Obama on Rushmore

What are you laughing about I laugh at everything I know you're just segment next hour gonna be talking about. Legislation that would require in the state of Massachusetts all bathrooms to beach Republicans turns -- right to be -- differently and the to have the third gender represented it's been a cruel world through human history of rolling into restrooms so. It's time for a third universal. That and now we are working to get that done here in Massachusetts the first few.

Or -- get there. We have Damon mogul in joining us director of Greenpeace global warming SA these guys did a wonderful thing as we mentioned earlier. We've been waiting six months now and Barack Obama has not had his likeness etched into the sky line in -- rush more. In order what's taken so long while we were wondering the guy's a Greenpeace went out there in there -- congratulations -- Are -- being here what -- you guys up to yesterday.

Well -- Extremely concerned about situation with global warming and obviously it. Realistic environments -- through -- day every a lot of really really serious problems. War or not all the people of the United States but around the world we don't act decisively. And we felt it -- artists are really put that challenge is president Obama's high level monumental problem is -- the monumental challenge.

And it's your feeling that he has he doesn't take this seriously enough.

Well certainly the rhetoric is in very good the president has committed government to bringing back on the White House. And developing I'll -- fine but. Rhetoric is really not good enough and not to count was that we --

What type of action you actually looking for the house. The congress has already passed cap and trade a lot of people are appalled by and I assume you are encouraged by. But Barack Obama put did more than just lip service on and he's been doing some active lobbying done -- what what do you expect out of the president.

What will actually Greenpeace boat support legislation would pop up purposes it is okay. Representative mark these these were here in the congress on environmental issues are involved in this but even so.

We feel it in the industry lobbyists basically Roy is jail and that it was actually not strong enough.

And doesn't all for -- if they -- a reduction in how we receive it -- greenhouse gases. In our though we are actually calling on the president.

out from behind congress lead from the front we believe real presidential -- do. And that what this person in need you need to have vary -- emissions reductions.

Immediately and certainly -- with what we need very significant reductions and fortunately the legislation being proposed.

Does not provide without it emissions reductions that we need stop catastrophic global war.

David what part of the presidential leadership you're looking for law. You require the president to embrace nuclear power as any emission free. Powered generating technology.

We we don't we. It's part of the solution one of the things we have to realize is that.

We actually have. -- is acknowledging now renewable clean. Technology. That we paid off the shelf.

And we got ourselves together the way we get ourselves together on the Apollo project or other major project our country has embraced. We can basically develop a clean energy economy which is gonna -- numbers of new jobs for American working people and it's gonna start producing energy that does not proceed.

Catastrophic greenhouse -- Probably nuclear technology is he incredibly expensive.

We have not all the nuclear waste problem.

And let's be realistic even if we start.

Try to build some of these one is gonna be massive public opposition to ensure nuclear technology in its nuclear waste. And plants are not going to address for her and indeed we have yet have seen -- English.

Damon yesterday there was some conflicts. The EPA administrator. Admitted that unilateral US action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would have no effect on the climate. Exactly. What level of altering of the normal course of events in the United States economically should we. -- you can get involved with without knowing what kind of welcome it would create.

I think that that first of all this can be a win win situation that.

We could also be a lose lose though via Europe to pose hypothetical that will magically this will be great writer. At first that we -- here we.

Have a potentially catastrophic problem global warming according for example we US government report released a couple of weeks ago is already. Period. Problem for a department we have more significant fire were having more intense storms were having flooding conditions all of this. -- global warming and we will get it right.

It'd be catastrophic. I don't mean our lights on currently in the -- on the virtual earth so these -- here not and do nothing.

Well the issue -- no the issue is can we can't we do anything that would actually impact it. And what is reasonable. And if we started to do the things that you guys suggest what would be the economic impact I -- to -- if you start operating around the world trying to rein in everybody's economy and if you -- in our economy. Then what you're doing is you're saying all the developing nations on the planet your economies are gonna stop dead. China without the US buying a -- the way we've been dying doesn't operate. You're talking about an economic catastrophe. Under the hypothetical the people gonna start buying -- is in their four talk going to be wonderful.

With all respect I think that that -- in your post is not the bargain we ain't. We we -- question is something we're gonna monitor economy in the opposite.

We do nothing our economies in the like like well that's it that's only too well what I don't believe it is but that our community has happily and on the -- That are being proposed right now and I into what we have to realize that we have -- huge opportunities. In building a green economy. Yet people in our country act to work shops that are that are in our country covered and it worked you work.

Dame and -- is whether the director Greenpeace global warming. -- in North Reading your NWR -- would Damon.

Morning it's great to it amber and I RR FI. A and I. That. Being seen as sign up on mount Rushmore are being we -- Leaders not act and I think -- on. Barack obsolete that I'd want -- I. Mean campaign into it may well it acts on that they donated over it. 200000 dollar and they learn it the largest nuclear energy. On the power plant. Elder in the United States I don't have I built it -- get.

And you're saying they give money to the Greenpeace that.

They gave money --

Obama's presidential campaign okay I think what they were at work Greenpeace was doing -- was protesting Obama's lack of leadership is now what you're up to yesterday dammit.

That's right and and calling on the president who really basic.

Excited -- the leadership to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Kevin in the car you're NWR -- Damon -- Glenn.

Good morning Kevin.

Kevin you gonna talk to us no gray in Arlington then good morning to you sir.

They did everybody ready to burst your bubble but most of people on this -- winter -- from the bed okay. And I know you're gonna say that without some sort somehow related to global warming but you know it's with a bunch of baloney. People start to see Pruitt. And you know you did Buick I don't even know what you do a lot of nerve coming on just doing the misinformation that you do because none of -- renewable technologies. Actually work without tax subsidies. But nuclear does so I don't I don't know who you think you are that you pistons Marlins a lot of people would joke.

Well is so what lies exactly did he tell.

Well look that included expenses of that was -- the US navy one partnerships for twenty years run nuclear it was that expensive but. --

Simple answer that question US -- ran it it or it's on nuclear technology was because.

It's a tool that'll happen is these are extremely -- very -- And if you look at what actually happens -- it had no way of dealing with nuclear expertise in the -- And see there's significant history.

Terrible medical problems among our military personnel and military personnel -- other country. Who were damaged by radiation from those nuclear technology.

Aren't they and that we have not fix the problems.

This ten K bit it's been running about twenty this statement just -- well let -- when he years.

Actually all the way back in 1950s. And all you have to do is read the history of the numerous -- in. And how these. And it's terrible things that happened on a number of these nuclear apple.

I'm really happy that our military personnel get forgotten.

But don't entertainment David. In Plymouth on a lifelong based state resident I am not aware of any. Higher incidence of cancer any type of terrible health outcomes in in for the residents in -- the end. In France we we read that almost 80% of their power is supplied by nuclear would not aware of any that terrible indications -- a lot.

I think if I tell their friends of I work -- bring in -- or current number of yours.

There's actually nuclear facilities it produces. On him for the current government.

Actually on nuclear waste in the Atlantic as.

Levels of radiation in the right -- orange code is so high that we if they caught up in that sentiment. The very act up and that. Intermediate level of weight on it it was that he needed nuclear waste. And it not been designated nuclear waste is the place from which he worked for Asian. And -- worked for a couple of predictability. Prix. Of radioactive.

Dana Dana let me study taut an -- to dinner the other night we had a -- experienced as an to a fabulous -- right next -- they will have fabulous -- will -- radiated. Laced his eye popping up. It's like Francis the French are no good stop buying French. Fries. Did an island as well let's direct our Greenpeace global warming are coming up my WRKO. That. -- Off from. --