tv The Rachel Maddow Show MSNBC January 14, 2011 12:00am-1:00am EST
that's caught up with us. we needed the revenue. >> party's over. thanks for your time tonight. that's jan 13th. you can hear me daily monday through friday on the majority report at majority.fm. to discuss where the common wisdom that gun control is unattainable, here's rachel maddow. >> great job tonight. thanks to you at home for staying with us for the next hour as well. today residents of tutucson, arizona, marked the next stage of the national tragedy that stretched into day six. the funerals for the six victims of last saturday's deadly shooting started today. after last night's public memorial service, today was expected to be a day of more private grieving by the families and friends of those who were killed. unexpectedly though, the events
today continued to involve the public. hundreds of people spontaneously turned out. look at this. hundreds of people spontaneously turned out to line the streets of tucson to salute the hearse that was carrying the youngest victim, 9-year-old christina taylor green. here was a sign that hung from a house across the street. your community is standing with you. as friends and family entered that church for the memorial today, they have passed underneath this flag. this is it the largest flag recovered from ground zero after the attacks of september 11th. the connection, of course, is that christina green was born on september 11th, 2001. it's a fact about her biography that was noted in one of the more moving moments from president obama's remarks last night. >> christina was given to us on september 11th, 2001, one of 50 babies born that day to be pictured in a book called "faces
of hope." on either side of her photo in that book were simple wishes for a child's life. i hope you help those in need, read one. i hope you know all the words to the national anthem. and sing it with your hand over your heart. i hope you jump in rain puddles. if there are rain puddles in heaven, christina is jumping in them today. >> president obama returned to washington very early this morning. and the white house, while not pivoting away from the tucson tragedy, did start to field anything in public policy that should change in response to the latest wave of american gun
violence. >> we'll have an opportunity to evaluate ideas and proposals that may be brought forth as a result of circumstances and the facts around this case. the president, again, since i have been with him in 2004, supported the assault weapons ban. we continue to do so. >> the president will continue to support the assault weapons ban. that position, a ban on semiautomatic assault weapons is a position that mr. obama happens to share with his predecessor as president. during the 2000 presidential campaign, george w. bush said he supported the assault weapons ban. it was a view he continued to hold while he was president. >> the president thought and said so in 2000 that the assault weapon ban was a reasonable step. he supports the reauthorization of the current ban. >> george w. bush ultimately
failed on that campaign process. the weapons ban was allowed to expire on his watch. president george w. bush did support a number of gun control measures. things like banning the importation of large ammunition clips. banning guns within 300 yards of a school. raising the gun ownership age from 18 to 21. requiring instant background checks at gun shows. requiring trigger locks with handgun sales. george w. bush supported all of these gun control policies, which is why angry, enraged nra members picketed his public appearances while he was president for all eight years. oh, wait, that didn't happen. that didn't happen because his position on gun control was considered to be relatively mainstream and noncontroversial. mr. bush supported some -- what you might call common sense restrictions on what weapons americans are allowed to have. and that's how the politics of the second amendment has worked.
there is a broadly defined consensus which includes both barack obama and george w. bush and every other politician of either party who holds mainstream views on this subject. it's the consensus view that the second amendment protects the right of americans to own firearms. but there are reasonable restrictions on what that means. in the wake of the tucson shootings, at the realization that the alleged shooter was able to kill and wound so many people, he was able to fire 30 bullets before he stopped to reload. he had a high capacity magazine. that would not have been legal for him to buy had the ban on that not expired in 2004. in the wake of that realization, we have to decide as a country if we're going to keep to the mainstream, centrist, george w. bush and barack obama included consensus on gun control, that some restrictions are okay. or whether we're going to reject that long-held consensus. the common wisdom in washington
is that there can be no new policies concerning guns whatsoever. no restrictions on gun access are politically possible no matter how great the need. no matter how big the problem that america has to confront about gun issues. no matter how great the national trauma. no matter how rational the restriction. i don't know that is the common wisdom. the fact it's common doesn't mean it's not radical. that's a radical assertion. that common wisdom we cannot do anything about guns, that has never been true of gun politics in modern times. saying all restrictions are off the table, that's a rejection of the centrist consensus we have had for generations. that is the view of the gun radicals. that's the view of the absolutists. >> fellow patriots, we have a lot of domestic enemies of the constitution, and they're right down the mall in the congress of the united states. right down independence avenue
in the white house of the united states -- that belongs to us. it's not about my ability to hunt, which i love to do. it's not about the ability for me to protect my people and property against criminals, which we have the right to do. but it's about -- it's all about us protecting ourselves from a tyrannical government of the united states. >> second amendment, not about hunting or self-defense. it's about citizens having the ability to overthrow the tyrannical government of the united states. "the washington post" wrote about this. finding congressman ron paul making the same argument in print five years ago. the second amendment is not about hunting deer or keeping a pistol in your night stand. it's not about protecting
oneself against enemies. it's about overthrowing a tyrannical government. the argument is that the second amendment exists so the citizens can overthrow the government. that is a view, a radical view of gun policy. >> we've had had record gun sales. when americans are asked, why are you buying guns? they're buying it for civil unrest and to it fight back against government tyranny. we essentially have two choices about what kind of country we are. do we believe the second amendment requires citizens to be well armed enough to defeat the military of this country? is it about the power to literally overthrow our government? if that's the case, this week's common wisdom is right. no matter the national trauma, there could be no regulation of the american people's fire power
whatsoever. right now it is illegal for citizens to own machine guns, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, mortars, cannons, molotov cocktails. technically they're not outright banned. but we do restrict access so greatly that these do not circulate among american citizens broadly. if you are with the alex joneses and ron pauls on gun policy, all of the laws that prohibit from having these things need to change. all of the laws that limit us from having access to anything need to change. in their view to do right by the constitution, you and i need to be able to defeat the u.s. military in battle and overthrow the u.s. government. we need not only anti-tank guns and rocket-propelled grenade launchers and bombs. if the u.s. army is armed with
depleted uranium and in order for us to go up against the tyrannical chief of the u.s. military in battle, you and i should be able to obtain private nuclear weapons. this is not high hyperbole. if you believe that argument, we need to be able to destroy the u.s. government. he's commander in chief of the u.s. military. we need to defeat him in battle. is that what gun rights are for? you and i need to privately buy everything the military has and more. we would probably be advised to restrict what weapons the u.s. military is able to have, so we, a tactical advantage. forget the arms race between the
u.s. and the soviet union in the 1980s. every day should be an arms race between you and me and the 82nd airborne if that's the way we're going to approach gun politics. is that the philosophy with which we approach it? or can we approach gun politics the way that we do in modern america, which is that we reject that radical position? we love and enjoy those folks. but we don't move forward on their suggestions. >> it's all about us protecting ourselves from a tyrannical government of the united states. >> we can either accept that view of gun policy or accept the view that our constitution allows law-abiding americans to own weapons with some reasonable restrictions that allow us to be a modern industrialized society that is not a thunder dome. joining us is e.j. dionne of the washington post. thank you for writing that smart column today at the washington post. >> bless you.
thank you for taking this issue on and casting it that way. i think we should spend the whole segment surprising everyone and praising george w. bush for his very reasonable stand on gun control. >> i mean, the thing that strikes me though is that for all of the differences that you can find mainstream republicans and mainstream democrats, even on issues of gun control, there is a consensus that the country is capable of addressing problems when the solution touches on gun rights. that has been the consensus the entire time i've been along and longer. we do accept some restrictions on gun rights. why is the common wisdom now that nothing can be done on this issue? >> you know, i think that we have had a detour on this ever since the assault weapons ban has passed. because a lot of democrats got very, very timid about this after the '94 elections and after al gore couldn't just win
the election outright without having the court intervene on bush's side in 2000. after they took the house in '06. they're worried about losing rural states and rural congressional districts. in the meantime, most republicans don't say they agree with congressman brown, but they've acted as if they do. the gun rights -- the assault weapons ban was not extended under president bush because the congress was taking essentially the nra's position. i think what you said is really important. people have to understand what is the logic behind this position if it is based on this view that the purpose of the second amendment is to help us fight tyranny and maybe the guys down the streets are tyrants then you have to go all the way. if you're not going to go all the way, why can't we restrict the big magazines.
if you had a smaller magazine, it's very likely fewer people would have gotten shot in tucson. why can't we ban assault weapons? but i think it's going to take an enormous effort. because there is just a huge political consensus that republicans don't want to do it. and democrats are too timid to take it on. they could have done it, by the way, in the last congress when they controlled the congress and barack obama was in the white house. and they didn't. it's got to be done now. >> is an event like this in tucson a big enough shock to the system. i'm going to speak with the congresswoman from new york, who introduced the gun fix to reinstate that large capacity magazine ban. has this event been enough to shake loose those politics? >> only if people stay on it for an extended period of time. i think that the nra and its allies have been able to wait
out events like this. they make public statements saying, all we need to do is arm each other. congress people should go around armed. i wrote a column using their rhetoric on how we're all safer carrying guns. there was a column called arm the senate. let's take down all the barriers. if they really believed this, they should want to walk around the congress. some of the congressmen are living up to their word. most people know that's not going to solve the problem. but the nra is in for a long game. they have people who vote on this issue and people who write columnists a lot whenever they cross them, which is fine with me. that's their first amendment right. i don't think people who care passionately about gun control have made it a central voting issue the way anti-gun voters have. there haven't been enough test
cases where a suburban republican who voted against a sensible gun restriction actually faced a tough primary focused on these issues. you've got to see some tests like that. it shouldn't be a long struggle but i'm afraid it is. >> thought experiment. if the ban on fully automatic machine guns had an expiration date like the assault weapons ban did, if that was expiring, could that ban be extended right now? >> i wonder. the first thought is the extension would be filibustered in the united states senate. maybe president obama has an interest in standing up for this. maybe he should say, do you want to vote for the sensible george w. bush gun control bill or stand with congressman brown? there have to be clear lines drawn on this.
then people have to struggle. sometimes people expect to lose and lose and lose and finally win again. maybe this terrible event will open minds again. >> e.j. dionne, great to have you on the show as always. there is a congressman from arizona who lamented there wasn't one more gun at the scene of last week's shootings in arizona. just one more gun, the right gun. this isn't a bruce willis movie. and the facts are worth seeking out. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 absolutely. i mean, these financial services companies tdd# 1-800-345-2550 are still talking about retirement tdd# 1-800-345-2550 like it's some kind of dream. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 it's either this magic number i'm supposed to reach, or... tdd# 1-800-345-2550 it's beach homes or it's starting a vineyard.
tdd# 1-800-345-2550 come on! tdd# 1-800-345-2550 just help me figure it out in a practical, tdd# 1-800-345-2550 let's-make-this-happen kind of way. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 a vineyard? give me a break. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 [ male announcer ] looking for real-life answers tdd# 1-800-345-2550 to your retirement questions? tdd# 1-800-345-2550 get real. get started. talk to chuck. tdd# 1-800-345-2550
that is not a story about that event. we wanted to do one thing that was a break, a moment of totally disconnected from the big story, sort of moment of wonder. the story we've got coming up it at the end of the show is the -- my favorite story i've worked on for this show in months. i hope you will stay tuned for it. the smell of home made chili whatever scents fill your household, purina tidy cats scoop helps neutralize odors in multiple cat homes... keeping your house smelling like it should. purina tidy cats scoop. keep your home smelling like home.
to save me a boatload of money on my mortgage, that would be awesome! sure. like that will happen. don't just think about it. spend 10 minutes at lending tree and save up to $272 a month. republican congressman trent franks of arizona made one specific comment yesterday in response to the tucson tragedy that struck me not only as very classy but reflected a lot of honorable restraint and i thought made a lot of sense. >> at this point, i have
criticized others for making a political nexus or a platform of political discussion out of this tragedy. and so i'm going to avoid doing that myself. >> that was mr. frank's response to a question about whether he would support a specific gun control measure that's been discussed in congress recently. that comment, i will refrain from making a political comment from this tragedy. that i think reflected class from congressman franks. here's something he said right before that. >> you know, i wish there had been one more gun there that day. you know, arizona is one of the most highly armed states in the nation. it is very easy to get guns there. there, in fact, was a man on
scene at the shooting in tucson, a witness to the shooting on saturday, a responsible gun owner, who had his legal weapon loaded and on him at the time of the shooting. he was a guest on ed shultz' show this week. >> as i came out of the door of the walgreens, i saw several individuals wrestling with him. and i came running. i was already at a full sprint. you know, it's no time to think about anything. i saw another individual holding the firearm. i kind of assumed he was the shooter so i grabbed his wrist and told him to drop it and forced him to drop the gun on the ground. when he did it that, everybody said, no, no, it's this guy. >> did you ever think of drawing your firearm or made the determination you didn't have to? >> sir, when i came through the door, i had the hand on the butt of my pistol and had the safety off. i was ready to kill him. but i was very blessed i didn't have to go to that place. luckily, they'd already begun
the solution. all i had to do was help. if they hadn't grabbed him and he was still moving, i would have shot him. i would have shot the man holding the gun. >> i almost shot the man holding the gun. to be clear, to everybody who's reacted to this shooting by saying, they wish there had been something with a gun other than the killer at the gun at the scene. there was someone at the scene with a gun. the person he almost shot was one of the heroes who just disarmed the killer. i understand there are a lot of fantasies about guns and heroism. the fantasy that an armed responsible gun owner was all that was needed to disprove this tragedy, that is not true. when you talk about there being a responsible gun owner, it is not a hypothetical. that did not work out according
to trent franks' fantasy about that. beyond that specific instance though, in the aggregate, it is worth understanding the facts. louie gomerit of texas proposed that members of congress carry guns onto the floor of the house of representatives. unlike e.j. who raised this issue for the senate, i think it's a modest proposal. when gomer, brought this up, he was not kidding. one group said that the elected officials be forced to carry guns. there is a john wayne, jerry bruckheimer fantasy about guns. i understand the fantasy. in 2004, criminology experts looked into right to carry laws
reduced crime in states that have them. their conclusion famously was, they don't know. they were completely unable to come to any statistical conclusion about it at all. a brilliant academic second look at all of the data available on the question suggests that if anything -- if there's anything that can be discerned from the data, maybe right to carry laws produce more aggravated assaults. because people who are armed feel emboldened to punch each other more and threaten to shoot each other. that's the only suggestion evident in the data. it's not proven that more guns equal less crime. more guns do not equal less crime. the statistical evidence doesn't support the fantasy. if you want to look at the blunt numbers, the states that have the highest rates of people being killed are by and large the people that have the highest numbers of guns per capita. louisiana, mississippi, alaska,
alabama and nevada. here are the rates of gun ownership rates. relatively high gun ownership rates. highest gun rate deaths. here are the estates with the lowest gun death rates. hawaii, rhode island, massachusetts, connecticut and new york. here are the gun ownership rates in those states. compare them. compare the list on the left and the list on the right. these are the states with the lowest rates of gun death. those are their comparatively rates of gun ownership. again, i understand the fantasy. everybody wants to believe that superheroes with super fire power can stop bad things from happening. it's a beautiful fantasy. the facts do not support the assertion that more guns equal less crime or a law-abiding citizen with a gun, made all the difference in tucson. regardless of your preliminary views about guns, there are facts.
now for some uncynical good gun news. and a totally not sarcastic round of applause for a conservative politician confronted with a disturbing news story. the free weekly in columbia, south carolina, the free times, this week that newspaper reported that a south carolina gun company started marketing a part for an ar-15 assault rifle that was stamped with the words "you lie."
they did that in honor of south carolina congressman joe wilson who famously screamed "you lie" at the president during the president's 2009 speech in front of a joint session of congress. in the wake of congresswoman giffords' shooting this weekend and in the wake of the reporting of the "you lie" thing existed, not only did the company that was making it, stop selling their gun part, but congressman joe wilson himself, who had had nothing to do with what this company had done, congressman wilson wrote to the company and said he recently learned about this thing they were doing. he thanked the company for taking the gun part off the market. as i said, not sarcastically, not tongue in cheek, is that correct free, congressman joe wilson doing a decent thing for the country this week in what have been very difficult times. ♪
children and wounded 30 others. he used a chinese-made assault weapon. that year president george h.w. bush signed a temporary ban on assault weapons from abroad. within the next few years, there were three more horrific shooting sprees. the first in killeen, texas at a luby's diner killing 23 people. at the university of iowa, a disgruntled graduate student shot ask killed four faculty members and a student. at a san francisco law firm, a man walked out of the elevator and started shooting. he ultimately killed eight people before killing himself. after those three highly publicized gun massacres, congress responded by passing the assault weapons bill. there was the brady act, signed after james brady was shot in 1981. after the virginia tech
massacre, congress passed the national instant criminal background act, to tighten up the connection between mental health records and gun background checks. the washington post put some of these on a time line today. the gun violence followed by the policy change it inspired. we've done policy-making a lot. in the wake of horrible gun crimes, we often pass new gun-related policies. under republican presidents and democratic presidents, we pass new gun laws when shootings shock the nation. in tucson on saturday, the killer was able to shoot 31 times before reloading. the law that banned that assault weapons ban expired two years ago.
we have the author of a new assault weapons ban fix. congresswoman, thank you for joining us. >> thank you for having me. >> the main principal of your legislation would be to have the extended magazine ban that we used to have, to regain that, is that right? >> absolute. we have found that large capacity clips, since the ban expired, there are more of them out there and much easier to get. unfortunately, with what happened in arizona, this is a bill i've been reintroducing every year since the assault weapons ban. because i know something like this was going to happen again. >> the original law that expired said that you could not sell new extended clips. but as far as i understood it, you could trade or sell old
ones. your bill will not allow you to you trade or sell old ones? >> if you own them, it's yours. you cannot trade or sell them. mainly because they would go into a gun show. that's where they would all be traded and basically go on to the black market. they would go to gangs. they would go -- to be very honest with you, the drug cartels from mexico. >> in terms of the political realities of this bill, the prospect of it passing, is that specific aspect part of the grounds on which it is objected to by the gun rights lobby? >> no. they don't like the whole bill. there's nothing in the bill they like. if there was something in there we could work with, i'd probably work with them. i did that with the background check after virginia tech. because i have always believed if i can compromise and get something that will still save lives, it's worth that little
bit of compromise to get it through. with that being said, they won't compromise on anything this time. >> what's your plan to build support for the bill? >> i go member to member, talking to everybody. i plan on talking to the president and reaching out to everyone i can and talk to speaker boehner, sit down with him and say why this is good for the whole country. this will save lives. my background's a nurse. i spent all my life trying to save lives. that's what i'm doing in congress. that's what i've been doing for the last 16 years. >> this is something that has touched you personally in terms of your family history, a violent death in your family caused by gun violence. is that something that allows you to talk to people about this who wouldn't otherwise talk to you about it, at least because of their respect for you because of your experience and what you went through? >> no. everybody in congress certainly knows my story. they know i came to congress to reduce gun violence in this country and they respect me for that. they might not agree with me but
they do respect me. they know i'm not a politician trying to get something through this is personal to me. large capacity clips were used on the long island railroad, killed six people, wounded 20. we've seen more shootings like that, as you've shown on the tv. this is personal. i happen to believe lives could have been saved on the long island railroad. collin ferguson had four clips with 15 bullets each. most of those bullets reached somebody. if he only had had ten bullets and one in the chamber, lives on the other end of the train would have been saved. same as, unfortunately, for gabby. probably this law would not have helped her. but it would have certainly saved lives and injuries down as he went forward.
>> one of the things that -- we've been looking intensely as a staff, researching what's been possible in the past around gun control. i am frustrated by the common wisdom that nothing is possible on gun control. whether it's immediate aftermath or a long time down the road like the brady bill, people working for a long time. there has been change in the past. i don't believe it's impossible to get it now. when republicans in the past have supported common sense -- what i would consider to be common sense gun control measures, things like the assault weapons ban. people like george bush were in support of that. do any of those republicans who have had mainstream, past consensus positions on common sense gun control, have any emerged to persuade other republicans on the issue? >> not that i know of at this particular point. you know what? you have to understand the legislative process. this is the beginning. introducing the bill. then i work the bill. we have to work to get it through a committee and to get
it on to the floor. it's not something that is easy on any bill, any bill. to be very honest with you, the consensus seems to be growing. people are coming up to me and are saying, i'm a gun owner. i'm a sportsman. i like to do target shooting. you're right on this though. i'm willing to make that sacrifice. i think the consensus is growing. people have to understand that this is something that's added to a gun. i'm not taking your gun away. and i think they're starting to see that now. mainly because so many shows like yours and others are actually talking about what the bill actually does. they're understanding on the opposite side where the nra is saying, she's taking our gun away again. i'm not doing that. >> the more you understand about the facts, the more you realize what a narrowly targeted provision. representative carolyn mccarthy of new york, sponsor of what i
think of as the gun fix, something that would reinstate the extended clip ban that expired in 2004. thank you for joining us tonight. i know this has been an exhausting week for you. thank you. >> thank you for having me. i appreciate it. >> okay. you remember tom delay, right? the hammer. the disgraced former house marnts leader who got sentenced to time in the big house for money laundering. the one and only tom delay. he is free on bail pending appeal. it is important for me to tell you he will be joining lawrence o'donnell on "the last word" after we're done. that's a big deal. this is election eve in america. it is not a typo in my teleprompter. tomorrow is the every other year election, which last time around gave us rnc chairman michael steele. pleas stay with us. i was diagnosed with copd. i could not take a deep breath i noticed i was having trouble. climbing the stairs, working in the garden, painting. my doctor suggested spiriva right then. announcer: spiriva is the only once-daily inhaled maintenance treatment
for copd, which includes chronic bronchitis and emphysema. i love what it does. it opens up the airways. announcer: spiriva does not replace fast-acting inhalers for sudden symptoms. stop taking spiriva and call your doctor right away if your breathing suddenly worsens, your throat or tongue swells, you get hives, have vision changes or eye pain, or have problems passing urine. tell your doctor if you have glaucoma, problems passing urine, or an enlarged prostate, as these may worsen with spiriva. also, discuss the medicines you take, even eye drops. side effects include dry mouth, constipation, and trouble passing urine. it makes me breathe easier. i can't do everything i used to do. but there's a lot i can do that i was struggling with. announcer: ask your doctor if once-daily spiriva is right for you. so why does this one cost so much less on hotwire.com? when hotels have unsold rooms they use hotwire hot rates to fill them, so you get ridiculously low prices, backed by our low price guarantee. like four stars in san francisco, orbitz price $174.
hotwire hot rate just $95. the same great room, just less than other travel sites. hotwire.com. four-star hotels. two-star prices. ♪ h-o-t-w-i-r-e ♪ hotwire.com save big on car rentals too. from $13.95 a day. ♪ 100 ways to enjoy pringles. ♪ ♪ and they're the same price as the leading bag chips. 100 crisps... 100 ways. ♪ everything pops with pringles. do you read your horoscope every day? my mom reads it into my voice mail when i've had a particularly good day in the
stars aires. your astrological sign is being changed too. all of ours are. for a reason that makes sense. it is upsetting and discombobulating. i'm worried it's going to change my relationship with my mother. but the weirdest thing is it makes sense. host: could switching to geico really save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance? host: was abe lincoln honest? mary todd: does this dress make my backside look big? abe: perhaps a... vo: geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.
the party's next chairman. michael steele is running for re-election against four challengers. what does it take this year to become rnc chairman? last week, the candidates for that job gathered for a debate. like any sort of fair to middling debate it included a lightning round. where you're supposed to respond quickly to something that's supposed to reveal something important about you. where do you get your news? and who besides ronald reagan is your hero? also, there was this one. >> how many guns do you own? >> none. >> none. >> five. >> well, i may surprise y'all. we just got a new gun safe for christmas. i think there are about 16 in there. everything from pistols and a glock to shotguns, rifles and my son at west point has an assault rifle i'm sad to report too.
there you go. >> i'm very inadequate at four. >> that lightning round was last week. before the events this weekend, of course, in tucson. the vote for rnc chairman is tomorrow. we've got one of my favorite ever republican guests lined up tomorrow to help us analyze the race and the results. we do hope you will join us for that coverage. back in the 80's, it was really tough for me and my family. i was living on welfare and supporting a family of four. after i got the job at walmart, things started changing immediately. then i wrote a letter to the food stamp office. "thank you very much, i don't need your help any more." you know now, i can actually say i bought my home. i knew that the more i dedicated... the harder i worked, the more it was going to benefit my family. this my son, mario and he now works at walmart. i believe mario is following in my footsteps. my name is noemi, and i work at walmart.
♪ guarantee me the best deal on my refinance loan, or pay me $1,000? that would be nice, not getting swindled. um...where are we? don't just think about it. put lendingtree to the test. get the best deal, or $1,000. and six slices of kraft 2% milk natural cheese for a dollar or less equals 22 grams of delicious whole grain that are good for you
esurance customers love this app. yeah, daily photo updates sent to your phone so you can follow your car repair while it's in the shop. that's what the esurance tech team does. we innovate. what else is on here? well that's um, uh... ooooh, frank. ...daddy gets his dance on. nice knee caps bro. [ female announcer ] repairview, at no extra cost. see for yourself at esurance. technology when you want it. people when you don't. this is something not about the tragedy in tucson. it is not about guns, violence, politics, anybody that's famous. it's about something completely different, amazing and true. i know this is a bit of a break of the hard news the last few
days but that's how we intend it, as break. this is earth, planet earth. our little home that is constantly in motion, spinning and orbiting and tilting in the great big cosmos with other planets and our sun and other galaxies with their stars and asteroids and universes filled with those fabulous things. but we have our little earth. it comes wrapped in a giant magnetic field. which is awesome. a magnetic field with a north and south so that when you're a kid, you can chase those little magnets around, right? north and south attract. north and north push each other away. because we are humans and we like to make order of things, we tend to think of our magnetic field like this, with magnetic north being where it ought to be, the north pole and magnetic south being at the south pole. 50/50, symmetrical. you can count on it, rock solid just like our earth.
but that is not really how it works. because our earth is not really rock solid. not really. if you look deep inside the planet, you see the part that is solid, the inner core. it's very small in relative terms and super, super, super hot. the outer core wrapped around it is mainly made of molten iron. liquid iron bubbly and sloshing about why we're way up on the earth's surface wondering what happened to the car keys. earth's outer core of iron is so fantastically in motion that it's even got whirlpools in it caused by the constant rotation of the earth. and laced through those whirlpools of molten iron, we seem to have these circulating electric currents, okay? so, we've got electricity, electric currents, we've got electricity and we've got metal. what happens when you combine electricity and metal? if you remember what happened in science class when you ran electricity through a hunk of metal.
what you got and what you get is a magnetic field. with the right equipment you can capture images of it and you can watch them all day, like we did today. the earth, comes wrapped in a magnetic field, like that. vaguely like that. here's the mind-blowing, awesome times 10, 1300 things about this. the giant magnetic filled, the one we live inside, is changing, changing all the time. check out this practical consequence of that. this is tampa international airport. today before dawn, at tampa international airport they reopened one of the busiest runways. they have been closing runways to adjust the signs, tell pilots zooming in at hundreds of miles an hour exactly where to land. why do they have to adjust the signs? well, it turns out the runways are numbered according to the points on a compass.
a compass depends on magnetic fields to work. that's how a compass needle knows where to point. that's how a compass needle knows how to point. it's pointing toward magnetic north. the problem with the runway is that magnetic north moves. it moves about 40 miles a year. 40 miles. when i first heard the news about that causing the tampa airport to have to move its runway signage around, my response was, basically this cannot be true. it is true. they have to be adjusted because they're based on the point on a compass and they're moving because north is moving, because our magnetic field is moving and that moves where north is. it moves earth's magnetic field 40 miles a year north. amazing. yet more amazing news about the weakliness and wobbliness of our earth. did you see this today?
quote, earth rotation changes zodiac signs. astronomers from the minnesota planetarium society found because of the moon's gravitational pull on the earth the alignment of the stars was pushed about a month. the moon is our moon, right? it rotates around us. it is a slave to our far superior gravity. but the moon also has its own gravity. also exerts its own little moonish gravitational pull on big old us. and that gravitational pull of our own moon on us means that we've tilted a little bit. we've tilted a little differently in relation to the sun than we used to be. we're tilted in relation to the sun than we were when that position, when our position relative to the sun, was used thousands of years ago to assign the zodiac signs. we have been nudged by our moon. and over time, that nudge means that instead of us and the sun and 12 zodiac signs dividing the calendar, it is us and the sun and 13 zodiac signs. and it also means that you are not the astrological sign you thought you were.
right between november 29th and december 17th there is a new humans born under the sign include, jane austen, ted nugent, emily dickinson, francisco, and julia who works on our cold, who has a cold. even if you are not ophiuchus, that's not your sign, you're still not what you thought you were. these are the new dates for all the signs. if you got moved over, i feel your pain. my whole life i have been an aries, now they tell me i'm a pisces. despite not believing in astrology, i here by insist on remaining an aries. never mind the minnesota planetarium sign, i am not changing the ram for tiny pair of fish. i'm not doing it.