Return to Transcripts main page
Is U.S. Next for Violent Protests?; Massachusetts Considers No- Spanking Law; U.S. Split Over Hillary
Aired November 28, 2007 - 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 (voice-over): Tonight, a third night of violent riots in France. Anti-government mobs leave hundreds of police injured. I`ll tell you why America is heading for a similar fate.
Plus, hero or killer?
JOE HORN, ALLEGEDLY KILLED BURGLARS: Move, you`re dead.
BECK: We`ll have the latest on the man who shot and killed two intruders in his neighbor`s house in Texas.
And a new report makes a surprising discovery. Or not. Middle America can`t stand Hillary Clinton. I`ll explain the reasons why, if you need an explanation.
All this and more, tonight.
BECK: Well, hello, America.
I`m just -- I`m just looking at this list here that we have youths, we have teenagers, young people, adolescents, young adults, juniors, youngsters, youngins, and tweens. I think I`ve read every single one of those in news stories as the media-implemented full-fledged P.C. gymnastics to try to avoid describing the rioters in France by any other characteristic other than their age.
Well, before the newly elected French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, he had another word that he used to describe the rioters when they start burning cars and going after police the last time the riots flared up in Paris. Let me see if I can remember that word. It was -- oh, yes. Scum.
Here`s "The Point" tonight. Sarkozy was right. And here`s how I got there.
What other word can you use to describe people who injured about 120 police officers who were just trying to calm the violence? Dozens of cops were wounded by buckshot on Monday night, and widespread arson soon spread around impoverished suburbs of Paris. Flaming cars were being crashed into buildings in an attempt to burn them down. A preschool and a train station were attacked.
The head of the police union said, "We`re not talking about urban violence; we`re talking about insurrection."
But who is responsible for all of these riots? Calmed only by police after they were forced into an almost military-style operation. Well, if you read most of the media reports, we know that they were young. But that`s about it.
If you dig far enough, you will note that the rioters were mostly poor minorities. OK. "Baltimore Sun" went a step further. They said they were Black Muslim kids. Well, that might not be unimportant in and of itself. But here`s what is.
When you try to walk this PC line, you don`t talk about what is really happening. And we are never going to solve a damn thing on this planet if we can`t be honest with each other.
I`ve said it before, and I`ll say it again. Immigrants are vital, not only to France; they`re vital to America. They`re vital to any free society. But just as vital is having people that come to your country come here because they love it or they want to be a part of making it better. Go to France because you want to be French.
The problem with the -- with the French is that so many immigrants are coming there that don`t want to be French. I mean, don`t get me wrong. I understand that, but I ain`t moving to France. They never assimilate. They wind up separating themselves from society.
The "Baltimore Sun" describes the area of the riots as a world apart, with its own codes and subculture. The A.P. describes it as largely isolated from the rest of society.
And Sarkozy, they said, is quote, "unwelcome" in the projects. Really? Isn`t he the president of the country?
So here`s what you need to know tonight. Now that you know, America, the path that France is on, if we don`t identify and solve these problems here at home, we will not be far behind.
I`m joined now by Sally McNamara. She is a European affairs and policy expert at the Heritage Foundation. And Steve Emerson, the director of the Investigative Project on Terror.
Let me start with -- let me start with you, Sally. First of all, tell me who these guys are, and let`s drop all the political bull crap. Who are these guys, and what`s causing this problem?
SALLY MCNAMARA, EUROPEAN AFFAIRS AND POLICY EXPERT, HERITAGE FOUNDATION: Well, the violence and rioting in France is overwhelmingly in the suburbs, which are -- which is where the immigrants and the Muslim population live. I don`t think they are Muslim riots or immigrant riots. They reflect a wider social and economic problem. But yes, it is largely the immigrant population, where there are problems in France.
The main problem is that this area is considered a no-go area, not just for Sarkozy but for the police. We cannot have areas in any democratic republic which are no-go, which the police are not allowed to go into. That is completely unacceptable.
BECK: Steve, we`re setting this up here in America, are we not?
STEVE EMERSON, DIRECTOR, INVESTIGATIVE PROJECT ON TERROR: Well, and potentially, Glenn, because if you look ten years down the line if the same immigration patterns occur and the same type of Muslim immigrant who doesn`t feel any type of loyalty to the host country continues to settle here, the potential is for either terrorism or riots.
BECK: All right. Let me take this out, Steve. I don`t think it`s just a Muslim problem. I mean, Europe is on the brink, and we`ll get to that here in a second. But it`s not just a Muslim problem. We do have those subcultures here in America that are isolating themselves.
But what about the American southwest? You`ve got people coming here that have no intention of being Americans. They say, you know, "Hey, this is our land. We deserve it back."
Aren`t we setting ourselves up with just our immigration problem or our illegal immigration problem in the southwest?
EMERSON: Well, I think -- I think you`re right in that respect. Those that are coming over here and saying, "This is our land" or "We have no intention of adhering to any loyalty to the U.S." are exactly replicating the same type of self-imposed alienation that the French youth are imposing upon themselves in divorcing themselves from any loyalty to French society.
BECK: OK. Sally, let me come back to you. And I`d actually like, Steve, you to answer the same question. How on the edge is Europe?
I just read a report. I think it was a Dutch report that says the Dutch are fleeing. And the old population, the traditional Dutch, gone. And they are abandoning these cities and they are abandoning these countries and moving away, because they`re losing their culture and everything else.
MCNAMARA: There is a massive problem in Europe, and Amsterdam is projected to be a majority Muslim city within about two decades. It`s actually projected. And that is a massive problem, because Europe doesn`t know what to do about its immigrants.
However, with America, you actually have a great model here for legal immigration. People come here, and they built the American dream. They feel they have access to entrepreneurship. They feel they have access to the American dream and social mobility, and they can get up the ladder of success.
However, they are one nation under God. They are American. Whereas in Europe what we have is we have this banner of cultural diversity, of multiculturalism, of assimilation.
However, what it isn`t, is French or British. We don`t know what it is to be a nation anymore, because we`ve replaced it with this chronic political correctness. And we need to go back to reasserting non- negotiable values of democracy and rule of law and the things we believe in.
BECK: I mean, Steve, you know, one of the things that kills me about America that people don`t understand is we don`t have an awful lot in common. We all come from different backgrounds, different heritage, et cetera, et cetera. We all -- we all at some point, our families came here to be an American.
The only thing to tie us together: language, common history, common goals or beliefs that everyone can make it. And what we`re doing is we have -- we`ve wasted all of this stuff. We`ve blown it all out of the water.
EMERSON: Well, look, the fact is that multiculturalism has essentially taken the morality out of any culture, so that our democratic culture, our values of pluralism, of separation of church and state, of the democracy that -- of the great values that come from democracy, basically, they`re stricken of any moral compass because of the relativity in which we treat other cultures that may actually have values that aren`t very, very enlightening.
For example, the fact that there are groups in the United States that support Hamas or Hezbollah or Islamic Jihad or al Qaeda, that is inconsistent with American values, and yet according to multiculturalism on campus, they`re to be respected and to be valued just as much as westerners are.
BECK: Steve, how are we expected to solve anything? How is France expected to solve anything, if their newspapers won`t identify people other than youths? How is Sarkozy going solve anything? Has he come out as strong as he did the last time and say these guys are scum?
EMERSON: He has not yet come out as strongly, but he has sent in 1,000 extra police officers, particularly because now the French Intifada, they`re now using shotguns besides rocks and, you know, fire bombs.
Here in the United States, if we can`t label the enemy among several, but one of the most principal and threatening enemies as radical Islamic fundamentalism, we`ve lost the battle, Glenn. We can`t possibly win it. Until we can designate them for who they are, we`ve lost it.
BECK: OK. Steve, Sally, thank you very much.
Coming up, spank your kids and go to jail. And that is exactly what some lawmakers in Massachusetts say. Spank your kids? I`ve got an idea.
How about the government stays out of my homes? I know Massachusetts wanted you out of the bedroom. Great. They got that. But now they come in and tell me they can anybody my kids` bedroom? I`ve got that story for you next.
And Abu Dhabi pumps a few billion dollars into Citigroup through a sovereign wealth fund. Interesting. But most Americans don`t even know what a sovereign wealth fund is. I`ll explain in tonight`s "Real Story." It`s tonight`s loss of sovereignty.
And don`t forget, our critically acclaimed special, "Exposed: The Extremist Agenda," one year later, an update tomorrow night. Don`t miss it.
BECK: Well, the U.N. wants to take money from the rich and give it to the poor to help solve global warming. Really? Kind of sounds like socialism to me.
I`ll have "The Real Story" behind one possible global warming solution that doesn`t involve the redistribution of wealth. It`s crazy, but let`s give it a whirl. That`s coming up.
But first, a proposal to ban the spanking of all children under 18 actually debated in a hearing in this country. Massachusetts, to be exact. And if I may just say, "New England, hello! Calling New England."
First we had the city in Maine that wanted to offer birth control to our kids. Now they want to legislate the way we raise our children in our own homes?
You tell me what the next step is. Do state employees want to come over and change my kids` diapers? Because I`m all in. I mean, you want to do that? You want to put them back to sleep at 2 in the morning when they`re crying? That`s cool. Just maybe not the spanking thing or the birth control pills.
A few weeks ago, on a personal note, I spanked my son for the very first time. I have four children. It was the first time I ever spanked any of my children. I understood for the very first time my father what he used to say, "This is going to hurt me more than it hurts you." It tore me apart. I was up all night. Every time I woke up I cried about it.
My wife kept saying to me, "It`s for his own good. It`s for his own good."
You can spank a child without being abusive, just like you can hug your child without molesting them. There is a line. And it`s common sense, not the government, that should decide where that line is.
We are quickly reverting to a Hitler Youth society, where parents are subservient to the state in raising our children, where our schools turn our children into spies who will report anything real or imagined that could get their parents in trouble. Is that the kind of society that we really want to create and live in?
You know what? If it`s not, you`d better start standing up against this idiocy. Otherwise, that is exactly the society we`re about to get.
Michael Graham is a talk show host with WTKK in Boston.
First of all, Michael, tell me about Jay Kaufman. This is the -- this is the guy who is trying to push this through.
MICHAEL GRAHAM, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: You know, first of all, let me give you some good news from New England, Glenn. Not just my callers, nine to one, ten to one against this, but every poll, every Internet poll, every sample, even the people of Massachusetts have gone, "You`ve got to be kidding me."
This legislature, though, Jay Kaufman, he said something interesting. After three days of beating the snot out of him on the air, he finally agreed to come on my show and just answer the question, "Is spanking child abuse?"
And after hemming and hawing I finally said, "Representative Kaufman, you`re a parent. Did you spank your child?"
And here`s the key answer, Glenn. His answer was, "It`s none of your damn business."
Wait a minute, wait a minute. You want -- you want to make it a law as to whether I spank my children.
GRAHAM: But as a legislator making a law it`s none of my business if you spank yours?
BECK: That is...
GRAHAM: And that`s the deal here. It is this notion that the government is smarter than us, they`re better parents than we`re ever going to be.
And you mention the Hitler Youth, and people think, "Oh, that`s Glenn Beck being over the top again." There`s something else here. You are making two teams now in my house. Me and my lovely bride, The Warden, as the parents, and then the state and my kids against me.
You`re right. Who`s going to turn me in if the kid decides he`s upset?
BECK: Yes. I mean, Michael...
GRAHAM: It`s going to be my son.
BECK: Michael, here`s the thing. I mean, I was just reading an article last night about how there is a global movement in Europe that is happening right now where they are trying to outlaw all home schooling.
BECK: Well, why would the state want to outlaw home schooling? That makes no sense whatsoever.
GRAHAM: Because the parents are the enemy.
BECK: Exactly right.
GRAHAM: The parents are -- they`re instilling their own values, their own beliefs, and not the state`s beliefs.
GRAHAM: And so the parents are the bad guys again and again.
Massachusetts has made it clear to me they want me to have as many jobs as I can stand, spend as much time away from my kids as I can, pour money into them, and they`ll handle that whole parenting thing for me.
BECK: Well, I mean, you`ve got it up in Maine. Let`s go back to the birth control thing.
It is illegal for an 11-year-old to have consensual sex, and yet the state says, "Well, they`re going to have it anyway." It`s illegal. So they`re undermining their own laws.
Then they say, "Well, they`re going to have it anyway so let me give them birth control, but shh, you don`t have to tell your parents. It`s just between us."
So you`re -- the state is telling the kids, "We`re fun. We have cute little secrets with each other. I can help you. Don`t worry about your parents." And now you have the spank thing. This is out of control.
GRAHAM: If your parent touches you, watch out. You know I love when these desperate, big-state, anti-parent people get desperate to prove their point. "Well, Michael, you know, it`s already illegal to spank people in Bulgaria and Romania."
Oh, great, people who don`t believe in spanking but do believe in vampires.
GRAHAM: That`s who I want to follow. Thank you.
BECK: I don`t think Bulgaria is believing in vampires.
You had -- in Massachusetts in 1999 they tried to pull this off. I mean, this is -- when you say to me, Glenn, I mean, everybody in Massachusetts knows -- it`s only a matter of time.
It`s like the -- it`s like the amnesty act. OK, we didn`t get the amnesty, but they`ll do the DREAM Act. Then they`ll put this one in. Then they`ll put this one in. These people will not give up. It`s going to be relentless.
What did the Supreme Court say in 1999 that people obviously didn`t hear?
GRAHAM: It said -- well, technically speaking we can`t stop you from spanking. I mean, it wasn`t -- the court`s desperate to apply its will, and of course, we have a situation here where the definition of marriage in Massachusetts was redefined, not by the people but by four out of seven justices.
And the people -- you know, what`s happening now is the notion of self-government, of the consent of the governed has been eroded. The government will tell you how to parent, whether you like it or not.
And by the way, if you ask us how we parent, it`s "None of your damn business, citizen. Get back to work and give me your money."
BECK: It`s unbelievable. Michael, thank you very much.
GRAHAM: Thank you, Glenn.
I`m telling you, America, you are about to lose your sovereignty. You are about to lose the America that we all grew up in. And it`s political correctness. It is going to be the death of all of us, because it leads to idiotic ideas like this one.
You think you know how to solve it? I`ve got to tell you something. I know exactly how to solve it. Pick up a copy of my new book, "An Inconvenient Book." You can find it in bookstores everywhere right now. And we talk about political correctness, its roots and how to pull it up out of the ground by its roots. You can buy it online at GlennBeck.com or in a bookstore.
Coming up, middle America hates Hillary Clinton. I could leave it at that, or I could tell you that it`s according to one newspaper. Is the senator from New York the most polarizing figure in the history of U.S. politics? That`s a mouthful.
And what happens when a Middle Eastern investment company drops $7.5 billion to save one of America`s biggest banks? Good news? Tonight`s "Real Story," coming up.
BECK: You know how when you`re not part of a really sticky hot mess, it`s easier to see the big picture? Well, in this case the hot mess is the 2008 presidential campaign, and the guy who probably can make more sense of it than the rest of us in the U.S. is the editor for the "London Daily Telegraph."
He has crisscrossed the country on a trip that taught him something I think Democrats in this country are only beginning to realize. People don`t really care much for Hillary Clinton.
Toby Harnden is the U.S. editor for the "Daily Telegraph."
Toby, is it just conservatives or non-Democrats that don`t like Hillary Clinton, or is it Democrats, as well?
TOBY HARNDEN, U.S. EDITOR, "DAILY TELEGRAPH": Hi, Glenn.
HARNDEN: We found some pretty significant obstacles that Hillary has to overcome in our trip across the country through the flyover states, if you like, and it wasn`t just Republicans. I mean, I already knew the conventional wisdom, and I`ve reported from here for many years that Hillary was a polarizing figure.
But what surprised me was yes, there are lots of people out there who hate her, but they`re not balanced by the number of people who love her. There are not that many people out there who love Hillary Clinton.
Certainly, there are quite a few people who say that they support her at the moment but often it`s for negative reasons: "Oh, well, she`s the front-runner"; "Oh, well, we think she can beat the Republicans." But the support for her is pretty thin.
So I think she`s got significant difficulties in the general election and in the primaries, too.
BECK: When you were out, Toby, did you -- did you get a sense people were saying like, I mean, "Maybe we should stop this Bush-Clinton, Bush- Clinton thing"? Did you hear that at all?
Or did you get a sense that people are saying, "Wait a minute, I don`t want another four or eight years where we`re tearing each other apart. I`m tired of these politicians that are so polarized"?
HARNDEN: Yes, certainly. Now, if there was one phenomenon that we discovered crossing America, it was not just hatred of Hillary Clinton. That wasn`t the No. 1 issue. It was hatred of politicians generally.
But the problem for Hillary Clinton is -- is that she is the archetypal politician.
HARNDEN: People believe that she`s calculating. She doesn`t mean what she says. She`ll do anything.
BECK: So explain her polling.
HARNDEN: She`s an insider from Washington...
BECK: Explain her numbers. Is she -- I mean, she`s wildly successful still.
HARNDEN: Well, she`s got very high negatives. She -- she splits the country. But my very strong impression, talking to dozens and dozens of people in states across the country, is that the support for her is thin. And if the going gets tough, if she loses Iowa, for instance, it could melt away very quickly.
BECK: All right. Thanks.
Coming up, a weakened economy is taking its toll on major U.S. businesses. But don`t worry, plenty of foreign investors circling, and they`re waiting to pounce. And the good news is they`re foreign governments. That`s tonight`s "Real Story," and it`s coming up next.
BECK: All right. Quick programming note. Make sure you tune in tomorrow for our special "Exposed: The Extremist Agenda" one year later, the face of radical Islam goes well beyond Osama bin Laden. Their hatred for America is something you need to see to believe. If you missed it last year or if you saw it last year, make sure you join us tomorrow. There are updates. That`s tomorrow night.
But first, welcome to the "Real Story." By now you probably have heard that Abu Dhabi has agreed to pump in $7.5 billion into Citigroup yesterday. Come on, stay with me. This is important. While the markets and the media spent the day cheering, the "Real Story" is, like everything in life, this deal has come at a very large price. What was underreported by most of the media was that Citigroup apparently was so desperate for cash that their chairman actually flew to Abu Dhabi to pitch the deal.
Consequently, since beggars can`t exactly be choosers, Citi gave up nearly 5 percent of the company and they are paying way above market interest rate to their investors. While Citigroup shareholders will eventually have to pay the price, this deal actually affects you, and here`s why.
Abu Dhabi made this investment with something called a foreign sovereign wealth fund. These are basically vehicles through which governments can invest in companies and property in foreign countries. These are governments doing it. They`re huge. Because of the massive oil profits right now, some analysts say that within five years these sovereign investment funds may have over $10 trillion to spend.
To put that into perspective, that`s over three times more than the entire budget of the United States of America in 2008. Here`s the real problem. It`s not their size. It`s their ownership. It`s the secrecy. Unlike hedge funds, this money is controlled by foreign governments in secret. So the investments aren`t always about profits. They`re also about politics.
For example, China, which has $200 billion in their fund to spend, recently invested $3 billion in a U.S. company called Blackstone. Big deal, right? It is. Blackstone has holdings that include a firm that creates software used by our military.
Anybody ever heard of back doors or hackers? There is a real threat that in the years to come large portions of American property and business may be owned by foreign governments, not foreigners but foreign governments.
That means not just a loss of security. It means a loss of sovereignty as well. Alan Tonelson is the U.S. Business and Industry Council Educational Foundation.
Alan, do I have this right? Am I overstating or understating this problem?
ALAN TONELSON, U.S. BUSINESS & INDUSTRY COUNCIL: I think you hit the nail right on the head. These sovereign wealth funds pose not only major economic challenges, they pose national security challenges. And the reason mainly is that most of the foreign governments that are operating them are clearly not America`s friends.
As you noted, one of the biggest sovereign wealth funds is run by the Chinese government. The Chinese government has been identified by the U.S. Defense Department as the major potential national security challenge facing the United States in the years and decades ahead.
And not only have we let them have access in theory to a U.S. company that makes defense-related software, about a month ago the U.S. government decided it was going to allow a Chinese government-related technology firm called Huawei to go in on a big deal to acquire the American technology company 3Com.
3Com makes network security hardware and software for the U.S. Defense Department.
BECK: This is incredible.
TONELSON: It is incredible.
BECK: Let me take you back here for a second. Let me go back to Citigroup. Everybody in the press, everybody is saying oh, this credit crisis is not that big of a deal. When you have the new head of Citicorp flying to the Middle East in the 11th hour on a Thanksgiving Day weekend, don`t tell me -- and he`s paying this kind of interest rate, don`t tell me that we`re not in real, real trouble.
If this is Citigroup, good God almighty, what are the rest of the banks like?
TONELSON: And like you said, not only did Citigroup put together this deal -- or scramble it together at the last minute, they`re paying through the nose. And two big problems that I see right now is, one, nobody knows what Citigroup`s obligations are and debts are in this toxic subprime market.
They`re talking about figures like $15 billion. But the scariest fact is no one really knows because all of these new investment instruments that became so popular in recent years are so opaque. Nobody can understand them, and nobody can see through them.
BECK: I saw.
TONELSON: The second problem is that these foreign government investors often buy at the top of the market. You mentioned Blackstone just now. Just before they bought -- just before the Chinese government bought into Blackstone, Blackstone went public. OK?
Right after Blackstone went public the stock tanked.
BECK: So they`re not really the smartest investors, either.
TONELSON: Not at all.
BECK: Gang, this is all due to our debt.
BECK: Alan, thank you very much.
TONELSON: My pleasure.
BECK: Now, our economy is so overextended, it is so fragile right now, and you are not getting the truth on this. And it is simply because of our existing obligations. We are spending money too much. And I`ve got to laugh every time I hear these debates.
I hear these politicians up there. They say oh, yes, and we also have to have health care. Are you kidding me? Let me give you this one. It`s not just in our country. Here`s one from the U.N.
There`s a new report out that says that rich nations -- and if you`re playing along at home that would be, oh, us. We need to provide $86 billion every year to help poor nations deal with the global warming- related issues. The entire budget for the Department of Homeland Security in our country is $32 billion, $86 billion kind of a lot of money. Thanks but no thanks, U.N.
And that to me confirms that global warming is really a mainstream disguise for global socialism. I don`t want to talk to you tonight about the politics of climate change. I`m not going to debate whether it`s happening or not. I want to talk about the solutions.
If you believe that global warming is happening, then if you really want to solve it, the "Real Story" is technology, innovation, capitalism. It will fix that problem much faster than the global redistribution of wealth that I can`t even figure out how it affects my thermometer.
That concept was illustrated perfectly yesterday when Google, a left kind of company, announced that they`ll invest hundreds of millions of dollars into lowering the cost of electricity from renewable resources by 25 to 50 percent. Amen, brother.
Their co-founder said: "If we achieve these goals, we are going to be in the electricity business for a very long time in a very big way. We should be able to make a lot of money from this."
Where`s Kate Smith when I need her? "God Bless America." I said it in my book, but it is worth repeating here and repeating all the time. The best solution for almost every problem we have is to do good while doing good business. Google can be a high-profile, high-profit, shining example of that.
But there are lots of other companies that are already doing it as well. In just a second, I`m going to introduce you to a few of them in 60 seconds.
BECK: Well, before the break I told you that the key to solving so many of our problems that we face, from dependence on foreign oil to, yes, even climate change is ensuring that the government stays out of our face. Let capitalism shine. Ron Pernick, he`s the co-founder of Clean Edge, an energy research company, and the author of "The Clean Tech Revolution."
Ron, capitalism is the solution every time. Innovation is the solution. And you say there are tons of companies that are now doing this.
RON PERNICK, CO-FOUNDER, CLEAN EDGE: Well, it`s true. If you look at the clean energy sector and you look at all the companies that are involved, you`re talking about companies like GE. You`re talking about companies like ADM, Applied Materials, Sharp Electronics, Toyota.
And these are the companies that are innovating the future right now around clean energy technologies. And yesterday Google kind of put themselves more squarely right in the middle of all that.
BECK: Yes. I have to tell you that, you know, you mentioned GE. I am so -- I`m really torn because I am a capitalist but a responsible capitalist and an honest capitalist. It really bothered me when GE -- or when NBC did that whole green week and didn`t disclose that GE stands to make billions of dollars if all of this green technology catches on and goes through the government in particular.
Google seems to be out front and open about it. They`ve partnered, I believe, with Al Gore, have they not?
PERNICK: I`m not -- I know that Al Gore maybe has done some stuff with Google, but I think in general this has been happening primarily from within the inner circles of Google, right up to the founders. And this has been something that they`ve been really thinking not just from yesterday, but they`ve been involved in looking at clean energy now for a couple of years.
BECK: Oh yes. Yes, and you know, this is the kind of thing that you look for. You know, they tried to -- they said, hey, there`s a problem, people don`t understand how to navigate the Web, and they solved that problem. Now they`re saying wait a minute, there`s a problem with energy, and they`re solving that one.
PERNICK: Well, I think you`re right that if you look at what Google has done, they`ve been very mission-driven. You mentioned that earlier. And they really look at, you know, how are we going to solve this problem with helping people navigate this new thing called the World Wide Web, and they did it through search.
And now they`re also looking at some other issues, and through their philanthropic arm which was part of their announcement the other day, they are saying, you know, energy is one of the largest issues facing the planet today.
We have carbon issues we`re looking up against, other constraints, what are we going to do about it? And I think yesterday they were basically saying, we`re going to put some minute money behind that.
BECK: You know, we have the health of the planet to worry about, we have to have cheap energy for nations that can`t afford it, but we also have plenty of -- we need plenty of energy for when China really comes on- line and these developing nations come on-line.
Where do you see us in 10 years?
PERNICK: Well, it`s interesting you mention China. I think, you know, right now the transition that we`re seeing around clean energy is that there are governments and countries and companies and organizations that are targeting getting 10, 20, 30 percent of their electricity from renewable energy sources. China is actually one of those nations.
And they actually have about 120 gigawatts of new clean energy that they hope to bring on-line over the next 15 years compared to about 40 gigawatts of nuclear.
BECK: OK. Ron, thanks a lot. That`s the "Real Story" tonight. If you`d like to read much, much more about this and my take on how to solve global warming, not really politically correct but it is common sense, along with 21 of the other big problems we face in the world, then pick up a copy of my new book "An Inconvenient Book" is available at wherever books are sold, I don`t think hardware stores but every place else. Also online at glennbeck.com.
Coming up, an update on the guy who took the law into his own hands with a shotgun in Houston. Do you remember the guy that people are calling a vigilante? We`re going to speak to his attorney, next.
BECK: Authorities in Pasadena, Texas, are still compiling their report on the November 14th shooting of two men suspected of burglarizing the home of one of Joe Horn`s neighbors. Mr. Horn, some believe, took the law into his own hands after being told 13 times by a 911 operator not to go outside and confront the men with his 12-gauge shotgun. That`s exactly what he did. And he shot them both, and he killed them both.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
OPERATOR: I don`t want you going outside, Mr. Horn.
JOE HORN: Well, here it goes, buddy. You hear the shotgun clicking, and I`m going.
OPERATOR: Don`t go outside.
JOE HORN: Move, you`re dead.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
BECK: All right. A grand jury is going to eventually decide whether or not to charge Joe Horn. And Texas law does protect those who use lethal force to protect themselves or their property.
But I have to tell you, there`s one line in this 911 call that really bothers me a great deal. It`s hard to square what -- that one line with the regret and remorse that Mr. Horn says he now feels. Tom Lambright is Joe Horn`s attorney.
Tom, I appreciate it. First of all, I have only heard great things about Joe. His neighbors and everybody says he was like a grandpa and he`s just a good man.
TOM LAMBRIGHT, JOE HORN`S ATTORNEY: I believe that`s exactly correct. Joe is exactly the opposite of what he has sort of been painted in the media of some sort of outlaw vigilante.
BECK: OK. I personally believe that Mr. Horn is a guy who is just tired of people not enforcing the laws and seeing his town and everything else go to hell in a handbasket. But here`s what I want to play for you. I want to play a piece of this tape and get your response on it. This is the part that bothers me.
Let`s go ahead and play the 911 tape.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
OPERATOR: You`re going to get yourself shot if you go outside that house with a gun, I don`t care what you think, OK?
JOE HORN: Do you want to make a bet? I`m going to kill them.
OPERATOR: Stay in the house.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
BECK: I mean, he said, do you want to make a bet? I`m not going to - - I `m going kill them. Didn`t he state his intent there?
LAMBRIGHT: No. I think if you back the tape up, and it goes back to the part where the dispatcher was telling him, you`re going to go outside, I don`t want you to shoot anybody, and he says, I don`t want to shoot anybody, I don`t want to do that.
And then he`s talking about, well, you don`t want to get yourself killed, and he`s talking about, well, I can`t afford to get killed, I don`t want to get killed, I`m going to take my shotgun out with me. So I don`t think he was talking about what he intended to go out and do, he was talking about self-protection.
BEC: OK. What happened when he went outside? What did the guys do? Did they turn? Did they have a gun? Did they come approach him? What happened?
LAMBRIGHT: The fellows originally left the window and ran around the far side of the house, and Joe couldn`t see them. He had to go outside of his front door to actually get a view of the street to let the people know at 911 how they were escaping. As he goes out, there are a lot of shrubberies on the right side, and he can`t see.
He has to walk out past those shrubberies. He`s looking all around. And lo and behold, here are the folks in his yard 10 to 12 feet coming in his direction. Quite a surprise.
BECK: All right. Tom, I appreciate it. Thank you very much. We will follow this story. America, I think this is -- we need to pay more attention to Texas. They`re ahead in disenfranchisement, and this story I think is going to prove critical to us in the future. Thank you very much, Tom.
Now let`s check in with CNN`s "Hero."
JAMES MCDOWELL, "COMMUNITY CRUSADER": I`m Sergeant Major James McDowell. I`m here with the soldiers in Afghanistan. We actually came here and saw that there was not a whole lot here. What you see here in Afghanistan probably looked the same 30 years ago, probably looked the same 300 years ago.
They`re a hard people who live a rough life, but they`re honest. The farmers need help here. What they really need in this country is some kind of a plan. If you don`t give a plan to the Afghan people to make their lives better, well, they`re going to come up with their own plan. And their own plan could be whoever offers the best deal to them.
The Taliban pretty much told them what they had to do. There`s a certain thing that was expected of them, and one of the things was poppies. As far as we could see, you could see nothing but poppy. It was for miles.
Afghanistan is the largest producer of opium in the world. Right now they`re making more opium and drugs than the whole world can use. That`s not good. We just started asking people what can we do?
And one of the farmers said, well, if you get me some saffron I`ll grow that. It`s the most expensive spice in the world by weight.
Asmad (ph), how are you doing, brother? Nice to meet you. Afta (ph)?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Doran (ph).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Doran.
MCDOWELL: Manumek (ph).
What we`re going to leave behind with the help of the Afghan government and the people is a better way for them. So you`re not seeing rusty American relics in a bazaar 100 years from now and saying, oh, the Americans must have been here too, with everybody else.
I want to do something good, I want the soldiers to stay alive, and I want this country to succeed.
BECK: Well, before I leave you, I just want to wish you a merry -- sorry. Happy -- no? Maybe just winter. And I wish that to you sincerely. You know, I know it`s politically incorrect to dream of a White Christmas anymore. In fact, I believe the proper thing to dream about now is a green holiday.
Stores here in New York have put out their holiday window displays, and they`re all trying to out-green each other. Let me tell you something, America. Stay away from this place. It will drive you insane.
It`s important to be green. At least that`s what the store windows tell me now. And it`s at least important to announce it as loudly as possible that you are green and stupid.
But here are the displays at Barney`s in New York. Look at this. There`s -- one sign says "green is the new black," which is a perfect slogan since environmentalism today has become essentially a fashion statement, and of course Rudolph the Recycling Reindeer there complete with an energy-sucking sign.
And don`t forget Santa`s fair trade sweat shop, which to me is a little confusing. I mean, I thought sweat shops were bad and fair trade was good. But I can`t follow it anymore. I mean, I know the guy from Coldplay always has fair trade written on the side of his piano. And if you can`t trust Coldplay`s piano, who can you trust?
Then what better way to express your legitimacy of any movement you might be in than by highlighting a bunch of celebrities, pictures of Al Gore, Bono, George Clooney, and for some reason, Bette Midler, which -- I mean, I`m sure she`s committed to green campaigners living in gigantic houses and flying in private jets and eating foods that are flown in from around the world at their every whim.
But -- and then there is this list that I want to show you. It is the green version of the 12 days of Christmas. Of course you`ve got your 12 tons of tofu, which I believe is 24,000 pounds of tofu, and I always thought vegetarians were supposed to be skinny.
You have 11 solar panels. Of course you need that many panels just to power the lighting in this window. Down the list you have eight tickets to Burning Man. And in case you don`t know, Burning Man is an eight-day-long event which culminates with the burning of a wooden effigy of man. Apparently, in an emission-free fire.
And don`t forget, a Prius and a pear tree. Perfect end ending, isn`t it? Especially considering the number one reason to buy a Prius, according to Prius owners, is not emissions, not fuel economy, not technology, it`s because "it says something about me."
That`s modern environmentalism plain and simple right there. Green is the new black. You can see their transparency even more clearly in the first chapter of my "Inconvenient Book." It`s in bookstores everywhere or online at glennbeck.com.
From New York, good night, America.