Editor's Note: Tuesday's American Morning audience reacted strongly to Carol Costello's exploration of the gun control debate. Many angry gun owners expressed opinion on why they support the right to bear arms. The majority viewed ownership as a “constitutional right,” for protection and enjoyment.
Why do you think some gun owners are angry? Where do you stand on this issue?
Program Note: Watch the full interview with Harrison Ford on CNN's "Your $$$$$," Saturday at 1 p.m. and Sunday at 3 p.m ET.
He didn't bring a bullwhip or a fedora, but Harrison Ford brought his star power to a cause close to his heart: climate change.
[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/09/22/ford.romans.art.jpg caption="Actor and activist Harrison Ford speaks with Christine Romans about climate change."]
Ford joined the president of Guyana and executives of Starbucks, SC Johnson, Wal-Mart, Harrah's, Wrigley, Conservation International and others to launch Team Earth, a "global sustainability movement."
Think of it as the companies, environmentalists and politicians together trying to outrun the massive rolling boulder that is climate change.
"You have to create a movement," Ford told me, after a Team Earth press conference in Manhattan. "Like the civil rights movement, like the anti-war movement, like the youth movement of the 60's. If we can come together as an efficient mass, the issues will be addressed."
Ford is particularly concerned about deforestation and notes that more than 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions are because of destruction of the rainforests.
Ford spoke on the eve of a climate change summit at the United Nations, where the presidents of the two largest greenhouse gas emitters – the U.S. and China – will address the world on the issue. In Pittsburgh later this week, leaders will negotiate a framework for addressing climate change ahead of a critical summit in Copenhagen in December.
It's a lot of politics and process and, well, talking. Environmentalists like Ford are trying to seize on the momentum heading to Copenhagen.
A couple's greatest joy has become, in some ways, their worst nightmare. Carolyn and Sean Savage wanted to have another child and they were having trouble, so they turned to in vitro fertilization. Then they learned the horrifying news that doctors had implanted Carolyn with another couple's embryo.
Despite a history of difficult pregnancy, Carolyn and Sean made the decision to carry the child to term and then to give that baby to its biological parents. But they also wanted to tell their story as a possible warning to other couples.
Carolyn and Sean spoke to Kiran Chetry on CNN’s “American Morning” Tuesday. Below is an edited transcript of the interview.
Kiran Chetry: Carolyn, you're 35 weeks pregnant right now. I understand you actually went to the hospital last night.
Carolyn Savage: Yeah, we just had a little false alarm last night. Being 35 weeks pregnant for me is nothing short of miraculous because I delivered my third child at 32 weeks, my second child at 30 weeks. And so it's been 15 years since I've been this pregnant. I just didn't quite know what was going on last night. So we just went in for safety purposes. And everything's fine. So hopefully we'll be able to squeeze a little more time out of this.
Chetry: Everything's going fine physically, thank goodness. Emotionally, it must be such a difficult time for both of you as you're trying to figure out what to do. Take us back to the beginning. You decided you needed to get in vitro fertilization to be able to become pregnant with your fourth child. When did you realize that a terrible mistake had been made and another couple's embryo had been implanted?
Sean Savage: I received a call, actually, at my desk in my office on my cell phone sharing with us that we were pregnant, but at the same time, that they had transferred another couple's embryos to Carolyn. So the news came simultaneously. And it was absolutely a shock.
Chetry: Carolyn, how did you react when you heard it?
Carolyn: Well, I was at home. The news went to Sean in error. They thought they were calling me and they called his cell phone by mistake. Sean came home and told me right away. It was just a very shocking moment. I couldn't even comprehend what he was saying. I know I was kind of yelling at him, asking him if he was joking. Clearly his physical demeanor indicated that there was no joke about the news he was delivering to me.
[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/POLITICS/08/18/obama.protest.rifle/art.obama.gun.pool.jpg caption="A man is shown legally carrying a rifle at a protest against President Obama in Phoenix, Arizona in August."]
December 15, 1791 – On that day the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified, sowing the seeds for an ongoing and still raging debate about the right to be free to bear arms vs. the right to be free of violence.
Here’s the exact wording:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
We went to western Pennsylvania, where hunting is popular, and to Baltimore, Maryland, where it isn’t, to understand better the cultural gap that divides the two sides.
Baltimore, Maryland – So far this year more than 300 people have been shot. Just last week six people died from gunfire. Baltimore is one of more than 450 small and large cities that have joined New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg in an effort to keep guns away from criminals.
Baltimore also has instituted “Safe Streets,” a program that aims to reduce shootings by putting community members onto the streets at night to mediate disputes that could lead to violence.
Dante Barksdale is one of those community members. An ex-con, Barksdale says “Safe Streets” gets at the heart of gun violence. “I don’t know about people loving guns,” he said, “but I know about people using guns to protect themselves or protect their image. … And this is why usually people use guns to resolve conflict. It’s because they feel like, you know, someone is stepping on their macho image [but] … being macho, being the biggest man with the biggest gun, the man who has all these people fearing him, this is not being a man. This is ignorance.”
(CNN) - While some criticism targeting President Obama is racially motivated, the fight over health care isn't, former President Bill Clinton told CNN Monday.
[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/POLITICS/09/21/bill.clinton.larry.king/art.clinton.lkl.cnn.jpg caption="Former President Bill Clinton says Democrats need to win the health care debate "on the merits.""]
"I believe that some of the right-wing extremists which oppose President Obama are also racially prejudiced and would prefer not to have an African-American president," Clinton told CNN's Larry King in a wide-ranging interview aired Monday evening. "But I don't believe that all the people who oppose him on health care - and all the conservatives - are racists. And I believe if he were white, every single person who opposes him now, would be opposing him then."
Clinton discussed a variety of issues facing the Obama administration - from health care to the war in Afghanistan - on the eve of the fifth annual meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative.
Regarding race, the former president was referring to an outburst from Rep. Joe Wilson, a South Carolina Republican, who shouted, "You lie," at Obama during the president's joint address to Congress, and also former President Jimmy Carter's assessment that racism is an obstacle for the current president.
"While I have devoted my life to getting rid of racism, I think this [health care] is a fight that my president and our party - this is one we need to win on the merits," Clinton said.