Return to Transcripts main page


Homegrown Terror a Growing Threat?; Former U.N. Ambassador Weighs in on Foreign Policy; Women Ordained Catholic Priests Over Vatican Objections

Aired November 12, 2007 - 19:00:00   ET


GLENN BECK, HOST (voice-over): It`s Veterans Day, the day we honor our troops fighting our enemies overseas. But what about the enemies here at home? Could popular discontent and radical ideologies lead to another Oklahoma City?

Plus, fallout from NBC`s Green Week. Where are the questions about how NBC`s parent company used the green theme to make greenbacks? An inconvenient truth? You bet. Full disclosure? Oh, in just a few minutes there will be.

And chaos continues in Pakistan. How long before Pakistan`s nukes fall into the wrong hands? We`ll ask former ambassador John Bolton.

All this and more, tonight.


BECK: Well, hello, America.

I have to start tonight remembering our soldiers and thanking them. Veterans Day was yesterday. Many of you have the day off today because of Veterans Day.

I just want to take a minute and sincerely thank anybody who is a veteran and served our country, fought for my right to have these stupid points of view every night on this program. Honestly, you give me hope for our future.

As hard as it is to believe sometimes, there are people actually out there who do get it, many of which are serving right now or have served in the past. Again, regardless of your politics, my most sincere thank-you to everybody who has served in our armed forces.

You know, I was thinking this morning, when you enlist in the military, you have to take an oath that says you`re going to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. On this program we talk a lot about the foreign threats. Maybe tonight we should spend some time on the growing domestic one.

It`s easy to sit back and -- and watch television and complain that our politicians aren`t listening to us, that they`re lying to us about the border, about out-of-control spending, or their apparent relentless quest to hand our country over to special interests. It feels, at least to me, like our leaders reflect an America that most of us don`t even recognize.

Well, here`s "The Point" tonight. While our foreign enemies are the obvious ones, the physical threat may be developing domestically, as well. And here`s how I got there.

As I told you last week, Ron Paul raised over $4 million in one day. That`s huge news. His supporters raised the cash on November the 5th to commemorate Guy Fawkes. This guy was a British terrorist who tried to overthrow the government by blowing up Parliament and killing everybody in it. Paul`s supporters called the donations, and I`m quoting, a "money bomb."

Fawkes was caught the very last minute, some say with his hand on a torch about to light the gunpowder under Parliament.

Now, the vast majority of Paul`s supporters take this little metaphor the way it`s intended, as a rallying cry to create a dramatic political shift. It`s really not the way I would go, you know, tying my movement in with a historical terrorist attack, especially in post-9/11 America. But hey, you know, I`m a libertarian at heart. I get it. You raise money however you want, as long as you`re not blowing other people up.

But America, here`s what you need to know tonight. Ron Paul`s supporters are tapping into something that`s very real. It`s something that I`ve talked about on this program for a very long time: the rising tide of disenfranchisement in this country. And it`s coming from all sides of the political spectrum.

If that feeling of disenfranchisement leads to political discussion, then our system works perfectly. But if fringe elements take that disenfranchisement and turn it into violence, we endanger the freedoms we`re supposedly all fighting for.

David Horowitz is the author of "Indoctrination U: The Left`s War Against Academic Freedom." And Jonathan Sandys, he is a writer and founder of Churchill`s Britain. He`s also the great-great-- I`m sorry, the great- grandson of Sir Winston Churchill.

Jonathan and David, it`s good to have you here.

Jonathan, let me -- let me start with you. Guy Hawkes -- or Fawkes, as I understand it, he is basically an old-timey Timothy McVeigh.


BECK: That he is England`s version in the 1600s of Timothy McVeigh, except his bomb didn`t work. He`s a terrorist. Is he not?

SANDYS: Yes, yes. Yes, he was a terrorist. Very much so. He had a very clear set of views. He was a Catholic and wanted to return Britain to a Catholic realm. And he was backed by the pope in Rome to blow up the parliament, blow up James I and his government...


SANDYS: ... and overthrow -- and then have a Catholic -- a Catholic king reinstated.

BECK: All right. Now, one of his big things, and I think this is where it ties in today. One of his big things was he felt that nobody was listening to him, that the government wouldn`t respond.

We felt that way, and that`s why we disbanded from the -- from Great Britain in the 1700s, as well, because we -- we felt like the king wasn`t listening to us. Do you sense at all that this is the same kind of thing that is going on in Great Britain and in America right now?

SANDYS: Yes, this is a problem we are facing at the moment in Great Britain certainly and also in America. We have governments that are promising an awful lot of things for the voters. But they aren`t delivering on them.

But nobody is actually asking the people what do you actually want? What is it in education that you want? What is it in life that you actually want? Nobody -- nobody cares.

BECK: Well, David, let me go to you. Because you are a -- you were a Marxist in the `60s. You were a radical. You were a guy that was exactly the opposite of where you are now. Winston Churchill I believe said that, you know, when you grow up you get some common sense.

Is this the same kind of thing, or is this worse than what it was in the `60s with the radicals then?

DAVID HOROWITZ, AUTHOR, "INDOCTRINATION U.": Oh, I think it`s much worse. First of all, my parents were communists, and they were part of a vast conspiracy, and it was orchestrated from Moscow and wanted America to lose the Cold War.

We have a lot of people in this country who think that we`re the enemy. And a lot of them are drawn from the ranks of the old left and the new left, the secular left. But to them has been added a -- you know, a whole new constituency of Muslim radicals, of which there are many in this country on our campuses.

And then the -- of Democratic Party leaders out of a very short- sighted desire for political advantage, have defected from a war that they -- that they all supported and have denigrated the mission of this war and fueled the -- you know, the fires of what you call disenfranchisement.

BECK: But -- let me go -- let me take it back the other way, though, David. It`s not just the left this time. It`s also the right. I mean, Ron Paul`s supporters are also the right, and that`s from people saying, you know what? Bush has really not told us the truth, not told the American people the truth on government spending, on the border.

And even when it comes to the war, you didn`t tell us that we are in the fight of our life. You told us to go shopping.

HOROWITZ: Well, but he did say it`s going to be a long war.

You`re right. There`s a strain of isolationism and anarchy in the American tradition which Ron Paul is tapping into. I think it`s very significant that he chose Guy Fawkes as an image.

There are plenty of, unfortunately, libertarian Web sites which are indistinguishable from the anti-American left these days. and others like that. Totally in bed with the Islamofascists and have turned against this country.

BECK: Jonathan, I met you, what, I think a couple of weeks ago, and we had a conversation. You are as concerned about your country as we are here in America on ours.


BECK: You`re seeing that it`s being sold out, as well, that it...


BECK: There`s something beneath the surface that is just washing everything away.

SANDYS: Glenn, we have had an agreement in this country for many years now that if our allies in America go to war that we will join you in that battle.

I believe David is completely right in what he is saying, that when George Bush stood up and actually said that we were going to go to war against terrorists and when Tony Blair stood up and said the same thing, both our countries, both our peoples and our governments were behind it -- were behind those two leaders.

In this country at the moment we are now looking at a backlash where everybody is saying we`ve got to get out of Iraq now, and we can`t look at Iran and everything like that. There`s a total loss of traditional values in this country for continuing and finishing what we start.


SANDYS: Once you`ve begun something, you`ve got to stop it.

BECK: Jonathan, thank you.

David, I`d love to have you on the radio program and talk about the history with your family.

HOROWITZ: Absolutely.

BECK: And what that was. So maybe we`ll line that up.

OK. Where am I wrong? The Ron Paul revolution, I think it`s meant to be a catchy slogan, but I fear some of his fringe supporters are taking the word "revolution" too literally. Agree or disagree? Go to Glenn -- I`m sorry, right now and cast your vote.

Coming up, our dear old friend President Musharraf. Good guy or bad guy? I`m not really sure. I`m going to ask somebody who knows: Ambassador John Bolton. Don`t forget, they`ve got nukes.

And NBC`s Green Week. Oh, it`s finally come to an end. And I don`t know about you, but I feel like hugging a tree and a puppy dog. My inconvenient truths in a very special inconvenient segment, NBC, coming up.


ANNOUNCER: Life pretty much stinks for our kids these days. Pedophiles trying to seduce them, extremists trying to kill them, universities trying to indoctrinate them, Hollywood trying to make them anorexic. And Al Gore trying to bury them in useless carbon taxes.

Fortunately, there is one thing you can do to save your children before it`s too late. Buy Glenn`s new book. "An Inconvenient Book: Real Solutions to the World`s Biggest Problems" continues Glenn`s common-sense answers to 22 of the worst problems we face.

You can order your copy at right now. And remember, it`s all for the good of our children.

None of your money will actually go to help any children.



BECK: Well, all this week I`m going to be bringing you "An Inconvenient Segment," a special series that literally reads between the lines of my new book, "An Inconvenient Book." It comes out next week. It`s available right now for preorder at

Today we`re going to delve into a topic near and dear to my heart, global warming and the bull crap that it is. Coming up in just a bit.

But first, there is a good reason that my radio show is No. 3 in the country instead of, you know, No. 1. And that`s because I constantly break the golden rule of talk radio, which is always have an opinion. Well, I`ve got to be honest with you. I don`t always have an opinion. I don`t always know what`s right and wrong.

Pakistan comes to mind. I`ve got no fricking idea on what`s going on in Pakistan. I don`t have an answer. I don`t know anymore who the good guys are and who are the bad guys. I know what I want to believe. You know, where I want to come down. But these guys have nukes. I think we should go with a little more than just our gut.

John Bolton is the former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. and author of "Surrender is Not an Option."

Ambassador, is Musharraf a good guy or a bad guy?

JOHN BOLTON, AUTHOR, "SURRENDER IS NOT AN OPTION": Well, I wouldn`t characterize him one way or the other. I think the main thing is he is the person most likely to be able to secure Pakistan`s nuclear weapons and also continue to help us in the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban. He responded after September 11, and I think with all of his imperfections he is the horse to back at the moment.

BECK: OK. So what -- so what exactly should we do? Should we be calling for the elections?

BOLTON: I think this is a mistake. You know, Vietnam analogies are popular. I`ll give you a Vietnam analogy here. We didn`t like Ngo Dinh Diem in the 1960s. We helped overthrow his government, and that led to a succession of revolving door governments in Vietnam, made it very hard to fight the Viet Cong.

If we get too involved in internal Pakistani politics -- and we have been involved already to an extent -- we risk increasing the potential for chaos and it`s in that chaos that those nuclear weapons could come unstuck.

BECK: OK. Well, there are some people that say we should just back away from Musharraf, but then the shah of Iran also comes to mind. That`s what we -- we kind of just said, you know, whatever. And that caused Islamic extremism over there. What are the chances that Islamic extremists grab a hold of power over there?

BOLTON: I think it`s a risk. I think you have fundamentalists rife within the military despite Musharraf`s efforts to clean them out, but certainly even in the well-educated segments of society there`s a lost fundamentalism. And the Democratic forces are very divided among themselves. So it`s in this unclear kind of environment that the real radicals can seize control.

BECK: You know, ambassador, we talked about your book on my radio program last week a little bit. And I`m very concerned about our country. I think we`re -- I think we`re losing our sovereignty. We`re surrounded by internationalists. I think the United Nations is a nightmare.

And we seem to just want to give it away. And in your book, you talk a little bit about the State Department and how the State Department is -- I mean, the president answers to the State Department in many ways in your opinion.

BOLTON: No, it`s really incredible. And one reason I wrote this book is to give people a sense behind the scenes, both at the United Nations and at the State Department, what actually happens. This is a book -- I mean, I have opinions in the book, no doubt about it. But this is not a book simply of sweeping assertions.

This is a book of facts, what happened during the Bush administration, so that American citizens, I hope, will read it and can make up their own minds in time for the 2008 presidential election.

Just the point you were making a moment ago. I think this is going to be a very consequential election for our future and the world as a whole, and I think people need to focus on this issue.

BECK: So let`s -- I don`t know how candid you`ll be with me on this. How close do you think we are to losing our sovereignty?

BOLTON: Well, I think there`s a tendency in American thought, and I think you can see it in many of the Democratic debates, that we don`t want to take actions to defend our national interests if we don`t pass what John Kerry in 2004 called the global test, if other people won`t give us permission to act.

That`s the biggest risk of loss of sovereignty. But it`s present in a lot of other ways. The international criminal court. The Law of the Sea Treaty. There are a whole raft of these ideas out there that need more debate. People -- Americans need to have a better sense of what they`re being asked to do, and that`s why...

BECK: But there doesn`t seem to be anybody that really wants to have that debate. I mean, the Republicans? There were four in the Senate subcommittee on the Law of the Sea Treaty, only four. It was 17-4 that stood against the Law of the Sea Treaty. I mean...

BOLTON: But here`s the good news. The entire Republican leadership of the Senate has bucked the administration and come out against the treaty. Our friends in the mainstream media don`t seem to have picked that little tidbit up.

But people need to make their views known. And that`s why I think in the debates on the Republican and the Democratic side, people need to get more involved on these national security issues.

BECK: What is the thing that keeps you up at night?

BOLTON: Nuclear weapons in the wrong hands and policies by the United States that don`t do enough to stop it. I think specifically of North Korea and Iran. If we don`t roll North Korea back and prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons, not only are they threats but other countries are going to draw the conclusion that if these people can get away with it, they can get away with it too, and that`s really bad news.

BECK: What happened in Syria? Why did we fly -- not us but the Israelis fly planes over, destroy a site, and then it just kind of disappeared. Syria didn`t really say anything. Nobody said anything. What really happened there?

BOLTON: Well, the -- what I`m told by people inside the U.S. and Israeli governments is that the United States in particular wanted to put a complete lid over this. Why would we want to do that?

Because there`s every reason to believe that North Korea was involved in some kind of joint venture with Syria, and we certainly don`t know all the facts. But some kind of joint venture on the nuclear front, which would mean if it became public it would be the end of the six-party talks concerning North Korea`s program if they`re outsourcing their nuclear weapons to Syria.

BECK: You think the Bush administration has kind of sold out their values that they had originally?

BOLTON: Well, I think the administration has done a u-turn, certainly, on North Korea. And you know, there are a lot of Republicans in Congress, a lot of Democrats in Congress, too, that want to know the facts of what the Israelis did on September the 6th.

BECK: All right. Ambassador, thank you so much. Coming up, two women were ordained priests over the weekend in St. Louis. But I don`t think the pope is all that happy with it. I`ll get the answers on this, coming up in just a second.

And the author of 13 consecutive "New York Times" best-sellers, David Baldacci, joins me in just a little bit to talk about his latest book, "Stone Cold." Coming up.


BECK: Well, several hundred people gathered yesterday in St. Louis to watch a historic first as two women were ordained as Roman Catholic priests. So, except for the part where women are forbidden to be priests in the Catholic faith and that the ordination ceremony was held in a synagogue, and also the women had been threatened with excommunication if they did it, it was a really momentous occasion. I think.

Bill Donohue is the president of the Catholic League.

Bill, I don`t even know where to start on this story. For the love of Pete, first of all, who is the synagogue, or what is the synagogue that thought this was a good idea?

BILL DONOHUE, PRESIDENT, CATHOLIC LEAGUE: I don`t know. I imagine if a Catholic school invited in Jews for Jesus to have their meetings there, some of those same people would have a problem.

You know, there is such a thing called house rules. And everybody needs to respect the house rules of other people`s religion. So that was one major mistake.

And then, of course, the other mistake was the part of these women. It`s always old ladies, by the way. Quite frankly, no Catholic girl in her 20s thinks that she has to go through some ceremony to become a priest. If she really felt that calling, then she would just simply leave the Catholic Church, join one of the mainline Protestant denominations.

It`s always the senior citizens in the Catholic Church who are still wringing their hands over Vatican 2, didn`t do what they expected it to do.

BECK: I`ve got to tell you, I don`t understand -- I don`t understand why people go to a Catholic Church when it`s not a Catholic Church. I mean, it`s like these people, these priests -- and I`ve seen male priests do the same thing. They leave the church, but yet they`re still Catholic.

Why do they -- why do they seem to want the authority of the church and yet not the authority of the Catholic Church?

DONOHUE: You know, that`s a good question. You know, they`re always railing against authority, but it`s their authority that they want. They`d like to impose their authority on the rest of the church.

And you know, they call themselves progressives. They`re the most regressive people god ever put on the face of the earth. They are still living in the past. These are the original flower children of the 1960s. They want the church to make all the -- all the detours that they -- that they said it would make and it didn`t.

And instead of growing up and just accepting the Catholic Church the way it is or quitting -- you can always exit the Catholic Church. No, they stay and they park themselves there. And now they pretend, like kids do on Halloween, listen. You can go into the asylum in any city in this country and find people that think they`re the pope.

BECK: Yes. You know, here`s what I don`t understand. Bill, if Father Marge decides that she can make up her own, you know, rules, why would I go to Father Marge`s church? Because I can make up my own rules, too, but I could do it watching football in my easy -- in my easy chair. I mean, churches that have watered it down and watered it down and watered it down so much, they don`t have any members left.

DONOHUE; There`s no question about it that the more you take a look at these churches, which have become assimilationist, and by that I mean that they`ve contoured the teachings of their religion to the most modern ideas of our society, there`s nobody left. Nobody wants to join them.

It`s the most orthodox within Catholicism, within Mormonism, within the Islamic religion, within Judaism that are the ones that are thriving. Look at evangelicals are not having problems.

BECK: Yes.

DONOHUE: So it`s really a mystery as to why -- you know what really is? They`re making a statement. They`re grandstanding. They`re up on their soapbox one more time.

BECK: I don`t know about you, but I`m just tired of people making a statement. Robert Redford, just shut up.

Bill, thanks a lot.

Coming up, tired of being beaten over the head with the global warming stick all week by NBC? They were making a statement, you know. Well, it`s over. But what did NBC`s parent company, General Electric, gain? The answer is in something I like to call "An Inconvenient Segment." Next.


BECK: Well, full disclosure, this is a shameless plug here. I`ve got a new book coming out next week called "An Inconvenient Book: Real Solutions to the World`s Biggest Problems."

And today I`m going to give you a preview of chapter one, called "Global Warming: Storming and Conforming." I wrote this chapter basically as kryptonite for you to use against your Gore-worshiping psycho friends.

The next time they tell you how global warming causes all sorts of massive natural disasters, you say, really? That`s interesting because I heard somewhere, I`m trying to remember, that deaths per year from extreme weather are down 95 percent since the 1920s. Sure, you`ll be unhip and friendless, but at least you`ll be accurate.

Anyway, as I put the chapter together, the thing that struck me -- the thing that was more amazing to me than the facts that I was finding was the fact that no one wanted to talk about those facts.

If a scientist says that temperatures are up .01 degree, lead story around the country in every newspaper. But when somebody with decades of experience comes out and says global warming is a manufactured crisis, no one cares and you can hear a pin drop.

How do I know? Because that is exactly what happened last week when the founder of the Weather Channel wrote an article that began, and I quote, "It is the greatest scam in history. I`m amazed, appalled, and highly offended by it. Global warming; it is a scam."

But since that opinion doesn`t fit nicely into the mouth of the media beast, hello NBC, you probably didn`t hear a word about it. Well, now you will. John Coleman is the founder of the Weather Channel. He was also the first weatherman ever on "Good Morning America." And he is currently weather man at KUSI News in San Diego. John, your head about exploded with the NBC thing this week. Is that -- that was the breaking point for you?

JOHN COLEMAN, FOUNDER, WEATHER CHANNEL: Well, I`d been listening to all the global warming talk for a long time and posting material about global warming on our Web site.

But finally, the crescendo of global warming myth, nonsense, exploded in my head and I had to write a real rant. And that`s the one that got noticed. I put it on our Web site. It was picked up by, picked up by Drudge. First thing you knew it was all over the newspapers, all over the radio, all over the TV sets. And I`d created a bit of a stir. And all I was doing was telling you the truth as best I know it.

BECK: Why is it that the scientists are all in on this? I mean, so many people are in on the global warming is real and we`ve got to stop it right now.

COLEMAN: Glenn, you`ve got to make a living, first of all. So you spent 10 years becoming a PhD in meteorology, you got a research job. And you decide you`re going to research the effect of human activity on global climate. And if you were to put out a research report that said not much and it doesn`t seem too bad, you`ve probably wasted all your 10 years.

BECK: John, what was the turning point for you? Because I know you that said that you went in to look for an honest answer, you thought maybe it`s real. What was the thing that stood out and you went, this is absolutely bogus?

COLEMAN: Well, when I looked at the hockey stick graph that was produced in Manning`s original report and it showed a steady line temperature through the millenniums and then a sudden rise global, I knew that that was incorrect. I knew it couldn`t possibly be.

And I started asking experts about it and I started digging into how that was produced, and I found out it was bogus science. It wasn`t real. The numbers had been massaged.

The whole thing had been created. What bothered me was that the other scientists had accepted it. Well, why did they possibly do that? And I think the real answer to that question is that they all have an agenda, an environmental and political agenda that says let`s pile on here, we`re all going to make a lot of money, we`re going to get research grants, we`re going to get awards, we`re going to become famous. And I guess that`s what happened.

BECK: John, do you think we`re at the point of no return yet? Are we at the point where no scientist will come out -- you`ve said to me on my radio program today that people are afraid in your business to speak out. Can we turn this around, or are we destined for global socialism?

COLEMAN: I think that the ship may have left the dock. But in 20 years, we`ll have the last laugh. But of course, billions of dollars will have been spent. Policy will have been changed worldwide. People will have been scared. We will have reacted to a myth.

But nonetheless, eventually we`ll realize that there is no global warming of significance and we`ll have the last laugh. Now, there are scientists speaking out. There are hundreds of them speaking out. There are thousands who signed a petition, 19,000 on a petition against global warming. There are many scientists speaking out.

But the mainstream press is totally ignoring them. The mainstream press has totally climbed the board and is marching along. And of course the former vice president got himself an Emmy and an Oscar and --

BECK: I believe that.

COLEMAN: -- A Nobel Peace Prize.

BECK: A Grammy as well. John, thank you very much. Thanks for your courage.

Now, another global warming angle that we cover in chapter 1 of "An Inconvenient Book" is how climate change and their cheerleaders that you see in the media are anything but independent. They love to talk about how the oil companies fund the studies to distort the truth. But the reality is that the conflict of interest works both ways. Oh, and I detail it in the book. And that is when it`s most dangerous, when it is hidden from you.

For example, did you watch NBC last week? You probably saw their "green is universal" promotion. It`s great. They changed their logo, their Web site. Let`s hug a tree. They even changed the plots of their sitcoms by corporate mandate, all to bring awareness to the issues of climate change.

Wow, what stewards of the earth they really are over at NBC. Unfortunately, what NBC didn`t tell you is far more important -- that they are a subsidiary of General Electric. General Electric, important for two reasons. First, G.E. has a bigger lobbying budget than the three largest U.S. oil companies combined. But more importantly, G.E. owns major environmental business like G.E. Energy, which has made huge bets on things like wind power and clean energy technologies. And they stand to make boatloads of cash if Congress passes all sorts of environmental legislation and you decide to go green.

Imagine the uproar if ABC did a week-long series called "War With Iran" complete with Islamic extremists competing on "Dancing with the Stars" but only later did you find out that ABC would actually be owned by Raytheon, one of the Pentagon`s largest weapons suppliers. Do you think "The New York Times" might cover that story?

This, honestly, is one of the worst manipulations of the public trust I have ever seen. In fact, I believe it`s damn near criminal what they`ve done and somebody should look into their license. NBC and G.E. have used the public airwaves against us. And they`ve done it all for the only type of green that they really care about, and that is money. Once you cut through the propaganda, G.E.`s real motive becomes very, very clear. It`s time you heard the full truth behind NBC`s green week. And you will, in 60 seconds.


BECK: Welcome back to "An Inconvenient Segment." Tonight we are exposing the major conflict of interest that NBC and its parent company, G.E., are hiding when it comes to promoting environmentalism. Tim Carney is the author of "The Big Ripoff: How Big Business and Big Government Steal Your Money." Tim, I`m amazed because this is really not about NBC saying you should have a choice and maybe choose a hybrid SUV. This is about legislation --


BECK: -- And special interest money.

CARNEY: NBC`s parent company, General Electric, actually spends more money on lobbying than any other corporation in America. Over the last six months -- first six months of this year, they spent $12 million on lobbying. And I see their Green Week as just another extension of that huge lobbying arm. So if they`re saying, well, you shouldn`t leave the lights on when you leave the room, then that`s a great idea. But this company has invested -- is investing $1.5 billion in renewable fuels, in carbon dioxide credits, things that are basically worthless without government action. That`s why they have such a good lobby.

BECK: This is -- what`s fascinating to me is that they actually bought all the trading systems and a lot of the stuff that Enron was developing, you know, before they went evil and they bought it because they thought Enron is on to something, if this legislation comes to the United States we`re in the money. Right?

CARNEY: Absolutely. They just launched a joint venture that`s about investing in carbon dioxide credits. And 10 million metric tons of CO2 worth credits. And these are worth nothing right now in the United States because, well, we can emit CO2, we`re a free country right now. If Joe Lieberman, John McCain, Hillary Clinton get their way, then these credits that they bought cheap because they`re worthless all of the sudden become worth a lot of money.

BECK: It`s really truly amazing, up on the Drudge Report earlier this afternoon there was a story about Al Gore and how he`s a venture capitalist now. He`s got some money to play with. And he was thinking about calling G.E. up. I mean, it just doesn`t stop, how these companies -- let me ask you this way. Do you think this is something that maybe the FCC or the SEC should look into? I don`t think I`ve ever seen a more blatant use of propaganda than this.

CARNEY: And again, I think it`s an extension of their lobbying arm. You see shows, they use this hype to try to push the call -- to pump up the call for more regulation on greenhouse gases. And they at least journalistically ought to disclose their parent company stands to profit from it.

BECK: Honestly, I have seen infomercials with more credibility. At the end they need to say, look, I want you to know, we`re making money off this. If NBC wanted to do this and at the end of the episode they would have said full disclosure, we`re owned by G.E., we stand to profit, you know, billions of dollars if this legislation goes through, then I wouldn`t have a problem with it.

CARNEY: One of their CNBS anchors I did see on his blog disclose that said maybe we ought to mention that G.E. is heavily invested in windmills, heavily invested in solar panels, and now heavily invested in CO2 credits.

But you know, if an oil company owned a T.V. station and they dedicated a week black gold week to talking about the beauties of driving and the beauties of oil, you would think that people would be all over the fact that the parent company stands to profit.

BECK: Tim, thanks a lot. I appreciate it. I didn`t know about -- I`m sorry, NBC, I didn`t know you had it on a CNBC blog, that disclosure there.

We have just scratched the surface of what`s in chapter 1 of "An Inconvenient Book." I want to tell you a couple of things about the book itself.

First, I asked for this book to be released right before Thanksgiving so it gave you a chance to read, have the arguments ready for those relatives, you know, that get their news from Keith Olbermann when they come over to your house.

Second, the book doesn`t look like the typical conservative manifesto. I mean, here`s, you know, "An Inconvenient Toot" here. Actually, this is the No. 1 book now on in the humor section. It`s a funny book, and it just looks different than other books. And I did this because you`ve got to save the people that you can save, the ones that you know are actually conservatives, but they just don`t want to, you know, read a conservative book. This is a good book that`s kind of stealth. You know what I`m saying? Check it out and preorder your copy right now at It`s released next week.

Coming up, further evidence that the border war is just heating up. Last week on this show, we had a member of the U.S. Congress tell a local county sheriff to shut up and do his job. Let me ask you, how are we supposed to solve the crisis on our border when we`re fighting against each other instead of working with each other? Coming up.


BECK: I`ve told you on the program before that if you really want the truth on what`s going on in an entertaining sort of fashion you can`t go to Hollywood anymore. You can`t go to television because they`re not really telling you, at least the things that I believe in.

However, authors are telling you the stories, and they are based in fact, that every American needs to read in this time in our country`s history.

Next guest, an author of 13 consecutive "New York Times" best-sellers. His latest is "Stone Cold." It`s on bookshelves now. He`s also got a Court TV special airing tonight called "Murder by the Book." David, welcome.


BECK: So nice to have you. This is -- I`m concerned about secret combinations in our country or -- you never know. We just did a segment this last -- the global warming segment on NBC. But it was really G.E. That`s really what this book is kind of dealing with in a way, that you don`t really know what the truth is.

BALDACCI: No, you don`t. I mean, the -- four outsiders. They have no power and influence. They`re headed by a guy who used to work for the CIA many years ago in a very specialized role. But they sort of watched government, watched the leaders to try to find out what is the truth.

BECK: Do you -- I started this segment with I think you guys do so much homework, you know. It was Clancy, they used to think that he was a CIA guy that we were trying to mislead the Soviets. You guys do so much research, you`ve got to have the facts right. And then you build a fiction story around it. Do you believe that we are riddled with these kinds of problems right now you that don`t really know what the truth is?

BALDACCI: Yeah, I think, you know, it`s so hard to -- why waste time trying to discover the truth when you can so easily create it and sell it and make an entire globe believe it? I think that in this day and age, it`s much easier to do it. You can do e-mail blasts and blogs, you can put stuff everywhere, and all of a sudden it`s like the emperor`s new clothes, one person says it`s true, another person says it`s true, all of a sudden everybody says it`s true.

BECK: So how do you solve that? How do they solve it in the book?

BALDACCI: I try to get into the trenches. When I`m doing research, I don`t go to talk to people in leadership positions. I go to talk to people who execute the job. And they`re very candid for the most part. A lot of them read my books, they like my books, they think I do a good job researching and writing them. And they`re very candid about the things they tell me. Things are not as great as people say they are, things are not as dire as some people say they are. It`s more in the middle. There are issues and problems. I think doing a lot of research just makes for a better read.

BECK: What keeps you up at night? I know you had off the record conversations on terror and what our targets are. What keeps awake at night? What do you think the thing that America should know that they just really aren`t paying attention to?

BALDACCI: Well, homeland security has a huge budget. They don`t necessarily know what to do with a lot of the money. We have $40 billion to throw around. You`ll get some counties that they`ll get a million dollars or $10 million with no instruction on what to do with it, so they go out and buy a new fire truck, not doing anything really connected to terror but they have to spend the money somehow.

We have -- you know, if I were a terrorist, I`m not telling any stories out of school, I wouldn`t go and attack a big -- like the Washington Monument, the Empire State Building. I`d go to a shopping mall and detonate and kill a bunch of people because that would guarantee that every shopping mall in the United States would become a ghost town. The same thing an airline ticket counter, the same thing in a movie theater.

BECK: That`s what they`re talking about now too, for the shopping. Now, I want you to know, enjoy your week. You`ll be No. 1 like you always are. But next week I unleash this on you, baby. So your good times are over.

BALDACCI: Well, thank goodness you`re non-fiction.

BECK: I`m just saying. Just enjoy it. Thank you very much.

BALDACCI: Thanks, Glenn.

BECK: David, appreciate it. Coming up, last week I saw something I just couldn`t believe. A guest of this program, Texas Congressman Henry Cuellar attacked the character of a sheriff, Rick Flores, a man who`s defending the U.S. citizens in border communities that are under assault from Mexican gangs. I`ve got to tell you, I saw this, and I couldn`t -- my mouth dropped open. We`ll revisit this interview with new information, next.


BECK: Well, if you missed this past Thursday`s show, you missed a segment that has generated more mail than perhaps anything we`ve done on this program in this year. It was an exchange between Sheriff Rick Flores and Representative Henry Cuellar, both from Texas. It`s about the border. Watch this.


SHERIFF RICK FLORES, WEBB COUNTY, TX: I want to ask the congressman, who is he representing, President Calderon or his district here in Laredo, Texas, where we haven`t received any resources at the local level to be able to combat the problems on the border?

REP. HENRY CUELLAR (D), TEXAS: Well, first of all, let me say this, Mr. Sheriff, what we`re looking at is you have got more money than you`ve ever gotten in the past, and we`ve got to keep in mind that the border will be patrolled by the Border Patrol and by the federal agencies. We will work with the local law enforcement, and we represent, but your job is to be a county sheriff, not a U.S. congressman, which is a big difference.

My job is to look at the big picture. Your job is to look at the smaller picture. And I will do my job as long as you do your job.

BECK: Shame on you for that response. That was the most belittling response I have ever heard. Shame on you.

CUELLAR: Well, let me tell you, let me.

BECK: No, sir, I`m going to change the subject now and I`m going to go to the hostages. You`ve had your piece.


BECK: It was really one of the most belittling things I`ve ever heard. Now, the question was why was the congressman seemingly so flippant about the work the sheriff was trying to do?

Well, the next day Cuellar in full damage control said in a video conference, quote, "He can`t expect to attack me, to attack my city that I care so much about and portray it as a war zone. People are going to think Laredo is a bad place to come to."

Really? OK. So the congressman just had an overblown case of city pride. He was worried that we`d ruin his little border town image. Really? OK.

Maybe the real cause of the controversy was a little more obvious and dubious. And of course, you won`t be surprised when I tell you that it all comes down to politics. Believe it or not, the guy who is running the sheriff for the sheriff`s job is Congressman Cuellar`s brother. I kid you not.

Congressman, we`ll be following this story, surrounding the border and your brother closely. I promise you that. Don`t forget, if you want to know more about tomorrow`s program or if you`d like a little more in-depth commentary on the news of the day, sign up for my free daily e-mail newsletter at America, from New York, good night.