Return to Transcripts main page
Does Obama`s Foreign Policy Make Sense?; L.A. Seeks to Ban Fast-Food Restaurants
Aired July 21, 2008 - 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, Obama is finally in Iraq. Oh, he is just so right when he`s just so wrong. I`ll explain.
Plus, an L.A. city councilwoman fights to ban construction on new fast food restaurants. Apparently, that`s the best way to keep your kids from turning into fatty-fat fatsos.
And an update on the two men I consider to be America`s first political prisoners. Why nothing has happened to free these two innocent men from prison.
All this and more, tonight.
BECK: Well, hello, fatty-fat fatsos. Tonight, hello, America. Our McDonald`s are in trouble. We`ll get to that story here in just a second. You`re not going to believe it. Blood will shoot out of your eyes.
And the campaign is in overdrive, and those political ads are everywhere. I think it`s important that we remember one thing, and that is when we start to go in to elect a candidate, no candidate is perfect. I don`t care if you`re Republican or Democrat. In fact, they`re far from perfect. I think they both suck, but one has been more consistent than the other. So here`s "The Point" tonight.
When it comes to defense and war, John McCain has been right from day one and, unlike Barack Obama, this guy hasn`t wavered and flip-flopped. I mean, jeez, would you like some syrup with those waffles, Barack? Here`s how I got there.
Like most people in America, I think that it`s -- there`s really three issues that matter. There`s the gas prices, the stability of our money, the economy and our national defense. Tonight, let`s concentrate on the last one.
Barack Obama is now in Iraq talking to the troop, and al Qaeda, about what we should do and when we should do it. Only problem is, he`s a little late to the party. This -- the campaign season is awfully darn long, but I believe he and John McCain, they hope that your memory is really, really short. They`re counting on you only remembering what they said last, not what they said first.
Politicians and the media that supports them like to call that a -- what would "The New York Times" call it? -- an evolution of opinion. I think it -- yes, smells like bull crap. We`ll get back to Barack here in just a second, but first, let`s take a look at John McCain.
I disagree with this clown on just a whole bunch of issues. And I don`t know if I can join James Dobson in voting for the guy, but McCain is right about national defense. When it comes to a consistent, well-informed position based on experience as a naval aviator and a senator, McCain is the only game in town. He`s always been strong on defense, from the invasion of Iraq to the surge to his commitment to finishing the job and -- here`s a novel idea in America now -- actually winning the war.
John McCain has been rock solid on these, and I respect and agree with him on those positions.
Now, as for Barack Obama, his position on defense has been a little more -- flexible? No, no, no. I`m sorry. "New York Times" would call it "open-minded." If you want to believe that Obama is right in his thinking today, that`s only because he was so incredibly wrong for the last 18 months.
Here`s how he used to think about the troops in Iraq and the effectiveness of the surge in January of 2007. May I quote? "I`m not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will make it worse."
Now I want you to take a look at what he`s been saying from July 2 of this year. Quote, "The extraordinary work that our troops have done, they have performed brilliantly throughout the process, and obviously, I am very pleased to see the reductions in violence that have occurred over the last several months. There is no doubt that because of their heroism and outstanding work we have the opportunity to salvage the situation in Iraq." Oh, my gosh.
Tonight, America, here`s what you need to know. Obama now thinks that we should go and get al Qaeda in Afghanistan after we`ve cleaned them out of Iraq. I don`t have any problem with that. It makes sense, but everybody but him has been saying it for months. The problem is Obama has also said that we should also fly our jets into Pakistan and bomb the terrorists there. That would be a little be dangerous, little bit hasty, kind of like forcing our way into Iran, which everybody says is a bad idea.
John McCain may not be perfect, but at least he understands that being commander in chief means always being strong and sensible with our defense. You can play soldier once in a while, but not when you`re president, not when it`s just politically convenient.
Mary Matalin is a Republican strategist for -- and a former White House advisor.
Mary, I see this guy. You know, Barack Obama says, "Oh, I`m a different kind of politician.
MARY MATALIN, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: He`s a change. He`s a change candidate. He`s a change his mind candidate.
BECK: Yes, yes. I mean, it`s brilliant if you`re a typical, same old politician. It`s brilliant now to go in and say, we`ve got to concentrate on Afghanistan because it`s falling apart. Now you`re not paying attention to what he said about Iraq, right?
MATALIN: You know, he -- I personally am delighted that he`s going, because if he doesn`t win -- I hope that he doesn`t. And that he remains in the Senate and he continues to serve on the foreign relations committees that he does. It`s imperative that you see who`s going on, on the ground. I`ve been all over Afghanistan. What you see when you go there is a transformation relative to what you say when you`re sitting in Washington. It`s shameful, some of the things he and other politicians have said, not - - not seeing the impact of what they`re seeing on the ground. Not just to our troops, but to the citizens.
You go to Afghanistan and you can see the greatness of what America has done. You can see their gratitude. And you can see, again, how shameful it is to say that Iraq was a distraction and now we`re going to go in and do this. We need to do in Afghanistan what we did to create the success we`re now having in Iraq, to be able to talk about a horizonal [SIC] withdrawal, which is to secure the public, rout out the insurgents and help them rebuild.
It`s successful, we`re making progress, but it`s fragile. And you can`t sit here and say what he`s been saying, so it`s a good thing that he`s there.
BECK: Wait a minute. Hole on. You can, though. You can get away with saying the things he said. There is no one -- do you remember what happened when they had "mission accomplished" up there? I think they`re still investigating that damn banner. Do you remember the last election? "I can`t vote for a president who can`t say he made a mistake."
Why won`t he admit that he made a mistake? Nobody is even asking Barack Obama, was it a mistake? They don`t even -- they`re just moving on.
MATALIN: You know, you did a just astounding chronicling of not just his pre-surge position, but at the outset of the surge, and how he not only was against it; he sponsored other legislation. Wouldn`t do. And all throughout the whole year, it`s not working four days after they were there, he`s saying it`s not working. They`ve been there four days, as you noted today.
And right up until recently, he was saying it wasn`t working. And as John McCain said in his piece at that "The New York Times" would not print, in response to the Obama "New York Times" editorial, he never talks about winning. He talks about ending. In any conflict of this nature, there`s winners and losers. So if it just ends and we`re not winning, they`re winning, which is catastrophic to us.
BECK: But don`t you know that in Barack Obama`s world, there are no losers. We can all win.
MATALIN: "Kumbaya." Let`s just all talk to them and sit around the campfire.
BECK: I know. I want to -- I want to get back to the "New York Times" article here on the thing. You mind if you just hang on the other side of the break and we`ll come back and talk?
BECK: I want to talk to you about that in a second, but is there anybody that is going to ask about the man`s judgment? We have Tony Rezko. We have Reverend Wright. We have Pakistan. Flying planes into an allied air space, Pakistan, a country that is on the verge of instability, and drop bombs is as, if not more dangerous, than it is to fly into Iran, which everyone on the left of the Democrats are against, but for some reason nobody seems to have a problem going into Pakistan. They`re both insane.
MATALIN: They`re -- you know what? It`s not Pakistan. It`s these tribal lands. It`s no man`s land. It`s Waziristan. If you fly over it, you can see that you could just be bombing Disney. I mean, just bombing anything. You can`t tell who you`re bombing. That`s why they can`t just go in there and get them. They don`t know they`re there.
Oh, by the way, Musharraf, who`s had multiple assassination attempts on his life, because he`s been trying to help secure not just his country but secure us, it points out what McCain has been saying. The naivete, the posturing. It`s really shameful, and it`s a big risk to what you`ve correctly identified as our No. 1 issue, security.
BECK: OK. So let me go back to -- let me play devil`s advocate here. Bush just sent somebody over to talk to Iran. That`s all that -- that`s all that Barack Obama has wanted to do. What`s the difference? Why should -- why was Barack Obama to say let`s sit down and talk to Iran, and Bush is right.
MATALIN: Barack`s position -- Barack Obama`s position has been, although he`s changed his mind or he`s refined his position.
BECK: Flexible, yes.
MATALIN: But his essential posture was, for the longest time, at least as long as the primary season, was that he would have unconditional talks. That we can sit down with these people. Of course, Germany, Great Britain and France and everybody hair got on fire and said no, no, no, you can`t do that.
Part of -- there is a big movement to pressure Iran for once and for all in what Iran has been saying, what everybody`s been using as an excuse, they won`t talk to us.
So, Chris Burns is listening. You know, listening. There can be no excuse. We`ve tried everything after this. And if they don`t denuclearize or deweaponize at this juncture, then there`s no excuse for their saying, "Well, come and talk to us."
MATALIN: It`s completely different...
BECK: So OK.
MATALIN: ... than having unconditional talks with the head of state.
BECK: Just let me ask. I`ve got 30 seconds. And then we`re going back to the break and we`ll come back. But real quick, I think this was a last-ditch effort. Are you saying the same thing? I think Bush saying, "Let`s go over and talk" is pretty much the last. You know, everybody knows it`s coming to a head. So, Bush is basically saying, "Look, we tried. We went, we talked to them. They didn`t want to talk to us at all, you know. All bets are off now."
MATALIN: I think last ditch, not in a pejorative way, but in the way, OK, you were going to try you`re way, we`re going to try everything. It was like Saddam and the 17 resolutions that he -- he said no, and we gave another deadline, another deadline, another deadline. There`s nothing that they have asked, that Bush has done, and what Bush has done throughout is remain resolved that this -- they neither have hegemony in the region or be a security threat to us.
BECK: OK. Back with Mary Matalin in just a second.
And also coming up, we`re going to -- we`re going to take on our energy crisis again. We`re never going to solve this unless we take huge steps to cut our dependency on oil. An alternative energy, is there an option out there? Find out. Panel of experts in tonight`s "Real Story." There is a real good option, but nobody wants to look at it.
And a quick programming alert. Tonight, I sit in for the King. That`s right. Believe it or not, you heard me correctly. Larry`s got the night off, and I`ve been asked to sit in his chair. You don`t want to miss it. Make sure you tune in tonight, 9 p.m. and midnight, only on "LARRY KING LIVE," CNN.
BECK: My mother used to say there`s a difference between can`t and won`t. Tonight, I`m going to talk a little bit about oil and new strategies. You know, they all say we can`t drill our way out of this one. Can`t or won`t? It`s coming up.
But first, back with Republican strategist, former White House advisor Mary Matalin.
Let me start with the "New York Times" thing. We were talking about this. This is amazing to me, Mary. "The New York Times" takes an op-ed piece for Barack Obama, and they publish it. Then, when John McCain issues a response, they say, "No, it`s kind of old news."
MATALIN: You can redirect and resend it in...
MATALIN: ... when it meets our specifications.
MATALIN: It`s amazing. And the editorial page editor used to work in the Clinton administration. No, there`s no media bias, is there?
BECK: No. No, of course there`s not. Not at all. And there`s no media bias with the three anchors that are following, you know, Barack Obama around to make sure that they can -- they can get anchor their news coverage on location with him.
John McCain has gone to foreign countries three times in the last four months. I don`t remember any of them being there. They might have had -- they might have had a cell phone down in the country where he was.
MATALIN: That`s the -- he`s the messiah. The messiah in Babylon, you know. They want to all get there, yes. And as you pointed out on one of your shows, Pew, who is a school of excellence in journalism, their study: Obama`s gotten a third plus more coverage. It`s not just that they`re covering him positively. It`s that they`re covering him almost -- not to the exclusion of McCain, but they are covering him like the messiah. What was once a joke is now sort of -- they`ve become a parody of themselves.
BECK: Oh, yes. No. They`re only thing they`re not doing is playing Handel behind him. It`s incredible. James Dobson came out today and said that he`s not endorsing John McCain. Back in January he said there`s no way he`d ever do it. No he says, "I can`t rule it out. I may -- I may have to change my mind on that."
MATALIN: Well, it reminds me, John McCain could never convince me to vote for him, but Barack Obama could. This is a testament against the power of the messiah. But obviously, when you do a side by side, the risk factor of a Barack Obama presidency is just too high. And McCain`s positions are incontestably better. And it`s a good thing for John McCain, because he`s unifying the base that he needs to energize them. And a James Dobson could do that.
BECK: Mary, you know I love you. And you`re looking lovely tonight.
MATALIN: Thank you. I`m back from my tour, and you`re back from yours.
BECK: You were on a tour? Did you do, like, a rock tour?
MATALIN: I`m a groupie. You don`t ever see me on the floor, but I`m out there, waving.
BECK: Applaud now. Applaud. The -- you just said a minute ago, you know, that John McCain is just so much better. OK, On the war.
MATALIN: Let me interrupt you.
BECK: Oh, wow. OK.
MATALIN: When you do a side by side, it is incontestable that the McCain tax plan, McCain budget, the McCain energy plan, and the McCain health care cost reduction plan, the McCain security plan, and McCain`s experience and leadership. OK. I`m not -- we have the same reservations about his candidacy, but we don`t get to make the perfect candidate. We have to make a choice.
BECK: Yes. Just, you know, when you say his tax plan, I`ve looked at his tax plan, and it is better than Barack Obama`s. But then, he`s also for cap and trade. He`s for all these hidden taxes. He`s for -- he`s for all these government bull crap, you know, programs that are just -- they`re going to bleed you dry one way or another.
That`s my problem with Barack Obama. Barack Obama and his views, you know, we shouldn`t have been in this war in the first place. It`s cost us $100 billion or whatever. And we could have spent that money on something else. Barack, you clowns are going to spend that money anyway. It`s not like we`re saving any money.
MATALIN: Yes. Here`s what people need to understand. Whatever we don`t know exactly about Barack Obama, since he was in the Senate for, what, 140 days? We do know this. They will expand a majority, Democratic liberal majorities in both chambers of Congress, led by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.
We do know that Barack Obama will be obliged to his hard-left, money- based bloggers and organizations. And we at least have a fighting chance to stop a cap and trade or to stop socialized health care. We just have to be on a, you know, stop expansion movement for the next four years.
BECK: Mary, thanks a lot. We`ve got to run.
Coming up, California wants to tell you how to live your life again. Now a local lawmaker wants to ban any new fast-food restaurants in Los Angeles, because it makes kids fat. Hey, parents, maybe you should stop buying burgers for them. I`m just saying.
Tonight, I fill in for Larry King. Larry King has the night off and somehow or another, I`m going to be in his chair. We`ll cover everything from politics to energy and the economy. You don`t want to miss it. Make sure you tune in tonight at 9 p.m. and again at midnight, only on CNN for "LARRY KING LIVE."
BECK: Well, if Virginia is for lovers, then California is for crazy people. A city councilwoman is pushing for a ban on fast-food restaurants in South Central Los Angeles. Can`t build any new ones because of an alarming rate of childhood obesity and, quote, a poverty of healthful eating choices.
First of all, when did drive-thru restaurants become priority No. 1 in the capital of drive-by shootings? I`m just saying.
Secondly, because you think some people, you know, should be eating avocados and tofu doesn`t mean, you know, you shouldn`t have a right to eat French fries and Taco Bell`s delicious Queso Crunch Wrap, which is yummy. This is America, and you have a right to eat poorly and get as fat as you like, even in Los Angeles. I`m trying it now, myself.
David Harsanyi is a guy who`s written about Twinkie fascists in his book, "Nanny State."
David, let me play devil`s advocate here. Why isn`t this a bad thing? These people are costing the health-care system a ton of money because of their obesity.
DAVID HARSANYI, AUTHOR, "NANNY STATE": Obesity is a lifestyle choice, not a -- well, that was sarcastic.
BECK: No, but it`s true.
HARSANYI: It is. I mean, there`s no end in sight when you want government to monitor your personal behavior. I think that, you know, if you start with fast food, why not just take it all the way? Let`s get it over with.
BECK: Let me ask you this. Why fast food? You can get a salad. I`ve never tried one, but I`ve seen them. You can get salads at fast food. You can get healthy choices. Nobody buys them.
HARSANYI: No. And, you know, there are plenty of choices. It`s ridiculous to say there aren`t supermarkets where you can buy a salad.
Fast-food restaurants, first of all, are not the reason for obesity. It`s an entire lifestyle choice that certain parents make for their kids, frankly, and to just sort of blame one sector of our eating habits, I guess, you know, undermines the whole -- the whole issue of why we have obesity.
BECK: Yes. You know, here in New York, they want those calorie counters up on the -- you know, on the boards for the menus. You know, for Dunkin Donuts. If you think you`re going to lose weight at Dunkin Donuts, you deserve to die.
No, seriously. We should thin out the herd. We should -- we should put the calorie count in Dunkin Donuts real low, so if you think you`re so -- you`re stuffing your face full of donuts, you`re like, "No, it`s health food," you drop dead of a heart attack and we`re all happier.
HARSANYI: Well, it`s not just Dunkin Donuts. It`s Starbucks. There are places where people, you know, right-minded people would never eat fast food go that have huge amounts of calories. Yet, they don`t want to ban Starbucks.
BECK: Yes. How about -- how about the society that says we shouldn`t eat at fast-food restaurants because it`s bad. It`s making our kids fatty- fat fatsos. But we also can`t have any playgrounds.
HARSANYI: Well, not playgrounds where you hurt yourself.
BECK: Exactly right. We`re teaching our kids not to play, not to exercise, and, you know -- and also eat at McDonald`s.
HARSANYI: Well, overall, we`re teaching society that government can take care of you. If there are too many fast-food restaurants, we`ll just ban them. If there are too many playgrounds where you get hurt, we`ll just make safe ones for you.
BECK: It`s fascist. This is fascist.
HARSANYI: It is. It is.
BECK: It is the state saying, "I`ll take care of you. I know better than you do." And you know what? Nobody makes that decision for me. Yet -- correct me if I`m wrong, David -- this is what you`re going to have to have if you have government health care. The government, the more they take care of you, the more they have to take care of you.
HARSANYI: Yes. Once it`s about externalities and what we all do and what the cost is overall, other people can tell you how to live your life because they`re paying for it.
BECK: Yes. Thanks a lot, David.
Now coming up next, we have Governor Rick Perry of Texas. He`s got a new plan to make his state the leader in alternative energy. Wait a minute. Texas is all about oil, I thought. Wait until you hear his new energy plan. It`s coming up next. Stick around.
BECK: Welcome to the "Real Story."
Well, you may have missed all the news because of last week, the media is so excited about Obama`s trip to the Middle East; but believe it or not, there is some drilling in the ANWR. Finally, it is true.
After months and months of wrangling over permits and cutting through the political red tape, you`d think this would be a lead story. The "Real Story" is we have finally been given the green light to drill for ice core samples. I`m not joking.
Scientists have drilled in 150 different holes just looking for samples in the ANWR over the last two weeks with the hope of -- get this -- figuring out how much climate change is affecting the Arctic. They want to see the effects of heat on ice.
I`m not a scientist, but I am a thinker. I think it melts. You know, if all the stupid snow and ice would just melt, it would be a lot easier to get all the oil buried there, but what do I know?
Of course, drilling for actual oil in the ANWR and tapping the estimated 10 billion barrels it holds is strictly off limits. And so is drilling on the outer continental shelf. Building new hydroelectric power plants, otherwise known as dams; putting wind farms in the way of Ted Kennedy`s gorgeous vista over there, and at least practically speaking, opening up a new gas refinery or a nuclear power plant.
Everything is off limits. Sorry, you can`t put a solar panel on your roof. And by the way, it would take an estimating 4.2 billion roofs covered with solar panels to make up for oil we would no longer use.
So what`s left gang? I mean, I don`t think most people have a problem with the concept of alternative energy; I`d just like to see what those alternatives are because I`m looking and can`t find them.
Rick Perry is the Governor of Texas, William Tucker, the author of "Terrestrial Energy: How Nuclear Power Can Lead the Green Revolution and End America`s Long Energy Odyssey."
Governor, let me start with you. First of all, good to see you again, sir.
GOV. RICK PERRY, (R) TEXAS: Yes, sir. Thank you.
BECK: You want to double the number of nuclear power plants in Texas?
PERRY: That`s a good start.
BECK: How do you do that? I thought you were controlled by big oil?
PERRY: Not quite. We love our oil and gas industry here but the fact of the matter is that we need to look at all the different alternatives that are out there; nuclear, wind. You know, we`re the number one wind energy producing state and just last week, we approved tripling the number of wind turbines we have got.
It`s going to take it all. The fact of the matter is, nuclear is the cleanest, it`s the least expensive, it`s obviously the answer when the French use up to 80 percent, and we`re sitting here with Texas with only 7 percent of our energy produced by nuclear, something`s not right there.
We need to get on the nuclear bandwagon. We need to have it as part of our portfolio along with the oil and gas and clean coal and et cetera, the bio-fuels. You name it, we`re going to need it.
BECK: All right, Bill, I happen to agree with that. I don`t think there`s anything that we should rule out. I think it should be a combination of all of them and when the alternative fuels actually kick in and they overtake a current technology, that`s when we should get off of oil, not a second before that. But nuclear energy, you`ve got Three Mile Island, which didn`t cause any problems, but you do have Chernobyl as an example of, it`s dangerous.
WILLIAM TUCKER, AUTHOR, "TERRESTRIAL ENERGY": Well, Chernobyl was a one of a kind accident. It will never happen in this country. There was no containment structure. They were using a reactor that we don`t use in this country.
But I think nuclear really has to be sold. I`m hoping the American people are going to fall in love with nuclear energy because I think when you really understand it, it`s just the answer to all our dreams of a clean energy source that doesn`t impact the environment.
BECK: What are we missing?
TUCKER: We`re missing the drama, the romance of how exciting it is that we`ve discovered this energy source that is just beyond anything we`ve ever encountered. A nuclear reaction is two million times the release of energy that you get with oil and gas and coal.
That`s why a nuclear power plant -- a coal plant, you have to bring a whole train of coal, 110 cars of train everyday to fire it. With a nuclear reactor, you bring a new set of fuel rods once every 18 months.
BECK: Governor, what is the reaction in your state to building and doubling the number of nuclear power plants. I mean, everybody says I want cheap energy, I want clean energy. But everybody also says not in my backyard.
PERRY: Well, not in Texas. I think the vast majority of the people in this state understand that we can be the energy epicenter of the world and frankly that`s what we`d like to be. Back to the issue of why don`t they get it about nuclear, I think it goes back to the people that want to scare the public to promote their own special agenda; the far left over there want to scare people about nuclear engine.
The fact of the matter is, it is safe, it is inexpensive and it is the future of the world. I think, we`ll get off of the fossil fuels is the best we can. We`re not ever going to get rid of them, but really get a reliance on nuclear and at that particular point in time, a lot of the craziness of the energy business goes away.
BECK: Bill, a lot of people say it`s too dangerous in today`s world to have a nuclear power plant because why don`t the hijackers -- why wouldn`t they just take a plane and ram it into the side of one of these reactors.
TUCKER: Well, go to YouTube and plug in "plane crashes into wall" and you`ll see the Department of Energy ran a test where they ran an F4 into the wall that represents a containment structure; the plane vaporizes. It completely disappears. The wall is just standing there.
The whole idea that you could do anything to a nuclear plant by crashing an airplane; an airplane is just a hollow tube. It would just fold like an accordion; whereas a concrete containment structure can protect against anything. Even if you did, the dangers of the elements of a nuclear reactor have been wildly exaggerated. It`s not a bomb; it`s not a nuclear bomb. It has nothing to do with atomic weapons.
BECK: It`s not even the same as it used to be, right? Now, it`s -- what are they called -- cold water plants? Now, it`s really a different kind of technology, isn`t it?
TUCKER: It`s just, the fissionable isotope that`s in there is about 3 percent. In a bomb, it has to be 90 percent. It`s taking the Iranians forever to get to the 3 percent; they haven`t even been able to produce a nuclear field yet. I say it`s the same between a jar of Vaseline and a napalm bomb. They`re both petroleum jelly but they have different flash points.
BECK: Governor, you were at my stage show when we did it in Dallas -- when was it -- on Thursday and you and I sat and talked after the program. And we were talking about your state.
I`ve traveled all over the country now here in the last two months and done these shows all over. You`re state is the only one that I saw a ton of cranes where your cities are still being built and I said at the time, it`s because you guys have low taxes, you`re not fighting new energies, you`re not chasing people out of your state, you believe in business.
This -- how is it that we can get the government, our United States government to follow the pattern of cut all the red tape and unleash people to do business in our country?
PERRY: I don`t know. It`s not rocket science. You keep taxes low. You keep a regulatory climate that`s fair. You have a legal system where you don`t get frivolously sued. You continue to have a good educated workforce so that people will move to your state.
And then government needs to get out of way and let them go do what they do best and that`s to create jobs and wealth. That is the blueprint. And the fact of the matter is, Texas, just last month in June, 47,400, I believe new jobs. Florida lost 78,000.
There`s quite a story that can be told there.
BECK: Governor thanks a lot. Bill, I appreciate it.
Now, one guy who has plenty of ideas of alternative energy but not a clue how to pay for them or how long it will take before they`re actually in our houses is Al Gore. He went on "Meet the Press" yesterday. He wanted to talk about all the ways we can spend billions of dollars more that we don`t have.
I just would like to play just a few of the wild allegations he mad and show you how he slipped in some unchallenged fear-mongering to make his case.
But first, I want to bring in Chris Horner, he`s the author of "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism." Chris here`s cut one. Love your thoughts on it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
AL GORE, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: There`s enough solar energy that hits the surface of the planet in 40 minutes to provide a full year`s worth of energy for the entire world.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: That is fantastic. What`s the problem?
CHRIS HORNER, AUTHOR, "POLITICALLY INCORRECT GUIDE TO GLOBAL WARMING": Well, there`s enough water in the Pacific Ocean to make sure nobody goes without a drink but it says nothing relevant or practical about the issue; about bringing potable water to Saharan Africa.
This is a twist on the argument that the wind and sun are free, but the problem is solar power and wind power are bloody expensive. He just said absolutely nothing in that clip.
BECK: I talked to Ray while on this program and he talked about that we will have this technology, he believes in five years, but we don`t have this technology now.
HORNER: Well, you`ve got problems. The solar power can be collected in areas far, far away from the people who need the electricity. You`ve got massive lines to be strung. You know, the Governor of Texas just spoke about their wonderful new windmill project. Unfortunately, it`s going to cost $5 billion, $2 million a mile to string transmission wires if the Greens don`t block the project through litigation; if the Greens don`t block the lines.
So, you`ve got practical problems other than just saying a lot of sun hits the earth everyday.
BECK: Ok, here comes cut two.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GORE: This is no joke, Tom. You said in your intro that there is some debate about how real it is. There`s really not a debate in the mainstream scientific community. It is the most serious threat that our civilization has ever faced. Look at the fires out in California right now, look at the epic flooding in the Midwest.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: That`s never happened before global warming.
HORNER: Right, this is the most serious threat facing humanity since the last most serious threat facing humanity which I think was global cooling; you might look it up. The problem is these floods come after very cold, very wet snowy winters and so you have a lot of stored frozen water that will melt. It does that in a period of time called summer.
Mr. Gore went to the Dakotas with President Clinton in, I think 1996 to say the exact same thing about the floods they were experiencing after a, of course, record snowfall and very cold winter. In other words, there`s always something big and bad happening somewhere and knew global warming caused it.
But he said various things in that, the fires in California. You know, the 1930s were warmer than today and it was a quiet period for fires. He goes on and takes it a little further, maybe he`ll play about more lightning. He`s really grasping at this point.
BECK: There`s a reason why you have more fires it`s because nobody will let you cut the underbrush and do controlled burns but that`s a different story. Talking about melting ice, he did mention this in cut three.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GORE: The entire polar icecap, Tom, been there three million years, it`s the size of the lower 48 states and the scientists now say that there`s a 75 percent chance it will be completely gone during the summer in as little as five years. This is happening on our watch. We have got to respond.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HORNER: Classic Gore.
BECK: How do we respond?
HORNER: He did this throughout his movie. He said, the scientists say, and what he`s doing is referring to an outlier, an extreme paper based on a computer model the spin of which the author even ran away from; his name is Mark Sarees (ph).
It claims that there`s a chance that the North Pole could be ice free. Remember, greenhouse warming says both poles would be warming first. Well, the South Pole is cooling and gaining ice mass at a fairly rapid clip. The North Pole, of course, we have more than 10 percent more ice today than we did a year ago on this date. They`re relying upon 2007, really, when there was a Siberian high pressure anomaly and they`re still trying to scare you off of that.
BECK: Chris, I have to just tell you that I think if the ice melts on the North Pole, it will be easier to get the oil.
Thanks Chris. That`s the "Real Story" tonight.
Remember, tonight, I fill in for Larry King. Larry King has the night off and somehow or another, I`m going to be in his chair. We`ll cover everything from politics to energy and the economy. You don`t want to miss it. Make sure you tune in tonight at 9:00 and again at midnight only on CNN for "Larry King Live."
BECK: If you listen to me on the radio or watch me on television, you know, I`m kind of little passionate about U.S. border agents, Ramos and Compean. They`ve been wrongfully imprisoned, in my opinion. They`ve been imprisoned for nothing more than doing their jobs, keeping drugs and drug smugglers out of our country. It`s a miscarriage of justice and it is still in full effect as these brave men continue to serve their sentences of over ten years a piece.
It has been now over a year since the senate held trials on their rogue prosecution led by Johnny Sutton that put them behind bars. Still, nothing is happening.
I spent last week, in fact Thursday and Friday with Monica Ramos. She was at my stage show in Dallas and in Houston. She was just in the audience. I met with her backstage, I think it was on Friday. And I told her and it killed me, "Monica, I have no idea when your husband might be free and be able to return home to you and the kids."
When are the people in Washington finally going to se that the border area in Arizona and Texas, more dangerous than Baghdad? And men like Ramos and Compean are political prisoners of this war being waged in our own backyard and our government is in on it.
Here`s an update with Tara Setmayer now. She`s the communications director for Republican Congressman, Dana Rohrabacher.
When I was in Texas last week, I sensed a difference in Texans over the last year. I hadn`t been there for a year. It has moved from, I don`t know what`s going on, Glenn, but it doesn`t seem right to our government is in on it and there are bad people in our own government. This is a dangerous thing that`s going on.
TARA SETMAYER, COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR FOR REP. DANA ROHRABACHER: It is and it`s difficult for me to provide an answer to them. Thankfully, my boss isn`t in on it and he`s one of the good guys here that calls out on the government when they were not doing the right thing. And in this case, this administration is clearly not doing the right thing, inexplicably.
I travel all over the country and I meet with law enforcement officers all the time who are so thankful that there are people like you and like my boss and others in Congress, some of them, that are fighting for Ramos and Compean and fighting for them.
That`s what this is really about. The implications of the Ramos and Compean case are far greater than just them. We have a war zone along our southern border that is wide open, not only to illegal aliens, but to terrorists who want to smuggle a dirty bomb or anything else across this border.
And yet this administration allowed this prosecution to continue, allows these men to be jailed and here we are a year later after Senators Feinstein and Cornyn brought Johnny Sutton before their hearing not under oath and he has a lot to explain for himself. There have been many developments since that year and a year ago.
BECK: I will tell you that I was supposed to be at a private party and the president was going to be there on Friday afternoon. I was disinvited and it is my understanding that people, me included and people like me, we have a little file being kept by our government now on how unhelpful we are on this issue. It is beginning to sound as crazy as the Nixon years of the enemies list.
SETMAYER: Yes, I think I`m in that file, too, Glenn. At least, I`m in good company.
BECK: Let me ask you this. We now have the cards that Johnny Sutton told me, they never gave that drug smuggler any of these cards. He told me this on the program over a year ago. We now have those cards.
SETMAYER: Yes. Johnny Sutton a year ago, on July 17, was able to finagle his way somewhat out of answering direct questions about why in the world would our government, his office permit the drug smugglers have six border-crossing cards without escorts, no conditions, he could come freely across the border. He stumbled over his words and tried to get out of it and said well, if in fact he did smuggle a second load then I guess it was a mistake.
At the time, we didn`t have copies of those cards so we couldn`t compare the dates. And at the time, he wouldn`t acknowledge that yes, for sure, that October load happened. Since then, our office obtained those cards and we were able to obtain those dates. He in fact did smuggle drugs, not only in October but in September and now the drug smuggler has since pled guilty to two more loads and is awaiting sentencing. Why hasn`t Johnny Sutton explained himself, why they kept that information from the jury and who made that decision ultimately?
BECK: Tara thanks a lot.
By the way, I`ve just completed exclusive jailhouse interviews with border agents, Ramos and Compean, for my magazine, "Fusion." We`ll be running the interviews in upcoming issues. This is the first time they`ve spoken out from the prison. You can subscribe to "Fusion" right now at glennbeck.com.
Back in a minute.
BECK: Robbie Doughty signed up for the army when he was 17 years old. He had plans to make the service his career. Unfortunately, those plans changed on July 8, 2004 when Robbie`s Humvee was hit by a roadside bomb in Iraq.
ROBBIE DOUGHTY, U.S. ARMY: The bomb basically took my right leg above the knee and my left leg below the knee. I didn`t lose my legs at that point, but the shrapnel damage to them would later cause them to be amputated during surgery.
BECK: Staff sergeant Robert Doughty had to deal with having both of his legs amputated and for many people something like that would send them into a deep depression. But not Robbie.
DOUGHTY: I did have a couple of bad days, but a lot of it stemmed from not knowing what I could do. Just as soon as I saw guys from physical therapy with their running legs on, I thought, I can still do that stuff. There is no bad feeling at all after that.
BECK: It was that spirit and determination that inspired that inspired the head of "Little Caesar`s Pizza" to offer Robbie a franchise, free and clear.
DAVID SCRIVANO, PRESIDENT, LITTLE CAESAR ENTERPRISES: It originally started with our founder, Mike Ilitch. He read an article in the newspaper about a soldier, Robbie Doughty, who was injured in the war in Iraq. After he read about him, he saw in Robbie perseverance, some great attributes that would make him a leader.
DOUGHTY: It just kind of blew me away because it was just one of those opportunities of a lifetime where they read a story about me and they saw my positive attitude and basically, wanted to reward me for it.
BECK: In 2007, Robbie opened the door to his "Little Caesar" store and a new life as an entrepreneur. And just two months ago, he opened his second.
DOUGHTY: I thought, here`s my chance to be my own boss, work with a food that I love and start a new life for myself.
BECK: Based on Robbie`s success, "Little Caesar`s" has decided start a special franchise program for veterans. Their hope, to inspire others the way Robbie inspired them.
SCRIVANO: For all veterans, we offer a $10,000-benefit to come join "Little Caesar`s" as a franchisee and for injured veterans, which was really the true intent of the program, we offer a benefit of up to $68,000.
This is really about the veterans and the people who serve.
DOUGHTY: It changed our lives right there. We went from being soldier in the army to owning our own business. We couldn`t be happier.
BECK: From New York, good night, America.