tv [untitled] June 12, 2012 7:00pm-7:30pm EDT
7:00 pm
remember this internet sensation well it looks like the crush has finally faded and obama's number one fan is singing a different tune coming up we'll ask the obama girl herself why she's not endorsing the president and his class reelection. police raids are no doubt dangerous and oftentimes deadly but in a new indiana law tells civilians that if they feel threatened and they're allowed to shoot back is this the newest version of stand your ground we will make citizens
7:01 pm
or will it make citizens feel like they're above the law all that and wore a hat. it's tuesday june twelfth seven pm here in washington d.c. i'm liz wahl and you're watching our t.v. . well she became an internet sensation when her song about her presidential crush went viral amberley at indira better known as the obama girl rose to the internet start on after making this music video back in two thousand and eight.
7:02 pm
well a video like that is sure to get president obama's young supporters all riled up but it turns out that her crush on obama turned out to be just that nothing but a short lived and saturation amber is now singing a new tune. oh . that's right obama's so-called number one fan is telling the president to shape up or ship out this time around the obama girl isn't endorsing
7:03 pm
obama why not is she still an obama girl well amber herself drove me earlier for they answer all these questions take a look. i guess that will never kind of go away i guess for me i'm just not as excited as i was last time i think i make sense i mean last time i was singing and dancing about i'm on rooftops and in subways i mean i can't keep gone forever. but will you endorse him this time around. this time around i'm just not sure who i'm voting for i'm actually waiting to listen to more of the debates and kind of make my decision but even when i do make the decision i'm not sure i'm going to tell anybody just because this time around i'm not making videos so maybe it's no one's business maybe i'll keep it to myself this time but i'm not going to discredit him i think he's done a good job and i think whoever kind of gets in office this time around they're not going to be able to turn everything around one hundred percent there's just a lot to be done and there's no one guy that's a miracle worker that's for sure and that amber you were paid to make that music
7:04 pm
video i understand is that correct yes and so you were paid to endorse obama. well in the beginning when when they approached me to do it i thought of it more as a funny political satire sketch and i never knew that it was going to turn into this big thing that i'd be talking about for year after year after year it's now five years and i had no clue what i got myself into obviously i liked obama that's why i did it but i didn't know that it would make me this person that would be going on all news stations talking about who and why and what i'm crushing on and who i'm voting for i had no clue what i got myself into so i wasn't really like i was paid to endorse him it was more of an acting gig in the beginning that turned into something a little bigger. book what were you hoping to achieve by making through the video did you just do it for fun or were you hoping to influence young voters to vote for obama. well ben rhodes is the creator and he had a bunch of intentions for that he launched a channel called barely political that was bought out by you tube and google they
7:05 pm
have millions and millions of subscribers in this great you tube channel that you can go to and watch a lot of fun videos for me one of the best parts was getting the young people involved and being able to go to the debates in the primaries and talk to young people go to the white house correspondents' dinner so things like that were all a plus i got to do saturday night live so a lot of things like that were exciting they talk about my video and history books it's a part of history now and i think that's what it was well worth it so it wasn't just about making a music video it sounds like you did want to make an impact at the time and try to stir up support for for president obama. that is that is definitely what turned out to happen we made not just one video we made. over thirty videos during the course of his term before he got elected and then once he was elected i was like oh i guess i'll be making more videos but then we kind of stopped and barely political went a different route now they make political music satires so yeah i don't know that's
7:06 pm
why we're not really doing anything new recently all right well we saw your more recent video there kind of spin off grease and it doesn't seem like you still have a crush on him are your views on him changing. i think now i'm just a little bit harder to please i think everyone including myself who had really high hopes for him we got really excited he was somebody new and fresh he got all of us just super pumped up and maybe our hopes were a little unrealistic so i think that's what happened to compare it i hate to do this but to compare it's like a relationship if you meet a guy he's great you see nothing wrong with him and then as time goes by you know he has some flaws he's not as he's not always cracked up to be great in the beginning and then their true colors always great in the beginning. and where you're a democrat or republican. honestly i voted both i hate to put myself in a box this time around it's going to be whatever i decide and it could be either or
7:07 pm
maybe more independent along those lines along those lines up. what issues would you say are important to you. well i mean there's too many to discuss to discuss actually and when it comes to talking about this sort of stuff on t.v. or to anyone that's more knowledgeable than myself i don't feel right it's not my forte i didn't get involved in this because i was this political expert i am an actress i have learned a lot along the way and for me it's that's had has to be probably the least fun thing to talk about is politics so i'm just going to stay out of you know what your videos are. about politics it is but it's satire it's satire it just has to get people excited to make them laugh and to not really take me too seriously so that when you think satire the reason why i do it when you when you think satire am or you're thinking you're poking fun at something what exactly were you poking fun of
7:08 pm
. i would say i was poking fun of myself i'm the one that looked like the idiot running around dancing about that i. like to laugh at myself everyone should be very awful and some able to laugh at yourself but if you say you were a do endorse him obama if you were paid again do you need to be paid in order to to come out and make another video like that and show your support for a candidate. well just to be clear even though i was paid it was it was far from what people i think think i got paid. it really doesn't have anything to do with the money it's more about what i feel in my heart is right and what i want to do so right now i have no political agenda and i have no plans on making any videos and money is not even being discussed so has really nothing to do with that now your video you know. to young people a lot of young men for the most part i would assume. and did have
7:09 pm
a lot of young people rallied behind rallying behind him and the last election this time it seems like young voters are kind of becoming disillusioned and dropping out some of them saying they're not even going to vote this year what do you think is behind that. yeah that that's really upsetting actually and it makes me kind of want to get back into this just to kind of talk to people i was thinking about you know within my slip cam out and getting on the road to to see what everyone's thoughts are but that's what i'm hearing across the board and i don't think i'm the only one that's like unsure and the only one that's not excited as we were we were hoping for massive changes and it just didn't happen but you know like i said i don't know if one person can do that congress in the senate are behind all this they're old school they've been doing the same thing they're maybe they're the ones that need to make change happen just the face you know ok you know it doesn't seem like you did that impressed with president obama so would you ever become a romney girl. does it ever and keep asking me. honestly
7:10 pm
i can't i can't say right now i have i have no clue i'm still my eyes and ears are open but i am impressed i think obama's done a good job i'm not discrediting him for anything it's done ok well good to keep an open mind you know who young people are seem to be rallying around this time around ron paul what about would you ever become a ron paul girl. i get e-mails about that weekly weekly no i don't want to be another person's girl i'm done with that one one girl per president is enough in my life and well you know what amber look so you have some competition let's take a look who you're up against. i am ready and i've been i mean i know i can take obama girl so i'm kind of just. i'm kind of just chillin here like some least you know if they're around if you can't find one and you got to pay for one or find someone you can leave that doesn't count so if you can't find one then
7:11 pm
there's a lot right there for electability but he really cute girls last thing. that was a threat there. she's going smack i couldn't see her but it sounds like a late night talk talk line or do you think she has anything on you amber didn't sound good i didn't see it but not don't think so i don't think so. is there any you can do you say that you did this kind of more for fun is there any any candidate that you would refuse to make a video in support of you no matter what just goes against your morals and yet your standards i will not support this person. and there's been quite a few and i've mentioned some in the past but then i wish i might tongue i hate talking bad about people i really do i'd rather keep it to myself i feel like if you have nothing nice to say don't say it at all that's a that's a good mom that's a good motto to live by so and realize you know that you said you're you're an actress and you're acting in real life would you be more inclined to have
7:12 pm
a crush on obama or romney in real life obama obama like yeah. i don't know he's just got that charisma and he just just he's just got it same as i felt for you four or five years ago he has that he has a swag to him that no other presidents ever had and may not have for a long lag that is more and characteristic in a president gotta have that swag. so you're not obama's girl anymore what are you working on these days. i'm in acting school full time and i'm still developing my jewelry line inspired by amber so i'm i'm pretty busy on the acting front and i love living out here in california i just got out here from new york so i can't complain i'm keeping busy any more videos to look forward to on you tube on you tube yeah. because i have a channel yeah i mean my channels you tube dot com slash amber but no political
7:13 pm
videos coming. out of. that was amberley thank you so much for coming on the show that was amberley out and you're a better known as the obama girl to hear more from her you can follow her at amber and her on twitter. well it turned out to a controversial new gun law in the state of indiana police they're up in arms over a law that allows citizens to shoot them it's the first law of its kind in the us and allows people to pull the trigger if a cop on lawfully unlawfully enters their home of course police are not happy about this law which is backed by the national rifle association but with a recent slew of reports on police for the taliban is this a power to the people or can this lead to a dangerous battle between public servants and civilians well earlier i was joined by mark walters host of arms american radio and co-author of lessons from armed america i asked them if this new law and power
7:14 pm
a citizens to shoot police take take take a listen to his response that's actually about what this does this is actually an amendment to what's known as the castle doctrine law that went into effect in indiana in two thousand and six and i think the first thing to do is to start off probably with the fourth amendment to the u.s. constitution i've got a lot of notes in front of this is a fairly complicated issue but let's start with the fourth amendment to the us constitution which clearly states that the right of the people to be secure in their persons houses papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures seizures shall not be violated and no warrants shout issue but upon probable cause supported by over affirmation and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized this case originally came up a gentleman by the name of richard barnes who had resisted officers what he felt were illegally entering his apartment during what was called in by his wife at the
7:15 pm
time a nine one one call domestic dispute he resisted the entry by officers into the apartment he was charged with three misdemeanors was subsequently convicted issue was during that case his trial judge did not allow the jury to be told that. he had the right under common law in indiana law at that time to reasonably resist what he felt was illegal lawful entry by the police as a result the judge did not allow that the jury did not hear it he was convicted an appellate court overturned the conviction and then it went to the indiana supreme court if you're following me on this and the indiana supreme court overturned the appellate overturning his conviction letting his convictions stand and that's how we got where we are today ok and that is that is the president but this is just one incidence of police misconduct and we are seeing reports of police misconduct in the country i think we have some statistics here. i think these are the most
7:16 pm
recent it's back from two thousand there were almost five thousand. three hundred fifty million dollars spent in court battling. go to the next. there most of the reported incidents of police using excessive force so does this serve as a justification for citizens being able to protect themselves against police. you know you have the right you have an inherent right as a human being to defend your life what this does if we goes ridgeley came out as s.b. one or s e one number one which was signed by governor mitch daniels and what this exactly states is that a person is justified in using reasonable force against a public servant if the person reasonably believes the force is necessary to protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of on lawful force by a public servant prevent or terminate the public servants unlawful entry or of
7:17 pm
attack on the persons dwelling or occupied motor vehicle or prevent were terminated public servants unlawful trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person's possession now what this does not allow and it's clearly written into law and i want people to be very clear on this that not. was standing and i'm quoting again from the law itself subsection i a person is not justified in using force against a public servant if the person is a committing or is escaping after the commission of a crime to the person provokes an action by the public servant with intent to cause bodily injury to the public servant or that the person is entered into combat with a public servant and so forth or threatens to continue on lawful action in other words you cannot during the commission of a crime shoot a police officer none of none of the laws have changed in the state of indiana what happened is that the supreme court according to indiana's legislature and the governor overstepped itself by removing the common law that had stood for years
7:18 pm
that says a person has the right to lawfully resist on lawful entry into their home which was not even a part of the original case so they took legislative action to correct that and you know mark as with many laws the critics of this say that this can create a path that slippery slope and raise questions on when it's in fact legal to shoot a police officer they hadn't in fact provide justification that first getting a police officer. and the line there between what is allowed what's legal and what's not legal can be can get pretty blurry no question that you know law enforcement officers around the country if you're reading some of the forums and you know are standing up in arms i believe that many of those law enforcement officers are misinformed as to the law hopefully they're not getting their information from the san francisco chronicle or the cleveland plain dealer but the national rifle association has come up with a number of countenance that countenances if you will to the miss that that the that s b want to laos homeowners to shoot and kill police officers they believe are
7:19 pm
off on their property or their houses for example that's patently false it allows reasonable force to be justified when a person reasonably believes it is not as an unlawful entry by force and should be reasonable the defensive force must be proportional. proportional to the reasonably perceived threat now you know a police officer doesn't have anything to worry about if they're not illegal if they're not doing anything illegal what they're concerned with and rightly concerned with is the perception by the public that they can get that the public can get away with something that they could have gotten away with prior to and they can nonetheless this is certainly a lot of controversy and a lot of fears among the police over there in indiana as to whether or not this will hinder them from being able to do their job well and i do want to bring up a quote from a police officer this was the from the san francisco bay says quote if i pull over a car and i walk up to it and the guy shoots me he's going to say well he was
7:20 pm
trying to legally enter my property. somebody is going to get away with killing a cop because of this law and what do you think about that fear that police feel like their lives are in jeopardy now because shooting a police cannot be justified i don't believe that it can be justified and i think that's an unfounded fear i'm not a police officer and i'm not the one approaching that vehicle so it's very difficult for me to speak to what's in the police officer's mind however it's illegal to shoot a police officer who approaches your vehicle on a traffic stop you're not going to be able to come up with that excuse i think that's an unfounded fear you know if you look at the way that these this law is written it's very clear when you look at s.b. one and actually read it when it's justifiable force is allowed and when it's not allowed but it does not give anybody the individual right to shoot at a police officer but they think this could you could you know police are supposed to be public servants as is pending the public against the police. you know i don't
7:21 pm
think so i think it's a matter of how this is reported and how it's going to be perceived you know police understandably have every right to be concerned about the perception of the public in the way that this law is being perceived by the public as as a means of how it's being reported by quite frankly irresponsible outlets i read the san francisco chronicle reports i've read the cleveland reports and reports from across the country and their quote it's a lot of fear mongering quite frankly none of them are going to the facts if you if you were to head over to the n.r.a. dot i r and r i o a page for example you can get the facts on the the missed one of the myths is if a police officer is walking by a home and a woman screams because her husband is beating her that the husband can shoot and kill the officer for entering the home to get away with it that's patently false the individual is and is in fact committing a crime which is what is directly written into the law is illegal there's been no change actually to indiana law as it stood prior to the original case that caused
7:22 pm
all of this problem they simply rewrote it back into the law all right and i guess ultimately if police if they aren't serving the public interest why should they be treated definitely differently from anyone else in terms of somebody feeling they are feeling like they need to protect themselves against another person if they feel like they're like us in danger. are you referring specifically to a police officer yes yes i mean in a situation like that where a police officer is breaking the law i guess then it does make sense that there is no differentiation between a police officer and a civilian if in both cases they are breaking the law and you feel like your life is in danger. nobody supports law enforcement more than i do on armed american radio i'm an avid supporter of law enforcement across the board but there are also cases there as i said last time i was on your show there are bad police officers there are bad judges there are bad lawyers there's someone from every walk of life sitting in a jail cell somewhere in the united states of america today for committing
7:23 pm
a crime simply because someone puts on a uniform or puts on a badge does not make them an inherently good person that person can commit a crime and you showed statistics as well. if i'm sitting at home at three o'clock in the morning in my door gets kicked in i have a right to defend my life and my family by firing my weapon to stop that if that were to happen to be police officers on the other side of that door am i right in doing that if they were at the wrong home i may be right in doing that but i might be right in doing that posthumously as their right of return on me will be greater than what i acted upon so it's a thin line there's no question about it i understand law enforcement's concern and it's really sad that we got to this point from the indiana supreme court who overstepped their bounds when i do want to ask you one more question mark we don't have that much time left but the national rifle association lobbied for this law this is the same organization that lobbied for stand your ground which is both of them are an expansion of the castle doctrine stand your ground is getting
7:24 pm
a lot of controversy right now over what happened in florida so keeping in mind that this is the n.r.a. is one of the groups behind this law could it be about expanding gun rights. i don't think it's about expanding gun rights nobody supports law enforcement more than the national rifle association and millions of their members or hundreds of thousands of our members are law enforcement agents across the nation in local county sheriffs are all agents and so forth are all member a lot of them a large majority of them are members of the national rifle association with the n.r.a. was doing here and looking at some of the research i've done is simply go back to put into place into the castle doctrine which apparently was gutted by the indiana supreme court overstepping its bounds they want to head and replaced it with the language to give that already back to the citizens to be able to defend themselves against what we know in common law for hundreds of years as an illegal entry not arresting the right to resist arrest because they'll be charged but the right to
7:25 pm
resist and illegal entry ok and you know what this is the first law of its kind and the last that allowed for this for our. citizens in some instances to be able to police that they feel like they're in danger do you think that's going to set a precedent and do you expect other states to pass similar laws well i disagree with the way that question was phrased only along the lines that we don't have a right to shoot police officers if you shoot a police officer you're going to do an awful lot of time if you survive it's that simple what this does was give the person the right to resist an unlawful entry into their home and expanded on the castle doctrine now many states across the across america already have in to have under common law the right that this law put back into place that the indiana supreme court removed and many believe overstepped their bounds and really quickly at the end of the day mark do you think that this makes us safer. i do yes i do but i also see the perspective from want horsemen
7:26 pm
it's a little bit too soon to see what's going to happen here hopefully everybody gets their wits about them and law enforcement stays safe that's the ultimate goals for say right mark thank you so much for coming on the show that was mark walters host of armed american radio and co-author lessons from armed america. p.r. we all know it stands for public relations good p.r. can help sway public opinion on stories and events can good p.r. help you win a war or influence world leaders artist has are so the span of conflict. images like these. and words like the innocent civilians were beaten imprisoned and the violence protect civilians are often would have preceded military operations in the name of stopping brutal killings by hardened dictators and while authoritarian regimes are not devoid of responsibility for atrocities the story often ends there especially when leaders of intervening countries have to
7:27 pm
justify their wars to their people it's depressingly easy to sell a war it's almost becoming a habit sanctioning even in spite of all that we now know about the lies told over iraq the same stereotypes crop up again and again and again regardless of who or what kind of regime is being attacked whether it's a secular regime or a religious one to the viewer it's about the good guy bad guy it's about saturating us over and over and over again with the same images now here's what they're good at satisfied the viewing audience without exposing your true agenda in one thousand nine hundred ninety agreed told the story of what iraqi soldiers did to babies in the kuwaiti hospital to think it is and let the children to die have a clue. her testimony was widely publicized and cited by politicians in justifying their support for kuwait in the first gulf war turned out she was the daughter of
7:28 pm
the kuwaiti ambassador to the us and her testimony was part of a public relations campaign run by an american p.r. agency for the kuwaiti government sparking controversy and public anger. p.r. firms or individuals spin doctors consulting for governments and politicians is certainly not new or uncommon but while there may be a need for effective communication there is also a very thin line between that and saddam hussein to build and keep weapons of mass destruction out right manipulation as many would point to the nonexistent weapons of mass destruction he used as a pretext for western powers to attack iraq in two thousand and three. communication is a weapon each slogan is a dumb dumb advertising terms have become war terms we talk about target we talk about strikes again we talk about its impact this is terrible it is also a weapon in the war because all wars are broadcast live and these images can influence world opinion with it's already been done several times in the past
7:29 pm
change the face of war to bring the bodies the make up you can always simulate a massacre that is not the current misinformation it is easy to fall during a period of war. even when history is full of examples to learn from some say people's collective memories are simply too short to reality for we have are blotted white truth with many sides to it but when the wheels you know warming things start serving up all of that happen through the facts take a back seat at the first and loudest they are often one stick and even if corrections apologies come later the damage has already been done but the questions are often the reverse of the. just personal you are to me part. that's going to do it for now if you missed part of the show or any show today you're in luck we post all of our interviews online and full for your viewing pleasure just go to our you to page it's youtube dot com.
29 Views
Uploaded by TV Archive on