>> if it happened in the gay rights movement, activist mark segal was probably there. he's got a new memoir out. let's get the inside story. good morning, and welcome to "inside story." i'm tamala edwards. indeed, mark segal is my guest. good morning. how are you? >> tamala, it is great to be with you again. >> it is good to be with you. the book is called "and then i danced." i was joking with you that you were the forrest gump of the gay movement. if it happened, you were there. and that's where my first question comes from. you grew up in philadelphia in a time when you're ashamed to be poor. you're ashamed to be jewish in a non-jewish neighborhood. it is not an easy place to be gay. you see a family member beaten and run out of the family for being gay. and yet, at an early age, you decided to live life out. many people would have said, "i'm finding a closet and going to the back of it." why did you decide to do that? >> i had this incredible

grandmother, fanny weinstein, who, at age 13, took me to my first civil rights march. she was a suffragette. she taught me how the family had fought to get out of europe during the pogroms. she talked about our family who struggled through the holocaust. she was a fighter. and she instilled that fight in me. but the book isn't all about that kind of sadness. it's full of stories of -- inside stories of philadelphia and patti labelle, elton john, and practically every politician that we've known for the last 20 years, including barack obama. >> you know them all, it seems, one way or the other. >> i've met them all. i'm the forrest gump, as you say. >> let's talk about this. from the very beginning, you become famous. any number of gay organizations out there, you're part of one called gay raiders. and you said, "if we make a spectacle, they can't ignore us." so you start showing up at places -- "the mike douglas show" here at wpvi. you interrupt walter cronkite as he's doing the evening news. i think we've got some pictures

that show what that looks like. but in the end, any number of these people that you stop -- walter cronkite, governor shapp, bob brady, john street -- people who often disagree with you to begin with -- you change how they feel about the issues, and they become your friends. and that's sort of surprising that they don't become your enemies. "this guy interrupted what i was doing." they become friends. what lesson is that, in our divided politics, for the rest of us? >> learn to talk to people. learn to befriend them. if you have differences, talk with them. i've always believed that the issue of lgbt rights is one of education, one of invisibility. we did the zaps starting in 1973 because lgbt people weren't on tv. there were only three networks and pbs. at that time, there was no lgbt stories on tv. we never appeared on the news. and our reason for disrupting the cbs evening news with walter cronkite was he'd never run a story on gay rights. and so the point was end

invisibility. if you end invisibility, people will see who we are, and they'll begin to really support us. and that's what we've done here in philadelphia. philadelphia is the most lgbt-friendly city in america. >> and speaking of philadelphia, you have some showdowns with various people -- councilman fran rafferty, even people at your mother's funeral. at various times, people come up and they're incredibly nasty and you don't give it back. you just walk away. and i thought that that was interesting, that you engage, engage, engage, but not with that. >> no, you have to move on. don't let the negative or bitterness be a part of your life. there's joy out there. try to accept it. try to have it. i mean, the book -- and i'm gonna hold it up -- "and then i danced" -- is full of joy, at least i believe it is, because every battle that i've ever had with somebody -- i've at least gotten them over to the point where they appreciate the issue, and luckily for me, we've become friends. >> and somebody might look at

the book, and most of those battles, mark, you win. and they would say, "we just -- gay marriage is now the law of the land." and somebody said to you, "if you compare where you started and you look at where you are now, is everything just peachy if you're gay in america?" what would you tell people as they sit down to read your book? >> well, as you mention, marriage equality's the law of the land, but most people don't realize that in pennsylvania, it became law of the state one year before the supreme court ruled. the inside story of how that happened has never been told before, and it's in the book. but i'm lucky. standing outside stonewall in 1969, watching that riot go on, i was a poor guy who had went to new york, no money in my pocket, and with no prospects. i thought i had no future. and watching that unfold in front of me, all of a sudden, i realized even though there wasn't a word for it, i was gonna be a gay activist. and all the titles i have in my life right now, the one that you can call me which makes me the happiest is gay activist. >> what is the next big fight for gay america, would you say?

>> well, the point being that today you can get married anywhere in the united states, but in most united states, you could be fired for getting married. so nondiscrimination is the next battle. here in pennsylvania, we have no nondiscrimination law. >> and finally, it sounds like of all the things you're proud of, and there's so many things you're proud of in the book, the senior center in philadelphia seems to mean the one that means the most to you, and it goes full circle back to your cousin norman. >> cousin norman was thrown out of his house. last time i saw him, he was a gay senior who was homeless. and my feeling is that's the first out generation. and unfortunately, we in the gay community are not taking care of our seniors. so that put me on the plight to try to open an lgbt-friendly senior home -- affordable home -- where lgbt seniors who were out way back in the '60s and '50s can afford to live with dignity. >> all right, well, mark segal, the book is called "and then i danced." thank you for coming to talk

about it. we'll take a short break, and then we'll be joined by our insiders. >> "inside story" is presented by temple university. temple fuels students with academics and opportunities to take charge. plugged into the city, powered by the world. temple.edu/takecharge.

why are you here? why are any of us here? windows people! windows are the eyes into the soul of the home!

ugly soul. [shutters] ugh don't make your life difficult. when your client needs blinds go to blinds to go. with the largest selection of beautiful blinds and shades custom sized and guaranteed for life they're a designer's best friend. trust me, they make window decorating easy. take during our early fallshad savings sale take 20-30% off all cellular shades and cascade double shades.

>> welcome back. i'm tamala edwards. let's get going and introduce you to the insiders on "inside story." first up, nia meeks, communications executive. >> good morning. >> foreign policy analyst ed turzanski. >> good morning. >> attorney jim eisenhower. >> good morning, tamala. >> and communications executive jeff jubelirer. >> good morning, tamala. >> let's talk about the pope's visit to philadelphia. we got so many kudos on the world stage. it was a beautiful event. the pope goes home, and then that monday, mayor nutter comes out to face the press and talk about was it a win or was it a loss? when you look at how things went, do you say it was a win for nutter or it was a loss for nutter in terms of what the event was and could have been? >> well, it's a win. i mean, you can't cry over the spilled milk, and there was plenty of milk out there that spilled. but when you look at the entire event, when you talk with the pilgrims, when you talk with the parishioners, when you look at how philadelphia came off and no one was hurt -- and i know that might seem like a really low bar, but it's an incredibly important thing -- this was a fabulous event, and we haven't had one since 1979. completely different conditions on the ground today, as opposed

to four decades ago. >> 9-11. >> you know, we take a claim on this one. yes, there were some aspects of it that could have gone better. there were some messaging problems. there were the scared -- the people that were conflicting the sacred with actually the secular and thinking they should make a lot of money, not understanding that these are religious pilgrims coming to town. they're not wealthy. they're not rolling out to go to the bars and the restaurants. they're trying to take care of business. but overall, i mean, the city looked great across the world, and you can't get much better than that. >> i think this was a spectacular event. tamala, you know i live downtown. i was locked in my apartment for three days, and all i did was watch this, so i probably got more knowledge of it than anybody. i thought it was just spectacular. i also walked down the parkway a couple different times. great crowds. we have to get outside of our own heads sometimes. i've been to huge political events. i've been to huge rock concerts and other types of public events. and this was beyond that. this was an international event in philadelphia in which our

city looked fantastic. >> let's talk about a couple of things that were raised. former governor and mayor ed rendell saying he did think that they mayor went too far when it came to the security and the concerns that people had. we heard stories of pilgrims waiting five, six, seven hours, and by the time they got to the parkway, the mass was over. and there were a lot of those stories out there. the dnc is coming next summer. is there a lesson here? was that security just too much or badly done? >> a number of -- and i'll generally agree with what nia and jim have said. there's that old expression, "two things you don't want to see made -- laws and sausages," right? add to it events like this because there are many problems that eventually were worked through, and the lasting impression will be a good one. that having been said, there were some problems, and we had better bone up on them quickly. the restaurants took a real hit, as did hotels. that was probably avoidable in

large part. and we can forgive the city because this is sui generis. it's just different than things that have happened before. but there are certainly improvements that can be made and need to be made if we're going to be an international convention destination city, which is what i think we want to be, we can be, but certainly, we have to be careful, especially when you ring the security bell. when you ring it loud, you can't un-ring it. and that scares people off. >> going on to jeff because there was a heated exchange between the mayor and a reporter, and he said pretty much it was the media's fault, that they scared everybody. and a reporter yelled back, "and so did you." who was really at fault at the end for -- it was beautiful, but more people probably would have stayed in town and spent money and gone to those hotels and bars if they weren't just convinced that they had to be scared. >> yeah, and the media, and i

think you would agree, being in the media, only report what they're told. and time and time again, unfortunately -- and this probably came down through secret service, who had the ultimate responsibility for security. let's be clear. there was a national security event responsible for the safety of the pope that people were gonna have to walk a number of miles, that they should be treated perhaps like a winter storm. and then to say, "well, i said it, but you reported it," time and time again. last time i checked, media doesn't care if, all due respect, that the plane landed. they are more interested if the plane didn't land. >> the thing to remember, though, and i tell this to my friends in new york and washington, philadelphia was the only site that the pope did a large outdoor event. he did not do a large outdoor event in new york. madison square garden is indoors. he did an indoor event in washington, at the capitol, at the cathedral. nothing like that occurred in north america, other than here. so let's keep that in perspective. >> let's talk about a couple of things that came out of the meeting here and have continued to be talked about -- the pope came out and talked about

sex-abuse victims. he met with some of them. he made very strong comments. and then on monday morning, archbishop charles chaput was asked about that. let's listen in on some of what he had to say. >> it wasn't a publicity stunt. there's a genuine interest on the part of the holy father to represent the whole church in expressing sadness and apology in the cases where there's sexual abuse by members of the church. and he sincerely meant that. >> later in that press conference, though, archbishop chaput said, after he continued to get questions, "we should get over wanting to go back and blame, blame, blame." so that made many people wonder for everything the pope said, what are we really going to see here in philadelphia in terms of changes or action? >> well, there have been extraordinary changes. and at some point -- and this is not to denigrate in any way the suffering that people experienced. this is absolutely horrible. it's disgusting.

it was an aberration. that's what the archbishop's trying to say. and at some point, you have to ask the question, with everything that the archdiocese has done, what else do you want to have happen? what is it? so tell us what you want so that we can move on. because everyone's life cannot just end at this point. there has to be recovery from this for the victims, certainly for the institution of the church. so at some point, this is really frustrating because this is an issue that never goes away, and there's never a sufficient answer. and i think you heard some of that frustration, and the archbishop is saying, "we've done so many things. what else do you want?" >> here's my problem. and i understand that, as well, but sometime it's how you say things versus what you say, and the pope is a great example of being a phenomenal communicator.

it's how he says things. it's not that he's disagreeing. he agrees, i'm sure, on policy, of course, and chaput. but chaput -- he just couldn't help it. i get it. it's frustrating to be asked again and again and again. but you have to bite your tongue. you have to understand how that comes off if you say, "enough. what else do you want us to do? you should be glad about it." that's the lasting impression. >> let's talk about another thing that's become a communications issue. we found out that the pope had met with kim davis when, the kentucky county clerk who was not going to sign marriage certificates for gay couples, that they met in washington d.c. and she claims the pope told her, "be courageous," and gave the impression that he was in support of what she was doing. this morning, the vatican came out and said, "no, that's not the case." it sounds as though she was one of many people that he met. he was not specifically commenting on her case. and in fact, somebody within the vatican says they now regret that the meeting happened. but it was interesting to me to watch the comments. there were so many people -- "i love francis. i may go back to church."

they saw this meeting -- "well, maybe i'm not gonna go back to church." now that we know the backstory on it, does the francis effect continue to take hold? will those people come out? or did it drop anchor for people who said, "wait, he met with her. that's it. i'm not coming back"? >> you know, if that's gonna be your marker, you weren't gonna go back to church anyway because any least little thing will happen. it's like, "oh, no!" the issue, again -- it gets to messaging. had the vatican come out earlier on and said, you know, "the holy father met with many people, including this person, because of this, and that's it," it would have been a one-day story. and not saying anything, it's the same thing as what happened before the pope came here with mayor nutter. you know, nature abhors a vacuum. and when there's no information, everything else comes in from social media to everything else. >> but they did issue a clarification, and i can say -- >> but the clarification, but not the front line. >> i can say when i first heard that news, i was personally disappointed in that. i think this woman is a law-breaker. i think she's a self-promoter. and i don't agree with anything that she stands for. and the way she spun it was that

she had this private meeting with the pope, and he was all for her. well, it turns out she may have been in a room with the pope. i've been in a room with barack obama. i don't know if i can tell you that he loves me and agrees with everything that i say. and many of us have had those kinds of situations. so that clarification, i think, was good and helpful because i personally was disappointed when i first heard that news. >> let's talk about something else a little strange that came out -- that we saw the pope down in congress giving a speech, and he leaves the podium and our bob brady dashes up, grabs his glass, takes a sip out of it, gives other people a sip of water. people are sprinkling it on themselves. late-night comedians had a ball with this. should we find it adorable? that's bob brady for you -- a little bit odd. >> got to have a touch of philly in there. >> it was a precursor to the real event that happened in philly. you know, he got everybody geared up to say, "well, if it happened in d.c., who knows what's gonna happen in philly?" that was a great promo. there you go. >> and this is his thing. he's taken barack obama's water. he did this. >> he's the water man.

>> he's the water man. >> evaluate it for its worth. >> we're counting the silverware. [ laughter ] >> so, let's take a little turn away from the pope and talk about something else that was in the news this week, and that's kathleen kane. and the story just continues to get a little strange. risa vetri ferman coming out. there are now perjury charges and any number of other charges related to whether or not she signed a document saying, "okay, i get it. i'm not supposed to release grand jury information." she had claimed she didn't. they went into her office. they found the document. she comes out, as she's being arraigned on all this, and says, "i'm releasing more e-mails, this time touching on a state supreme court justice." it's of a piece -- the e-mails are terrible. but she never answers the charge. it's almost, "here comes more e-mails." but the e-mails are disturbing. but because of who she is and what's going on, do we ever look at that? or it's just, "there goes the circus"? >> it becomes a go-to well as far as an escape hatch, so to speak. and this is unfortunate, because any good work that she may have done has been totally and completely eclipsed by this

ongoing "drip, drip, drip," and then "splash!" and it seems like, at this point, the only one that could save her from herself perhaps would be bill or hillary clinton, and say, "hey, maybe you want to step down now, right before..." >> "we run." >> yeah, there's that. >> but this week, we saw a front-page story on one of the local papers taking a look at a man at the center of this who she had a feud with, frank fina, and doing a biography, and noting that there are people in the office who had accused him of gender discrimination. marc costanzo, another person mentioned by kane, had some sexual-harassment issues in the office. seth williams has tried to say, "i'm gonna get them some retraining. we're done with this." but it sounds like it's percolating back up, that she may go down, but if her goal was to take them with her, is she going to get that? >> she may, but let's focus on her for a moment. her credibility is in tatters. and it strains credulity to understand how she can continue to exercise that function of public trust given where her credibility is. so, that's where you start.

and if others are going to take the fall for bad behavior, then that's their problem. but she's not going to slip the noose. >> no. >> and clearly, here, she was signaling all along -- "well, if you're coming for me..." >> "i'll come for you." >> "...i'm going to get you as well." >> is this state's supreme court justice in trouble? >> perhaps. i mean, i will speak to perception. it's been referred to the judicial conduct board, and there could be some sort of ethics or other action that can take place. he obviously is in a pickle, because he can't discuss it. >> his name's michael eakin, by the way. >> yes, justice eakin. but it could be a matter of just horrific behavior, but not necessarily impacting his role as a justice. we don't know that because of the drip, drip. she's selectively releasing e-mails, and we don't know who sent, who received. >> getting past the distraction of the e-mails, which is why -- my opinion is that's why they're being put out, to distract. this lady's charge goes right to the heart of the case against her. she has said all along -- which,

by the way, i believe, also, as a lawyer, she's wrong on this -- that she wasn't bound by the grand jury secrecy law. she said that. and she's also said she never signed any document that said she would be bound. >> but there's a document. >> and she denied that. she denied it under oath before the grand jury. she testified to that effect. now, how did they execute a search warrant and find it in her office? someone in her office had to tell them where it was. >> well, they've said people in her office have -- they contributed to the case. >> so, that's a flat-out contradiction of something that she testified to under oath. >> right. >> as the chief law enforcement officer. >> mark, how long, legally, before this all comes to fruition? could we be looking at months, years, even? >> well, she is indicted -- or charged, i should say. and criminal trials, there's a speedy-trial rule. it's not like a civil case that can go on forever and ever and ever. so, i would think the case would have to be tried sometime in 2016. >> okay. and, very quickly, let's talk about the cover of philadelphia magazine that came out. a lot of people looking askance because it's about city schools. they took a picture at greenfield school in the city. do you notice anything about this picture, talking about

philadelphia city schools? do you notice that there's not one black child among those children? the publisher, the editor-in-chief tom mcgrath, has come out and said, "boy, we screwed it up here. i'm sorry. i should've caught it." it is really a gaff, or something more? >> well, you know, it's hard to keep hearing "i'm sorry. we didn't mean it." because we had the same conversation with the philadelphia association of black journalists when we had the "being white in philly" article that came out and caused an uproar. we, as an organization, had conversations with tom mcgrath personally. we had town-hall meetings. there have been other things. so, if the aspect was education, or "i hadn't really thought about it," that's one thing. but when you come and say, "well, we are gonna change, and we're gonna have more diversity in our outlook, and perhaps even some of our hires so we can have different aspects of things," i mean, even the fact that we're only going to greenfield, that's the only public school that's worthwhile in philadelphia? or the only school worthwhile? again, the diversity is more than just color, but the color issue continues to come up at philadelphia magazine. it's troubling. >> you know, jeff, but is it crazy like a fox, "hey, we're

talking about his cover," and if he had run a different picture, would we? >> not this time. and because -- i think that they had the mistake, and nia referred to it, with the "being white in philly" issue, and in part of, sort of, our world of crisis communication, you apologize, but then you say, "what are you gonna do to make sure that doesn't happen again?" now, they've said they're going to be transparent about that, but they've had a year plus to be transparent, and we don't know what the details are of the transparency. >> nia, do they have black staffers? >> as far as i know, we have not yet seen a black staffer come on, even though they've had some contributors. so, maybe something has changed. >> i wonder if anyone's actually cracked the cover. >> i would love to hear it, but we got to take a break so you can have an inside story. we'll be right back. ♪

your immune system doesn't work the way it did when rock was young. so we made fluzone high-dose vaccine... for people 65+.

with a high high higher dose of antigen... it's significantly more effective than fluzone vaccine in preventing flu. fluzone high-dose vaccine is approved for people 65 and older. it's not for anyone who's had a severe allergic reaction to any vaccine component, including eggs, egg products, or to a prior dose of any flu vaccine. tell your doctor if you've ever had guillain-barré syndrome. side effects include pain swelling and redness at the injection site; muscle aches, fatigue, headache and fever. other side effects may occur. if you have other symptoms or problems following vaccination, call your doctor immediately. vaccination may not protect everyone. so, if you hopped around the clock, ask your doctor or pharmacist about fluzone high-dose. fluzone high-dose vaccine. >> "inside story" is presented by temple university. temple fuels students with academics and opportunities to take charge. plugged into the city, powered by the world. temple.edu/takecharge.

>> welcome back. nia, inside story. >> saturday, october 17th, philadelphia association of black journalists, scholarship and awards, barbara grant lifetime achievement award. phillyabj.org for more. >> ed. >> americans are owed $43.5 billion by iran because of terror acts. congressman pat toom-- or pat meehan, senator pat toomey introduced a bill -- before iran gets a penny of the $150 billion for the nuclear deal, those people have to be compensated. the white house said they will veto the measure. >> jim. >> tam, state auditor general eugene depasquale. last man standing. guy's had a good record, is a lawyer. lot of talk he may run for attorney general next time, and clean up the kathleen kane mess. >> all right. we'll end with you, jeff. >> talked about journalism, we talk about temple, our friend here. there has been a report billy penn put out this week saying that gerry lenfest, from the philadelphia media news, publisher of the inquirer and daily news, might bequeath that to the nonprofit temple university to run, or

help put these newspapers back in shape. we'll be interested to see if that happens. >> indeed. thanks to all of you. thanks to you for joining us. this has been "inside story." i'm tamala edwards. we'll see you next sunday. ♪

it's a cloudy, cool, winds day across the region today, a slight chance off spotty shower, it's mainly dry. we're starting out with clouds moving through the day, there's a chance of sunny breaks returning, can't guarantee it. but some of you may see that. in the lehigh valley, sunny and breezy, 62 degrees, on the windy side but not as windy as yesterday and likely dry. down the shore, cloudy and breezy, there's a chance of a spotty shower coming through areas close to the coast. 65 is the high, and we have coastal flooding issue. in fact down the shore, several issues for you. the winds are gusting 25 to 35 miles per hour. we are looking for moderate coastal flooding especially at times of the afternoon high tide