Return to Transcripts main page

Glenn Beck

Is Media Spinning Numbers?; Mexico; Friend or Foe?; Mother Wants to Reverse Adoption

Aired October 11, 2006 - 19:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

GLENN BECK, HOST: Coming up, the election season is entering its final few weeks. Will anyone please talk about the issues?
Plus, Dog the bounty hunter and Mexico, friend or foe? Next.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANNOUNCER: Tonight`s episode is brought to you by Mexico. Come visit beautiful Mexico. Lie on the beach, eat delicious food and get shot in the face by a drug warlord. Viva Mexico.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: All right. Tonight, we`re going to start with politics and the president`s speech today. Now I`m going to rattle off some numbers that you will and won`t be hearing a lot about as the election season enters its final few weeks.

Here`s one number that you will definitely be hearing endless amounts about: 655,000. One that you will not be hearing? Sixty-nine. I`ll explain more in a minute.

Another number that will not get mentioned is 11,867. One that will: 248 billion. But what about 22.3? Oh, no, you won`t hear a peep about that.

Now before I explain what those numbers mean, here`s the point tonight. Because we are getting close to an election, half of the real news is being intentionally withheld from you, which makes the news as meaningless as the numbers I just gave to you unless they`re put into context. Here`s how we got there.

The first number is 655,000; you probably read about it today or heard about it on the radio. It is the number of Iraqi civilians that have been killed since the war began. Here`s what the president had to say to that number.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: No, I don`t consider it a credible report. Neither does General Casey, and neither do Iraq officials. I do know that a lot of innocent people have died, and that troubles me and grieves me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: OK, now here`s the reason why President Bush does not think the number is credible. It was -- it is a number taken from a study, published Thursday on the web site of "The Lancet". It`s a British medical journal.

Forget that it was based on a survey of households in Iraq, not a body count. Basically, they went door-to-door and said, "Bring out your dead." your dead." But let`s us, just for the sake of argument, disagree with the president and take this number at face value. Let`s just assume that number is true.

This leads us right into the second number I gave you a couple of minutes ago, 69. Sixty-nine is the percentage of the 655,000 Iraqi civilians who did not die at the hands of American soldiers. That leaves 451,950 Iraqis who were killed by someone else other than Americans.

Gee, who else is killing people over there? This number leads me to believe that the Iraqis would be saying, "Good God, Americans, please don`t leave us now. We`re surrounded by people trying to kill us."

The third number, 11,687, that is the number the Dow Jones closed at yesterday. That number is the highest ever, and the fourth time the Dow broke the all-time high in the last two weeks. Don`t you always hear people saying, "People vote with their pocketbooks" or my favorite, "It`s the economy, stupid."

Well, how come nobody`s saying that this time around, with the election only weeks away? What a surprise.

The fourth number, 248 billion, that`s the one you will be hearing a lot about. That is our budget deficit, $248 billion.

What you won`t be hearing is the number 22.3. Our budget deficit has actually shrunk by 22.3 percent since last year. Well, how is that possible? Well, more numbers you`re not going to hear about.

Revenues are at an all-time high, which means that, by cutting taxes, we`ve actually grown the economy and are getting more tax revenue. Gee, I was told by the liberals in the media that that sort of thing just doesn`t happen. Well, it just has, America.

The reason you`re not hearing it is because the liberal left would then have to accept this as fact, and then they`d have to shift their argument. They`d have to tell you what they really have been trying to do the whole time. They would no longer be able to say, "We can`t afford these tax cuts" because we can, clearly. They`d have to make the case for their real plan, redistributing wealth. That`s what they really want to do.

Go ahead, make the argument for that. But they can`t, because they`d have to say things like, well, it`s for social programs. But socialism isn`t a real destination. Socialism is a middle step between capitalism and communism. Look it up in the dictionary. I did. It will blow your mind. Good luck selling that to the American people.

This all leads me to a question: is the media truly not biased, or does it have an agenda? I`ve got to say, it seems like the agenda thing is working right now. Four weeks before an election, why else would you have to go to a yahoo like me to get the real story behind these numbers?

So here`s what I know tonight: numbers are an amazing game. To say that we have caused 655,000 deaths in Iraq, wow, that`s like saying Americans killed 10 million people in World War II, even though six million of those died in concentration camps at the hands of Adolph Hitler.

I also know the economy is in fine shape. We`re spending like Paris Hilton in a (expletive deleted) house, but, hey, it`s fine. Why is it that when the economy is weak, it`s all you hear about? But when it`s strong, like it is now, oh, it`s invisible, especially when a Republican`s in charge?

You remember when the Dow was breaking all the records when Bill Clinton was in charge? That`s all they could talk about.

Now they say that good news doesn`t sell. I say, bull crap. Good news just doesn`t sell some people`s agenda.

Here`s what I don`t know: how do people continue to get away with half-truths? I think the media may have a little something to do with it. But what do I know? I`ve got a stupid cable show.

Mike Allen, White House correspondent for "TIME" magazine, convince me, sir, that -- that all of Washington, including the -- including the media, is just not spinning things like a top right now.

MIKE ALLEN, "TIME" MAGAZINE: Well, Glenn, good evening. Congratulations on the success of your show.

My buddies in the administration talk about the Bush boom. I guess you can talk about the Bush-Beck boom, as well.

BECK: Yes, I`m sure.

ALLEN: I don`t know that I am going to convince you. My grandmother said a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.

BECK: Right.

ALLEN: But I will point out to you, your viewers are smarter than the average bear. And so I think if they know that if you`re getting your news from one place, you are susceptible to the type of distortion you very accurately point to.

If I`m a good red-blooded, red-stated American in Kaysville, Utah, I`m not going to only get my news by just reading the "Desert News (ph)". I`m also going to look at "The New Republic" or "TIME" or "The Nation" or "The Weekly Standard" or GlennBeck.com. And get a variety of sources for my information.

And I`m going to know what the bias is in those sources of information are. I know who`s going to be maybe giving me the Bush line without some context that I might want to know.

BECK: Sure.

ALLEN: I might know which columnist or newscast is always going to say that the glass is half empty.

BECK: So, Mike. Let me jump off here on what you`re just saying. I think it is impossible -- you know what drives me nuts, people who are on television and everyone else saying, I have no agenda here.

Bull crap. We`re all prisms. Even if you`re trying to be fair, you still see things differently because you`re a human being.

You know, everybody has somewhat of a -- two people can see exactly the same thing, like this plane that flew into a building here in New York today. We can see it the same time, but we won`t see it the same way. Isn`t that the case at its very rosiest?

ALLEN: Well, I think that`s a good point. That`s why being a reporter who does this sort of like daily news, one advantage that we have is that we see both sides of things. We know the holes in each -- in each side`s argument, and we know the points that they have.

BECK: OK.

ALLEN: If I`m covering the Bush campaign, I`m going to spend half of my time talking to the Kerry campaign, and vice versa. And so between those, I`m able to give people a full picture.

BECK: OK. Then help me out -- help me out with this. I`ve got some audio here from John McCain and Hillary Clinton, both talking about -- both talking about North Korea. Watch this and help me out.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. HILLARY CLINTON (D), NEW YORK: Some of the reason we are facing this danger is because of the failed policies of the Bush administration, and I regret deeply their failure to deal with the threat posed by North Korea.

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: I would remind Senator Clinton and other Democrats critical of the Bush administration policies that the framework agreement her husband`s administration negotiated was a failure.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: OK. All right. Let me translate bull crap to English, and then you can tell me if I`m right or wrong.

They`re both right. Clinton blew it, and so did Bush. Clinton had all carrots, no sticks. Bush had all sticks, but he didn`t have Russia and China in his back pocket. So they both are at fault. Am I wrong?

ALLEN: It`s a case of looking through both ends of the telescope. Just like with the numbers, you made a very good point about the way you could play with numbers earlier on.

With that study about Iraqi deaths, in my edition, the very last paragraph of "The New York Times" story about that quoted some statistician as saying there were significant statistical problems with that study. I`m like that`s the last paragraph?

BECK: I know.

ALLEN: Just like with the deficit numbers, the number that you didn`t mention is the number zero. That`s what the deficit was when the president took office.

Now of course, the enemy hit us and the other things he points out.

BECK: Right.

ALLEN: But you can omit or stack up numbers to your heart`s content. And that`s why you shouldn`t make yourself prisoner of any one particular type of information, because sooner or later either side is going to let you down.

BECK: Good for you. Mike, thank you very much.

Only 27 more days until the election, and I`m just waiting for the blood to shoot out of my eyes at any moment. Everybody -- as Mike said, both sides -- politicizing everything. Ads about every conceivable issue, from Mark Foley`s instant messages to the situation in North Korea. And apparently, North Korea is so red hot, it`s now fair game for just about anybody, really.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANNOUNCER: North Korea, a powder keg ready to explode. And what are our two major parties doing? Playing the blame game. This November, vote for the party who knows where the real blame for North Korea lies, squarely on North Korea.

Hi, we`re the Green Libertarian Nazi Hemp Party, and we`re not about partisan politics. Yes, we may burn the occasional cross, but when we do, you`ll be sure they`re made only of 100 percent pure hemp and without emitting those dangerous greenhouse gases.

The Green Libertarian Nazi Hemp Party is not affiliated with the Green Libertarian Nazi Hemp Reform Party.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: OK, you can`t call Congress completely useless, why 23 congressmen are petitioning Condi Rice about Dog, the bounty hunter.

Plus, award-winning actor Gary Sinise joins me to talk about some projects, including one very closet to his heart.

And a scary reminder here in New York City today. Why our national security is the No. 1 issue we face at home.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Duane "Dog" Chapman, also known as "Dog the Bounty Hunter," is the star of a popular reality show on A&E. Now last month, he was arrested, along with two of his co-stars, after his capture of convicted rapist Andrew Luster. This is the guy who was in charge of -- the heir to Max Factor.

He was deported to Puerto Vallarta. "Dog" was released on bail, but is about to be extradited to Mexico, where he faces charges of illegal detention and conspiracy.

Bounty hunting apparently is against the law in Mexico. "Dog" has said that he would rot in a Mexican jail if extradited. Twenty-nine congressmen have now sent a letter to Condoleezza Rice to stop it.

Here is what I think that -- I think we need to preface this so you know where I stand. Mexico is not our friend. No matter what anybody tells you, it is a crime-riddled country that is out for its own interests.

Representative Tom Tancredo from Colorado. Mexico, Tom, is that a friend or foe?

REP. TOM TANCREDO (R), COLORADO: It`s a foe. It`s a foe. And I thought so for a long time. I told the president of Mexico. I told the head of a ministry down there called, at that time, by the way, believe it or not, the Ministry for Mexicans Living in the United States.

And when he told me what they did and how they, in fact, were pushing their nationals into the United States, helping people break our laws, I told him that I believed it was an act of an aggressor nation, not a friendly nation.

BECK: Yes.

TANCREDO: And there are many things that lead us to that conclusion, of course, of course their use of the military, their military, to come into the United States and protect drug deals.

BECK: OK, so we have "Dog" the bounty hunter. What the heck is this thing even about?

TANCREDO: Well, my guess, my guess -- and it`s only a guess at this point in time, but I think it`s got to do with a high-profile exchange. They are going to extradite to the United States, in fact have, a very high profile drug dealer. And I think this is sort of a quid pro quo.

We`re going to ask somebody to come back. Because we have been pushing them to extradite -- they`ve got over 3,000 people down there who have murder warrants out on them from California alone that they are essentially hiding.

BECK: Yes.

TANCREDO: So I think this is because -- because Dog Chapman is certainly a well-known personality. And they think, we`ll show you. We can do this. We can grab somebody up there and bring him back for breaking the law.

But, in fact, you know, he actually was doing what he believed was right. He had a Mexican policeman with him during the course of his -- his investigation down there. The guy took a powder when they went to the jail with Mr. Luster, because frankly, everybody is on the take down there, and the policeman was afraid to go to the police station with Dog.

BECK: Well, they knew where Luster was. They knew where the heir of Max Factor was. And it`s my understanding that they let him get away with it, because he was good for the economy.

TANCREDO: You bet your life. He was spreading money all over town. And that`s one reason why the policeman was afraid to actually go to the police station with Luster and with the Dog, because he knew that there were people down there -- at least this is what I am told -- he knew that there were people down there who were, you know, benefiting by Mr. Luster`s presence in their town.

BECK: Right. So this is a guy -- if anybody who doesn`t know, this is a guy who was wanted on 86 rapes.

TANCREDO: That`s right.

BECK: Not a -- not a good guy. You come over to Mexico, I just want to put you on alert here, you want to send bounty hunters in and take people who are, you know, wanted for rape or murder, you know, out of our country into yours, we`re not going to ask for you to be extradited. You go, girl. You bring them on.

TANCREDO: Here`s another thing. Again, as I understand the situation, the -- now the charge that they are leveling against Dog Chapman has -- even if he is convicted of it -- has like a four-month sentence attached to it. Under our extradition treaty, we do not have to extradite anybody who faces any penalty of less than a year.

So the question I have, and the question that I asked the State Department and the Department of Justice now is, why are you doing this? What`s the purpose?

The guy goes down there and brings back, you know, a criminal that you just described with 86 rapes on his record. He`s now serving 124 years. And -- and Dog Chapman, believe me, does more for meting out justice in the United States than a lot of other departments of justice.

BECK: So, Congressman, what`s going to happen? Is Condi Rice going to listen to you guys? Or is -- are we going to send him down to Mexico?

TANCREDO: I don`t know, buddy. What can I tell you? All I can do is what I can do. I wrote the letter. I got my colleagues to sign on, too. We have the chairman of the subcommittee -- of the judiciary subcommittee on immigration who has signed onto the letter.

There are a lot of folks on that letter that, you know, are more powerful than I. And perhaps they will pay attention. All I can do is what I can do.

BECK: Great, Congressman, thank you very much.

All right. Back in a minute.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Here`s a story that kind of hits close to home for me. Helen Briggs, she was first introduced to the 9-year-old boy she was to take home and to provide foster care for six years ago. Instantly fell in love, chose to adopt him, making him a permanent member of her family.

Three years later, at her son`s sexual battery hearing, she was given information she claims she didn`t have prior to his adoption. Things like his drug addicted parents physically abused him; he had been hospitalized in psychiatric institutions seven times.

Now Briggs and her husband are trying to "unadopt" their 16-year-old son. I`ve got some natural born teenagers that you could adopt at any time.

State welfare officials in Virginia are unable to comment because of confidentiality restrictions. But according to "The Washington Post", records show caseworkers don`t believe she wasn`t aware.

Joining us now to talk about this unique case is Lee Allen. He`s the policy director for the National Council for Adoption.

Lee, is there such a thing as an adoption lemon law?

LEE ALLEN, POLICY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION: You took the words out of my mouth, Glenn. It`s not a trial run. It`s not something that...

BECK: Thank you.

ALLEN: ... that you can just -- there`s no do-overs.

BECK: Right. I mean, if it`s your natural child, believe me, those teenagers, there are times, oh, get them out of the house. But I have adopted a son. I have my son Ray. And I have thought about this in the past. What happens, you know, if he`s -- because I don`t know all of his makeup and genetics and everything else. You know, it doesn`t matter. He`s my son.

ALLEN: Absolutely right, Glenn. There`s no guarantees. And when you adopt a child, you bring that child into your family. And it`s the exact same thing as if you bring a biological child into your family. You -- you have all of the rights, but you also have all of the responsibilities.

BECK: Right.

ALLEN: And how is this child served better by dissolving his family?

BECK: No.

ALLEN: This is the only family this child knows.

BECK: I will tell you, Lee, that maybe in this particular case, the son`s or the child`s interest would be served by getting him out of this family. Only because -- I mean, only because when does a child need the family more? You`re into trouble or something. You`ve got to be a parent that stands there.

I mean, parents that don`t want to be parents, those are probably worse than no parents at all, aren`t they?

ALLEN: Sure. But this family had this child for five years in their home. And this family -- this family is the only family this child knows. And he, just like you said, the child needs a family more now than he may have ever needed them.

BECK: This is the weird part about this story. And honestly, she was supposed to be on with us, but she thought I would beat her up. And honestly, the more I hear about the story, she probably was right. She -- she actually -- it`s not about money. She wants the money. She wants, what, $600 a month or something like that.

She wants the state to take care of him, et cetera, because she was lied to. But she said she still loves him. She still loves him. She still wants him to be at home, et cetera, et cetera. What is that all about?

ALLEN: Well, it`s clear that this child should have probably been removed from the home if he`s a predator, if he`s a risk to himself or to others. But just because he should be removed from the home, does that mean that he should be removed from the family?

BECK: Right.

ALLEN: We think not.

BECK: And she was -- she claims that he was on medication that she didn`t know about. How do you adopt a 9-year-old kid that`s on five different medicines and not -- not know about it?

ALLEN: Well, sometimes adopted families kind of look at their adoption through rose-colored glasses and they think that they can love a child through anything. And most of the case -- times, that`s good.

BECK: Right.

ALLEN: But maybe we can dissolve this problem without dissolving this family.

BECK: Right. Lee, thank you very much.

ALLEN: Thank you.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) BECK: Welcome to "The Real Story." This is where we try to cut through the media spin and try to figure out why a story is actually important to you.

It was a couple of nights ago here in New York City that Barbra Streisand performed at Madison Square Garden. And as you may have heard by now, her concert basically turned into a political commentary. What, Barbra Streisand? She had a Bush impersonator come on stage and perform a skit with her. According to most accounts, the skit portrayed Bush as a bumbling idiot. No!

And it went on and on and on and on, way too long for some people. They began booing and heckling and asking her to get back to -- I don`t know, Barbra, maybe singing? That`s when she dropped the now-infamous f- bomb at an audience member, who her publicist is now theorizing might have been a right-wing political operative. Right. After the incident, she then apparently tried to get the audience back on her side by speaking of unity.

The real story tonight is that actions are stronger than words. You cannot speak of unity while you`re performing a skit bashing the president. But there`s a bigger issue here than just that: It is called intellectual dishonesty.

Although celebrities are always the ones to get the headlines, there is an epidemic in this country of people from both sides of the aisle who think that their side just can`t do any wrong. But quite honestly, if you believe that, you`re just simply naive or extremely stupid. There are scumbags and brilliant patriots on both sides. It`s our job to sort them out, figure out which one`s which.

Listen to this quote from an article in the "Chicago Tribune." It said, quote, "With civilization and world order threatened by the forward sweep of dictatorship, the party has a solemn responsibility to nominate the best man available for the job," end quote. That was from 1940, a little over a year before Pearl Harbor changed everything in America.

Those unbelievably serious times had people understanding that their very way of life depended on electing the right people, not the right party. Those lessons apply today more than ever before. We have got to cut through all of the noise and the rhetoric that does nothing but confuse and divide us and find people who are there to lead us.

This November, please, don`t vote for a Republican. Don`t vote for a Democrat. Don`t vote for an independent. Vote for an American. And, by the way, save yourself the $750 on a Streisand ticket. I hear the Bush impersonator, pretty bad.

Next, "The New York Times" recently gave a great review to a new book called "The Road." It tells the story of a father and son who survived a near-apocalyptic event that resulted in the death of billions and left a world filled with fire and ash. Although this is obviously just fiction, the real story is that history has shown us that pop culture is merely a reflection of what people are really feeling in their gut.

Think about it. During the Great Depression, audiences loved stories in which the wealthy and care-free suddenly found their fortunes reversed. During World War II, movie after movie came out offering a message of hope. And most of the well-known comic book heroes ever created first appeared to provide inspiration that victory would eventually come in World War II.

And now, pop culture is reflecting something else. Over the last few years, movies, books, television shows in record numbers have begun reflecting our collective concern about the end of our civilization. A new "Vanity fair" article by a prominent historian makes the case that America is looking an awful lot like the Roman Empire just before its fall. And an upcoming Mel Gibson movie, "Apocalypto," tells the story of the dawning days of the great Mayan civilization.

"The Road" is now the fifth best-selling fictional novel on Amazon right now. In the last few weeks, two major new network television shows featuring stories about a nuclear bomb detonating in Manhattan have begun. This is not a coincidence.

The entertainment industry exists to get ratings and to make money. They do that by taking advantage of what we`re already feeling. By this time, I believe they haven`t gone far enough. Where are the movies and the shows about the real enemy? Have you noticed? They`re gone. Islamic extremists, where are those shows?

Where are the hidden camera investigations and the undercover reports from television news stations into terror sleeper cells and radical mosques that are operating right here in the U.S.? They don`t exist. In fact, the only movie I know of that tries to expose Islamic radicalism is a movie called "Obsession." This movie can`t even find a distributor in this country. Gee, what`s up with that?

You know, one of the television shows I mentioned earlier is a show called "Heroes" on NBC. Already people are saying that this is the first breakout hit of the new season. Why? Well, maybe it`s because, by featuring people with superhuman powers, they have the ability to save us from destruction. It combines our fear with our hope.

But the reality is: We don`t need superheroes. We just need people to speak their mind. Maybe in America that takes a superhero today. Political correctness and cries of racism have created a culture of fear that is crippling us and will kill us if we don`t break the cycle.

But what most people don`t realize is that fear has its own kryptonite. It`s called the truth.

Bradley Jacobs, senior editor at "US Weekly" magazine, Bradley, how are you?

BRADLEY JACOBS, SENIOR EDITOR, "US WEEKLY": Great. Here with the truth.

BECK: Here with the truth. You got the truth on the apocalypse? I have a feeling -- you`re from Hollywood, aren`t you?

JACOBS: We can talk about the apocalypse tomorrow. I`m here to talk about "Jericho" and "Heroes," the shows that you`re talking about.

BECK: That`s what I`m talking about. That`s Hollywood talking about the apocalypse.

JACOBS: Right.

BECK: This is the new, hot trend in Hollywood, right?

JACOBS: Well, it`s been five years since 9/11, and Americans really learned a lot about terrorism on that morning. You know, as has been written about many times before, Americans really didn`t understand terrorism on a day-to-day basis before that horrible morning.

And now we really do understand, and it doesn`t surprise me that we would start seeing the realities of terrorism reflected back at us a few years later...

BECK: Yes, but, you know -- hang on -- this is not 9/11. This isn`t terrorism. That`s "24." This is an apocalyptic view, especially "Jericho." This is the -- I mean, look at this, "The Road" by Cormac McCarthy. I mean, look at this cover; that looks pretty bleak. And it is about the entire Earth being destroyed.

JACOBS: Right.

BECK: There is something else going on. People are looking at the future, not necessarily the past.

JACOBS: Well, I do think that people, now that we do understand terrorism better, can picture the apocalypse.

BECK: Right.

JACOBS: It`s a very dark thing to talk about, but I think we can understand now how the world could possibly end, and that`s why you are seeing a show like "Jericho," a book like this, a show like "Heroes," which, as you point out, centers around an atomic bomb going off in New York City. You know, people`s minds are going there now.

You know, we were in a relatively safe place before 9/11. You know, now it looks like we were in a relatively safe place. Now, maybe not so much anymore. The headlines are filled with it. Look at this airplane that crashed in New York City today. Who didn`t think the first time they heard about it -- I heard about it in the car over here -- who didn`t think, "Oh, my God, it`s happened again"?

BECK: So tell me how you could explain or how Hollywood explains their hypocrisy? They all came out and said, "I can`t believe the Republicans or George Bush or whoever is using 9/11 to get elected." And yet Hollywood is using the fear of 9/11 and terrorism and the apocalypse to make money. Is there any kind of hypocrisy there?

JACOBS: Well, first of all, you`re assuming that all of Hollywood feels strongly against George W. Bush, and that`s just not true.

BECK: Right, I know. I`ve got Gary Sinise. He`s the one. He`s going to be in with us in a couple of minutes. He doesn`t feel strongly against him, I don`t think.

JACOBS: I mean, Hollywood is putting out material that tries to reflect the zeitgeist. And the zeitgeist is that people are thinking more about terrorism, people are thinking more about the political climate around the world. They are picturing what this possibly could look like.

BECK: You know, in a way, they`re doing us a favor. They are helping educate through entertainment.

Bradley, thank you very much. That is "The Real Story" tonight. And if you`d like to read more about this or if you`ve found a real story of your own that you`d like to tell us about, please visit glennbeck.com and click on the "Real Story" button.

All right, let`s go "Straight to Hill," Erica Hill, the anchor of "PRIME NEWS" on Headline News. Hello, Erica.

ERICA HILL, CNN HEADLINE NEWS ANCHOR: Hello, Glenn.

BECK: I hear that politics is hot.

HILL: Hot, I mean, like so hot that maybe even Paris Hilton is -- well, no, not that hot.

BECK: Let`s not go down that road.

HILL: No, but the story is politics are back in vogue these days. Interest -- yes?

BECK: No, nothing. It`s an inside joke. I got yelled at. I was being naughty about Paris Hilton earlier.

HILL: Oh, I missed it. I`m sorry.

BECK: Oh, I`m in trouble. They`re going to take me to the CNN woodshed and spank my bottom.

HILL: Little did I know. OK, that`s more information than I needed.

BECK: All right. So anyway...

HILL: Here you go. Here`s some information maybe you could use. OK. Interest in politics, basically, at its highest level in more than a decade in the U.S. That`s coming from a new Associated Press-Pew poll that finds 70 percent of respondents are talking politics with family and friends; 43 percent say they debate political issues at work. But, of course, the big question in all of this, Glenn, is will all of the talk actually get people to the polls on November 7th? Because in the past it hasn`t worked that way.

BECK: Let me ask you a question. I don`t know if you can answer it because, you know, you`re a journalist.

HILL: Because I`m a journalist?

BECK: Yes, because you`re a journalist. But do you think people are talking about politics or do you think people are talking about issues?

HILL: See, I got to tell you, when I first saw this story, I was surprised, because I don`t see it -- and maybe that`s just me -- but among my friends and family as high political interest, it`s more like, "Can you believe all of the stuff that`s going on?"

BECK: I know, can you believe...

HILL: I mean, come on.

BECK: ... the stuff -- and can you believe the boneheads that aren`t doing anything about it? Erica, thank you.

HILL: Have a good night.

BECK: You bet. Bye-bye.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: The majority of people aren`t paying attention. The majority of the people are just listening to the ads. They`re just following the donkey; they`re following the elephant. Well, you know what? Most times in my world, the way I see it, the elephant is right. But there are a lot of scumbag elephants out there. Stop looking at the stupid animals and look at the issues and convince your friends to look at the issues and vote for the right person, not party.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: You know, last Friday, "Time" magazine published an amazing e- mail from a marine in Iraq that was originally written as a private account of the war meant only for his friends and family. When you read it, what strikes you, at least at first for me, was how real and how honest it is. But it also makes you realize just how different the war is from what you hear in the media every single day. So today I want to show you another side of the war, something inspiring, something that you`re probably not hearing about anywhere else.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BECK (voice-over): Helping soldiers help children, that`s the mission of Operation Iraqi Children, a program launched two years ago by actor Gary Sinise and author Laura Hillenbrand. The inspiration of the program came while Sinise was on a USO tour of Iraq.

Speaking with American soldiers, he quickly became aware of the deplorable conditions inside most Iraqi schools: no books; no blackboards; not even paper or pencils. The very future of the Iraqi nation was being squandered all because they lacked the most basic of school supplies.

Through the program`s Web site, ordinary Americans can donate school supplies, which are then assembled into kits and transported to Iraq. The kits are then distributed by soldiers to the eager students.

Operation Iraqi Children believes the benefits of their program will reach far beyond the recipients of the supplies. Every time a kid is delivered by our troops, it`s another small victory in winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people, a beautiful way to begin a friendship with the future leaders and citizens of Iraq.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BECK: One of the good guys, Gary Sinise. Hello, sir. How are you?

GARY SINISE, CO-FOUNDER, OPERATION IRAQI CHILDREN: Very good. Thank you. Thanks for having me.

BECK: This actually started with you on a USO tour, and then you came home and started it at your children`s school, if I`m not mistaken?

SINISE: Right, Glenn. I went over to Iraq in June of `03, and then I went back in November of `03. On the November trip, I was able to go out and visit some schools, and see the kids, see the troops interacting with the kids. And, you know, I wanted to keep supporting the troops in some way from home.

I can`t make USO trips over there all the time. So I went to my principal at my kid`s school and said, "Let`s collect some school supplies, and we`ll ship them over to the base that I visited, and they can take them out and give them to the kids." And we did that.

And out of that, I partnered with Laura Hillenbrand. Laura wrote "Seabiscuit." And we partnered up together. We started the Web site, OperationIraqiChildren.org, to show what we did at our school and to basically provide a guideline so that other people could do the same thing.

Well, I started going on television and promoting the program so that people could see a way that they could support the troops by sending these supplies over. And we were contacted by Mary Eisenhower`s organization, People to People International. And they said, "Well, this is a great program. How can we help?"

So we had always wanted to expand the program, be able to grow it. With their help, we were able to secure a warehouse. Now a lot of supplies come from all over the country. People go to our Web site. They follow the guidelines on the Web site, send us the supplies, and we get them over to the troops in Iraq and they, in turn, take them out and give them to the kids all over the country. We`ve sent hundreds of thousands of supplies over there in the last two and a half years.

BECK: Gary, why do you feel so passionately about this? I mean, in Hollywood, there`s, you know, those who speak out against the war, et cetera. And I think that harms their career like crazy. And then I think it could harm your career, I don`t know, being in Hollywood and being somebody who`s really pro-military and pro-troops. Why do you feel passionately about this?

SINISE: You know, I`ve never run into anyone out in the Hollywood community that says they can`t stand the troops and don`t want to have anything to do with supporting them. I`ve heard people criticize the effort, but say they support the troops.

Maybe one of the differences with me is that I go on USO tours. And I`m not the only one. There are people from Hollywood that do it all the time.

BECK: Sure.

SINISE: I wanted to be able to continue to support the troops without just doing one or two USO tours a year. So I started this program with Laura so that we could show other people in the country a way that you can actually do something to support the troops by sending them these supplies. And then, in turn, they take them out and give them to the kids.

Every time they go and give these supplies to the kids, it`s a very good day for the kids, and it`s a very good day for the troops.

BECK: By the way, the way to get involved is at the bottom of your screen.

You have been over in Iraq, so you know the difference -- I mean, I remember the first time I went to Israel, I walked the streets and I expected it to be different. It really has a different spin when you`re there. What is it that we`re missing in the media or sitting in our home about the story of Iraq? What`s it really like?

SINISE: Well, I mean, it`s like anything. I mean, if you just watch the news every night from Los Angeles or any one of our major cities, if you just watch the news and that`s all you know, you`d think everything was bad. I mean, that`s just the facts. The first 10 stories on the Los Angeles news every night, not unlike any other city, are terrible stories of death, and murder, and rape, and fires, and things that are going wrong.

BECK: Right.

SINISE: So we`re naturally going to get all of those dramatic stories. The day-to-day things that are going on there -- you know, there are certainly tragic things that are happening and disappointing things that are happening and difficult things.

BECK: Right.

SINISE: But there are 150,000 troops over there, American troops, and there are coalition forces, and they`re doing day-to-day work over there, rebuilding schools, and, you know, they`re doing a lot of things. You know, it`s unfortunate that the soldiers that get the attention or that get the press are the ones that screw up. And that`s unfortunate. I know a lot of people over there that have helped a lot of kids...

BECK: Well, you, sir, are...

SINISE: ... and have, you know, done some good things.

BECK: You, sir, are part of the good effort. Thank you very much, Gary Sinise. Back in a second.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Earlier today, just across the park from where I`m seated, a small plane hit a condo building on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. Many people all across America flipped on the TV to see the reports. The rumors and the questions were flying.

First, it was a plane, then it was a helicopter, then it was a plane again. Was the pilot really not in touch with air traffic control? Two people were killed, or was it four, or was it more? Cory Lidle, was he one of them? There are no indications of terrorism, but could it have possibly been an accident? Could it have been caused by the pilot having a heart attack? Were there fighter planes really scrambled over Manhattan today?

Some of these things wound up to be false. Some questions we`ll probably never know the answer to. And, unfortunately, some of it was true.

But as millions around America were watching the reports spill out of their television set, I looked right out of my window in my office and I saw smoke pouring out of the building, right out of the window. Being here in New York makes something like this more intense. I wasn`t in New York City when the Trade Centers went down. I was in Tampa, Florida.

A week later, I was doing my radio show here after viewing the wreckage. It is one of the only things in my life I truly regret doing. It is something that I will never, ever get out of my mind. The next year, I was still living in Florida when a 15-year-old -- his name was Charles Bishop. He crashed a small plane into a downtown Tampa building.

And just as with today`s story, as the reports leaked out, your mind just raced to all sorts of crazy possibilities. But what is amazing about this story that`s still developing is the difference in how we all react. Years ago, we would have immediately thought about the people on the plane. How did it happen? Is there any chance anyone survived? What about the people inside the building or on the ground?

What struck me was my first thought today was to call my wife, to let her know what was going on and that I was OK. My thoughts went back to an attack, rather than an awful but innocent tragedy. It`s an amazing commentary on where we are in this country. And while the FBI immediately said that it wasn`t related to terrorism, the image of a plane hitting a building, it couldn`t help but jar you back to that moment and remind you how important and how difficult the battles are that we are fighting today.

We will see you tomorrow morning on the radio, back here tomorrow night. From New York City, good night.

END