Return to Transcripts main page
What`s Truth Behind Mark Foley Scandal?; Jerry Falwell Weighs in on Controversial Op-Ed
Aired October 5, 2006 - 19:00:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
GLENN BECK, HOST: Coming up, I`m going to rock your world with my new feelings about Mark Foley. Plus, I`ll see if Jerry Falwell thinks Islam is evil. And we`ll go back to school to examine the scourge of our college campuses, unchecked liberalism. Coming up next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: Tonight`s episode of GLENN BECK is brought to you by the House Ethics Committee. We know ethics, kind of. You know, unless it`s an election year and we think nobody`s looking. Then we might try something. Totally not a big deal. But we`ll be tough on this Mark Foley guy, unless you all get distracted by "Dancing with the Stars". Then we`ll back off, maybe.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: All right. Before we get into things tonight, let me make one thing perfectly clear. I think Mark Foley is a first rate scumbag. I am glad that he is no longer a congressman, and if it does turn out that he did break the law, I hope the guy goes to prison.
But here`s the point tonight. We in the news need to make sure that we get the whole story. We get it right, not just get it first.
We don`t know nearly enough about what really happened in the Mark Foley case to lock him up or point the finger at others, at least not yet. Yes, Mark Foley is a slimy guy, man. He creeps me out. He doesn`t have the moral character that I happen to want in an American congressman. But that`s all really we know for sure, isn`t it?
And if we start calling for resignations, you know, for every slimy congressman, I suspect the herd is going to get awfully thin, not that that`s necessarily a bad thing.
Take a look at this clip from my radio show earlier today. I had a caller who blogs for PassionateAmerica.blogspot.com, or something or other. He`s a fan of the show, and he called me up. He brought me an exclusive twist on this Foley case, one that focuses us on reexamining everything we think we know about this scandal.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They change their story almost every day and they were trying to link the e-mails to instant messages, and everybody was 16. And then when they said -- we had already searched for about two days and found out what his birth date was. And then they started saying that, you know, he was underage and all this. And we tracked it down and we knew that he was not underage.
BECK: Did this happen while he was a page? Do we know? Bill, do you know?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He had a speech or whatever -- he`s met -- he`s met Foley before, you know, when he was a page. And I think that`s when they started -- you know, they said hi or whatever. But then he was back in his home state when most of the instant messaging was happening.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: OK. As it turns out, it is entirely possible that the young man Mark Foley was chatting with was 18 years old, not 16. He also not -- might not have been a congressional page at the time of the liaison. Wouldn`t that really change absolutely everything in this story?
Remember, I am not defending Mark Foley. There`s no question the guy is sleazy, but sleazy isn`t a crime, especially in Washington, D.C.
Does anybody remember a story a few years ago? What was that guy`s name? Oh, Bill Clinton, yes. I seem to remember President Clinton not sending naughty instant messages, but actually getting oral sex in the Oval Office. He didn`t resign. He didn`t play the alcoholic card, check himself into rehab. He finished out his term and went on with his life.
And I remember all of the Democrats at the time springing up to his defense, saying, "Hey, this is a private matter. It`s his private life. Whatever happened between him and that woman, they`re consenting adults."
I`m not saying that it is, but that could very well be the case here with Mark Foley. What did happen with Bill Clinton mattered to me at the time, and whatever happened with Foley now matters to me now.
Sadly, it seems that politics, too often, prevent the rules from applying equally to everybody. What about the congressional page scandal of 1983? Who could forget it, right? Representatives Gerry Studds and Dan Crane. Studds was gay. Crane was straight. Both confessed to having sex with underage pages, and neither of them resigned. The only sentence Gerry Studds served was 13 more years in Congress.
In a very real sense, Mark Foley is suffering more from the timing of his alleged offense than anything else. Again, I`m glad he`s out of office. I`m just not sure he belongs behind bars. At least at this point.
So tonight, here`s what I know. I believe we can take the moral high ground. We can and should expect more from our leaders. And if they get caught doing something inappropriate, let alone illegal, we need to take swift and decisive action and remove them from office and hold them accountable. What I don`t know is when we`ll stop abandoning logic in favor of party politics.
I`m a dad first, an American second, and I will forever value decency over being a Democrat or a Republican. I don`t care about your political affiliation. Laws are only good if they apply the same to everybody. Justice without consistency is bias. I believe that we`re better than that.
Joining me now is Jonathan Turney. He is a professor of law at George Washington University. Professor, based on what we know now, how deep is Foley in it?
JONATHAN TURNEY, PROFESSOR OF LAW, GEORGE UNIVERSITY: Well, we`re still learning a lot day by day. The problem for Congressman -- or ex- Congressman Foley is that there`s a host of new laws, some of which he helped write, 40 states and the federal government have what are called anti-luring and anti-enticement statutes, that if you entice or you lure a minor over the Internet, there are hefty criminal penalties.
States like Florida and Louisiana have other laws, as well. Now, there are laws involving transmitting obscene material, photos and that type of thing.
And then, finally, there are laws about the possession of child pornography. Part of the problem with these types of investigations for the defendants is that you often find things that were not the original target of the investigation.
TURNEY: So, for example, you know, this is a man who helped write these laws. So he -- you can expect that he knew where some of these tripwires were. But it`s not uncommon to find that people with dark predilections often have dark material on their at-home computers or at home in a print sense.
BECK: Right. But let`s go back to -- we`ll find what we find. And I agree with you. You don`t -- usually you don`t have one thing going wrong in your life and then, you know, everything else is completely clean, but this guy is -- it was really, really smart. As you pointed out, he helped draft the law. Didn`t he do the smartest thing he could by resigning?
TURNEY: Oh, yes.
BECK: I mean, that was brilliant strategy, wasn`t it?
TURNEY: It was very, very smart. And that`s one of the reason many of us who were former pages is upset with the House of Representatives. Because there is a window of opportunity in dealing with someone who`s a predator or a pedophile. If they had aggressively pursued early indications, then they could have put a trap in place.
First of all, the House of Representatives could have cooperated. They could have had a detective on the other end of one of these lines, and they could have seen if Congressman Foley was trying to arrange some type of meeting. That`s often the key in these criminal cases. Once the subject knows that they are a target, then obviously you don`t get much of anything at that point.
BECK: But wait. Did they have enough? I mean, I read the e-mails. The e-mails just seemed a little slimy. Is that enough to actually eavesdrop on his IMs and everything else?
TURNEY: I`ll tell you what concerns a lot of us, and that is, you know, from what we understand, there was an informal treatment of this problem, that someone went to him and said, you know, "What is it with these e-mails?" And he said they were just a few.
And he said, "All right."
"Don`t send anymore. Don`t contact them anymore, and they were assured that it was just mentoring."
Well, obviously, someone should have thought, what if he is a pedophile or a predatorial member? What else would he say?
BECK: Wait a minute. Doesn`t this get right into what everybody in Congress is all upset about with the Patriot Act? Everybody is saying, well, wait a minute. You don`t really have any evidence. You`re saying -- the guy could have just been kind of a weird, old-fashioned Jimmy Stewart mentor to these kids.
TURNEY: Well, apparently, he was not. And the key is not...
BECK: But you didn`t know that when you had the e-mails. What I`m asking is, how do you project -- legally, how do you project and say, wait a minute. There could be more here. Was there any indication other than, that doesn`t feel right?
TURNEY: You know, when you have a man of this age contacting young men, whether they`re 16, 17 or 18, a light goes off. And it doesn`t mean that they`re guilty. It doesn`t mean that you start rummaging through their mail. What you do is that you have a basis for further investigation. No further investigation apparently was made. It was just going to him and asking him.
BECK: Boy, you know, I`ve got to tell you, we`re out of time. I would love to have more time with you, because I think this is exactly what people in Congress are complaining about.
If you said that, made that very case to -- to the Muslim community, a lot in the Muslim community would say, "Whoa, whoa, whoa. Wait a minute. You`ve got nothing here. You just have a gut feeling."
We`ll have you back. Jonathan, thank you very much.
TURNEY: It`s my pleasure.
BECK: Now, how the story is going to play out. I mean, really, anybody`s guess. One thing I do know, as a spokesperson -- go with me on this for a second. As a spokesperson, I think Mark Foley might actually have a future. No, really.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: And now, an ironic public service announcement from Mark Foley.
MARK FOLEY (R), FORMER FLORIDA REPRESENTATIVE: Talk to your kids about safer Internet usage.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: Coming up, going to talk to Reverend Jerry Falwell about how to get out of the spiral of religious hatred we seem to be in right now.
And a parent complains about a classroom of kids and how they were exposed to nudity on the trip to a museum. The art teacher has been fired.
Also, the president makes a speech. Headline in all the papers, Republicans are the only party that can keep you safe. My surprising take on that.
BECK: A high school teacher in France, Robert Redeker, recently wrote an op-ed piece in which he called the Korean a "book of extraordinary violence" and the Prophet Mohammed a "pitiless warlord."
Since then, Redeker has received countless death threats and has photos of his home and family published on web sites. He has been forced to go into hiding. He actually has to move his family every two days.
Whether or not you agree with him, Redeker was simply exercising freedom of speech. The Reverend Jerry Falwell, somebody who is familiar with controversy and free speech, he joins us now.
Doctor, Redeker`s article says that Jesus is a master of love, Mohammed is a master of hate. Do you -- do you agree with him?
REV. JERRY FALWELL, LIBERTY UNIVERSITY: I wouldn`t go there. I would simply say that everyone should be entitled to their own opinion. And for this school teacher, like Salman Rushdie in years past, hiding for his or her life, with family and all, just because someone says, "If you cal, me violent I`ll kill you," it is ridiculous.
And you know, it just -- I don`t indict all of Islam for what a few crazies do. Al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein. We have some bad guys who fly in the name of Christian, and all religious and faiths do.
FALWELL: But I can say that we cannot succumb to this kind of fear and intimidation. I`ve had a couple of fatwas put on my life, that is contracts by these people because I say what I believe also.
BECK: Right. Reverend, I -- you know, one of the -- I get phone calls all the time, whenever I talk about Islam. And I`ve really tried to understand it. And I have, I think, come to an understanding that I don`t believe that Islam is evil.
Like you said, I really do believe there are really evil people in it and really good people in it. It just depends on how you use it, just like the people in the `God hates fags" church, which I think those people are out of their mind nuts and evil.
BECK: But every time I say that, people say, "Come on, Glenn, you just don`t know. Islam is evil." And people really want to hear that. Do -- I don`t know if you can even answer this. If you believed it, would you say it?
FALWELL: Well, yes, I would. I think everybody knows that I say exactly what I believe. I`m the guy who said that -- revealed our best opponent in `08.
And I do believe -- I happen to have a lot of dear friends, Muslim friends, life-long friends, who hate violence, hate what al Qaeda is doing as much as you and I do.
FALWELL: So, it is a bad thing to generalize...
FALWELL: ... and indict 1.3 billion Muslims for what a very large contingency inside Islam is doing.
Now, what really clouds the issue is there are so many thousands caught up in the fervor of hatred in the Middle East towards the state of Israel. And I speak of Hamas, and Hezbollah, and of the Palestinians, et cetera. And then I look at the president of Iran and his threats, and it`s almost universal.
The hatred for Israel, going back to the two boys, Ishmael and Isaac, is so intense that we get the impression that all Islamic people are barbarians. That is not true. There are plenty of barbarians in the movement.
BECK: Right. And you bring up President Tom, as I like to call him, Ahmadinejad. He is -- he`s a spooky dude, and al-Sadr this week said that, you know, we were only fighting in Iraq because we`re trying to stop the Mahdi from coming, the messiah from coming. Do you believe, as a Christian leader, do you believe that we are in the end days?
FALWELL: Well, almost all evangelicals believe that the coming of the lord could be imminent. But no one who knows the scripture says...
BECK: Yes, I know that.
FALWELL: ... dates and sets times.
BECK: I know that, but what does your gut tell you? Are you storing stuff in your basement?
FALWELL: No, I don`t store anything. If the lord comes, I`ll be raptured up instantly, and I won`t need a thing.
FALWELL: But I`m supposed to live every moment as though I would meet Christ today, but I`m supposed to work and plan with the next generation in mind, and that kind of balance keeps one from being a nut case.
And the idea of Armageddon, Armageddon for the Christian, the dispensation of scripture (ph), is something that will happen after the lord has come and at the end of a tribulation period. The church will not even be here. And for what the Muslim Armageddon is a blood bath, a jihad, war of all wars to end all wars. A total different concept.
BECK: Let me change gears here. You mentioned Hillary Clinton. I want to make sure I get to another person first. Mitt Romney. Could you vote for a Mormon?
FALWELL: Of course. I could vote for any man or woman whose views and values more closely approximate my Christian views and values than the opponent of that person would be. I know Mitt Romney. He`s a friend of mine.
BECK: I believe that -- I think it was. I hate to say this without having this in front of me. But I believe it was the head of the Southern Baptist Convention that just said, just recently, this is going to be the biggest decision that Southern Baptists have to make, whether or not you vote for somebody you know you disagree with or to vote for a Mormon.
FALWELL: Well, I`m not sure who said that, but I do know this. We`re going to have two candidates. Third party never works in America. We`re going to have somebody opposing Hillary Clinton, who I believe will be the candidate for the Democrats.
And that person, hopefully, will be pro-life, will be pro-family and strong on military defense and anti-terrorism and willing to face frontally, militarily any force that attempts to take away our freedoms. Now, that is not Hillary. And that -- there`s some Republicans who don`t have that kind of stance.
FALWELL: And so I`ll be voting. I will be asked -- I`m not trying to get a Sunday school teacher in the White House. We`ve got 1,000 of them here at my Thomas Rose Church. Not looking for a Sunday school -- I`m looking for a good moral, intelligent leader who is right on the issues that count.
BECK: I`ve got to tell you, Reverend, good to talk to you, sir. I think we`re headed in the same direction. I want somebody with a spine, as well. I don`t care if it`s a Republican, Democrat or an Internet. I want an American first.
FALWELL: Thank you, Glenn.
BECK: Thank you, sir. Appreciate it.
BECK: Every day, you can hear my radio program on stations all across this country, including 1170 KFAQ in Tulsa, Oklahoma. And by the way, if you can`t find an affiliate in your area, you can sign up and listen online at my web site, at GlennBeck.com.
Now let`s go to Dave Glover. He`s on our affiliate in St. Louis, 97.1 FM, KFTK.
Dave, have you followed this story out of Texas with the teacher and the art museum?
DAVE GLOVER, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: I have followed this story. A 28- year veteran art teacher takes her fifth grade class to the art museum, fine art museum. This isn`t some sort of alternative museum. It is the art museum.
And one of the students complains to their parents that they were offended by a nude statue. Next thing you know, she is suspended without pay, and they`re trying to replace her.
BECK: What am I missing on this story?
GLOVER: Nothing. You`re not missing anything. It`s a bunch of freaks is what it is. You know, there`s -- maybe there`s a fine line between art and pornography, but this isn`t close. They`re not passing out "Barely Legal" here.
GLOVER: This is art.
BECK: I challenge you to go to an art museum and not see naked -- you`re lucky that the people who are looking at the art aren`t all naked. Everybody is naked in an art museum.
GLOVER: I challenge you to go to Wal-mart and not see someone with their top off. So yes. I mean...
BECK: All right. That`s disturbing.
GLOVER: You know, here`s one thing.
BECK: What kind of Wal-Marts does he go to?
GLOVER: Send a permission slip. And if there`s some mouth breathing knuckle dragger who doesn`t want their children to go see art, then keep them home and they can keep video games and watch...
BECK: My understanding is that there were permission slips on this.
GLOVER: Who doesn`t know? They said it took them by surprise. "Oh, my God, we didn`t know there`d be any sort of nudity at the art museum." I think this says a lot more about that parent than it does the process.
BECK: Well, you know, I was going to say Jethro wouldn`t know, but seeing that Jethro, I hear, is a fan of this program, I`m not going to insult Jethro. And I believe in the "Beverly Hillbillies" there were naked statues by the pool. So, yes, even Jethro would have known about this.
GLOVER: They`re all over this. You betcha.
BECK: Next one, as well, we`re here on kooks. The woman who says that Harry Potter should be taken out of every library and off the shelves of every store.
GLOVER: Yes, in the past five years, it`s also been "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn", "The Diary of Anne Frank", which is another example of it`s...
GLOVER: Oh, yes, absolutely.
BECK: Wait, "The Diary of Anne Frank"?
BECK: That`s salacious.
BECK: What exactly is in "The Diary of Anne Frank"?
GLOVER: Because it took a religious position, and they don`t want that in a public library.
BECK: Wait. What was the religious -- that they were Jewish? Is that the religious...
GLOVER: I guess, or that she was praying to God for deliverance from the Nazis, you know. Who knows?
But yes, this really gets to me, because, look, when I see my first wizard, when I see my first kid that grew up and became a wizard because of Harry Potter, maybe you`ll have...
BECK: Happened to me. Happened to me.
GLOVER: You were a magician.
BECK: I was -- I started out as a magician when I was 8 years old. Next thing I know I`m, you know...
GLOVER: On national television.
BECK: Raining snake blood. And I`m a warlock now.
GLOVER: I wanted to be the Hulk when I was a kid, you know? I had the same measurements.
BECK: Holy cow.
GLOVER: So yes, again, this is one of those that, if your kid grows up to think he`s a wizard, your kid is a freak. And it doesn`t matter whether he`s reading "Harry Potter", or he`s reading "Huck Finn" or the Bible. He`ll end up being a Bible freak.
BECK: the whole world is upside down.
Thank you so much.
GLOVER: See you, man.
BECK: All right. Welcome to "The Real Story." This is where we try to cut through the media spin and figure out why a story is actually important to you.
One of the big headlines today is that President Bush recently said, quote, "Vote Republican for the safety of the United States of America," end quote. Well, I`ve got to tell you. When I read that, even as a conservative, I had to cringe a little bit. I`m like, "Oh, what are you saying there?"
But, as usual, when I found out the real story behind that quote, once again I realized headlines really hardly ever tell you the whole truth.
During this part of the speech, the president was specifically talking about the terrorist surveillance program which came up to a vote in the House recently; 177 Democrats voted against the bill. Bush used that fact to make the case that Democrats simply think differently about how best to protect us. The full quote actually read, "If you want to make sure those on the front line of protecting you have the tools necessary to do so, vote Republican."
Well, that statement to me is true. I mean, that`s an entirely different statement from what`s being reported. He`s talking about the specific use of surveillance, something that most Democrats are clearly against and most Republicans think is imperative. There`s nothing wrong with that.
But, with all that being said, let`s play the game for a second and assume that Bush actually did say that voting Democrat means that we`ll all die immediately. Since I always tell you that this show is about right and wrong, not left and right, let me prove it to you: Making a claim like that is wrong.
We`re Democrats, we`re Republicans, but when it really gets down to it, we`re Americans. The difference is that the face of the Democrats currently, the Al Gores, the Howard Deans, the Michael Moores of the party, are all on the extreme left. And they believe that coming out again anything to do with the war is the best way to get elected.
Now, many of them actually do believe those insane thoughts. But it`s the Democrats with the real power in the party, the Hillary Clintons of the party, that really matter. You haven`t hear Hillary Clinton say these things, like pull our troops out, do you?
I honestly believe -- and maybe it`s just optimism and really wishful thinking -- but I believe that, if the Democrats ever would take over, even if they took the White House eventually, they would go through the process of talking to all the advisers, all of the experts, reading all the confidential briefings, and they would be responsible for us now, and they would reach the same conclusion the Republicans have: The threats against us are real. They are imminent. They need every possible tool in their arsenal so we can defend ourselves.
I believe there are liberal nut jobs in the Democratic Party, just as there are nut job conservatives in the Republican Party. But the core of each party gets their strength from the center.
Next, try to hold your laughter as I read this one. A task force has determined that Harvard University`s curriculum isn`t -- get this -- as relevant to the real world as it should be. No! Yes, yes, apparently so.
The real story is Harvard, along with so many other colleges and universities, isn`t teaching our kids anymore: They`re indoctrinating them. What? What?
Now, I know that conservatives scream about liberal professors. And that`s nothing new. So for once, let me give you some actual stats and evidence to prove just how prevalent this has become. A recent study revealed that 72 percent of college professors label themselves as liberal compared with just 15 percent claiming to be conservative.
And if you look only at the elite schools, the places like Harvard, 87 percent say they`re liberal. Did you hear that, 87 percent? And it`s not like they`re all teaching art history. They`re spread throughout every discipline.
In fact, one of the professors who co-authored this study said there is no field in which there are more conservatives than liberals, more Republicans more Democrats. That is outrageous. I mean, I can already hear the response now: "Oh, just hold on a minute there, Mr. Hatemonger. Their political views don`t matter at all. They just teach the facts!"
Right. Seriously, dude, they teach the facts just like I "report the news." Yes. We all have our own biases. We all see things through our own prisms. That`s it. I`m telling you I`m giving you my opinion. It`s fine if you`re honest about it. But like most people on TV and journalists, they`re like the professors. They`re not honest about it.
A study of students at the top 50 U.S. universities and colleges found that almost half of the students say their professors, quote, "use the classroom to present their personal political views." Wow, half. What a coincidence. That`s almost like the country and how it`s split in terms of politics. Yes, not a coincidence. You don`t think it`s indoctrination if you agree with what you`re hearing.
But the worst part is that 30 percent of the students felt like they actually had to agree with their professor`s views in order to get a good grade. You don`t call that indoctrination? College should be about getting both sides of the argument and making up your own mind, right?
Professors aren`t there to teach us what to think; they`re there to teach us how to think. And it`s about time some of them start remembering that.
Ben Shapiro, he is the author of the new book, "Brainwashed: How Universities Indoctrinate America`s Youth."
Ben, the professors, they don`t believe that their opinion is an opinion. They believe it`s fact, don`t they?
BEN SHAPIRO, AUTHOR, "BRAINWASHED": That`s exactly right. I mean, when you`re talking about a lot of these professors who have been in academia for the last 30 years, they get the Pauline Kael syndrome. Pauline Kael was the movie critic for the "New York Times" for a long time. In 1972, when Nixon won in a landslide, she said, "Well, I don`t know how he won. Everyone I know voted for McGovern."
Well, it`s the same sort of thing in liberal academia. Everyone in liberal academia is liberal. And therefore a lot of the liberal talking points ends up sounding a lot like fact to professors. So once they can`t tell the difference between opinion and fact, then by definition, when a conservative student brings up a conservative opinion, that`s no longer an opinion. That is not fact.
So a lot of the time, you know, what conservatives realize as opinion and liberals think is fact end up hurting conservatives in the classroom.
BECK: OK, I don`t know about anybody else, but you`re pissing me off. You look too young to be this smart. Do you think that professors believe it is their job to bring both sides of a certain point of view to the plate, to the table?
SHAPIRO: Oh, god, no. I mean, if you look at even the American Association of University Professors, the head of that a couple of years ago said that it would be impossible for professors to bring both sides in the classroom. In fact, professors are hired to teach basically what they want to teach. And that`s the problem.
I mean, as you said before, when you`re talking about professors who just get up there and say, "Look, I`m a liberal, and I`m going to bash Bush whenever I get the chance," you know, that`s their issue. And I think that most college students should be smart enough to kind of write that off.
But the problem is that most professors don`t do that. Most professors simply have control over the syllabus, so they decide what goes on and what doesn`t. So, you know, Michael Moore is going to be put on the syllabus as an accurate depiction of capitalism. You know, "Roger and Me" is going to be put out there as though that is telling the truth about corporations. But you`re never going to read anything by Friedrich Hayek.
So that`s where the real indoctrination occurs. And the people that it hurts are actually the liberals and the apathetics. You know, people who are conservative like me, you can get a really good education at a liberal university. You go there, and you listen to all the liberal talking points, and you have to strengthen your own arguments.
If you`re a liberal, then you don`t. You`re hearing all the talking points that you normally hear from Air America. If you`re, you know, an apathetic student, then you`d rather have a beer and go to some sort of drinking party than you would go home and read Robert Nozick. So those are the people who end up with, you know, lifelong impressions that really don`t fade.
BECK: Ben, what are you going to do with this big brain of yours? You`re a freak. How old are you, 12?
SHAPIRO: Twenty two. Twenty two.
BECK: Twenty two years old. What are you going to do for a living?
SHAPIRO: Well, you know, I`m at Harvard Law, so I`m going to go into law for the moment, and maybe politics down the line, trying to, you know, bring some honesty to the issue. But we`ll see.
BECK: Because I have a friend who has his son in Columbia. And he said -- you know, he hasn`t decided yet whether he`s going to open up his mouth and speak out and speak his views or not.
My poor daughter just started college. I told her, "Change your last name. If anybody says, are you" -- "Nope, I don`t know the guy on TV." What should students do if they are sitting there in class, and, you know, they`re hearing a professor, and they`re like, "I don`t agree with anything he says"?
SHAPIRO: Engage the professor. A lot of professors are, you know, open and willing to hear the other side in the classroom. I mean, it shouldn`t sound like every single professor is Stalin and wants to shut down all debate.
But, you know, if you have a professor who is, you know, the kind of person who wants to shut down debate, shut up. Just get a good grade. It`s more important. I mean, I tell conservatives students this all the time. It`s much more important to get a good grade than it is to talk back to the professor, especially because professors have a tremendous amount of authority and legitimacy, just based on the fact that generally, you know, parents are paying $30,000 for students to listen to professors. So students don`t have the authority to challenge professors, generally.
BECK: Ben, even though you piss me off because you`re so smart, best of luck.
SHAPIRO: Thank you so much.
BECK: Talk to you again.
All right. Let`s go to Erica Hill now, "Straight to Hill," the anchor of "PRIME NEWS" on Headline News.
ERICA HILL, CNN HEADLINE NEWS ANCHOR: Hi, Glenn, how are you?
BECK: I`m good. Do you have an update for us on what happened to Lancaster County today?
HILL: Yes, I do, actually. Today in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, funerals for four of the young girls who were killed in the schoolhouse shootings earlier this week, hundreds of people turning from the area`s Amish community to attend those funerals. The funeral for the fifth victim is going to be held tomorrow.
On Monday, of course, is when gunman Charles Roberts invaded the one- room schoolhouse there. There are still five girls in the hospital, Glenn. Three of them are in serious condition. Two are critical. We`ve also learned that one of the other young girls was taken off life support. Her family has brought her home to die.
BECK: Hang on just a second. Could we go back? Do we have time to go back to that footage with the airplane, with the helicopter? That was supposed to be banned today. Why is it we feel it`s necessary to have a helicopter fly over this funeral service?
HILL: Well, the other thing, too, is I`m not sure when that video was from. I don`t know if it`s from prior days or if it`s actually from today...
BECK: I hope it is.
HILL: ... so that`s something that should be checked on.
BECK: Man, I hope it is.
HILL: But you`re right. It was only supposed to be shots of the buggies today.
BECK: Right, good. Thank you very much, Erica.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: You know what? No matter how hard you try, beer never made you want to exploit teenagers. I come from the old school of alcoholism, you know, where the one -- you screwed up your own family. You screwed up your own life. "Sure, I destroyed my family, but I was a sentimental drunk." I just love you, Dad. You`re the greatest in the -- we need to spend more -- we need to spend -- we need to spend more time with each other. That`s what we need to do."
That`s the kind of drunk I was. Of course, I was saying that at the time to a lamp, but it made for good entertainment.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: All right. Those days, I promise you, are over. Now I only drink Shirley Temples. Oh, yes, I`m secure in my masculinity. Don`t worry. Our public viewer, Brian Sack, is here to shatter my confidence once again.
BRIAN SACK, PUBLIC VIEWER: No, I`m not here to shatter you.
BECK: Oh, yes, you are.
SACK: I`m building you up like the Six Million Dollar Man. You`re like Lee Majors, and I`m there to help.
BECK: Old and wrinkly?
SACK: Yes, but you once married Farrah Fawcett.
BECK: No, not so much.
SACK: All right.
BECK: All right. What`s up, Brian?
SACK: Well, you were in L.A. last week.
BECK: Yes, I was.
SACK: You went to the city of angels. You played some baseball.
BECK: Oh, come on.
SACK: Oh, look, Glenn`s pitching. Oh, look, Glenn`s a lefty. Who would have thunk?
BECK: Yes, I don`t think I actually am. After that pitch, I think I am a righty.
SACK: And I like -- they kind of planted you right in the middle. I guess somebody called that out the other day in the viewer mail, which is nice.
BECK: Yes, thank you.
SACK: I know somebody -- I know the guy who manages Pedro Martinez. I can hook up lessons for you, if you want.
SACK: Yes, sure.
BECK: Is he a baseball player?
SACK: Pedro Martinez?
SACK: Yes, I think he plays -- you know what? I don`t know sports. But I think he plays for the Red Sox...
SACK: ... used to the Red -- I`m really good with sports.
BECK: He`s good.
SACK: He`s over at the Yankees, I think.
BECK: Yes, I`m questioning your sexuality right now.
SACK: Well, did you just see how you threw?
BECK: Hang on a second. Mark Foley is on IM for you.
SACK: Is he? OK, hold on a second.
BECK: Know what I`m saying?
SACK: I`ll move on.
BECK: Yes, I think you should.
SACK: Yes, woo-hoo. And I noticed the other day, I think it was on, yes, Tuesday -- you were talking about how you didn`t want to do a yelly show. And I pulled the clip for you. And we`ll take a look at that first.
BECK: A yelly?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: That is the most ridiculous thing I`ve ever heard.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Glenn, Glenn, Glenn, Glenn, Italians do it, Jews do it, Germans do it...
BECK: And it`s wrong when Italians do it and Jews do it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK, so what? People of all nationalities do it, Glenn.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So don`t sit back and say, "Well, why do black folks do this?"
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SACK: That`s not exactly the clip I meant to pull.
SACK: So we`ll move on from that.
BECK: What was that?
SACK: Well, you had said you didn`t -- there was a clip I was hoping to pull that you said you didn`t want to do one of those yelly shows.
SACK: Then I had that clip that was going to come up next, and there is the comedy. That`s the -- as they call it, the punch line, in show business.
BECK: OK, hold on just a second. Brian, this is it. I am now going to be your public viewer. I mean, you have one segment a week to do. And it sucks this much?
SACK: No, no. There`s still potential to not suck.
BECK: I`m going to...
SACK: If we continue.
BECK: You can write me about Brian, how much you hate him.
SACK: Oh, dear God. And they will.
BECK: Go ahead.
SACK: A Katherine Harris interview.
SACK: OK, you`re chatting with Katherine Harris.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: Please don`t let this be swept under the rug, please.
REP. KATHERINE HARRIS (R), FLORIDA: I don`t think there`s any possibility of that occurring.
BECK: Good, I`m glad to hear that. People should not vote for a Republican this term. They should not vote for a Democrat.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SACK: See, you said that to a lady who`s spending $10 million bucks of her own money, "Don`t vote for a Republican."
BECK: Did you see the...
SACK: I brought it back to the Zapruder lab, and I want to analyze it in slow motion here, her reaction when you said, "Don`t vote for a Republican."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: People should not vote for a Republican this term.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SACK: She`s like, "Whoa, what? No. Where is this going? Where are you going?" But, fortunately, you moved on.
BECK: That`s what we`re all saying.
SACK: And then, of course, you come back from a commercial the other night with this graphic, and it made me spit my chardonnay all over the coffee table.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: Am I the only one in America...
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SACK: Glenn on molesting children.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: ... not molesting children?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SACK: Now, I`m thinking -- this is what I was thinking. What if I`m sitting in a bar, and I look up, and I see -- it`s silent, and I just "Glenn" -- and it just says "Glenn on molesting children"?
BECK: There would be -- what did you say? There were good tips there. There were good tips.
SACK: I`m just thinking, you know, from the standpoint of a person sitting in a bar maybe, or at the airport, not quite sure what`s going on. "Glenn on molesting children."
BECK: I don`t know about you, but I need to sit at a bar after this. I really do.
SACK: And one more thing maybe.
BECK: Do we have to?
SACK: I`m going to take off my clothes.
BECK: Yes. No, no. I think we`re all done. Thank you.
SACK: That`s the point sound effect.
BECK: Yes, it is.
SACK: PublicViewer@GlennBeck.com. What was that noise?
BECK: I don`t know. I`ve given up. I`ve given up. PublicViewer@GlennBeck.com. Thanks, Brian.
SACK: Yes. See you next week?
BECK: No, not so much.
Don`t forget, the November issue of my magazine called "Fusion" is almost ready. We have the guaranteed election results in this issue, including an actual letter from the eventual losing party to the people of America. Don`t miss it. That`s "Fusion" magazine. You can order it right now by calling 888-GLENN-BECK or by visiting glennbeck.com.
Back in a flash.
BECK: All right. Welcome to Mark Foley`s favorite portion of the program, e-mail. Happy to tell you, however, these e-mails will not be overly friendly, and I personally guarantee I`m not delaying a vote in Congress just to read or answer them.
First, one comes in from Jamie in St. Louis. "Glenn, I was married when I was 18. My parents begged me not to do it. It was only four years later when I also realized my ex-husband was a dirt bag. Now I see a woman who was kidnapped by her parents so she couldn`t get married. I`m not condoning it, but I hope that, if there`s a divorce in three months, they immediately release the parents from jail. Parents know best."
In case you don`t know this story, it`s amazing. Juliana Redd, she was supposed to pick up her wedding clothes with her parents the day before her wedding. But instead, they threw her in the back of the van and drove her across state lines into Colorado. Parents barely talked to her while they were driving. She even thought about just jumping out of the moving van to escape. But finally, after her wedding was supposed to take place, they brought her back to the state, and she was married four days later.
Yes, parents usually do know best, but that really doesn`t matter here. When your kid is no longer a kid, I don`t think you should be able to force them to go across state lines in captivity because you don`t like the decision they`re making.
You`ve got to let your kids live their own lives, and that goes for every parent, except me. My kids never have to worry about making decisions, because Daddy will always be there. Oh, yes, kids, always. Remember, no dating until you qualify for Social Security.
Up next is Clayton. He writes, "Glenn, start a TV campaign to force screening of all congressional candidates by sex offender detection programs. We need no more criminals in Congress."
Well, Clayton, the problem with that one is, if we got rid of all the criminals in Congress, we`d just have to lock the doors and turn off the lights. I mean, all you could do is find the ones that don`t belong there and get them out.
But this is yet another reason why we really need to ditch all of the partisan politics. I`m not saying that you can possibly detect in advance who`s a good guy and who isn`t every single time, but you definitely will be not able to do it if you`re just pulling the lever that says R or D.
All right. You can e-mail me at GlennBeck@CNN.com or, you know, just keep your thoughts to yourself. Whatever. That`s fine, too.
We`ll see you tomorrow, you sick, twisted freak.