Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS OBAMA CARE
WAS SUPPOSED TO DO.
>> I THINK IN ADDITION TO OBAMA
CARE, WHICH A LOT OF VOTERS CARE
ABOUT, THEY ALSO CARE ABOUT
JOBS.
AND IF WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT JOBS,
I THINK THAT THE PRESIDENT HAS
GOT TO APPROVE THE KEYSTONE
PIPELINE.
YOU'VE GOT MAJOR LABOR UNION
FOLKS BACKING THIS.
PRESIDENT CLINTON SAID WE'VE GOT
TO EMBRACE KEYSTONE.
IT JUST GOT A CLEAN BILL OF
HEALTH IN THIS REPORT.
HAVEN'T THE OPPONENTS TO KEYTONE
ALREADY LOST?
I THINK THE PRESIDENT APPROVES
THIS.
YOU WANT TO MAKE A BET?
>> ABSOLUTELY NOT.
I WILL BET YOU.
>> OKAY, LET'S DO IT.
>> I WON'T BET YOU MY
RETIREMENT.
>> LET'S STAY AWAY FROM $10,000
BETS.
WE'LL JUST SHAKE ON IT.
>> GOOD.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE REPORT, THE
REPORT DOESN'T ACTUALLY SAY THAT
THIS IS GOING TO BE GOOD FOR THE
COUNTRY.
WHAT THE REPORT ACTUALLY SAYS IS
THAT IN AND OF ITSELF YOU CANNOT
MAKE A DETERMINATION ON THE
IMPACT OF WHAT THIS ONE PROJECT
BY ITSELF WITHOUT ANY OTHER
FACTOR COMING INTO PLAY WILL
HAVE ON CARBON EMISSIONS.
WHAT IT DOES SAY, THOUGH, IS IT
PLAYS OUT SCENARIOS WHICH ARE
VERY FEASIBLE THAT WILL PLAY
OUT, FOR EXAMPLE, THE PRICE OF
OIL GOES DOWN.
EVERYONE SPECULATED THE PRICE OF
OIL WILL GO DOWN.
IF THAT HAPPENS, THEN TAR SANDS
EXPANDS AND CARBON EMISSIONS
WILL GO UP.
AND SO I ACTUALLY THINK TAKING
THAT ALONG WITH EVERYTHING ELSE
A THE PRESIDENT WANTS TO DO ON
CLIMATE CHANGE CAN GIVE HIM A
GREEN LIGHT TO SAY NO.
>> I REALLY WANT TO GET YOUR
OPINION ON THIS.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY
REPUBLICANS HAVE MADE THIS
PROJECT THE CENTERPIECE OF THEIR
ENTIRE ECONOMIC PHILOSOPHY.
>> I THINK THAT'S OVERSTATED
QUITE A BIT.
>> EVERY TIME WE HAVE A SHOW,
SOMEBODY SAYS SOMETHING,
SOMEBODY SAYS SOMETHING ABOUT
KEYSTONE AND SOMEHOW KEYSTONE IS
GOING TO CREATE ALL THESE JOBS.
THE TWL NOBOUMBERS ARE 3,900
TEMPORARY JOBS IN THE
CONSTRUCTION SECTOR AND 35
PERMANENT JOBS.
WHY IS THIS OBSESSION THAT YOU
GUYS HAVE WHEN YOU HAVE A
FOREIGN CORPORATION,
TRANS-CANADA, WHO IS GOING TO BE
SEIZING AMERICAN FARMLAND,
PUTTING A DANGEROUS TOXIC
CHEMICAL THROUGH SO THEY CAN
SEND IT OVER TO CHINA AND CREATE
35 JOBS.
WHY IS THIS YOUR TALKING POINT?
>> FIRST OF ALL, I DON'T THINK
THAT'S A FAIR READING OF THE
REPORT.
42,000 JOBS CREATED.
>> 42,000 JOBS DIRECT, INDIRECT
AND INDUCED.
>> THAT'S A METRIC MODEL THAT
SHOWS THE SPENDING OF PEOPLE
THAT GET JOBS AND SO FORTH.
IT ISN'T FAIR TO JUST LIMIT IT.
>> BUT 3,900 CONSTRUCTION JOBS.
>> BY DEFINITION, CONSTRUCTION
JOBS ARE TEMPORARY.
WHEN YOU BUILD A BUILDING, GUESS
WHAT?
WHEN THE BUILDING'S BUILT, MOVE
ON TO NEXT PROJECT.
IT'S RIDICULOUS TO SAY YOU
SHOULDN'T BUILD A PIPELINE FOR
THAT REASON.
THAT'S NUMBER ONE.
NUMBER TWO, THE MAIN ARGUMENT
FOR WHY IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN
GREEN LIGHTED IS ITS POTENTIAL
EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.
AND WHAT THE REPORT SHOWS, VAN,
AND THIS IS IRREFUTABLE, THE
SCIENCE IS CLEAR, THAT THE
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PIPELINE ARE
WORSE.
IF YOU USE PRIMARILY TANKER
TRUCKS TO TRANSPORT THIS SHALE
GAS, CLIMATE EMISSIONS WILL BE
28% HIGHER THAN THE PIPELINE.