your team. Do you understand? It's not why I'm two. I don't want to be on your team. Do you understand? It's not why I'm here. I'm not here to pretend. Hey, Republicans, you should have liked me more. I'm not here to be liked. Democrats, you still got me. You never had me.

I'm not Mario Cuomo. I'm not Andrew Cuomo. They're your guys. I'm not your boy. I'm here to do the job for everybody else. I believe we can do better than this fight. So did George Carlin. Orthodoxy on both sides. Oh, but there is no orthodoxy on both sides. The Republicans want to destroy the democracy. And that's what this is about. Do you know that what Trump was saying about Democrats? Don't you remember that they're trying to destroy the democracy? How dare he say that? You can't destroy democracy. Our institutions are strong. Where's that now? You see what I'm saying? Don't become what you oppose. Don't become what you oppose. Now, I'm saying that we have to do better than this game. I'm saying that our leaders have to have more demanded from them and they should be rewarded when they do things for us that are good. That's where I'm coming from. That's what being a free agent is about. I'm willing to put myself out there about my struggles in life and kind of use that as an aperture, as a window into a world that we all know very, very well.

Come on. Who doesn't know somebody who's struggling with some kind of mental or emotional issue? Any more than you don't know anybody who's dealing with a physical issue. We're just more comfortable with some of it than others. You know, that's how social evolution works. You know, they're lagging indicators. You know, things just take time. But the time is now for this.

The time is now for this. No more parody. No more mental health, physical health. There's just this holistic sense of wellness, of well-being. Mind, body, and spirit. We know this is true. You know I'm right. I'm not creating something.

I'm not patting myself on the back for saying what's obvious to all of us. I'm just not afraid to put it out there about myself because I'm okay. I'm doing what I feel is right for me and for the relationships that matter to me. I'm all right with it. I I have with my emotional well-being. It's harder. Emotional well-being is harder. Pick up heavy shit, put it back down. Don't put too much food in your face. You'll get to a better place in terms of how you look. Emotionally, not so easy. Why you are how you are, how you behave, what triggers you. This is complicated stuff. I get why people want to avoid it. I've just never been that way. I believe in leaning into my flaws and I got plenty of them. So there's a lot of work to do. And there's a lot of work to do for us together in a lot of different ways. And I believe the more that we ignore the game, ignore the fringes, we are not effing social media. Do you understand? It's not reality. And I know we rely on it, but it's not you.

And you know, it's not you. You keep saying, who are these people? Who are these people? Exactly. Exactly. They're the magnified minority. Remember who you are, where you are in your community and what you talk about and how you discuss it. How many of you are like, you are, where you are in your community and what you talk about and how you discuss it. How many of you are like, you know, going to the mat over whether or not the search of Mar-a-Lago was right or wrong? It was right, by the way, but they played it badly. Garland should have said how much came before that search warrant in terms of how many appeals were made and that Trump's guys were playing a game. And now they got a problem because why'd they take his medical records? Why'd they take his personal identification? What was that about? Tax? Why? I thought it was about confidential information. Explain it. You ever hear the expression, tell the world who you

are or they'll tell you? That happens in politics all the time. Control the narrative, define the narrative. And I don't mean bullshit. I mean, tell me how I'm supposed to see this or I'm going to listen to somebody else about it. Democrats get caught short on this on a regular bullshit. I mean, tell me what how I'm supposed to see this or I'm going to listen to somebody else about it. Democrats get caught short on this on a regular basis. I think it's about to happen again. And in fact, if I had to put my noodle to it and as I keep saying, the more they keep Trump's name out of their mouth because he's just a symbol and speak to the concerns of the people who voted for him, who are desperate enough to choose somebody who I can't believe they would want to be like, the better off the Democrats will be. And for the Republicans, keep putting up moderate candidates. Keep putting up people who are open to compromise and not like your mascot and see where that gets you. Now, of course, the Democrats will have to stop funding extreme candidates in these primaries.

That's effed up. That is dirty pool. Trying to make the right as extreme as they can be to give you a better chance of winning, talking about Trump so much because you think that's your best chance, that's not leadership. And I know that's the game, but I think the game has to change. And remember, none of this is new. We've been at each other's throats from jump in this country because this is hard what we're doing. This is hard to have differences celebrated. It's not what human beings do well, but we're trying it here. And Carlin would be right back in the day. It's just as true now. Orthodoxy on both sides must die. Why? Because one group cannot be celebrated for its attempts to try to control another. And whether it's talking

about Islam or what is good about Christians and bad about Islam and that bullshit, or it's about if you don't agree with us about how to define gender or this or that, then you're a bad person. We have to stop that. And we have to think about common concerns and collective will.

That's what I'm here to do. That's what I'm here to do with you. And to do that, we got to start listening to the people who understand why we are how we are over time, who've watched, who understand, and whom we respect. Pretty short list. Oh, I got one. I got one for you today. Who's so nice, I'm doing them twice. Bob Costas is our guest today. I talked to his ass for so long, I'm going to do it in two episodes. And I didn't even know how long it was. Greg was like waving his hands there. He's like, we're losing sunlight. No, it was obviously inside,

who cares? But we talked so long, we're doing two episodes with Bob Costas. His thoughts about our culture and our politics and how it cleaves with sports and why he does what he does and what he's learned over time. It is magic. It is food for the head and the heart. Bob Costas, ladies and gentlemen. The Chris Cuomo Project is supported by Cozy Earth. Why? Because I like their sheets. That's why. A lot of people don't get a good night's sleep for a lot of reasons. One of the ones that you can control is bedding. One out of three of us report being sleep-deprived. Okay, well, what is it? Well, it stresses all kinds of things. But the wrong sheets can make you hot, can make you cold. I'm telling you, I don't even believe it either, but Cozy Earth sheets breathe. And here's what I love about them. Cozy Earth's best-selling sheet is a bamboo set, okay? Temperature regulating. G gets softer with every wash. I'm not kidding you. All right. Now, so if you go to CozyEarth.com and you enter the code, enter the code Chris, and you can get up to 35 percent off your first order.

CozyEarth.com and the code is Chris. We don't fake the funk here. And here's the real talk. Chris. We don't fake the funk here, and here's the real talk. Over 40 years of age, 52% of us experience some kind of ED between the ages of 40 and 70. I know it's taboo, it's embarrassing, but it shouldn't be. Thankfully, we now have HIMS, and it's changing the vibe by providing affordable access to ED treatment, and it's all online. HIMS is changing men's health care. Why? Because it's giving you access to affordable and discreet sexual health treatments, and you do it right from your couch. HIMS provides access to clinically proven generic alternatives to Viagra or Cialis or whatever, and it's up to like 95% cheaper. And there are

options as low as two bucks a dose. HIMS has hundreds of thousands of trusted subscribers. So if ED is getting you down, it's time to pick it up. Start your free online visit today at HIMS.com slash CCP. H-I-M-S dot com slash CCP. And you will get personalized ED treatment options. HIMS.com slash CCP. Prescriptions, you need an online consultation with a healthcare provider, and they will determine if appropriate. Restrictions apply. You see the website, you'll get details and important safety information. You're going to need a subscription. It's required. Plus, price is going to vary based on product and subscription plan. Bob Costas. Now, this was nice of you to do. It wasn't difficult. Well, but it's about a 10 minute ride,

maybe a 20 minute walk. You have always been somebody I look up to in the business because you do it very, very well. The list of accolades that you have received, I want to deal with first because you are not an accolade guy. But I also have noticed that people who tend not to be accolade guys win the most. Does it matter to you that you have won more of the awards that matter than anyone in the history of sports broadcasting? You know, if there's one that I take a small measure of pride in, because a lot of it is circumstantial,

were you on the right programs or on the right events and who were you surrounded by, the producers, the directors, everybody else that contributes. But the fact that I won or have won in sports, news, and entertainment, the late night program later in the 80s and 90s. And one of my regrets is that I left that much sooner than I should have. I only did it for six years. I couldn't still be doing it, but I could have done it for another five or six, but there were circumstances that led me to step aside. But that versatility maybe is something that I can take a small measure of pride in. What did you want to do that you didn't do? Although that's not right. Haven't done, because you're not done. Yeah, but right now I'm doing the things that are kind of callbacks to the things that I most identify with. So I'm back at HBO, but not a large workload, quarterly shows,

but it's the same idea. Journalism, commentary, long form interviews, contributor at CNN when sports crosses over into news and doing baseball games on both TBS and the Major League Baseball Network. Not just when sports crosses over the news. I was there when Jeff brought you in. Great decision. Jeff understood your value of understanding the dynamics that push our culture. Sometimes sports, as metaphor, no question. But you're better than that. You understand, you know, but you're better than that. You understand,

you know, neither of us are kids anymore. You've seen a lot of things happen and you understand why they've happened and where we are. And that is a gift. You've got to find different ways to share it. Well, you hope that if you've paid attention, you're reasonably well read. And that means across the spectrum, not staying in one bubble or another. Try to get as much of the broad range of viewpoints and information as you can. I'm not an expert on policy. I couldn't do what Ted Koppel did. That wasn't my background.

But certainly in a big picture way, if someone asks you to comment about Donald Trump and live golf, I'm qualified to do that because of my background in sports, but also because I've just paid attention as a citizen. You don't have to be a constitutional expert. You don't have to have served in government to make valid observations about Donald Trump or for that matter, Joe Biden. Do you wish you had done more politics? No. No news? You know, I did a lot.

I did a fair amount of politics on later. Your dad knows, I guess. I know. A couple of times. My father loved. But look, we all do, right? I mean, Bob Costas is probably one of the few cultural figures left that everybody agrees on. Until this decision.

I'm not sure about the maggot crowd. not just your voice uh what he loved the best uh one was that you were greek and my my father loves the greeks but he loves to give him a hard time somehow about not being italian but he it is and i i feel the same way you have a unique fluency where you are able to take what you know, what you don't know that you want to ask about that still connects with that boy, girl, man, woman, whatever at home, what they want to know. And you keep going over time, the fluency. And you keep going over time, the fluency. That's what Pop loved and respected. You know, I had such regard for him.

One of the funniest moments that ever happened on Later. Larry King, who in many ways was a better guest than he was a host. He was a great storyteller. You know, as a host, everybody loved him and his career speaks for itself. But you know how Larry always used to say, I don't read the book. I don't need any preparation. And I'd been with him when he'd walk in like 10 minutes for the show, had a little blue card, looked it over. And then, you know, a typical thing from Larry, especially in the last five, six years of his career, Joe Biden, what do you make of it? What do you make of it? That was it. That was it. You don't

have to know anything. What do you make? Chris Cuomo. What do you make of him? Right. So so Larry, Larry says to me on like his fifth visit on later, I can interview anybody. I don't need to be prepared. I said, all right, next time when you come back, you bring somebody and I don't know who it is. And he or she walks out from behind the door. I'll bring somebody and he or she walks out. And for half the show, you interview the guy I brought and I'll interview whoever you brought. He brought your dad. Okay. Your dad sits down. He's in that.

You're going to run for governor and blah, blah, blah. You're going to run again. Blah, blah, blah. I knew what to ask him. Okay. I brought meatloaf. So meatloaf, meatloaf walks out. He has no idea who meatloaf is.

Okay. So the first five or six questions they're trying to determine, it's like he might as well have been Dorothy Kilgallen blindfolded. What's my line? Is this larger than a bread box? Do you work in politics? And so finally he determines that I think that Meat told him that his name was Meatloaf. And all I remember after that is Larry saying, do I address you as Meat or Mr.

Loaf? So I think I won that standoff with Larry. But your dad was always so great, always so great to me. And to your earlier point, one of the most gratifying things that I've heard through the years, people will say, I'm not that big a sports fan, but you make it accessible and enjoyable for me. And that's one of the differences in network sports as opposed to local sports. Even if it's a baseball game, as we're taping this, last night I did Mets-Dodgers. Jacob deGrom pitched a great game. It's just a terrific baseball game. And the Mets won two to one before a charged up crowd. But I'm broadcasting to the whole country, not to an exclusively Met audience or to a Dodger audience. So it wouldn't

be appropriate to respond to everything the same way a local broadcaster would. You're trying to make it accessible to someone in Tacoma who doesn't know every last thing about the Mets. So it's got to be knowledgeable, but at the same time, not too inside baseball to drive the casual fan away. And that was especially true on the Olympics. Most Americans don't pay attention to track and field, platform diving, cross-country skiing for the Winter Olympics, except during those two or three weeks.

And then they're intensely interested. So the host of the Olympics is not someone obsessed with minutiae. That person has to be a good generalist. They have to know everything or most important things about the history of the Olympics, the host nation, the host city, and the two dozen or so events or athletes who are likely to be the focus in prime time. And if you can do that in a way that's accessible, are there going to be the 1% of the audience that is obsessed with the pole vault who says,

I didn't see what I wanted to see there? Yes, but you're not broadcasting it for them. So if I'm able to, for the most part, satisfy the real aficionados, but also bring in the people that are only casually interested, then that's what you should do on network television. How aware are you of the fact that you still love it and how many would still love it? This is one of the reasons that we put this on camera, because many podcasts are just audio, is because I want people to see, because we connect so much visually. You light up.

You love it. You love that you were at the game. Yes. You love that it was well pitched. You still love sport and what you do. I do, but I've narrowed it down to the things that I love best and that I'm most connected to. I did a dozen Olympics and it was an honor. And right to the end, I think I did it at least professionally, but there was a little bit of diminution in how connected I was to it. The way they were produced changed a little bit.

I'm not saying for better or worse, but I just wasn't as fully connected to it as I was. And maybe some of that is being in my 60s at that point, as opposed to in my late 30s when I started doing it. The NFL, I always did a professional job, but I was not as connected to it as I was and still am to baseball. The NBA in the 90s, the Michael Jordan era, the NBA on NBC in that period of time. Boy, that was just fantastic. I didn't have to fake anything or just do it on professionalism. I was so thrilled to walk into that arena or into that ballpark. And now I'm 70 years old.

But in the aftermath of the game last night, when I left the ballpark, I was buzzing. I said, just what a hell of a ball game. What a privilege to be not just at the game, but to bring it to people. But the number of things that make me feel that way at this point is not quite as large as it used to be. So I confine it to the things where I can honestly say I should be here. Authenticity. Everybody talks about what's changed. What's stayed the

same? What do you believe is still true about the universal experience and need for attachment to sport? I think the connection, the generational connections, the idea, corny as it sounds, that a grandmother or grandfather can take their grandchild to a ballgame and that they can enjoy it, but that it's also a callback to every game that they've seen before. I think the recent death of Vin Scully points that up. 67 years as the voice of the Dodgers, beginning in Brooklyn and all the way through 2016 in Los Angeles. Every game he broadcast right to the end was simultaneously a news bulletin and a flashback. It was present and nostalgic. It was a reminder of every game you heard him describe, but beyond

that, even if he wasn't the announcer, every game you ever went to. And so a 20-year-old Dodger fan could feel maybe not the same level because it wasn't the same amount of experience, but he felt affection for Vin Scully. And so did his 80-year-old grandmother or grandfather. Now, baseball is unique in that respect, and Scully's life and career were unique. But that general idea that sports can connect us, that you can walk into a ballpark and people of disparate backgrounds, people who wouldn't necessarily go to the same concert will go to the same ballgame. And in that moment, they're generally rooting for the same team. They're rooting for the home team.

So there's that. I think it's very important, especially now. We have to remember what connects us. There's been way too much hyper focus on the division. Now we have to remember what connects us. There's been way too much hyper-focus on the division. And the weird thing is that it's a statistical minority. Yeah.

That I think the focus on Americana and reminding what makes this a special nation is going to come back into vogue, or at least I hope it is. Let me ask you some stuff that's always of interest to a real sports fan. The idea that the Warriors of now could compete or beat the great Lakers teams of the 80s, the Bulls of the 90s. Do you believe that? Well, especially in the 80s, it was more of a center-oriented league. It's not that at all now. And? Yeah, and much more physical. You know, Michael Jordan, at the end, those games were in the 80s. And Michael Jordan scored 45 points in his last game as a Bull, and the final score is like 87 to 86. Think of the percentage of the total points. He scored more than half of the Bulls' points in the game. Yeah, and it was much

more physical. Hands-on defense, the whole sort of thing. So it's always difficult in every sport to compare across eras, but you did have great centers back then. You know, Kareem was battling Robert Parrish if the Lakers played. But you have five guys on the court who are that size now. They're not seven feet tall. They're close. You have six, eight guys who can shoot three-pointers. You do have that.

And that's why I think they've moved away from the big, except for Shaq is that you don't have a guy who can dominate through size. You have two, three guys who can come around you and create a problem. I don't think they beat those teams because of the physicality. Depends on what the rules are. That's right. But I'm saying if you're going to have the physicality, it's because they're letting you.

The reason that you can't have it now is because it's not like these guys couldn't be physical it's that you know they're bigger they're stronger they're faster they're not they're not allowed to it's not the game but physicality changes that game oh michael jordan to me is extraordinary because he was not the biggest guy in the world no he was not the biggest guy at the time he didn't jump higher than everybody. I mean, you'd already had David Thompson in the league and Julius Irving in the league. And he took that beating in those years that I don't know that these guys, I don't even know that LeBron James could take the beating. Physically, of course, he could be a starting tight end on most teams. But I don't know that

emotionally he would be able to take guys who are absolutely trying to put him on his ass and hurt him regularly. Michael Jordan was as mentally tough as any athlete I've ever covered or observed. And the Jordan rules, which was the title of a bestselling book, wasn't invented by Sam Smith, who wrote the book. It was invented by Chuck Daly, the coach of the Pistons, who was one of the great NBA coaches. But basically, the idea of the bad boy Pistons was, look, we can't really stop him, but we can punish him. If he comes into the lane, he may go to the line, but before he does, he's going to be on his ass. Time after time, the beating that he took. And yet he adjusted his game game and he managed to excel and especially excel in all the biggest

moments. Oh, I mean, just extraordinary. And the more you learn about him, the greater his... And what I love about it is the transcendence of it. Look, Jordan as a man doesn't make it that easy to make him a transcendent figure the way, in my opinion, a Kareem does or a Bill Russell does, you know, or many others. He's pretty much limited to the court, but the intensity and focus translates into everything. And that's what I've always believed about sport. And I've always wanted to see more of in politics. You know, one of the reasons I love my pop was I didn't agree with some of the things he used to beat me up about the death penalty. I used to mess with him at it. Like later in his life when he was battling

and he was really battling to hold on, I would always bring up the death penalty, right? And his eyes would kind of come up and he'd look at me and I'd say, people want it. They should have it, Bob. He'd be like, hmm, that's what you think. That's what you think we're about. I said, well, that's a democracy, right? He said, no, that's what you think. That's what you think we're about. I said, well, that's a democracy, right?

He said, no, that's a mobocracy. That's not a democracy. So it wasn't the positions, but it was the man. And I really wish we could have more of that in our politics where people can say, hey, look, you know, I'm not a Bills fan. You know, I'm not a Bulls fan. I'm not a Democrat. I'm not a Republican. But I like that guy.

And I like the way they are. You almost never hear that. No, no, you don't have any of that Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill stuff going on. And it wasn't that long ago that someone who was essentially a Democrat could name a large number of Republicans for whom he or she had great respect and regard. That's a good person, not a perfect person, not someone I agree with all the time, but this is a person worthy of respect. And the same could be said the other way. Now it's all so tribal and few people have the courage to risk temporarily alienating any portion of their base

by speaking hard truths to their own constituency. You know, I was talking to one of my kids the other day, he was in college, and we were talking about politics. And I was thinking to myself, I don't even like what I just said to my kid. It is silly. You know, I seek balance. I try to see things so that people who are on one side can understand in some different context what they believe about the other side. I think

that's very important, especially in a binary system. The Republicans have bought into a toxicity because of Trump, though he didn't create it, that is indefensible. He didn't create it, but he amplified it. Absolutely. Tom Tancredo, Steve King, you know, guys that he examined and thought about when he was running and matched with his marketing skill, which is absolutely, makes him very clever. But he's the first guy in politics I've ever seen who identifies with a group that he does not belong to, which is very unusual in politics i've ever seen who identifies with a group that he does not belong to which is very unusual in politics and they worship him um i think that i think that the word

what do you call where you are so desperate and angry and want a different outcome so much that you'll go with a guy that you know can make it happen, even though he's really not your guy. He's just your guy for this purpose. Is that worship? Well, it's become almost cult-like, so I don't know. But with his electeds, it's fear. My point is, I talk about, well, both sides. Yeah, both sides. But what they've done with the election and the lies that they're perpetrating are, I've never seen the Democrats do anything like it. And yet they are neck and neck. And it's almost mind boggling. Well, part of it is, let's be honest, even if there are legislative achievements,

There are legislative achievements. Biden does not inspire many people. If there is to be an effective answer to the toxicity, then there have to emerge, someone has to emerge, someone, maybe not just one person, maybe it's a group of people, but as a presidential candidate, a Democrat and a Republican who are willing to say, look, these are our principles, shared and particular to our party. But there are universal principles of honesty and of civility and shared American principles. And we're going to disavow the worst of what our respective parties have been about, whether with the Democrats, it's just foolishness, the illiberal aspect of some of woke culture,

which is illiberal. It's not by degree different than classic liberalism. It's someplace else. It's a diversion. Yes, it is. Whether it's that or whether it's signing on to lies and insanity because it helps you win a congressional seat or whatever it might

be, or maybe someday be the Speaker of the House. Whoever these people were hoping for are, they have to not just represent something, they have to swallow hard and repudiate something. I don't look, I don't disagree. I mean, the scary thing to me is it's like Jets Patriots. As a self-loathing Jets fan. It builds character. I don't know. We tell ourselves things about the Patriots, but we know we're not

even. We know they're better than us. And I see it now in our politics where you know this stuff about the election is bullshit. Of course, every election is going to have a measure of fraud. It's an imperfect system. It's run by human beings.

Everything man touches, he corrupts. But you know that this has been vetted to death. And your own judges, your own people in positions of power in the states have said it's not there. That is the Jets believing that because the Patriots recorded a practice, they are equal franchises. That's right. It's nonsensical thinking. And yet it is accepted because of the binary nature of it, the toxic twosome, as I call it. And I don't know the fix except more parties. And I'm getting beaten up for it now, which is okay. But I don't know what fix there is otherwise. You know, we are at a place, and we've been here for a number of years, where everything you want to be true is true, even absent any credible evidence to support it.

And anything you don't want to be true is not true, even with a mountain of evidence and a choir of angels to attest to it. Because there is a place you can go that will validate whatever you believe in to begin with and never challenge it. And anything that gratifies what you want to believe is accepted uncritically. what you want to believe is accepted uncritically. And they've already handed you an excuse, a catch-all excuse that covers every uncomfortable truth that might be presented. Oh, that was on CNN. That's fake news.

Now, I'm only tangentially connected to CNN. I'm not part of the day-to-day operation. You were. Not without flaw, certainly. But the very idea that there are millions of people who believe that if you showed them Jack Ruby shooting Lee Harvey Oswald, oh, that's not true. It was on CNN. Yeah, it's true. And look, you know, I'm supposed to be Mr. Bitter, right? I got shit canned at CNN. I think it's the best news organization in the world. I know that we were never in the fake news business.

And I was often seen as an outsider there. Flaws and mistakes. Everybody makes flaws and mistakes. But not corrupt to its core. Not even a question. There is only one outlet that goes way too far with groupthink and it's fox news that's absolutely true now newsmax that oan they're trying uh the same thing to yeah they're they're but they're way worse yes they're more insane but but they're less consequential i worked for roger ailes okay

i worked for jeff zucker they are not the same species a Ailes knew politics, knew manipulation of message and market, and he knew what would work with a set of people. I never heard Jeff Zucker talk about anything in any of the terms

that Roger spoke about regularly. So it's not even a close call. However, it doesn't matter because the crazy uncles are getting all the attention right now. We all used to have them at the table. Oh boy, here we go. Let's not bring this up. Here he is. That's all we listen to right now. Shame on me and the rest of us in the media for magnifying this minority in this misplaced sense. Well, this is America. We're all about the minority. No, we're about protecting the minority, not elevating it to a sense of significance that it doesn't justify by its own suffrage. And we are now doing that where, yes, there are silos. But how many of the people in your life over the last four or five years have you realized don't want to talk to you about any of these things? They're just turned off by it. They don't identify. They've heard enough of it. They don't want to hear it. And they're not,

well, I thought it was stolen. I have friends who are real conservatives, Trump voters. They don't believe it was stolen. They think it's all a little corrupt. They think it's all a little dirty. They think there was a little bit of this here and a little bit of that there. Biden won the election. Let's move on. And so what are we doing here? Why is it that the fringe continues to get so much attention and power? Because primaries, there are, well, primaries are an important part of it. And you're more qualified to talk about this than I, but from the Republican standpoint, just strategically, the makeup of the Senate, the fact that South Dakota and North Dakota have as many senators as California and New York combined,

the Electoral College and gerrymandering certain districts, that's the only way that they stay viable, that they stay in the game. Seven of the last eight presidential elections, the popular vote has gone to the Democrat. Only second time around for Bush over Kerry in 2004. So the kind of amplifying the message to that particular group is a survival or it's a strategic approach. But maybe this isn't a direct response to what you're asking, but we're having a free-flowing conversation here. I spent most of my adult life-

It's amazing what happens when you sit on the couch. Correct. Go ahead. And we're not even imbibing. This is Club Soda. Please, knock yourself out. I spent most of my adult life in St. Louis. Missouri was a purple state.

In fact, famously, I think there was only one presidential election in the course of a century where Missouri didn't go with a winner. That's right. Be it Democrat or Republican. It was a true bellwether. Right. And now it's a crimson red state. Bernie Goldberg, late of CBS News, more recently of HBO, and now I think he does some work for The Hill.

Wrote the notorious book. Wrote Bias. Right. He had a point that he had a point bernie had a point and his point was not that cbs and other network news operations weren't filled with good people and credible journalists but that there was a certain left-of-center bias built into the cake that many of the producers and reporters were not even conscious of. And that that needed, if they were going to get better, that needed to be identified and tempered in some way. That was a reasonable response. When Fox News came along in 1996, if they had been a responsible,

honest, conservative voice, kind of a Wall Street journal of the air, but more entertaining. It's television after all, right? So it can't be that dry. But if essentially they had been guided by solid journalistic precepts, that not only would have been acceptable, that would have been a very, very good thing. But instead, the supposed antidote to whatever the problem was is much worse than the problem itself. And there's something deeply perverse about people at Fox News lecturing about fake news

and lecturing about the media mob. It's deeply perverse because on a daily basis, with exceptions, not everybody there can be indicted in this way, but on a daily basis, they commit crimes against journalism

and against basic fair dealing and dealing in good faith on an ongoing basis. Oh, there's, look, I mean, it's just how it is. And I work there, okay? And Roger Ailes gave me my start in the business. He taught me a lot about interviewing. He was very savvy about it. It wasn't what it is now.

I would have never made it. But, you know, I heard this jackalope on there the other day say this. Biden calls us fascist. You can't call us fascist. That is way over the line. That should never be said. It should never be mentioned. But Joe Biden, you're the fascist. You can't call us fascist. That is way over the line. That should never be said. It should never be mentioned. But Joe Biden, you're the fascist. Right. And I started to laugh at like, I wonder if he understands what he just said. This should never be said. This is a line that should never be crossed. But I'll cross it. And now I'm going to do it immediately as if now justified because of what was done. And I thought in that moment, I really see where we are.

The question is how to get out of it, which is completely where my head is about why I'm coming back into the business. And my fixes are the multiple parties. People don't like it. Okay. Shame campaign for Congress to pass term limits because Congress has to do it. Shame campaign is the only way to get it done. Ranked choice voting. That's a state level thing that you're going to have to do. It works. You're seeing it now at play with Palin.

Interestingly, a senator comes out and says this shows that it's a scam. No, it's math. Unless math is a scam, rank choice voting is not a scam. It automatically puts you with somebody who has a broader basis of some support than otherwise. It just does. And I believe that you need to have a shame campaign on states to apportion their electors. And there's some half measures there going on. But I believe that if you have those changes, because you're not going to do it culturally, I think the culture ones are following the system's allowance. Well, there's a business model.

If we're just talking about media, when the business model is you don't inform your viewers with perhaps a conservative or somewhat left of center viewpoint, but you're dealing honestly. If the whole idea is that you're stirring their emotions, you're playing to their resentments more so than their ideals, you'd rather infuriate than illuminate. If that's the business model, and if all the research shows this is what gets clicks, that people become addicted to that kind of outrage. It's like asking McDonald's to sell vegetables. It might be a good thing, but that's not what they're selling. That's exactly right. And it doesn't work.

It doesn't work as well. I always try to put it this way. This is borrowed from my pop. What is the positive opposite, the term for the positive opposite to a demagogue. There isn't one. There is no such thing as the positive opposite to a riot. Negativity is very powerful. The Greeks coined the phrase of demagogue for a reason. It works better than pushing peace and comity and love and allowance and compassion. And something that could fit on a bumper sticker works better than nuance and complexity. Especially if it's nasty. Right. And shades of gray.

You know, I have a number of stray thoughts, and it's a podcast, so I can circle back to them. One of the points I was about to make is living in St. Louis for most of my adult life, raising our children there, I never had a feeling that liberals or conservatives were more community-minded, more generous, more kind, more worthy of your respect, more worthy of your friendship. I did a lot of charity work in St. Louis. People who you would think of as, you know, Chamber of Commerce types, more conservative types, generally more Republican types, were among the most community-minded,

the most charitable, the most generous, the most admirable. This departure that they would cast their lot with someone so deeply contemptible as a human being is astonishing to me. My guys say, no, Bob, you're missing the other part. So are the other guys. And okay, maybe Trump is an exaggerated form of what I don't like in all politicians, but I'm not going to have these other guys. He's a unicorn. I'm not going to have these other guys tell me that he's a liar when they're liars or that he's not worthy when they're not worthy.

They don't get to say that. That's a big part. No, I get that. I get that. But, you know, if, and again, I'm jumping around here a little bit, but if we're talking about media, you're not an honest broker if you're only calling fouls on one side. I'm not going to name the guy. Wouldn't be right in this context. But I have a pretty good friend at Fox, a very good guy. And I said to him, you know what? You come in for your segments,

and there's no shortage of lunacy and dopey stuff from the left. You can always find some professor somewhere who thinks there are 16 pronouns, and let's focus on that rather than what you should be here to learn, rather than have critical thinking. And you can find somebody who says that they're deeply sorry for the harm that's been caused by inviting Ben Shapiro to speak on our campus. And no thoughtful person views that with anything but contempt. It's outrageous and stupid. There's all kinds of examples of that. So you can have 10 of them every time you show up, but you're like an official at a ball game who's calling offsides every time the other team is one inch offsides. But your team could be in the other team's huddle and you can't call offsides.

So it isn't that what you're saying is necessarily untrue or not valid, but it is only in one direction. You're completely blind to the same offenses or worse. You're not really blind to it. You know it's there, but it's not part of the business model. And if you came in and had five Republican or conservative outrages and five liberal outrages, you wouldn't have a job anymore. Give us 10 liberal outrage. are like, I cannot believe that you see anything about us that matches up with what's going on with him over there. He set a whole new standard for perfidy. I get it. And it makes doing the job harder because like, you know, my analysis, Merrick Garland should have gone out in front of this search sooner because this, the vacuum, the silence created an opportunity for deception. Now people will say, well, they don't have to tell us what they're doing. That's about the law. That's about court and doing that. Yeah. It's also

politics. I'm not saying he had to give you the goods on why he's doing it, compromise witnesses, but he created a vacuum and there is a political and there is a public component to what he does. They say, well, don't bring him up. It only matters that what Trump did. No, both matter, but they're not equal. Right. Garland would have saved us some agita if he had said, look, I got a supporting affidavit here. We asked for this stuff five times the nice way. OK, that we probably wouldn't have done if it weren't of a former president of the United States. What really helps in this atmosphere is someone in authority spelling a complicated situation out in a concise and forceful way. Yes. We didn't just bust into his house. They didn't even have their coats on. It isn't a raid. That's right. There's nothing like that about it. We do raids

all the time. This ain't one of them. And it is because of who he is. And we asked a bunch of times and they didn't comply. And now you'd say, oh, yeah. And by the way, you complained about all these things. Now we know that your complaints are hollow. Why did you secrete these documents? He's never answered. Trump has a lot to say about this. Right. He has never said why they're there and why. And that's all that matters now. It's not about the raid anymore. You know, his people can call the raid and say, sir, say whatever they say. We know they're there. Why are they there? There are questions for both sides, but they are not equal questions. And I think people have lost sight of that. So they'll come after me. Don't mention Garland. Just keep the pressure on the other side. What about this? Even if it's a three on a 10 scale, balances this, which might be a nine. That's right. But by calling out the three, it gives you more heft on the 10. Because I'm not a guy who ignores the three. I see the three. But now back to this. It's literally, to me,

it's become like, all right, you robbed the bank. But as you were driving away, somebody was making an illegal left. And you're like, well, what about that left? That's right. Yeah. What about it? That's a ticket. You're a felony. And I think that that's what I think people on the left. But I get why they're scared about it. And they're like, no, no, no. Every time you do that, it means that nobody's going to care about what Trump did because now it offsets. No, you have to keep calling it straight so it can't offset. Well, a good example, and where CNN, you know it better than I do, but I have a pretty good handle on it because of my long friendship with Jeff, long before I became kind of a peripheral contributor, and what I know about it now.

With all these producers and reporters, correspondents deployed around the world, by and large, they do a job that's beyond credible, a job to be proud of. But there are flaws and mistakes. And let's take, for example- Not unique to CNN, though. No. No, but CNN has more sway than MSNBC, because MSNBC, even though they have credible people, people of scholarship and whatnot and good broadcasters, they're clearly coming from a certain perspective. CNN should be positioned more toward the center. But take the summer of George Floyd, right? It is absolutely true that not only historically and at present are there outrages and tragedies

and murders involving police and people of color, but it would have been helpful to put that in some kind of numerical perspective as against the number of encounters. It wouldn't get the police and rogue cops off the hook to say, you know, on a daily basis, you know how many cats they get out of a tree? You know how many traffic jams they unravel? You know how many domestic disputes that are difficult and complicated they wade into? That isn't to soft pedal the need to reform the police. And when the riots took place, the idea that this was all just a spontaneous plea for justice,

some of it was, but some of it was also opportunistic, breaking into stores, looting. There's no question about it. And that should have been more forcefully delineated on CNN and elsewhere. And it would have given more credibility to the question of injustice, both historic and present. But that injustice can be put in perspective. What's true is bad enough. When you have LeBron James saying, we are being hunted every day, that's a wildly provocative and not fact based statement. A few things. Yes, comma, but I was there. Right. And I was in the thick of it.

One, I certainly never and I'm not playing as an accused here, but I never had the intention of doing that. I have a quote that is taken from this time out of context all the time, which I'll give you credit. It pisses me off. It says, where does it say in the Constitution that protests are supposed to be peaceful? Obviously, it says it in the First Amendment. That wasn't my context. It was when people were protesting. I've always had a line that you say what you want, say it how you want. That's fine. As soon as you touch personal property, you're a criminal. This is now a riot. I've said it many, many times.

My point was protests aren't supposed to be peaceful meaning they're going to be polite they had they're going to say things and i should have said the word polite um and it was clear from the context it gets chopped up why everything's weaponized now here's the problem in an emotional moment not for me but the community, it is not a time where talking balance is going to be well-received. But isn't that a journalist's job? Absolutely. But I'm saying time, place, and manner, okay? A big test in the law when you deal with constitutionality. Time, place, and manner, meaning that, okay, but when did this happen? And where were you? And how, what was going on, the manner when this was happening? That is relevant also. When they see video, and when I say they, I mean the black

community. Yes, I believe George Floyd was one of the only incidents I've ever seen that involved violence against minorities or black specifically that brought in as much white consensus as George Floyd did. Because there was graphic evidence right there. It was so beyond the pale. When I first saw it, I said, there's only one thing that makes this make sense. The only thing that makes this make sense is if that officer knew George Floyd from the nightclub that they worked at and hated him and was some kind of capo within the force where he could co-op the other guys. And that proved out to not be the case.

That might have made sense as motivation, but not justification. Oh, no, no, never. No, there was no justification. It was obvious. I thought it was insanity for the guy to do that. It could never have made sense. So it was so egregious that the idea that there was a leavening principle at play, oh yeah, but this rarely happens. I don't believe it was

the time for that because it had to be understood that this can't happen. Absolutely. But other things happened around it spontaneously that needed to be placed in some kind of perspective. Yes. The problem is, to my idea of not ignoring the three, because it takes away your heft on the 10, by people calling them all protests when they were obviously riots and violent, you allowed people who felt that for some reason they needed to push back against the fact that the blacks have a hard time with police and say, well, look, they're lying for them now. Aren't we supposed to make distinctions? Difficult as those distinctions may be. Yes. We're supposed to make those distinctions. And I think that we failed, we being the media overall, I'm not really involved. No, you weren't, but I was. But that we could have done a better job of that. But there was also something else. I'm not prioritizing this above, but something which I didn't hear mentioned as often as

it should have been. Black Americans are not just talking about those who have feelings of distrust or wariness about the police. They're not just talking about the tragedies. They're talking about the traffic stops for driving while black. They're talking about a person with a master's degree and someone looking askance

while he's sort of window shopping and doing the things you and I can do all the time without somebody questioning why they're there. And what I'm about to say does not make me heroic. I think it's just, I'll bet that most of the people I know would have done the same thing. In 1996, my son, who's now 36 years old, would have been 10. And we're driving through St. Louis. Al Joyner, who was the brother of Jackie Joyner-Kersee in the region from East St. Louis,

Jackie Joyner-Kersee, one of the great Olympic athletes. Al Joyner was stopped right after the 96 Olympics in Atlanta for driving while black. And that was his sole... Oh, they wreck it? Oh, fine. Go on your way. So I try to explain to my son, Keith, you know, unless I run a red light or unless I'm speeding, no one's going to stop me. But I'm almost, except for the color of our skin, I'm almost the same person as Ozzie Smith. We're roughly the same age. We weren't born in St. Louis, but sports brought us to St. Louis. Sports, baseball especially, is our connection to St. Louis. We're in roughly the same economic class. He lives not far from us, but he could be stopped driving down this road.

Now, they'd recognize him and they'd say, oh, Ozzy, have a good game tonight. But that won't happen to you or to me. And we need to understand that. I don't think that's a brilliant observation, but it's something that we need to be aware of. And those indignities play into people's responses, even if those responses are not numerically supported, factually supported. The idea, Bill Maher mentioned this, and I may be getting the figures wrong, but this is probably a year or so ago that Bill cited this.

They asked Democrats how many police killings of Black Americans on each year. And the number was wildly, wildly above. Not black people being surveyed, Democrats. Wildly above what it actually was. What's true is bad enough. But it's our job to provide some proportion, some perspective, and not just play to people's emotions. Yeah, it's just not easy. And that's not a defense. I'm saying it's not easy because we're dealing in a climate where your audience isn't a bunch of constuses. It's a bunch of people

who want to hear certain things. And that doesn't mean that you've got to tell them those things. Look, I have been, you know, this is why I believe in being the man in the arena. This is why I believe in doing the job and taking what comes along with it that is not nice. Because I think the job matters anyway. And, you know, if that means that the left doesn't like what you're doing, if it means that Trump villainizes you and makes you have to move, which happened in my case, then it happens. He made you have to move your residence?

Oh, yeah. Absolutely. I don't know the story. His guys kept coming to my house and saying shit to my kids. And I was going to fold somebody up and wind up in jail. So was your reporting that it pissed him off? No, his guys were pissed off because he would come after me by name. And he decided-

Come after you by name because of your reporting? Yeah. Well, look, I believe in the, you know, he can speak for himself, obviously, but I believe the former president believes that because we're both somebodies from New York, I was supposed to like be his guy or something like that. And instead I became Zucker's guy in his mind once their relationship went bad. You know, at one point that would have been good that I was Zucker's guy because he likes it. So he weaponized his discontent and his guys started coming to my house and, you know, throwing shit on the lawn.

You know, some stuff is like normal. Driving into my driveway is not normal. Anyway, my point is I'm no victim. What I'm saying is it is very hard when the media will punish the media for not appeasing the audience. And by audience, it's a defined term as a fringe or minority aspect of the audience that the media can use against the member of the media that they want to in that moment. And it does break left. I think there's good and bad reason for that. And it's important thing for people to know. And it's why I didn't like Bernie's book. I thought he had a point, though.

I thought Bernie had a point. But he absented himself from that notion until it didn't suit him anymore. And then he's going to be a truth teller. That always bothers me. You didn't do it in the moment. You didn't do it when you were there. You knew it then, too. How about that, Bob Costas?

Short man, big ideas. He has been a friend and a mentor for a really long time. He's also a mensch. To come in here and sit with me and give me all this time. And how about the gift of his perspective for you? He is so nice. We're doing him twice. You got a big serving now. There's even more to come.

I'll see you next time.