Skip navigation

The Ed Show for Thursday, February 27th, 2014

Read the transcript to the Thursday show

  Most Popular
Most viewed

February 27, 2014

Guests: Byron Steskal, Sheldon Whitehouse, John O`Connor, Jim Tarnick, Mike

ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC HOST: Good evening Americans. And welcome to the Ed
Show live from New York. Let`s get to work.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why not approve the Keystone Pipeline today?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And we welcome the U.S. State Department`s report.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Even the study now that they put out paves the way for

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Keystone XL would not have a significant environmental

REP. JOHN BOEHNER, (R-OH) HOUSE SPEAKER: Complex. Do you think the
Keystone Pipeline is complex?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Goodness gracious.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline is not in the
national interest.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Obviously, this is an issue where there are strongly
felt opinions on all sides.

BOEHNER: It`s been under study for five years. We build pipelines
everywhere in American everyday.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: President is going to approve the XL Pipeline.

BOEHNER: He can also pick up his pen and finally approve the Keystone

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don`t why his going to wait for two or three months
to do it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: My guess is he`ll say yes to Keystone.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I mean, you just write it down. He is going to approve
the XL Pipeline. He is.

BOEHNER: We can build it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There is no defending, not opening the XL Pipeline.

BOEHNER: There`s nothing complex about the Keystone Pipeline. It`s time
to build it.


SCHULTZ: Oh no, no, no, Speaker Boehner. It`s very complex.

Good to have you with us tonight folks. Thanks for watching. We start
tonight with some major news on the Keystone XL Pipeline.

On Wednesday night, the State Department`s inspector general, that`s right,
he`s been looking at this whole thing over, he stood by the State
Department report on the Keystone XL Pipeline. The inspector general
cleared the department of any allegations running wrongdoing of improperly
hiring ERM, an outside consulting firm which ties the oil industry that
wrote this whole report and everybody`s up in arms about.

There was no conflict of interest. That`s the final word from the
inspector general. The inspector general said, "the State Department
substantially followed it`s prescribed guidance and at times was more
rigorous than that guidance."

Interesting. Now, this latest news has Republicans calling for the
president of the United States to fast track the pipeline. Let`s go. What
are we waiting for?

A spokesperson for House Speaker John Boehner said, "It`s long past time
the president stop pandering to his extremist allies and just approve it so
we can get people back to work."

Hold it right there. Mr. Boehner, I have been to Nebraska. The jobs that
you`re referring are temporary. They`re not long term. So don`t be trying
to play this thing that it`s going to be a big boost when it comes to
creating jobs in America. It will be short term.

Now, the speaker hasn`t been shy about his support for the pipeline. He
throws the jobs thing out all the time. Boehner has been putting serious
pressure on the president to approve the pipeline for months.


BOEHNER: It`s bad enough that he continues to block the Keystone Pipeline
which his own administration says would mean tens of thousands of new jobs.

He can also pick up his pen and finally approve the Keystone Pipeline.

Last week the State Department produced yet another report showing what we
already knew. That there`s no reason, scientific or otherwise, to block
this project any longer.

You think the Keystone Pipeline is complex? It`s been under study for five
years. We build pipelines everywhere in America everyday.


SCHULTZ: So, Mr. Boehner, do you think the president of the United States
should just say the heck with the State Supreme Court in Nebraska and just
do something federal over states rights? I thought your writings were all
about states rights in backyard control?

Democrats still don`t trust Boehner and the State Department report.
Arizona Congressman Raul Grijalva isn`t happy with the State Department`s
inspector general. He released a statement saying, "The inspector general
was only asked to examine whether the State Department followed its own
flawed process for selecting a third party contractor. The fact that the
answer is "yes" doesn`t address any outstanding concerns about the
integrity of ERM`s work."

Oh yeah. Congressman Grijalva, he wants the devil in the detail to come to
the party. Now, it`s not just the State Department report Democrats are
concerned about, Senators Barbara Boxer and also Sheldon Whitehouse are now
raising new questions over health concerns surrounding the pipeline and
digging the stuff out of the ground. The senators wrote Secretary of State
John Kerry asking for an immediate and comprehensive study on how tar sands
oil would affect health. And on Wednesday, both Whitehouse and Boxer said
health impacts of tar sands oil are being ignored.


SEN. BARBARA BOXER, (D) CALIFORNIA: We need could clearly understand that
as tar sands oil flows to our Gulf Coast refineries, it will increase toxic
pollution that already plagues communities like Port Arthur, Texas.

SEN. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, (D) RHODE ISLAND: A decision as important as the
Keystone XL Pipeline be made by this country with our eyes wide open to the
health effects, to the climate effects, and not just take as gospel parts
of a report.


SCHULTZ: Meanwhile, there are also growing concerns about the quality of
the XL Pipeline itself. I mean the physical pipeline itself is in any

When I was in Nebraska, I spoke with a man named Byron Steskal. If the
pipeline is approved, this is going to run right through his land. Steskal
gave us -- I thought a very interesting illustration of the pipeline.


SCHULTZ: This goes through your land, doesn`t it?

BYRON STESKAL, KEYSTONE XL OPPONENT: Yes. It goes across my properties,
puts it right in half 1.2 miles. My visual aid is -- this is how big the
pipeline is only it is not this thick. It is 0.47, 8 something of that and
it`s made in India. OK. As you can see, if has some flex to it, you know.
This pipeline is not rigid. It`s unsafe as far as I`m concerned, you know.
They can say it`s coated with some type of coating to make it safer, as far
as their electronic system for leaks, I have -- the TransCanada memo that
says it will leak 1 to 2 percent undetected.


SCHULTZ: 1 to 2 percent undetected. He`s got a visual aid. I`ve got a
visual aid. Now, it`s no secret. I`m a Canadian businessman too. I have
a fishing lodge up in Canada. Let me tell you about regulations my
friends. It`s very interesting.

This is our 6,000 gallon diesel gas tank. This one`s for abgas. What are
all these things? Oh yeah, that`s regulated. You got to put these high
weighed jobbers up there and it got to be four feet from the tank and they
got to be 36 inches apart by regulation. This tank has to be inspected
every two years, it has to be tagged or they`ll put me out of business and
I really get really ornery when I can`t catch fish. You know what I mean?

Here is the bottom line. This is a double-walled tank or I couldn`t be in
business. In other words, you have to have two sheets of iron in this tank
in case there`s some kind of a spill. Then there has to be a catching
mechanism on the outside which exactly with that wall is that of course
this has to be up the code, that has to be up the code, then that`s has to
be up the code, and anything within 20 feet got to be up the code. I mean,
I`m telling you, I got all kinds of regulations when it comes to fuel in

TransCanada, isn`t that the oil company that`s trying to build this
pipeline? Why don`t they have this scheduled to be all along the pipeline?
Why don`t they have a requirement for a double thickness? Why is that
they`re always picking on the little guy and why is that that there have
been so many leaks and there have been no changes? I can tell you. If
there was a leak out of that tank, environmental folks in Canada be all
over me at Wrong Lake and they would coming up with all kinds of
recommendations on what I have to do with that tank.

So, maybe this is just a situation where it is such a huge company that
they can come in and pretty much do whatever they want and write the damn
regulations if they don`t like them.

Get your cellphones out. I want to know what you think tonight`s question.
Would you let the Keystone XL Pipeline run through your backyard? Text A
for Yes, text B for No to 67622. You can always go to our blog at We`ll bring you the results later on this show.

For more, let me bring in Senator Sheldon Whitehouse and also Dr. John
O`Connor who studies the health effects of the tar sands oil. Gentlemen,
great to have you with us tonight.

Senator, you first. Are you happy with the State Department inspector
general`s report? Your thoughts?

WHITEHOUSE: No, I`m not. I think that it is cleared the hurdle of being
disqualified as a conflict of interest in violation of the department`s own
guidelines, but it`s clear that as a report, it is infected with the bias
of the oil industry from which this consultant comes. And I think that
there are flaws in the report that we`re still looking into but one of them
was that I think that the evidence we brought out in the environment public
work committee was new and haven`t been adequately considered.

And that was, you know, Dr. O`Connor`s work showing the downstream harm
from those who are near the mining of the tar sands and the testimony from
our community organizer in Texas about those who are -- have health damage
because of the refining of tar sands type crude oil and then those who are
near the Petco. The waste product of it in Detroit and Chicago with --
really telling stories about children literally having to flee the baseball
fields to get away from the cloud of choking dust that was blown off the

SCHULTZ: Dr. O`Connor, I keep hearing this that the tar sands oil is far
more toxic than anything else that is being refined anywhere in the world.
Is that correct sir?


SCHULTZ: It is correct that there`s nothing worst coming out of the ground
on the phase of the earth than this oil that`s going to come out other than
tar sands?

O`CONNOR: All the information we have supports that.

SCHULTZ: Dr. O`Connor, how toxic is it when it comes to imposing possible
health risks on society?

O`CONNOR: I guess from the point of view of what`s released into the
environment, you know, at both hands, I`m more familiar with the mining and
of the digging under the ground, independent signs has, thank God, piled up
indicating that there is a big impact and the release of a lot of
carcinogenic material into the environment which may will be linked up with
the health issues that have risen downstreams especially in the community
of Fort Chipewyan which is about an hours like north downstream.

SCHULTZ: And doctor, how much oil could be leaked out of a pipeline before
it would become very serious in your opinion?

O`CONNOR: I would have to hazard (ph) against of that and I would like to
live that up to the experts.

SCHULTZ: OK. Senator, do you expect the State Department to give this
stamp of approval where did John Kerry gave a very pointed speech a couple
of weekends ago about this almost to the point where it`s going to be hard
for him to back away and give the president a recommendation for approval.
And do you think that this State Department report is credible?

WHITEHOUSE: I think that there are flaws within the State Department
report but I also want to say that if you actually look at the State
Department report, it`s a lot more balanced than the Republican version of
the report.

The Republican version of the report, if you listen to Speaker Boehner, is
that this was a big fact green light. There are no problems, just go on
right ahead. And in fact, the report says that the down stream effect of
burning all these tar sands would be the equivalent of -- if I remember
correctly, it was 5.6 million cars running out in the -- on the roads per
year and that the pipeline at certain oil prices is the difference between
all of that pollution ain`t not.

So, you know, I think that there are things that John Kerry can find in
that report that would support a decision not to go forward with the
pipeline. And I think if you look at the flaws in the report and look at
it with clear eyes, that`s the direction that he should be leaning and you
know, the Republicans want to stampede this project through. They are
getting hundreds of millions of dollars from the oil coal, Koch Brothers,
polluting industry consortium, and they want to try to create an atmosphere
of stampede and that`s why there`s all this false urgency about it and zero
interest in the health effects and outright denial of the climate change
effects. Makes that lot easier for them, Ed, if they don`t even believe
that climate change is happening or that carbon pollution contributes to

SCHULTZ: Senator, I need to ask you. You mentioned the Koch Brothers, are
they behind this to your knowledge?

WHITEHOUSE: I don`t know that they`re behind it but there`s an awful lot
of money that supports the Republican Party that comes out of the coal
industry out of the oil industry, out of the gas industry, out of the
technological folks that support those industries, and the Koch Brothers
are deeply involved in those industries. So it`s part and parcel of a
large powerful industry that at this point, it appears to have an absolute
descript on the Republican Party to the point that they can`t even talk
about climate change any longer.

SCHULTZ: And senator, do you want more information. Do you want a health
impact study on this? What would satisfy you from the health perspective
in the dangers here?

WHITEHOUSE: I think when you`ve heard from Dr. O`Connor about the increase
in cancers in the area of the mining, when you`ve heard from the community
organizer from Port Arthur, Texas about the increase in health effects down
in the refining area, when you`ve heard from the community environmental
groups that are having to deal with the Petco problem, there are questions
that should be answered and could be answered in a thorough report. And I
also think that there are real issues of where the focus should be within
this report. There`s actually some quite good information in it that cuts
very hard against allowing the Keystone Pipeline.

SCHULTZ: OK. And Dr. O`Connor, on the ground where this type of oil has
been extracted in the past, you have seen significant and your research
shows that there has been significant increase in cancer?

O`CONNOR: Exactly. In Aboriginal communities that are far up to be
contract (ph), but unfortunately, at the receiving and of the Athabasca
River, the Athabasca River has been used to provide water to assist this
type of mining. 30 percent high rate of cancer in the community of 1100
people, a traditional Aboriginal community, where 80 percent of the
community leaves off the land. They hunt fish, trap, and gather.

Amazing. And when you consider that overall cancers in First Nations is
lower than non-First Nations. It makes it even more significant. The
Alberta Government and the Canadian Government promised when this report
came out in 2009 after we do comprehensive health studies. They have
walked away from the community port ship and from Fort MacKay where I`m
currently based -- a disgrace.

SCHULTZ: So they have not followed up on what they said they were going to
do with the health impact studies.

O`CONNOR: Absolutely not. And with all the science -- the independent
science for this piled up indicating the contrary to what the industry in
the governments have been saying that this industry is having a major
impact on the environment. There is still no movement. It is incredible
in this day and age.

SCHULTZ: And finally Senator Whitehouse, would this not be a huge symbolic
statement by the president and this country if the president -- and it is
his decision were to deny this pipeline to come through America.

WHITEHOUSE: I think it would be a very strong statement that at long last
this government in the United States is serious about climate change, is
serious about the harm that carbon pollution is doing in our atmosphere, is
doing in our oceans, and is serious about trying to address the effects
that in my home State of Rhode Island for instance, we`re already seeing.
We`ve got 10 inches more sea lapping against our shores. And then a big
storm that makes a big difference to a small state like ours.

SCHULTZ: OK. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse and Dr. John O`Connor, I
appreciate your time tonight. Thanks so much for joining us on the Ed

Up next, Jan Brewer finally did the right thing in Arizona. Mike Rogers
joins me to discuss what took her so long and why conservatives are fuming
about it. Still ahead, the White House called for public opinions on the
Keystone XL Pipeline and you answer.

We`ll share your comments and bring you more from Nebraska in our series
"Divided Heartland, The American Debate."


SCHULTZ: Time now for the Trenders. In the social media, this is where
you can find us. And thanks for being a part of the Ed team.,, and Radio show on
SiriusXM 127, Monday through Friday, noon to 3:00, channel 127. And of
course, you can get my podcast of the radio website at

The Ed Show social media nation has decided the topics today. We are
reporting. Here are today`s top Trenders voted on by you.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You`re my hero.

SCHULTZ: The number three trender, off the mark.

MARK LEVIN, "THE MARK LEVIN SHOW": People even remember what the purpose
of CPAC was? It was to challenge the Republican establishment.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh you don`t know the man?

LEVIN: It`s not a Republican Convention. It`s not a big tent convention

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No dogs allowed.

SCHULTZ: CPAC says the conservative talker is a first amendment defender.

LEVIN: Oh yeah, yeah it`s just magnificent.


LEVIN: Can`t wait not to go.

SCHULTZ: The number two trender, Crisscross.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don`t want to believe with the Bridgegate stuff.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: New e-mails just published by Bergen records.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You`ve got a mail.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Revealed that weeks before the G.W. Bridge traffic
jam, the two principle figures in the investigation we`re joking about
creating traffic problems for political enemy.

GOV. CHRIS CHRISTIE (R) NEW JERSEY: We`re going through an internal

SCHULTZ: Governor Chris Christie says Bridgegate is just water under the

CHRISTIE: I`m not going to give in to the hysteria.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is madness. It`s madness, I tell you.

CHRISTIE: You folks are the only people at the moment who are asking about

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And this is really becoming like a weird obsession

CHRISTIE: I will be damned if I let any of this stuff getting the way of
doing my real job.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He needs to focus on his job as governor.

CHRISTIE: This is my real job, and I`m doing it.

SCHULTZ: And today`s top trender, do the right thing.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: After six days of protest.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What took you so long?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Governor Jan Brewer changed the chance to cheer,
vetoing Senate Bill 1062.

SCHULTZ: They willing put together a piece of legislation that was going
to discriminate.

GOV. JAN BREWER, (R) ARIZONA: The deal is broadly worded and could result
in unintended and negative consequences.

SCHULTZ: Righties say Jan Brewer`s in the wrong for her veto of Senate
Bill 1062.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is not tolerating people`s religious beliefs.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We`re being besieged.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Just about denying me as a Christian, my right to
exercise my conscience.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We feel people of faith that all rights are being
within the way in the name of gay rights.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It`s effectively eviscerating the first amendment
right of freedom of speech, expression, and religious expression for the
people of Arizona


SCHULTZ: And joining tonight from, Mike Rogers, long time
activist as well. Thanks for doing the radio show from time to time. I
appreciate it very much.


SCHULTZ: There`s been -- this is been a hot topic, no question about it in
the last couple of days. OK. So the Republicans in Arizona, they full
trotted vote for it and then they run away from it. What`s this about?

ROGERS: Well, I think what it is about is that the American people, and
more importantly in Arizona at this example, is business. The businesses
of this country stood up and said everybody slow down a minute because we
have hundreds of thousands and millions of LGBT employees at our companies
and this is just not acceptable. And I think, these conservatives as they
often do, try to get things in under the radar. They try to slide things
through, and then once they`re nailed and caught on that, this is what
happens, it becomes a big brouhaha. And the country stands up and says
"No. We`re not a country that is based on discrimination."|

SCHULTZ: Mike, as gay man and journalist, what is your response to -- the
proponent saying, well you were infringing upon religious freedom.

ROGERS: I have no idea what that means, Ed from them because they have all
of these wonderful concerns about impugning religious freedom and standing
on people`s ways and they can`t point to examples and Arizona is one. The
governor even admitted it. We don`t have one case, she said, that anybody
can point to in this law. So, it`s clearly about them and their politics.

SCHULTZ: Well, if they don`t have one case, what took it so long?


SCHULTZ: It`s a two-page bill.

ROGERS: She`s got a lot of publicity to put out there for her self. She
has a real opportunity to be the focal point of attention which we all know
Jan Brewer loves. And it actually is, to me, I really have to say it was a
two-page bill, she could have read it the second it arrived on her desk and
should have immediately, if not immediately, within a matter of hours that
corporations and leaders were coming out and say "no." I don`t know what
took her three or four days.

SCHULTZ: Do you anticipate these kinds of reckless types of legislation
being thrown out in legislative sessions. Are we going to see a slow down
of this or that`s still going to be full throttle that -- will this affect
it at all?

ROGERS: Well, you know, you show people like Michele Bachmann on the show
and people who were like, "We have to do this. We have to this." And
those bills are there. They`ve been there in Mississippi, and there`s a
bill under consideration in Georgia. But I think the lesson has been made
very clear. And all of those guys are back tracking much like the people
on Arizona who voted for it and then said, "Uh-oh, this is really bad."
Those guys are ripping those bills right out of consideration. In
Mississippi, they`re declaring we need further -- a further look at this,
another angle we want to make sure. In other words, they know the damages
will inflict.

SCHULTZ: Are this common to the floor of both chambers in a lot of states
because of the activist groups that are well-funded by people who
definitely want social change. I mean, or is this really coming from
someone who is elected and genuinely goes back to his or her office and
sits down and writes this. Or this stuff you think being corporately
handed to him and then of course they don`t want to become a target on
election time, they`re going to go along with the fraternity?

ROGERS: Well, I think it`s actually a little bit of both and these guys
are right, I mean, they get into the position. These right crazy right
wingers throw up all these stuffs and then instep (ph) these politicians
and actually validated by participating in it. And when you listen to what
some of them say, do you really believe this or you`re just spewing those
talking points? And in most cases, these guys have no understanding. And
they are spewing talking points. The fact that they`re being elected in
doing it is what`s a big part of the problem.

SCHULTZ: OK, Mike Rogers, Good to have you with us tonight.
Thanks so much.

ROGERS: Thank you Ed.

SCHULTZ: Coming up, there`s just one week left to make sure the White
House hears your concerns of the Keystone XL Pipeline. We`ll have more
from our series "Divided Heartland, The American Debate".

Still ahead, amid one of the strongest lobbying efforts Nebraska has ever
seen, landowner concerns were met with silence. Nebraska farmer Jim
Tarnick tells us what happened when he traveled to Washington to meet with
his representatives.

But next, I`m talking your questions. Ask Ed Live coming up in the Ed Show
on MSNBC. We are right back.


SCHULTZ: And thanks for staying with us tonight. Love this segment. I
really appreciate the questions every night here on the Ed Show in our Ask
Ed Live segment.

First question comes from Pat. "Why has Congress turned their backs on
long-term unemployment?"

Well, I know there`s one party that hasn`t. The Democrats would like to do
something about it. The Liberals would like to do something about it for
sure. But the reality of it is the long-term unemployed in this country
have very little or no political clouts. It`s unfortunate but that`s the
way it is.

Our next question comes from Twitter user named RomanMan, OK. "Will you
ever get a two-hour show? One hour is just not enough."

15 hours of radio a week and five hours in TV and you want more out of my
hide? Give me a break. What are you trying to do? Win a fishing trip out
of me or what? I`ll do whatever the boss asks me to do. How`s that?

Lots more coming up on the Ed Show. Stay with us.

MORGAN BRENNAN: I`m Morgan Brennan with your CNBC Market Wrap.

Stocks up across the board today, the DOW gained 74 points, the S and P hit
an all-time high adding nine, and the NASDAQ grows 26 points.

The number of Americans filing first time claims for unemployment benefits
jumps unexpectedly last week, that`s up by 14,000.

The average rate of a 30-year fixed mortgage rose to 4.37 percent this week
and mortgage giant Freddie Mac posted an $8.6 billion profit for the fourth

That`s it from CNBC, first in business worldwide.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show.

Tonight, we continue our series on the Keystone XL Pipeline. This is
Divided Heartland: The American Debate.

All week we have been bringing you stories from real people in Nebraska who
live and work around the site of the proposed pipeline.

Tonight, we focus on the Obama administration`s call for your opinions.
The public comment period ends next week, March 7th.


OBAMA: The state department has gone through its review. There`s now a
common period.

SHANNON GRAVES, KEYSTONE XL OPPONENT: I`m hoping President Obama does a
better job of listening to Americans than some of our state officials have
listened to Nebraskans and realize that this is just going to turn the
United States into an alleyway for foreign product going from one foreign
country to the open market.

RON KAMINSKI, KEYSTONE XL PROPONENT: Mr. President, you know, this has
been reviewed by the state department for years. Everybody`s had a fair
amount of time to discuss the issue. Both sides have given their points of
view and it`s time to approve this pipeline.

KLEEB: President Obama tells us to be the change that this is the year of
action and Secretary Kerry just gave a world speech about climate change
and how that is a weapon of mass destruction.

SCHULTZ: If the president was standing here now what would you tell him?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I`d say that I as a citizen of Nebraska, I am in
favor of the pipeline.

SCHULTZ: It boils down to one man, President Obama.

GRAVES: I would ask him if he would willingly sleep 275 feet away from a
36 inch pipe of sledging poison day after day after day after day, if
that`s something that he really would feel comfortable doing. Personally,
I don`t.

OBAMA: The shift to a cleaner energy economy won`t happen overnight and it
will require some tough choices along the way.

KEVIN GRAVES, KEYSTONE XL OPPONENT: I already speak to the president here
in the national interest comment period. I guess I would use the word
nation and we`re a nation of people and if something is in the national
interest I would think that each person in the nation should somehow be
better for the project if it`s found in the national interest.

OBAMA: When our children`s children look us in the eye and ask if we did
all we could to lead them a safer, more stable world with new sources of
energy, I want us to be able to say, "Yes, we did."

JIM TARNICK, KEYSTONE XL OPPONENT: It`s time to step up. You can`t say
these things and make these speeches and then be the hypocrites that don`t
do something when it`s on their plate.

SCHULTZ: The president make climate change a top priority during his State
of the Union address and has tried to change the game with executive orders
to reduce carbon emissions.

OBAMA: Over the past eight years, the United States has reduced our total
carbon pollution more than any other nation on earth.

JENNI HARRINGTON, KEYSTONE XL OPPONENT: I have a vision and not keep on
this road of using dirty fuel. So I think it is not in our national
interest. I think the president gets that. I think he`s asking us to step
up to the plate and support him.

KLEEB: And all of us is serious about climate change and diversifying our
energy sources.

OBAMA: This is something that we have to deal with. I mean, it has to
affect all of our decisions at this stage because the science is
irrefutable, it has consequences for our businesses, for our jobs, for our
families, for safety and security.

HARRINGTON: It is time and I think America is moving towards being ready
to put their money where their mouth is as far as the investment we need to
make in America.

KLEEB: So, President Obama and Secretary Kerry have to look in the mirror
and ask if they`re serious when they gave those speeches.

OBAMA: But we only have one planet. We do have to appoint to the future
and show leadership.

TARNICK: Well, here it is, you know, you`re here in the national stage or
the international stage for it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I would call out to black eagle as he`s known to the
native people. We were not consulted. We have not signed off and we
deserve that signatory status.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We have serious and grave concerns about, you know,
just the basic safety of our people.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Rosebud Sioux Tribe is poised to stand the line and
keep the pipeline from going through this territory.

SCHULTZ: President Obama now has the chance to make a huge symbolic
statement to the world by not giving Big Oil what it wants in the middle of
the country.

TARNICK: It`s right in front of him now, you know, and we got to be the
leaders for it and I`d like to -- I can bring him out here just like what`s
going on outside right now, we got 30 long hour wind blowing it`s time to
look more at the renewables.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When you went and brushed your teeth this morning and
flipped on that switch was -- did that power come from water turbines,
nuclear wind or coal, you know? We need to really look at renewables.

ART TANDERUP, KEYSTONE XL OPPONENT: I believe that the most valuable thing
here is protecting the largest aquifer in the United States.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you want clean water and good food or do you want

fine line between being a good neighbor and being a fool. We don`t want to
be the fools.


SCHULTZ: Now we want to know what you think. The Ed Show social media has
been very active on this issue for weeks.

Today, we ask for your messages for President Obama and I`m just going to
read a couple of them to you.

Our first is from Deanna. "If you care as much about the country as you
say you do, you will not pass this."

Quite a strong statement.

Our next response comes from George. He says, "I would prefer to see this
product transported by pipeline rather than by truck or rail."

And our next response comes from Patsy. "People in the country, in this
country, are supposed to have rights. I`m sick and tired of rich
corporations thinking that their rights supersede those of regular

And our last response tonight comes from Rick. He says, "The oil trains
are untenable and we are stuck with oil for years to come. We need the
nasty stuff so transport it in the best safest way possible."

Thanks for your responses. We certainly want to thank all of you for
watching this segment and we`ve got more coming up. Our Keystone Pipeline
XL investigation continues next right here on the Ed Show. Stay with us.



THOMPSON: As I look at this project and the risk involved, you know, this
thing is basically going to -- it`s going to be a scar on America`s
landscape forever from the northern border to the southern border. And
we`re going to cross thousands of our streams and lakes in the heartland of
this country for what?


SCHULTZ: It`s hard to take the politics out of this decision because
that`s the only thing the Republicans believe in. The president has the
potential to turn this entire conversation in this country based on
science. That is the hope and change people have been waiting for.

So far, 1.5 million Americans have commented on the final draft of the
Keystone XL Environmental Impact Study. There is a lot of information out
there and there`s plenty of misinformation. We`ll tackle that when we come
back as our series continuous, Divided Heartland: The American Debate.
Keep it here.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. The greatest privilege any American
has is the right to vote in a representative government. Members of
Congress have a responsibility to represent the people who sent them there.
In Rulo, Nebraska, the people I met last Friday are getting a raw deal.
Many of them traveled to Washington to talk to Congressman Terry Lee and
Senator Mike Johanns concerning the pipeline.

Tonight, this is their story.


SCHULTZ: In the Bread Basket of America where corn is king, everything
surrounding this fight has been taller than corn. From the lobbying effort
to the misinformation campaign, these concerned citizens feel Big Oil has
tried to confuse the residents of Nebraska and it seems that everybody is
in on the game.

KLEEB: He sent an e-mail to his supporter saying that their electricity
bills will go up unless the Keystone XL Pipeline is approved. That is

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That is outrageous.

KLEEB: It is outrageous. And that .

SCHULTZ: So the fear tactic is out there as well?


KLEEB: Absolutely. Absolutely.


SCHULTZ: You were told that your electricity rates are going to go up.

KLEEB: It`s going to go up .

SCHULTZ: . unless the pipeline`s built?

KLEEB: Yes. It`s outrageous. If that`s the type of tactics then not only
Representative Terry uses but Alec and Americans for Prosperity, all of
those groups on the far right who don`t care actually about protecting
farmers and ranches they`ll put them in their political ads but they --
when it comes time when the rubber hits the road, where are they? Had a
single Republican leader stood with us throughout this time? No.



SCHULTZ: These activists have exhausted every effort taking troops to
Washington to make sure their voices were heard. Unfortunately, they were
met with unusual resistance.

HARRINGTON: We`ve been to .


HARRINGTON: . speak with them personally and we were told we won`t talk
tar sands with you. I have never been so appalled in my life of, you know,
taking my own personal time, my own money to go meet with the -- in the
representatives office in Washington, D.C. that supposed to represent me.
And they told us a group that they wouldn`t talk with us about the issue.

SCHULTZ: So you went to Washington.


SCHULTZ: . wit the issue.


SCHULTZ: . and you were denied conversation?


SCHULTZ: In a Representative Government .


SCHULTZ: . there was the subject that was off the table?


SCHULTZ: What`s your response to that?

HARRINGTON: Unbelievable. The next statement was, "You want to know my
record on the environment?" And we`re like, "Yeah." He said, "Zero."

TARNICK: I used to think elect -- whoever elected in the office, you
know, they were working for you.



TARNICK: For the guy that got him in that .


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That`s not the way it`s happening.

TARNICK: Yeah, I was a guy -- I was na‹ve.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Have you guys seen that?

TARNICK: I was that na‹ve until we went to Washington, until we went to
place like he said. We went -- Senator Johanns` first comment to us was "I
don`t care about you and the pipeline."


SCHULTZ: So wait a minute, he used to be the governor of Nebraska?



SCHULTZ: And he used to be the ad secretary under ...

TARNICK: Exactly.

SCHULTZ: Now, he`s United States Senator, he said what?

TARNICK: He does not care about us and the pipeline.

SCHULTZ: Senator Johanns along with 44 other Republican senators have
signed a letter to President Obama urging approval of the project.

So before Keystone, you really weren`t mad at politicians were you?



SCHULTZ: You really weren`t .


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You do it alone.

SCHULTZ: All these process is done is soured some really good Americans
about how their government works.

GRAVES: I think our elected officials (inaudible) they kind of sold us
out. You know, Lee Terry at Omaha, Governor Heineman, name it, everyone
who`s comes out in favor of the pipeline that are supposed to be working
for us. I want to ask each and every one of them, if you think this is
such a great plan, if you think this is such a good thing for America, then
why don`t you put it on state and federal lands? Really, you could
certainly go down the road ditches.

Why is it you`re asking landowners, private citizens? Why are we being
asked to handle all the risk? Because it`s a -- anything that`s built by
man is not invaluable so there`s going to be accidents. There`s going to
be leaks. There`s going to be things that happen. And why are we the ones
that have to be holding the bag when that happens?


SCHULTZ: Jim Tarnick, one of the members of who join me
at the Sustainable Energy Barn last Friday joins us tonight.

Jim, good to have you with us. It`s been a very eventful week some more
comments coming from Congress. Have you tried to contact Congressman Terry
Lee of Nebraska since you went to Washington?

TARNICK: No, I haven`t. I haven`t tried to make any contact with Lee

SCHULTZ: And describe the trip that you had and how it all worked out?

TARNICK: Well, we went down to Washington a group of us, landowners and
people from Bold Nebraska, and we went to, you know, see our
representatives and take part against -- take part in the rally for the
climate. And as we`re down there for that, we had -- we had meetings set
up in which like we would go to see the -- like, the one with Senator
Johanns. He just talked to us maybe for three minutes and then it was his
justice staff but he was very -- he was on the defensive for the many on
the room saying, you know, "I don`t care about you or the pipeline, you
know, it`s -- this is my vote on it. It`s going through." It`s what he
wanted. And it`s been the same, you know, Lee Terry and that you meet with
his staffers and, you know, for the most part, most of them were zoned out
on you anyways.

SCHULTZ: Do you think that there`s anyway you can turn the decision in
your favor? I mean, do you feel like you have some momentum or do you
think you`re chasing this?

TARNICK: No. When I found out about the pipeline and found out some of
the true or facts about it and what TransCanada was really up to, you know,
I really did feel like, you know, you know, "Gosh, you know, we`re going
try to put up this fight and we`re going to try and do everything we can."
but, yeah, we`re, you know, it`s like, you know, it`s about the end of the
game and, you know, then and I`m late getting there to the party anyways,
you know, and in this fight.

But as we`ve gone on over the last few years, we`ve gained significant
momentum and the striking down of LB1161 has just been a huge uplift to a
lot of people and it`s opened a lot of eyes and everybody`s has told us,
you know, this pipeline`s going to go through and it`s, you know, in
TransCanada said it over and over again, you know. It`s always three
months and it`s going to be going.

It`s this amount of time where we`ll be rolling and it will be going. And
they send you the letters. They say "Sign up now with us because it offers
-- money is going down and you better get on board with us because you`re
only going to lose out."

And here we are now, you know, we`re still standing, we`re standing
stronger, you know, and the president`s hearing our voice, you know, and
people like you, Ed, are picking us up, you know, and letting us tell our
story and I feel we`ve got a lot of momentum. I feel these things gone to
our favor.

SCHULTZ: Jim, there`s 75 miles of land that has not been decided upon, is
that correct, of the 275 across Nebraska? How determined are these
landowners not to give in to TransCanada?

TARNICK: We`re very determined. You know, TransCanada and their people
will tell you, you know, they`ve got 90 percent of line that`s locked up,
you know. These people are ready to go. You know, if you want to look at
us, you know, and people look on that map and they see a line, you know,
and they say, "This thing ain`t no big deal. I want to go."

You know, we`re people, you know. The landowners, the farmers, the
ranchers, people that make their lives off this land and, you know, we`re
standing united and we get stronger as this fight continues, you know, you
know. And there`s more people joining us everyday.

And there`s people that, you know, TransCanada, you don`t get that earlier
a number of people that might have signed up because they thought they had
to, you know. There was that risk that, you know, TransCanada threatened
me three times at the eminent domain after Governor approved that.

SCHULTZ: Yeah. All right. Jim Tarnick, we`ll stay on the story. I
appreciate your time tonight. Thanks for speaking up.

Congressman Lee Terry agreed to join us on the program tonight but because
of votes in Congress, he was unable to join us this evening. He will
appear on this program next week.

That`s the Ed Show. I`m Ed Schultz.

Politics Nation with Reverend Al Sharpton starts right now. Good evening,


<Copy: Content and programming copyright 2014 MSNBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Copyright 2014 Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>

The Ed Show Section Front
Add The Ed Show headlines to your news reader:

Sponsored links

Resource guide