tv Andrea Mitchell Reports MSNBC December 9, 2009 1:00pm-2:00pm EST
joins us. i sat down with former vice president al gore to talk about climate change. his new book, "our choice," and sarah palin. today in an op-ed in "the washington post" palin is escalating his attack on the copenhagen sum i. palin calls it junk science and writes the agenda driven policies being pushed in copenhagen won't change the weather. >> global warming den ires persist in this era of real. the entire north polar ice cap, which has been there for most of the last 3 million years, is disappearing before our eyes. 40% is already gone. the rest is expected to go completely within the next decade. what do they think is causing this? the mountain glaciers in every region of the world are melting.
many of them at an accelerated rate, threatening drinking supplies. and drinking water supplies. and agricultural water supplies. we have these record storms, droughts, floods, fires, and tree deaths in the american west. climate refugees beginning now, expected to rise to the hundreds of millions unless we take action. these effects are taking place all over the world. exactly as predicted by the styneses who have warned for years that if we continue putting 90 million tons of global warming pollution into the atmosphere, every day, the accumulation is going to trap lots more heat, raise temperatures, and cause all of these consequences that are already beginning. >> one of the things that she has written recently on facebook is that this is doomsday scare tactics, pushed by an environmental priesthood that makes the public feel like own an suv is a sin against the planet. >> well, the scientific
community has worked very intensively for 20 years within this international process and they now say the evidence is unequivocal. 150 years ago this year was the discovery that co2 traps heat. that is a principle in physics. it is not a question of debate. it is like gravity. it exists. >> if it is so unequivocal, i have to ask you about the leaks of those e-mails. even today tom friedman talks about them massaging the evidence. why would they feel the need to hype the evidence if it is so unequivocal? some scientists, i should say. >> i don't think they did. i haven't read all of the e-mails that were stolen there from -- the most recent one is like ten years ago. and what they have done is they have snatch ad few phrases completely out of context. i will give you an example. one of the off-quoted phrases has to do with the scientists
saying that a particular study isn't good science and shouldn't be included in the -- international report. well, that was their view. they exchanged it privately. the study was included, fully aired, discussed, the weak points were analyzed. what -- the other points were analyzed. so it is an example of how these private exchanges had been blown out of proportion, taken out of context. and misrepresented. >> at the same time, there is an economic impact. it is harder to persuade a lot of people, lot of americans, unemployed. facing the effects of this recession. that the up-front costs of doing something about global warm ring worth it. no doubt that there are, you know, overwhelming economic benefits down the road. but how do you persuade people in the middle of a recession that this should be their immediate priority. >> for one thing, when the world
went into the recession, interest rates were already so low that the only economic policy tools that government has had to try to simulate the economy was to have stimulus spending. and the need to build new infrastructure to accommodate the shift away from imported owl on which we have a growing dangerous dependence pushed many countries, including the u.s. to devote a substantial part of that stimulus to a green stimulus. now we have the opportunity to create millions of good new jobs in making this transition. just the retrofitting of homes. with better windows and lighting and insulation to save money on their energy bills and put millions of people to work and in local communities in jobs that cannot be outsourced. building the smart grids, building the solar, wind, renewable energy systems, planting trees. these are all job creators that
help to stimulate the economy and produce sustainable growth. >> even if the net job creators nationally, there are going to be areas in the rustbelt, mish let's say, where there is a net loss from the effects of doing something, making a commitment and spending billions of dollars to help poor countries adjust, commitments being expected of the president and of the united states government at cop enhagen. >> the jobs started a long time ago with the outsourcing to other countries for a variety of reasons. and including the cheaper labor costs. it is not -- not because of the response of global warming. the response to global warming can bring jobs back. i will give you an example. there's this company called cardinal fasteners in ohio that is very proud to have made the bolts for the golden gate bridge and the statue of liberty. they had hard times. now they are -- hiring people
back, making bolts for windmills. and these wind farm insulations. the governor of michigan, governor grant hoholm is one ofe most vigorous advocates of bringing jobs back into the rustbelt areas hard hit years ago. but now the hope for a renaissan renaissance, putting people to work and building new renewable energy insulation. >> as you know in our choice, there is a real partisan divide when it comes to people's attitudes. pew poll you cite say college democrats believe humans are responsible. >> it may be the tendency for people to follow their perceived political leaders and the leadership of the modern republican party has really gotten into global warming
denier posture flunked some people. but it should not be a political issue. it really is a moral issue. it speaks to the responsibility of the present generation to take steps to safeguard those generations yet to come. because this has now reached the level where if we were not to act, the consequences already beginning at a low level are predicted to reach catastrophic levels unless we take steps to prevent it from happening. >> there's been, according to the pew research, a 20% job in the number of people in the last year. since 2008, 71% believed that humans contributed to global warming and now it is only 51%. do you attribute to that to the economic hard times and people focusing inward? >> i think that result dove tails with the first one you cited because when you look
inside that study, virtually 100% of those who changed their opinion were conservative republicans. and the -- this should be a bipartisan issue. it used to be. and the -- the extreme partis partisanship we have seen in recent years, i think has affected the way our country has responded to this. now, beneath the surface, there have been a lot of republicans, a lot of people that used to be skeptics actually moving towards an acceptance of this science and a determination to do something about it. lindsey graham, for example, from south carolina, is one of those republicans in the senate who is now saying look, the evidence tells us we have really got to take action. a lot of -- in the faith based community. a lot of fundamentalist groups are now saying, you know, the earth is lord's and fullness thereof and we have an obligation to be good stewards
of the planet. and -- so -- i see signs of optimism and hope, even though in an economic recession, naturally when you ask people to list their priorities, they are going to place a higher priority on the immediate economic situation. >> you met with president obama this week. and he is, of course, going to head to copenhagen. green peace and natural allies are very upset, really critical of what the administration is doing. saying that there should be a binding agreement now, not just these targets which are lower than the targets the clinton/gore administration proposed in 1997. we seem to be moving backwards. what can you say of the administration about doing more from your perspective? >> well, within one month of taking office, president obama made a major investment in the
green stimulus program. he has accomplished major improvements in auto efficiency. his epa has issued a binding regulation requiring the reduction of co2 even if legislation does not -- >> this week. >> is not passed. yes, but that began early in the administration and took this amount of time for the administrative procedures act to be followed. another regulation requires public reporting of all co2 emissions by major emitters covering 85% of the co2 emissions in the u.s. he has succeeded in passing this legislation in one house of congress. and the sponsors say they now have the votes to pass it early next year in the senate. i hope that they are right. he cannot be expected in my opinion, to make commitments that go beyond what the congress is willing to approve. we -- we have seen that before.
that doesn't work out very well. so yes, the reductions are lower than they should be. and the treaty that hopefully results next year will be weaker than it should be. but it is a crucial first step. and putting a price on carbon and beginning the process of adjusting to a low carbon economy can build on its own momentum. what we have often seen is that when we americans say look, we got to reduce pollution, business -- some businesses complain about it but almost every time it is turned -- it turned you on to be easier and cheaper and accomplished faster and they -- gain confidence and then we go farther. >> you are an old hand at washington politics. you know the house from your years there, the senate. was it a mistake to do health care first because now everything else is backed up behind health care. and who knows when the senate will get to this? how can you expect china and india to make commitments?
you can't pressure them until the senate acts. >> the old cliche is hindsight is 20/20. had they known health care would take the entire year and possibly more, maybe there would have been some different calculations. but i have not criticized the president for trying to do several things right at the beginning of his administration. because i know that the mandate of the new president is much stronger and more powerful at the beginning of the administration. and he was elected having made a number of pledges and wanted to follow through on them. so i'm pleased he's consistently made the climate crisis one of his top three priorities and has continued to speak about it. i would always like to see more done on this issue. but i give the president credit for really changing the mood and bringing about a change in the
u.s. position. >> you cite interesting psychological data. what is it about the way we think that makes it so difficult for people, for many people, obviously not everyone, to accept the facts as you see them? >> well, it is an unprecedented challenge. and because the impacts of global warming are distributed globally, the crisis masquerades as a distraction and because the length of time between causes and consequences is longer than we are used to dealing with, it gives us the illusion that we have the luxury of time. neither of those things is true. but when we respond to threats immediately and take action right away, it is usually to threats that we are hard-wired to respond to. the kinds of things that our ancestors survived. on this one, we have to use our reasoning capacity and set long-term goals based on our
deepest values. the good news is that the experts, you know, neuroscience and psychology and all of that, reassure us we definitely have the capacity to do that. we did it with nato and we did it with the marshall plan and a number of things. it is more difficult, it require as conscious choice and requires full communication about why we are setting out on this course. and we have to stick to it. so it -- it does require leadership and determination. >> more of our interview coming up. what al gore has to say about the war in afghanistan and president obama tackling health care so early in its presidency. and negatives, msnbc's rachel maddow joining us to talk about the health care deal on the hill. so many arthritis pain relievers --
that's 80 pills. just 2 aleve can last all day. perfect. choose aleve and you can be taking four times... fewer pills than extra strength tylenol. just 2 aleve have the strength to relieve arthritis pain all day. ( cracking, crash ) that was delivered fast! it's not delivery and we'd like it back. new digiorno ultimate toppings pepperoni, with 50% more pepperoni. taste. believe. it's not delivery, it's digiorno. your own seafood feast at red lobster. choose two or three from new creations... like wood-grilled shrimp with garlic creme and parmesan... to classics like succulent steamed crab legs. for a limited time, at red lobster.
joining me now, raich ed maddow. it is great to see you. >> hi. >> during the day. first let's talk about sarah palin versus al gore. sarah palin on her facebook page and in this op-ed in "the washington post" today writes this climate-gate scandal obviously calls into question the proposals being pushed in copenhagen without trustworthy science and so much at stake americans should be wary about what comes out of this politicized conference. her facebook entry says mr. president, boycott copenhagen. how do you rationalize the deniers and the impact they are having? >> the choice people on the right is whether they are going to acknowledge climate change exists and acknowledge the scientific consensus that's unassailable on climate change and then say they have a differentrence of opinion about what to do in terms of
responding to it or whether they will go off the deep end and say we don't believe the problem is real. it seems like the denialists have the momentum among ambitious republicans. imhoff has weirdly helped politically within the republican party. i don't think that is a good sign for us being able to make constructive progress on the issue as a country or even being able to have a constructive debate. it would be nice if everybody conceded the facts and we start there. >> do you think that the -- al gore was saying that -- making excuses, you could argue for president obama saying look, he has to take this only so far because there is no point in going beyond what the senate wants to do. then again the president chose health care as his signature issue. he had to face all of the other problems on the economy which he inherited in a mess. but now the senate hasn't even acted. >> the white house, remember, they thought health care would be done by august. so -- i think that in terms of setting out with their -- that's
what they say. and certainly to speak with the white house officials they express prone found regret it went so far beyond august and it is still not resolved. they may have set up their priorities on a more ambitious calendar than they should have reasonably expected. it is true that you can't promise more than the congress can be deliver. if the congress is going to be mired in denying the facts before you can even get to debating the policy, then it is not going to be a bipartisan policy. that's actually easier to do because you push it through with kempatic votes. >> let's talk about afghanistan. more testimony today, general petraeus on the hill. let's look at what he had to say about the whole time frame. this a day after karzai said 15 years, 20 years, you know, whatever. here's general petraeus. >> achieving progress in afghanistan will be hard and the progress there likely will be slower in developing than when was the progress achieved in iraq. as in iraq, the situation is likely to get harder before it
gets easier. >> now, here you have the president leaving today for norway to accept the nobel peace prize. a coalition of activists has written a letter saying he shouldn't be getting the prize. she a war president. not a peace president. fair? >> well, big coalition of peace activists including veterans groups and others saying that this is -- giving the nobel peace prize acceptance speech nine days after announcing a huge escalation is ironic at best and a lot of other things at worst. honestly, think the president has got to figure out what case he wants to make to the country and world. the goal of the afghanistan strategy is the eradication of al qaeda. the strategy to get there is building up of the afghan government and afghan security forces. i mean, car stay says you are going to be paying for our army and police for 15 years. defense secretary bob gates sort of reacts to that by saying i'm not sure that's our timeline. general mcchrystal yesterday admitted to the senate that the taliban actually pays people
more to fight on their side than we are paying to fight on our side in the afghan government side in afghanistan. it is -- you can -- >> two mercenary armies. >> what's the point? what are they fighting for? chuck hagel wrote an insizive op-ed in "the washington post." he raised the major question win what? what is winning? obviously the eradication of al qaeda is something everybody agrees on. getting there by shoring up an afghan government is not only an uncertain path to that end but one that i'm not sure we agree gets us there. >> the president recently named chuck hagel to a little known group as pithia. the president's foreign intelligence advisory board. he's got some inside influence and also sees all of the intelligence. let's move on to health care. harry reid announce this deal expanding medicare, giving up the public option, herron dean
endorsed it. lieberman says so far so good. should progressives say something is better than nothing? or do you think that -- >> i think the progressives need to drive hard bargain. i think the one thing that liberals frequently forget in political negotiations is that you need to ask for more than you expect goat. i think conservatives are better at remembering. giving up the public option i think hurts liberals and off to hurt liberals in terms of the ideological goals for what health care reform is about. public option got whittled down to something so weak, so puny, in terms of its policy impact that giving it up won't have that much of a real world effect on what health care looks like. that said politically they ought to get big concessions for you in a big expansion of medicare and medicaid would be the sort of thing i think would make liberals happy. >> got to ask you -- i was watching last night and almost fell out when i watched your interview with richard cohen. talk about deniers. following on twitter and -- what a storm over this interview with
this man. you are talking about richard cohen, author of "coming out straight understanding and healing homosexuality." he's the head of the international healing foundation, whatever that is, which claims to be able to turn gay people straight. let's play a little bit of your interview. >> let me read to you from your book. okay. page 49. homosexuality -- homosexuals are 12 times more likely on molest children than homosexuals. this is the claim you make in your book that exactly feeds these folks who want to execute people for being gay, what they need in order to justify that. do you stand by what you said in your book? >> actually, you know, that one particular quote when i do republish it, reprint it, we will extract that from it
because we don't want such things to be used against homosexual persons. >> you know, there is an impact that you have reported better than anyone else because this is the -- this is fueling did crazies internationally. explain. >> there is a proposed law in uganda which reuters is report thing week is likely to become law. it could happen any day now. it would execute people for being gay. life impolirisonmentimprisonmen >> capital punishment for being gay. >> yes. the main proponent of that bill has been pushing richard cohen's book "coming out straight." it invited a member of the organization to address the ugandan parliament and anti-gay conference which gave rise to this bill. so while richard cohen, i think, you would generally discount somebody like that, sort of a quack and obviously and sort of somebody that's -- somebody off the deep end and doesn't need a national television platform, the fact remains he is being
very influential. american conservatives of a specific stripe have been really influential in uganda. and could actually possibly stop this bill from becoming law. they have been influential in that country before. they so far have been unwilling to work to stop this. i think it is tough for them to justify it. >> this guy is making money from his alleged foundations, selling his book, and taking unsuspecting people, families, parents of gay people who maybe are secretarying advice and think that this is a legitimate advice book. >> yes. all of the responsible professional associations, american psychiatric association, national association of counselors, have debunked this idea that there is any evidence that you can change gay people into straight people. you can't. there's a whole industry of people who pray on the hope that could be -- that could be possible. this guy's one of the worst among them. and for the low, low price of
$349.95 you can get counseling sessions with him. he's totally unlicensed, totally unaccredited but maintains himself as he is a scientific authority. what you heard me quoting to him from his book, all of those statistics are completely made up. attributed to somebody that has been kicked out of every professional association he has ever been in but the people have air of authority that maybe doesn't play here but it does play abroad. it may be responsible for killing people. >> unbelievable. rachel maddow. what a program. you can watch "raich ed maddow" tonight at 9:00 p.m. eastern. thank you for coming in. >> thank you. >> your interview with al gore sin credible. >> thank you very much. we will keep following this on twitder and everything else you have been doing. thanks. we will come back soon with jonathan martin. scount. and you'll save big on the paid-in-full discount. and the anti-theft thank you. discount. and the homeowners ah! discount. the e-sign discount, and the paperless discount.
the multi-freckle discount. i'm just making sure you're listening. and, not to mention the multi-policy discount. would you like one great big bag or two still pretty big bags? giving you the gift of savings. now, that's progressive. call or click today. let the all-new campbellskitchen.com help bring your family to the table this holiday. from timeless favorites like campbell's green bean casserole to new classics like swanson herb roasted turkey with pan gravy and pepperidge farm holiday brie en croute even clever ideas that give leftovers a full makeover. for inspiration, family pleasing recipes and 15 dollars in valuable coupons, explore the all-new campbellskitchen.com for a very happy holiday.
osteoporosis treatment, i called joni. my doctor said reclast helps re-strengthen our bones to help make them resistant to fracture and reclast is approved to help protect from fracture in more places: hips, spine, even other bones. (announcer) you should not take reclast if you're on zometa, have low blood calcium, kidney problems. or you're pregnant, plan to become pregnant or nursing. take calcium and vitamin d daily. tell your doctor if you develop severe muscle, bone or joint pain or if you have dental problems, as rarely, jaw problems have been reported. the most common side effects include flu-like symptoms, fever, muscle or joint pain, headache, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea. nothing strengthens you like an old friendship. but when it comes to our bones, we both look to reclast. you've gotta ask your doctor! or call 866-51 reclast. year-long protection for on-the-go women. senate majority leader harry reid blocks the public option
and expands medicare to include people as young as 5. jonathan martin, senior political reporter from politico joins us. will this stand up? >> i think it has a shot, perhaps the best shot they had yet. they got buy-in from liberal and moderate senators. i think that's sort of the key in all of this. now the question is, though, can they get the republicans? from what we understand, senator snow the main moderate that has concerns about that expansion of medicare from folks who are -- 55 to 64. that could be a deal breaker for her. so you get some of your democrats in the tent lined up and you may lose the one republican that you have, target. >> it strikes me that they have a real challenge with the cbo scoring on this because medicare is where they really have, you know, physical problems down the road and now you are expanding medicare to people as young as 5. there is a big, big cause to that. >> a great point. if you are trying to back the impression this is going to
break the bank, then this may not help your cause because like you said, the cost down the road for the baby boomer generation on medicare are so exorbitant this could, you know, be seen as going over a trillion dollars from the cbo folks. >> okay, jonathan martin from politico.com. thank you very much. in the war on terror, should we be focusing on more on pakistan than afghanistan? former vice president al gore weighing in next on "andrea mitchell reports."
president obama heads to oslo today to accept the nobel peace prize tomorrow. amidst criticism today from anti-war activists because of the president's position on afghanistan. al gore, of course is a nobel laureate, won the honor in 2007. i asked him today if he had any advice for president obama. >> it is a wonderful, wonderful ceremony. and a well-deserved honor for him and i hope that -- i hope that he really enjoys the
experience and i'm certain that he will use the occasion to deliver a meaningful address. >> is there some disdense of him accepting the peace prize as he had to for the war strategy in afghanistan? >> well, the strategy in afghanistan is, after all, designed to achieve peace. and when we were attacked from the territory of afghanistan. and now a nuclear armed nation next door to afghanistan is under siege from fundamentalists forces that are connected to those groups in the border areas that would probably take over afghanistan again if this effort failed. so it is consistent with the search for peace. and prosperity. and i'm sure i read from reports that he will address this in oslo. >> many of your friends and
allies in the anti-war movement are very unhappy. many progressive democrats are very unhappy with the president and this new deployment. are you comfortable with what he's outlined 30,000 more troops, karzai saying to secretary gates yesterday that they only need help 15 to 20 years? what's america getting into here? >> well, there are uncertainties that lie ahead. but i don't remember seeing a foreign policy and national security challenge quite as complex as the one president obama faced in afghanistan. i don't think that he had the choice of just pulling out and leaving that situation to deteriorate. again, in major part because it is next door to a nation facing a lot of unrest from the same forces that -- that are undermining afghanistan and pakistan has this very large nuclear arsenal that absolutely has to be protected.
that is a major potential threat to the united states were it to fall into the wrong hands. so i don't think that he had a choice but to try to stabilize the situation in afghanistan. whether this strategy will work will depend on the execution of this plan and some uncertainties that lie ahead that they will have to adjust to and react to. so i think that all in all, he threaded a very difficult needle. and now the success will depoend how well this is executed. >> should we be focusing more on pakistan which is nuclear armed? which has this very unstable government? >> but it has a government in place and the majority of the people in pakistan want to see a moderate regime there. and in -- pakistan, the idea of introducing u.s. troops is
counterproductive for all the reasons that you know. and just because the focus in the president's speech and plan is on afghanistan should not be taken as a statement that they are not focusing on pakistan, in fact, they are, they just have to go about it in a very different way. >> late last tonight there was a compromise the majority leader harry reid announced which would we are -- we are told lower the entrance into medicare. expand medicare to include people as young as 5 years old. and eliminate what's been known as the public option. do you think that the liberal wing of the party should sign on to this? is this something that progressives should support? is it better to having something rather than nothing in this health care possible rest i haven't seen the plan. the details of it have not been released. so i would prefer to withhold judgment. >> but in general, do you think that the liberal democrats need
to compromise and produce something rather than having this whole thing fall apart? >> i hope that this doesn't fall apart. i hope that at the end of this process, there is a meaningful health care reform plan that achieves the important objectives the president has laid out. whether or not this plan meets that standard, i really don't know. but it is interesting that medicare is now an icon of succe success. anything that even brings about cost savings in medicare, many republicans attacked, medicare has been an outstanding success. it is a government-run plan. and, of course, in the -- larger scheme of things, it is ridiculous that our country spends way more than any other nation on health care, a third of it or so for unnecessary
paperwork and so much of it wasted, and even though we spend much more than any other country, we do not get better outcomes. in fact, we are way behind many or countries and with tens of millions of americans having absolutely no health insurance. the current system works well for some. but it is completely failing way too many other americans. so it is obvious that we need the reform but the details do matter. >> nonproliferation has long been one of your most passionate causes. and iran, the president reaches out to iran and he takes new steps, engagement. they reach an agreement in principle, at least, for doing something about their enriched uranium and exporting it to russia to be reformat ted in a nonthreatening form. and at the same time, iran is
now stonewalling. >> yeah. >> what would you do? sanctions haven't worked. we can't get russia and china to move beyond where they have been in the security council. if there is no agreement, what do you do about the iranian nuke low a threat? >> it is very difficult because it is apparently dispersed and multiple locations. not all of which are known. many of which are hardened and hidden. and so the option of military strike to take out the capacity may not be feasible. so the effort to build an effective international coalition is still option a. i would not assume that the dialogue with russia and china behind the scenes has yielded no chance of cooperation from them. the russians are very frustrating to deal with on this issue. but there are many in moscow who do understand that they themselves face a terrorist threat. some of which is connected to
some -- islamic fundamentalist groups in the transcaucuses. the possibility of a loose nuclear weapon or a nuclear terrorist incident threatening russia itself is something that they have had to think about and it is connected to the potential proliferation of the devices were iran to get access. to nuclear weapons technology. it is -- it is an extremely dangerous situation. and i would hope that the administration is successful in working with russia and china. i think china will cooperate eventually. russia is a harder case. but -- and that's where i think that the principle focus has to be. >> how do you persuade israel, which has a much shorter time frame and believes that the red line that iran is crossing is much sooner rather than later, their own estimates are -- really far different from our own intelligence, how do you
persuade israel it would make things worse to take military -- military action against iraq? >> israel has its own rights as a nation to defend its national security. it did so in launching an attack on the reactor project in iraq many years ago, the ee actor from news reports, also in syria and the world did not really raise a peep because essentially people recognize that it was justified. nobody said that but i think that was the reality. where iran is concerned, we have to come back to a point earlier discussed, it is not clear that a military option could be successful because the sites are dispersed. some of them are unknown, some are hidden and hardened. and so it is not clear that option is really one that would
succeed. >> and finally, north korea. you had some unwelcomed connections to north korea and these -- last months with, of course, the capture of two of your current tv employees and the -- great news of their release. what do we know -- what more do we know because through happenstance, president clinton was able to go, what do we know about pyongyang as our own envoy bosworth arrives there today and yesterday? >> yeah. first of all, i'm very happy that laurali ling and euna lee e back hope with their families and we are quite happy they are safe. the hermit kingdom as north korea is sometimes called, it is very difficult to understand because they appear to act irrationally. so much of the time.
i think that there is now an opportunity to engage with them, albeit in the context of this six-party framework with five other nations joining with the u.s. >> you have a representative in pyongyang for the first time. >> that is correct. that is correct. >> seems to be potentially -- i mean -- it is probably the result of the fact that president clinton was received there to negotiate for the two women. aside effect perhaps. so we now have one-on-one talks. do you think that there is a way to get them back into the nuclear framework? >> there may be. there is such a long history of broken promises on their side. some complaints that they lodged back in 2001, 2002 that can be reviewed by both sides. but i think that the obama administration has done an
excellent job in figuring out a way to have a direct dialogue without threatening the integrity of this alliance in northeast asia that has been bill up over a period of years. i'm hopeful that ambassador bosworth will make progress. >> thank you so much, vice president al gore. the book is "our choice." what's your next adventure? beyond copenhagen, what's the next chapter? >> i'm going to be focused on doing everything i possibly can to help solve the climate crisis. that includes trying to convince the senate to pass meaningful legislation and then assist in any way possible and converting that into a final treaty next year. and then there will be the ratification battle for that treaty. >> thank you very, very much. >> thank you. >> safe travels. tell us your thoughts on al gore's interview.
twitter.msnbc.com and follow the link to my twitter page. we will be right back. why hello there, santa. don't you look handsome. ho, ho.merry christmas to you... mom says if you're not ready in minutes, we're leaving. (announcer) it's the most wonderful time of the year and walmart is here to help. ready? (announcer) with faded glory jeans soft, organic tops lined hoodies and reversible bubble coats all redesigned. get department store styles for less. christmas costs less at walmart.
save money. live better. wmart. sometimes, the little things in life feel like our biggest enemies. they can be damaged... they can be stolen. happily, there's the american express charge card. if something you recently bought with the card breaks, it can be repaired, replaced or your account can be credited. you'll even get membership rewards points with each purchase. and peace of mind when you travel. can your card say that?
straight ahead, the backlash over sarah palin's clents on "climate change," next on andrea mitchell reports. has gingko for memory and concentration. plus support for bone and breast health. just what i need! one a day women's. somewhere in america, there's a home by the sea powered by the wind on the plains. there's a hospital where technology has a healing touch. there's a factory giving old industries new life. and there's a train that got a whole city moving again.
somewhere in america, the toughest questions are answered every day. because somewhere in america, 69,000 people spend every day answering them. siemens. answers. with annuities from fidelity. turn your savings into income -- guaranteed, and get a retirement "paycheck" for life -- guaranteed. call... to get started, and learn how to secure retirement income that won't go down -- guaranteed. call fidelity at... for details about guaranteed income for life, and change the way you think about your retirement savings.
buchanan. my reports are that you've been slugging it out during the break over "climate change." >> friendly slugging. >> al gore says the science is there. it's like physics, gravity. do we have to drop an apple on your head, what's up there? >> come on now, andrea, since 1977, there has been no global warming, every since kyoto. it stopped then. none since then. our gal sarah says polar bears
have doubled in size. we're seeing them on ice flows. there's no doubt some warming has taken place. there's no doubt man is responsible for it. there's no evidence it is dangerous or something like that. there is no evidence to justify the mass power and wealth grab that is going on in copenhagen. >> first of all, there was a study today by the meteorological survey, the last ten years the warmest since 1980 when ronald reagan was elected. >> how bad is that? >> the warmest since 1980. jump in here. >> the science is really overwhelming. the recent scandal with some of the scientists has become a big distraction. yes, there were a few people behaving badly. that's regrettable, because it allowed this debate to take place. the truth is, the science is overwhelming that suggests the earth is warming and human activities of contributing to
it. regardless what our beloved friend pat has to say, it's indisputable and we have to do something about it. >> let me respond to that basically. if it is as warm as it was in the last decade as it was in the 1980s, again, how bad is that. andrea, we heard about the arctic icecap that is supposedly shrinking. i've been up there and seen the ice shrinking. this antarctic icecap shrinking is enormous. again, there's science that says global warming is going on. if the worst it's going to be is in the 1980s, for heaven's sake, how bad is that? >> pat buchanan, deedee myers, we're out of time. what are you doing at 1:00 tomorrow or friday. we've got to continue this. thank you very much. i'm andrea mitchell in new york. contessa brewer picks up our coverage next right here on msnbc. i'll just use my phone. let's say we crashed. whoops, you lost your phone and you're disoriented. i'm not disoriented.
your walgreens pharmacist also dispenses wisdom... to help you make the right health care decisions. like understanding medicare part d. we'll walk you through a free plan comparison report... to guide you to the most cost-effective... and comprehensive plan, whether you're new to medicare part d... or you've been covered for a while. so stop in and stay well. cheese! walgreens. there's a way to stay well.