Return to Transcripts main page

Glenn Beck

Candidates on the Attack; Chicago Church to Give Sanctuary to Illegal Immigrant; Bush to Get Tough on Earmarks?

Aired January 29, 2008 - 19:00   ET

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

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
GLENN BECK, HOST (voice-over): Tonight, political infighting reaches a fever pitch as candidates on both sides go for the throat. But can both parties ultimately unite, or has the damage already been done?

Plus, a Chicago church that offered sanctuary to an illegal immigrant a year ago plans to do it again. In other words, they`re planning on breaking the law. Can we plan on arresting them?

And a man claims to have accidentally electrocuted his wife during sex. Now he`s charged with manslaughter. Kinky sex, plain crazy or consenting adults.

All this and more tonight.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BECK: Well, hello, America.

President Bush gave his final State of the Union address last night. I`ll have more on that in just a bit.

But first, while I was watching the speech, or shall I say while I was watching Congress watch the speech, one thing became increasingly clear, so here`s "The Point" tonight.

Both parties are self-destructing. I mean, they are eating their own young. It`s actually kind of fun to watch, as this election cycle gets more and more vicious by the day. And here`s how I got there.

During last night`s speech, it actually became comical watching the audience trying to figure out when they stand up and applaud and when they shouldn`t. Did you notice that? You know, what response signaled support for which candidate? It was like watching a Three Stooges routine. It really was. And that`s mild, compared to what`s happening with the rest of the political culture.

Yesterday the president of the New York chapter of the National Organization of Women nagged Ted Kennedy for endorsing Barack Obama instead of Hillary Clinton. Sorry, Kennedy, but hell have no fury like a liberated chick scorned. You know what I`m saying?

Here`s a bit of their statement yesterday. Quote, "Women have just experienced the ultimate betrayal. Senator Kennedy`s endorsement of Hillary Clinton`s opponent in the Democratic presidential primary campaign has really hit women hard. Women have forgiven Kennedy, stuck up for him, stood by him. And now the greatest betrayal! We are repaid with his abandonment! He`s picked a new guy over us. He`s joined the list of progressive white men who can`t or won`t handle the prospect of a woman president who is Hillary Clinton," end quote.

Ladies, this is Ted Kennedy, the guy who dropped his date off at the bottom of a lake, man. Ladies you`re hurting your own cause here. If you truly want to compete in an equal playing field, you`ve got to understand it`s not personal; it`s politics. And it`s a Kennedy.

So tonight, here`s what you need to know. Now, there are cries of sexism for supporting Obama. Brace yourself for the cries of racism thrown at Clinton supporters. And these are the Democrats. I mean, I expect the Republicans to unravel before our eyes as they search for their soul, dethroning icons and supporting half wits in the process.

Both sides, however, need to wake up. And they better do it fast. I mean, if this is the way they`re acting now, come November the only sensible way to vote may be for none of the above.

David Freddoso is a political reporter for the "National Review," and Mort Zuckerman is the editor in chief of "U.S. News & World Report."

Mort, let me -- let me start with you. Let`s start with the Democrats. Bill Clinton played the race card, and it has really put a divide in there. Is that something that heals quickly? Or I mean, are they political animals enough in the party to say, "Whatever, we forgive you, and let`s move on"?

MORT ZUCKERMAN, EDITOR IN CHIEF, "U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT": Well, to some extent, that`s always the case when everybody tries to get together and defeat the other side in a real election. But I think this one`s going have long-lasting implications.

African-American community votes 91, 92 percent for the Democratic Party in a national election. But I have to tell you, I think there are such raw feelings and such anger in the African-American community over the way Bill Clinton has handled himself that I doubt if they`re going to go out to vote in any kind of significant numbers the way they might have, had Barack Obama certainly been the candidate.

BECK: Even if Barack Obama becomes the candidate and Bill Clinton goes and does this to the Republicans? You think it wouldn`t be healed?

ZUCKERMAN: No. I think if Barack Obama is the candidate, I think he will attract the -- not only the African-American community in large numbers but younger voters in large numbers. And the -- quote unquote -- the idealistic strain of the Democratic Party.

But, remember as the old cliche shows, there are more beer drinkers than there are wine drinkers. And I think Barack Obama has got a problem, as it was demonstrated in New Hampshire, with younger, black -- younger white men, working-class men. And this is where Ted Kennedy`s endorsement I think might help him.

BECK: OK. David, the Democrats and the Republicans -- I mean, I had Michael Reagan on last night. And I said, could you -- you know, he was -- he absolutely disagreed with everything John McCain said. And I said, "Could you pull the lever if he becomes the candidate?"

He said, "Of course. We`re Republicans."

I said, "Isn`t that what`s getting us into trouble here?" Do people sell their values out just to win?

DAVID FREDDOSO, POLITICAL REPORTER, "NATIONAL REVIEW": Some people always will, Glenn. I think, though, that the danger of disunity is much greater on the Republican side. The Democratic candidates, ideologically, are more or less the same. And I think the Democratic base tends to unite a lot more strongly before a general election.

And this time we have a lot of prominent conservatives. And I understand, yourself included, you might just not be that interested in the John McCain candidacy.

BECK: Might not be interested?

FREDDOSO: Wouldn`t be at all. How`s that?

BECK: Wouldn`t be at all, man. I`m looking for -- I`m really -- I`m looking for cartoon figures on that ballot if John McCain is the guy. I think McCain and Clinton should just join up and make it one ticket.

FREDDOSO: Listen, Glenn, the thing about -- the Democratic Party has always had -- they`ve never had the problem of the base not coming together. In fact, it`s been more than 30 years since the last time the Democratic presidential nominee got a majority.

And the reason is that they can get the base come together but the base that they have is smaller. They need to win over a large majority of independent voters.

BECK: Right.

FREDDOSO: The Republicans, on the other hand, if their base falls apart, which can happen a lot more easily in a field like this where they`re very ideologically different, you end up with a much bigger problem.

BECK: So Mort, tell me about the Democratic base here. Because you`ve got really the two power families in the Democratic -- in the Democratic field. You`ve got the Kennedys and the Clintons, I mean, becoming the Hatfields and McCoys.

What is the motivation for Kennedy to go for Barack Obama? He just thinks he`s the best candidate or...

ZUCKERMAN: Well, you know, I think the -- there has been a real, real dismay within the Democratic Party over the way Bill Clinton has handled the racial issue and the way he`s trying to characterize Barack Obama as a black candidate and not as a candidate who happens to be black. I think this is something that is a real hot button within the Democratic Party. So I think this is something that was a part of the inspiration for what Ted Kennedy did.

There`s another thing. You know, the Kennedy family, with John Kennedy and Robert Kennedy, both of whom, of course, were sadly assassinated. There`s a halo over them, if only for that reason but for other reasons besides that. And they, in a sense, tie into the younger generation to the sort of idealistic strain within the Democratic Party. And that`s what Obama represents to Ted Kennedy.

And I think this is a part of what inspired him and, in particular, what inspired Caroline Kennedy. So you have that part of the Kennedy family, I think, feeling very strongly that that`s a part of the tradition that they feel they personify for the Democratic Party.

BECK: Do you believe -- Mort, do you believe -- I mean, Caroline I actually believe to be sincere. Ted Kennedy just seems like a political animal that he could say -- you know, "it says a lot about the Kennedys if I endorse Barack Obama, not necessarily" -- I mean, I don`t know if the guy has a value that he really stands for.

ZUCKERMAN: Well, I -- you know, I think that`s a bit unfair to him. I mean, say whatever else you want to say about him. And there are many things to say about -- you could say. And you`ve said them, in fact. But, you know the facts are that he...

BECK: Somebody`s got to, Mort.

ZUCKERMAN: He has been genuinely liberal, in fact, one of the most liberal members of the Democratic Party now for 40 years in the Senate. And he has been a real workhorse in the Senate. He`s really done a lot of very, very good things in the Senate.

And he`s been open to compromise and to working within the normal procedures of legislative compromise in order to accomplish things with a Republican president, as he did, for example, on to program of No Child Left behind.

BECK: No Child Left Behind. Right.

ZUCKERMAN: No Child Left Behind.

BECK: David, real quick. About ten seconds here. Anybody that the Republicans can actually come around? Is there one unifying figure?

FREDDOSO: Well, that`s a really good question. Glenn, I don`t even know -- I don`t think I can answer that in ten seconds. Maybe not. I don`t know the answer to that. There`s -- there are a lot of problems with the candidates that are there. It looks like it`s McCain versus Romney, and each one has his own specific problems right now.

BECK: OK, good.

Coming up, illegal immigrants continue to enter our country and get sanctuary. The latest is an immigration activist who sought protection from the Chicago church, the same church which made headlines in August for a similar stunt. We`ll talk to the pastor in just a few seconds.

Then, a good friend of the show, Hugo Chavez, back in the news. This time, he`s trying to sabotage our economy. I`ll explain in tonight`s "Real Story."

Then something about kinky sex, electrocution and manslaughter. If you`re into that kind of stuff, you don`t want to miss this story. It`s coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Well, if the saying "show me your friends and I`ll show you your future" is accurate, then we should be able to learn something from the presidential candidates and who they choose to associate themselves with.

Keep that in mind as you watch this clip of Juan Hernandez. He`s been on this program several times. He`s a duel U.S./Mexican citizen and the former head of the Office for Mexicans Living Abroad under former Mexican president Vicente Fox.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JUAN HERNANDEZ, FORMER HEAD OF THE OFFICE FOR MEXICANS LIVING ABROAD: I don`t think we need to build walls to control immigration. We are in the 21st century now. We are a country that has always broken down walls.

Once again, with regard to securing the borders, we need to work with Mexico. We`re never going to have a secure border. We`re not going to put a wall for hundreds and hundreds of thousands of miles. We have to work with our neighbors. We need to think now for the future. Canada, United States...

LOU DOBBS, CNN ANCHOR: Let me ask you this.

HERNANDEZ: ... working as a bloc.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: Working as a bloc. Yes, let`s think regionally.

You remember this guy? I haven`t had him on the program, because he makes blood shoot out of my eyes every time he`s on the program. I love that argument. Canada, Mexico and America working together. We`re not three sovereign nations anymore; we`re one union. And our people must be able to flow freely. It`s a pile of garbage.

So now which candidate has now reportedly staffed Mr. Hernandez as a non-paid Hispanic outreach director? Yes, believe it or not, it`s the man who`s learned his lesson from the American people, Mr. Amnesty himself, John McCain.

Tomorrow night, we hope to finally have Juan Hernandez on the program. I`ll ask him directly just how interested John McCain is in his open-border agenda. And I`m sure we`ll hear the frank truth.

But first, while we`re on the topic of illegal immigration, everybody`s favorite sanctuary church is back in the news. You remember that -- that church in Chicago? Remember, they were sheltering that so- called immigration activist, Elvira Arellano, for about a year until she was arrested and deported?

Well, that church is at it again. This time, the chosen illegal immigrant is 28-year-old Mexican citizen who is slated to turn herself into immigration authorities on Monday.

But she said, quote, "I am taking a stand of civil disobedience," she said, "because I believe with my heart that the United States and Mexico must end the system of undocumented labor."

Well, on that one, we agree. And that`s exactly why we need to return her home. You can stand in line with the millions of others who want to come through the front door and earn the right to practice civil disobedience.

Reverend Walter Coleman, he`s the pastor at the church in Chicago.

Welcome to the program, sir? Why is your church above the law?

REV. WALTER COLEMAN, PASTOR: Well, we`re not above the law, but -- but we have two contradictory policies in this country. One legislative policy and one economic policy.

We have an economic policy of NAFTA, which has destroyed the world economy of Mexico. We had an open border that brought people in. We had corporations that hired them knowingly. We had the IRS, which gave them I- 10 (ph) numbers. And when they were here, they married. Some of them had children. They became part of our community. So that was an economic policy.

Now, you don`t think...

BECK: Don`t you have to -- don`t you have to earn the right to disobey the laws that -- that you supposedly live under? Don`t you have -- don`t you have to earn something, sir, to be a part of the civil discourse?

COLEMAN: I don`t know if you`re talking about me, Glenn. But...

BECK: No, no. Of course not you, her.

COLEMAN: We`re just -- we`re just -- well, we`re providing space in which this contradiction can be out there. Because what`s going on now will not end the system of undocumented labor. As long as NAFTA...

BECK: It`s a political statement, isn`t it, sir?

COLEMAN: As long as NAFTA`s driving people up from the south...

BECK: So do you have a -- are you a tax-exempt church -- because you`re making political statements here.

COLEMAN: And then on the other hand, as long as deporting 12 million people every year, not 12,000 every year, will not make 12 million people leave the country.

BECK: I understand she didn`t want to come here. I understand she didn`t even want to come here.

COLEMAN: I`m not exactly sure what you`re saying. But she came here...

BECK: She didn`t want to come here.

COLEMAN: She came in order to support her children because of what this country`s policy had done to the economy of her town.

BECK: So she didn`t even want to become an American. And she just wanted to hold her family together, right?

COLEMAN: She`s not asking to become an American citizen.

BECK: I know that. And I appreciate that.

COLEMAN: But she`s asking to be treated with dignity.

BECK: She can be. I`ll -- I`ll personally, politely put her on a plane and send her home.

She wanted to keep her family together, right, sir?

COLEMAN: Glenn...

BECK: Answer the question. She wanted -- she wanted to keep her family together, right, sir?

COLEMAN: She wanted to make sure that her children could eat and go to school.

BECK: Right. Where are her children?

COLEMAN: That`s her responsibility.

BECK: Where are her children?

COLEMAN: They`re in Mexico.

BECK: They`re in Mexico. Where`s her husband?

COLEMAN: Her husband is no longer in the picture. She wasn`t...

BECK: Was she married?

COLEMAN: She went to court and tried to...

BECK: Was she married?

COLEMAN: ... get money and was not able to get any.

BECK: Yes. That`s what I thought.

COLEMAN: What we`re talking about here, Glenn, is how do we end the system? You can`t end the system...

BECK: We end the system -- we don`t -- look at you, a man of the cloth.

COLEMAN: Twelve million people are not just going to leave, when they have children....

BECK: A man of the cloth that now would like to start the divisive -- the division of "I hate somebody" because I disagree with you. I don`t hate this woman.

COLEMAN: I didn`t suggest that you were hating...

BECK: Yes, you did, sir.

COLEMAN: No, sir. I`m saying that -- that we`re not going to end this system just by hoping that it goes away.

BECK: No, I`m not hoping it`s going to go away. I will personally escort her -- I promise you, sir, I will do this. And I`ll do it politely, and I`ll do it with love in my heart. I will personally escort her from your church to the airport, where she can get on the plane. I`ll pay for the ticket. And she can go back home and reunite with her children.

Because as a man of the cloth, you of course, know that the fundamental building block of God`s kingdom is the family, right, Reverend?

COLEMAN: I`m glad you`re preaching to me, Glenn. But you`re preaching an illusion to people if you think that, by deporting 12,000 people...

BECK: Yes, I know.

COLEMAN: ... that you`re going to get 12 million people to leave.

BECK: No, no.

COLEMAN: We need Congress to act to fix this thing.

BECK: We sure do, Reverend. And the first thing I`d like to do is revoke your tax -- your -- your tax-exempt status, sir. You`re making political statements. You, sir, are not a church.

Reverend Coleman, thank you very much.

Where I am wrong, America? When houses of worship start making political statements, it is time we start pulling their income tax exemptions. Agree or disagree? Go to CNN.com/Glenn right now and cast your vote.

Coming up, in last night`s State of the Union, President Bush declared he was ready to throw the book at hidden earmarks. Really? Where`s he been? And can he do it?

And everybody`s favorite dictator once again proclaiming his love for good old U.S. of A. This time, he`s taking interest in our economy. And let me tell you, it is not a good thing.

(NEWSBREAK)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Well, last night the president gave his seventh and last State of the Union address. Aside from the usual laundry lists of accomplishments during his presidency, George Bush took time to make this point.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNTIED STATES: You send me an appropriation bill that does not cut the number and cost of earmarks in half, I`ll send it back to you with my veto.

And tomorrow I will issue an executive order that directs federal agencies to ignore any future earmark that is not voted on by Congress.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: Well, if you could do that, why hasn`t he done that a long time ago? It seems like a good idea. The question is, can he do it?

Arizona Congressman Jeff Flake is with us.

Jeff, can he do this?

REP. JEFF FLAKE (R), ARIZONA: Well, in terms of requiring earmarks to be in bills, yes, he can. And we have actually encouraged him...

BECK: What`s the -- what`s the catch?

FLAKE: Well, the catch is he would have to tell the agencies right now to not fund some 11,000 earmarks that were passed last year. That would make a lot of members of Congress angry. And so he chose to give fair warning and say next year if they aren`t in the bill text, then we`re not going to fund them.

BECK: Come on. So -- so what are they going to do? First of all, any time we piss a bunch of people off in Congress, I think a lot of people in America are happy.

FLAKE: Well, I`m right with you.

BECK: I know you have.

FLAKE: I`ve been encouraging the president to do this for a long time. But having said that, we`ll take what we can get from the president. The problem of earmarking is ours, not the president`s. It really originates here.

BECK: See, here`s -- here`s the problem, and you know this because you have been following earmarks and on this bandwagon for a long time. It is always the party that is trying to get back into power that says, "We wouldn`t do that." Then they get in and they do it.

So when he says something like this, it`s a little disingenuous, because if you had this power, why didn`t you do it a long time when you were complaining about earmarks? And B, you know, why now?

FLAKE: Good point. It`s a very good point. And that`s why we`ve been encouraging him to do it when Republicans were in power. But better late than never. And some of us have been pushing even when Republicans were in power. So...

BECK: I know you have. And I know on your Web site -- I love this -- the earmark of the week on your Web site. Do you have one -- have you posted one this week?

FLAKE: I think we will on Friday.

BECK: What was last week`s? Can you remember? Just give me -- just give me the one that just makes me say, "Oh!"

FLAKE: Well, I think one was for -- for an opera house in New York. We said that that earmark was baroque. So -- or for the Buffalo Theater in Oklahoma City.

BECK: Yes.

FLAKE: I think we -- we said that we didn`t even know that buffaloes could act.

BECK: Yes. Let me tell you something, Congressman. I live in New York. The last thing we need is another opera house. Really.

FLAKE: Certainly not courtesy of the federal taxpayer.

BECK: Oh, jeez. Thank you very much, Congressman.

FLAKE: Thank you.

BECK: Coming right up, believe it or not, people actually pay more taxes than they need to, intentionally. Patriots or lunatics? Next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Well, I would like to think what happens in the bedroom should stay in the bedroom. Please. Keep it to yourself. Unless it has to wind up in the courtroom which is exactly what happened to guy facing manslaughter chargers for the accidental electrocution of his wife.

That is why, my friends, that the kinky thing should be left to the experts, whoever they may be.

But first, welcome to the "Real Story." While it seems all of the news about our economy and elections has made our old friend Hugo Chavez long for the days when these "Real Story" segments were all about him. We decided to make it about him. Hugo, this one`s for you.

The real story tonight is, a bad recession or worse here in the United States isn`t just an economic issue, it is also security one. It`s part of what I have been talking about in the perfect storm and that`s where Hugo Chavez comes in. Over the weekend he urged his allies in Latin America to start withdrawing billions of dollars from our banks because quote, "you can`t put all of your eggs in one basket." And Latin America must, quote, "save itself from our collapse."

Now, before good old Glenn drops -- hops on the paranoia express. Let me make a couple of disclaimers. First of all I am well aware Hugo Chavez is the mayor of crazy town.

But there had been a few people in history that were crazy and did plenty of damage. Number two, Venezuela`s GDP is less than that of Connecticut. But, with all of that aside, Chavez`s speech underscored something that I think is important. And we`ve been talking about a while on this program.

Our enemies are watching us. The world now is interconnected. What happens here with our falling dollar and our massive deficits makes news in Venezuela, China, Russia and yes, even in the caves of Afghanistan.

So while some people will say it`s impractical to think that someone like Hugo Chavez can do much damage right now, I`d like to think a little bit bigger than that. What if China decides they want to remove us from the world stage and that`s more important than being a trading partner? What if the oil cartel in the Middle East stops bailing out our banking system? What if foreigners just decide to stop buying our real estate and our blue jeans? Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and Ben Franklin they all warned us in slaving ourselves to whims of others would be the end of our prosperity and now it`s happening.

So while Chavez may get all of the headlines, the fact is, we`re no longer really in charge of our own economic destiny and that is the real threat to our children`s futures.

Krishna Guha is the chief U.S. economic correspondent for the "Financial Times." Krishna, first of all, agree or disagree with what I just said.

KRISHNA GUHA, "FINANCIAL TIMES": I`m not sure I would have put it in exactly the same words, Glenn. Because you make an important point there and that`s as long as America lives beyond its means, as long as it doesn`t save itself to cover its investment. The U.S. is reliant on inflows of foreign capital.

Right now it suits the rest of the world just fine to come and buy U.S. assets, whether that be U.S. businesses, U.S. treasuries or U.S. real estate. But if day ever came when some of those big players decided they were done buying U.S. assets that would present some serious problems for the U.S. economy.

BECK: Or if they decided. We`re not going to finance your deficit anymore. We can`t do it. We don`t think you`re a good credit risk anymore, what happens to the U.S. economy?

GUHA: You could paint a bleak scenario. If the worse were to materialize, biggest foreign nations were to pull their reserves out of U.S. dollars, stop buying U.S. assets, it would be messy. The dollar will plunge, interests rates would go up, the stock markets would fall. But there is an important catch with all of this -- it`s very hard for any of these foreign nations to inflict harm on the U.S. even if they wish to without hurting themselves as well.

Remember, China relies on U.S. for its export markets. And those export businesses keep a lot of their own workers employed. So you have a situation of mutual assured destruction here. It`s very hard for the Chinese to hit the U.S. for instance without tanking their own economy as well.

There are a lot of interests in common.

BECK: But it does make us into a paper tiger. For instance with Taiwan, we`re not going to do anything about Taiwan. We`re not going to tangle with China like that. If God forbid something happened in Taiwan, we`re bound to help Taiwan. But we`re not really going to because, I mean, we can`t get into that fight. That`s where we enslave ourselves.

GUHA: Well, look, you`re correct. Unquestionably correct to raise the potential national security vulnerability that this creates. You know, there are episodes in history, like the Suez Crisis, for instance in the postwar years where Britain and France went off on an adventure in the Middle East. The U.S. didn`t like it so it used its control over hard currency, the dollar there, to pull those allies back into line. However, my point about mutually assured destruction is a serious constraint for the Chinese even in a situation of geopolitical conflict.

BECK: Real quick because I`ve only got about 10 seconds. I just want to make sure you also agree I`m right that Hugo Chavez, nobody`s listening to him except Sean Penn.

GUHA: He`s joke figure. We really shouldn`t worry too much about what Chavez has to say. The important thing is managing the relationship with China and Middle Eastern nations in such a way that it pays off for everybody and doesn`t get into this sort of lose-lose mutually assured destruction tonight, the down spiral.

BECK: Krishna, thank you very much.

GUHA: Thank you.

BECK: Now let me turn the page to last night`s State of the Union address. It`s being criticized today for the lack of specific initiatives but the "Real Story" is the president did announce one idea. I have been advocating for years now. I think you probably have, too. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, U.S. PRESIDENT: Others have said they would personally to be happy to pay higher taxes. I welcome their enthusiasm. Pleased to report that IRS accepts both checks and money orders.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Finally, somebody has the guts to tell those tax cut haters that nobody`s stopping them. You can pay more to the IRS if you want too. Always amazing to me that that wealthiest people in this country so pro big government liberals.

In fact in the income gap chapter in my book, "The Inconvenient Book" we include one of the most unbelievable quotes that I have ever read in my life. It is from Michael Moore, a guy who by all accounts worked hard. Was able to rise out of Flint, Michigan and become a multimillionaire Hollywood director flying around in his own personal jet. And I say good for him.

But listen to the excerpt his from his book. Quote, "Listen friends, you have to face the truth. You are never going to be rich. The system is rigged in the favor of a few. And your name is not among them. Not now, not ever."

So, basically what Michael Moore`s saying, he can make it, but everybody else should pay higher taxes and succumb to the government because we`re all too weak to do it ourselves.

This guy, he has got the self-control to make it. Is that right, Michael? He says I know the president`s going to be use his final months in office to champion this whole volunteer tax idea. I figure, I`ll pick up the torch. I`ll do it for you, George.

So I wanted to give some air time to this. I wanted to get somebody from the IRS who can explain if something like this is something that people can do and if so, how many of these higher tax-loving liberals actually do it. Donald Alexander is a tax attorney and former IRS commissioner. Donald, how are you?

DONALD ALEXANDER, TAX ATTORNEY: Fine.

BECK: Has anyone ever said, you know what, I want to give an extra $5,000 to the IRS?

ALEXANDER: In my four years in office, I never received such a letter. I would have been proud and happy to receive the $5,000.

BECK: OK. Let me make this clear. You were commissioner for four years. Not one time did you see anybody say, man, I want to give you extra. I`m not paying enough tax. Warren Buffett never did that?

ALEXANDER: Warren Buffett, my memory didn`t -- if he did that I couldn`t talk about it during my time. But Warren Buffett did recently testify that he would like paying estate taxes and thought paying estate taxes should remain in effect.

BECK: Sure, sure. I wanted to know if he paid extra income taxes at any time because I feel bad that he is not paying enough taxes.

If you wanted to do this, how do you send it in? What`s the process of sending in more money?

ALEXANDER: You can send in money. And we did receive some money frequently from people who wanted to remain anonymous. That was really strange. They`ll send in some money without identifying themselves. But a lot of people overpay their taxes deliberately, they overpay them deliberately because they don`t want to gain deductions that would likely in their mind, anyway, create an audit.

BECK: I`m not talking about that. I`m saying, some do-gooder in Hollywood, California is right now going, I want to write an extra check for another $25,000. I just feel guilty about this movie money that I`ve made. How do they send it to you or send it to the IRS?

ALEXANDER: The IRS can receive it by check or money order. As the president said. He was accurate at least in that respect.

BECK: That`s fantastic. Don, thank you very much. Thank you for your service to the country, sir.

That`s the "Real Story" tonight. By the way, if you missed Mitt Romney`s special commentary in our free e-mail newsletter today than make sure you sign up right now at glennbeck.com. We are going to republish that link for you tomorrow. That is our free e-mail newsletter. You can sign up now at glennbeck.com.

Coming up -- death by electrocution while having sex. It takes all kinds. The guy is in jail, the woman is dead. The details next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: All right. Let`s be honest. We have all been there. You`re engaging in a little electrical shock sex with your spouse. You flip the switch one too many time. You think she`s playing dead to heighten in the moment. It`s the usual Tuesday night thing. Right?

The problem is, according to police reports one Pennsylvania woman wasn`t just playing dead, her husband finally confessed to police he and his wife had been enjoying electric sex. Whatever the heck that is and other types of extreme bondage for years. The authorities didn`t see that -- let`s just put it this way, they were totally non-kinky and they totally, totally killed the mood. They charged him with involuntary manslaughter. Buzz kill. Lisa Bloom is an attorney and anchor for "In Session" at TruTV, she joins me now.

LISA BLOOM, ANCHOR, TRUTV: Yeah. Thank you for thinking I`m an expert on this subject, Glenn.

BECK: I read this story, Lisa, and I of course thought of you. The - - Do you want to tell the story here?

BLOOM: Well, I think you told it pretty well. Here`s the problem this guy has. Because he says it`s consensual sex. They engage it in it all the time. She put nipple clamps on herself. She turned on the electricity. He comes in into the room, finds her engaging in that self- pleasure. He ratchets up the electricity and puts electrical tape over her mouth. So those actions could constitute reckless enough behavior to charge him with involuntary manslaughter.

Even she consented, even if she enjoys this kind of thing, and maybe there is witnesses, friends who say that she did. His taking those reckless steps would be enough to get him charged with involuntary manslaughter. So that`s where it stands.

BECK: I don`t know how times I got electrical wires strapped to my nipples. Just thinking to myself, ooh, ah, that`s a lot of fun. I had two people came up to the other day when I saw this in the paper, they said, Glenn, I can`t believe. They`re consenting adults what they do in their own bedroom is their own business. And I said, she`s dead.

BLOOM: Right. This is not a rape case. So consent is not a defense. You can`t consent to homicide in this country. You can`t consent to have somebody kill you or to engage behavior that`s so reckless it could cause your death. So consent is just not a defense in this case.

BECK: What are the odds that he made this -- I mean, he lied to police. You know, I would, too. She stops breathing. He dresses her. They come and he said, she was in bathtub with a hair dryer, she just kind of fell. And they`re like, there`s no hair dryer here.

BLOOM: The hair dryer defense. It`s always bad to lie to police and it makes you look more like a suspect. And look, she`s dead. We don`t have her side of story. We don`t know if he was angry at her and committed this sadistic act intending to kill her. Now, he`s not charged with murder. That would be premeditated intent. He`s not charged with heat of the passion type of crime, that would be voluntary manslaughter. Right now, it`s only involuntary manslaughter. Probably three to six years but homicide crimes are all about what`s going in the guy`s head. We have to believe him. He is the only one standing to tell us that so we have to believe him but he changed his story so can we believe him?

BECK: What`s going through his head? I can`t even imagine the scene. He said he was in kitchen and his wife was alone in the other room. He walked by, oh, honey, you`re in the mood. I don`t even understand this psycho and her, too, how much time could he spend in jail for this?

BLOOM: He could spend probably three to six years in jail.

BECK: Do you think he will?

BLOOM: If we get an involuntary manslaughter.

I mean, look, we only have the preliminary facts right now. We haven`t really heard his side the story right now except consent which is not going to be a defense. The jury may have some sympathy on him, the judge may have some sympathy. If it turns out that there are witnesses that she really loved this, she got off on this, she was begging for all the time, I think that could help him.

BECK: Lisa, I`m not going to go any further with this.

BLOOM: Thanks for inviting me on your show. See you soon.

BECK: You bet. Thanks a lot.

Now, time tonight for "Real America" brought to you this evening by CSX. That wasn`t the "Real America," this is.

In 1944, G.I. Bill helped educate million World War II veterans. But these days the amount of money that our government gives our veterans is barely enough money to cover one year of the cost of college.

One man is trying to change that. Here`s his story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BECK (voice-over): Jerome Kohlberg, World War II veteran who knows first hand the benefit of G.I. bill. It helped him get three degrees, including one in law.

JEROME KOHLBERG, THE FUND FOR VETERANS EDUCATION: Assuming that you could get in where you wanted to, the government would give you full tuition a little something extra for books and walking around. And pay for your entire education.

BECK: Now, under today`s Montgomery G.I. bll, active duty veterans get about $39,000 to pay for a four-year degree. Reservists get far less. With college costs skyrocketing, it many vets just can`t afford to pay the difference.

KOHLBERG: That doesn`t even cover a couple of years of community college much less a four-year institution. So, it`s just completely inadequate and unappreciative of these people that are -- that have given so much.

BECK: So Kohlberg started the fund for Veterans Education. To provide scholarships to veterans that served in Iraq or Afghanistan.

KOHLBERG: I put in $4 million. I`m prepared to put in some more. I hope it does really start a fire that the Congress will come together on a bill that will give a full college education.

BECK: Sheila Pion Army reservist spent a year in Iraq. When she returned home, she immediately wanted to go back to school.

SPC SHEILA PION, U.S. ARMY RESERVIST: I had to take out a credit card, I was going swipe it every s semester for my senior year and just pay for it whenever I graduate. And it gets in you.

BECK: Sheila was one of 96 veterans that were recently awarded scholarships by Kohlberg which he sees as an investment in our country`s future.

PION: I`m glad there`s people that still care for an education. It`s awesome.

KOHLBERG: The most important thing I think that we can do is help educate the younger generation and if we don`t, there`s going to be one hell a gap there. I just think it`s something we can`t let go.

BECK: People say to me all time, Glenn, wished you`d do more stories. Why aren`t people reporting more good news stories on television? Well, I`ve got a ton of these kind of stories right on the Internet. Cnn.com/glenn. Look for the "Real America" section.

Tonight`s "Real America" sponsored by CSX, it`s how tomorrow moves.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Well, since there are some big decisions that are being made tonight and in next week, I thought we would talk about how to make them or how I make them. Here`s the school of thought that Michael Reagan expressed last night that I thought we should spend a minute on. Here`s the clip.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL REAGAN, GOP STRATEGIST: What`s one of the legacies of Ronald Reagan? One of the legacies of Ronald Reagan is that you fight it out in the primaries. Whoever comes through it and wins in the primaries gets the nomination of the party. That`s person you coalesce behind and you support for the presidency of the United States. My dad had to do it with Gerald Ford back in 1976. Do you think it was easy going out and campaigning for Gerald Ford? The Ford people didn`t want us out until the last two weeks of the campaign.

BECK: At some point, don`t you have to stand for values. Don`t you have to say, I can`t do it. It`s same thing. Hasn`t that thinking gotten us to where we are now? To where you don`t know who stands for what?

REAGAN: If you don`t vote, Glenn, then you get Hillary Rodham Clinton .

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: If you watch this program regularly, you know how I feel about Ronald Reagan and I have to say, this is my least favorite part of his legacy. This is the whole, 11th Commandment, thou shalt not attack another Republican.

I don`t subscribe to it. It`s not what I signed up for. I never signed the papers. Did you? In fact, if you`re wondering why I talk about who I would vote for, like it`s hypothetical it`s because it is for me. Next Tuesday, my state Connecticut holds a winner take all primary. Thirty delegates on the line and I`m not going to be voting in it. I`m not a Republican. The Republican "R" doesn`t mean anything to me. I believe in the ideas of conservative values. You know, not the magical R. When the R abandons conservative values as it has lately, I don`t feel a need to vote for any of its candidates.

I have no idea what I`m going to do be doing many the booth in November. But I have to tell you no matter who I vote for in November, I`m going to have them on a short leash. Washington has not earned the right to get the benefit of the doubt from me or you. And I can also promise you that the deciding factor of what lever I pull will definitely not be the letter after their name.

Now, if you want to hear about the candidates or hear more from the candidates, many of them have written special message exclusively for our newsletter subscribers. Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney have already written and in the next couple of days we`ll have a message to Ron Paul.

You can read them all by going to glennbeck.com and signing up for the e-mail newsletter and it is absolutely free. From New York, good night.

END