Below you can read the highlights and listen to the entire CYInterview for some interesting insights from one of America’s most successful fiction writers today and learn about her latest book, titled Deadlocked:

Listen to the entire Charlaine Harris CYInterview:

Have trouble listening to the audio?
Listen here

Browse CYInterview.com while you listen – Click here

In October 2008, Charlaine Harris became the only author to have an entire series on the New York Times bestsellers list for her books on which the the HBO series True Blood is based. She believes fantasy fiction gets a bump in sales during challenging economic times.

“I think people particularly in economically depressed times are anxious to read something that really doesn’t bare much relationship to their daily life. So fantasy fiction also traditionally takes a bump in sales during depressed economic times…That was pretty soon after True Blood started airing and though my books had been selling very, very well before that, the screening of True Blood just gave them a huge bump and I was the beneficiary of that bump and all the books started selling suddenly even more than they had before. So it just, all the numbers just combined and that incredible week happened.”

When looking at her 30 years writing books, Ms. Harris reflects about what it takes to write good fiction and looks at how the Sookie Stackhouse series came together and what it takes to make a good series of books:

“I think you have to have a conviction that you have a story to tell and that you really think people will enjoy reading it. I think you have to have a lot of determination. I guess you just have to write what entertains you and hope that it will also entertain other people…Having started the series, there is a lot of pressure. I have to say most of it was self applied in the hopes that each book would be better than the one proceeding it. Sometimes I make my target, sometimes I don’t, but I always try. The first book was a hard sell. I’d been published many years before when I wrote conventional mysteries, but the first book was a leap for me. It was out of the genre people were use to me being in and it took a long time for my agent to sell it.”

NY Times Bestselling Author Charlaine Harris

Commenting on the latest book from the Sookie Stackhouse series titled Deadlocked, Charlaine shares with us what her goals were. The character Sookie Stackhouse is telepathic, has a vampire boyfriend and deals with many challenges in her daily life. Deadlocked opens with Sookie and her female friends at a male strip club:

“There was a lot to tie together, a certain amount of plot threads that I had to end or resolve in some way. Plus I had to show her further development as a character and the events and the various supernatural communities and human communities that comprise her world…I just thought it would be a good note to start the book on, not any blood and guts, something that has a serious undertone when one of the people there realize it’s her husband up on the stage. For research I talked extensively to a male stripper.”

With the vampire craze sweeping America in recent years, from the Twilight movies to the HBO series True Blood inspired by her books, Ms. Harris has given the most interesting answer I’ve heard to date on why vampire entertainment has been a hot sell in recent years:

“I think aside from the escape into fantasy in general, maybe vampires in particular because Americans are always trying to look younger than they are. They’re always trying to perfect themselves physically and vampires are frozen at the moment they were turned which was usually at their physical peak. I think that’s kinda the American ideal to be forever as you are. Not to age or change.”

With the age of technology continuing to move along at what some would say is warp speed, Charlaine gives her thoughts on the state of literacy in America and people reading books on electronic devices:

“I thought about it extensively as you might imagine, but as a matter of fact, I think that books being on small screens will actually encourage reading because people now are conditioned to look at screens. They love their little gadgets that they carry with them and I’m not trying to sound patronizing, I’ve got my own little gadgets, but I think since the advent of eBooks, I think reading is up. I actually think more people are reading because they can do it on a device they can carry with them in their pocket.”

With 30 years of writing fiction, NY Times Bestselling success and books translated into 20 languages, Charlaine Harris says tells us what she’s most proud of in her writing career:

“My greatest accomplishment is producing a book I’m proud of and looking back on a scene and saying I did that right. There are a handful of things in the books I’ve written in my life, maybe you know five to ten scenes when I think I just did that as well as I ever could even if I look at in ten years I’ll say, ‘I did the best on that I could ever do.’ And I’m really proud of that. I wish I could sustain that for a whole book, but writing like everything else has different levels of excellence and you just have to keep striving. Writing is never easy no matter how many years you do it, unfortunately.”

You can find more information and purchase a copy of Charlaine Harris’s Deadlocked here

The following dates are listed below for Charlaine Harris’s Deadlocked book tour:

May 4: CHARLESTON, SC @ 7 PM
Barnes & Noble, 1812 Rittenberg Blvd., Charleston, SC

May 5: LEXINGTON, KY @ 7 PM
Joseph-Beth Booksellers, 161 Lexington Green Circle, Lexington, KY

May 6: CHARLOTTE, NC @ 3 PM
Barnes & Noble, 3327 Pineville-Matthews Rd., Charlotte, NC

May 7: WINSTON-SALEM, NC @ 7 PM
Bookmarks, 2133 Bethabara Rd., Winston-Salem, NC

May 8: MEMPHIS, TN @ 7 PM
That Bookstore in Blytheville, 316 W. Main St., Blytheville, AR

May 9: JACKSON, MS @ 7 PM
Barnes & Noble, 1000 Highland Colony Parkway, Ridgeland, MS

May 10: BATON ROUGE, LA @ 7 PM
Barnes & Noble, 25900 Citiplace Court, Baton Rouge, LA

May 11: HOUSTON, TX @ 7 PM
Murder by the Book, 2342 Bissonnet St., Houston, TX

May 12: AUSTIN, TX @ 7 PM
Bookpeople, 603 North Lamar, Austin, TX

Charlaine Harris’s official website is here.

You can email Chris Yandek at ChrisYandek@CYInterview.com Chris is available for interviews to comment on anything featured on CYInterview.

You can follow Chris Yandek on Twitter here.

In recent months, mainstream media outlets have discussed the state of the Senate, particularly its seeming lack of getting much accomplished. Members of Congress have seemed to forget the art of compromise. With this in mind, and with his new book out, we are pleased to have had the opportunity to speak with former Senator Specter. During this CYInterview, featured columnist Jay Bildstein continued to put forward his solutions to change the environment in Congress:

Below you can read the entire transcript or listen to the entire CYInterview:

Listen to the entire Alren Specter CYInterview:

Have trouble listening to the audio?
Listen here

Browse CYInterview.com while you listen – Click here

Chris Yandek: Senator, thank you so much for joining us today. We really, greatly appreciate it and I want to get right into it with you and say you know, looking at one of the biggest messages of the book, you talk about the lack of centrists, the lack of moderates, the lack of people in Washington willing to meet in the middle. The question I have for you as you very well know, Maine’s Olympia Snowe has recently retired because she can’t deal with not being able to be a moderate. How are we ever going to get anything accomplished in Congress? How are we ever gonna get anything accomplished in the Senate if we can’t have people meet in the middle, if we can’t have people compromising?

Arlen Specter: “The perspective answer has been supplied by what happened to Senator Murkowski in Alaska. We’ve had a situation where the extremes have taken control of both parties where you have a strong senator like Bob Bennett in Utah with a 93 percent conservative rating, can’t win a Republican primary because of a single vote. Similarly you have an outstanding senator like Joe Lieberman from Connecticut who can’t win a Democratic primary.

Well, with Senator Lisa Murkowski, she was opposed in a primary by a Tea Party candidate, she was defeated, but she came back to win a write in. And you know how hard it is to write in Murkowski. If you put a y instead of an I, your ballot’s thrown out. But that showed and she won the primary statewide, virtually unprecedented move in American political history. It shows that if you acquaint the people with the nature of the problem and motivate them, but you can get the center out to put a moderate in government. I think that could be a microcosm of what could be done in this 2012 election.”

CY: Well, I know that Jay is gonna want to talk with you about the center and he’ll have some ideas for you that we’ve been talking about with so many high profile people in politics, so Jay why don’t you go ahead.

Jay Bildstein: Well, Senator Specter first of all, thank you for being with us here today. It’s an honor to be speaking with you. To follow up on what Chris said, you know, you make this point and I really take to mean that for our nation to be led well it’s gotta be led from the center, certainly not from the far left, certainly not from the far right. But for a nation to be led well we need leaders and to me, and I think to many Americans, to be a leader means to lead by example.

Now in our current economic climate, where meaningful adjustments are gonna have to be made to insure the financial well being of the nation, I’ve put forward and I’ve spoken to this to a number of people. One of the last folks we just spoke to is somebody who I regard very highly, former U.S. Comptroller General David Walker and I put forward a three point fiscal leadership plan which consists of the following: One, the Congress, president and vice president need to take a 50 percent pay cut in salaries because after all currently, we’re practically borrowing half the money, which is being paid to them and which is using to go to fund most of the programs of the nation and they have to give up their rich after office benefits. Two, we need a lifetime embargo on lobbying. And three, there need to be term limits. I wonder what your thoughts on that type of plan are?

AS: “Well, I think that if you cut the president’s salary by 50 percent it would be symbolic, but it wouldn’t save you a lot of money. When you talk about lobbying, I think there you do put your finger on it, on an important nerve where there is too much influence by the lobbyists, too much political fundraising, too much bundling and really too much influence. Of course that’s only a fraction of the problem which you have in larger measure by the decision in Citizen’s United where now the Supreme Court is allowing corporations and unions to make unlimited and anonymous expenditures.

When you get to the subject of term limits, there I’m hesitant. You got a very tough ingrained bureaucracy. I served as Chairman of the Intelligence Committee. Let me tell you, it’s tough to find out what the CIA is doing. They led us astray on the weapons of mass destruction that they said Saddam Hussein found. We sent out Collin Powell, Secretary of State, former National Security Counselor, chief of staff, four star general, couldn’t find it out. I’d be reluctant to cut into term limits. I think if the voters would become informed and aroused, they could impose the proper limits on the guys who ought to be out, guys and gals.”

JB: Senator, do you think that there’s a reason that some, not all, but that some people in Congress have, at least it seems to me, a lot of people we’ve spoken to kind of act in a way that is not kind of congruent with what the average American is dealing with. I mean, I read all the time, all these different kind of fiscal plans looking to solve the financial and economic ills of the United States of America.

Don’t you think we should be in a nation where the people who lead us and have to make the tough fiscal decisions, if they ask the every man or the every woman, “Hey! Pull your belt in two notches,” shouldn’t they be willing to pull their belt in four notches to kind of say, “Look” – like a good leader in a battle, like a good platoon sergeant – “Look, guys. I’m in front of you. I’m not behind you saying take that hill. I’m in front of you saying follow me,”?

Shouldn’t we at least work to do something in Congress, where American people – David Walker said we’re gonna have to renegotiate the social insurance contract of America; I think he knows what he’s talking about – don’t you think we’re gonna have to ask our leaders somehow to do a bit more than they ask of the general public to kind of raise morale and say, “It’s not Washington hypocrisy,”?

AS: “Yeah. But what I would ask the leaders to do is to better understand the American people. I would insist that the leaders have town meetings and meet the people and listen to them and find out what is on their minds. I made it a point in 30 years to cover virtually every county, virtually every year. When I turned up for my town meetings in 2009 when the Tea Party rebellion is starting to swell, had a very famous town meeting, 1200 people, stormed of the Bastille, shaking their fists in my face.

I’d make – before I’d elect somebody – I’d make him do town meetings and face the people and then I would insist that the person not run on a platform of no compromising. The meaningful thing that the leaders could do would be to be dedicated to a discussion across the isle, to vote their consciences and not to follow the strict party line. I think that would lead to sensible decisions. I would seek leadership on those really meaningful ways. Make those demands and make them stick or vote them out.”

CY: I think more so than anything else I agree with you on many of the things you’re saying, but you know looking at the future of the Senate as someone who was there for three decades, you know if we have people on the far left and we have people on the far right and no one is willing to compromise, no one is willing to meet in the middle, no one is willing to have some taxes raised with some cuts applied to a budget plan, how are we ever going to get any meaningful legislation done in the Senate going forward. Isn’t it just dysfunctional at this point?

AS: “Well, we have people there who do have substantial wisdom and substantial experience. And if they were confident enough to express their own views, that they wouldn’t be bushwhacked by the party for casting a single vote like Bob Bennett was or like I was, they’d be willing to speak up and they’d be willing to speak their consciences and put their ideas on the line. But right now, there is timidity, there is fear that if they do that a single votes gonna cost them their job and they’re not willing to make that kind of a sacrifice and they’re not enough with the people. How many members of Congress go face the people in a town meeting and are prepared to answer questions from the floor. That to me is the real litmus test.”

CY: I think I agree with you, what you’re saying is that, but people at the same time need to hold their public officials accountable. But what I say to you is when I look at that scenario, you know if you’re in Washington and you’re concerned about one vote that’s possibly gonna get you voted out, you’re really not being a public official. A public official is someone who goes to Washington to benefit the public and that means that they’re not worried about being a career politician.

And the problem we have with Washington right now Senator is we’ve got too many career politicians. We’ve got too many people who are concerned only about you know, continuing to have this public official job that they think is supposed to be a long term career from the private sector and that’s just not the case.

AS: “Well, you and I agree. I think a public official ought to follow his conscience as to what is in the public interest, not what will protect his job. Listen, great talking to you, but I gotta move on.”

CY: Well, thank you very much for your time senator. We greatly appreciate it.

JB: Thank you senator. Thank you very much. Have a very nice day.

AS: “Good talking. Thank you.”

You can purchase a copy and find out more information about Alren Specter’s book Life Among The Cannibals: A Political Career, a Tea Party Uprising, and the End of Governing As We Know It here

You can email Chris Yandek at ChrisYandek@CYInterview.com Chris and Jay are available for interviews to comment on anything featured on CYInterview.

You can follow Chris Yandek on Twitter here.

Steve Russell, a now retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel, in his recently released book We Got Him! A Memoir of the Hunt and Capture of Saddam Hussein, delivers over 400 pages drawn from his journals, as well as research on his time in Iraq. Having served 21 years in the military, he gives us an up close view of the war and what the American military went through to find Iraq’s former dictator, Saddam Hussein. Lt. Col. Russell commanded the 1st Battalion, 22nd Infantry Regiment, 4th Infantry Division, comprising 1000 soldiers, in the first year of the Iraq war.

Aside from the search for the former Iraqi dictator, Mr. Russell gives answers to many important questions about the Iraq war.

You can read the highlights and listen to the entire CYInterview below:

Listen to the entire CYInterview with LT. Col. Steve Russell:

Have trouble listening to the audio?
Listen here

Browse CYInterview.com while you listen – Click here

Mr. Russell writes in his book that in May of 2003, “No one in the entire command from generals to soldiers knew how the Iraqi people would react following the overthrow of Saddam Hussein and the defeat of his army in the field it was assumed we would simply transition to better times. Neither Colonel Jim Hickey who would soon be my commander, nor I believed the theory of better times.” Steve Russell discusses the unknown part of the Iraq war:

“I think the unknown was how the Iraqi people would react to us once we occupied their country. That was the big unknown as I started in the book. We did feel that with his regime gone, if Saddam himself were captured that that would take the wind out of the sails of a lot of the resistance because as we know now, Saddam was fully intending to develop an insurgency to cause us to lose national will and to pull out and he could restore himself to power.

The odd twist in it was when al-Qaeda came in the 2004 timeframe, 2005 and they began co opt the failing insurgency under Saddam. I mean, that’s all for the historic record now…There was an insurgent effort planned even before we had fully defeated Saddam’s army. They knew that they could not keep the American forces out of the country and they planned to resist us once we occupied it…Were it not for the Iraqi people, Saddam would never have been captured and Iraq would never have been put in its path toward progress that we see today.”

With the December 2011 announcement by President Obama declaring the war was over, Lt. Col. Russell reacts to the end of the war. In 2008, Mr. Russell went back to Iraq to do research for the book. He gives us his thoughts, based on experience, about the future of Iraq.

“As we get to the pullout, it’s kind of mixed emotion. On the one hand and I’m speaking for myself as a solider who served there, I’m thrilled to see the future that Iraq has and I’m also thrilled that we go home having accomplished the mission. That’s very rewarding. To have that robbed from us from our own nation would’ve left a huge hole in us that could never be healed. So very grateful that we left Iraq on favorable terms and having had every mission that we were asked to do accomplished…

I was stunned even in 2008 at how much security had improved, how much the Iraqis already were in control of their own country and was hardened by that and that was three years ago. So I have no doubt and I have many friends in Iraq and stay in touch with them. These people are far better off than they were at any time under Saddam…We drove from Baghdad [in 2008] to Tikrit 160 miles, went there and back. You want to test security and see what it’s like? Go do that. And I was able to do that and I’m talking to you here today and I was struck by how much Iraq was in charge of their own security and in charge of their own country.”

In the last few years of the Iraq war there was less and less media coverage of the ongoing events of the conflict. Besides death announcements of fallen American soldiers there wasn’t much else. The retired military man discusses the media coverage of the war:

“You had some very good field reporters and I learned a lot about their trade, but most were not and the only news that they seemed to want to portray was another soldier killed in Iraq today. We have to get beyond this as a country. It’s like we only celebrate the antihero, the victim, the downcast, the downtrodden who’s the victim of the man somewhere. I just, I don’t understand this mentality that we are migrating through as Americans.

And I think that that’s largely responsible in how things are viewed through the lens of the camera or the printed matter as it comes. Many reporters and you’ll see in this book were very frustrated that the stories that they filed would be bumped for some latest celebrity’s shenanigans or they would be bumped because the editors didn’t feel it fit in with their political viewpoint. The reporters were very frustrated by that, the field reporters.”

To the average American, it was never truly clear what exactly the mission was in Iraq toward the end of the conflict. As the commander of 1000 men in the first year of the war, Lt. Colonel Russell lays out the mission:

“Same it was when we went in. And here’s the thing, when we were ordered to go to Iraq, we were given very clear objectives. You have to remember, I was a task force commander of 1000 soldiers so I would’ve been given at leas the operational level of what the mission was and it was pretty clear. It was defeat Saddam’s army, remove Saddam’s regime from power, kill or capture Saddam and bring him to justice, provide stability to the point where they could rebuild and restructure their own institutions and that would set the conditions for independence and we could leave. That was the objective, those five things. I remember them clear as a bell. Well, guess what? That takes a little time and the remarkable thing is that we were able to do it in just eight years.”

What about the biggest misconceptions about the Iraq War?

“Well, I think that people refused to look at the war beyond a singular president and that’s the biggest mistake. You cannot look at this war through the lens of a single president. You have to look at this war through the lens of 30 years in the past. And what I mean by that, well, the very national policy that launched us into Iraq was called the Iraqi Liberation Act and it was signed by President Clinton in 1998. It was very good policy in 1998 when it was signed and it was good when we implemented it in 2003. It called for regime removal…

He [Saddam Hussein] was trying to develop mass destructive weapons to include nuclear weapons. The record is there. We found evidence of it even in Iraq. That’s a big misconception. Oh, there was no WMD, there was no nuclear program. That is false… They were clearly on a path to develop destructive weapons. Was that the only basis for going in? No. It never was. It was never about WMD. It was about what right does one man have to defy the entire world and put it in a kilter. Every western country’s national policy and every Middle Eastern country’s national policy revolved around him and his irritation to the world. He had to be brought to account and I’m very proud to have been a part of bringing him to justice.”

To those people who believe the American military didn’t find any weapons of mass destruction, the former military commander tells this story:

“Let me share a story with you. A good buddy of mine Chuck Sexton commanded Task Force 136 in Baghdad and he went on a raid. They were able to capture Dr. Mahdi Obeidi with a special operations forces team, Saddam’s nuclear physicist. When they got there he said, ‘Well, what you’re looking for is in the garden under the rose bushes.’ They began to dig and they found a western manufactured zippe centrifuge. And if you know anything about nuclear technology, you know that a zippe centrifuge is crucial to the development of nuclear weapons. Only a handful of countries have ever been able to acquire one. Let me name them, Israel, India, Pakistan, North Korea, what do they all have in common? They all have nuclear weapons.

So to say that Saddam was never on the path to develop nuclear weapons is categorically false. The evidence is there. The facts are there. And if you read Dr. Madhi Obedi’s book, wasn’t a best selling title, it was called The Bomb in My Garden, but he lays it out and he states in that book that he was convinced that the processed the technology to develop a nuclear weapon, but what they had the problem was gaining certain key elements of raw materials, but by playing the game they would be able to smuggle in the different materials over time with the inspections and all of that and he felt that if Saddam ever got his hands on a nuclear weapon, he would actually have used it because he used every other destructive weapon he ever possessed.”

In posing the question to the retired military veteran about why American soldiers are in over 100 countries worldwide, instead of bringing them home to spend money in America, Mr. Russell provided this response:

“The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits US Military from serving in a police capacity. You don’t want US soldiers serving as policeman. That makes us a dictatorship. Let’s get back to what our republic is here and to defend our economic interests and to defend our national security interests, it necessarily requires involvement in other places in the world. Let’s wake up here. In terms of do we need the soldiers in all of these different countries, well, do we need embassies?

Do you need business transaction and people in all of these different countries? When people quote things like that, they’re counting ever soldier that stands guarding an embassy, they’re counting every soldier that is on a mission of training or partnership….I look at those statistics and I kind of laugh because they’re only intended to skew a certain viewpoint. If we have our global commitments in the world, we necessarily have global interaction with people in the world. That’s just the reality.”

There is no denying the United States military should protect the country, but it begs the question particularly in challenging economic times and with the government running massive deficits, should the military really be protecting economic and financial interests around the world? Should that be the role of America’s military? This is the retired lieutenant colonel’s response:

“They always have. Name a time they have not. From the Shores of Tripoli to the Barbary Pirates and Thomas Jefferson, go back and read your history. The military is the arm of our political government. It always has been and we don’t make and set the policy. We defend it. But with regard to defending within the borders, we never want to be viewed as a police state. Our founding fathers formed this country with a great suspicion of standing armies.

They believe the citizen soldier and the militia would be more than adequate to defend the country in time of crisis. So our own national history requires a separation between soldiers being on guard in the borders our country. I don’t think we want to constitutionally broach that. But in terms of defending different things in the world, well, should we not? Should we become isolationists? Should we pretend that we don’t have all of these economic enterprises? Do we want to shut down the entire economy, what’s left of it in our country by not being engaged in partnerships around the world? “

In closing, Steve Russell tells us what he believes the future of the American military is:

“Well, I think what we’ll see after every drawdown in a national crisis or war time is that we will see budgets slashed, we will see the troop numbers decline and necessarily so in some areas. So we’ll see a much streamline, smaller military. We’ll see contracts disappear. We’ll see civilian workers grow smaller in number and then, you know, we will reach a critical point where we just say, ‘No. We have to have this much even to defend our modest obligations.’

So there’s gonna be a lot of trials going forth in the future. One thing I do hope is that we will not get an overreliance on the technical means of fighting and absent the boots on the ground. I think one thing we’ve clearly learned in Iraq and Afghanistan is while the technical things are great enhancers to fighting, they’re not replacement. You have to have people on the ground that are willing to pull dictators out of holes and are willing to go into the mountains of Afghanistan to find bad guys in caves.”

You can purchase a copy and find more information about We Hot Him! A Memoir of the Hunt and Capture of Saddam Hussein clicking here

The We Got Him! official Facebook page is here.

You can email Chris Yandek at ChrisYandek@CYInterview.com Chris is available for interviews to comment on anything featured on CYInterview.

You can follow Chris Yandek on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/chrisyandek

In our ongoing coverage of all things Michael Jackson, including speaking with his sister La Toya Jackson [see here] and [here], former choreographer for the This Is It Tour Travis Payne [see here] and our one hour interview remembering Michael in 2009 with former Sony executives Cory Rooney and Chris Apostle [see here], our CYInterview with Mr. Cascio covers MJ’s life on a day to day basis, over a period of years.

You can listen to the entire CYInterview below or read the highlights:

Listen to the entire Frank Cascio CYInterview:

Have trouble listening to the audio?
Listen here

Browse CYInterview.com while you listen – Click here

Frank Casci believes he was one of the few who truly knew who Michael Jackson was. Frank met Michael as a young child through his father Dominic who was an employee at a hotel Michael visited on different occasions. Because Michael formed a friendship with Frank’s father, Frank got to spend a lot of time with the gloved one and would later go from being a friend to a working employee for Michael and dealing with many different business aspects of MJ’s career.

“I think I’m one of the few who actually knew this man and got to see so many different sides of him over a long period of time and you know, I’ve been blessed because Michael doesn’t bring many people into his life, especially for that long period of a time…If it wasn’t for my father being the person who he was, this would have never even been possible. It could have been anyone, but Michael took an affection to my father.”

Frank tells a story of one of his early experiences with Michael, recounted in My Friend Michael, about Madonna inviting the king of pop back to her hotel room. Cascio gives his thoughts on the story:

“Girls would throw themselves at Michael. But yeah, Madonna, that’s right, wanted to seduce, tried to seduce Michael and I remember Michael telling us that story. He admitted he was so shy with her because she was overly aggressive and Michael’s a very sensitive man.”

Frank shows a personal side of Michael, sharing stories about him kissing and dating numerous women. He agreed that Michael’s attraction to women was something that generally wasn’t focused on.

“It was downplayed. And I’ll tell you, Michael was private about that part of his life. Michael was attracted to women. He had a very particular type and it’s funny because people wouldn’t think it, but it’s a simpleton. He was dating this girl who he really cared about and you know and she cared about him and it was great to see, but it was also kept very private because Michael did not want to, you know, expose this girl and have the media from the outside ruin a relationship that he really was enjoying and you know, he likes slender, tall, simpletons, sweet, humble, soft-spoken girls. And I’m really happy that Michael actually found that in his life later on.”

As a minor, Frank Cascio traveled the world with Michael Jackson – with his parents’ consent – and saw many his of live performances around the world. Frank says Michael is not a pedophile and didn’t have any physical attraction to young children. He says those comments are hurtful:

“Michael has never ever once ever invited a child to stay in his room, sleep in his bed. Michael’s never invited a child to stay in his room. You know, it’s different. You want to stay with him. You wanted. It’s like hanging with your buddy. It’s like having a slumber party. And Michael was a child at heart. There was nothing sexual about Michael. He had no attraction to young children. It’s just disgusting. I’m so hurtful [sic] by those misconceptions, that in particular. Michael loves children for their innocence and their purity and that was his inspiration. It just hurts me because Michael is not a pedophile and has been falsely accused and that’s hurt him.”

Regarding Michael, Mr. Cascio does get into some stories about Michael Jackson’s use of prescription drugs. For a period of time, Frank states he was monitoring Michael’s prescription drug intake. He also believes there were doctors who took advantage of him. Cascio also speaks of Michael’s chronic back pain.

“I was concerned when I saw some doctors come in, give him medicine and how he would react to it and his state of mind. And you know, for a period of time, it was something that I was concerned about. He was also going through many, many things. He had back issues. He had, who’s trying to take money from him here. Who’s trying to accuse him of this on this end? Who’s trying to, you know, friends just let him down and go sell him out.

He had all these different factors coming in and what was going on. Yes, I was concerned and Michael resorted to some medicines more than I personally think he should of, but I’m not a doctor…I also believe that Michael was also manipulated by many doctors and was taken advantage of that because they saw him as a money pit… It was bad. He had constant back pain for years…After all these years, it [performing] just took a tool on his body and that’s where the chronic pain came from…Nobody can understand it, but your body takes a beating, it takes abuse and Michael’s body was abused after all these years of working, working, dancing, dancing, dancing and it took a toll on him and it caught up with him.”

Frank agreed that it’s hard for people to accept that Michael Jackson was just another human being, who dealt with issues and troubles like everyone else:

“I think it is because you would never know; because every time Michael was performing, or in front of you, you never saw that side of, you only saw the professionalist. You only saw the genius. You saw the brilliance. You saw someone very, very special and unique. And even, and I can’t say when the cameras were off or he’s on stage he wasn’t you know, special and unique, but he was, but there’s also a human side of him that he didn’t want, you know, some people to see immediately. Later in life he wanted everyone to see the human side of his stuff, to understand. Michael wasn’t very good at communicating and explaining himself to people. “

When it comes to some people believing Dr. Conrad Murray was the fall guy in the death of Michael Jackson, Mr. Cascio states that he believes Dr. Murray is the only person who was responsible for Michael’s death.

“Dr. Murray was the ignorant doctor, selfish, manipulated Michael, portrayed himself to be a doctor that he wasn’t. And out of negligence, ignorance and selfishness, we lost Michael Jackson because of Dr. Murray.”

In a story published, not that long ago, about Marlin Brando, Elizabeth Taylor and Michael Jackson driving across country together and ending up in Ohio after 9/11, Cascio says that story is completely inaccurate. He tells me that Michael was with his family in New Jersey after the events of September 11th, 2011.

“That’s completely, completely inaccurate. After 9/11, Michael and I, his family, his kids I should say, got in a car and went to my family’s house in New Jersey and we were there for a couple of weeks, maybe two or three weeks. We were in Franklin Lakes, New Jersey. And that story is completely inaccurate.”

There is a quote on page 96 of Cascio’s book claiming the gloved one said to Frank, “All you have to do is study these pictures and these words. Look in the mirror and tell yourself what you want to happen. Do that every day and it will happen.” Frank elaborates on that:

“The key to his success first was in the form of do everything from a place of love and do everything that you do the best. And before The Secret and all these documentaries and books coming out, Michael understood the secret way before The Secret. Michael understood being connected with God, the universe, whatever you may want to call it and believing in yourself and it all comes from within.”

You can find more information and purchase a copy of Frank Cascio’s book My Friend Michael here.

You can email Chris Yandek at ChrisYandek@CYInterview.com

Numerous commentators and followers of the trial believed it was a slam dunk that Ms. Anthony would be found guilty. Many individuals posting on the Internet and calling into various talk shows shared their anger and frustration with the jury’s verdict.

Lots of people still have questions about the case, as well as dealing with something of a lack of closure regarding three year old Caylee’s death. Former prosecutor Jeff Ashton works at giving answers in his new book, Imperfect Justice: Prosecuting Casey Anthony.

Below are some of the highlights from Mr. Ashton’s CYInterview. We discuss many of the important events surrounding the trial. However, if you really want to learn about the multifaceted Casey Anthony trial and its aftermath, listen to the complete audio.

___________________________

Listen to the entire Jeff Ashton CYInterview:

Have trouble listening to the audio?
Listen here

Browse CYInterview.com while you listen – Click here

Attorney Jeff Ashton opens up by explaining that he hopes Imperfect Justice will be the closure for everyone who was not happy with the decision of the jury, in addition to providing answers to their questions:

“What I’m trying to say to people is, here’s everything we know about the case, here’s as much truth as I can give you. Here’s an understanding of how the system works and I think that they need to understand that to kind of not accept the result, but at least try to understand it as best as it can be understood and then to get some closure and move on with it, move on with their lives.

And you know, the amount of anger that I was seeing out there after the verdict concerned me ‘cause I mean you know, frustration and all those things are understandable, but the last thing I ever want to see is anybody do anything or respond angrily to a juror or to defense counsel or to the defendant or anything like that. So I’m hoping that this will give people a way of kind of closing on it and dealing with it and moving on.”

After Ms. Anthony was found not guilty, some people voiced hopes that something bad would happen to her, since they believed she was responsible for the death of Caylee. Recently, there were reports of death threats against her. Attorney Ashton says this type of reaction is alarming. He hopes people will move on and resolve to save other children’s lives.

“It’s alarming. It’s not something that I ever want to see come out of a criminal case. And you know, some people I think just at some point got to, they took it too personally, it became too personal. For a lot of people I think Caylee became personal. And that’s a real tribute to the memory of that little girl, but there’s a point where you have to say, well let’s step back from this. The system operated in a certain way, we don’t agree with it, but it’s time to just accept it and move on to find ways you know to protect the next Caylee.”

Why were many people so emotionally invested in a murder trial that had no direct impact on their lives? Jeff Ashton explains:

“I think it probably started out with the fact that the original report was that Caylee was missing. I think if on July the 16th the story had been Caylee Anthony found dead, this would have not been the kind of story it was. But I think the fact that she was missing captured the imagination of so many people in hopes that she would be found. That’s what everybody always thinks…You add that to the mother’s inexplicable attitude toward her disappearance, that the whole 31 days with doing nothing and not reporting it and that sort of adds to everyone’s sort of curiosity. They just want to know how is it possible for a mother to do this kind of thing.

So you put those together, it’s like, it’s the perfect combination, a perfect recipe for people to really get involved in the case. And I think that happened here. And of course you throw in you know, I refer to them as the infotainers who kind of used this case as a way of upping their ratings and inflaming passions and things like that.”

After the trial, one of the jurors spoke out and said the prosecution didn’t show them how Caylee died. Ashton stated in his book, ‘The jurors had to put the pieces together and apply some common sense to the notion of how people do and don’t act. This jury was not willing to do that, so in a sense we lost before we started.’ Jeff explains why the jury couldn’t put the pieces together and find Casey Anthony guilty, when it seemed everything was stacked against her.

“I’m not sure what the jury’s attitude or take was on Casey’s actions during that 31 days. You know, I don’t. To me, I think to most people, pretty persuasive of the fact that this wasn’t an accident. But the jury seemed to only want to look at medical evidence for proof of that issue and that I think was ultimately where why the verdict came out is because they were limiting that view on that issue only to medical evidence. And if we couldn’t prove to them medically how she died than they weren’t really willing to look at other evidence to make that determination and that’s what our case was based on.

It was based on the circumstances and the actions and the concept of common sense. I don’t know how the jury, if the jury actually felt it was reasonable that somebody would respond to an accidental drowning by you know putting duct tape over the face, wrapping them in a garbage bag and throwing them in the swamp. That seemed to me to be unreasonable, but perhaps the jury didn’t think so…I just can’t think of anything we could’ve said that would have gotten the jury to open their minds to the proof of these issues from a variety of sources. “

In his book, the Florida attorney provides a detailed view of Casey’s parents, George and Cindy. Former prosecutor Ashton describes Casey’s mother as someone who was in denial when it came to the actions of her daughter.

“I think Cindy really wanted in a sense, wanted to be lied to. You know, she wanted to accept whatever Casey was saying. I mean, you know, a normal person wouldn’t have gone for thirty days without seeing her granddaughter. You know it wouldn’t have taken a car that smelled like a dead body to get her moving, but that’s what it took for Cindy. Cindy would rather take whatever story Casey told her no matter how ridiculous it was and run with it rather than facing the truth.”

Ashton explains why he believes Caylee Anthony became less of the focal point during the trial as many in the media switched gears and focused on Casey Anthony and the murder charges she faced:

“That’s just a natural thing that happens in trials. It just is. I mean, as much as we as prosecutors try to keep the jury’s focus on the humanity of the individual, you know eventually the case just becomes about the defendant and you hope that whatever images o f the victim that you were able to get before the jury stays with them. We really hoped that Caylee and a concern for her and a concern for the truth about what happened to her would you know, make the journey want to put the work in to try to find the truth and just apparently we didn’t reach them on that level.”

There were a lot of questions during Casey Anthony’s trial regarding her defense attorney Jose Baez. There was discussion of some of his statements, that were defined as accusations and allegations without any concrete facts or evidence to back them up. Mr. Ashton says Mr. Baez was a good salesman with the jury and reviews the defense’s case.

“He’s a good salesman and I think that’s basically what a salesman does. You make, you put a shine on the car you’re trying to sell and hope that no one looks beneath the hood. And that’s very much what this defense was. It was shiny on the outside, but if you asked more than a couple of questions about it, it fell apart. I mean, the whole idea of you know somebody taking a body, a child that died by accident and hiding it from somebody you know on the surface sounds like oh maybe.

But then you go, wait a minute, how would you actually ever do that, you know. And why would you do that. Why would you think that you could do that…It’s that kind of like sound byte mentality, something that sounds good for a 30 second sound byte, but then when you actually subject it to analysis, it falls apart…This jury was sold and wanted to be sold.”

I asked Lawyer Ashton if he thought Ms. Anthony might end up having further legal troubles in her life. This was his prediction on her future:

“I think Casey’s probably bigger danger in her life is ending up on the wrong side of someone that she’s lied to. I think that would be, if I wanted to guess on how she’s gonna end up, it would be that she’s gonna lie to somebody and they’re not gonna take it very well and they’re not gonna go to the police. But yeah it’s hard to predict what will happen with someone else. I mean, really I can say for sure about Casey is that Casey will continue to lie to people. That’s the thing I’m sure about.”

Comparisons between the OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony murder trials are inevitable. Jeff talks about the comparison:

“Both of them in their own way were heavily forensic scientific cases. I think they had very different challenges in that case than our case. And I had the pleasure of meeting Marcia Clark two weeks ago when I was out in L.A. and she actually told me which really surprised me that they didn’t expect to win that case. So I guess that’s a big difference is we really did. We thought we were doing good…

It’s also an interesting comparison between sort of the trial of the television century and the trial of the Internet century. And I think this case really showed how things have changed with the advent of the Internet. I mean, hundreds of thousands of people had the ability to know everything about this case from the Internet. Every single piece of information was right out there and I think that’s a huge difference in the way people address criminal cases.”

Mr. Ashton talked about meeting OJ Simpson prosecutor, Marcia Clark and compares the trials:

“I felt like we were having a meeting of the loser’s club. It was amazing though. It’s you know, the amazing is that the reasons why her case and my case were huge were so completely different. I mean, her case was huge because of the defendant because of his notoriety and who he was and our case was really huge because of the facts and what happened and who the victim was. So it was pretty interesting meeting her.”

In 1987, Jeff Ashton says he was an attorney in the first case in the United States where DNA evidence was used, in State of Florida vs. Tommy Lee Andrews. He said it might be the first trial in the world that used DNA evidence, but he’s not sure. Before the trial of Casey Anthony, then prosecutor Ashton had only had two trials with not guilty verdicts.

“That was in the state of Florida in 1987 in a case called State of Florida vs. Tommy Lee Andrews. It was the first one in the United States and interesting enough, it probably was the first one in the world. Though I’ve never gotten the exact date of it, there was a case in England that was around the same period of time. I think it was a week or so after. So it may be the first in the world, at least surely the first in the U.S.”

A fun fact for everyone out there, Jeff Ashton went to high school with actress Angela Bassett where they acted in a play together. Some will recall my CYInterview with Ms. Bassett back in 2008 [see here]. Ashton recalls the Hollywood veteran.

“Actually I don’t recall what it was we were in. I was a senior. She was a junior. I just recall her as a friend being a very, very nice person. She was a cheerleader, you know homecoming court. One of those people that everybody wanted to be around. But just being very unassuming, very nice. And when I started, she went off to Yale after college I knew that she would be successful. But every time I see her on TV or in the movies or on stage, I’m just proud. You know she’s just – ‘cause she came from very, very modest surroundings. I think she was raised by a single mom in a not great part of St. Petersburg [Florida]. So you know she really is a credit to the fact that with the right support you can overcome anything, but yeah, every time I see her I just smile.”

There were a lot of followers of the Casey Anthony trial who were concerned about any profiting off the death of Caylee. With the writing of his book, Mr. Ashton says he didn’t have many concerns:

“I know there are people that, most people I’ve talked to sort of are angry about the possibility of the defendant or the defense counsel profiting from them because they feel like they’re dancing on Caylee’s grave. I haven’t gotten a whole lot of hostility about my book. But you know if there are people out there that don’t like the fact that I’m telling the story and that people are profiting from it, I understand that, I respect their opinion. That’s their opinion. Publishers don’t print books for free and you know I could not have spent the last four months writing this book if I wasn’t making money for it. So I don’t apologize to people for it. Not at all.”

Finally, some states have proposed Caylee’s Law, which would make it a felony for a parent not to report a missing child after 24 hours. Jeff gives his thoughts on the law and his ideas on a better solution:

“The whole issue of the Caylee’s Law to criminalize, I’m not sure that that’s really that helpful. I mean, this incident is one that is so unusual. I just don’t know that it’s gonna to be a kinda law that’s going to be applied a lot and of course there are also some I think constitutional problems with it. I mean to require someone to report a missing child potentially if that person has done something criminal in relation to that, well that’s a violation of the Fifth Amendment. So there are all those issues.

I do like some laws that I’ve heard of that are being suggested about making it a felony to lie in reference to a missing child. That I think is potentially something that could be good for society to you know to make it a little bit more serious to lie about a missing child than it would be to lie about you know a drunk driving case or a check being stolen. So I think that’s probably a step in the right direction.”

You can purchase a copy and find more information about Jeff Ashton’s book Imperfect Justice: Prosecuting Casey Anthony here.

You can email Chris Yandek at ChrisYandek@CYInterview.com

The candidate for the Republican presidential nomination has been doing double duty: out on the stump, running for president and, at the same time, touting her book Core of Conviction.

We asked our questions within the same overlapping context within which the congresswoman has been presenting herself to the American people. She wants to be president and is working at selling a book. We wanted answers on information presented in her book, as well as about her candidacy.

Our main goal was to engage Congresswoman Bachmann in a conversation about her being a – self-touted – consistent conservative. Our main point of focus was to be on fiscal issues seeing that the candidate has been amply covered when it comes to her social views.

CYInterview followers will know that featured columnist Jay Bildstein has been putting forward his set of ideas on how to effectuate positive change in the USA, both economically and otherwise. Jay’s premise is that our leaders – the president, vice-president and Congress – must lead by example. He says it would be the best way to demonstrate to the American people that our leaders in Washington are sincere about taking action in the best interests of the nation. Great things happen when people are inspired by leaders who walk their talk.

At the core of Jay’s ideas is a 50% pay cut for the president, vice-president and Congress. Certainly, this particular act of fiscal discipline would do almost nothing, dollar-wise, to reduce the federal budget deficit and debt. In the scope of the nation’s finances, it is an infinitesimal amount of money.

However, this type of action would demonstrate that the politicians in D.C. were willing to lead by example, accepting financial pain before they delivered it unto the American public. It could serve as a rallying point to deal with the nation’s budget woes.

Who better then self-proclaimed, consistent conservative, Michele Bachmann to agree with this idea?

As you will see in this CYInterview, that does not appear to be the case.

During our conversation, the congresswoman claimed she voted for and took a 5% pay cut this year (2011,) something we cannot find proof of anywhere. And we looked. Congress did cut its budget, but it is clear from Jay’s question, that he was talking about their pay. So far as we can tell there was no congressional pay cut, yet Congresswoman Bachmann claims one.

Ms. Bachmann attempted to avoid committing to Jay’s 50% congressional/presidential pay cut concept by talking around the issue, stating the need to cut everyone’s pay in the federal government by 50%, as well as removing certain governmental departments.

Logically, Jay came back and offered that whatever cuts would have to be made in Washington, it would make most sense to lead by example and immediately introduce a bill to cut congressional salaries. When Jay asked for a direct answer to his question, what followed was an interruption by one of Congresswoman Bachmann’s handlers, asking if there were any questions about the book.

The book is all about being conservative. The Congresswoman is running for president. She purports to be a fiscal conservative. Why not answer the question directly?

We could have pressed the issue, but our feeling was that the non-answer was an answer in and of itself. You decide.

The CYInterview was conducted on November 30th. Since then we researched whether members of Congress received a 5% pay cut this year. As mentioned above, we found nothing to support that assertion.

You can read and or listen to the entire CYInterview with Congresswoman Michele Bachmann below:

Listen to the entire Michele Bachmann CYInterview:

Have trouble listening to the audio?
Listen here

Browse CYInterview.com while you listen – Click here

Chris Yandek: This is Chris Yandek . Featured columnist Jay Bildstein is on this call with me. We are welcomed to bring to CYInterview Congresswoman Michele Bachmann of Minnesota. Her new book out is called Core of Conviction: My Story. Congressman [sic] thank you so much for joining me today. Where are you today? I believe you’re in Iowa before we begin.

Michele Bachmann: “I am in Des Moines, Iowa right now. I just did an interview with MSNBC and some other interviews. Now I’m just about to go up to Cedar Falls, Minnesota [sic] or Iowa where I’ll be speaking at the University of Northern Iowa and I’ll hold a townhall with the students there. Then I’ll be on my way to Waverly, Iowa to the Pizza Ranch and also to Charles City, Iowa to the Pizza Ranch and I’ll hold townhall meetings there as well today.”

CY: In Core of Conviction, I think you try very hard to express your beliefs and positions, but at the same time, you try to get across that you understand other people have different points of views. Do you feel like that’s one of the things you really haven’t had a chance to show people?

MB: “I think that’s true. A lot of people don’t realize that I grew up in a Democrat home and a Democrat family. We had one Republican in my family. And when I was growing up, we just assumed that we were all Democrats and I actually worked on Jimmy Carter’s campaign when he was running for President in 1976 and it was after he was elected and I saw the effects of his policies both on foreign policy and domestically that I decided that his policies didn’t match up with what I had believed my entire life. I became a Republican. I worked on Ronald Regan’s campaign and I never looked back.”

CY: Jay.

Jay Bildstein: Uh, Congresswoman Bachmann, in your book and on the stump you portray yourself as a fiscal conservative. Now for the most part we lack individuals in Washington who are willing to lead by example, to inspire the nation by applying budget cuts to themselves first, demonstrating they’re true fiscal conservatives. Now we need shared sacrifice. If people believe Congress and the president are living the good life while the rest of the nation is suffering, nothing’s gonna get done.

Here’s the first part of my solution. We’ve discussed this with some members of Congress here on CYInterview as well as one of your opponents for the Republican Presidential Nomination. Congress, the president and the vice president must take a 50 percent pay cut. That would be leading by example. I’ve said this before, a good general leads his troops from the front and in the corporate world salespeople prosper when they do well. They suffer when they don’t. That said, Ms. Bachmann, you currently serve in the United States Congress. You don’t have to wait to become president to take action. Will you introduce a bill to Congress to cut its salary by 50 percent as well as cutting the salaries of the president and the vice president by 50 percent to demonstrate leadership. Yes or no?

MB: “Well, I’ve already demonstrated that type of leadership because I have voted and I have already received a cut in my pay this year in the amount of five percent. That’s something that we wanted to do to lead by example and that’s what we have done. The best thing that we can do to lead by example is to actually turn the economy around and grow it and that’s, those are my policies that I want to move forward. I think if we go with a pay cut for 50 percent for both the president, the vice president and the Congress, we shouldn’t stop there.

We should extend that pay cut by 50 percent to all federal employees because today, the average federal employee makes double what their counterpart makes in the private sector and I think that’s what the bill should say. The bill should say that every federal employee takes a 50 percent pay cut and also we need to have a pay cut in the benefit packages as well which aren’t in line with the benefit packages in the private sector. But I think we need to even go farther than that. I want to actually eliminate federal departments altogether, like the Department of Education, the EPA and other departments that are well beyond the Constitutional scope that was envisioned in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution.”

JB: Well, let’s talk, though, concrete actions right now. Obviously it’s gonna be a tough sell to get a 50 percent pay cut on federal workers unless Congress, the president and vice president apply it to themselves first, to lead by example. Look, Congress people right now make about $175,000 a year. The average American makes about, under $40,000 a year. Right now the United States of America as you said borrows almost half its money to live.

Wouldn’t it be a bold and historic statement if to start this movement in a concrete way, not just talk, you went into Congress, you introduced a bill and you called it the lead by leading bill, the fiscal control by leading bill and said, ‘You know what? We do have to remove these agencies. We do have to cut down the federal payroll, but we’re gonna do it first to ourselves, we’re gonna do it with the president and vice president to prove we’re serious.

We’re not gonna be a bunch of Marie Antoinette’s saying you know they don’t have bread, let them eat cake. I mean, the president has been out on the golf course how many times in the last two and a half years, over 70 while people are suffering. Will you go to Congress and start the ball rolling and at least push for a bill that cuts Congress, the president and vice president’s salary in half, as the starting move to what you want to get done?

Alice Stewart [Michele Bachmann’s PR person]: “Hi Chris. This is Alice. Uh, um, I don’t know if there was another, a new question in there, but this interview’s about the book so if you have a question about the book, we’ll be happy to talk about that.”

CY: Yeah. Sure. I’ll be happy to finish with one question. Sure. Sure.

AS: “Ok. Do you have a question about her book Core of Conviction?”

CY: Yes. Absolutely.

AS: “Ok. Go ahead.”

CY: Congressman [sic] I want to say, you know in closing, what was really interesting in the book, you know, um, your biological farther left you and your mother, um, early on in your life and I wonder how that lesson and how that experience, you know, shaped you and the family you would later have with your husband?

MB: “Well, thank you for asking a question about the book. I appreciate it. Some of the Core of Conviction values that I learned is the importance of family and I think sometimes when you have breaking and suffering in your life, you really, you learn to appreciate what you don’t have and I’m thankful that when I was a young girl I had an intact family, but I know what it is to go through that heartbreak of a divorce and the ensuing poverty that came as a result of that and that encouraged me to want to have an intact family.

And I’m grateful that I married a wonderful man. We’ve been married for 33 years. I didn’t forget the challenges of that time in my life and so my husband and I have broken hearts for kids that go through those kind of challenges. So we reached out and brought 23 foster children into our home to love and to raise, we did and we also saw that in the midst of their difficulties; they often fall through the cracks at public school. So we decided to work together, some other families. We started the first K-12 charter school in the country for at risk children and it’s still going on. We’re very proud of that and I also saw because of my foster children, that’s why I entered public policy because I was worried about the politically correct, dumbed down federal education standards that were being imposed on them in my state.

So I led an education reform movement in Minnesota unlike any other in the United States and we actually became the only state to repeal our federal education standards and replace them with true academic standards to help kids no matter what their background so that they could succeed and compete in the marketplace of ideas. I’m extremely grateful for that success. It wasn’t Republican or Democrat. It was about helping kids and I was able to succeed and unite people under that flag of helping kids and that’s something I’m very proud of.”

CY: Last question, very quickly, are you going to seek reelection in Congress if you do not end up winning the Republican nomination?

MB: “I’m focused now on winning the presidency. We think we’re poised right now in a very good place to be victorious and I’m excited about that. And people can learn more about my plan of action by reading Core of Conviction.”

AS: “Thank you Chris. I appreciate your time.”

CY: Thank you so much.

AS: “Have a good day. Bye.”

You can purchase a copy and find more information about Michele Bachmann’s book Core of Conviction: My Story here.

Michele Bachmann’s official website is at http://www.michelebachmann.com

You can email Chris Yandek at ChrisYandek@CYInterview.com

The former D.C. power player now purports to want to serve as a catalyst for change when it comes to Congress and lobbyists. Mr. Abramoff gives a detailed view of his life in lobbying in his new book Capital Punishment: The Hard Truth About Washington Corruption From America’s Most Notorious Lobbyist.

For the best grasp of the topics we covered in our half hour CYInterview with Jack Abramoff, you can listen below, or you can read the highlights. Featured columnist Jay Bildstein joins me for this conversation:

Listen to the entire Jack Abramoff CYInterview:

Have trouble listening to the audio?
Listen here

Browse CYInterview.com while you listen – Click here

With the American public believing that many members of Congress, as well as other public officials, place their interests above the good of the people they are supposed to serve, Mr. Abramoff opens by suggesting how to fix the system and prevent corruption.

“First of all, on the overall, it’s gonna require the American people asking their federal government to do a lot less than they do because the federal government is involved in so many areas with so many different things that it opens the door for frankly rampant corruption in all sorts of areas and a lot of participation by 20,000 lobbyists who run around Washington, D.C.,. So on sort of a 30,000 foot view, that’s one thing that’s gotta happen for ultimately for this ever to be cleaned up. In the shorter term, what people should insist upon is cutting the tie between lobbying, and between advocacy and between our federal government, and the public servants and the money.

The money is what really corrupts everything. Whether it’s the money people get by going through the revolving door and getting a job in the lobbying sector afterwards or the money that lobbyists lavish on Congressmen both in terms of contributions and gifts and gratuities. All of that’s gotta be removed from the system and it all can be removed by the very legislators who are doing it.”

In being compared to Bernard Madoff, Jack Abramoff rejects the comparison other than that their names end the same:

“I think Madoff’s situation was completely different than mine obviously. I’m not a person who caused people, that amounts of people to lose their fortunes and things like that. I mean, I was involved in a system that I shouldn’t have been in. I did things that I shouldn’t have done, but my last name may rhyme with his, but I think that’s the extent of the comparison. In terms of, I think with me, what I did, I want to make it clear, I take 100 percent responsibility. I was wrong. I committed crimes. I did things I’m ashamed of. I got punished for them. I’m not running away from that at all…As I look at my case, probably a third of it was fairly accurate in terms of what I did, a third of it was kind of exaggerated and a third of it just never happened and I had to live with all that unfortunately as sort of a news story…

I admit that having looked deep within myself, I just shook my head and wondered what the heck was I doing and now to some degree I want to try to set it right if I can…It’s a system that has caused the American people to look at their government and wonder what the heck do we have here. This isn’t what was intended. This isn’t what our founders had hoped for us and has probably gotten out of control and my involvement in it is a source of great shame to me.”

When it comes to changing our system and ending corruption in our government, Jack says the American people need to wake up:

“Americans have got to pay attention to this. The reason I got away with and all of them get away with it is because people go to sleep. People don’t pay attention. They’ll pay attention for 15 minutes. They’ll see Jack Abramoff carted off to jail and they’ll pat each other on the back and they’ll say, ‘Oh, we fixed everything. Everything’s great now.’ And that’s just not the case.”

During his recent interview with 60 Minutes, Abramoff mentioned that, in effect, he held sway with 100 members of Congress. In his book, he does mention names of some elected officials he dealt with, but it does not come close to 100. Jay asked Jack if he would present all of the names so the American people could decide whether, at election time, to vote for those members of Congress who had ties to him. The former lobbyist says he has thought about it and gives his explanation:

“I could turn my life into a revenge society where I basically go and start naming names and this one did that and get into he said, she said and I just don’t think that for me is productive. That doesn’t do what I want to do which is, but I’m not trying to protect anybody. What I’m trying to do is go after the system. And the more that we basically make this about individuals…Everybody in this system at some level is playing in a bad way whether they want to or not.

The system is set up in a way that has to be changed…I thought about it, but I don’t think it’s productive for me to do that…The problem is I don’t have at my disposal any longer a lot of the back up that I had. The things I wrote in the book I had back up, I had ways to be able to verify them and I want to be very careful. They’re people’s lives at stake here…I’m not trying to protect anybody. Certainly nobody protected me.”

Mr. Abramoff agreed with Jay’s plan mandating full transparency between a member of Congress and any lobbyist. Under this scenario, a member of Congress could meet with a lobbyist only in his or her Congressional office. The interaction would be video and audio taped and the entire recording of the meeting would be put on an official Internet site for the world to see. Jack likes the idea of full transparency. He also gave his own thoughts on having his own lobbying/public official transparency organization with those principles.

“I love it. Fantastic. I agree…On one hand, I would be the first to grab the flag and start running, I wouldn’t want my unfortunate reputation and unfortunate position as a felon and all the rest to impede this movement, but if I thought it wouldn’t, I’d be in the lead.”

During the period that Abramoff was investigated before he was sent to prison, he spent numerous hours being interviewed by the Department of Justice, which he speaks about in Capitol Punishment. He also discusses his working relationships/friendships with Ralph Reed and Grover Norquist. For those who have wondered why Mr. Reed and Mr. Norquist did not face the kind of legal action he met with, Mr. Abramoff offers us this explanation, while confiding that he has not spoken to Mr. Norquist since this scandal unfolded:

“I haven’t talked to Grover since this scandal started…I think it’s a mistake to think that they weren’t investigated and that there weren’t thorough investigations of everybody involved. I understood that there were 2000 open investigations and you can’t even imagine how many agents and how many people in Justice were involved in this, but again I’m not privy to the investigations, but I got to believe based on the fact that I truly believed that the prosecutors who were involved in the case that I had interactions with were very honest that if there was something that they felt was criminal, they would’ve gone at whoever it was. I don’t think they let anybody off the hook if they felt that they had actionable criminal evidence.”

In the book, Abramoff says of Senate Majority leader Harry Reid, “Reid was very much a secret weapon in our lobbying efforts. “ Jack sheds light on this:

“He was a senator from a gaming state [Nevada] who had obviously tremendous influence as the majority leader or minority leader depending on when it was who we solicited to help us with our gaming clients in other states such as Louisiana and he intervened at key times for us at our request.”

Commenting on former House Majority Leader Tom Delay, who he had a close relationship with, Abramoff believes Mr. Delay got a raw deal in his money laundering case in Texas. Delay was convicted of money laundering but he is currently appealing the decision:

“I think he got a raw deal…I read the case and I know Tom and I don’t believe on the facts, I mean the law I can’t comment on, but to me it read like it was an aggressive prosecution and a political prosecution frankly, but I guess the appeals court will decide that, but everything I read about that felt was unfair and unfortunate.”

In closing, Mr. Abramoff says his family is in tough financial straits. With 44 million dollars in restitution to make, in addition to other debts, Jack says that is where most of the money will go from his book. He said he plans to do some speaking, in the future, as well.

“We’re financially in difficult straits and we just hold on to each other and hope for the best and that’s the best we can do…Whatever finally does come through, a lot of it will be given to restitution and probably the rest of it will go to paying debts…I have 44 million dollars to pay so I have to give a lot of speeches.”

You can find more information and purchase a copy of Jack Abramoff’s book Capitol Punishment here.

Jack Abramoff’s official website is here

You can email Chris Yandek at ChrisYandek@CYInterview.com

Mr. Johnston’s last few years have been drama packed. He came to the public’s attention at the 2008 Republican National Convention, when the Palin family was introduced to the nation. Recently, Levi put out a memoir titled Deer in The Headlights: My Life in Sarah Palin’s Crosshairs, where he takes us through his account of his life and experiences with then girlfriend Bristol as well as the former Governor and the entire Palin family.

In Levi’s CYInterview, he shares his experiences and frustrations regarding various topics. Whatever your prior impression of Levi might be, it is possible your view of him may change after reading or listen to the entire CYInterview below:

Have trouble listening to the audio?
Listen here

Browse CYInterview.com while you listen – Click here

Chris Yandek: After finishing the book and closing it, one word came to mind to describe your life and the word is mess. Is that how you’ve felt these last few years?

Levi Johnston: “Definitely. That’s a good way to explain it. It’s been a tough ride. It’s been very difficult for not only myself, but my family as well.”

CY: You know, I understand you go through things and you have to go through experiences growing up. Life can’t prepare two young, immature people who are growing and trying to learn through their own experiences, but isn’t there part of you that says to yourself, ‘What was I thinking? and that both of you in some ways were naive?

LJ: “Yeah. I mean, a little bit. Sure.”

CY: Do you feel like no matter what, there was no way you could be ready for any of this and through it all, these things, you say to yourself, you know, I’m gonna be regretting some things for a very long time?

LJ: “Yeah. It has been tough. But, you know, a lot of hard decisions I’ve had to make, but at the same time you know I still, I don’t regret any of them.”

CY: As you mentioned in the book, you know, had Sarah Palin never became John McCain’s running mate, you and Bristol would probably be living the quiet life together and you would probably still be together and you and me wouldn’t be sitting here today. Do you agree with that assessment?

LJ: “Oh yeah. I definitely strongly feel that way. The media’s put, made it very hard for us to live a normal life and has put a lot of stress and it’s just been a big problem.”

CY: Continuing to move along here, I just wonder you know if you look back on this entire experience and you say to yourself, you know, maybe I shouldn’t have done this or maybe I shouldn’t have done that, is there anything that comes to mind?

LJ: “Oh you know, even like Playgirl. There’s a lot of decisions I’ve made that probably weren’t exactly the right ones. I wouldn’t say they’re the wrong ones, but you know, I did everything for a reason and it’s been quite the ride.”

CY: In this book, you talk about that numerous jobs you had before Bristol delivered Tripp. I knew none of this about you, you know, that you had these jobs, that you were supporting Bristol, that you were trying to be the best man you can, make the best of the situation. Do you feel like the media never really took time to learn your side of the story?

LJ: “No. They definitely didn’t and that’s you know, most definitely why I wrote the book. They didn’t know who I was. They thought I was just thrown out there and I was looking for fame, but you know, I was raised a lot differently at a very young age to work. I had to work for everything I ever got. I was an electrician and I worked on the North Slope just like most Alaskans do. You know, so they definitely made me out to just look like a fool.”

CY: Was the only reason you started talking to the media and started going on shows like Tyra Banks because you didn’t want people thinking you were a deadbeat dad and you just wanted to get your side of the story out? Was that the main reason?

LJ: “That was a lot of it. Yes. And for my son to read when he’s older, you know, I didn’t want them feeding him lies and telling them that I’m a deadbeat father, I’m this, I’m that. I don’t want to see him, whatever the case may be. Then they started talking bad about my mother and my sister. That’s really when it hits home with me and that’s not ok.”

CY: Looking at this entire scenario, you’re saying to yourself, the reason I went out and I went into the media is because I want my son to know that I stuck up for what I believe for him and I didn’t want him to think that I was one thing. You wanted him when he grows up to see both sides of the story correct?

LJ: “Definitely. That’s the main reason you know for my son and for you know for my mother and sister to stick up for them who had completely no part of this and didn’t ask for any of it. You know, so I felt like I needed to support my whole family.”

CY: Is your plan to make as much money as possible you know off your name with this book and other things because you’ve dealt with drama and then when it’s finally over you’re gonna go work with your dad on a business plan and leave the spotlight altogether correct? Do you think, is that’s what your plan is? Is that what your thinking is?

LJ: “Well, it’s all great. I mean, I get different offers like the reality show that I’ve been filming. You know if that happens great, if it doesn’t it doesn’t. And you know, my all time ultimate goal since I was little is to become a pilot and become a hunting guide. And if that’s the life that I’m going to be living soon that’s great. That’s what I’ve always wanted. So as far as milking the whole money thing from all this, if it happens great, if not, then I’m still gonna live a good life back in Alaska.”

CY: So what do you say to the people who say hasn’t this guy said his piece already? Why doesn’t he go away quietly? It seems you have a lot of critics out there definitely as far as that goes.

LJ: “There’s a lot of people who hate me and there’s a lot of people who support me just like everybody else in this world. You know, the minute I shut up is the minute Sarah and Bristol started talking or writing another book and slamming me again. So it really as much as I’d like it to be it really is an almost never ending process and it is very frustrating to. People gotta understand, I don’t like waking up and going and talking about my ex-girlfriend. You know, it causes problems with my new girlfriend that I’ve been dating for 11 months. My family doesn’t like it. So it’s not fun to do this and people need to understand that. I’m doing it for the right reasons and not so much the money and fame.”

CY: So you’ve had a girlfriend for 11 months? You’ve moved on?

LJ: “I have. Yes.”

CY: I think that people would be quite surprised to know that, that haven’t heard this, you know. So you’re basically saying to the world is you know what, I don’t want to be out there every day, I don’t want to be on these media programs, I don’t want to have to be talking about these things, but the minute that I stop talking Bristol, Sarah or whoever else from the Palin camp is talking about me knocking me one way or another direction. So I feel like I have to, you know stand up for myself and comment on every statement. Is that you’re thinking?

LJ: “Yeah definitely. I mean, there’s only so much you can take of somebody talking bad about you and this isn’t only coming from only Bristol and Sarah, the Palin’s family, it’s coming from all the bloggers and everybody else in this world who have never once met me or my family or have no clue about anybody. They don’t know me, they don’t know Bristol, they don’t know anything. And they sit there and love to believe that they know everything about me and I’m just this horrible, bad guy and it’s ridiculous. And there comes a time where you really gotta just stand up on your own two feet and kind of take control over this. I mean, when everybody else in this world and this town, I live in a small town and they start hearing all this and believing this it’s not good.”

CY: You and others who lived and knew the Palins personally, describe both Sarah and Todd as parents who don’t really parent. They live with their kids, but it’s not like there always there to take care of them. The parents and the kids kind of just do their own thing separately is how you describe it. You tell many stories about how they would just leave money for the kids for food and Bristol was a parent to her younger siblings. Are you saying to me that Todd and Sarah have kids, of course, but there is no parenting to these kids?

LJ: “Yeah. I wasn’t saying, I’m sure there are times that they do parent. But more than not when I was there for the many years, I was there dating Bristol, Todd was either on the slope, screwing around with his snow machine, you know, getting ready for the Iron Dog. Sarah was off running around a lot and Bristol was the mother of that family. She took care of Willow. She took care of Piper, they did homework, we cooked, we hung out, we watched TV together and that was it.

I mean, Sarah and them were gone. When they were home, she was on her blackberry, she was in her bedroom. She was there but she wasn’t around if you know what I mean? She wasn’t social with the kids. She didn’t. It was different. I didn’t grow up like that at all. I came home; both parents were there to help me with my homework; we had a family dinner; we watched a movie; we did everything together. It was just so much different then how I grew up.”

CY: In the book you describe Sarah Palin as ‘stupid-smart’ is what you say. What did you mean by that?

LJ: “Well, Sarah is a very, very intelligent, intelligent woman. To a certain point I respect her in a big way. She has accomplished something that nobody can really say they have. I mean, she’s one of very few people. And, but at the same time, I mean, she gets caught in so many small lies even as far as to what newspaper you read, what TV shows you read [sic], just little stuff like that and especially stuff I caught her in like I wasn’t there for my son being born. Like, really? I was there on the other side of Bristol holding her other hand. Like, she’s, just as far as the stupid part, she just makes up the smallest lies that make no sense to why would you even try it, why would you do that.”

CY: You mentioned that, you know say you’re in the delivery room with Sarah and Bristol is about to give birth, you two are the only ones there, no one else is there and Sarah says down the road in a statement you’re not even there. How does that happen?

LJ: “I honestly don’t see how that happens. I mean, I go through it all in the book. Long story short, I was at their cabin with Todd and Willow and we get a phone call Sarah and Bristol are heading to the hospital, she’s going into Labor. Todd and I jet back on our snow machines in the middle of the night in the pitch black, get to my truck, I leave. Todd goes back to the cabin for Willow, the younger girl. I drive all the way two hours in the dark all the way to the hospital. I get there, she ends up having Tripp at like 5:53 in the morning. I was there four, five hours in time, so I was plenty good. Sarah was on the left hand side of Bristol holding her hand and I was on the right and we had Tripp. So for her to come out and say some sh** that something that’s so, such a big lie and just so stupid, why when I could literally go to the hospital and prove that I was there. I don’t know why she would do that.”

CY: The way you describe it, it would seem Bristol wanted to get back at her mom. Did she want to get pregnant and have a child to get even with Sarah?

LJ: “I mean, part of it might have been that and a lot of it was. That’s the whole reason we got pregnant is we talk about it previous knowing Sarah’s pregnant again with Trigg, but that really sparked Bristol. We had Trigg now, she had another little baby, she loved kids. That’s really what got us going on this.”

CY: Do you think Bristol has identity issues? That she has no idea who she is or what she wants for herself? It seems that way, the best way you describe it in the book.

LJ: “Definitely. I mean, she’s always been kind of uncomfortable with herself as much as I told her she’s beautiful and I loved her and we were getting married. She was never comfortable with herself. She tries four jobs; she’d quit; she’d do a different one. She never had her mindset set on one thing in life. She just kind of bounced around and kind of did what her mom told her. You know now she’s apparently got all the plastic surgery done. She’s trying to do other Hollywood things and I think she’s definitely lost and that’s another big thing. I wanted to write this book, they say I’m in Hollywood and L.A. I have never. I’ve had the same house for three or four years now. I wear flannels. I’m nothing but camouflage, big pickup truck. I’m still a country boy and you know, that Hollywood thing is not me at all. That’s not who I am.”

CY: How often do you talk to Bristol today and how often do you see your son?

LJ: “I don’t see me son near often as I’d like to. Fortunately we will be going to court soon and I’m looking forward to that so we can get everything set in stone with my son and as far as Bristol, you know I don’t talk to her much. When I do we keep it to about Tripp and that’s it.”

CY: So you’re telling me the custody has not been worked out yet?

LJ: “Nope.”

CY: You know, Looking at politics and America today Levi, I just wonder if you feel like that maybe this country lacks leadership and me and my colleague [Jay Bildstein] have been talking with members of Congress, political figures and he’s brought up a proposal that he believes you know that the members of Congress, the president, the vice president of the United States of America should take a 50 percent pay cut of their salary to lead by example. Do you think the government should take some kind of pay cut to lead by example to show leadership?

LJ: “You know, that’s hard to say. I don’t follow politics much. But there’s no difference than any other job out here I’m gonna go with. I mean, electricians and that’s how I’m looking at it. It’s just a job. It’s the path they choose. So, they’re entitled to what they were, their, money, they’re entitled to everything they signed up for. If they’re doing their job then I don’t think they should.”

CY: What do you hope people take away from your life story and what is your message?

LJ: “I wrote it just to kind of to give them an idea of you know where I was, what I came from and what I kind of got thrown into, you know without choice and basically what I made out of it and to kind of clear up everything that was told about my family and myself, about all the lies. You know, then a little bit about Alaska, I mean it’s all in there and I think it’s, it took me a long time to write it and I think it’s a good book.”

CY: It’s an interesting story definitely. You know, we get to learn about the fishing and all the jobs that you had. Again, I just think the most interesting thing in closing with you Levi is that you were working all these jobs; you were actually being responsible; you were getting ready for the birth of your son; you weren’t just playing around, not being responsible and the media really painted you that way.

LJ: “Yeah. That’s, the media, I’ve learned a lot these last few years. I’ve really grown up and seen kinda how the world works in that kind of light. So it’s definitely a frustrating thing to see. They definitely did me for the wrong.”

You can find more information and purchase a copy of Levi Johnston’s book Here

You can email Chris Yandek at ChrisYandek@CYInterview.com

Enthusiasm for Mr. Cain, a successful businessman and former chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, who has never held elected office, is palpable. It is, in part, a sign of voter discontent with Washington and a system which, at best, can only be termed as dysfunctional.

Herman Cain might win the Republican nomination and go on to become, as he terms himself, the first American Black Conservative to become President of the United States. If he does not take the nomination, it seems likely he will be considered for the vice presidential spot on the ticket. Cain, however, does not seem to be angling for second place. His rise in the polls is strong and his delivery on the stump is powerful.

Mr. Cain continues to successfully introduce himself to the American people. With a straw poll win in Florida, good showings in other polls and a new book out this week, titled This is Herman Cain: My Journey to the White House, it is all systems go in the former CEO’s efforts to capture the presidency.

With all that said, Herman Cain joins featured columnist Jay Bildstein and myself for an extraordinary interview covering a variety of topics, including the economic policies he would implement as president.

As followers of CYInterview know, Jay Bildstein has put forward what he terms The 50 Percent Solution to Bring America Back to Prosperity. The solution is elegant in its simplicity. Get America’s political leaders – the Congress, the president and the vice president – to accept a 50% pay cut demonstrating, no matter what side of the aisle they are on, that they are willing to lead by example.

The solution starts the process of shared sacrifice at its logical beginning, with America’s leaders. After all, real change takes hold in a society when leaders embrace change for themselves first.

Jay believes, and I agree, that if our leaders led by example, people in the United States would be far more confident about the future of the country. Unfortunately, when politicians talk about all the things that will have to be cut during these tough times, their own salaries are rarely if ever mentioned. This reinforces the feeling that they are out of touch with the economic realities of today or worse yet, that they are simply in politics for their own benefit.

Spending cuts will have to be adopted to put the United States on a path of fiscal sobriety and economic sustainability. But this will not happen, in any substantial way, if our leaders abdicate their responsibility to lead by example. They must adopt cuts and apply them to themselves first. Now is a time for leading by action, not stale words and empty rhetoric.

Jay Bildstein has been on an ongoing search to find a political figure who will endorse this 50%-pay-cut-lead-by-example solution. We at CYInterview have spoken, on the record, to members of Congress and other people in the political realm about the concept. Up until now, no elected official has been as enthusiastic about the idea as we are. Perhaps, that is changing.

As you will hear in this CYInterview with Herman Cain, Jay Bildstein has found an individual of experience, stature and media prominence who agrees with his plan in principle. Listen or read, for yourself, to find out exactly what Mr. Cain has to say about the solution. To give you some idea, he believes in leading by example:

Listen to the entire Herman Cain CYInterview:

Have trouble listening to the audio?
Listen here

Browse CYInterview.com while you listen – Click here

Chris Yandek: This is Chris Yandek, featured columnist Jay Bildstein is on this call with me. We welcome Republican Presidential Candidate Herman Cain who has been taking all the headlines this week. His new book is titled This is Herman Cain, currently in the top 20 on Amazon. Mr. Cain thank you so much for joining us today, we greatly appreciate it before we begin.

Herman Cain: “It is my pleasure to be with you. Thanks for having me on and I wouldn’t say I took all the headlines, maybe I took some of the headlines.”

CY: I think you took a lot of them this week.

HC: “(Laughs)”

CY: But anyways, let’s get into it. I think the big message you want people to walk away with from your book is no matter what challenges you face including possibly encountering racism, prejudice or any other difficulties, you can achieve whatever you want in America and there is no excuse and there is no reason to play a victim for example. Is that what your big message to the American public has been is that that’s the thing you’ve been trying to explain recently?

HC: “Yes it is. That’s exactly the message that I’ve been trying to explain to some people and get that message across because as you have probably noticed in reviewing my book, all of the major accomplishments that I have made in my career have been in many instances against the odds. But you don’t allow the odds against you to deter you from figuring out a way. One of my guiding principles that I’ve used all my life as I talk with people is that they’re three kinds of people in the world.

There are people who make things happen. There are people who watch things happen and then there are people who ask well, what in the heck happened? Leaders make things happen. Leaders will take a situation and try and figure out what is it that we’re trying to do, what is the problem, what kind of priorities and resources do we need, what kind of people do I need to bring to bear on this problem, what kind of plans do we need to succeed. So that is the message that I get across to people.

This is why I don’t have a lot of patience for these demonstrations going on, on Wall Street. First of all, they’re directing their frustrations at the wrong place. The frustrations should be directed at the White House. Wall Street does not set economic policy. The White House sets economic policy. Wall Street wasn’t the one that developed the failed economic policies that have kept unemployment high that has stagnated this economy. It is the policies of the Obama Administration that has led to a stagnated economy as well as high unemployment, as well as many of the other issues that we face and so you are right. That attitude should be what can they do in order to improve their economic lot in life.”

CY: Ok.

HC: “Sorry to give you such a long answer but it was related.”

Jay Bildstein: You know Mr. Cain, you said something tremendous. You brought up the concept of leaders and in tough times, change takes place when leaders set examples through their actions. Now, getting America financially healthy means shared sacrifice. Asking a federal worker to take a 10 percent pay cut won’t go down easy if the perception is that the Congress and the president are living the good life while they’re sacrificing.

Here’s my solution. Congress, the president and the vice president must take a 50 percent pay cut. That’s leading by example. A good general leads his troops from the front. In the corporate world, salespeople prosper when they do well. They suffer when they don’t. As president, will you take a 50 percent pay cut, ask your vice president to take the same and most importantly, introduce to Congress a bill so that its members take a 50 percent pay cut to put the lead back into leadership?

HC: “I would have no problem leading in that manner. What I don’t know is whether 50 percent is the right number, but I do believe that there is a number that would be substantive enough to basically say we are going to lead.”

JB: We’re almost borrowing 50 percent of our money to function right now. Why not say to Congress, listen, if we gotta borrow half the money to live, hey, take half.

HC: “Go back to one of my guiding principles, I gotta make sure we’re working on the right problem. You are absolutely right. That is part of the problem. But what I’m saying is that’s not the total problem. What I was gonna say is, I would go even further. I don’t know the extent to which the contracts with federal workers allows me to ask them or to basically dictate to them that they do the same thing while private sector jobs have been contained because of the pressures that have been put on private businesses, public sector job salaries have just skyrocketed, which is why we have on average a 25 percent differential between private sector and public sector jobs. This is another place that I want to look. They should not be immune to the pains and pressures of this stagnating economy.”

JB: But you would go to Congress, though, with a bill or at least you’d get up in front of the American public and you’d say to Congress, now look, we need collective sacrifice, but that can’t be collective sacrifice just saying, we gotta cut here, cut there, cut every place else, but we’re not gonna cut ourselves. A leader would take the action on himself first. I believe you’d take the action on yourself as president.

HC: “Yes.”

JB: Would you confront Congress and would you say to Congress, ‘Now look, if we’re gonna make a 10 percent cut across the board, we gotta do better on ourselves and we’ve gotta take a cut first.’ Would you do that yes or no?

HC: “Yes I would. I would absolutely do that.”

CY: Thank you very much Mr. Cain, now here’s my question following up on that and just help me with this because I think that a lot of people have overlooked this. With the 9-9-9 plan and cutting 10 percent across the board, which you have mentioned in your book, noting put everything on the table, would we still be running a deficit at that point?

HC: “Well, there’s one more piece that I would do. I would do the 10 percent across the board, but I would find another 10 percent by doing a deep dive on every government agency. Net net, I believe that in that first fiscal year budget that I would oversee, that we need to find at least 20 percent reduction vs. the previous year. So with that 20 percent reduction and with the 9-9-9 plan stimulating growth and putting people back to work, we’ll have revenues going up because the 9-9-9 plan is gonna provide certainty and we’re gonna be containing the costs. Yes, I believe that. We have to have costs go down and revenues going up. That’s why a combination of the cuts and the bold plan that I put on the table will get us to not adding to the national debt.”

CY: So 20 percent with a 9-9-9 plan equals a surplus? Getting to a surplus?

HC: “It will probably equal a balanced fiscal year budget for the first fiscal year that I would preside over. So I can’t guarantee a surplus in that first year because of some other factors that will have to be taken into consideration.”

CY: But we would be moving towards that?

HC: “We would be moving towards that. My goal would be for that first fiscal year to be expended spending equals revenue and the way we’re gonna get there is do the deep 20 percent cut across and down and ten across, ten down and then stimulate the economy and 9-9-9 is gonna stimulate economic growth because the corporations are gonna love the fact that they only have to pay a nine percent flat tax on their income minus purchases and capital investment. It’s going to inspire them to think growth again rather than survival.”

CY: Ok three more very quick ones for you, as president are you willing to bring the troops home as soon as possible from Iraq and Afghanistan, but on top of that, are you willing to consider shutting down many of the bases across the country [sic] [world] where we have American troops? We have bases in over 100 countries. Don’t you think it’s time to bring those troops home and have them spend money in America?

HC: “I can answer the second one a lot quicker. Yes. I absolutely agree with you. We have too many bases scattered around the world that I can’t believe that we need to be in all of these locations and so I would definitely want to take a look at that. Secondly, I would want to bring home the troops in Afghanistan and Iraq and Libya and all of the other places, but I want to do it the right way. Not based upon some political promise and the right way is for me to talk to the commanders on the ground, assess can we win.

Secondly, if we can’t, how do we get out of there. Secondly, if we can, how long do we need to stay. I don’t think it’s real clear in that situation. The other thing that I would do is that when I did make a decision about when we’re going to bring the troops home and yes, my goal would be to bring them home as fast as possible. I’m not gonna tell the enemy when I’m gonna do it or how I’m gonna do it.

Iran has already made a statement and told its insurgents in Iraq stop fighting, stop shooting, stop killing Americans. Let’s just wait till they get most of the troops out and then we’re gonna back and take over the country. That’s not how you run a war and so that’s one of the fallacies with this president in terms of trying to live up to a political promise and he’s putting our men and women in jeopardy by letting them know what the time tables are gonna be. I believe in bringing them home as fast and as quick as possible, but I want to do it the right way.”

CY: Ok two more very quick ones.

JB: Chris, I’ve got one quick question. Do you believe Mr. Cain that Barack Obama, in getting us involved in Libya, do you believe that he committed an impeachable offense?

HC: “If he did not consult Congress the right way and there’s some debate about that because of you know the fuzziness.”

JB: But as it’s been reported to us right now, from what we know from the general media right now?

HC: “I’m not gonna go out on that limb because I don’t know all the reports that have been made relative to how he went about doing that. I know that there are some questions, but I am not looking at all the information in front of me at this point to be able to say that for certainty.”

JB: Did you believe George Bush deceived the country when he took us to Iraq?

HC: “I do not believe George Bush deceived the country when he took us to Iraq because we went to Iraq for a number of reasons and the biggest problem with the Bush Administration was they had it all focused on one thing when in fact there were a number of reasons and so I do not believe he deceived the country in terms of Iraq. You gotta ask your other last question real quick.”

CY: Thank you very much. Mr. Cain, if you do end up on the Republican ticket as the president or vice president, in general, what can people expect from you and what would it mean to be the first African American as a vice president or presidential candidate on the Republican ticket.

HC: “First, I refer to myself as an American Black Conservative.”

CY: Ok.

HC: “But I’m not offended if you call me an African American. I prefer a black American.”

CY: Ok.

HC: American Black Conservative. Here’s what they can expect from Herman Cain, the truth. Secondly, you will also expect from Herman Cain for him to be clear in terms of where he stands on positions. Some people may not agree with me, that’s their prerogative, but you would know clearly where Herman Cain stands on all of the issues, but more importantly where he stands on what we need to do in order to be able to get this nation moving in the direction we need to be moving.

Under this administration, this country has become weaker economically. It has become weaker militarily. It has become weaker in terms of being an United States of America. I wanna reverse that with my actions as President of the United States by getting back to those values and getting back to a robust growing economy because if we do not boost this economy, our debate over a lot of these other issues won’t matter. We’ve got to, boosting this economy has got to be our highest domestic priority and our other highest priority has got to be national security.”

CY: Mr. Cain thank you so much for joining us.

JB: Thank you Mr. Cain and when you’re on the debate, please, please if you could make a statement and say, ‘You know what? Leading means just that, by example.’ And that you would see to it that this elite that’s in control, they take some of the pain before they ask everybody else to. I think we’d be a lot more confident as citizens if Congress would take a pay cut and lead by example. I think you’re a man who could get that message out there.

HC: “You know, I might surprise you in the next couple of debates and you may hear that statement.”

JB: I’m gonna be listening because there’s no way to lead without leading. There’s just not. I think you have proven that you just don’t talk, you walk it, but Congress has gotta walk it too.

HC: “Great speaking to you guys.”

CY: And you can reference that you didn’t butcher the last name of Chris Yandek as well. Thank you so much.

HC: “(Laughs)”

JB: Thank you very much Mr. Cain.

HC: “Thanks guys.”

CY: Have a good day.

JB: Good luck to you. Buh bye.

HC: “Buh bye”

Editors note: Mr. Cain pronounced my last name right when he called me for this interview. Rarely does someone not butcher my last name when they first try to pronounce it.

You can find more information and purchase a copy of Herman Cain’s book This is Herman Cain: My Journey to the White House Clicking Here

Herman Cain’s official website is at http://www.hermancain.com

You can email Chris Yandek at ChrisYandek@CYInterview.com

Michael Benfante, was a sales team leader, working on the 81st floor of Tower One, of the World Trade Center, on that fateful day. He came to national attention because he and a coworker, John Cerqueira, helped carry Tina Fansen, a woman in a wheelchair, down 68 stories of stairs to safety. The media rightfully hailed him as a hero. Yet, as Michael points out, there were many heroes that day.

At the time, Michael’s story was covered on a wide variety of media outlets. Now, almost 10 years later, Mr. Benfante takes us through an accounting of his life prior, during and after that tragic day, in his new book Reluctant Hero.

What follows are some excerpts of my CYInterview with Michael Benfante. To gain a broader understanding of his story, you will probably want to listen to the entire CYInterview by clicking below.

Listen to the entire Michael Benfante interview:

Have trouble listening to the audio?
Listen here

Browse CYInterview.com while you listen – Click here

To begin with, Michael Benfante tells us how 9/11 changed his life:

“I’m like the same person I was but rearranged in a sense I would have to say…I liken it to like when you have a child for the first time. You’re still the same person, but you’re rearranged, you’re different and it’s that child, it’s that life, that new love that does change you. Later on in life it was because I went on to have a son, but initially it was a traumatic experience. It was an experience of great hope and victory for finding the woman in the World Trade Center and being able to carry her out and save her life, but it was also a very traumatic experience in the things that I witnessed and the way I had to run for my own life. But even with that being said, there were just many countless measures of kindness and reaching out to people as well.”

On 9/11, Michael rallied his coworkers, on the 81st floor of World Trade Center one to get out after a plane crashed into crashed into the building, more than ten stories above them. No one was left behind. They all survived.

“I managed an office on the 81st floor. It was a sales office… When the plane hit about 12 floors above us, there was a lot of obviously, a lot of shock, a lot of fright, a lot of panic, but to see the way my employees or my sales reps came together and well, first they listened and then they came together and they headed to the stairwell and they left no one behind. They all went out together. Whether it was in pairs or whether it was in groups, they all went out together and they all survived and I’m just blown away by their camaraderie, their brotherhood and their consideration for each other.”

Michael says he and Tina, the woman in the wheelchair he and John Cerqueira carried to safety that day, still talk. He says they try to talk on September 11th every year.

“Tina’s doing fine. We talk once or twice a year. We usually try to speak on the commemoration of that day…This is really a day to commemorate a bunch of things…Hearing her voice and hearing how well things are going for her obviously makes me very happy as well.”

Every year on September 11th, Michael says he thinks about the firefighters he passed while going down the stairs of Tower One as he headed to safety. His descriptive account in Reluctant Hero makes you think you are right there with him.

“I think about the fireman that I passed on the way down in the tower. I think about their courage. I think about the whole way down, all they did was calm our fears whereas it was just to tell us to keep pushing forward. Telling us everything was going to be ok and that’s all they kept saying. You can tell what their lips were saying, their eyes weren’t telling the same story…

These fireman, they knew. They knew what was going on. They knew what they were facing and they kept going up to try to save others and to me they’re the ultimate heroes. To me, I just happened to get caught by a camera doing what I did…If you read my story, you’ll see that I have a hard time being considered or being called a hero especially when I pass 75 to 100 heroes going up, knowing what they were facing, but still going to help others.”

The word hero is something Michael continues to struggle with. He tells us he acted after he was asked for help. He still thinks about the families who lost loved ones on 9/11, a day when he escaped death and saved a woman’s life.

“I acted in the only way I knew how to. It wasn’t a matter of sitting there and calculating what could happen to me or what could happen. I saw someone who needed help. I asked a simple question, ‘Do you need help?’ She said, ‘Yes.’ I went into action and we found each other for the next 96 minutes to be exact. We got out with six minutes to spare. If you look at it, everything kind of worked out for me that day. Everybody in my office on the 81st floor made it out…

After we were in there all that time and we placed Tina in an ambulance and we turned around and we started seeing the enormity of it all and we saw all the destruction and as I’m walking away, the top of the tower explodes behind me and I’m running for my life thinking at this point that I waited around down there too long and I’m not going to make it, this was the end and I still made it out of that. So everything kind of worked out for me as you could say and it wasn’t the same story for so many others and things worked out for my family and it wasn’t the same story for so many other families and I think about them more than you can imagine.”

In his book, Michael talks about the guilt of being alive. After 9/11, he admits he probably did not take the proper steps in addressing what happened to him that day. He deals with the guilt of being a survivor by paying tribute to those who died that day.

“I didn’t realize that I maybe was experiencing post traumatic stress disorder. I didn’t realize I was going into depression. I didn’t realize that this experience was affecting me in the way it was as I was living with it. By writing this book I was able to get everything out…I probably didn’t take the proper steps initially after all this happened and that’s what this book did for me. The way I deal with the guilt of being a survivor is living my life to commemorate those that gave so much, that gave the ultimate sacrifice…So I want to memorialize those people, those fireman, those countless others that gave because they were trying to give, by continuing to give by continuing to make the right choices by continuing to help others when they need help.”

Receiving coverage from Oprah, A&E Biography, Good Morning America, 48 Hours and USA Today, as well as having the event reenacted in a Spiderman comic book and gaining recognition from President Bush, the late Senator Ted Kennedy and Jim Carrey mentioning his name on the national 9/11 telethon, Michael admits the attention and press coverage were overwhelming. He says he got his story out to hopefully provide healing to others. At the same time, he pushed aside some issues that needed to be addressed.

“It was overwhelming. You’re trying to make sense of this. People want the story of carrying this woman out 68 flights, carrying her out of this building to safety…I still feel that l I did the right thing in that sense, but it was without addressing other issues. Sometimes I wish the camera wasn’t down there when I carried her out… John and I finding Tina, she was there as much to save our lives as we were there to save hers .”

Michael believes all of us have the ability to do good:

“We do have within us to do what’s right. We do have these untapped reservoirs, that goodness that just need to be tapped….I think that if we can just focus on trying to stop and check ourselves and just think about what we could do to help or what we can do that day to make a difference in someone else’s life or to make more of an impact in a positive way… I’m trying to be a better person as a result of everything I experienced, everything I went through these past 10 years.”

Michael Benfante’s book, Reluctant Hero, shares the resounding message that through the best of times and the worst of times, like September 11th, 2001, what we have through it all is each other.

“I still can’t put my mind around the fact that the towers aren’t there…I’m always going to remember it all…All we do, we have each other right? Now the way that we could really appreciate each other, the way that we could really enjoy each other is continuing to be considerate of each other. Continuing to, when we see someone in need or needs help, then try to reach out and help them. Everybody’s born with different abilities and different strengths and different intelligence. And you have to take what you’re born with and try and help people that maybe aren’t born with the same abilities, strengths and intelligence.”

You can find more information and purchase a copy of Michael Benfante’s book Reluctant Hero here

You can email Chris Yandek at ChrisYandek@CYInterview.com