Return to Transcripts main page
Delving into the Truth about Energy; Expert Weighs in on Economy; British Family Fights Deportation
Aired July 22, 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, as the gas crisis takes center stage on Capitol Hill, we have a realistic look at what it will take to get alternative energy into the mainstream. How long will we have to wait?
Plus, how does today`s economic problems stack up against history? From the Great Depression to the Savings and Loan crisis. We`ll find out if we`re near the bottom or still falling.
And just how much more money would you owe the government if this guy gets elected? I`ll ask former presidential contender Steve Forbes.
All this and more tonight.
BECK: Hello, America.
I think that we`re probably an awfully lot alike, you and me. Not only am I fed up with our energy crisis, but I`m sick and tired of all the spin and the people simplifying the issue and making it seem like, "Oh, Tinkerbelle is flying in here. She`s going to wave her wand and all of a sudden, we`re going to have magical energy."
It took us a long, long time to get into this mess, and it`s going to take us a long time for us to get out this was mess, no matter what Tinkerbelle and Al Gore want you to believe. So here`s "The Point" tonight.
To truly solve our energy crisis once and for all, we need an energy moon shot in this country, and we need a healthy dose of reality. If we don`t have the government step in and somebody at the top clear the path for all energy, the red tape, the rules and the regulation, it`s going to leave us literally in the dark. And here`s how I got there.
The way some people, shall we say, talk about energy alternatives like solar and wind, you`d think that these systems can all be up and running and saving the world by the next Earth Day. Man, I have to tell you. I wish that were true. I wish that were the case just as much as you do. But wishing doesn`t make it so.
Texas oil mogul T. Boone Pickens was on Capitol Hill today, pushing a renewable energy agenda that focuses on technology like wind. Great. Senator Joe Lieberman praised the plan as "can do" and bold. And you know what? I`ve sat on this desk with -- well, not -- he sat in that chair, I sat in this -- with T. Boone. I agree with him. Let`s cut right to the chase.
The question is, how long for just wind to be a viable solution for a reasonable percentage of Americans? Forget about solar and everything else. Just, for a second, just focus on wind, for a reasonable amount of energy to come from wind? How many years? Just to build the wind turbines? How much time to figure out a way to store the energy, then create, you know, a place to deliver it? The technology for the storage units doesn`t exist.
How long will it take to run the lines that would deliver that energy to homes to? To retrofit those homes so they can receive and use that energy? Then, on top of that, there`s all the regulations and the permits and the environmental impact studies that would all have to be addressed before any of that could even be started.
Ten years would seem like a crazy miracle. But that`s what Al Gore says, 10 years. Here`s some perspective. Before you can set up an offshore oil rig -- this is something completely legal, safe, proven technology; for decades we`ve been doing it -- there are 13 environmental statutes and executive orders that have to be complied with. Everything from the Endangered Species Act -- more owls and polar bears there -- to the government performance and results act. Since when does Washington know anything about performance and results?
Of course, all of this can be done only after you`ve completed the 10- step progress -- process just to get a lease to drill!
Tonight, America, here is what you need to know. We would have never made to it the moon if President Kennedy hadn`t cleared the deck and made the moon shot a national priority. An affordable, dependable energy supply is far more important than going to the moon. Achieving it demands the same kind of dedication and commitment without the mountains of paperwork. Red tape exist to protect us and the planet. I get it. Blah, blah, blah.
You know what? That`s good and everything. But right now the dangers of not fast-tracking energy solutions far outweigh the dangers of doing it.
We need oil and a moon shot. But we also need a dose of reality on how important oil is, how we`re tied to oil, and how far away this magic technology really is. It`s not here today. But maybe, perspective and answers are.
James Meigs is the editor in chief of "Popular Mechanics". Patrick Moore is the chairman and chief scientist of Green Spirit Strategies.
Patrick, let me start with you. Al Gore wants to get all electricity -- Al Gore wants to get off all electricity that has any kind of carbon in it within 10 years. To me, I`d love to do that. That sounds crazy. Possible or not?
PATRICK MOORE, CHAIRMAN/CHIEF SCIENTIST, GREEN SPIRIT STRATEGIES: It is crazy. It`s preposterous. No way we`ll stop using fossil fuels in the next 10 years, never mind the next 100 years.
So, I really think it`s unfortunate that he is misleading people, especially misleading them into thinking that technologies like wind and solar can replace the big coal-fired plants.
BECK: OK. You`re a green guy, right?
MOORE: I`m a green guy. I`m in favor of reducing fossil fuels. I think we should stop using so much coal to produce our electricity and use more nuclear energy. And if the greens in the mainstream like Al Gore weren`t so anti-nuclear and anti-hydroelectric, there`d be a lot less coal- fired plants in the world today.
BECK: OK. Jim, to you. Moon shot. Everybody compares this to a moon shot. And I know I just called for one. But also a dose of reality. The moon shot, we had to -- what did we create? Ten Apollo capsules.
We`re talking about the entire population of the United States. You know, getting a new car or a new whatever it is, totally retrofitting everything, not 10 Apollo capsules and, what, eight Gemini capsules.
JAMES MEIGS, EDITOR IN CHIEF, "POPULAR MECHANICS": You`re absolutely right, Glenn. So many people use the Apollo program as a metaphor or an example of how to solve problems. But putting two men on the moon was a very, very specific problem. Remaking the entire economy, the lifestyles of millions of Americans, is far more complex.
And the government, if you decide to put that entire program in the hands of a big government agency they`re far more likely to have opportunities to screw it up.
So what we need to be careful about is that we do pursue the alternative, but we don`t use government resources to lock down a particular choice of technology that might in the long run not be the right one. We don`t know yet what the best solutions are going to be. They`re out there, but we don`t know exactly which ones are going to work out best.
BECK: And Patrick, that`s what concerns me. You always make mistakes when you rush into anything. From the time we invented the car to the assembly line, that`s not even the tipping point of how many people had cars. From the time we had the invention of the car to the assembly line, it was 28 years.
Now we`re talking about rushing new technology in, in a 10-year period. It hasn`t even been invented. You couldn`t even -- you couldn`t even study the environmental impact in that time. You could do something like, listen to the scientists and say butter is good, butter is bad. You know, rocks cause cancer, rocks don`t cause cancer. You`d never know, until possibly it`s too late, that you`ve done more damage.
MOORE: It`s really too bad that Al Gore, of all important people, is misleading the public into thinking this can be done in 10 years. Hopefully, by 10 years from now, the first new nuclear plants will be coming online and, hopefully, by then we will have built more wind power so that we can turn the gas off when the wind is blowing.
But wind can only provide a small percentage. Denmark gets 15 percent of its energy from wind, and the people there realize now that they went a little overboard on wind, because it stops for three or four days at a time. The sun doesn`t shine at night or when it`s cloudy. These technologies have no storage capacity to be able to tide it over, so you have to back it up with something.
We should be building the backups, in other words, the continuous reliable power sources, such as nuclear and hydroelectric and biomass and geothermal and plug-in cars. But it doesn`t make sense to charge a plug-in hybrid on a coal-fired power plant. Therefore, we should be moving our electricity from 50 percent coal, 20 percent nuclear to 50 percent nuclear, 20 percent coal. We could do that in a 25- to 30-year period if we went at it like a moon shot.
BECK: Jim, I have to tell you something. I mean, you might as well go for the dilithium crystals so we can all have warp drive. I mean, for the love of Pete, you`ve got the answer. A big portion of our energy answer sitting right here, called nuclear energy.
You can take a jet and fly it into the side of one of those power plants. The walls are 30 feet thick. And yet no one will do it. No one. How do you expect to invent new technology or get to this when the red tape and the government is all over it and the special-interest groups are steering you into their own direction?
MEIGS: Well, the sad thing is that we`re seeing a lot of emphasis on alternative technologies, which are important and promising, but we`re also forgetting that the mess we`re in is probably a result of energy policies that have restricted some of the technologies.
Nuclear is one. Natural gas is another. We have a lot of natural gas in this country. It`s relatively clean compared to coal or oil. And yet we`ve restricted the use of natural gas. We`ve restricted nuclear power.
We`ve actually steered under Jimmy Carter`s energy policy. Remember, that was all about drilling more, more coal. Making more power plants based on coal. That seemed like a good idea at the time. Didn`t work out so else in retrospective.
BECK: Both or you, I just need a yes or no question. I just have one more question after this. But yes or no: do you believe nuclear is the No. 1 priority of the technology that we have that should be pursued right now?
MEIGS: Well, it`s there.
MOORE: Along with a bunch of others.
BECK: OK, yes. I`m not saying exclusively.
And finally, Patrick, is it even probable? Al Gore says get off carbon in 10 years. Is it even probable that, even with the moon shot and every -- you know, the sky is opening up, that we could be off of carbon in 25 years?
MOORE: Very unlikely. I mean, at least the moon shot was technically feasible. What Al Gore is talking about is not feasible with the knowledge and technology we have today.
BECK: I have to tell you, as a green guy, man, you`re a very brave man. Thank you very much.
And James, thank you. We`ll talk again.
Now, coming up, our economic crisis put into context. Where do our current economic struggles rate against the past crunches? Could it get worse? Is it better than what everybody is saying?
Plus, they also say the only certainties in life are death and taxes. So our next president could end up taxing us all to death, as I see it. "The Real Story" with Steve Forbes coming up.
BECK: Well, let me ask you this question. Feel like you`re already giving the government too much of your money? Well, just wait to see what happens when Obama is elected. We`ll be talking tax and how much is too much with the man who knows something about the subject. Former presidential contender Mr. Steve Forbes, coming up in just a second.
But first, when people talk about this country`s economic crisis, they love to toss around comparisons to the Great Depression. They say Savings and Loan scandal, Black Monday, market crash of `87. Well, here`s the thing. Comparing today`s economic climate to points throughout our history is one thing. But explaining why the comparisons are valid is something else.
I don`t want to throw meaningless headlines at you. Instead, I`d rather define, you know, some terms so we can both move along and understand what`s happening. What is a recession? Would do bank failures mean to you, the average person? How bad is housing, unemployment, the strength of the dollar? Unless we all understand these basic ideas -- and believe me I spent -- like 2 a.m. in the morning I`m reading stuff, going, "Oh, my head hurts." Unless you understand them, it doesn`t matter how many stories you read or what I say.
So, while I don`t love everything the "New York Times" writes, in fact I don`t like, really pretty much any of the stuff the "New York Times" writes, there`s Steve Forbes back there. There we go. Thank you.
The paper`s national economic reporter, Peter Goodman, had a fantastic piece over the weekend that explains our shaky economy in even a way I can understand.
Hi, Pete, how are you?
PETER GOODMAN, "NEW YORK TIMES": Hi. Great, thanks.
BECK: Good. OK. Here`s the thing. Why don`t we go through some of these housing and the dollar and unemployment, and you explain and tell us if it`s better or worse than it`s been before and where you think it might end up, well, according to the experts, the economists, where you think it might end up?
GOODMAN: You bet.
BECK: OK. Let`s start with housing. Some people say that we have a lot more to go. You know, real estate agents are saying I think we`re at the end. Who`s right?
GOODMAN: Well, there`s a widespread view that we got a long way to go, for the simple reason that we had such a big speculative bubble that we have so many houses on the market that if we didn`t build a single house we`d have enough houses that 2 1/2 years could go by before we sell them all, according to Economy.com.
BECK: Right. And some cities are worse, like Miami has got...
GOODMAN: Yes, I mean, Miami is horrendous.
BECK: All of Cuba.
GOODMAN: Los Angeles. The San Francisco Bay Area. A lot of central valley, California. A lot of houses.
BECK: How much more do you think it`s going to fall, or do the experts say it`s going to fall?
GOODMAN: Well, the people I talked to say we probably need another 10 percent or so. We dropped 17 percent since the peak back in 2005.
GOODMAN: And housing prices doubled between 2000 and 2005. We dropped about 17. We may have 10, maybe 15 percent more to go.
BECK: OK. Unemployment 5.5 percent right now. Where do the charts say, according to the economists, that that`s going to end up?
GOODMAN: Well, a lot of people think we`re going to hit 6.5 percent or so by late next year. And it could go up into 2010, even if the economy is growing, because remember, we have this jobless recovery after the last recession.
BECK: So, explain this, because this would imply that we`re going to be in a double dip recession, which they say is really bad. It goes -- it goes down, and then you hit something that makes it go up. In this case it`s the tax rebate. And then it goes up. And then it comes back down again.
If tax rate -- rebates are good, how come no one in Washington understands that lower taxes would be even better? Something you can count on?
GOODMAN: Well, I think I`ll punt that to people in Washington and stick with what the data tells us.
But I mean, the widespread sense is these tax rebates did a pretty good job convincing people to spend some money. And let`s remember that the American consumer is 70 percent of the American economy and, really, the engine of the global economy.
GOODMAN: So, we sent checks worth $100 billion out and people spent some of that money, but now that`s wearing out.
BECK: All right. The -- The -- I have sat with some of the biggest - - you know, had dinner with some of the biggest names in the financial industry, and the scariest thing that anybody said to me was, Glenn, we don`t really even know. We don`t know, because everything has been sold off. And we own a piece and they own a piece. We don`t know what they`ve done with their piece. This is a new thing for the financial markets, yes or no?
GOODMAN: Yes. I mean, that`s right. There`s an enormous amount of complexity. And that complexity was supposed to be a good thing when the banks were borrowing enormous sums of money and then lending enormous sums of money so people could buy houses. And they were borrowing against those mortgages and selling pieces of those mortgages in these very complex investments around the globe.
And the theory was, well, the risk spread, but the risk emboldened banks to take -- I`m sorry the spreading of risk emboldened the banks to take bigger risks. And now we can`t figure out...
BECK: OK. So, you actually say that the data points that our financial market, the banks are in as bad a shape right now as we were in the Great Depression. Is that possibly true?
GOODMAN: There`s a widespread sense that this is probably the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. I mean, let`s not get carried away. In the Great Depression you had massive run on banks and hundreds of banks going out of business.
BECK: OK. So this is the worse since that was over?
GOODMAN: Yes. That`s right.
BECK: OK. Then if that`s true, wouldn`t the added stress of anything else -- I mean I`ve been worried about a perfect store. We can handle anything. But we`ve got a perfect storm formulating. With all of the other things that -- you know, the uncertainty in, you know, the government and what they`re going to do and regulation and everything else. Oil. War.
Wouldn`t that lead us to believe the -- did you find any worry that a few of these things coming together at a precarious time like now could cause real, real havoc?
GOODMAN: This is a dangerous time in our economic history. That`s a widespread view out there, that there is a lot of uncertainty over the value of the dollar. We`re going to have some kind of new regulatory structure.
I mean, the biggest problem is -- in terms of uncertainty is that the banks have just lost, some people think, a trillion dollars on the mortgage market, and they have already recognized about $300 billion worth of losses. Well, that leaves $700 billion or more or, you know, somewhere in that ballpark to account for. And they have to raise money to replace it. And in the meantime they`re hanging onto whatever dollars they have, which means you can get a loan.
BECK: Peter, I have to tell you, the "New York Times," when they get it right they do it unlike any other paper in the country. And you did it right this weekend. A very good article.
GOODMAN: Thank you very much. I really appreciate it.
BECK: All right. Coming up, Utah family is facing deportation within a matter of days. So why is this even a story? I`ll explain when we come back in just a second.
And a little later, "The Real Story" on taxes. I`m going to talk to somebody who knows a little something about money. Last name Forbes. Former presidential candidate, Steve Forbes.
BECK: I want to introduce you to Debbie and Kevin Owen. They`re a couple that came from England with their kids three years ago. They sold absolutely everything they had, just to afford trip and start a new life here in America. They hired attorneys to help with the visa process. They did everything legal, everything by the book. Along the way one of their attorneys screwed up and filed the wrong form. Now, our country is deporting them.
You know, I take a very hard line against illegal immigration. But I`m not anti-immigrant. If I`m going to come out against those who break the rules, then if I were consistent, I`ve got to support those who play by them.
Debbie Owen joins with her daughter now, Laura.
DEBBIE OWEN, FACING DEPORTATION: Hi, Glenn.
BECK: Debbie, can you -- tell me the story, because I don`t understand this. How is this happening to you?
D. OWEN: We applied for an extension on a visa that we already held that we had already, you know, been trying to find worthy to hold. And it was just a straightforward extension, and we -- the lawyer filed the wrong paperwork. We had a letter that came back that just said incorrect paperwork filed, application denied.
BECK: OK. What was the incorrect paperwork? Because I`ve heard that you guys filed for a business visa, and you guys don`t own a business.
D. OWEN: We do actually own a business. We own a business down in Arizona, and we hold an E-2 visa, which is a business visa.
BECK: What is your business in Arizona?
D. OWEN: Arizona Air Adventures.
BECK: OK. I have to tell you, I am amazed by this story, but I am also amazed -- I have called every congressman in Utah. I`ve called both senators. Everybody says this is Senator Hatch`s deal. And Senator Hatch`s office, who won`t actually talk to me in person, his people say that here`s the thing. He doesn`t want to say anything, because he`s on this case. And he doesn`t want to spoil the chances by getting it, you know, into the media, et cetera, et cetera.
Do you believe that? Is anybody working on your case? You guys leave in, like, ten days, don`t you?
D. OWEN: We sure do. Yes. We have had communication with Sharon Golem (ph), which is an aide at Senator Hatch`s office. And I believe from the bottom of my heart that she is actually working on it. She has been consistent with everything that she`s done.
We actually spoke with her on Friday. And she said that they have spoken to immigration, and they are going to try and get them to reopen our case. But it is a decision that needs to be made by immigration.
BECK: OK. And Laura, you can`t go to college now, because you`re 18. So you can`t go to college here in the United States. You`ve missed it now in England.
LAURA OWEN, FACING DEPORTATION: Yes. I`m really disappointed. I`ve always wanted to go to the college. It`s been a big thing in my life, and now I don`t get to go.
BECK: Right. And you guys -- you guys are -- you`re home-schooled. You home-schooled the kids, right?
D. OWEN: For a short while we did home-school them.
BECK: All right.
D. OWEN: But they are in regular school at the moment.
BECK: The first thing you did, Debbie, every morning with the kids?
D. OWEN: I insisted that they said the Pledge of Allegiance. They are -- they`ve grown up part of their life here, and they are American. They use American words more than -- more than English words. And that was a big thing for me. They are going to live their life here, and I wanted them to be able to do the same things at home as they would be doing in a normal, regular school.
BECK: Debbie, we`ll be in touch with you. I don`t know what`s going on right now. But if everything is at it seems and you guys did all the right things and you came through the front door, then, you know what? I will do everything I can to make sure that the people in power look at your case again. We shouldn`t be kicking people out of the country for a clerical error when you`re trying to do the right thing. Thanks.
Back in a second with "The Real Story."
BECK: Well, welcome to "The Real Story."
A lot of people will say that Barack Obama will raise taxes on the rich to pay for all of his great new ideas. In fact, Barack Obama says that Barack Obama will raise taxes on the rich. So my source on that one is pretty good, it`s Barack Obama.
But, if you`re part of the wealthiest one percent, have another scone, lovely. You may want to check the news here while you`re getting the scone because you don`t actually have to start checking out Peru` citizenship requirements just yet because "The Real Story" is that Obama may actually turn out to be one of the most rich-friendly presidents since, wait for it, Jimmy Carter. Not kidding.
Hear me out. Right now the wealthiest one percent pay about 40 percent of the country`s entire income tax bill; one percent pays 40 percent. It`s about time they start paying their fair share. But that ratio only got that high after George W. Bush gave the rich, which was, of course, this supposed huge tax cut.
Before then, the richest Americans actually paid far less, which brings me back to Barack Obama. According to the "Wall Street Journal", the change that Obama is hoping for is a change back to the rates of the Jimmy Carter era.
It sounds, quite frankly, just frightening to me. But if you make a lot of money, back then, the rich paid 19 percent of this country`s bill. Remember it`s over 40 percent now. So, in other words, higher taxes can easily result in a less progressive system, exactly the opposite of what Obama says he wants.
But when has anybody in politics ever gotten what they wanted? It`s always the opposite. When it comes to taxes the only thing that`s truly unbiased are the actual IRS statistics.
Okay. So you can say, Glenn you`re a Conservative. You want this. Let me not spin anything. Let me just give you the IRS stats.
Listen to a couple of them that nobody from the left would like you to hear. First one: after the 2003 Bush tax cuts two big things happened in this country. One, the number of millionaires almost doubled. Oh, no. Two, our deficit compared to the size of our economy went from 3.5 percent in 2003 to 1.9 percent in 2006. That`s a good thing.
Oh, but Glenn all your fancy numbers are great but the middle class is shrinking. I know you heard that a million times before, right? I`m here to tell you that`s an absolute fact. It is true.
The middle class is shrinking. Why is the next question that nobody asked? The answer: because they are moving from the middle class to the upper class. Isn`t that what we should all be trying to do? Isn`t that the essence of the American dream?
The more families we can move into higher tax brackets the more our government makes? But look at the IRS data. That only happens with lower taxes. The higher taxes makes everybody move down the ladder the opposite direction.
The fact is, since 2003 more people have become millionaires. Our economy has expanded rapidly and consequently our federal government now has more money than ever to waste.
Steve Forbes is the president and CEO of Forbes and editor-in-chief of "Forbes" magazine. Hello, Steve.
STEVE FORBES, CEO, FORBES: Good to be with you, Glenn. Thank you very much.
BECK: You bet. You know a little something about the wealthiest one percent I hear.
FORBES: So I`m told.
BECK: Everybody has said these tax cuts have created these huge deficits and we just can`t afford tax cuts any more.
FORBES: Well, as you pointed out, if you really want more government revenue you get off the backs of people as Ronald Reagan did, as John Kennedy did in the 1960s and guess what, the economy expands, more jobs are created, higher salaries are created and we all come out ahead.
BECK: Steve, here`s the thing. I don`t know how to get across to people. I`m a small businessman. If we had a flat tax -- I don`t know if you`ve heard of that idea -- if we had a flat tax like Russia does, here`s what would happen. Me as a small businessman I would keep more of my money so I would create more jobs.
But people don`t understand that and more importantly, Steve we`ve created a bad situation. Tell me how to solve this.
The top 10 percent of wage earners in America pay 71 percent of all income tax. The bottom 50 percent only pay 2.9 percent. People in the bottom 50 don`t care any more. They don`t care about tax argument because they are getting more than they are giving. How do you solve that?
FORBES: Well, one thing that I think still works in our favor is that even though they pay less proportionate natural income tax they pay the social security and Medicare taxes and that`s a big chunk of their salaries. They also get socked on the local level, state and municipalities hit them as well with property taxes, sales taxes and the like.
So I think there`s still an anti-tax constituency in this country that is still very strong and I think that`s the one way, one of the key ways that John McCain can turn this election around running on substance of taxes, as higher tax is the way to get this economy moving again.
BECK: Explain this to me, Steve, because I know you`re a John McCain guy and I`m not a John McCain. I don`t have any guy in the running now.
FORBES: Why aren`t you running?
BECK: I`d vaporize too many cities.
Here`s the thing. John McCain may be good on income tax and he says he gets that and I`ve seen his plan and it`s good. But in the same plan he talks about cap-in-trade; gigantic tax programs. The biggest ever created. So you`re taking it, sure not getting an income tax but I`m getting it over here and here and here.
FORBES: I think cap-in-trade is going to go the way of some other things, as you may remember.
When he came into office Bill Clinton had a proposal to tax carbons and stuff like that. I don`t think those things are going to get very far as people start to examine the details of them.
BECK: But shouldn`t he have examined those details? Shouldn`t he have known that`s a bad idea?
FORBES: Yes. Well, he`s moving in the right direction. You`ve got to give him credit. He`s now for a really having active exploration off shore; going full bore on nuclear power plants 45 in the next 20, 25 years.
And that`s another thing that the Democrats are squirming about. People know we should do more off shore production and drilling. And they wish that issue would go away and we`re not going to let it go away.
BECK: Who`s going to help -- I don`t know if I want to ask this because I know you`re a John McCain. Tell me how to fix -- let`s not get into politics. How do we stop the fed from killing our dollar? It`s a very simple formula.
I`m an uneducated guy. I`m a self-educated alcoholic DJ, for the love of Pete. And I can figure this out. As the dollar goes up, oil goes down, the stock market goes up, everything is fine. We`re killing our dollar.
FORBES: Well that`s the biggest mistake of the Bush administration doing what Jimmy Carter did over 30 years ago and having a weak dollar policy. They got crazy reasons for it but in the real world it just means higher prices and giving hundreds of billions of dollars of windfalls to our enemies in Venezuela, Iran and elsewhere.
And in terms of the Federal Reserve they just think printing more money is the way to solve any problem. So, you`re right. It`s very simple.
Stop printing too much money. Soak up some of the excess money you`ve created. Tell the markets you`re doing it. And the dollar will recover.
There`s another factor on the oil front that hasn`t gotten much play yet and that is in addition to the weak dollar that is I think there`s real fears that the Israelis are going to strike Iran after the elections, especially if Barack Obama is elected then I can`t guarantee it but I think it`s a high likelihood that they`re going to take real action.
BECK: I think they`re going to do o it on either of these guys.
Real quick. I`ve only got about 30 seconds. Why is Wall Street for all of these gigantic bailouts? It`s insane.
FORBES: Because they are the ones being bailed out and so suddenly when they are drowning they like life rafts wherever they come from.
The proper thing to do is what I think Ronald Reagan would have done - - and they sort of tried to do it -- and that is take something like Fannie and Freddie -- Fannie May and Freddie Mac -- bust them up into 12 different companies, recapitalize them. Send them to the marketplace like private companies. Sever their ties with government.
Those two companies, Glenn, as you know, are the biggest powerful lobbies in Washington. Everyone who wants get as job from Freddie or Fannie.
BECK: Get your pitchforks and torches out, gang; it`s about time. Steve thanks a lot. I appreciate it.
FORBES: Glenn, thank you.
BECK: You bet.
That`s the "Real Story" night.
Coming up, clearly a new Russia these days. Time is right now for a brand new kind of Russian spy thriller. I just finished reading this; it is fantastic. One of my favorite writers right around the corner next.
BECK: When it comes to spy novels, the old ones, the old rules no longer apply. Gone is the Cold War and its icy blondes and back-stabbing double agents hiding microfilm in the heel of their shoe. Over the course of the 10 previous books, my next guest has elevated the craft, establishing himself as one of the world`s finest writers.
His latest book seems to be ripped right out of the headlines. I`ve got to tell you, it is something that you look at and you go, "Wait a minute I think I read this."
Oil rich Russia is the key to survival. Now playing the "Moscow Rules," the author is one of my absolute favorites. Daniel Silva is with us now. Welcome, sir. How are you?
DANIEL SILVA, AUTHOR, "MOSCOW RULES": It`s so nice to see you.
BECK: Huge fan of your work and huge fan of your books. This one is tremendous; off the charts.
SILVA: I have a little confession to make, though. This is a mutual admiration society tonight because I am a huge fan of yours. The producers and I were talking back stage and we want you to take a look at the following piece of videotape.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: I said this -- before I went on vacation I still haven`t received one somebody in America I can`t buy them in Manhattan, I need a pitchfork.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SILVA: Ask and you shall receive.
BECK: Oh, you brought me a -- holy cow.
SILVA: A pitchfork. It`s actually a manure pitchfork which is good for Washington.
BECK: That`s fantastic.
SILVA: It`s engraved for your collection. If you bring it to Washington please don`t try to take it on the shuttle. There are a couple of buildings in Washington that you really don`t want to walk around with a pitchfork --
BECK: Yes, this is bad for the airport.
SILVA: Stay away from the White House and maybe --
BECK: That`s fantastic.
BECK: Ok. Let`s talk a little bit about Russia in the book that you`re writing because it is the stuff with, you know, in real life Putin poisoning these reporters, killing them, everything else and that`s how this book starts.
SILVA: It was, you know I have been waiting a long time to write a Russia book. Writers of my age, my generation we were all raised on this stuff. And I`ve wanted for a long time to try to tackle Russia but Russia of the `90s when it was on its knees wasn`t very interesting to me.
I thought about writing a historical look at Russia during the Cold War; didn`t want to go there. And when Alexander Litvinenko was killed in the heart of London in 2006 --
BECK: That`s the polonium --
SILVA: Polonium 210; perhaps the most dangerous substance on the planet. We`re rightly concerned about bad guys laying their hands on chemical, biological other sorts of stuff. It is pretty clear now that the Russia secret service smuggled this highly dangerous stuff across Europe, sprinkled it around London and killed a man; committed an act of nuclear murder in the heart of London.
I felt, you know what, now is the time to write about that stuff.
BECK: Right and that`s where the book starts. I have this theory and here you are again on the front lines of it. I have this theory that Communist Russia never went -- KGB Russia never went away.
SILVA: It didn`t.
BECK: Putin is an evil dude. You don`t want to comment on that?
SILVA: I do. You know, I heard a wonderful story about a very senior British official who met with him recently and said, "I looked into his eyes and saw pure evil."
BECK: Unlike what Bush said.
SILVA: Unlike what President Bush said. He was confronted face to face with Putin and a group of reporters. I think that if he could walk that one back he probably would.
But having said that, Putin comes from a KGB background; What people don`t realize is that about 75 percent to 80 percent of the senior people inside the Kremlin are also from the security services, the Russians have a new name for it called siloviki, men of the KGB. And these guys are running Russia.
BECK: Your book -- now we`ve only got a minute now; you and your pitchfork.
The idea of the book is they are in bed and they are giving weapons to our enemies, real bad Middle Eastern stuff. I just read in the paper last week Russia tried to go after all of the carbon in Liberia. They are already doing a deal with our enemies in Iran. How realistic do you think what`s happening in your book?
SILVA: The book is a -- the plot of the book deals with a Russian oligarch, a billionaire and arms dealer who is planning to sell some very dangerous weapons to Al Qaeda. That is straight from the headlines. I mean we have examples of Russian arms dealer named Victor Bout who did exactly the same thing. So, unfortunately, it`s not too far removed from reality.
BECK: We just said that if Russia puts nukes in Cuba, that`s a red line for us. This just came out today. Are they thinking about putting nukes in Cuba? What would that mean?
SILVA: I don`t know why that came out. I don`t know -- look, when they get irritated with us over the missile defense shield they threatened to target European cities with their missiles again. Why Russia is a member of the G8 and threatening to target European capitals --
BECK: Everybody in the media and every place else, they all love Russia. This is an evil empire.
SILVA: The debate is starting to run against Russia.
SILVA: I think that, you know, great powers sometimes have the, it`s difficult for them to walk and chew gum at the same time. And throughout the last seven years we`ve been focused almost exclusively on the threat from Al Qaeda.
Putin used that cynically to gather up power in Russia, cut off, strangle democracy in its infancy and impose an authoritarian state capitalist system in Russia. It`s going to be a threat for a long time.
BECK: America let me tell you something. This guy is one of my favorite writers. I think there`s a handful of writers out there right now doing what Hollywood used to do in World War II. You will learn something from his book but the best thing is you will be entertained by it as well.
The name of the book is "Moscow Rules." The author is Daniel Silva and it`s in bookstores today. Go get it.
Now, time for tonight`s "Real America" brought to you by CSX. Hard to meet a person that hasn`t actually been personally affected by cancer or at least know somebody who has; that includes one young woman from Pittsburgh who has decided to take that seemingly sad fact and actually turn it into a positive.
KELSEY BARNER: Jill was the principal at my brother`s middle school and he had cancer for five years.
BECK: Kelsey and Taylor Barner saw first hand what cancer can do when they watched their middle school principal battle colon cancer.
KIM BARNER, KELSEY`S PARENTS: I think that made them think about most teenagers don`t realize how short life is. I think for them that was eye opening.
BECK: So the kids got involved with the American Cancer Society`s Relay for Life; a 24 hour event that raises money for the organization. It was there that 15-year-old Kelsey came up with an idea.
KELSEY BARNER: We did seminars there. I was actually in a fund- raising seminar. And one of the ideas that was talked about was sharing cancer`s survivor stories with other people. So I thought it would be cool to put it into a book format so it would be easier to share.
BECK: That was eight months ago and since then the entire family has been working to make the book a reality. Kelsey even contributed $1,500 of her own money.
KIM BARNER: She`s very ambitious; always doing something, very active. So when she had the idea, although it sounded ambitious, it was her typical let`s come up with something new and exciting, and it was.
BECK: The book, "In Their Own Words," was published last month. It is 30 personal accounts of how patients and loved ones have dealt with the devastating disease.
KELSEY BARNER: They are really sad but they`re inspiring to read. So it`s hard to read them but you feel better and they help other people.
KIM BARNER: The interesting thing is, even though they`re sad in their content, they all end with optimism, with a purpose. There`s some purpose behind what they went through with cancer.
BECK: Though her school principal lost HIS battle with cancer, Kelsey hope this is book will inspire others continue their fight against the disease.
KELSEY BARNER: People enjoy sharing their stories. It helps other people with cancer to know that other people are going through the same thing.
BECK: Another good story on the program; "In Their Own Words" costs $15. All the proceeds go directly to the American Cancer Society. If you want to purchase a copy of the book just email firstname.lastname@example.org.
If you`d like to see more stories like this one, just click on cnn.com/Glenn and look for the section called the "Real America."
And that is tonight`s "Real America" sponsored by CSX; it`s how tomorrow moves.
BECK: I`ve been saying for a while lately that Americans are getting to the point where they`re ready to grab their torches and their pitch forks and throw the bums out of Washington. Well, this is the second one that I`ve received. I`ve asked people to send them to me. On the radio program I started last Friday getting out the address. I`m going to have a collection of them here.
Here`s a picture of the first one being delivered yesterday to the offices. Some might say that a lot of mail rooms in urban Manhattans aren`t exactly used to getting large pieces of rural farm equipment. But I figure it will make life that much more exciting for everybody here at the Time Warner Center.
Actually, I want to put these pitchforks right here on the set. Some place in New York City, that way every time a weasly politician on the show comes on and he starts talking and shoveling bull crap, I`ll remind him exactly how the American people are feeling by my nice little collection of pitchforks and torches.
Now, the torch and pitchfork have become our little symbol of a reminder to Washington, at least on this program, or they`re about to be, if they don`t start doing their job and honoring the fact that their power comes from us, the people. We`ll just keep throwing them out until we finally find somebody who gets it.
This country was designed with a very specific pecking order in mind. The true power comes from God to the people and then we lend the power to government. When they start misusing that power, when they`ve had the power far too long, it`s time for us to take it back from them, give it to somebody else, loan it to them.
I`ve been traveling around the country talking to people from every walk of life and I`ve noticed a shift. It`s changing from are they listening to us, to they`re not even listening to us, Glenn. Think of it as a kid in the backseat of the car. They start saying, "dad, dad, dad, dad! Dad! Dad!" It gets louder and louder until you can`t ignore it anymore.
That`s where we are now. The sooner Washington recognizes it, the better. Washington, wake up.
For all of you looking to make this point without having to carry around a sharp metal fork or something or something that`s on fire, I offer you this. It`s a new t-shirt now available at glennbeck.com. Torches and pitchforks; protecting Americans from politicians since 1791." It`s available now at glennbeck.com
Good thing really about pitchforks, by the way, it`s not only does a pitchfork or two help throw the politicians out, but they`re also a great way to move manure; which pretty much is the same thing. Isn`t it?
From New York, good night America.