Return to Transcripts main page

Glenn Beck

Palestinians Supporting Obama; Hypocrisy with Religion and Campaigns?; Polar Bears Declared a Threatened Species

Aired May 15, 2008 - 19:00   ET

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

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
GLENN BECK, HOST (voice-over): Tonight, phone banking for Obama. A group of Palestinians lobbying for Obama as the president accuses him of wanting to appease terrorists.

Plus an horrific attack in Cleveland leaves one man dead and raises the issue about whether or not people should have more handguns not less. We`ll be joined by Wayne LaPierre.

And the cute cuddly polar bear has joined the threatening species list. I`ll tell you what this is really all about. It has nothing to do with the bears. It has everything to do with global warming and attorneys.

All this and more tonight.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BECK: Well, hello, America.

Tonight I want to shift our focus a little bit to the international impact of the presidential candidates. On today`s global stage, all we need to do is figure out what other countries think about our leadership. It is important to at least hear what counties think here at home. So while the Democrats are still split on who they want as president, some in the Middle East have already made up their minds.

Here`s "The Point" tonight. Some Palestinians in Gaza are campaigning for Barack Obama. In him, they see the same radical possibilities that so many Americans see that share Obama`s extreme leftist views. That is as testifying as it is dangerous, and here`s how I got there.

According to an Al Jazeera news report, a group of Palestinians in Gaza are phone banking in support of Barack Obama`s campaign. Before every U.S. primary, a 23-year-old Gaza man gathers a group of his friends and randomly call America`s -- Americans to rally support for Obama.

Here`s a bit from Al Jazeera.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ABU JAYYAB, OBAMA SUPPORTER (through translator): It all started at the time of the U.S. primaries. After studying Obama`s electoral campaign manifesto, I thought this is a man that`s capable of change inside America. As for a potential change in the Middle East, he can also do that. I think he can bring peace to the area. At least this is what we hope.

I will change, I will shift the justice in the Middle East.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: Who`s paying their salaries on the phone bank?

Let`s be clear: I am not saying or even suggesting that Barack Obama has solicited, encouraged or even wants this Palestinian support. What I am saying is that this story from Al Jazeera makes it clear that some foreign countries have decided who the best American president would be for them, who will help them further their agenda.

Barack has positioned himself as an empty vessel into which Americans can project all of their hopes and dreams for change in him. Obviously, some Palestinians feel the same way.

And by the way, just a note here. This isn`t personal against him. If China were making calls for Hillary Clinton or Mexicans across the border were calling for John McCain, you`re damn right I`d bring you this story.

All of this comes as Israel celebrates their 60th anniversary. Now Israel, our most important ally in the Middle East. And the Hezbollah- controlled government of Lebanon: here`s a government that`s been charged with harboring and supporting terrorist groups like Hamas, and they`re run by Hezbollah.

And John McCain recently went so far as to say that Obama is the favorite candidate of Hamas. Now, I`m not saying that, but what we do need to look at is the company Barack Obama keeps. We know it. Twenty years with the radical Reverend Wright, close ties to the leader of the Weather Underground that bombed the Pentagon and other federal buildings.

And last week, Obama had to sever his relationship with a Middle East advisor who had a number of direct meetings with Hamas. This is not speculation; this is not smear; this is fact. There are a lot of questions about the company Obama keeps.

And he`s really got pretty lousy answers or none at all. Obama is taking the Jimmy Carter approach, thinking that the secret to the Middle East lies with meetings, that we just sit down and talk to them, with Hamas and Hezbollah. Too bad the reality is that Saudi Arabia says that Iran is pulling the strings in Lebanon.

Iran`s President Ahmadinejad, by the way, wished Israel a happy birthday by saying that Israel has reached the end like a dead rat. Israel is doomed to disappear. It can`t be revived and is a rotting corpse. Pass the birthday cake.

So tonight, America, here is what you need to know. You don`t meet with terrorist leaders; you kill them. This whole give-peace-a-chance crap might have worked when you were smoking dope laying naked on your bed with your ugly wife playing the guitar in the 1960s, but it doesn`t work now. It`s naive policy for a man who says he`s the one to lead the free world.

It`s -- this is not about flag pins. It`s not about false Muslim charges. Forget all of those things. When Obama himself says he wants to meet with some of the worst despots and tyrants the world has seen in the last 100 years, believe him.

Bottom line is some in Gaza have decided that Barack Obama is the right candidate for them, which just gives me one more reason -- one more reason -- why I know for sure he`s the wrong candidate for me.

Jed Babbin is the former deputy -- deputy undersecretary of defense and the editor of "Human Events."

Jed, important that we know what this phone bank is in Gaza?

JED BABBIN, EDITOR, "HUMAN EVENTS": Sure. I mean it`s very important to know who`s paying for it, who`s behind it, what they`re saying. You know, this could be some of the most interesting push polling that`s ever been done in the United States. This is really -- it could be a serious thing.

It`s not likely, but I`d like to know why Mr. Obama isn`t speaking out on it, rejecting anything that they could be saying nice about him. You know, as you pointed out in the opening, this man has had a very close relationship with Bill Ayers, an unrepentant former terrorist. This is something that is very troubling about Obama.

And as to his idea that he`s going to, you know, wave his little Harry Potter magic wand at Iran and all of a sudden they`re going to be good guys, it`s an astonishing level of naivete that we haven`t seen since -- since Howard Dean`s campaign for president.

BECK: I want to give you a quote. This is from the -- the Hamas political advisor, the spokesperson. "We don`t mind, actually we like Mr. Obama. We hope he will win the election, and we do believe he is like John Kennedy: a great man with great principle. He had a vision to change America to make it in a position to lead the world community but not with domination or arrogance."

To have Hamas tell us or Hezbollah, tell us that we want to lead the world and all be peaceful, they have caused a civil war in Lebanon. They - - it is all about Muslim fundamental extremists. That`s what this is about.

BABBIN: Absolutely.

BECK: It`s beyond naive that think that these people are going to live in harmony with us.

BABBIN: It`s a fundamental misunderstanding of what we`re up against. You have a guy who says, "Well, I`m going to ignore the fact that, since 1979 when this incredible terrorist regime took charge in Iran, absolutely no one has ever conducted a negotiation with them successfully -- zero, zip, zilch -- that I`m going to come in here. I`m going to say such charming, nice things. I`m going to smile at them and give them my nice voice. And all of a sudden, hey, they`re going to come around and agree"?

BECK: Sure.

BABBIN: This is astonishing naivete. This man -- or for the Hamas people to compare him to JFK, let me remind them that JFK was helping the Cuban resistance. And but for the Bay of Pigs disaster, he would have freed Cuba from communist oppression.

BECK: Yes. You know, Hillary Clinton, her campaign has actually suggested -- and I believe this is a quote -- "dubious ties" between Hamas and Barack Obama`s church. I don`t know if that is even true.

I can just tell you that the people he surrounds himself with should tell us an awful lot about him. That he`s either just not a good judge of character or there`s something much more about him that we don`t know.

BABBIN: Well, I would like to know -- apparently Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, who`s his wife, both former Weather Underground terrorists, they were there at the start of Barack Obama`s career in politics. I`d like to know -- I`d like to know why they thought he was a good guy to launch into politics.

BECK: Right. They weren`t just there. They launched it at their house.

BABBIN: Yes. Thanks a lot.

I`ve got to switch. Got to go to religion here for a second. This one came out yesterday, and this has been driving me crazy. It`s continually coming up in this election, and never in a good way.

Republican Mike Huckabee too religious. Remember? And he`s got that scary -- look at that, it`s a cross. No, it`s not. It`s a bookcase. Mitt Romney, oh, well, that`s the wrong religion.

Funny how things change. I want to -- want to show you a photo of Barack Obama standing in front of a cross. This is for his campaign. Now that it`s crunch time before the Kentucky primary, exploding religious imagery is magically OK with everybody in the press. Obama seems to be marketing himself as the religious candidate and, if that`s what he`s selling, the hypocrisy never seems to ends.

Kevin Madden is a Republican strategist and former senior advisor to Mitt Romney. Let me ask you this, Kevin. This is -- this is the flyer for Barack Obama, and it says under, "My faith teaches me that I can sit in church and pray all I want, but I won`t be fulfilling God`s will unless I go out and do the Lord`s work."

Do you think Mitt Romney could have gotten away with a campaign flyer that said that?

KEVIN MADDEN, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: We would have gotten a long front-page story in the "New York Times" about Mitt Romney`s missionary work and how it affected him as a candidate. Oh, wait, that actually happened during the campaign.

BECK: Did you -- when you see this stuff, Kevin, does the blood shoot out of your eyes? Do you say -- does -- because there are times that I read the newspaper and I just look around, like, "Where are the cameras? Am I on one of those joke -- am I on `Jackass` or `Punked` or something? What is this?"

MADDEN: No, it`s a very obvious double standard. And it`s one that, you know, quite frankly, as somebody who`s worked in Republican communications for so long. I`ve gotten very used to it, Glenn.

So, look, reporters will always go out and try and litigate any use of religion by Democrats or seek to explain it to voters or wow themselves about how the wondrous brains behind it as a smart tactic. And whenever Republicans do it, it`s always framed as being somewhat divisive...

BECK: Right. Or dangerous.

MADDEN: Yes, dangerous or blurring the lines between separation of church and state.

BECK: You know what? Let me jump off on that. OK. Here`s -- play the video of the Mike Huckabee ad with the little cross on there. Again, it`s dangerous; he`s a religious kook. And, boy, you know, what`s going to happen with Mike Huckabee when he gets in and look at that, church and state.

Tell me, Kevin, a guy whose theology in his own church reduces all evil in the world to white racism, is stuck in the 1960s mentality, viewing blacks as perpetual victims, ignoring real black progress, adopts Marxist views of class warfare -- they`re just redistribute the wealth -- and looks to the government to forcefully redistribute unearned wealth as justice.

How is that not a scary theology? How is that not something that blurs the line between church and state?

MADDEN: Well, I actually don`t want to cast aspersions on anybody`s religious beliefs, but I do believe this, Glenn, that ultimately campaigns are a contest of attributes.

And when you are looking to judge -- judge a candidate based on their attributes, their leadership abilities, their world experience, and -- and how they would approach the job with those said attributes. I do think that that`s where how somebody`s faith guides them as a public policy official, does come into the bay. And that`s why we`re going to have a very robust discussion.

You know, I would like to have a discussion about Mitt Romney`s Mormonism and how certain tenets of his faith would affect him. But...

BECK: If tenets of his faith do not dictate that the government level justice by taking from one group and giving to another.

MADDEN: Correct.

BECK: That is completely different.

MADDEN: But when you talk about your faith in a public square, like Barack Obama has, it is absolutely a topic for discussion. And I think a lot of people will examine that further upon -- you know, during this campaign.

BECK: OK. Thanks. We`ll talk to you again.

Just a reminder, tonight`s show brought to you by the Sleep Number Bed by Select Comfort. Sleep Number, it`s the bed that counts.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: In case the people in Washington have forgotten, we need oil in this country, and we need it badly. But nobody in Washington seems to be really doing anything about it.

There`s plenty of oil in Alaska, but special-interest groups that are pulling the strings now have decided that we can`t have any, because polar bears live near there.

Ironically, the administration considered adding them to the endangered species list but decided to call them a threatened species instead.

Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne announced the decision yesterday. I mean, here`s a species, Mr. Secretary, that has gone from 5,000 in population to 25,000 in population, and we`ve just created a litigation nightmare.

DIRK KEMPTHORNE, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR: Well, I`ll tell you, unfortunately I have to follow the law or fortunately. But that`s what the Endangered Species Act is about, that`s why as a United States senator I tried to bring about reform measures for the law itself. As governor I had to live with that.

But by going with the threatened, and this is based upon a three-year administrative record, I cannot overlook the law. I have a constitutional requirement to uphold the law.

But this allows us to now put in place what has been in place since 1972: a program called the Marine Mammal Protection Act. All of the oil and gas industry in Alaska have been operating under that regime for three decades. And so they will continue to be able to go and explore and develop oil and gas in that region.

BECK: Mr. Secretary, you know they`re not going to do that. I mean, I have a -- this has come from the National Wildlife Federation today, they`re already saying the decision should highlight for all of us a larger problem. Global warming threatens an increasing number of wildlife species.

They`re not talking about -- they`re not talking about going and protecting the moose, the salmon, the trout, birds. I mean, this is -- I mean, what`s coming is litigation nightmare.

KEMPTHORNE: Glenn, ironically, you already have a litigation nightmare. In 2006, NOAA listed the coral, based on temperature change of the water. So you have all of these. They`re not going to be successful, because the Endangered Species Act is very straightforward and simple.

It is -- you have to deal with the habitat, and whether or not there is a take or the loss of a species, you cannot make a scientific claim that an emission anywhere is leading to the take of a polar bear in the north. The U.S. Geological Survey has affirmed that. The Wildlife Service has affirmed that.

So while we have to adhere to what the law is and is prescribed, this is not going to be the backdoor opportunity for them to then regulate greenhouse gasses or climate change.

BECK: Here`s the problem. I mean, you say that it`s not -- they`re not going to win. I was talking to the president of -- what was it -- Shell Oil here about two weeks ago on the program. I said how long is it going to take, if we needed to drill someplace, to actually get the oil? He said depending on litigation, but it`s at least ten to 15 years. But litigation can drag that out even further.

Secretary Chertoff had to have some -- more power given to him than anybody in the history of this country. He was given the power to suspend all of the environmental regulations so he could get the border fence built. For the love of Pete, when will anyone understand in government that we can`t suspend the laws that all of you people keep creating there. Business needs to be on the endangered species list soon.

KEMPTHORNE: Glenn, I`m one of those that voluntarily left the United States Senate to go back to Idaho, because I believe in state`s rights. So I didn`t put this particular law on the books. But let me just add when you talk about supply.

BECK: I want to just -- let me stop you here first. Sir, I`m frustrated, as many Americans are, and I`m not blaming this on you. I just don`t understand what we`re doing right now.

KEMPTHORNE: Glenn, if I may.

BECK: Yes.

KEMPTHORNE: In the last six months, we`ve had three significant lease sales for oil and gas. I released to Congress the next five year plan for oil and gas development. I included 48 million additional acres that had never been made available before. This includes the Chukchi Sea up there in the -- in the Arctic region.

What OMB, the Office of Management and Budget, had anticipated would be about $66 million in bids. We actually received $2.6 billion.

Down in the Gulf of Mexico, just about three months ago, we had lease sales. And it was the highest amount ever recorded in United States history.

So we`re aggressive. We`re going to bring about the further development. One-third of all domestic oil and gas that`s produced in the United States is under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior, and that`s one of our charges and missions.

BECK: All right. Mr. Secretary, thank you so much.

KEMPTHORNE: Thank you.

BECK: We`ll be back with a response in just a second. Hang on.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: So all the dopes today are, like, "Oh, gee, the fuzzy, cute little polar bear" -- they leave out that it`s man eating -- is threatened. Is this a bad idea?

Reed Hopper, an attorney for the Civic Legal Foundation, is a guy who`s planning on challenging the administration`s decision.

Reed, you just saw the secretary there. What`s your reaction?

REED HOPPER, ATTORNEY, CIVIC LEGAL FOUNDATION: I think it is a bad idea. We will be challenging the listing of the polar bear in federal court as unwarranted.

BECK: OK. Why do you say it`s unwarranted? I mean, is it just because the population has gone from 20 to 25,000 since 1972? I`m sorry, from 5,000 to 25,000 in 1972?

HOPPER: That`s one reason, but not the only reason. The other reason is that the Endangered Species Act does not authorize the listing of a species that is already protected by other laws.

BECK: OK. I have several press releases saying these attorneys are - - I mean, they were out late last night having cocktails and cake celebrating, because this is going to be a cottage industry. And they are going to start going after all these other animals because of global warming, yes or no?

HOPPER: Absolutely. But beyond that, they will be lining up to challenge productive activity in the United States. It will be arguing that any industrial activity that contributes to global warming by greenhouse gas emissions harms the species and must be curtailed or stopped.

BECK: The secretary just said that that`s not going to happen.

HOPPER: I think that`s political cover for a bad decision, just wishful thinking.

BECK: Are other nations affected by this? I mean, we`ve -- we`re currently spending $5 million doing a survey of the Arctic Circle to make sure that we can make a claim on some of the -- they have -- in the Arctic Circle now, 25 percent of the remaining oil and gas is up in that area.

We`re spending money trying to figure out if we can lay claim to it or at least stop Russia from laying claim to it. Even if we could get claim, could we get that oil and gas? Or will the rest of the world pay attention to the endangered wildlife claim?

HOPPER: There`s always a possible ripple effect. The Endangered Species Act listing itself only affects activities in the United States.

BECK: Wait a minute. It`s only affecting the United States?

HOPPER: The actual listing only applies in the United States. There could be some ripple effects, however, beyond our borders.

BECK: OK, so in other words, Russia can say, "Screw the polar bear," and they can do whatever they want?

HOPPER: They`re not going to be bound by the Endangered Species Act.

BECK: That`s amazing. So that`s of course, going to be perfect for business in America, as the oil and gas industry or anything else that we want to build here in America?

HOPPER: I think we`re looking at the floodgates being opened now for litigious activists trying to shut down any type of industrial activity that the activists believe is going to contribute to global warming.

BECK: OK. Go ahead.

HOPPER: This could include challenges to agricultural industry, housing, transportation, energy, manufacturing. The ultimate effect is that we`re going to se increased prices in energy, housing, food. It`s going to affect the poor and the middle class the most.

BECK: OK, Reed, thanks a lot.

Coming up, we`re going to talk about pensions and tuition that is at risk. It`s a little life cycle of economic responsibility in our "Real Story." More great friends in the government in just a bit. Hang on.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: A quick programming note. My full hour conversation with actor, author and pop culture icon William Shatner airs tomorrow night. We have covered everything from acting to alcoholism. We taped it a couple of days ago.

Believe me, this is not one you want to miss. You have never seen William Shatner like this, and that is a promise.

Tomorrow night at 7:00 p.m. You don`t want to miss it.

Well, welcome to "The Real Story."

Tonight we`re going to talk about politicians. You know, I think they`re a lot like kids. We tell our kids, don`t touch that, and if you tell your kid that, they can`t keep their hands of it. But while our children may want to touch candy or a hot stove, our politicians only want to touch one thing, and that is your wallet.

We should all know by now that Al Gore was promoting two myths. The second one was about that locked box in Washington? Yeah, yeah. That`s impossible. There are no locked boxes.

Earmarked money for education? Oh, please, that`s pulled out for roadwork. Set money aside for Social Security? That`s used for defense.

In California, even the lottery isn`t safe anymore. Governor Schwarzenegger now wants to borrow $15 million from the lottery to help balance their disaster of a budget. Borrowing from the lottery, isn`t that kind of like borrowing from the mob?

All the spending has had an obvious consequence, and that is we`re broke. Although nobody really wants to admit it -- we could print more money -- "The Real Story" is, somebody has got to pay for all the reckless spending we have been doing in this country, all the broken promises and empty lock boxes that we have accumulated over the years. And unfortunately, you know who`s going to pay for it.

One of the big problems facing America that nobody really wants to talk about is who`s going to finance their retirements of our parents and grandparents? They`re all retiring now.

It`s not going to be them. Only half of Americans have actually saved more than 31,000 for their retirement. I mean, how long are you going to live on that?

It`s not going to be corporate pensions. Twenty percent of workers now have them, and most companies have never even fully funded them. It`s not going to be government pensions, because most are broke because our politicians just couldn`t keep their hands out of the cookie jar.

And it`s certainly not going to be Social Security or Medicare. That`s a joke. These two programs are on track to eat up almost the entire federal budget in the decades ahead.

So like I said, it`s going to be you and me. And probably our kids and our grandkids and maybe our great, great grand kids as well.

You know, a lot of people will tell you, oh, we can solve these problems. We`ve just got to start taxing the wealthiest one percent. That`s a lie. This is not a tax problem, it never was.

It is a spending problem, it is a problem of greed. So now how do we get back to sanity?

Roger Lowenstein says he has an answer. He`s the author of "While America Aged."

Roger, let`s start with GM. How did the whole GM thing happen?

ROGER LOWENSTEIN, AUTHOR, "WHILE AMERICA AGED: Glenn, GM started giving out pensions in the late `40s, in 1950, the treaty of Detroit, with the other manufacturers. And the system worked for a couple of decades, because when you went to the car dealer, the show room, and they showed you the car with the nice tail fins, you got a pension along with it.

All the manufacturers had the same pensions, they priced them into the price of the car. But when imports started coming in, you had a choice. You could get, you know, the Chevy with the pensions or you could get the Toyota without it. And basically from that day on, the American level of benefits became uncompetitive.

BECK: OK. So we`ve got -- we`ve got this system failing all across America in every realm.

LOWENSTEIN: Well, we got on the private side, a lot of companies failed and a lot of others just said we really don`t want to be the GM of the future.

BECK: Sure.

LOWENSTEIN: So we`re going to terminate or freeze. And that system, as you said, is winding down. Fewer than one out of five private sector people have a pension.

BECK: OK. And the states are having the same problem. So what is the solution here?

LOWENSTEIN: The states have radically underfunded. They`re hundreds of billions of dollars with health care liabilities thrown in, a trillion dollars in the red, according to the GAO.

And you said there are two solutions, and, you know, I disagree with you. It could be a tax solution or it could be a lower benefits solution. But we have sort of had a schizophrenic approach in this country to retirement and social benefits, which is, you know, we want the benefits but we don`t want to pay for them. And it`s got to be one or the other.

It can`t be we`ll take the benefits and we won`t tax and we won`t pay for them. You know...

(CROSSTALK)

BECK: But you want to take all of these pensions and jam it over to the federal government, which, I mean, everybody says -- see, the problem with GM, as I understand it, Roger, is -- was the arrogance. GM will always be GM. GM`s never going to go out of business, it`s never going to have problems, it`s never going to fall on tough times. Well now...

LOWENSTEIN: It was arrogance. It was fear because the unions were going to strike.

BECK: Right.

LOWENSTEIN: And it was always easier, and it was always today to -- you know, to pass the pensions through to tomorrow.

BECK: You tell me, though, Roger, how that`s not different from the United States right now. Instead of fear of the unions, it`s fear of the electorate. People are voting for politicians who will say, oh, I`ll give this and we`ll just pass it on to the next generation.

LOWENSTEIN: If the legislatures -- what I`m for is a legislature, when it approves a pension, every dollar that`s approved should be funded right then. Then you`d have legislatures making honest choices.

Maybe some of them would say, hey, do voters want to pay for taxes and want to pay so public employees can retire at age 50? If that`s not popular, they wouldn`t.

I`m just saying, let`s have an honest choice. Fund what we approve. If we don`t fund it, then don`t approve it.

BECK: All right. Roger, I think we ended at a nice place, because you and I agree completely on that.

Thank you so much, sir.

LOWENSTEIN: Thank you.

BECK: Now, our country may be in financial trouble, many of our country`s colleges, oh, they`re not. They`re doing -- they`re kicking butt.

I wrote a column today on CNN.com about the top five college university endowments in America. They`re reporting a combined value of over $100 billion at the end of 2007.

So how did these endowments get so big? Well, they would like you to believe it`s just because they`re so prestigious. Oh, we`re Harvard, you know.

"The Real Story" is it`s because they`re run like a business, a tax- free business. Earlier this month, a company made an offer to take over a California lumber company. It has over 200,000 acres of forest.

The company? Harvard Management Company. What do they do? Oh, yeah, they run the school`s $35 billion endowment fund.

What the hell is a school doing running a timber company? It`s a tax- free school. Good question. Unfortunately, it`s the wrong one. The question you should be asking is what schools like Harvard are doing with all of the billions of tax-free money they have been stockpiling.

In 2007, schools with large endowments like Harvard and Yale spent an average of just 4.4 percent of it. Meanwhile, they earned an average of over 19 percent on that money. And it`s not like these schools are funneling all the extra cash into the communities -- oh, look at us helping the poor.

No, no, no. Harvard voluntarily gives Boston about $1.8 million a year. Wow. That`s great, until you figure out and realize that that`s an embarrassing .005 percent of their fund`s value.

The result is that some of these cities these schools basically own, like New Haven, Connecticut, are dying. New Haven is one of the top 10 poorest cities in the country. And the fact that Yale University, the biggest tenant -- go and find a building in New Haven that`s not owned by Yale -- uses the city services -- hey, call the fire department.

They use all the resources and they pay virtually nothing in property tax. So the city is in this giant hole and nobody`s there to dig them out of it.

So what should happen? Should we tax them? You`re damn right we should.

Quite honestly, I`m not in favor of giving our government even more money for them to waste. But this is a business. If we don`t tax them, we should at least make them spend the same minimum five percent that foundations, private foundations, are forced to. Bill and Melinda Gates, their foundation, they have got to spend five percent if they want to keep their tax-free status.

And we should absolutely stop giving these undercover timber-buying hedge funds any more subsidies or handouts. They have more money to invest right now than the entire federal government could even dream of because we don`t have an endowment and our lock boxes are all empty.

Richard Wolff is an economic professor at the University of Massachusetts.

Richard, you and I were talking just a little while ago. I mean, they get these tax breaks. Why should they? They`re businesses.

RICHARD WOLFF, ECONOMICS PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS: Yes, it`s always been a mystery to me ever since I started looking into it, that many years ago, the idea was you`d give a tax break to Yale and Harvard because they began as schools that trained ministers for local churches. So the local community gave them a benefit, no tax, because the local community got a benefit in return, namely ministers to preach.

Now they`re multibillion-dollar corporations, they mainly service people that have nothing to do, for example, with New Haven. They don`t come from New Haven, they don`t return to New Haven.

It`s a patent absurdity to give them a tax break that means that the city of New Haven, one of the 10 poorest, as you pointed out, in the world -- or in the United States, excuse me -- ends up having to tax all the poor people of New Haven to pay for the delivery of free public services to Yale University, one of the richest universities in the world. It`s Robin Hood in reverse.

BECK: OK. But they`ll say that they provide things like hospital -- Yale New Haven Hospital, one of the best hospitals in the world. That`s what they`ll say. That`s their contribution to the city.

WOLFF: Right. But first of all, most of the patients that go to Yale New Haven Hospital come from outside the city of New Haven. So if there was any kind of rational plan to have people who benefit pay the cost, then there would have to be some sharing of that responsibility. Nobody does that.

Number two, if Yale paid the same rate of taxation that everybody else in New Haven, every poor family in New Haven pays, the amount of money the city would earn each year from Yale would allow them to run their own hospital and still have plenty of money left over to take care of the needs of the city of New Haven. Really, the running of that hospital is about the same thing as the statistic you pointed out of .005 percent.

Yale is getting away with not paying its fair share for the services the city delivers to them. And the same is true of the state and the federal government.

BECK: You know, here`s the thing, Richard -- by the way, you teach at U Mass?

WOLFF: Yes, I do.

BECK: I think you`re a professor I would dig.

You listen to these universities, and they preach about socialism and how bad capitalism is, then they engage in obscene capitalism and try to preach to us that that`s not a profit, that`s an endowment. And then they come back for a second dip into the kitty and have us pay for tuition.

WOLFF: Right. One of the things that most amazed me was when I discovered that the largest single source of income each year at Yale University over the last 30 years has not been tuition, room and board, has not been gifts from rich people, it`s been money from the federal government.

When anybody does research at Yale, they submit a budget. The federal government gives them the money to do the research and then lops on an additional amount to help defray the costs of maintaining Yale University.

BECK: Unbelievable. Richard...

WOLFF: So not only do they not pay the taxes, but then they get the money we all pay in taxes as a way to build up the income and wealth of the university.

BECK: That`s "The Real Story" tonight. You can read more about the college endowment funds and how they represent the world`s largest and incredible tax break. Check out the column I wrote for CNN today by visiting cnn.com/glenn.

Coming up, a terrifying crime in Cleveland leaves a 41-year-old man dead. Gun control advocates love to talk about guns causing crime. Could a gun have prevented this crime? The NRA`s Wayne LaPierre joins me next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Well, earlier this week in Cleveland, a group of about 15 men attacked a man right out in the street. Neighbors called police, 911. You should hear the 911 calls.

The men brutally beat this man to death. They pulled of all of his clothes. One man then urinated on the dead man`s head.

It is a terrible, horrific crime, one that like so many others may have had a different outcome if somebody in the neighborhood had a gun, or if everybody in the neighborhood had a gun. I mean, I grew up on my grandfather`s street. You know, I spent time, summers on my grandfather`s street. And when there was a problem in the neighborhood, everybody got their gun and went to the neighbor`s house.

The media loves to tell us about all these stories about crimes that were committed with guns, but how many crimes would have been prevented by guns?

Tonight we continue our weeklong series on the Second Amendment with executive vice president of the NRA, Wayne LaPierre.

Hello, Wayne.

WAYNE LAPIERRE, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, NRA: Hi, Glenn. How are you doing?

BECK: I`m doing well.

The -- everybody is focused on how guns cause crime. How about some of the stories where guns prevented crime?

LAPIERRE: Yes, you`re exactly right. And we know from all the figures that happens 2.5 to three million times a year. The honest people use a firearm to defend themselves against some criminal that ought to be in jail.

BECK: Wait, wait. Wait, wait, wait, wait. Say that number again.

LAPIERRE: 2.5 to three million times a year the good guys use a firearm against the bad guys that ought to be in jail but are out somehow walking the streets.

BECK: Where are you coming up with that number, Wayne?

LAPIERRE: Every...

BECK: Go ahead.

LAPIERRE: Every researcher has come up with those figures. Gary Kleck, University of Florida, all kinds of other researchers. That`s the number.

You know, we read about it in the paper. It`s just it`s usually on page 17 or 18 rather than page one.

BECK: No, you don`t...

LAPIERRE: It varies.

BECK: You know what? I have to tell you, you don`t read about it in the newspaper. What you do read about in the newspaper is a guy from Pizza Hut going to deliver a pizza. He`s got a gun, he shoots a guy, this guy gets fired because the guy who he knocked on the door had a gun, trying to rob him. And Pizza Hut says, he shouldn`t have been carrying a gun.

LAPIERRE: Yes, it`s outrageous. I mean, we have seen attack on the personal protection rights of workers coming out of some of these arrogant corporate legal staffs in conjunction with the anti-gun groups. And they`re trying right now to put parking lots all over the country off- limits to firearms.

BECK: Right.

LAPIERRE: Well, you know, it`s an attack on the second and third- shift personal protection rights to protect themselves or their workers.

BECK: Right. If you`re walking out -- or my wife was walking out in the middle of the night. She had to go out to a parking garage or a parking space across the street. I`d want my wife to be able to protect her if she had a permit for a gun and she knew what she was doing on that.

Georgia is actually -- didn`t last night -- didn`t they come up with, what is it, Bill 89, I think?

LAPIERRE: Yes, they sure did. And the week before Florida did too.

BECK: And what is it?

LAPIERRE: It`s a bill that says if you have a right to carry a permit -- and keep in mind, 40 states now have that law -- that you`re entitled to take that firearm and have it in the trunk of your car while you`re at work so when you get off work at 1:00 or 2:00 in the morning, you can protect yourself on the way home. And the company cannot prohibit you from having the firearm in the trunk of your car while you`re at work.

BECK: It really amazes me, Wayne, that -- because I talked about this earlier this week, that cities like Philadelphia, where they had a cop killed here just recently, over and over and over these police officers are killed. Chicago says, oh, our cops are in the line of fire and they`re outgunned. And yet, what do they do? The city and the state come up and they say, we need stronger gun laws.

No you don`t. You need to enforce the ones you have. And you need to put the criminals behind bars.

LAPIERRE: That`s exactly right. And everyone knows that the criminal justice system in the city of Philadelphia is a shameful wreck.

The local prosecutors say that the judges don`t do their jobs and put these criminals in jail. The U.S. attorney said the problem in Philadelphia is a felon can put a gun in his pocket and walk out on the street and has no appreciation that he`ll ever do any jail time if he gets caught. They have a completely collapsed criminal justice system up there, and that`s the problem.

BECK: Fifteen seconds. Any of these candidates any good on guns? Or which is the one -- 15 seconds -- give me the one that you say absolutely, please dear God, not that guy for president.

LAPIERRE: Well, I`ll tell you, either Hillary or Obama. I mean, I know they`re pandering to gun owners by claiming to be pro-Second Amendment.

BECK: Right.

LAPIERRE: It`s an embarrassment and it won`t work.

BECK: OK.

LAPIERRE: They both try to do everything to destroy the Second Amendment in Washington.

BECK: Wayne, thank you very much.

And don`t forget, we`re running exclusive commentary all week in my free e-mail newsletter about the Second Amendment. Tomorrow`s edition hopefully will feature that piece from John McCain if he`d just stop campaigning for a second and actually write it.

Go over to glenbeck.com right now and sign up. It`s completely free.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Well, Nashville is getting some unwanted attention because of how its 911 system seems to be handling some emergency calls. Now, obviously most of the operators do a great job, and you can always find examples of some people who are treated worse than others, but this case kind of stands out.

We have the 911 audio to show you how much it stands out here in a minute. It starts with a woman named Sheila Jones. Sheila was at home when her ex-boyfriend busted into the house, began harassing her.

She immediately picks up the phone and dials 911. She tells the operator, "Help. I need police."

She says, "My life has been threatened." The ex-boyfriend is there. He`s pulled out a knife.

She eventually was able to get him out of the house, and he left the property. But without the police. They didn`t show up.

After waiting a while, she called back again, and then again, and then again. She told the operator that, everybody keeps saying that somebody`s on the way, but nobody`s showing up. Throughout all of these calls, the ex-boyfriend continued to call her and make threats, so she knew she wasn`t out of the clear yet.

Eventually, 911 apologized and said, oh, sorry, we had to divert an officer to make a stop at a more important incident. He had a traffic stop. Probably not as important as somebody being threatened with a knife, but what do I know?

Now, two and a half hours after the initial call, Sheila calls again. This time she`s told, yeah, nobody`s working on that one. She understandably flips out, wondering, are you just going to wait until, you know, I`m dead before you show up? She said she was scared to leave her house and hung up, and then this happened...

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I`m scared to even leave out my (EXPLETIVE DELETED) house.

OPERATOR: OK, ma`am. I updated the call. We`ll get somebody there as soon as possible.

(HANGS UP)

I really just don`t give a (EXPLETIVE DELETED) what happens to you.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

BECK: Wow. Yes, but, no, no, no, let`s let the government take our guns from us.

Sheila actually had to call the mayor`s office, and only then did suddenly help arrive. Luckily, we can report the 911 operator who said that, no longer a 9/11 operator. He`s been fired. I don`t want him greeting me at the Wal-Mart.

Don`t forget, sign up for my free e-mail newsletter this week, the importance of the Second Amendment. Get some perspective from John McCain in your inbox tomorrow. If you sign up now, it is totally free at glennbeck.com.

From New York, goodnight, America.

END