Return to Transcripts main page

Glenn Beck

Is War with Iran Inevitable?; Will Obama`s Honesty Help or Hurt Him?; John Edwards: Man of the People?

Aired February 12, 2007 - 19:00   ET

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

GLENN BECK, HOST: Are we headed for a nuclear showdown with Iran?
Plus, the latest on Anna Nicole Smith. And believe it or not, you`re going to want the answer to this question. What was in her fridge when she died? The answer will shock you. That`s more, next.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANNOUNCER: Tonight`s episode is brought to you by the Grammy Awards, now with more politics and weird orange body paint than ever before.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: Whoa. I don`t know about you but I was shocked to hear that the Dixie Chicks won a Grammy and Jimmy Carter, as well. Who would have seen it coming?

Huge news out of Tehran this weekend. First of all the 28th anniversary of the overthrow of the shah of Iran. Seems to come earlier every year, doesn`t it?

Plus, to commemorate this very special day, President Ahmadinejad made a huge announcement, or at least that`s what he promised, to tens of thousand of his followers. Are you ready for this. It`s earth shattering. He said, "We`ll have an announcement in April."

I mean, Debbie Downer, when did you show up? You were supposed to have an update. I think it was supposed to come yesterday, and you promised -- and I`m not kidding you -- an herbal cure for AIDS.

Here`s the point tonight. Even if Iran may be bluffing or stalling on their nuclear program, they are still a major threat to us and the rest of the world, and it needs to be taken seriously. If not, we could be headed for the worst possible outcome, a global war.

Here`s how I got there. Yesterday, according to U.S. military officers, top Iranian leaders have been giving Shiite militants in Iraq high-tech armor piercing road side bombs. These bombs have killed more than 170 of our men and women recently.

Now, this is not a hunch of some kook like me on TV. They have tracked down the serial numbers. And guess where they came from? Tehran.

So what does Mr. "I just want peace", President Tom, have to say about that? Well, today Diane Sawyer interviewed him on "Good Morning America", and she asked him about these bombs.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DIANE SAWYER, HOST, ABC`s "GOOD MORNING AMERICA": Are you sending Iranian weapons into Iraq?

MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD, PRESIDENT OF IRAN (through translator): In the name of God the compassionate and merciful, let me first say good morning to your viewers all over the states and its good people. And let me tell them that we have spring weather here in Tehran. And I hope that it will be spring all over the world. We shy away from any kind of conflict, any kind of bloodshed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: I`m not even sure what any of that meant. You know, I do know that President Tom didn`t really answer the question, but I think he also came out for global warming. I`m not sure. But thanks for the Accuweather five-day forecast, President Tom.

The thing Americans need to understand is this: Iran is directly responsible for the deaths of our soldiers.

Another part of Sawyer`s report really stuck out. I mean, it jumped out at me. At one point, she went out on the streets of Tehran. She wanted to get a feel for the mood of the Iranian people. Well, there was one exchange between Diane and an Iranian woman that I think perfectly captures the feelings towards America.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SAWYER: A woman screams at me. "The American government has done many crimes against us," she says. I try to move on, but she follows me. We jostle through the crowd. She even pushes me hard.

But as we walk, something else. First, she helps me make my head dress more appropriate. Next, she decides to kiss me, cheeks and head. Then shielding me from the crowd, she walks with me, yelling, "Death to America."

And before we part, in accented English, there it is.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I love you. I love you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: OK. This indicated to me what I`ve been saying for a long, long time. And it`s something that the detractors of my program don`t want to hear every time I say it.

Our greatest hope in this conflict is the Iranian people. If they ever stand up to their government and say, enough. A global and an apocalyptic style war could be avoided.

However, the Iranian people could also have the capacity to lead us directly into war. Why? Because the economy, the economy in Iran is a total mess. The Tehran stock exchange has lost over 25 percent of its value over the last year and a half. Inflation is rising. The unemployment rate is at 12 percent and rising to unofficial figures put that closer to 30 percent and inflation rate maybe as high as 50 percent. It`s almost like Jimmy Carter is running the country.

Plus, the population has doubled to 68 million people since 1979. Lots of these people are young, male, poor, and angry.

Bottom line, all of these factors add up to a powder keg of gloom and anger. President Tom knows this, and what better way to restore the national pride than by challenging the great Satan and offering a shiny new nuclear weapons program to rally behind? But is he bluffing? Some people in Washington think that he is.

On Friday the "Wall Street Journal" quoted a senior administration official, saying that Iran`s nuclear program, he said there`s a large enough element of theater in all of this. But there`s little reason to believe that Iran is actually leaping into a new technological level.

That`s all well and good. But if President Tom keeps crying nuke, one day you`ve got to take him at his word. And the results could be catastrophic.

So here`s what I know tonight. I know that all of this bluffing and posturing by President Ahmadinejad could eventually lead to war. Whether it`s the bombs that we now know he supplied to Shiite militants in Iraq or the nukes he may or may not be building, Iran is a serious threat, not just to us but the entire world. And the world cannot stand for it much longer.

Here`s what I don`t know. Could Iran secretly be hoping we attack them so they`ll appear to be a victim of American aggression to the rest of the world? It`s worked before. You remember Iraq?

Retired commander Harlan Kenneth Ullman, he is the military theorist responsible for shock and awe, the strategy that everybody was talking about when we went into Iraq.

Commander, do you believe that war is inevitable between the United States and Iran?

HARLAN ULLMAN, RETIRED COMMANDER: Of course not, Glenn. And I would tone down the rhetoric a little bit. I mean, it makes for great copy, but the situation is such, in my judgment, that Iran is no means an enemy. It is a problem. It is a potential danger.

But if we are smart and clever it`s something we can deal with. The problem is, we allow this inflamed rhetoric just to take its course. And we listen to it too seriously.

President Ahmadinejad is not in a strong position. The elections that just took place in Iran dealt him a more severe blow than the November elections that took place here in the United States with the Democrats` control of Congress.

What you have to realize is that this guy is a demagogue, but he is not controlling things in Iran, and that the ruling mullahs are not stupid. And so I think we`ve got to be very, very careful before we have the dogs of war being brought out unnecessarily.

There`s no reason for there to be a conflict. And if you find that difficult to accept, look at North Korea. North Korea is at least as dangerous. It`s got a million man army and at least it has something resembling a nuclear weapon. And President Bush has quite wisely said war is out of the question, because it`s going to be too expensive there.

I think in this particular case what you`re talking about is the possibility of limited strikes against a very fledgling nuclear power capability, but all-out war is something that I think is very remote.

BECK: Well, I hate to disagree with you, sir...

ULLMAN: Please do. I think it makes for good television.

BECK: Well, I couldn`t think that you are more wrong if you were talking about striking into Iran. If you don`t think that President Tom would use that as a way to whip his people up into a frenzy.

I agree with you, sir, I don`t want war with Iran. I think it`s horrible, horrible in all aspects. However, you can`t tell me that he wouldn`t whip his people up into a frenzy if we attacked him.

ULLMAN: I look at it a different way. If we -- and we were foolish enough, this would be a strategic catastrophe. Iran has got very many weapons at its disposal, levers. The oil embargo is one. It could probably send thousands of revolutionary guards into Iraq, attack our supply lines. He could resort to terrorism. He could do all sorts of things that would make life very, very difficult for us.

However, what you have to realize, to make the other side of your argument, Glenn, is that President Bush, while saying we don`t have plans to attack Iran, has said that Iran gaining a nuclear weapon is just unacceptable.

BECK: Well, he said that about North Korea, too.

ULLMAN: Absolutely.

BECK: Yes. And we`ve got one now. Don`t we?

ULLMAN: Well, we don`t know that yet.

BECK: It wasn`t -- please. Come on. Please.

ULLMAN: A baby fire cracker. I think the point is that through negotiations I think we`re going to see Kim Jong-Il and North Korea probably back down. I think the same thing is imminently possible in Iran, if we were to embark on some type of discussion, negotiation, talks. But this administration and the White House does not appear to do that.

BECK: How do you -- how do you expect us to talk to people who have absolutely no intention of being -- I mean, they believe we`re Satan. So how do you take them at their word?

ULLMAN: Well, here`s -- I ask you to go back in history to 1968 during the Vietnam War. Sixty-eight started off in a very bad way with the Tet Offensive. In China, there was the great proletarian cultural revolution. We thought that country had gone nuts.

In the summer, Leonid Brezhnev and the Soviets who repressed brutally the Prague spring and democracy in eastern Europe that Richard Nixon, who was running for office, said, "I`m going to talk to the Chinese," who really thought were nuts. We actually fought a war with them. "And I`m going to talk to the Soviets," about which people had nastier thing to say than about Iran.

And what happened? Ultimately -- ultimately, the Soviet Union collapsed and China no longer is the enemy. I`m just saying think about that -- that particular analogy. It`s not exact. It`s not perfect, but I think that there are ways to deal with Iran.

BECK: Commander, I appreciate your viewpoint. If you`re trying to point out that things worked out well for us in Vietnam, if you want to call a Tet Offensive a military mistake, are militarily good for their side, I think you`re wrong.

ULLMAN: That`s not what I`m saying. What I`m saying is that things worked out pretty well vis-a-vis the Soviet Union and China.

BECK: And worked out really poorly for us in Vietnam. Thanks. We`re out of town.

Barack Obama, his checkered past and his knack for coming clean might seem to be working, but his skeletons might just get him elected.

Plus, Vladimir Putin accuses the United States of provoking an arms race. Great, another Cold War. We`ll give you "The Real Story" and Russia`s agenda, coming up.

And it`s like a macabre episode of "Cribs". What do the contents of Anna Nicole`s refrigerator have to do with her death? We have exclusive photos that, believe it or not, you just have to see. Don`t miss it, coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: All right. This past Sunday Barack Obama appeared on "60 Minutes". He explained, I think, the main thing that sets him apart from all the other Democratic candidates. And I want you to take a look at this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D), ILLINOIS: I think one of the things about national politics is this attempt to airbrush your life. And it`s exhausting. You know?

This is who I am. This is where I`ve come from. And if we have problems in this campaign, I suspect it`s not going to be because of mistakes I`ve made in the past. I think it`s going to be mistakes that I make in the future.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: I`ve got to tell you. I know very little about him, but what I do know I like as a person. Everybody is jumping on this bandwagon, and you can see why. You know, it`s a little different running the president than writing books and giving speeches.

But when you watched him last night, he was so honest about who he was, warts and all, or at least he appeared that way, that I think he`s the kind of candidate that the country has been screaming for, politics aside. He answers the questions. He`ll tell you about his drug past, his religious indication, his stance on the war.

He`ll do it before the critics have a chance to ask those questions.

But I still have to wonder, once middle America shifts their focus from his, you know, uniqueness of being honest about himself and his toned abs, and they look at his liberal politics, will the honeymoon be over?

Mike Allen is the chief political writer for Politico.com.

Mike, his honesty, is he as honest as he seems he is?

MIKE ALLEN, CHIEF POLITICAL WRITER, POLITICO.COM: Well, sure. I think we should assume that.

And Glenn, I think you`re right, that Senator Obama has been trying to make a virtue of necessity. That is, he wrote an extremely honest, fascinating book, which I only read last week. Nothing like any campaign book you`ve ever read. But he wrote it when he had no idea that he`d be running for president. And he included references to chasing the ladies and doing other recreational things.

BECK: Right.

ALLEN: What do you do with that now? He talks about it up front.

And I love that clip that you just showed, because it showed one of the rarest things you see in politics. It showed a little humility. Right? And I think that that`s a rare quality that people will appreciate.

There was a similar strain in his speech when he referred to his -- the campaign as an improbable quest. How often do you hear a candidate say that?

BECK: You know, he did say -- in one of the books they were talking about last night, he said, you know, "My language was really pretty rough in it," et cetera, et cetera.

I have heard that you kind of want to keep him out of the -- away from the media a little bit because he is rougher on -- around the edges than he appears on television. Is that true?

ALLEN: Well, of course, I know that`s not true of you, Glenn. But there`s a lot of people who maybe are a little more careful when they`re in front of your vast audience than they would be otherwise.

But I think that`s true of anyone, and the scrutiny is starting sooner. It`s more intense because of YouTube. Every little thing is going to occur. I think that`s part of why you hear Senator Obama talking about stopping smoking. And I think it`s instructing that he doesn`t just stop smoking. He talks about stopping smoking.

BECK: Well, it`s a struggle.

ALLEN: He was referring the other night to the fact that he was chewing Nicorette. So it`s another way that people can identify with him. And in this field, I think you can agree with me. There`s very few people normal Joe can identify with.

BECK: Yes. He`s -- I think he is exactly the kind of candidate that America has been looking for.

However, his politics, he`s so far out of step with the mainstream voter in America, politically speaking. Do you think -- which do you think is going to be more important? Is this going to be a beauty contest, like we just want somebody real? Will his politics matter? And if they do, how much?

ALLEN: Well, of course, they will matter. And I think, Glenn, it`s a measure of the degree to which she has been very literal, is that "Rolling Stone", of all places, on their cover, has something that says the radical roots of Barack Obama.

Well, if "Rolling Stone" thinks you`re radical, that probably makes you tough in a lot of red states.

But I think people will first look at his authenticity. That then gives him the opening to talk about his policies. He`s been criticized for the thinness of his policy agenda.

But can you believe it? Saturday morning, I fired up my web site, and there on -- I fired up my laptop, and there on his web site were 12 policy papers outlining his views on various issues, including most of the more standard things like defending America, strengthening America. But one of them was defending -- protecting the right to vote. That`s not one you`re going to find from either candidate. So that gives you an idea of where he`s going and voters he`s appealing to.

BECK: I have to tell you, I mean, you`re not going to find a lot of policies that make any sense. I, for the life of me, after this weekend, I have no idea where Hillary Clinton -- where she stands on the war at all. Do you?

ALLEN: Senator Clinton was for the war when it looked like a good idea, and now it`s a mess.

BECK: Yes.

ALLEN: And I think you have to -- I think you have to acknowledge the facts that changed since Senator Clinton took her first stance on the war.

BECK: No, I`m not really going to give you that one. That`s too easy of a loophole. Mike, thanks a lot.

Coming up a little later in the program, a sneak peak into the eating habits of Anna Nicole Smith. Believe it or not, it`s not a pretty picture, and it explains so much. Don`t miss it. Coming up.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP))

BECK: The Dixie Chicks have paid just a horrible price for not being able to keep the fat one`s mouth shut in between songs. Terrible price. They only won five Grammys last night.

This is blatantly the Dixie Chicks getting rewarded by the entertainment industry for standing up against our evil president. Now the academy gives them the Grammy because, well, now it`s popular. We can do that. Bravo, Dixie Chicks, bravo.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: You know, a lot of politicians will go out of their way to show you they`re no different from the average Joe. I`m just like you. But the thing is, they are different. They`re usually richer, better educated, frequently come from more prominent families. They`re not really the average or relatable about most politicians.

And John Edwards, you know, son of a mill worker, seems to be a lesson he`s learning the hard way.

Edwards lives now in the biggest, most expensive house in Orange County, North Carolina. He says he`s a man of the people. Problem is his neighbors say, "No, huh-uh, not so much." He hasn`t even spoken to them, ever.

Monty Johnson, John Edwards` neighbor, he just put a "Go, Rudy Giuliani" sign on his fence. He`s not going to be coming by to ask for your vote now, is he?

MONTY JOHNSON, JOHN EDWARDS` NEIGHBOR: I wouldn`t think so.

BECK: Yes. Your sign is right at the end of his driveway?

JOHNSON: Yes, it is.

BECK: And I understand that you won`t take it down. And I also have read someplace that you have, like, a shed or something that`s pretty dilapidated, and you just will never tear that down.

JOHNSON: Probably not.

BECK: Is that just to irritate him?

JOHNSON: No. It was like that before he got there. I said, well, I don`t want to change now.

BECK: Right. So why is it you-- you don`t think he`s really a man of the people? I mean, besides the fact that he has an indoor squash court in his house, which I mean, come on, racquetball, at least the people can relate to racquetball. Squash? Snobbish.

Why is it you don`t like him? Why is he not one of the people?

JOHNSON: He don`t know anything about people like us. He has no idea what we really -- what we really believe, what we really want. He has no idea what we...

BECK: Well, how do you -- I mean, how do you say that? I mean, you don`t know the guy.

JOHNSON: Well, he`s not going to get to know any poor people with his gate locked and setting there.

BECK: Well, I mean, I think he`s being consistent. He says he doesn`t like poverty, and he`s got a 50-acre buffer zone all around poverty now.

JOHNSON: You got it.

BECK: So that`s a pretty good -- pretty good thing.

You`re actually a turnip farmer?

JOHNSON: Well, I do a little of everything.

BECK: Yes. And do you ever -- do you ever run into him in town? Do you have an actual turnip truck?

JOHNSON: No. We just do a little farming there on the place.

BECK: Right. And do you ever run into him? Or the Mrs...

JOHNSON: Oh, I see him almost every day.

BECK: Do you really?

JOHNSON: I just saw him on the way over here.

BECK: Really?

JOHNSON: Yes.

BECK: And what was he doing?

JOHNSON: Turning in his driveway.

BECK: Right. Did you wave?

JOHNSON: He didn`t see me.

BECK: Are you hiding in the bushes?

JOHNSON: No. I was sitting on the side of the road.

BECK: And he didn`t see you?

JOHNSON: I guess he just didn`t notice me.

BECK: You mean he didn`t look at you.

JOHNSON: No.

BECK: That`s probably the difference between not looking at you and not seeing you.

JOHNSON: But I was sitting near my sign.

BECK: Right. That`s probably -- I don`t think he probably looks in that direction anymore?

JOHNSON: I don`t think so either.

BECK: Quite honestly. All right, best of luck to you, sir. Thank you so much for talking to us.

JOHNSON: All right.

BECK: All right. Bye-bye.

Coming up next, "The Real Story" on why the minimum wage hikes actually are costing hard-working people their jobs. We didn`t fall off the turnip truck. We know. Stick around. "Real Story" coming up.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANNOUNCER: Valentine`s Day is almost here, which can mean only one thing. Glenn will attempt to eat his weight in candy.

BECK: I don`t even know what this one is.

ANNOUNCER: Will he succeed? Find out by going to CNN.com/podcast or iTunes. Then download Glenn`s podcast, "Sick Twisted Freak".

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Welcome to "The Real Story." This is where we try to cut through the media spin to figure out why a story is actually important to you.

Congress is mulling over that package that would raise the national minimum wage to $7.25 an hour. Some states have already implemented the increase. And as a result, employers, many of them have been forced to lay off workers and cut the hours of others.

The real story is, an increase in the minimum wage is bad for people who run small businesses and the employees who work for those businesses. I and my fellow conservatives have been telling this for a long, long time. You don`t have to be an economist to understand why, but apparently you just can`t be a liberal congressman.

It doesn`t get any simpler, Washington. I`ll speak slowly. Raising taxes and increasing the minimum wage hurts job growth. The more a business owner has to pay, the less money he has to grow his business and pay employees. The more things cost, the less we have to spend.

Think of your own life. The way you run your family`s budget isn`t that much different than those small businesses. Unfortunately, it`s not the way they run things in Washington, so they don`t get it. Sadly, this minimum wage increase is going to hit small businesses the hardest because, hello, they`re small businesses.

The woman running the pizza place or the family that owns the coffee shop doesn`t have a lot of financial wiggle room. They`re often living payroll to payroll, and they have to rely on minimum wage workers just to stay afloat.

I should know. I grew up in a bakery. My family owned it. And I can assure you it wasn`t easy.

But if you think the impact on small business is just too small to consider when considering a national wage hike, think again. According to the House of Representatives small business community -- or their committee -- small businesses represent more than 99 percent of all employers, 99 percent.

Let`s look at the one state now that has instituted this minimum wage increase just last month. It was in Arizona. Minimum wage went from $5.15 to $6.75 an hour. That`s a 31 percent increase, still 50 cents cheaper than what Congress is currently considering. Arizona legislators claimed that the increase would help create a living wage for their state`s poorest workers. Not really been the case. What a surprise.

You know who took the hit? Teenagers. They`re the ones who hold most of the minimum wage jobs. They`re the first ones to be laid off. And here`s the part that makes me crazy. Over 30 percent of those affected by minimum wage live with their parents. They have no real expenses. According to the Employment Policies Institute, less than 8 percent of minimum wage workers support a family.

And looking back to 2003, a study by a Federal Reserve economist showed that a 10 percent increase, 10 percent, in minimum wage resulted in as much as a 3 percent decrease in employment.

So, Congress, geniuses that you are, before you push through your legislation that increases the minimum wage, remember all you`re doing is hurting small business, the backbone of our economy, and giving our teenagers a little extra free time. Always a good idea. Try minding your own business and let the market dictate wages.

Now, I`ve been talking about the former Soviet Union for months. Of course, you know, most of what I say gets dismissed in mainstream media because, you know, I`m a warmongering kook obsessed with World War III. Well, real story is, well, it`s basically the same story.

Russia and its head psycho, Vladimir Putin, are positioning themselves as an enemy of the U.S. and an ally of Iran. And if you don`t believe me, just check with the "New York Times." Either they`re getting crazier or I`m starting to sound sane.

Speaking at an international security conference, and not seeing any of the irony in that fact alone, the Russian president accused the United States of provoking a new nuclear arms race by developing ballistic missile shields, undermining international institutions, and making the Middle East more unstable. Wow. I mean, that`s really weird. That`s a strange accusation coming from the former head of the KGB, the Russian security force that made the Nazis look like Mouseketeers, isn`t it?

Here`s the truth, and here`s the truth -- this is about Russia. There is no opinion here. There is no agenda, just the facts on Russia.

Putin is reviving many of the old-school policies that made Russia so terrifying back in the day. Russia is a one-party government with over 70 percent of the parliament now directly under Putin`s control and littered with his old KGB pals. Russians` nuclear material popping up on the international black market.

Putin controls both the country`s television networks. How great is that? The government controls all major private sector businesses and the public utilities. Russia is sitting on one of the world`s largest deposits of natural gas and, if he has his way, Putin will join with other Middle Eastern countries like Iran to form an OPEC of natural gas.

Make no mistake: Russia is rested, revitalized and rebuilding. They have put us on their radar, and we need to put them back on ours, especially now that they are debt free. That`s right. They don`t owe anything to anybody, not a dime.

The bad guys are putting on their black hats again for all the world to see. They are flush with oil money. Putin has not only shown himself sympathetic to Iran and Iraq, but he is also the first Russian leader to make an official trip to North Korea, ever. If you don`t think that a play date between Putin, Kim Jong Il and Ahmadinejad is the very definition of the axis of evil, I don`t know what it.

Remember, it was Putin`s Soviet spies that were sent into Iraq to feed Saddam Hussein information on the United States and on our attack. That is not theory; that is fact.

Towards the end of his speech this past Saturday, Putin offered this little gem. The world, he says, is now unipolar, one single center of power, one single center of force, a single center of decision-making. This is the world of one master, one sovereign.

You know what, Vladimir? I`m actually comfortable with that. The U.S., far from perfect, but when given the option between us being the world`s lone superpower or merely a tiny island of sanity in a world gone mad with despots, and dictators, and religious extremists, you know, I`m pretty happy with America taking the reins.

The alternative of a restored Soviet Union and an overcrowded nuclear clubhouse itching to start World War III, just too terrifying. But with the United States not serving as a strong and unwavering leader, it`s also terrifyingly possible.

Peter Baker, he is the former Moscow bureau chief for the "Washington Post" and the author of "Kremlin Rising: Vladimir Putin`s Russia, the End of the Revolution."

Peter, Putin is not our friend. But do you think he`s our enemy?

PETER BAKER, CO-AUTHOR, "KREMLIN RISING": Well, I think at the moment he`s something in between, something a little bit more complex than friend or enemy. On the one hand, he understands that he needs to forge stronger economic ties with the West. He wants to be a member of the World Trade Organization. He wants to, you know, trade with Western Europe and the United States.

But on the other hand, he is, in fact, leading a resurgent Russia, a Russia that has restored its oil industry, that has, as you mentioned, the natural gas deposits, and is using them to affect its neighbors when policy dictates. So, you know, he`s defining what he sees as Russia`s interest and not going along necessarily with what he sees as our interest.

BECK: He is -- I mean, let`s put it this way. He`s in a situation where he really can`t lose. I mean, nobody wants war, and war with Iran would be a horrible thing. But then again, if the entire Middle East is set on fire, Russia wins, don`t they? I mean, they`re sitting on a ton of oil. They have a ton of clout and power because of that oil, don`t they?

BAKER: Well, they do have increasing clout because of their energy supply. They pump these days almost as much oil as Saudi Arabia. They`re the second-largest oil producer in the world. And as you mentioned, they have the largest natural gas reserves. They provide about a quarter of Europe`s natural gas, very important leverage when it comes to dealing with the West right now.

Twice in the last 14 months, gas from the Russian energy company, owned by the state, has cut off gas supplies through Ukraine first, and then Belarus, which really secured Europe, which looked at the idea of winter without heating provided. So this woke up a lot of people in Europe to the potential challenges that Putin`s Kremlin is posing right now.

BECK: He has really cobbled back together this. And he doesn`t seem to have any interest in letting the states, former Soviet states, kind of go their own way. He`s cobbling this thing back together. Does he have a Soviet dream, or is this something entirely different?

BAKER: Well, I think it`s something in between. We`re not going back to your father`s Soviet Union. If you`re a Russian today, you can travel abroad, you can form a business, you can, you know, do the kinds of things that people do in the West without fear that your neighbor is going to rat you out, send you off to the gulag.

On the other hand, it`s a political space where, if you actually try to do something that`s challenging to the Kremlin, either as an opposition party, a journalist, human rights group, that`s where you risk, you know, in fact, being slapped down in some fashion or not.

BECK: "Slapped down"? I mean, killed.

BAKER: Yes. Well, in some cases, yes. Obviously, we don`t know the origins of some of these situations of violence, but there is a pattern that`s happened, obviously in the past few years, where people who have been sworn enemies or critics or skeptics of the Kremlin have met with very violent situations, the most recent, of course, being Alexander Litvinenko in London, who was poisoned with the polonium. Nobody knows for sure what happened there, but obviously that sends a message to anybody who wants to stand up to the Kremlin.

BECK: Great, Peter, thank you very much. That is the "Real Story" tonight. If you`d like to read more about this or if you`ve found a real story of your own, please tell us. Visit glennbeck.com and click on "The Real Story" button. Back in a minute.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: I think fluorescent lights come right directly from Hell. And I do believe -- this is a Glenn Beck ballpark fact -- I believe they suck the electrolytes right out of you. They`re thinking about passing a law in California, by 2009, no lights except fluorescents. I am against white lights. It`s too white; it`s too sanitary; it`s too hospital. It kills your creativity. It`s bad for you. I hate them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: Here`s the thing. Anna Nicole Smith, that story really no longer the story of her death. It`s now the story of her half-billion- dollar baby and the bare-knuckle custody battle to come. Does anybody care about this baby? Please, someone, love this child.

Today, though, the story was about appliances, specifically Anna Nicole`s refrigerator. TMZ.com got a sneak peak inside the death fridge, and it wasn`t pretty.

Harvey Levin is here. He`s the managing editor TMZ. I can`t believe I was actually interested in this fridge. When I heard this story on the radio, at first, I thought, "Oh, please, a picture of the fridge," but it`s fascinating. Harvey, what was in it?

HARVEY LEVIN, MANAGING EDITOR, TMZ.COM: Well, for starters, there was a big container of methadone. And that is hugely important, Glenn, for a couple of reasons.

Number one, remember that her son, Daniel, who died last September, had methadone in his system. And we found out at least one witness is going to testify next month at the coroner`s inquest that Howard K. Stern gave Daniel the methadone that helped to kill him and then flushed the rest down the toilet after he died.

Now, when you start placing methadone now in Anna Nicole`s house, in her bedroom, a place that Howard K. Stern lived, then you`re saying methadone is all around Howard K. Stern. It becomes really significant.

BECK: You know, I saw the mother this morning on television. I guess she`s the grandmother of the baby. And she said -- and I thought it was an amazing thing coming out of her mouth. She said, Howard K. Smith was around when my grandson died, when my daughter died, and I am afraid for my grandchild now. She was really kind of insinuating that this guy`s really bad news.

LEVIN: Well, I can`t say -- I certainly can`t make that kind of a leap. I can just tell you that we found out that today the police talked with Howard K. Stern, or at least were scheduled to talk with Howard K. Stern, about Daniel`s death yet again. He`s already been interviewed several times. And he is going to be asked about the methadone in the refrigerator, we`re told, during the coroner`s inquest. So it`s an issue.

BECK: So the deal with Howard K. Stern -- I read some place -- I really didn`t follow the baby, you know, whose dad thing it is. Help me out with this. There was somebody that I read today that said that they were asked by Anna Nicole to put their name on the birth certificate, and then they said no, and then, voila, here comes Howard K. Stern`s name. Do you know that story?

LEVIN: Yes, I do. And it`s G. Ben Thompson, because he is the guy who -- I mean, this is going to make Michael Jackson`s life seem normal to you, Glenn. I`ll try to walk you through this.

G. Ben Thompson is an older guy in South Carolina who did have a short affair with her. She tried to pin it on him that he was the father of this baby initially. He`s a very wealthy guy. And he said, you know, Anna, I kind of get your game here, but here`s the problem: I had a vasectomy two years ago, so it can`t be me.

But the story is that she still tried putting him on the birth certificate. He wouldn`t allow it, and then Howard`s name went on.

BECK: Who do you think the baby belongs to really?

LEVIN: Larry Birkhead. I really think Larry Birkhead is the father of this kid. I think it`s why they wouldn`t take a DNA test. I think that, you know, Larry Birkhead from the beginning, you know, has really been trying to look after the welfare of this baby. And if anybody doesn`t have an agenda, honestly, I think it`s him, and I think he`s the dad.

BECK: And there was a break-in today. What was that all about, at her house?

LEVIN: It wasn`t today. It was over the weekend. And it wasn`t -- you know, whether it`s a break-in or not, that`s what Howard K. Stern`s people say. G. Ben Thompson owns that house. And G. Ben Thompson is the one who let Anna live in the house. And they had a big fight, I`m sure you remember, about Anna saying, "He gave it to me as a gift." And he said, "No, I didn`t."

The bottom line is, G. Ben Thompson said, look, once Anna died, she was the only person I let live in the house. Howard K. Stern never had a deal with me, so I`m going in and changing the locks. So they went in and changed the locks over the weekend, and Howard K. Stern came back, changed them back, again so there`s a big dog fight about that.

BECK: OK. Harvey, thanks a lot.

Let`s check in now with Nancy Grace, see what she`s got coming up on the show tonight -- Nancy?

NANCY GRACE, CNN HOST: Glenn, tonight we go live to the Bahamas, Florida and L.A., as this storm intensifies around the sudden and unexpected death of cover girl Anna Nicole Smith.

At this moment, sources say boyfriend/lawyer Howard K. Stern being questioned by Bahaman police. Her own child locked out of the home, and allegations fly that hangers-on make off with art and possessions to the tune of thousands. And tonight, new allegations Anna Nicole`s untimely death could be because of recent plastic surgery.

It`s a legal nightmare, Glenn, all while an estimated $475 million hangs in the balance.

BECK: That poor baby.

Don`t forget, you can change out Nancy tonight at 8:00 and 10:00 p.m. Eastern, right here on Headline Prime.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Lots of e-mails coming in reacting to my interview this past Friday, like this. "Glenn, thank you so much for your extraordinary interview with Irshad Manji. She is brilliant and truly an enlightened leader. I have seen her interviewed a few times, but never in such an in- depth manner. While cable news was feeding their audience heartburn- inducing hot tamales, Anna Nicole, you were feeding yours filet mignon."

Thanks, Mary, but, I mean, honestly, I`m not above Anna Nicole talk by any means. We just did some. I need the occasional break from nuclear annihilation to get me through the day. But when we had a chance to really go in depth with somebody who is as remarkable as Irshad Manji, I had to do it.

Here is she is a Muslim woman that refuses to take it anymore. She refuses to let her religion get taken over by crazy people. We wanted to have her on the show. Glad you enjoyed it.

Harvey in Georgia writes, "Glenn, being politically correct means that the only group you can make fun of or talk about anymore is middle-aged, bald, white guys, and we, unlike" -- am I in that? "And we, unlike everybody else, can take a joke. When did we as a society lose our sense of humor?"

You know what? I don`t know when we lost it exactly, but it is long gone. The amazing thing is that we`ve not only lost the ability to laugh about your differences together, we`ve lost the ability to think the best of each other. When we can`t even make an honest mistake, when we are speaking and we`re afraid to say something because we think that somebody is going to think that we`re a hatemonger, or a racist, or a sexist, or a speciesist, instead of assuming the worst about each other, can`t we just give people the benefit of the doubt and expect the best?

Also, Harvey, it`s not true that the only group you can make fun of is middle-aged bald, white guys. You can make fun of middle-aged, hairy, white guys, as well, so the potential is basically limitless.

Brooks in Idaho asks, "Glenn, just wondering if you could tell me how illegal immigrants -- I mean, undocumented workers buy their alcohol. If they`re undocumented, that means they don`t have an I.D., right? Do they get carded, or is that discrimination?"

Brooks, I mean, come on, of course, it`s discrimination. You evil, hatemonger, you. Plus, illegal immigrants would never drink alcohol, or smoke, or even eat trans-fats. They`re here to work for their families and serve humanity. As soon as they`re done breaking that one, little law, which, of course, is really just a hateful law anyway.

You can e-mail me your border-crossing tips and drink recipes to GlennBeck@CNN.com. We`ll see you back here on the radio tomorrow and then back here tomorrow night. See you then.

END