Skip to main content

tv   All In With Chris Hayes  MSNBC  September 25, 2013 3:00am-4:00am EDT

3:00 am
leaders over there know this. here we go on the road to hope that the united states will not have to go to war. i much prefer to be on that road than the other one, the one we were so dangerously and so recently on. and that's "hardball" for now. "all in with chris hayes" starts now. good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. tonight on "all in," fake it till you break it. republican ted cruz takes to the senate floor in a faux filibuster talking about, among other things, nazi germany and carrier pigeons, saying he will speak against obama care until he is no longer able to stand. he's still going and we've got the live cruz cam here all night long. also tonight, senator marco rubio desperate to get back in the tea party's good graces decides to kneecap a judicial nominee for no good reason. we'll tell the entire, sad, pathetic tale of desperation. and climate change
3:01 am
annihilation 2.0. the one part of a conservative rebranding effort that's been sneakally effective. but tonight we begin with munich on the potomac. >> you go to the 1940s. nazi germany. we saw in britain, neville chamberlin who told the british people, accept the nazis. yes, they'll dominate the continent of europe, but that's not our problem. let's appease them. why? because it can't be done. we can't possibly stand against them. and in america, there were voices that listened to that. i suspect those same pundits who say it can't be done. if it had been in the 1940, we would have been listening to them. then they would have made television. they would have gotten beyond carrier pigeons and beyond letters and they would have been on tv and they would have been saying you cannot defeat the germans.
3:02 am
>> that was texas senator ted cruz in the first hour of his ongoing fake filibuster of the senate's budget resolution, comparing the pundits who don't think his ridiculous showboating event will work to nazi appeasers. it's a characterization that would seem to include me and my dear friends at the wall street journal editorial board who this morning speaking for a republican establishment that has been outflanked, outplayed wrote that when mr. cruz demands that house wins should hold firm, he means they should keep trying to defend obama care even if it results in a shutdown that president obama claims on republicans. the supposedly intrepid general cruz can view the battle from the comfort hq while the enlisted troops suffer any casualties. >> there are actual troops in a war zone actually managed by a part of the government, the pentagon. active military personnel who
3:03 am
don't know if they will get paid on time. right now there are people inside the pentagon taking their effort and talent and attention, diverting it toward executing a shutdown plan. there are some 800,000 workers who were unsure if they will be getting a paycheck in a week, all depending on how this ted cruz-inspired stunt ultimately plays out. >> it happens every three months and every three months they figure out how to cobble together something and then it's three months later on. >> tucking away as much money as possible. that's all you can do. >> a word for what those workers are talking about is uncertainty. the same type of uncertainty that the gop has been saying for years was killing the economy. >> everybody i talk to in the business world is plagued by the uncertainty and the uncertainty starts in washington. >> when you have so much uncertainty, uncertainty with the health care, uncertainty with the debt. >> there's so much uncertainty about what all the rules are and what all the costs are that
3:04 am
employers are scared to death. >> all republicans have done since the 2011 budget control act is normalize uncertainty to create recurring confusion by design. in fact one of the only things we can be certain of is that whatever happens, ted cruz will end up with a lot more twitter followers. joining me is senator jeff merkley. senator, you have been one of the most outspoken proponents of filibuster reform to take that broken body and move it towards a functioning institution in which people talk out, make their case. do you like what you're seeing from ted cruz tonight? isn't he doing exact low what senator jeff merkley has called upon his fellow senators to do? >> certainly in terms of standing up and taking his position before the american public, that is accountability and that is transparency. let's understand what else he is doing. he is saying he is going to hold the government hostage. all of the programs, pay delayed
3:05 am
for our military, small business loans, mortgages being processed by fanny and freddie. a whole list of things including headstart for our children impacted by this. he's willing to say i am willing to hold all of this hostage because of my passion on a particular policy item. a policy item, i might add, in which he really is not listening to the people. if he is listening to the people, he would understand that they have grave concerns about being able to get insurance under the current system and they're not able to get insurance, pre-existing conditions, about being thrown off their policies when they're ill. about not having emphasis on prevention, about not being able to have comparable insurance policies to be able to produce competition. and so he's deathly afraid that people are going to actually see this reform in place and realize that this actually helps a whole lot of people across america. he's determined to prevent the american people from discovering this there's some real improvements to be read here. >> the other thing is that there is no suspense here insofar as
3:06 am
he negotiated with senator majority leader harry reid about how long he could talk for, because there's a vote scheduled for tomorrow that's going to happen whether ted cruz likes it or not. i mean this is one of these aspects of senator procedure that makes those of us who observe it from the outside just shake our heads and say what is the deal with this chamber? >> yes. once an objection was lodged on monday, a petition had to be filed yesterday to try to get a vote. under senate procedure we can't vote until the day after. and so essentially he's fill that time, as you say he's not actually delaying anything. so this is not a true kind of stand and delay until i drop, this is i'm going to fill the void to make sure that everyone in america is watching me as i argue for running the american economy over the cliff. >> what is it -- >> i just came from a group of bankers who were talking to me about the fact that there's huge amounts of deposits waiting to be reinvested by american enterprises that are not doing so because of the series of
3:07 am
manufactured crises. crises manufactured by john boehner and ted cruz. >> what does it say to you that your colleagues on the other side of the aisle have joined ted cruz. senator mike lee, senator marco rubio reported he was going to join. what does it say to you that this kind of grandstanding has a real constituency, that actually it has a tendency to spread among the caucus? >> yes. it certainly is an appeal to who is going to be the champion of the tea party. the tea party may be a small part of the republican spectrum, but it's significant and folks believe that's where the passion is, where individuals are going to turn out, knock on doors and raise funds. so there's this competition to be the leader of the tea party, if you will. we're seeing it play out, even in terms of threatening to run the economy over the cliff. >> senator majority leader harry reid said they're going to bring up a resolution that will fund
3:08 am
the government through mid-november. is there any way to actually get back to a normal budget process so that you and i don't have this conversation in mid-november? >> there absolutely is and it's actually republicans in the senate who are filibustering the appointing of conferees in order to have a budget conference which provides foundation for the spending bills that allows us to get out of this series of crises. and this goes to the point i've been arguing for. let's get rid of the filibuster on motions to proceed to bills. let's get rid of it on going to conference committee. this type of paralysis that any one individual can create is completely counterproductive. >> senator -- jeff merkley, thank you for your time. we're going to dip in live to ted cruz who was last i heard reading "green eggs and ham." >> they are so good, so good, you see. so i will eat them in a box and i will eat them with a fox.
3:09 am
i will eat them in a house and i will eat them with a mouse. i will eat them here or there, say, i will eat them anywhere. i do so like green eggs and ham. thank you, thank you, sam i am. and i want to say to caroline and katherine, my angels, i love you with all my heart. it's bedtime. >> i believe you're still on. >> give mommy a hug and a kiss. >> you're still there. i guess i have to ask you your response to that stirring about it of oratory from the junior senator from texas about green eggs and ham. >> i was waiting for him to insert the words i will filibuster anywhere into that rhyme. maybe we'll get some response in the next two days of conversation. joining me is robert reich. his new film, which is excellent, "in equality for all" is out friday. suzy khimm is with us as well.
3:10 am
she wrote a great piece and the cruz cam goes up and if any dr. seuss classics are read, we will be sure to go to that live. robert, before he was reading dr. seuss, ted cruz was making an argument that you hear from the right, which is basically an argument about the fact that the affordable care act has broken the labor market. that there are all these things wrong with the labor market that we haven't seen a very robust recovery, there's too many people doing part-time work, that we have -- you know, we have employers that are anxious about the future. does that argument hold up? is that the reason the labor market is broken because of obama care? >> no, chris. the labor market is broken because almost all the gains since the recession have gone to the top 1%. so most people don't have the money to turn around and spend to create jobs. you know, the job creators in this country are not the ceos
3:11 am
and wall street and the very rich. the job creators are the great middle class and everybody wants to join the middle class because they create jobs because they spend money. if they're not able to spend money, if they don't have enough money in their pockets, they're not going to be any jobs created. that is what the republicans don't want to talk about. they still cling to this sort of trickle down economics view, which is just plain wrong. it's a cruel hoax. it's always been a cruel hoax. >> what about this uncertainty idea, that everyone -- that employers are kind of waiting around, worried about what obama care will look like before they decide to hire their next marginal worker. >> employers don't like up certainty, the markets don't like uncertainty. the republicans number one strategy for years has been to throw monkey wrenches into the procedures of government so nobody knows what's going to happen. >> and, suzy, you wrote a great piece about what that uncertainty means for everyone from federal employees to someone that runs a hotel next to a national park. what do you hear from folks
3:12 am
about what effect this recurring uncertainty has on them? >> i spoke, when i was listening to ted cruz, i was just thinking of what mindy kauffman, who runs a bed and breakfast outside of the joshua tree national park would think about this. when i spoke to her yesterday, she would say that a shutdown of even a couple of days would mean tons of cancellations and if it lasted a couple of weeks, she'd be out of business. so for her this isn't about democrats or republican, it's about her livelihood. it's about decisions that she can make as a business. and having this question up in the air certainly isn't helping things. >> and there's also -- i mean i remember i was in washington during a few rounds of this and i was amazed that people i know, sources and friends who worked in the federal government, how much energy was being devoted to planning for the shutdown. these are people that are public servants, taxpayers are paying to do a job. what we were saying to them is do half your job and then half your time spend planning for how you're not going to do your job.
3:13 am
>> yeah. and then this is exactly what we're talking about in terms of the greater effect of uncertainty on businesses in america, on people's willingness to invest and trust that the federal government can fulfill its basic functions. in 2011 there was analysis done to show that just the uncertainty of whether or not we were going to raise the debt ceiling and actually pay out our obligations cost us $1.3 trillion and that was sort of the best case scenario. we didn't end up reaching the debt ceiling. so whatever ends up happening, this whole fight, this whole debate and the uncertainty surrounding it is going to have a cost, and that cost is going to be born by american businesses and american families. >> do you agree with that, robert. do you believe there are macroeconomic ripples to this government by recurring crises? >> absolutely. we are just now beginning to come out of the worse economic crisis since the great depression. we're still in the gravitational pull of this recession. people are not getting jobs back.
3:14 am
a few jobs are coming back. the jobs that are coming back pay less than the jobs that were lost. but the reality is that if you have a government shutdown, if you don't raise the debt limit, if you have the games that republicans are intent on playing, you are jeopardizing this recovery. you're going to mean -- you know, it means hundreds of thousands of government employees are not going to get their paychecks. it means a lot of other citizens are not going to be able to live off of simply the buying that the government employees do. you have military personnel that are either going to get ious instead of paychecks. how can you run an economy with this degree of not only uncertainty but this degree of irresponsibility? >> former labor secretary robert reich, new film i highly recommend. msnbc reporter suzy khimm. thank you both. today every single leader in the world was within a few square miles of each other and our own president and the leader of the longest standing enemy
3:15 am
both spoke to the world. what they had to say coming up. hey, buddy? oh, hey, flo. you want to see something cool? snapshot, from progressive. my insurance company told me not to talk to people like you. you always do what they tell you? no... try it, and see what your good driving can save you. you don't even have to switch. unless you're scared. i'm not scared, it's... you know we can still see you. no, you can't. pretty sure we can...
3:16 am
try snapshot today -- no pressure.
3:17 am
we always love hearing from you on facebook and twitter. after senator cruz's stunt today's subject is about filibustering. if you could take to the senate floor to lead a filibuster, what would your issue be. i'll share a couple at the end of the show. while you're there, just go ahead and follow us on twitter and like us on facebook. we'll be right back.
3:18 am
we will continue to monitor
3:19 am
the cruz cam you see in the bottom of your screen as texas senator ted cruz continues to pretend to filibuster and read children's books. in other news today, there were growing expectations of the possibility of a really big, big event happening in new york today. the first face-to-face meeting between an american and iranian head of state since the hostage crisis of 1979. in the lead-up to today, administration officials made it clear that any meeting would be on the margin, a handshake in a hallway perhaps, nothing official, no photo op. according to a senior administration official, we did not have any plan for any formal bilateral meeting here. we indicated the two leaders could have had a discussion on the margins if the opportunity presented itself. but it was not to be today. the iranians got back to us and said it was clear that it was too complicated for them to do that at this time given their own dynamic back home. so this highly anticipated, unofficial meeting which had already started to make some republicans and even some democratic lawmakers fret about president obama moving too fast
3:20 am
toward the new comparatively moderate iranian leader, that meeting never happened, because at least according to one anonymous white house source, the iranian regime wasn't quite there. but aside from those optics, a great deal did happen moving the two countries forward toward the possibility of actual direct face-to-face negotiations over iran's nuclear program. >> conciliatory words will have to be matched by actions that are transparent and verifiable. we are encouraged that president rouhani received from the iranian people a mandate to pursue a more moderate course. and given president rouhani's stated commitment to reach an agreement, i am directing john kerry to pursue this effort with the iranian government. the roadblocks may prove to be too great, but i firmly believe the diplomatic path must be tested. >> president obama's speech did not include the almost perfunctory phrase of all options are on the table with respect to any military options in preventing iran from developing a nuclear weapon.
3:21 am
that was a notable softening of tone. and for his part, iran's president, hassan rouhani said he listened carefully to president obama's speech and president rouhani offered his own fig leaf of sorts. >> translator: hoping that he will refrain from following the short-sighted interest of war mongering groups we can arrive and manage our differences. >> rouhani's tone was noticeably sharper than his very conciliatory op ed from last week, but he, like president obama, had a domestic audience to speak to as much as an international one. joining me is barbara lee. you were there today at the u.n. general assembly. were you at all surprised by rouhani's tone, given how much it seemed as if both countries were opening a kind of back-and-forth approach to each
3:22 am
other toward some kind of sitdown negotiations? >> chris, i was not really surprised at his tone, but what's important is that the president, our president gave a magnificent speech calling -- we know it's going to be very tough as we heard today, but i think we need to applaud president obama for really ensuring the rest of the world that he's going to take that step and it's going to be slow, but i've offered the legislation for many years now calling for a special envoy as it relates to iran and also, you know, getting rid of this no-contact policy that we have. and so we have not done that yet -- >> explain the no-contact policy. >> well, there in law we are not to really have bilateral contacts with the iranian government. i know we've done back channel contacts and what have you. >> of course. >> but officially, the
3:23 am
bilateral, which is what, again, my legislation would call for, is that i believe that in order to seek global peace and security, reduce the threat of iran achieving and getting a nuclear bomb, that we have to have bilateral talks between the highest levels in our government. >> the overtures from the new iranian government, the president's overtures back have gotten some congress members worried. this is a letter from senator john mccain and chuck schumer, democrat. we respectfully urge that any diplomatic outreach to iran re-emphasize the united states will not allow iran to acquire nuclear weapons capability and any relief will only be provided if iran takes meaningful and verifiable actions to halt its nuclear activities. do you think there's going to be growing political pressure on the president to not make sure that he moves too quickly toward diplomacy? >> i think there will be. but i also think there will be growing numbers of voices in our own country calling for a strong
3:24 am
diplomatic effort, because no one wants iran to have a nuclear bomb. we all -- and my bill -- we call it nonproliferation legislation. we do not believe the world should have any more nuclear weapons. we need to disarm and that's the only way we're going to achieve global peace. so we're going to see both sides, i think, digging in. and the debate is going to continue, but i think what's important is that the president did open the door and we'll see what happens. that's the important thing. >> israeli prime minister netanyahu releasing a video message to the u.n. general assembly. take a listen. >> israel would welcome a genuine diplomatic solution that truly dismantles iran's capacity to develop nuclear weapon, but we will not be fooled by half measures that merely provide a smoke screen for iran's continual pursuit of nuclear weapons, and the world should not be fooled either.
3:25 am
>> last year netanyahu famously got up before the u.n. general assembly with a drawing of a bomb. is israel an obstacle to a diplomatic settlement between the u.s. and iran? >> i visited israel many times. of course israel quite naturally should be concerned about iran acquiring a nuclear weapon, just as we should be. and so i believe, as i said earlier, we have to take every step we can to make sure that nonproliferation and the nuclear capability for a bomb is not there, and so we have to ensure that what the president, our president, the steps that he is taking right now succeed, and that's going to be a tough road to walk but -- >> is israel an obstacle? >> i don't believe israel is an obstacle. i believe that the middle east would be a much safer place if we reduce the tensions and really insist that nuclear weapons become not the weapon of the world. and that is an extremely important part of our foreign
3:26 am
policy that we need to embrace very quickly. >> congresswoman barbara lee, thank you so much. we'll be right back with click three.
3:27 am
3:28 am
3:29 am
i'll tell you what desperate attempt senator marco rubio has made to get back to the tea party's good graces. the new tactic in climate change denialism that's surprisingly effective. i'll explain that coming up. first i want to share the three awesomest things on the internet. we begin in the united states senate with a wingman for the ages.
3:30 am
ted cruz thought he had the spotlight during the early part of his filibuster stunt but our attention was on that guy arriving with zero fanfare and grimacing like a champ throughout. this suit-wearing individual was by far the most interesting point of today's ted talk. a man of no words and very little movement, he came to be known as corner guy. the most beloved ancillary political figure since ron paul's master blaster big little duo in the background on the night of the new hampshire primary in 2012. twitter was smitten. corner guy getting suspicious. another asked why there aren't any immediate gifts of corner guy. we thought we'd go one better offering images of corner guy working his magic around the edge of the frame like standing next to president obama when he announced the death of osama bin laden or one of the most famous corners are all, giving moral support to the italian stallion in his big fight with apollo creed. turns out he's legal counsel to senator cruz. before today that title was probably on the top of his resume but now you're corner
3:31 am
guy. say hello to your new colleague, sneezing panda. the second awesomest thing on the internet, making miley more family friendly. these three seconds of her song "wrecking ball" are pretty much the only ones we can show on tv. we were happy to let this adorable kitten stand in as a more than adequate miley double. but the award may have to go to an overweight hedge hog named regina. ♪ like a wrecking ball i never hit so hard in love ♪ ♪ all i wanted was to break you ♪ >> regina has her own facebook page. she suffers from a medical condition that causes weight gain. she's pretty cheerful and recently celebrated her third birthday. so if driving around in a tank top will help her we're all for it.
3:32 am
the third awesomest thing on the internet. don't call it a comeback. the founder of the rent is too damn high party, launcher of a thousand names and he's back. this time running for new york city mayor and kicking off his bid in the general election with a new campaign music video. ♪ monday you're working for the rent ♪ ♪ tuesday you're working for the rent ♪ ♪ thursday you're working for the rent ♪ ♪ friday you're working for the rent ♪ ♪ saturday you're working for the rent ♪ ♪ sunday you go to church >> so if you want to watch it, misspell his catch phrase or rock out, this one is for you. but we don't think jimmy mcmillan needs any help garnering publicity. every larger than life candidate could use a good hype man. we think this guy could be perfect. get him in your corner, jimmy. you can find all of the links on our website. we'll be right back.
3:33 am
my mantra? always go the extra mile. to treat my low testosterone, i did my research. my doctor and i went with axiron, the only underarm low t treatment. axiron can restore t levels to normal in about 2 weeks in most men. axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18 or men with prostate or breast cancer. women, especially those who are or who may become pregnant and children should avoid contact where axiron is applied as unexpected signs of puberty in children or changes in body hair or increased acne in women may occur. report these symptoms to your doctor. tell your doctor about all medical conditions and medications. serious side effects could include increased risk of prostate cancer; worsening prostate symptoms; decreased sperm count; ankle, feet or body swelling; enlarged or painful breasts; problems breathing while sleeping; and blood clots in the legs. common side effects include skin redness or irritation where applied, increased red blood cell count, headache, diarrhea, vomiting, and increase in psa. ask your doctor about the only underarm low t treatment,
3:34 am
3:35 am
3:36 am
we're back giving you some cruz cam there on the bottom of the screen with oklahoma senator james inhofe briefly occupying the podium. we will keep you updated on all of your fake filibuster news. right now marco rubio. the marco rubio right wing grassroots rehabilitation project is entering its pathetic phase with actual and demonstrative collateral damage. here's the thing. just a short while ago, marco rubio was the tea party darling. a few years ago he raised more money than any other candidate backed by the tea party. "the new york times" even ran a piece questioning whether rubio was the first tea party senator. but since then, rubio decided that out of some combination of political ambition and genuine admirable conscientious to take a political risk and push for the morally, politically and substantively correct immigration policy, one that would deliver some 11 million people out of the shadows of the
3:37 am
tyranny of fear and into the full citizenship of the united states. and for that decision, the decision to back comprehensive immigration reform, the tea party, the grassroots of the republican party, has come to despise marco rubio. so much so, in fact, that even though you cannot recall u.s. senators in the state of florida, tea party activists are working to draft state legislation that would allow for senators to face recall votes for the sole purpose of getting rid of rubio. with his popularity down a whopping 15 points among republican voters since february, with ted cruz filling the vacuum as the next great tea party hope, the conservative base throwing their arms around him. marco rubio is desperate to get back in the tea party's good graces. he doesn't care how pathetic he looks doing it. today rubio has decided to kneecap the career of this guy, judge william thomas who sits on the miami-dade circuit for the federal bench. thomas was one of ten children raised by a single mother on welfare. became the first in his family
3:38 am
to get a college education. had he been elevated to the federal bench, he would have been the first black openly gay man on the federal bench. just ten short months ago, marco rubio himself gave judge thomas his full-throated support and so did democrat bill nelson. the way it works is that for a confirmation of federal district judges to move ahead, both senators from the host state must sign off on the candidate. rubio's office is trying to rationalize why he withdrew his support saying there's an issue with two criminal cases in which they question his judicial temperament and his willingness to impose appropriate criminal sentences. of course these cases didn't just happen yesterday. the sentences came down in january. marco rubio could have objected to thomas then. the prosecutor in one of those cases wrote a letter stating that during the sentencing thomas acted with compassion and careful judgment. rubio also got letters supporting thomas' nomination from such organizations as the broward police benevolent
3:39 am
association and the league of prosecutors. besides, last year when rubio recommended both thomas and judge brian davis for the federal bench he said one of the pleasant surprises of this job is the quality of individuals who offer themselves for public service and the quality of individuals who we've been able to forward to the president, to the white house, today being no exception. and now all of a sudden one of those men is no longer fit to be a federal judge. so instead of helping ensure that judge william thomas will go on to become the ninth openly gay federal judge under president obama following todd hughes who was confirmed today unanimously as the first out gay federal appellate judge in history, senator marco rubio instead has embarked upon a tea party rehab strategy that has him incoherently and transparently lashing out at a man viewed as eminently qualified in the vague hopes that this small fit of cruelty will put him back in the good graces of those still furious at him for flashing a little too much empathy a few months prior. it's a sad, desperate spectacle.
3:40 am
they hate you, senator. you might as well just embrace it. she's always had a playful side. and you love her for it. but your erectile dysfunction - that could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity.
3:41 am
do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than 4 hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if you have any allergic reactions such as rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial. ♪ honey, we need to talk. we do? i took the trash out. i know. and thank you so much for that. i think we should get a medicare supplement insurance plan. right now? [ male announcer ] whether you're new to medicare or not, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. it's up to you to pay the difference. so think about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan,
3:42 am
insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, they help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. i did a little research. with a medicare supplement plan, you'll be able to stay with your doctor. oh, you know, i love that guy. mm-hmm. [ male announcer ] these types of plans let you visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. and there are no networks. is this a one-size-fits-all kind of thing? no. there are lots of plan options. it all depends on what we need and how much we want to spend. [ male announcer ] call now to request your free decision guide. it could help you find an aarp medicare supplement plan that's right for you. what happens when we travel? the plans go with us. anywhere in the country. i like that. you know what else? unitedhealthcare insurance company has years and years of experience. what do you say? ♪ i'm in. [ male announcer ] join the millions already enrolled
3:43 am
in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp. remember, all medicare supplement plans help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay and could really save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. you'll be able to choose your own doctor or hospital as long as they accept medicare patients. and with these plans, there could be low or no copays. you do your push-ups today? prepare to be amazed. [ male announcer ] don't wait. call today to request your free decision guide and find the aarp medicare supplement plan to go the distance with you. go long. i see it in the faces of young people everywhere who can access the entire world with the click of a button, and who are eager to join the cause of eradicating extreme poverty and combatting climate change, starting businesses, expanding freedom, an leaving behind the
3:44 am
old ideological battles of the past. >> that was the president speaking today before the u.n. general assembly and that was his one mention of climate change. putting it in a generational context, speaking to the young people who will inherit the most urgent problem. as much as he might hope we are done with the old ideological battles of the past, those old ideological battles aren't done for us. >> i wouldn't say we're closed for repairs, we're open for repairs and that's the republican party that needs to grow. >> we've all seen the gop's efforts at rebranding. >> we've got to stop being the stupid party. >> last year's shellacking at the polls led to studied soul searching at least on paper. the one place those rebranding efforts seem to be actually paying off is on the issue of climate change. you're probably familiar with the old conservative approach. deny, deny, deny. >> i don't think that it has been established yet as a fact
3:45 am
that global warming is the issue of the day. >> there seems to be no conclusive scientific data that proves that global warming theory. it's a theory. >> the idea of human induced global climate change is one of the greatest hoaxes perpetrated out of the scientific community. >> my point is god is still up there and this is the arrogance of people who think that we human beings would be able to change what he is doing in the climate is to me outrageous. >> do you believe global warming, man made global warming is real? >> i believe we don't know. >> we don't know what's causing climate change. >> there is no such thing as global warming. >> the science is not settled on this. >> when in doubt, call for backup. >> a fox news global warming alert. it's still cold. it's still really cold. >> and it's the most severe winter storm in years, which would seem to contradict al gore's hysterical global warming theories.
3:46 am
>> but then the 2012 election happened and younger voters sided with the president. on the issue of climate change, there was a particular rift between the republican party and the under 30 set. it didn't help the gop's climate change poster boy -- >> it's all about money. >> sounded an awful lot like grandpa simpson. >> all right, i admit it. i am the lindbergh baby. >> so now the smarter and salvier of the bunch have made a calculated pivot. moving away from denying the problem, to denying the solution. >> even if you concede climate change is real, you can't do it alone. china and india are planning to build hundreds of coal-fired power plants. >> there are other countries that are polluting in the atmosphere much greater than we are at this point, china and india. >> i don't think we can control emissions from china and india. >> you're never going to get china and india on board. >> i don't think you can do that much about it unless you deindustrialize india and china.
3:47 am
>> if we get india and china not working with us, all we'll do is ship millions of american jobs just overseas. >> just last week congressman david mckinley of west virginia defending his state's dependency on big coal used the new brand of denialism to combat the obama administration's plan to carb carbon pollution. >> china,oscopyia, russia and europe are all expanding their use of coal. the administration is embarking now on a new global initiative, exporting uncertainty. >> these arguments come from the very same people who espouse the virtues of american exceptionalism. and yet when it comes to the single greatest challenge we face as a planet, the american exceptionalism crowd is advocating we outsource things to china and india. or, to use another phrase, lead from behind. but the fact of the matter is this problem won't be solved unless the u.s. takes a
3:48 am
leadership role, and the denialists know this. that is why denialism 2.0 is so devilishly clever and unquestionably dangerous. rather than resting on a principle that is fundamentally false, it rests on one that is fundamentally true. the solution is global. and by playing this game and telling the other guys to go first, denialists are essentially trying to convince americans that there isn't any possibility for a consensus. those same dead-enders who are holding their own government hostage in a play for political dwayne are threatening the entire global community with the exact same tactics, obstructing any kind of discussion or solution and placing blame on others. we've all seen -- joining me now is kumi, the executive director of greenpeace international. we also have christina fregara who runs the climate process at the u.n. and its current incarnation and former secretary of the interior, ken salazar joining me from washington.
3:49 am
mr. salazar, i'd like to ask you first in the most blunt terms possible, is it the case that the u.s.' inaction legislatively on this is the single biggest obstacle to a global solution on climate? >> well, first, i would say, chris, that climate change is real. the global climate is in fact changing. our planet is getting warmer and 97% of the scientists are there. secondly, i would say that the way the united states goes, the world also will go with us. and so this is a global problem. it does require a global solution. >> but doesn't the u.s. -- doesn't the u.s. have to do something first? i mean there's even the strongest possible argument that basically not only does the u.s. have to move first, but because we have used 100 years of fossil fuel and burned up so much of that carbon and have enjoyed the fruits of that economic growth, the u.s. actually has to pay other countries if we want them to not develop their own fossil fuels in the same way?
3:50 am
>> you know, the answer is that we have to move forward as a world, and we here in the united states know what it is that we have had to. we have to cut carbon pollution. we have to make sure that we move forward with renewable energy, develop efficiency programs and that we have stakeholders, including the states involved in developing common sense solutions. scientists know what we have to do. there is a lot more progress that needs to be made, but we ought not sit back and say we can't do anything, because china and india and other countries are going to contribute greatly to global pollution. >> is there any chance of any kind of -- the u.n. process right now, which is complicated and somewhat opaque to me, if you'll allow me to say that, and also seems -- >> a black box? >> a black box that is -- a black box that is also doomed to failure. we'll talk about that in a moment. is there any possibility of -- an actual global deal getting done or real -- >> absolutely. >> without the u.s. doing something? >> no, there's no possibility without the u.s. but the u.s. is already starting, right, so we already have some states that are moving
3:51 am
forward. california, massachusetts. but the u.s. is actually committed to a global deal. i've actually just walked out of the full day meeting of the ministers of the 20 largest economies of the world, who are again committed to the very, very clear time line that they have set for coming to this global agreement, including the united states. >> a global agreement that has, if i'm not mistaken, the force of law, right? i think what's the technical language coming out? it's a force of law, but it's not binding. and i want to talk about -- i want you to convince me to come back, and you too, as well, that this process can actually bear fruit. that it can solve the problem. that the people who are essentially solution denialists aren't, in fact, right. right after this break.
3:52 am
oh, don't worry, beloved viewer. earlier in the show we asked you, if you could lead a fake filibuster on any issue, what would it be? we've got a bunch of answers posted to our facebook page and
3:53 am
twitter accounts. food stamp cuts. 3.4 million names random from the phone book to illustrate the number of people cut. and from jeff zoto on twitter, one word, jobs. finally, moses k. i would fix filibuster to end fake filibuster, followed immediately by a real filibuster to end real filibusters. good idea. we'll be right back.
3:54 am
3:55 am
still with me, kumi, you're the head of green peace international, and you guys are fighting the fight on this. direct action, nonviolent resistance. just got hauled into court by the russians for a protest of an oil rig in russian territory. do you have any faith in this u.n. process that it can produce a deal? >> the u.n. process is the only process that we have. the strength of the process is not the failings of the u.n. itself. but it's the positions that
3:56 am
countries bring to the negotiations. and the u.s., sadly, even though the world is hungry for u.s. leadership, under president bush, and sadly, under president obama, the role the u.s. has played in negotiations has been a negative, destructive role. >> is that true? do you agree with that, the u.s. has played a destructive role? >> it certainly has put a hand brake on the negotiations. sadly, because there actually is -- >> why is that? >> double opportunity. they're blind to the double opportunity. one opportunity is for the united states to make serious investments here at home, into clean technologies, that are going to bring more jobs. here right now, the u.s. is frankly giving up jobs, very interesting jobs. to china. >> right. but we can't do that without passing through the appropriations process. >> oh, yes, we can. >> chris -- >> i would like you to respond. those are strong words about the u.s. role in this. >> chris, i mean, let's be frank about this. what you've had here, you've had the president and some members of congress trying to move forward with this issue. you have an agreement of the
3:57 am
united states that climate change is a reality and something needs to be done about it. you have epa now moving forward with greenhouse gas rules, and, in fact, more than 40% of our greenhouse gas comes from coal-burning fired power power plants. moving ahead between now and 2014, you're going to have epa putting together a set of rules, but it's going to involve the states. and so these state implementation plans hopefully will take the common sense approach to be able to move forward and show the world that, yes, the united states can get something done. it would be better if congress were to act, but the reality of it is, it's going to happen in congress, and so it's going to happen through epa and executive authority of the united states. >> and through the states. >> while these are positive steps in the right direction, let's be very clear. these are baby steps compared to the scale of the problem. >> here's the thing. i want to invert that around. what ends up happening is, what is so incidious about this new kind of rhetoric about futility we have seen in the american domestic political context, it's precisely your argument, right?
3:58 am
they say, well, what are we really going to do, we're nibbling at the margins and china and india have all these coal plants. so what ends up happening, they have gone from denying the problem to saying the problem is so big we can't fix it. what i hear is why should we bother. >> the u.s. dragging its feet is compromising not only the entire planet, but is compromising u.s. economic --. interests. >> future. >> but also, what it's doing is, when i sit down with the head of the chinese climate negotiation team and talk, they are ready with india. they are ready to say, we will move our fossil fuels. they say how can we move -- >> wait a second. aren't they just -- isn't everyone just doing the same thing? this is a big game theory conundrum, right? you want everyone else to go first, of course, right, from a rational self interest perspective. aren't china and india just doing the same thing, just saying, yes, go ahead, please, america. >> no. china is going forward. china has completely left the
3:59 am
u.s. in the dust. china is the major exporter of s.o.n.a.r. panels and solar energy and installing five times more solar energy over the next few years. >> i would disagree with that. because it's china -- >> let me just finish. >> more coal fired plants than anybody else. >> true. >> but look at the progress that has been made. part of the problem here is the polarization of the debate is keeping any common sense solution from moving forward. it was just the united states and china that signed off on a big contributor to greenhouse gases and that's a kind of movement that has to take place, because what's happening here is polarization essentially is keeping a solution from being found. >> absolutely. i completely agree. it really has to be -- and i certainly welcome everything that has been done between the united states and china in the last few months. especially since the second term of president obama. it's actually very, very good news. >> kumi from green peace international. christina fegarus from t


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on