Return to Transcripts main page

Glenn Beck

Mining Energy Crisis; Self-Proclaimed Pedophile Released; Controversy over `Kid Nation`; Political Literacy

Aired August 24, 2007 - 19:00   ET

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

GLENN BECK, CNN HEADLINE NEWS ANCHOR: Tonight, why are we still mining coal the way grandpa did back in 1899? Time to update the technology or maybe update the energy source. No, not that - not that one either - bingo. And the literacy of the left. A new poll reveals conservatives don`t read as much as liberals. Oh, really?
And why did these parents send these kids into this mining town? For a reality show, of course. Now the kids, parents and CBS are getting their dose of reality.

All this and more coming up tonight.

Thank you, Jesus, it`s the weekend. Hello America. It seems like the coal industry wants to party like it`s 1899. For reasons I don`t completely understand, mining is still done by men who tunnel miles under the earth with only a big axe and a helmet with a flashlight on it. And they`re dying as a result. Here is the point tonight. We need to take a long, hard look at the state of mining and the conditions of its workers. If they keep treating the present like it`s still the past, they`re not really going to have much of a future. And here`s how I got there.

In the last two weeks alone with the six men are presumed dead in Utah in the mining accident there, three more died while trying to rescue the original six. Make no mistake about it. Hauling rocks out of a hole in the ground is dangerous business and the people who do it - I think they`re miraculous.

Last year in West Virginia`s Sago mine explosion, 12 miners died. That brought the 2006 year end total to 47 mine-related deaths. Now I`m no mining expert, but I am a thinker and I have to wonder, it`s 2007, isn`t it? Can we check a calendar? Don`t we live in an ultra-mechanized world with robots and lasers and stuff that Sony makes?

Can`t we discover a way to get coal out of the earth - we can find a planet that is light years away, because scientists have figured out how to analyze the vibrations bouncing off a nearby celestial body. There`s no safer way, more efficient technology that we can use to get coal out of the ground than the methods we currently have in place?

And I`m just talking about the United States. If you look at the mining around the world, the number of fatalities is terrifying. In China alone, which OSHA I`m sure would love, 172 miners died in one accident alone last week. Men and women are dying at the rate that forces us to stop and take stock of what we`re doing and why. How long is it going to take before we finally embrace a truly safe energy alternative? No, I`m sorry, I`m not talking about wind farms or putting those solar panels on top of your television. I bet Jane Fonda would love that idea. In fact, she`s for that stuff, which is reason enough for me to be against it. But that`s a different story.

I`m talking about nuclear energy. Wake up. It is not the 1970s anymore. Nuclear power has come a long way, but then there was the Three Mile Island accident and that messy love canal business. And if you add the deaths from those incidents together - just the deaths of those two things alone makes a death total of zero. You can be against nuclear energy if it`s going to hurt your social standing with Al Gore and your buddies at the farmer`s market, but you can`t argue with the safety and efficiency of nuclear energy.

So tonight, here`s what you need to know. France gets over 75 percent of their electricity from nuclear energy. And if there`s one thing that I can`t stand, it`s being beaten by France at anything. Even though we`ve been in coal mining in America since the late 1700s, times have changed. We need to move forward, weigh our traditions against our desire for safe, reliable energy independence. We have to consider what`s to be gained and what`s to be lost.

Joining me now is Jeff Goodell. He`s the author of "Big Coal: The Dirty Secret Behind America`s Energy Future." Jeff, let me start here. I am not saying that we should get off of coal by any stretch of the imaginations. With the energy needs of America, let alone the rest of the world in the next 25 years, we need every source of energy we can get. But isn`t there a safer way to get it out of the ground?

JEFF GOODELL, AUTHOR: Well, you would think so, but there`s really not. I mean, there are big strip mines that can take it out of the ground through open pits, but if you`re going underground and especially if you`re going underground as deeply as they were going in Utah, there`s no simple way to do it. You can`t send robots down there. You have to have men down there underground.

And when you have been underground in those situations, you`re going to have things like this happen.

BECK: OK, President Bush announced that we`re going to start blowing up mountains which I don`t know, I mean I`m not an environmentalist but that just sounds like a bad idea.

Strip mines and blowing up mountains, why can`t we just put it all back after we`re done? I mean, I grew up in the Pacific Northwest. They didn`t just want to strip mountainsides of all their trees, so they did it pieces at a time and then they had to replant it. So you didn`t have big, empty mountains. Isn`t there any way to repair the damage to the planet once we take the coal out?

GOODELL: No, I mean not - in West Virginia, there`s no way to really do it. They talk about reclamation and stuff, but it`s completely different than what you saw in the Pacific Northwest. I mean, they are actually blowing up the mountains and dumping them into streams and filling up the streams and essentially leveling these areas.

BECK: Instead of saying that we can`t do that, shouldn`t we have the argument of let`s not dump it all into a stream. Let`s hold onto it and then put it back where it was. Isn`t that reasonable to have some sort of a non-crazy compromise?

GOODELL: Well, you`re not thinking like a coal operator here, Glenn. That`s not the way they think about it. They think about how do you get rid of this stuff as cheaply as possible? And the way you dump it - they way you get rid of it cheaply is you dump it in the river on the other side of the hill where nobody can see it. And so what if it fills up all the stream?

BECK: What are the people who are actually coal miners - what are they like? I would imagine the people who were trapped in the mine, what was it a year ago, a couple of years ago - did any of them go back to work? Once you`re trapped in a mine, do you ever go back?

GOODELL: Well, I got to know those nine guys who were trapped in Pennsylvania in 2002 pretty well because I wrote a book with them. And you know, those guys were all very - except for one, were all very eager to get out. A lot of coal miners or some coal miners certainly do love their work. They love the underground adventure of it. They love the camaraderie. In their blood, they say. But a vast majority of the guys who were doing it would rather be doing something else.

And in fact, one of the guys who was trapped in that Pennsylvania mine is now working at one of your favorite places, I know, which is a wind farm, a wind turbine.

BECK: I hope he`s not blocking Ted Kennedy`s view. Thanks a lot, Jeff.

Now we`re talking about the future of energy. And America, to me, it`s simple - nuclear energy has got to be an option. Becky Norton Dunlop, she`s an expert in environmental regulation with the Heritage Foundation. She joins me now to tell me where exactly I`m wrong. Go ahead Becky, let me have it.

BECKY NORTON DUNLOP, HERITAGE FOUNDATION: Well, Glenn I`m not going to tell you you`re wrong. I think that nuclear energy is an option and as you mentioned, the French are doing something right. It`s one of the areas that the United States might follow France`s lead. And we need to have the government look at streamlining the regulations and cutting some of the red tape so we can get some more nuclear plants online.

BECK: You know Becky, what kills me is people saying how dangerous it is. It really isn`t. I mean it is, in the hands of crazy people and it is in the hands of countries that are collapsing economically, like when Russia did it with Chernobyl, really bad. But even Chernobyl, it`s so relative here to say, was not as bad as we expected it to be, and that was in the hands of a collapsing economy and a collapsing government. It`s really relatively safe.

NORTON DUNLOP: Well, I think what we need to keep in mind, Glenn, you`ve made this point on your show before - there`s risk in everything that we do. But in a free society, we ought to let the private sector develop these options and take the risks and bear the liability.

BECK: Well, yes and no. I don`t want private corporations going - nuclear waste, where did I put that. I mean, I would like to have some regulation on nuclear waste.

NORTON DUNLOP: Well there are regulations and there of course are regulations on coal mines also, but the government has to play its part, but a limited part. And then it has to allow the private sector to develop all of these options so we have a diverse energy supply in America.

BECK: But there`s a problem with nuclear energy that`s really two- fold. It kind of comes from the same place. The red tape is enormous and it`s been put in by special interest groups to stop people from making nuclear - to make it impossible to do business. And the second is, when you say nuclear power plant, everybody thinks of a nuclear bomb. And they have so effectively tied these two things together that most people are just - they won`t even look at the facts of nuclear energy. I mean France is doing it.

NORTON DUNLOP: That`s right. Well, we have 100 nuclear power plants here in the United States in 31 states. And if you ask people who are watching your program right now, do you have a nuclear power plant in your state, even those who have it aren`t aware of it because it`s run cleanly, it`s run efficiently. Just nobody knows it`s there.

BECK: Yes, I love the people - the environmentalists that say we need these electric cars. And they say it`s so green, it`s going to be so great for the environment. And all you have to do is plug it in your garage. And I`m like, do you have a power plant in your garage? Where`s that power coming from? It`s going to have to come from either coal, hydropower or nuclear power. Where do they think the phantom power is coming from?

NORTON DUNLOP: Well, they don`t really think and that`s one of the great benefits of what you`re doing right now and that`s bringing to the attention of the American people that there are options. There are more options than we know about right now and that nuclear power deserves to be discussed and reconsidered.

BECK: Great, thank you very much, I appreciate it. And guys, if we`re running out of power, we`re going to need all the options on the table.

Coming up, self-proclaimed pedophile Jack McClellan, a free man, back on the streets because of a legal technicality. Hello, let`s close the loopholes.

And the latest reality sensation from CBS taking some serious heat. Why some parents are crying foul over "Kid Nation." You know, because they certainly didn`t sign their kids up to be famous or do anything risky or anything like that.

And foreclosures are up almost 100 percent this year. This year, and Congress has $1 billion plan to bail everybody out, which I believe is only going to make things much, much worse. We`ll explain in tonight`s real story.

And don`t forget, see more of what I have to say about today`s hottest topics, check out Beck`s Brain at CNN.com/GlennBeck.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Coming up, the housing bubble has burst. Thousands of Americans are facing foreclosure and our Democratic Congress wants to bail them out. Bad idea. I`ll explain why in just a minute.

First, I told you yesterday the FBI is looking to identify these two men in connection with suspicious activity aboard ferries in the Seattle area. While beautiful mountains, waterfront homes whizzing by, these two guys apparently had their cameras focused on less interesting things, like the working parts of a ferry. With Seattle on heightened state of alert, there was a brief period of panic today. This crew was doing a routine security sweep of a ferry and they found suspicious items in the men`s room. The boat and the terminal evacuated. Bomb squad was brought in. Fortunately, the items turned out to be harmless. But please, America please take a look at these men. If you have information on who they are, where they might be, please contact the FBI immediately.

Kind of creepy, they were like sitting next to. What, I don`t see a resemblance.

According to the "L.A. Times," which they tell me is kind of a newspaper, self-proclaimed pedophile Jack McClellan has been released back into the general population of L.A.`s freaks and misfits. The legal eagles over at the L.A. city attorney`s office has come to the conclusion that the restraining order that he was arrested for violating was quote, "procedurally defective." Only in Los Angeles, could they bungle the O.J. investigation, and a case where a scum bag like Jack McClellan, who admits being sexually attracted to little girls, gets caught leering outside a daycare center with a camera. I mean, was there a glove that didn`t fit? I wonder what color the sky is in Los Angeles for the prosecutors because you`re living in a different world, Jack.

Granted, there are pockets of sanity. Earlier this month, Los Angeles superior court judge Melvin Sandvig issued a sweeping restraining order to keep McClellan away children. He was barred from coming within 10 yards of any child in the state of three years. What happens if he rides a bus?

However, the spokesman for the city attorney said that while McClellan did violate that order, there was no additional hearing to give McClellan notice of the more extensive nature of the judge`s order. Usually the restraining orders are only good for about three weeks, so they had to cut him loose.

Now, it seems official. No matter what this guy does, no matter how much fair warning Jack McClellan gives us on his evil thoughts and perverted inclinations, the state of California is going to keep their hands off him until he puts his hands on some unsuspecting child.

You know what? Honestly, I mean this. Between the mudslides, the earthquakes, Hollywood -- California, I don`t know how you do it, I really don`t. You scare me.

Wendy Murphy is a former prosecutor and the author of the forthcoming book "And Justice for Some".

Wendy, how did they screw this up?

WENDY MURPHY, AUTHOR, "AND JUSTICE FOR SOME": Let me clarify one thing. The judge issued two different orders. One was forbidding this guy to come within ten yards of all people under the age of 18 all across the state of California.

BECK: Not even possible, right? The guy couldn`t have ever left his house, which I`m not saying is a bad idea. But you`re constantly violating that.

MURPHY: Of course. And frankly, I never even suggested that sort of thing as a remedy for the folks who were concerned, because I think it`s unconstitutional.

BECK: OK.

MURPHY: But there was another order that only applied to the Santa Clarita area, because that`s where the two parents were from, the ones who filed the request originally. And that`s still alive.

Likewise, the order that I think is unconstitutional is still technically out there, still viable. But I think we`ve heard loud and clear from the city attorney, they don`t have any intention of going after this guy. Both for the procedural reasons you said and also because I think, politically, the city attorney is pandering a bit to his constituents, who think this is a little bit too, you know, harsh on his freedom.

I think we`ve got to find a compromise.

BECK: Wait, wait, wait. Wait, wait.

MURPHY: Let me tell you why I think that. The first comment that came out of the city attorney`s office today, the early wire stories basically said what you reported, that it was all this, you know, procedural. We didn`t give him a hearing and so forth.

Later in the day, the city attorney said, "Oh, we think it`s unconstitutionally overbroad." Well, why didn`t that come out the first time?

What does it really mean, Glenn? It means that somebody`s got to get all the folks who care in a room to come up with a narrowly tailored order that actually restrains this guy. Because it isn`t about free speech.

He`s not just doing speech, he`s doing speech plus. Speech plus photographs, speech plus walking near the children. Speech plus teaching all the predators how to hunt down little girls and the joys of raping them. That`s not free speech. That`s actually speech plus action, which is not constitutionally protected in the same way that pure speech is.

BECK: You know what? I have news for you. I think -- honestly, I think George Washington or James Madison or Thomas Jefferson would come up and just slap us across the face if we said this is protected speech. They would slap us. It doesn`t mean that we`re handcuffed to just nincompoops.

I mean, we`ve got to have some common sense here. There`s got to be some way to get a guy who is -- you know what, you look at any religious thought, anywhere from, you know, Sufi, that upon which you gaze upon you become, to Jesus, "as you think so shall it be."

I mean, all of this stuff will tell you, a man`s mind, a man`s thoughts become action. You can`t live in this world.

MURPHY: Well, I`m not going to go that far. I`m not going to go that far, because I think it`s very important, no matter what you`re saying, that you be allowed to say things that are disagreeable, offensive...

BECK: Not -- not when it`s -- look how hot these children are and look where they are.

MURPHY: I agree with you. I agree with you. But here`s the solution, Glenn. And there`s actually a member of the legislature in California, an assemblywoman, I think, who`s already got something written up.

She basically wants to codify what is sort of the stalking endangerment- like law that would actually give prosecutors the responsibility, the duty and the power to go after this guy. That`s pending.

BECK: OK. I`ve got ten seconds, Wendy. Quickly. If somebody goes out and rapes a kid, and they find his web site on their computer, is he held responsible at all?

MURPHY: You know, I`m going to try like hell to go after him if there`s anything I can do about it, if that happens. In the meantime, all parents should do what he`s doing: take his picture, post it all over the neighborhoods, get his name out there. Haunt and stalk him. How`s that for free speech?

BECK: Wendy, thanks a lot.

Coming up, foreclosures are up almost 100 percent this year and now Congress wants to bail everybody out so they don`t lose their homes. Sounds good, right? Yes, not so much. You`ll find out in tonight`s "Real Story".

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: We are still a month away from all of the new fall TV shows, but already, one is stealing all the headlines and our hearts. CBS` new reality show, "Kid Nation", puts 40 kids unsupervised in a deserted New Mexico mining town for 40 days. What could possibly happen around a deserted mine? Without any running water or electricity.

And of course, no surprise, accusations of child abuse are now surfacing. Most shocking being -- get this -- kids drinking bleach from an unmarked soda bottle.

Who`s to blame? CBS trying to make a buck or the parents signing their kids up for it?

Joining me now is Carlos Castanada. He is from the New Mexico Department of Work Force Solutions.

Carlos, CBS didn`t seen tell the state what was really going own. They said this was a summer camp, right?

CARLOS CASTANADA, NEW MEXICO DEPARTMENT OF WORK FORCE SOLUTIONS: That`s correct, yes, Glenn.

BECK: Yes. And so when the allegations starting coming out, what did the state say?

CASTANADA: Well, we -- we sent inspectors to the site to see what exactly was going on. Unfortunately, our inspectors were unable to get in. Security held them off at the gate, and we were unable to accomplish anything.

We did this at the site more than once. Each time we, again, were unable to talk to the CBS representatives. We basically wanted to make an investigation or a quick site investigation to make sure that the conditions were appropriate for the conditions, or rather for the children that were working at the site.

BECK: OK. Now, they were apparently working 24 hours a day, seven days a week, yada, yada, filming this thing. But honestly, I mean, one of the allegations, one parent is suing because, you know, their child was splattered with grease while they were cooking, et cetera, et cetera. I mean, I`ve gone to summer camp before. A lot happens, man. It`s lucky I came out alive.

CASTANADA: Well, Glenn, and again, this is exactly what we were looking for, to make sure that there is appropriate personnel, certified and qualified individuals that were assisting the children during this production with the cooking and the safety, the sanitary part of it.

And, again, this was shot during the school year and we wanted also to make sure there was tutors and certified teachers on site, as well.

BECK: OK. So hang on. Why -- why would the state want all of these things for a TV show but not for a summer camp? Not for a camp?

CASTANADA: Well, summer camps are a little bit different. They`re -- obviously, the children are not working. We wanted to make sure that was the case.

Initially, when we received complaints about this, we were told it was a TV production, so obviously we were going to assume that the children are participating in a production and working and getting paid for it. But CBS told us that in the end that it was a summer camp and that those regulations did not apply.

BECK: But in a way it is. I mean, they`re not memorizing scripts or anything. This was just a -- you know, I have to put the air quotes around it -- a "reality show." They weren`t memorizing scripts. They were just being at a camp and creating their own, you know, their own town, right?

CASTANADA: Well, we still require a certain permits to be taking out by a production company or any non-profit organization. We require the Boys and Girls Club to do it when they do a summer camp. We require the Boy Scouts of America to get a permit, make sure -- and it`s all to protect the children and make sure the conditions are appropriate.

BECK: OK. Carlos, I appreciate it. This is what happens when big corporations want to make money and the parents want their kids to be famous. Thanks.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Coming up, political literacy put to the test. Who do you think reads more books, liberals or conservatives like me? Oh, I can`t wait to find out the surprising answer, next.

But first, welcome to the "Real Story." As the health care debate picks up steam, you`re undoubtedly going to continue to see critics like Michael Moore. He`s smart. I`ll bet he writes books and reads them, too. He`s going to cite all kinds of "evidence" showing just how broken our health care system is. In fact, here`s a clip from "Sicko."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL MOORE, FILMMAKER: The United States slipped to number 37 in health care around the world, just slightly ahead of Slovenia. But that`s understandable, because Congress was busy with other matters.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: So let me see if I can translate that, because you`re probably a conservative and you`re slow. Republicans are so busy with Iraq that doctors now have to cut the patient`s legs off with a handsaw. Is that about right, Mr. Michael Moore?

There`s one stat in that clip that was accurate. The WHO does rank our health care system 37th best in the world. Panic! America, how could that possibly be? The "Real Story" is, I wish we were ranked a whole lot lower by the WHO, because the WHO cares less about the quality of health care than the distribution of health care. And by distribution, I, of course, do mean socialism.

What Moore and others won`t tell you is that the WHO ranking is garbage for two reasons. First, the study takes the overall life expectancy into account. Now, I`m not sure if you`ve noticed, but the U.S. has a few more fatal car accidents than countries where bikes and rickshaws are the main transportation option. That really doesn`t have anything to do with the quality of our health care, does it? Our homicide rate, also a lot higher than many countries. And while that`s nothing to brag about, it has no relevance on how skilled our doctors are.

The second reason we`re ranked so low on the WHO list is the one I mentioned earlier. The WHO looks at how, quote, "fairly" health care is distributed. But, again, that doesn`t have anything to do with the quality of health care. It`s just a play to make you envy the system in France, a system with huge tax burdens, 40 percent co-pays, long waiting lists, and DMV-style service. Wow, that sounds great. How do I sign up? Oh, I remember, I think I sign up at the voting booth next November.

Michael Tanner is the director of health and welfare studies at the Cato Institute.

Michael, first of all, the list of the WHO, isn`t that kind of like saying, "Here`s a list of the best cars out there," but the list is compiled by companies that make SUVs and you have to take into account which one has the heaviest curve weight and the worst gas mileage?

MICHAEL TANNER, HEALTH AND WELFARE STUDIES, CATO INSTITUTE: That`s right. You can get any answer you want if you get to set the criteria. And in this study, they got to set criteria, like which countries had the most progressive tax rate. We got knocked down in the United States for having things like health savings accounts. So they actually used a lot of criteria that had nothing to do with health and had a lot to do with the authors` political bias.

BECK: And life expectancy, I mean, I had a Swedish doctor tell me one time, who was a doctor over in Sweden, and said the health care itself is the same over in Sweden as it is here, he said but the quality of life is better here, because you don`t have the long waiting lists and you`re not necessarily in pain waiting for surgery, et cetera, et cetera. Beyond that, you have life expectancy. Explain, if you will, the same health care system, how life expectancy in Utah can be different than the life expectancy in Nevada?

TANNER: Well, that`s right. And I don`t think Utah has a more socialized health care system than Nevada. The fact is, there`s all sorts of outside factors that have nothing to do with health care. They can range from things like whether people smoke or not to how many people are overweight. And they can do things like drug abuse, automobile accidents, homicides. In fact, if you actually take out homicides and accidents from the figures, the United States goes right up to the top of the list in life expectancy.

BECK: And then you have low infant mortality rate. This is a numbers game that, correct me if I`m wrong, we just track things differently than other countries.

TANNER: Well, that`s right. Even the OECD which track these numbers says you shouldn`t use them for cross-country comparisons because the definitions are very different. In many other countries, babies that are born alive in the United States and don`t live very long because they`re of such low birth weight or they have birth defects would simply be listed as a still birth in the other countries. They wouldn`t try to save them. But at any specific birth weight, you`re much more likely to have the baby survive in the United States than in other countries.

BECK: And this is the one stat that drives me out of my mind: 45 million people without health insurance here in America. Everybody, Republicans and Democrats, quote it. How is it wrong?

TANNER: Well, first of all, about a third of those people are actually eligible for government programs. Now, they could go on Medicaid but they just haven`t signed up. And most of the others are uninsured for just a short period of time. It`s a snapshot. It says they`re uninsured today; it doesn`t mean they`ll be uninsured tomorrow or that they were uninsured yesterday. Many people go in and out of the insurance markets. And, sure, we need to fix that, but it doesn`t mean that they`re born without insurance and then die without insurance 70-some-odd years later.

BECK: All right, Michael, thank you very much.

Now, let`s go to home foreclosures. Wow, up 93 percent from last year. The mortgage crisis has gone from Main Street, unfortunately for you and me, right to Pennsylvania Avenue. Once again, the politicians are going to come in and save the day because everybody knows, if something`s broken, the government`s good at fixing things.

So what are they proposing? Well, among other things, Hillary Clinton wants to put $2 billion in federal money -- that`s your money and my money -- into various funds to help homeowners. Oh, she cares about people. Not to be outdone, John Edwards says, "I care about people even more." The champion of the poor and the $400 haircut wants federal bailout plus mandatory restructuring of the terms of many existing home mortgages.

All of that probably sounds appealing, because, I mean, who doesn`t like free money from the government? They`ll just make more. The real story is that what we`re going through right now might be difficult. It may be ugly now. It may be getting a lot, lot worse. But it`s healthy.

One of the Democrats` favorite ideas, besides bailout funds, is to allow Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which are the two government-sponsored lenders -- hear those words -- to temporarily take on a lot more mortgages than they`re currently allowed to. Well, what a fantastic idea. So that way, when those loans go bad, we get to shift the burden from the people who actually wrote the loans and took the loans -- you know, the ones who were actually responsible -- and shift that burden right to you and me, people who didn`t have anything to do with them. That sounds great. It will make the $519 billion S&L bailout from the 1980s seem like a picnic.

Look, you know this if you`re a long-time watcher or listener to this program. I`m an alcoholic. I`m a frickin` drunk, OK? You know what? When you have too much to drink, you pay for it the next day, not fun, not pretty. But blackouts and hangovers are the price you pay for the party. And it`s only because of those blackouts and hangovers that I stopped and changed my behavior.

Well, we`ve spent the last years in low-interest-rate happy hour, buying stuff we could never afford, and spending money we shouldn`t have. Now it`s time for the hangover and the blackout. And, you know, while I`m sober today, America, you know, is not really sober. I just wish I wouldn`t have wasted all those great blackouts because I could really use one now to forget about the stupidity that I continue to see out of the pinheads in Washington.

Aaron Task is the editor-at-large of TheStreet.com. Hi, Aaron.

AARON TASK, THESTREET.COM: Hi, Glenn.

BECK: Well, I see you here, and I think to myself, I just have to recap this. The last time you were on with me, I said, "Come on, it`s 14,000 -- this is a bubble. This is bad." And you said this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TASK: I do disagree with you, Glenn. I think the market is very strong fundamentally, and it`s a lot different than it was in 1999 and 2000.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: Uh-oh.

TASK: Well, it was different. It is different than 1999 and 2000. Back then, everyone was becoming a day-trader and dentists were leaving their practice so they could trade stocks, and that`s what you were hinting at what is happening now, and that`s not what`s going on. I would say that you were right for the wrong reasons.

BECK: OK. All right. Look, not everybody is right, but you -- please tell me that we agree on this, that a bailout is a colossally bad idea.

TASK: It is a bad idea, and I do agree with you that you do need to have these periodic shakeouts in an industry like the mortgage industry where people were just lending money. There was the liar loans, the no- document loans, where people who were not even citizens of this country were getting loans from approved lenders. And that was obviously ridiculous and outrageous and needed to stop. And there needs to be mortgage lenders that go out of business. The problem is, if you just let it all shake out, there`s going to be a lot of people who are going to lose their homes. And that becomes a, quote, unquote, "real economy" problem, instead of a problem for Wall Street.

BECK: You know what? Let me tell you something, Aaron. And if you`re a newsletter subscriber at glennbeck.com, you`ll be able to find this interview I did on the radio today. I talked to the woman who wrote the book "The Forgotten Man." It is tremendous. Have you read it?

TASK: I have not read it. I`ve heard very good things about it.

BECK: It is tremendous. It is the history of the Depression and the New Deal. The Depression was not caused by the stock market crash. It was caused by the government going in and trying to fix things and scaring the bat crap out of business so you couldn`t recover.

TASK: Right, and the Fed also did some dumb things back then.

BECK: Absolutely.

(CROSSTALK)

BECK: It`s much more complicated than just that. But the point is, when government gets involved, they screw it up. Punish the people through capitalism that screwed this thing up, take the hit and recover from it.

TASK: Well, you are seeing that. I mean, you`re seeing American Home Mortgage go out of business, and Luminen (ph), and New Century, a lot of these other lenders either going out of business or laying off a lot of people. The problem if you`re a politician is that a lot of those people being laid off are your constituents. Others of your constituents are losing their home. And so you`re going to have to do something about it. You can`t just say, "Well, take your punishment."

BECK: Yes, you can. If you care about the country, that`s exactly what you do. Aaron, thank you very much.

TASK: Thank you.

BECK: We`ll talk to you again.

That`s the "Real Story" tonight. If you`d like to read more about this or you found a real story of your own that you`d like to tell us about, please visit glennbeck.com and click on the "Real Story" button. Also, that`s the place where you can sign up for our newsletter at glennbeck.com.

Coming up, why the liberals read more than conservatives. It`s because we`re dumb. Stick around. I`ll tell you about it.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: There`s this new report out that, you know, that conservatives just don`t read books. They just don`t do it, you know? They`re just looking for bumper stickers. That`s all they`re looking for. "No, we`re too busy reading the Bible. That`s all we read." Which is weird, because the most conservative book ever written seems to be the world`s best- selling book, but that`s a different story.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: I love these pointless polls. You know, I even love it more when people try to analyze them. So let`s do it together, shall we? Pat Schroeder, she`s the president of the American Association of Publishers and former House Democrat. I didn`t know that one. She thinks she knows exactly why liberals read one whole book more than conservatives every single year.

Quote, "The Karl Roves of the world have built a generation that just wants a couple of slogans. No, don`t raise my taxes. No new taxes. It`s pretty hard to write a book saying, `No new taxes, no new taxes, no new taxes` on every page."

Actually, Pat, it`s really kind of hard to write a new book on how well tax cuts work since it`s pretty much been a foregone conclusion since about 1911. But I also find it pretty comical that this woman could possibly be making the argument that the party of no war for oil, the U.S. out of my uterus, one nation under surveillance -- I love that one -- selected not elected, the left is right, Jesus was a liberal, more trees, less Bushes, actually claiming that conservatives are the ones who live on bumper sticker slogans.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson is a nationally syndicated columnist. Earl, are conservatives like me just slow readers and dummies?

EARL OFARI HUTCHINSON, POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I wouldn`t say that. As a matter of fact, some of my best friends are conservatives, and at times...

(CROSSTALK)

BECK: Oh, that`s what you always say. Prove your friends, Earl.

HUTCHINSON: There they are. But you know what? We do read books. Now, let`s get to the A.P.-Ipsos survey and let`s get to Miss Pat Schroeder. Pat Schroeder`s a liberal. We know that.

We also know something else, that when you look at the book business in general, now, there might be a little something to it, Glenn, if you think of it this way. When you look at a lot of the books that are written that are on the market today, a lot of them are written by liberal academicians, liberal historians, sociologists, psychologists. And also the book business itself, it`s in your neck of the woods, New York City.

So by definition and also history, a lot of liberals do write books and they do get them published. So I wouldn`t be too surprised to see that there is a liberal constituency, a liberal audience, and, yes, a liberal reading public out there. Now, Glenn, that`s not to say that you`re stupid or dumb and you don`t read books now, we`re not saying that.

(CROSSTALK)

BECK: No, I totally agree with you. I mean, look, here`s, you know, a big-time liberal, and she`s in charge of the biggest book publishing group out there. She`s speaking for them. That`s who she is. And you know what? A lot of the publishers -- believe me, because I`ve met them -- a lot of the publishers are on-fire liberal. There`s not a lot of conservative books that are written. A lot of even the history books are written by flaming on-fire liberals. Why do they want to subject themselves to that?

HUTCHINSON: OK, so that`s the whole point. So, Glenn, you`re actually kind of underscoring what I`m saying. You`re essentially saying that, look, if you`ve got an industry out there, and they pump out a lot of books every year -- I think the last count I saw was over 3 million books that are turned out every year.

Now, if that`s the case -- maybe more than that -- if that`s the case, it`s in New York City. You`ve got a liberal academic writing audience, reading audience out there. Why should it surprise anyone with this study, this survey, and even if Pat Schroeder has an agenda, a hidden agenda to make that point, which she probably does...

BECK: I`m not going to go that far. I don`t think it`s an agenda. I just think people see things differently. I mean, I swear to you, now that I live here in New York, I begin to understand the media a little bit more. I understand everything a little bit more. The people who live on this island, they think that this is America and anything across the river, it`s some far distant land. There are crazy people that live there. I mean, they just see the world differently. I don`t think it`s an agenda.

HUTCHINSON: Well, no, but I was saying because she is a liberal, so oftentimes there is an inference there. And, by the way, I`ve heard commentary and some comments since this study came out, and many people are saying, "Wait a minute, are you saying conservatives are stupider, that they`re dumber because they don`t read books?"

I think probably the better thing to say is this. If we move away for a second from who reads what or who doesn`t read what books, how about just being well-versed? Now, when you really put it that way, I think it`s fair to say that the Glenn Becks, the Earl Ofari Hutchinsons, liberal or conservatives of the world, many of us are pretty darn well-versed, whether we read a book or not.

BECK: Again, once again, everything is always spun for political reasons, and it`s so ridiculous. OK, so liberals read one more book than conservatives do. Here`s the real thing that we should be talking about in this study that there is one out of four Americans that read no books.

HUTCHINSON: No books, right. Now, are they liberal or conservative? See the study didn`t ask that. When I saw that, I wanted to know this. Now, OK, one out of four Americans read no books every year. Are they liberal or are they conservative? It would have been interesting if they had fine-tuned it a little bit more. We might find something.

BECK: You know what? And not even to say that the people who don`t read any books are stupid, they may get their information from the Internet or whatever.

HUTCHINSON: Absolutely they do. The world has changed.

BECK: Absolutely.

HUTCHINSON: The world has changed.

BECK: Thank you very much. Appreciate it. We`ll be back in just a minute.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Welcome to America, a land filled with people that were so frustrated with the Congress they elected, only 26 approved of their performance, so they voted them out, brought in the Democrats. And now only 18 percent approve, and for good reason. That is the lowest in recorded history, by the way.

Even though the polls show that we`re generally happy people, we can find something to complain about. It`s part of our human condition. But as we approach the election season, politicians are going to try to capitalize on that. They`re going to start to promise solutions to all of our problems from our jobs, to our health, even the weather. You know, as the cycle continues, we`ll all, you know, stand around when they don`t deliver and we`ll say, "Gee, what happened? They promised us."

Luckily some people are rising above their obstacles and taking matters into their own hands and achieving things that, quite honestly, just make me feel worse about myself. Sheila Drummond, she is a 53-year- old amateur golfer. She recently got a hole in one on a par 3 hole. OK, impressive enough, but not television-worthy. You know, but it is impressive, especially since I have the athletic ability of a hamster that`s too lazy to get on the wheel. But it makes me feel even more pathetic when I realize that not only did Sheila get the hole in one in the pouring rain, but she`s also blind.

She has been blind for 26 years, and she`s only been playing golf for 15, meaning that she learned to play golf while blind. Remember that the next time that you slice one into the woods or kill a passing squirrel. Just think about Sheila. According to the United States Blind Golfers Association -- which they tell me really does exist -- it is the first time a totally blind female has ever recorded a hole in one.

Now, another record, while not as impressive, can top not only golf, but even watching golf while blind, in terms of boredom, Les Stewart, apparently not a busy guy, in 1983 completed the achievement of counting from one to one million on his typewriter. Wow, let`s get him signed up for universal health care.

Some people would say that`s not enough to hang your hat on for one lifetime, but he thought that for a while, then he realized, "No, no, I can do more." He decided to count from one to one million again on his typewriter, but this time no numerals. No, he`s going to use words. It took him 16 years to accomplish.

Since his record has been voted the third most bizarre record in history, he`s getting a new level of recognition. And when I use the word "level," I mean, "some." He`s getting some recognition, this program. What an accomplishment.

Don`t forget, you want to know what`s on tomorrow`s program or if you`d like a little more in-depth commentary on the news of the day, sign up for my free daily newsletter at glennbeck.com. From New York, good night, America.

END