Another dose of liberal fascism brought to you today by yet another liberal bigot. " I disagree with this persons opinions now lets all boycott him and invest our negative energy!!"

Politics...pshh... Polidicks

You just get more tired each day listening to this kind of crap. How anyone can take Beck serious is beyond me.

Dear Roger,
Your voice still rings clear and true, and I look forward to your tweets on every topic these days as much as I always look forward to your reviews. Your tweet title sure got my attention just now, but your blog entry speaks straight to the heart. Thank you for giving words to reason so well.

The right wing always (I'm generalizing, I know.) uses fear to further their goals. Take the health care debate, for example. I haven't heard any real points against it from Fox News - all they say is that it's a evil, socialist scary thing. The current bill is far from perfect, but all Beck and his cohorts seem to want to do is destroy the entire system with all this fear-mongering.

Glenn Beck grew up about an hour south of me, in Mount Vernon Washington. But here, an hour north, we are across the Canadian border in the Vancouver area, and no one I know can understand how Beck has any audience at all, or why anyone takes him seriously, either in the U.S. or anywhere else. And we like our social justice up here too, I think.

It amazes me that people don't get it. Anyone that listens on a regular basis to Beck understands that his problem is with the government being a solution. The government is the problem. As a "clergyman" myself, I know that it is the church's responsibility to take care of the poor and those less fortunate. If a church is advocating that the government do this through "social justice", Beck is in fact correct. The only reason big government has ever developed any of these social programs is for power and control, not out of a desire to help.

Glenn Beck as a self-proclaimed ratings hound, so I am confused by this peculiar move. Unless I am mistaken, his listeners should be very wary of a man telling them to question the houses of their faith. His Davidian-like arrogance is thin, and it runs contrary to the beliefs of the most loyal of his audience. He would be wise to apologize for his remarks. That would, after all, be good for his ratings.

A news outlet that tells you it's "fair and balanced" is like a restaurant that tells you that it has "the best food in town." It marketing. And it's a lie.

Well, we've come to this. The Republican Party, composed of mostly decent people trying to do best, just like we liberals do, is being misrepresented by a bunch of morons like Beck who dishoner logic, science and human decency. I will say it: Pat Buchanan made a better zealot than Beck, and is a heck more intelligent.

Before responses, I know Buchanan was a Nazi supporting, South African supporting a-hole. But he was better than this.

Oh, how I love my "socialist," "Nazi" church! I wish Mr. Beck could have heard this morning's sermon which challenged us to, among other things, work toward economic equality among the different racial groups in our city, and offer a more loving image of God to combat that presented by the hateful, homophobic protesters coming here from Westboro Baptist Church to picket the funeral of a young soldier killed in Iraq. It would have made those angry veins on his forehead pop.

You cannot serve both God and Money.

Well said Mr. Ebert. Your words are inspiring and I hope that more people will see how dangerous Beck really is for America.

Glenn Beck is a nutcase.

He is just another uneducated white person with a television show

If Fox news was smart they would kick Glenn off the airwaves before white boy gets them in trouble with the masses of people in America

Glenn Beck claim to fame is preaching fear into white folks

The conservatives often say that charities, not government, should provide social services. No government health care, but church sponsored hospitals or clinics. No state- or federal- sponsored food stamps or welfare, but church soup kitchens and the like.

But then Beck says that churches do not and should not practice social justice. So what's a government-hating conservative to do? The answer is nothing, except to watch more of Beck, buy stuff from his sponsors, and read his books.

His brand of "conservatism" is clear. Conserve everything for ME, ME, ME.

Social justice means we're all in it together. Today's conservatism means it's every man for himself.

It sometimes annoys me when people get too gushy on the internet but I think this is the best analysis of Beck's rhetoric I've read.

It's very helpful to distinguish standard conservativism from Beck's rhetoric, which is something beyond that. I agree wholeheartedly and this is a point not often made. I deplore the conservativism of William F. Buckley and Richard Nixon but it's a completely different breed than whatever Beck's shilling.

Most of the pieces that write about him do so with some hysteria (which is hard to avoid when it comes to Beck, because his rhetoric is frightening). Or they focus too much on who he is as a person, which is a distraction. I think you get at the heart of it without name-calling.

I stand at your right shoulder, Roger. Social and economic justice, sign me up. Mr. Beck can call me names all day and all night, I stand with you, Roger.

Jeez, more and more I think this country may be screwed.

Thanks for the licorice chuckles and the naildim grin. The man has too much ilk. This is a fine blow in aid of Ilk Reduction.

I don't understand why Glenn Beck rails on about Nazis, I think he would have been quite happy to have lived in Nazi Germany. Blond hair, blue eyes and bat shit crazy.

Great post. Beck has noted many times that he is afraid of government/Liberals/Democrats/fill-in-the-blank, and I read somewhere that the opposite of love isn't hate - it's fear. Christianity is the embodiment of love, and Beck with his fear is the exact opposite of everything Christianity stands for.

Roger Ebert, I respect and commend you for having the remarkable ability to discuss with such rationale, such harmonious composure, the musings of a man as ignorant as Glen Beck. Honestly, I feel as though I agree with you 100% of the time. It's scary, actually, but I suppose when good sense is applied to a problem, even from multiple angles, those solutions, though different, will remain agreeable to each other.

Mr. Ebert,
I have refrained from commenting on blogs and
mostly they are just a shouting post but your provacative title begs for a response. You have falsely framed the phrase "social justice". In all due respect to Mr. Wallis, nowhere did Jesus ever dictate to the Roman government or the Jewish religious body to use the power of the state to feed the poor, clothe the naked, to care for orphans and widows. Jesus appealed to the "INDIVIDUAL" who, from a change of heart in response to follwing Jesus, would do these things.

The state can't act in love as the state use "coersion" via the sword or the AK47 to implement it's policy. Jesus lived in a day of slavery but never spoke out against it. He lived in a day of oppressive misogeny and never spoke out against that. Greed, violence, poverty, disease, ignorance were rampant and there was no such thing as a middle class. In His day either you were an owner or a slave and Jesus never addressed this. Instead He called for His FOLLOWERES NOT THE STATE to live out His principles which then changed the world.

I even heard advocates of "social justice" claim that Jesus was a socialist! This so far from the truth. Would any socialist say "the poor you will always have with you"? Jesus said that. Would any socialist use free market capitalism terms such as interest and investments when describing the way of God's kingdom? Jesus did.

I respect the goals of most liberals but unfortunately their worldview misses the mark. The falleness of man makes utopia impossible. As a biblical Christian this does not mean give up. It means for me to love my neighbor directly not via the government. It means for me to donate a portion of my money (that the government hasn't forcefully confiscated) to help the poor that I know personally or a charity that I beleive in. Give a homeless man food when he asks, etc.

Mr. Ebert you are barking up the wrong tree here. Beck is rather forceful in his comments but he is spot on.

Ebert: I don't know if Beck cares about the politics of your church or pastor. If they favor social justice, he's against them. If he had made your argument, we could discuss it sanely. But he didn't.

Do they really let Beck continue on like this because he brings in ratings?

Is the world so cruel?

If he represents what the majority of "real" Americans feel will there be a colony for the rest of us on the dark side of the moon where we'll never have to live in view of the world Glenn Beck inhabits?

The Glenn Beck philosophy of debate and conjecture: "The louder I am, the more correct I am." The real chilling part is whatever he has is spreading.

In this disappointing political age of buzzwords and sound bytes ("Death Panels", "Government Takeover of Health Care", etc) it's sad but true that when you start explaining you start losing. Here is where I feel like commenting on the shortening American attention span, but I wonder what we'll do when even 'GTHC' is too long.

Gosh darn it, Roger, I've never listened to Glenn Beck, nor even seen his ears wiggle. I only barely recognize that face from supermarket magazine covers. I don't know what he sounds like. I've heard he was popular.

But you've posted actual film footage of Glenn Beck; I may have to oblige myself to watch and listen to them if I'm going to make relevant remarks.

I don't know what to do. I've really enjoyed not listening to Glenn Beck or even see his ears wiggle. I can at least say this much: those Nazis sure had swell uniforms. Also, you have to admit, Hitler is still really interesting looking. He was right about that mustache, too. He alone owned the look, the way Elvis alone could get away with that greasy front hair curl.

So, when you find a way to work in Hitler, Nazis and those great looking uniforms, it's hard to go wrong. It's as reliable as the Sports Illustrated Swim Suit Issue.

...let's just say that one day somebody left one of those great-looking SS uniforms laid out on your bed. You know, maybe just by accident. There's nobody around. Not a soul. Chaz has gone to the relatives for a day or so. You've got the day off. Nobody will know.

Boy, and look at those shiny black riding boots, too! God damn, they're snappy. And what about that full length mirror over there? What if you were to just... just a few goose-steps, just to see how it looks...

C'mon. Just try the outfit on; those fabulous boots, too. Just this once. I won't tell anybody. I'd do it.

Ebert: I have at last touched on a phenomenon unknown in the Darkian universe.

i find this article and the author very offensive. disgusted

I just love you Roger Ebert. :)

Ah, that pinko Jesus. Unless, of course, He was a fascist. One hardly knows what to believe. Next we'll be told He didn't write the Bible in English.

Somebody ought to send Mr. Beck this recording of Woody Guthrie singing "The Ballad of Jesus Christ."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDS00Pnhkqk

Maybe he'll put it on the air. Woody doesn't get near enough airplay these days.

The thing that annoys me about Fox News is they call CNN the "mainstream media", and then brag about how they have higher ratings than CNN.

Great piece of writing here. Despite what some might say, I am so glad that you've chosen to expand beyond critique of film to media criticism, political commentary, etc. Your voice is like a lighthouse in a foggy wilderness of obliviousness.

Thank you for keeping this in the news--not because I have any respect for Beck, heaven forbid. To the contrary, he needs to be exposed for the demagogue he really is, as early and as often as possible. Yes, there are bad Christian churches; not because they have ever preached fascist or communist ideologies, but because they have failed to live up to the ideals of their God.

As much as I fervently disagree with you on most of the political issues and stances you blog about, you are absolutely right on about Beck, and the same (with just a bit less vitriol) goes for the other two kings of Fox News political commentary, Hannity and O'Reilly.

As what you call a real conservative, I have become increasingly discouraged with the people who are seen to represent me, and I think that many people like me would agree. It is possible to be against the Democrats' health care plan for reasons other than "death panels," and I am, but how are people to know it when kooks like Beck are the faces of conservatism.

When Obama was running for office, I heard a truly horrifying amount of people express distrust in him "because his name sounds like Osama" or "because he might be a Muslim" or other such nonsense. My question to them was always this: "There are any number of perfectly logical reasons not to want this man voted into office. Can't you pick one of those?"

It's no fun to be embarrassed by something that isn't your fault.

I'm pleased to say my only exposure to Beck here in Australia has been through people like yourself. I don't know if his show is on cable here cos I don't have cable (I know he's not on free-to-air), so I only get to know of him indirectly. From this distance Beck's schtick looks to me more like performance art than anything else; could he in fact be a giant hoax perpetrated on the media? (I have similar suspicions about Uwe Boll.)

This does not surprise me in the least. Everyone knows that trolling hacks like Glenn Beck are known for actualizing Godwin's Law. What scares me, however, is to see it leaping from the relative obscurity of internet forums to widely-watched shows in the mainstream media.

"What Beck has demonstrated, in a singularly inelegant way, is an increasing tendency of the extreme right to automatically describe its opponents in negative buzz words."

Might I point out that I never would have guessed the epithet "teabagger" would become a regular appellation anywhere except the internet and the 7th grade boys locker room? It's not parallel, granted, since it doesn't even qualify as a buzz word.

I recall my parents telling me about Glenn Beck years ago, when I was still in high school. My mother and father are what many would call "ordinary Americans," as am I. Their enthusiasm waned quickly. Mine never began.

I'm a conservative and a Mormon (and a huge Ebert fan). I feel sad and embarrassed that Glenn Beck associates himself with these two labels with which I so strongly identify. Earnest, thoughtful political discourse is too valuable to America to be bothered with people of his ilk.

Glenn, Glenn, Glenn. You are indeed one very, very sick little puppy. I've been trying to understand why and how you can speak so loosely and with reckless abandon, and have surmised that it may be attributed to all of those drug-filled days and nights you left behind not all that long ago (you DID leave them all behind, right?), a DSM diagnosis of delusional disorder (paranoid type) or psychotic disorder not otherwise specified, and/or absolute stupidity. You're given much too much latitude in what you say and you really do need to be reeled in just a bit, if not because you are so offensive and stupid, then because your sponsors will again start abandoning you ... again. The very sad part of all of this is, I truly believe that YOU believe what you are spewing. The even sadder part of this is that some Americans are so stupid as to swallow your ignorance -- hook, line, and sinker. Folie a dieu ...

You nailed it again, Roger.

Will this convince Beck's many fans? No. They don't read you.

I despair when I see those like Beck get away with his awful message. For that matter, I despair when I see mainstream media continue to give more airtime to masters of deception like Karl Rove and Dick Cheney. We see them more now than when they were in the White House.

But keep up the good work, Roger. Silence in the presence of idiocy show acquiescence. Use your bully pulpit. We enjoy hearing from you; you are still at the top of your game.

Glen Beck is wright. If a church promotes social justice run as fast as you can. Jesus never commissioned the church to preach, teach or provide social justice. He commissioned His church to do the same thing he did - to seek and save the lost. That mission should be the main priority of a Bible believing church. Unfortunately, Glen Beck is a Mormon and hypocritical because the Mormon church is into the whole social justice thing and many other anti-Christian beliefs. So Glen Beck should run as fast he can from the Mormon church and as far as hypocrisy he should be speaking out against the ungodly unbiblical practices of his own faith rather than criticism those outside his own faith.

What?! Glenn Beck What's Wrong With You?!

Glenn Beck is a scumbag.

I'm not a religious person, but I respect all religions and what I like about Christianity, along with Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, are that these texts stress the importance of charity, social justice, and respect for all people.

Too bad some people have forgotten that today.

Somehow I can't help but think that perhaps this isn't a lapse in logic by him, but rather a carful plan by him to SEEM like there's been a lapse in logic. The two options are:

1. He's crazy.
2. He's deliberately saying something crazy in a hidden attempt to knock over some dominos that you can't push in the open.

Option 1 is the easiest, but the most unlikely. Anybody rational knows that playing the Nazi card is ALWAYS a bad idea. Option 2 seems like a more rational move for him, but whatever dominos he's trying to push then, I can't see them at all.

"You think that when you start a political snowball rolling, it will always go where you wanted it to go? You're smart, Bean, but you're naive. Give the universe a push and you don't know which dominos will fall. There are always a few you never thought were connected. Some will always push back a little harder than you expected."--Hyrum Graff, "Ender's Shadow" by Orson Scott Card

You recently retweeted the following:

"A person making angry reductive projections, whether at entire race or one individual, is always suffering underneath, usually deep fear."

Could "religion" be substituted for "race"? And, if so, do you think you're being a bit hypocritical here?

I know there's a stigma because of "The Secret", but I tend to believe in the whole "we give power to the things we focus on". Maybe you should spend less of your time and energy shadow-boxing people like Glenn Beck (who I never even would have heard of were it not for people like you in the media bad mouthing him) and ignorant Christians. Just the fact you tend to lump all Christians together with complete disregard for the varying ideologies of the tens of thousands of sects is so dangerous (and ignorant) on your part I cannot even begin to get into here.

You're an intelligent human being whose insights, on a whole, I respect and cherish, but like any intelligent human when you become clouded by hatred and anger (born out of fear) you lose your way.

Forbes estimated his annual income at $23 million and rising. This loony's laughing all the way to the bank.

Now this is alarming. And to think he called his latest book "Common Sense." Not that I'm going to even try to argue with this guy. He's even got a book saved up for such instances!

Mr. Ebert,

I can be referred to in blog and net parlance as a lurker. Your journal article, 'Jesus was a Nazi. So's your preacher' has motivated me to leave a comment.

Since the days of "Sneak Previews" I have relished, with glee, your candor and insight.

It was your heartfelt and intelligent review of 'Lucas' many years ago that made Corey Haim's untimely passing all the more poignant for me. I would not have recognized his understated talent nor this wonderful movie had it not been for your review.

Such is the influence that you have had in your own thoughtful way on my life and that of many many others.

Now hear I am, older and most certainly wiser, chancing upon this before bedtime from your journal entry today. . .

"I was on the brink of picking up the phone and asking Francis Cardinal George if he was down on this whole social justice thing, but then I recalled that I no longer use the telephone. Do you suppose the cardinal texts?"

I don't know if Francis Cardinal George texts or not. If he doesn't, I strongly suspect that he will be doing so shortly after today's journal entry.

You are a HERO to all in the truest sense of the word.

You stand tall and your voice will always resonate strongly from the tallest of mountains

Actually, the term "social justice" does carry an insidious connotation to some religious folks, typically those who would be considered fundamentalist evangelicals. The connotation is not to Nazism or Communism as Beck is trying to paint it, however. It is a code word that references "liberal Christians" who place doing good works above or to the detriment of other more "important" doctrines (such as preaching penal substitionary atonement). So yes, Christianity does explicitly support justice in all its forms, but the phrase "social justice" is used by some as code for bad doctrine.

I think Beck finally went off the deep end on this one. If there is one thing Conservatives cling to more than anything else, it is their religion. Telling them to stop going to their church is like treason. One would hope that this would make his listeners snap to their senses and realize he is a kook but there's already nobody left but the True Believers.

Roger,

You might be surprised to find that there is a significant group in evangelical Christianity that agrees with Beck. They believe that God is a Republican who hates taxes and wealth redistribution as much as he hates sin. They also believe that Christians are being persecuted by the government for their religious beliefs (and everything they believe is a religious belief).

It's so sad that the current political climate is killing political moderation and sensible discourse. This far-right, fingerpointing, name-calling, "Nazi"-shouting method of doing politics has been so successful that the reasonable people in the middle are getting pushed out, or being forced to reformat their views to placate these ideologues.

Look at John McCain over the last year, for example. The brave "maverick" of a decade ago who was willing to break ranks with his party over immigration reform or campaign finance is now disagreeing with his own former positions (not least because he's being challenged in his Arizona primary by a "real conservative").

There's nowhere that this can be seen more clearly than on the health care debate. The right has gotten in such lock-step opposition for purely partisan reasons that there are plenty of examples of politicians disagreeing with health care reforms identical to what they've previously supported. It's all just aimed at beating Obama, whatever the cost.

You've talked before about how the right has twisted things around so voluntary end of life counseling becomes "death panels" and the option to buy into a public plan becomes a "government takeover". And now they're saying that if the senate or house uses procedures that ratify a bill with a healthy majority of the votes, they're "cramming the bill down America's throat". In other words, if they DON'T let a minority on the right filibuster them, they're cheating.

Thanks for being the most levelheaded guy in the room, Roger!

Sadly, Jerry Falwell, Jr. has agreed with Beck. But then Falwell, like his father, has never really grasped the whole basic concepts presented in the New Testament. Perhaps the whole concept that "If thou will be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor," from Matthew 19:21 doesn't make sense to Beck or Falwell, but it sure sounds like economic and social justice to me and I've been an atheist for over 20 years. It makes me ashamed that he shares my surname.

And when will Great Movies III be out?

Roger Ebert believes in wearing pants in public!
Hitler wore pants in public! Coincidence? I'm only pointing out the facts! I'll let you decide for yourself, but call me crazy for noticing these connections! First, we'll let Roger Ebert tell us what movies to watch... What's next? Maybe we'll let Roger Ebert tell us what Jews to hate! This is how it all starts! These are the same tactics the Nazis and Communists used! I love America too much to just watch as that socialist Roger Ebert destroys everything that makes this country great!

Has Beck finally gone too far?

Will he call the Statue of Liberty a Nazi as well, considering the famous poem on her base?

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

I read that as referring to social justice, offering an opportunity to the poor to improve their lives.

This doesn't even make sense in the context of of it's own insanity. During WWII, the Nazis rounded up the Communists the same way they rounded up the Jews. These words don't mean anything to Beck. He's just spouting out whatever emotional buzzword will get his insane point across. Does he really expect that isolating the Christian Community is going to help the Political Right? Christians are the backbone of the Republican party. If were part of the Conservative party, I try to disassociate myself from this wack-job as much as possible.

Well it just seems his rhetoric is a bit off. He's not going to convert everyone to Libertarianism that way.

What are the words "social justice" code for?

The progressive left. I love you as a movie critic, Roger, but are you being deliberately naive? I'm no fan of Beck, but he is charging many churches of being well left of center, and saying that any church using the term "social justice" is almost certainly a church well left of center as we define it here in America.

"Social justice" has a specific set of goals as well as the political method of achieving them. You describe it here:

I think it involves civil rights and liberties. It involves a trial in a fair legal system. It involves freedom of speech and the practice, or non-practice, of religion. It involves a living wage and decent working conditions.

All of this is laden with political and ideological values. "Living wage"? America has agreed on a "minimum wage", but anyone who says that social justice can only be achieved by paying people a higher amount regardless of the work done is not speaking an common value, but a political one espoused by the left. As for "decent working conditions", the term "decent" is wide enough for several trucks, and usually people who talk about it have something specific in mind. Freedom of speech? Sure, so long as it doesn't involve people or corporations spending money on political campaigns.

Other things that are generally included in social justice by the left: affirmative action in education, employment, and housing loans, bountiful college grants (not loans), and socialized medicine.

But you know this, Roger. Everyone wants social justice. The devil is in the definition. And only the left describes their goals with that particular phrase.

Ebert: Not quite exact. Google "social justice" and the name of any faith and you will discover that faith advocates it.

http://j.mp/bPgKBO

PS--Just in case I'm the first one posting:

The rule about invoking Nazis is called Godwin's law, formulated for online conversations. The longer a conversation goes on, the more certain it is that someone will bring up the Nazis.

It may interest you to know that Glenn Beck got his start at WFLA-AM, in my adopted hometown of Tampa. I listened avidly for a year or so before Beck lost me--he devoted several minuted of airtime one day to reciting the plot of Schindler's List. As if there were six sentient, sensitive and logical human beings who hadn't already seen it. Now Beck strikes me as the kind of person Howard Beale was trying to warn us about. That, or Beck has become Howard Beale's antithesis.

How far can a person lean right or left before they aren't either? It's one thing to sling a bit of mud at your political opponent by using words with historically negative connotations, but this is a pretty far-stretched straw Mr. Beck is grabbing at. It's pretty absurd to take a concept that is hundreds - if not thousands of years old (the protection & care of those less fortunate resonates back to the books of Moses, as far as the Judeo-Christian thought goes) and attribute it to 20th century stigma, simply because it can correlate to your rival political party.

I am employed full time for my church, which cannot stand idly by and allow the continued suffering of so many people in our neighborhood and city. Our belief is that God blessed us with a large, noticeable building in an urban neighborhood so that we can be a beacon of hope & help to our city. In the audio clip, Mr. Beck would not expound on what "social justice" means to him. In our church, social justice is not allowing those who made poor choices and are on the streets hungry to be without food and a way to get themselves back on their feet. It means that we will not allow the victims of domestic violence to stay in their dangerous situation. It means that we will not let the lonely elderly people of our neighborhood quietly fade away without notice. Even within our congregation, there are those who cannot afford the adequate healthcare they need. Our parish nurse volunteers over 80 hours a week to regular visits, trips to the store, and any necessary fights with medical center front offices to see that the people in her charge are properly treated.

I understand that the Mormon faith places their emphasis on the Book of Mormon, Doctrine of the Covenant, & Pearl of Great Price, but they still refer to the Christian Bible as a standard for their faith. Perhaps Mr. Beck should re-examine the Book of Acts, in which the early church operated as an equal community, sharing belongings & pooling resources for the greater good. It seems that the entire Christian Church was in fact, a secret ploy by the proto-communists & proto-Nazis to infiltrate every facet of the American political system. Those diabolical bastards had a 2,000 year leg up on the American people. No wonder we've all been duped!

I'm simply a man living out his faith, who seems to get it from both sides. I'm evangelical, which makes me a radical right-winger, and yet I'm Christian (which apparently makes me a fascist-communist?) - It's frustrating. Sorry for stealing your soapbox, Roger. I know I'm just restating the obvious here.

Any concept around which people will gather in good
faith, be it tenets of religion, patriotism, democracy
etc. will be ceased upon as a demographic to be marketed
to in quests for money and power.

Behind almost all of the great mis-steps in history
there will be found the smoking cigars of those
leveraging philosophical agreement for personal gain
with but disingenuous posturing to those being leveraged.

It's this realization by this country's founders and the
framers of the constitution that made for the wall of
separation between church and state to protect each from
the leveraging of the other.

Of course when the constitution is circumvented
those leveraged will often be left to pay the check.

Mr. Beck seems to certainly be twisted , but in a way
he comes as a perverse form of the check to be paid.

A good friend of mine is a Mormon, as Mr. Beck apparently calls himself. She is currently serving as a missionary in Thailand, performing acts of - gasp! - social justice. If she were to listen to Beck she should run far, far away from the Mormon Church.

In the final analysis, Beck is no more a Christian than was Ayn Rand, who said, "What I am fighting is the idea that charity is a moral duty and a primary virtue." Christ, of course, believed that it was both.

Hello everyone. My name is Nathanael Hood. I am twenty years old and I am a religious conservative who supports universal health care and social justice.

I like to think that there are more people out there like me. My values are intensely conservative but my politics are incredibly liberal. And why? Because Jesus was a liberal.

No really, he was.

Think about it. When he was approached by the crowd of 5000, what did he do? He collected five loaves and two fish from the crowd, and the redistributed it to the masses. Of course, as a Christian I believe that he multiplied the food so that everyone could be fed. But the story remains that Jesus redistributed the wealth, *cough* excuse me, food, to everybody who was there. He didn't ask if they deserved it. He didn't ask if they worked hard enough for it. He didn't ask for a credit rating. He just gave. And gave, and gave, and gave.

And, mind you, he didn't hand out 5,000 fishing poles, wish them good luck, and leave.

Hi Roger,

I am deeply, deeply conservative. Although, I am most influenced by Russell Kirk and those like him. I do think Beck tends to generate a sense of hysteria that is not good. I am not a big fan of his for that reason.
-------------
I've never understood why we need to qualify justice in the first place. Justice is justice and that's enough. You can't make a situation more just by qualifying it as 'social justice'. The same can be said for 'social gospel'. What was wrong with the gospel that we need to add to it or qualify it? In fact, those qualifications do tend to generate suspicion. What was wrong with justice that we needed to change it or call it by a different name? Anyway, adding unnecessary words does bother me. :) The qualification tends to communicate (to me), in part, that justice in and of itself is not good enough. It does not communicate (to me) that we have fallen short in our practice of justice. But that's really a separate issue.

Does the concept of social justice bother me? No. But how it is practiced can. I am bothered when people cry for justice and then push the responsibility to their neighbor. "This person needs help! But I'm busy. So you, pay more taxes, so they can have a coat! Besides, I can't part with one of the four I have in my closet. But, Joey down the street, he has more than he needs. Make him do it." I believe when we attempt to enact justice in that way (and my example is only somewhat fecetious), it is a justice that results in pride and resentment, instead of humility and genuine sympathy and empathy for my fellow man. The person who is now being forced to help someone else's neighbor resents that his wages are being forcefully handed over to someone else, while the person being helped is being helped by an impersonal, faceless entity, resulting in a lack of gratitude.

The person being forced to give often develops negative, even false, views about the recipient ('why don't you just get a job') and the recipient may also grow bitter as they believe that everyone with more than them is just a hoarder 'trying to keep a man down'. Genuine relationships don't have a chance to be developed in this context. Are there people who can work but refuse to try, instead living off the system? Yes. Are there people who are greedy hoarders and laugh at other's poverty and misery (and perhaps cause it)? Yes. There always has been and always will be. But when 'social justice', in an attempt to alleviate these problems and others, is enacted by the force of government these views and characteristics become exaggerated. They become held and practiced by people who would otherwise be willing to help, generously and voluntarily, their own neighbor. And they become held and practiced by people who would otherwise not resent someone else's riches and instead be humbly thankful for the help.

I believe when social justice is enacted by force instead of by conviction (convictions that can be fostered and learned), it harms the relationships in society and exacerbates the chasm and conflicts between those who have and those who have not. I believe forced social justice is, in fact, an attempt to practice justice but in an unjust way. Christ did believe in justice, plain and simple. But he didn't spend his life petitioning his government to do the helping. In his day-to-day life he helped people when he saw need. And he encouraged his followers to do the same. If this is what is meant by 'social' justice, then I'm all in (though let's just call it justice, no qualifications needed). If by social justice people mean petitioning a representative hundreds of miles away to help my own neighbor who is 10 feet away, I've got no use for it and do not condone it. In the long run, it builds a bitter society that is less compassionate than what it could be.

I think (though I don't know) this is what Beck is trying to say. But he gets lost in hyperbole and hysteria and he, well, scares me. So I don't listen to him.

I do think this argument can be made (and won) without constantly comparing one's opponents to the worst world leaders in recent history (something both sides do, regularly). The deeper question is how to foster and enact justice (which is absolutely a necessary debate), not which side in every argument has more traits in common with the greatest villians of the 20th century.

I will say one last thing (I know, thank the Lord). Constantly comparing one's opponents to the worst humanity has to offer numbs people to the noise. And that's not a good thing because when the next villain does come along, no one will believe it until it's too late. That is perhaps the biggest reason to refrain from those comparisons. There are marxists and fascists and people of every other bad ideology one can name. But, calling everyone by every title muddies the water. The words lose their real meaning and it makes it hard to identify truly 'bad' people when they do come along.

Ebert: Thank you for your thoughtful comment. I miss the kinds of conservatives I found interesting in older days. I heard Russell Kirk speak. I used to subscribe to the National Review. If I were a conservative I would be deeply disturbed by the catch-phrase "conservative broadcaster Glenn Beck." He is not a conservative. What he is I do not know.

There must be a word for him. My thesaurus offers the following synonyms for "conservatjve." Few if any of them seem to apply:

1 the conservative wing of the party: right-wing, reactionary, traditionalist; Republican; Brit. Tory; informal redneck. ANTONYMS socialist.

2 our more conservative neighbors may object to the modern architecture being proposed: traditionalist, traditional, conventional, orthodox, old-fashioned, dyed-in-the-wool, hidebound, unadventurous, set in one's ways; moderate, middle-of-the-road, buttoned-down; informal stick-in-the-mud. ANTONYMS radical.

3 he wore a conservative blue suit: conventional, sober, modest, plain, unobtrusive, restrained, subtle, low-key, demure; informal square, straight. ANTONYMS ostentatious.

4 a conservative estimate: low, cautious, understated, moderate, reasonable.

I think you're assuming that "social justice" means the same to you as it does to Beck.

Ebert: To me, and apparently all church denominations in the U.S.

Mr. Beck is completely illogical in his rants, whether they be on the topic of religion, politics, or anything else for that matter. He makes Fox/Faux News a laughing stock through his non-sensical diatribes.

Of course a person in his position would disagree with the concept of social justice, as social justice goes against Capitalist philosophy. He is but a mere puppet for the elitists.

He is also a liar, as he claimed to have a degree in theology when I caught him in his ignorance on the subject of religion. He does not, I checked. He answered a question I had posited on Yahoo Answers, and I made him eat his words. He then had the nerve to threaten me. I took no notice, as he is a complete idiot, and easily made a fool of.

See for yourself, as this is a snippet of our discourse:

"Mr. beck—the proverbial mouse has bitten the cheese.
You say:
“You quote certain passages to show that God is "fickle, pernicious and lofty". I can quote passages that show Him to be the opposite of all those qualities you picked out of a thesaurus.”

"You are a very poor reader, and do not understand logic and arguments very well. My argument is based on showing the bible is against all wisdom, and in favor of wisdom, which I did do under the titles “wisdom is good” and 'wisdom is bad”, so I gave quotes from both sides to show that they were opposite and contradictory. Now, you have agreed with me yourself, giving support to my argument, as you admit yourself that in the bible there are passages which confirm both sides; that is all wisdom is good, and all wisdom is bad. This supports my conclusion that the christian god is fickle, pernicious and lofty, and that the bible is contradictory.

THANK YOU FOR GIVING FURTHER EVIDENCE AND SUPPORT TO MY ARGUMENT AND CONCLUSION THAT THE CHRISTIAN GOD IS FICKLE, PERNICIOUS AND LOFTY, AND THAT THE BIBLE IS CONTRADICTORY. "

It would be wise for Fox to remove him before Fox becomes the laughing stock of the airwaves.

To me, it always seems that Glenn Beck is ranting about whatever is on his mind at the moment- as a matter of fact, I bet he rarely (if ever) thinks through anything he says on the show. His anger is genuine- his reasoning, not so much.

You're right, Roger - he has jumped the rails.

Well-written piece about Beck and the endangerment of critical thinking in America. Ebert FTW!

"Social Justice" and "Economic Justice" are vague terms. For a legal system to me just, it must treat everyone -equally-, not fairly. Fair is a subjective term; what's fair for me may not be fair for you.

If you start implying that some people deserve more than others, you're an idiot. Just because I have more than someone else does not obligate me to give more of my stuff away; for all you know, I could've nearly killed myself obtaining those rewards.

As far as earning a 'living wage' goes, have you ever actually employed anyone? If they didn't do their job well, did you fire them? I suspect not. Nobody has a *right* to my money except me.

In closing, I'm glad you thoroughly articulated how one acts on emotion rather than reason.

This is unrelated, but has anyone else stumbled upon this Ebert-related eBay auction?

http://cgi.ebay.ca/Roger-Ebert-Gobstopper-Chin-Portrait-Painting-Art-Lacey_W0QQitemZ250595194864QQcmdZViewItemQQptZArt_Paintings?hash=item3a58a337f0

What's that about?

Ebert: Hmmm. The item has been removed.

Like you, I guess, I find Glenn Beck infuriating. I also find him morbidly fascinating. Some day, I'd like to get a hold of Father Coughlin's recordings and compare how they reached their audiences. By the way, Coughlin had audiences which make Beck's look microscopic. (Coughlin, you know, was the rabid anti-New Deal priest who is seen as birthing right-wing radio, and also founded the National Union for Social Jus... hey, wait a second!)

Beck's rantings are less obviously hate-filled than Limbaugh's or Lou Dobbs'. Rather, he creates his own reality where hate is no longer necessary -- was it necessary for Winston Smith to hate Big Brother in "1984?"

A good case in point for this was the recent mishap with Rep. Eric Massa--which ended with Beck apologizing to his audience for wasting their time. When Massa proclaimed to the world that he was being persecuted for his opposition to Obama's agenda, it fed directly into Beck's world-view. It probably never occurred to him that Massa would contradict his theory on his own show. It probably never even occurred to him that Massa might have been lying. Guys like Beck and Limbaugh, who cut their teeth yelling paranoid fantasies into the back void of radio, aren't accustomed to reality intruding.

You, sir, obviously have taken bits and pieces from things you don't understand, and have created a fine fallacy for the attention of the gullible.

Jesus said, "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's." He also said, "The poor will always be with you (meaning mankind)." He never said anything about trying to equalize the differences between all people... He said to share, to help, to give. But taking from those who work to give to those who don't is NOT a "Christian" value.

When poverty was something difficult, people tried desperately to get OUT of it, to work, to educate themselves, to strive to be better. In most of the world, it is still like that. And those people would consider the "poor" in the US wildly rich by their standards.

In this country, it's a ticket to freebies, without stigma, without responsibility. Count how many "poor" people have cell phone/cameras, big TVs, nice cars, etc. My family can't afford those things. But we pay our taxes to help pay for those who do. (Something our governmental employees would do well to honor, too.)

There is a HUGE difference between "social justice" and charity towards the poor. If you don't understand that, you're a fool.

Ebert: I didn't mention poverty. Nor did he.

You can find some good prices on cell phones these days.

Freedom of speech is not an absolute right. How I wish that one of the exceptions to this right would be utterly arrogant, stupid and dangerous media commentaries that aim to mislead people to do actually something stupid. I prefer that Glenn Beck works for Comedy Central and create his own spoof news for Saturday night laughs.

Unfortunately, Beck is anything but alone in thinking the bible has no business containing all that sissy forgiveness, kindness, calls for social justice and turning of cheeks crapola. Google conservapedia's bible project and you'll find that a league of people just like him are rewriting the bible to take all that stuff out.

At risk of committing reductio ad Hitlerum myself, I feel compelled to mention that the Nazis produced a rewrite of the bible uncannily similar to Conservapedia's. I promise you I'm telling the absolute literal truth, so help me unbowldlerized God.

I came across Glenn Beck's television show on Fox by accident some weeks back. At one point he started to foam at the mouth on purpose. I think he was just trying to annoy viewers. Anyone on a news network like Fox that foams at the mouth just to irritate people loses credibility. You cannot even take such a person seriously, or trust what they say. And what adult would do that anyway?

I think it is safe to say that Glenn Beck has become more animal like, and less human. He certainly showed how insane he truly has become.

Glenn Beck's only motive is to maintain an audience: without them, he's nothing but another insignificant, irrelevant talking head on cable.

Shock, appall, anger, distress - these are just a tip of the iceberg of insanity that Beck barfs onto television every night. He spews slime of unthinkable illogic, irrational inanity that appeals to only the most primal of emotions and sensationalism. He is a fanatic for his fans, a caricature of journalism who's only reason for still being on air is because of his despicable appeal. He is soulless, spineless in actually defining for what he stands for except to his pathetic desire for people to listen to him, let alone look at him.

Cut the audience, cut the ratings and you'll have nothing but a sad human being crumpled and crushed from a rejection of his career, his existence even. I can hardly feel pity for someone who has chosen to suffer under the weight of his hatred, stupidity, and blatant plea for attention.

Beck gives new dimension to the concept of grandiosity...he fancies himself as a prophet when in reality he is interested only in profit.

Just another pseudo-intellectual snake-oil salesman.

Mr. Ebert, I'm sorry to say that at this point, Beck does indeed " speak for average Americans." In this Evening Land, any intelligent or non-aggressive thought is seen as threatening and the only words on the common man's lips are those that "pundits" put in them. Beck symbolizes the end of individuality and, indeed, of rationality, of Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Spinoza, of thought. I fear that true Jeffersonian democracy is come to an end, save for those still literate, those who still may find fault in these Beckian arguments.

I don't consider myself a religious man (perhaps the closest religion I adhere to is of the Pastafarian faith. If you haven't heard of it, look up The Flying Spaghetti Monster), but I have to protest. Mr. Beck quite obviously doesn't know what he's talking about, and neither does his audience.

businessdictionary.com defines Social Justice as "Fair and proper administration of laws conforming to the natural law that all persons, irrespective of ethnic origin, gender, possessions, race, religion, etc., are to be treated equally and without prejudice." So tell us, Mr. Beck, where do Hitler and Stalin fit into all of this? I'd love to hear what his definition of social justice is.

Nice little rant. Too bad you completely misconstrued Beck's words. He didn't warn "his viewers against the dangers of Christianity." Firstly, the quote you mentioned was from his radio show, thus he didn't have viewers. But I guess I can give you a pass on that one because you probably got the quote from a blogger who probably got the quote from another blogger who probably got the quote from moveon.org or Media Matters. Secondly,
he wasn't warning about the dangers of christianity or any religion, he was warning about the dangers of allowing the government to get its slimy tentacles into religious sects. This last Friday on his radio show, Beck discussed this issue again as many bloggers have only quoted a portion of Beck's monologue from which they were referencing. You can disagree with Beck, but please do a bit of research before you rant about him. During that monologue, he said that charity an the care of the poor is important and that churches should be encouraging it on an individual level. The phrases "economic justice" and "social justice" should simply set off warning bells that your church may be subscribing to progressive or communistic ideologies.

Ebert: I linked his radio broadcast first thing under the entry.

geeze... what a jerky jerk...

Glen Beck would be an amusing bit of satirical theater if he wasn't actually a satire. It makes me very frustrated as a citizen to see so many others take this looney (and others of his ilk) seriously.

I'm a teacher that gives lessons on critical thinking to my students. An entire textbook could be devised with Glen Beck case studies.

As always Mr. Ebert, you have confectioned a marvelous piece of work. That is until you reach that last paragraph. I'm sure you didn't mean to offend, but let me remind you that atheism is nothing to be afraid of, and most atheists tend to live surprisingly happy lives without the need of a God or house of worship (a stark contrast of a lonely, barren, and/or ignorant wilderness).

So what are atheists supposed to take from Beck's comment? Might Beck be helping us by decreasing the number of theists? But many of us are humanists, and we can't afford to have more Americans who don't subscribe to the principles of social justice. Perhaps he wants to put us in a...conundrum! Clever little fella.

The headline is pretty misleading. Whatever kind of nutjob Mr. Beck might be, Christ presented social justice in a way that was pretty revolutionary back in the day.

Ebert: I've put the headline in quotes to diminish confusion.

The "wop bop a loo bop, a wop bam boom" line made me laugh harder than I have in a long, long time.

The rest of the entry was excellent, too.

It would be so easy to resort to a reductio ad Hitlerum argument yourself and call him a moron. Thanks for your thoughtful post.

Nicely done, Mr. Ebert

Roger,
I respectfully disagree whole heartedly that Fox news is fair and balanced. They swing wildly from left to right, with nary a sensible middle ground. And coverage on the economy and middle east is an absolute joke. As someone who works in the financial field and having studied economics, I believe the O administration is leading us to socialism/communism. After all, gov't is getting bigger and taking more from its citizens every day, as well as planning to in the future. One could argue its wall street, or the corporations. But who's got their big grubby hands in wall st and corporate pockets? Who is claiming to help the american public particularly with jobs, yet has not slowed spending a bit, and is making small businesses suffer even greater? Isn't this kind of big gov't essentially communism, or getting real close to it?
People don't need a church to tell them what's right. People will not be lost outside of it. We only need to take responsibility for our actions and feelings once again, and reclaim that right from our gov't and media. I believe that's Beck's message. As a state we are so far out on the spectrum that an overcorrective message like Beck's is necessary just to even make people blink these days.

And I had just thought that Jesus was a communist. Thanks for setting me straight, Glenn.

You are distorting the issue. He is not saying Jesus was a NAZI. You are a typical leftist. You don't want to deal with the facts so you make up a smear.

Ebert: Do you much relate to irony?

thank you for this Roger. As soon as I heard about this, I knew real Christians would speak out. I've actually spent the last 4 hours researching this on the internet, and I'm not surprised by the outrage the majority of the country who call themselves Christians were going to display. Man, I need a blog!

I consider myself a moderate, but some of my friends call me conservative or worse. I point that out just to add context to my declaration that I can't stand Glenn Beck. There is almost always a disconnect between what he is actually saying and what (I assume) he means to say. On top of that, he is overly sincere and weepy and it all seems phony to me. That being said, I will agree with Beck in that Jesus always has seemed like a socialist to me (whether being a socialist is a good or bad thing I leave to individual judgement here). Interestingly, Ayn Rand was very emphatic that Christianity and Capitalism are fundamentally at odds - I believe she had a feud with William F. Buckley over that issue (but I might be confused about that). Sounds like Beck agrees with Rand on this, or, more probably, he was trying to make a distinction between private charity and government actions, in which case he chose his words very poorly.

Longtime lurker, first time commenter, and I must applaud.

Sometimes I half expect Glenn Beck to take of the rubber mask and reveal himself to be Andy Kaufman, not really dead and still screwing around with us all. That's the only possible explanation for some of the crap he spews.

I don't know which would be worse, really, if Beck believed the stuff he rants about or if he's just playing at crazy to earn ratings.

Watching American news makes me very proud to be Canadian.

Beck even went so far as to cite Jesus Christ, saying, and I quote: "Nowhere does Jesus say, Hey, if somebody asks for your shirt, give your coat to the government and have the government give them a pair of slacks." Well, Beck has me there. It is quite true that nowhere does Jesus say that. Nor, for that matter, does he ever say, A wop bop a lu bop, a wop bam boom!

Oh you had me on the floor with that! My hat's off, sir. Not only were you succinct - but funny as hell. As for Beck....pffft! Man's cheese has completely slipped off its cracker - if it ever had any cheese to begin with. Lord but the inside of his head must be labyrinthine. Where does he come up with such foolishness? Yech! Whenever something Beck says strikes me as particularly ludicrous - I try picturing him as a clown (my attempt to neutralize the venom). Unfortunately, all I ever manage to conjure up is that evil toy clown from the Post Office commercial (less ha, ha and more shudder, I’m afraid). Sheesh. Where’s a full-fledged boggart when you really need one?

It was only a matter of time. The conservative commentators have been creating a tempest for years in order to attract an audience. Once they exhausted the usual targets (liberals, Clinton, etc) they have to turn on their core supporters. He definately got press! His ratings will probably go up. It's a success, if you keep score that way.

Come on, Mr. E..Did you just waste so much time and an entire blog entry on Glenn Beck?? I thought you were smarter than this!

Beck is not going to dream something like this up in the makeup chair,go on camera and improvise this swill. Big media works in a bit more systematic manner.
It is a tough uphill battle to convince folks to vote against their interests. I know we all love Billionaires and even the poor folks with only a hundred million or so to throw around. Unfortunately there are only a few thousand of these people in the USA. The script that Beck is riffing on is written deliberately to get the rest of us to insure that those folks don't ever pay their fair share to reap the amazing benefits of the American experience, which has benefited them so handsomely.
I have spent 20 minutes or so scanning the inter-web for 1 word from Fox denouncing the rogue Mr. Beck for his outlandish theory. I am not going to find it, and neither are you.
The systematic process at work here is called dehumanization. Simply put, you cannot allow the enemy to be seen as human. The enemies ideas cannot be seen as valid. Mr. Beck has inspired me to mention Hitler. If the German citizens are not to be concerned about cooking the Jews in ovens, they have to see the Jews as less than human. Any Jewish idea or philosophy must be undermined. The press is controlled to accomplish this. That is step 1.
After the dehumanization process has set in, then the Jews can be oppressed. They can be oppressed any way the oppressors want. It is legal, and anyone who objects is an enemy of the State.
The concept of social justice was around way before Jesus. But we need to undermine the concept now. Anyone who believes in it is an idiot right? They are less than human, they are so stupid. It does not matter if they are the most righteous pious persons in the world. The concept might as well be the most vile Nazi propaganda ever. Beck needs us to believe that Social Justice is the most evil thing in the world. Why?
Because the Billionaire welfare program will be endangered if we don't. That is the worst thing that will happen. Not the sky falling down if there is more access to health care in this country. It is simply a small matter of those who can most afford it contributing a share equal to what the rest of us (all 99.99%) have to pony up. I don't think the most powerfull country in the world should be run like a thriftstore. Those who try fail. The anti tax idiots who get in power spend money like nothing we have ever seen.
It is the phoniest scam. It is illogical. The fatcats are going to be all thrifty when they take control of the worlds biggest military force, the worlds biggest, best and most powerfull everything? No. They do what they do best, spend money. It doesn't even have to make sense. All they have to do is call anyone that doesnt bow down a "terrorist".
So we know that "Social Justice" is the Fox target of what, the day, the week? Is this "Attack Social Justice Month" at Fox? It goes beyond Beck. He has only said one of the top 3 most idiotic things that any one has said on TV ever. I cant think of anything said on TV that would offend so many across all divides. This is beyond John Lennon saying the Beatles were more popular than Jesus. That might have actually been true in some demographics.
Fox denouncing Beck for going all roughish and mavricky would be the least to expect in this case. You are not going to hear it, because this is the party line.

You have GOT to be kidding. You try to pass of your hatred for Glenn Beck as "journalism"? Are you just trying to do the job MediaMatters is so miserably failing at? Do some research into the rise of Hitler. He didn't go in and tell everyone he was going to kill the Jews, and try to take over the world. He promised "Social Justice" to the whole country!! Do your boss a favor, and try something called Movie Reviewing!!!!!

Ebert: Here on my blog, I'm the boss.

I think Hitler made his plans for the Jews very plain.

The world seems to be becoming a scarier place - the crazies are taking control. Beck has more far reaching influence than you might guess. Here's some of his flock - the fundy wacko right who idolize Beck. Did you see the article about the Texas Education Board rewriting history - effectively - by ordering a few changes in how history books are written. Texas often sets the standards for what kids in many other states are taught, as well. Here, for example, a few of the Education Boards planned improvements:

"For the next ten years, millions of students in Texas and across the country will read history textbooks suggesting that the actions of witch-hunt instigator Joseph McCarthy were justified. They will read about religious icon John Calvin instead of Thomas Jefferson. "

"They [students] will read a description of the US government that includes the words "constitutional republic" but not the word "democratic.""

And students will be "reading about the Judeo-Christian influences of the nation's Founding Fathers at the same time. But they won't be reading about the rationale for a separation of church and state. That's gone, too."

an article describing the school board's tactics (antics?) is
http://rawstory.com/2010/03/texas-approves-radical-rightwing-history-books-2/
or here:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/nightlinedailyline/2010/03/are-americas-textbooks-too-liberal.html

A wop bop a lu bop, a wop bam boom

It's frightening, isn't it? One wonders who it is that listens to such a man as this. We shake our heads and remind ourselves that, surely, any person with a shred of reason in their lives must certainly look upon this fool and see him for what he is.

Really though, this is not about any one comment Beck howls into the camera. This is about creating a following by gathering about him those who fear the great, wide universe of human ideas, simply because they exist outside of their (and Beck's) tiny, shuttered world. It is demagoguery, plain and simple. He would say anything to hold his followers to him, and convince himself that any who flee from him were not worth of his grandeur.

Yet like a small child flailing his arms, fighting his mother's attempt to get him to eat his greens, Beck spews whatever words come to mind. I wonder if even he understands the analogies he makes, or the ideas he growls into his camera. Irrationality has become all he has left, and frankly I consider that a positive sign.

I am a High School English teacher, and everyday I am forced to combat the sort of dangerous ignorance that fools like Beck spew. I explain to my students that there is a great gulf between simply Not Knowing, and Ignorance. To Not Know is just that; to lack the knowledge. There is not shame in this. After all, no matter how learned a person might be, there will always be a long list of things they do not know. Ignorance is a beast of a very different, more vile nature. Ignorant is what you become when, faced with something that is to your benefit to know, you steadfastly refuse to learn about it. I encourage those who Do Not Know to seek knowledge whenever they can. I encourage those who are Ignorant to reconsider whatever it is that keeps them from seeking understanding in the world around them, or at the very least, to get out of the way of those who wish to make the world a better place by understanding as much as they can.

Beck reminds my university days, studying history. Over and over again, barbarians come and try to tear down the walls of reason and replace them with ignorance. Sometimes they succeed, sometimes they fail. Regardless, one basic truth remains; while the barbarians come and go, reason always returns. The more easily knowledge is shared, the harder the barbarians' job becomes. Thus reason becomes ever stronger, and ever more resilient to the barbarian hordes.

Beck can keep preaching to the fearful, the angry, and the Ignorant. I will continue to arm my students with a desire to know the world, and the ability to use it for good.

When Beck is gone, who will remember him? How many Visigoths remain? How many Huns?

Keep posting, Mr. Ebert. Keep fighting.

Dear Ebert,
I am a little confused by your article.

What I don't understand is why you say Christianity is evil. You do not agree with Glen Beck about his social justice = Nazi (which I also agree is absurd). So I guess my question is why do you say Christianity is evil? In a previous article you seemed to have sympathetic feelings towards your Catholic upbringing (http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/04/how_i_believe_in_g.html). I just feel like you are presenting mixed messages. One day you say good things about growing up Catholic. And the next day you say Christianity is evil. So please explain yourself. What are your reasons for saying Christianity is evil?

As a Mormon, I'm ashamed Glenn and I have something in common.

It’s not enough that Beck passes such judgments on compassionate believers, the urgency for his advice is clearly and frighteningly articulated. He says that religious freedom is under attack and you may have only a year left to worship as you choose. So you had better start to worship as HE chooses. Or better yet, worship him.

That's where Beck is heading. And he's doubling down on the crazy. He now says that anyone on public assistance surrenders his liberty to the state. He even uses the word "slave" to describe the status of such a person.

I actually watched one of this man's shows back in the summer of 2006, when he was on Headline News, and he had Irshad Manji on for (*gasp*) an actual discussion, about the threats of Islamic extremism, hurting women so much as far as not being able to get an education or to fend for themselves. I know my comment is going to seem like a cheap shot and going out on a limb, but I genuinely feel that Beck has either a rekindled substance abuse problem, or possibly something else even more serious going on. He's already out in the open about his past history with alcoholism, and the vigor with which he spouts this stuff, I can't believe he doesn't have some kind of chemical imbalance, whether self-inflicted or not.
I offer up a prayer for him and his family, for whatever immediate needs they might have.

I was recently updating my facebook info page of favorite movies, which include Ikiru, The Third Man, and 12 Angry Men. What do they have in common and what does that have to do with Glenn Beck & Fox News? All deal with social justice to some degree, none would be endorsed by the Nationalsozialistische Arbeiterpartei, each requires viewers to think for themselves and realize, in the words of Scott Peck, that life is difficult and complex. In contrast, Fox News and its stable of gab-meisters treat viewers like they're idiots and that problems can be easily solved if the right scapegoats are exterminated. Somewhat like Mein Kampf. Ja?

Beck's rhetoric matches perfectly his radio past time... "morning zoo." You can tell from the instant you see him and his mannerisms and his oddball stage props and hear his voice that he's using the same bag of tricks he gleaned from his days doing top 40 zoo radio DJing to sell himself. And sadly, it works. People eat it up. Despite his almost never ending stream of craziness, he has built quite an audience for himself. I don't necessarily find it surprising I suppose, there's always been a market for "crazy" in this country, what irks me... and this is true of both Liberal and Conservative pundits alike.... is the constant mutilation of history on these shows (and blogs, etc.). Being a history junkie, I always find myself getting peeved when someone like Beck tries to talk about Fascism or Communism (Or Socialism... or hell, even Liberalism) and yet seems to have no clear definition of the terms and no sense of historical context what-so-ever. It's maddening, and even more so considering people actually take these peoples statements seriously.

Beck's rhetoric matches perfectly his radio past time... "morning zoo." You can tell from the instant you see him and his mannerisms and his oddball stage props and hear his voice that he's using the same bag of tricks he gleaned from his days doing top 40 zoo radio DJing to sell himself. And sadly, it works. People eat it up. Despite his almost never ending stream of craziness, he has built quite an audience for himself. I don't necessarily find it surprising I suppose, there's always been a market for "crazy" in this country, what irks me... and this is true of both Liberal and Conservative pundits alike.... is the constant mutilation of history on these shows (and blogs, etc.). Being a history junkie, I always find myself getting peeved when someone like Beck tries to talk about Fascism or Communism (Or Socialism... or hell, even Liberalism) and yet seems to have no clear definition of the terms and no sense of historical context what-so-ever. It's maddening, and even more so considering people actually take these peoples statements seriously.

Beautifully said, Roger.

Sadly, long ago we reached the point where words themselves no longer mean anything to the followers of Beck and Palin. For much of the Right, rhetoric has been methodically distilled into a witchbag of raw, emotional signifiers. It's all just wingnut word jazz (tm), which is why these same people are also so maddeningly impervious to reason.

They are the fascism that Upton Sinclair warned about coming to America "wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross". Also, apparently, babbling like mental patients.

More of such dangerous talk is available here in the Exciting!New!Format! of radio :-) http://tinyurl.com/yh6alm6

To "semi-quote" Glenn Beck:

I beg you, look for the words "compassionate conservatism" or "Glenn Beck" on the FOX News website. If you find it, run as fast as you can! They are code words. If you have a talk show host that is pushing "compassionate conservatism", go find another news program.

And to those career politicians who's only idea for solution to our nation's problems is to shrink the federal government:

Reduce the government workforce by one and resign from office.

To repudiate Beck, I would like to quote the ever wise Martin Luther King Jr. in a sermon the book Strength to Love entitled, "How Should A Christian View Communism?":

In spite of the noble affirmations of Christianity, the church has often lagged in its concern for social justice and too often has been content to mouth pious irrelevancies and sanctimonious trivialities. It has often been so absorbed in a future good "over yonder" that it forgets the present evils "down here." Yet the church is challenged to make the gospel of Jesus Christ relevant within the social situation. We must come to see that the Christian gospel is a two-way road. On the one side, it seeks to change the souls of men and thereby unite them with God; on the other, it seeks to change the environmental conditions of men so that the soul will have a chance after it is changed. Any religion that professes to be concerned with the souls of men and yet is not concerned with the economic and social conditions that strangle them and the social conditions that cripple them is the kind the Marxist describes as "an opiate of the people."

(As a side note, the sermon probably gives the most balanced reading of Communist doctrine I've read anywhere. King correctly notes that Communism is incompatible with Christianity, and that it has differed drastically... and horrifically... in its actual application as opposed to its purely theoretical form. Even with that said, King still believes Communism's call for "social justice," while erring in the wrong due to its materialistic and Godless nature, was something that people, and especially the Church, should take seriously and work on in a manner consistent with the teachings of Jesus, as touched on by the quote above. I'd love to see a hack like Beck be able to give such an impassioned speech with such nuance and realism, but that would be asking for miracle that is entirely unlikely to ever occur)

Maybe his water has been fluoridated.

I'm a little leery of health care passing without a robust public option, but if it does pass, I'm going to be awful disappointed that I can't get fox news. I'd pay good money on that day to watch live as Glen Beck cries.

The real problem isn't Beck, it's the people that follow him.

Honestly, I would do the same as Beck if it got me a tv show, book deals and a ton of money.

I have this theory that Glen Beck is really a plant put into Fox News by some Bond-style villain to create confusion in the American people. My fear is that this makes more sense than the current story, that a news company would employ this man without coercion.

I think if anything it's kind of sad if these are the types of things that he actually believes.

Is there a type of psychological term for letting your biases negatively affect your thinking?

Looking at the world completely objectly, everything's just atoms and space and time, so I think some sort of point of view is important to finding meaning in life, but is it possible that a person can be too subjective?

I can't claim to have read all of the comments but the ones that I have read seem to only focus on the political/ sociological implications of this.

I know this is a political subject but what about the spiritual side of this?

I'm probably doing this too, and it's something that's kind of inevitable but it kind of feels like by filtering Religion through Politics and vice versa you diminish the best parts of both of those things.

The church of any religion should be an empowering force, much more than a dispenser of charity, if at all. It's prime function is to awake people to their dignity and worth, and ability to cope with anything. MLK and Gandhi are prime examples of people who created such mighty chain reactions of inner-generated energy that worked positively towards justice.

Roger,

So where are all the quotes from Beck's radio show broadcast this last Friday in which he addressed all the bloggers misrepresenting his words?

Here are some for you:

"Now, I wasn't aware that God had politics. I would like to again join all of the liberals in suggesting we have a separation of church and state, that maybe there's a problem when your preacher stands up and starts telling you who to vote for, how to vote, and what the government should look like.

Now, I know there are churches that do that. I don't attend them. I don't like them. You can do that if you want, but if you want to make sure that God's politics aren't America's politics, you know, that would probably be a good thing to check into those words of those churches. Because I don't think God has politics. I think he has the truth. "

"Your church is there and that's why I said I don't care what church you go to. I don't care. As long as that church is telling you and helping you be a better person, be more honorable, be more honest, be more giving. But once that church starts to preach social and economic justice, especially through the structure of a giant government, well, now that's something totally different. Now, now you are talking about a church that is getting involved in government itself. We don't do that. We don't do that. "

found at: http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/37852/

I suggest you all read the transcript

Ebert: I hope Glenn devotes an entire program to his belief that God doesn't have politics. That may come as news to some of his followers.

I always assumed Glenn Beck would publicly self-destruct at some point, ala Joe McCarthy, and even his pathetic audience would jump ship....and, you would THINK the following would have done this -- 'in his own words' as it were -- but alas, I think we sadly live in a country that celebrates the demagogue and embraces mediocrity as a virtue. Good blog Roger, always nice to read Somebody calling out this deuchbag, but again, you would think HIS words would be enough for people to see right through. I fear not.See More

I am a moderate republican and I think this guy is a whack job. He spells everything that is wrong for conservatives, he is embarassing us all, as Americans worldwide and Republicans in America. I'm sure Bachmann, Demint and Rubio will be proud.

I seem to remember someone approaching Jesus and asking, "What must I do to be saved?" And Jesus answering, "Sell all you have, and give it to the poor." And the man went away distressed, because he had much.

Well, this is an incident Mr. Beck, and his kind, don't even bother to explain-away. For even if it applied to that one individual, they feel uncomfortably like him.

Not sure what I can add to this post, except to say that most of the comments on this entry show a firmer grasp of the issues (social justice, politics, and religion) than Glenn Beck seems to have. Not that this should surprise anyone. Jon Stewart once showed how, when Beck was on CNN, he thought our health care system was a nightmare, whereas on his Fox show, our health care system is the best in the world. Apparently, he'll believe whatever is guaranteed to get him higher ratings, facts be damned (I should note that Beck is a favorite punching bag of Stewart's, since he's, well, just so ripe for satire).

Here's the clip: http://www.indecisionforever.com/2009/08/14/jon-stewart-owns-glenn-beck-on-healthcare-hypocrisy/

Reply to: Ebert: I know some priests pretty well, and two ministers I went to high school with, and a rabbi, and I have a Muslim friend who teaches that faith in Chicago universities, and I work with a Buddhist, but it's no use asking them. They're all down on this social justice thing.

Having a Muslim friend is not the same thing as knowing what Islam really is. We assume that a religion with over a billion followers is legitimate.

TimesOnline: In a Muslim “Religion of Peace” demonstration in London, we saw these signs:

“Slay those who insult Islam”

“Behead those who insult Islam”

“Europe is a cancer, Islam is the answer”

“Islam will dominate the world”

“Europe will pay, your 9/11 is on its way.” (end)

Reply to: Beck: Social justice and economic justice, they are code words..... "My church doesn't, (teach social justice?) " said Beck, who is a Mormon.

The Chinese government thinks Christianity is trying to undermine their authority. Yes, they are code words for larger programs.

Reply to: Ebert: I am proudly a liberal. I am also patriotic, reasonable, pro-American, and stand for family values.

I'm also pro-American, but I don't subscribe to most of the items on the "family values" menu.

I don't think sex should be limited to married couples. I think our society has moved far beyond that archaic concept.

SITE: Pre-marital sex is absolutely forbidden in Islam, no matter whether it is with a girl-friend or a prostitute. Pre-marital sex is fornication (zina). (One opinion, I'd be glad to read others.)

There are a lot of individuals who call themselves Muslim, and advocate rational social and religious positions. If you actually read the Qur'an, however, a much different position appears. And if you look only at the rewrite done by the men who came after Mohammed died, what you see is a group using religion as a front. In 1200 AD, a position might have been popular. If you try to sell that same position in 2010 AD, it's a different story. A religion that is based on a single holy text can't change. It can't evolve. Millions left Arab countries to escape the evils of Islam. I must protest anyone who thinks Islam should be introduced to the United States.

I refuse to waste my time by researching the idiocy of Glenn Beck.

Roger,

Thank you for continuing to bravely contribute to the American debate despite your infirmity. The clarity and depth of thought you bring to your columns is so important in the U.S. moving forward, not just with critique of art.

I really enjoy Bill O'Reilly; he makes me smile. He's a grumpy ol' guy who, I can tell, is quite sensitive at heart. At least he's real.

Glenn Beck makes me cringe. He's like a condescending car salesman, or a high school football coach who's been hired in desperation as an adjunct English teacher.

Bill O'Reilly at his most vicious is easier on the psyche and senses than Glenn Beck at his smarmy charmiest.

wow, jared. you need a crash course in reading comprehension. show me anywhere in this article where roger says Christianity is evil. ohhhh right, you can't, because he doesn't.

re-read it, or have someone smart read it to you and explain confusing things like "sarcasm" as they go.

I see Ronald Reagan spinning in his grave.

Tweet from Beck on Oscar Night:

"Gee, an anti US/human movie against an anti US/Troops movie. What will hollywood do? My guess? HURT because the other made too much profit." 7:11 PM Mar 7th via web

The Hurt Locker is anti U.S. troops? He must not know anything about movies either.

What does it say about me that I'm sitting here right this moment, trying to think of another man or woman currently alive who deserves the label 'evil' more than Glenn Beck...and I'm coming up blank? The problem with the reductio ad Hitlerum argument's ubiquity is that if another Hitler ever really does show up, his success will be due to our unwillingness to call him what he is.

Call that Vanden-Eykel's Corollary to Godwin's Law.

Thank you for recognizing the difference between normal conservatives and this madness. Hopefully atheist/ignostic liberals will recognize that the church-dominated right wing aren't slaves to the words of a frothing mad man.

And "Supermarket Sweep" was the greatest game show ever. EVER.

Dear Roger,

I'm with Tom Dark on this one. Glenn Beck? I know of him by his ridiculous reputation but until your blog, I've never seen his face. Watch that cracker foam at the mouth on Youtube? Nah, Antichrist just got added to Netflix streaming. If I'm going to watch some crazy $hi# before bed, well...

What I don't understand is the ease with which many conservatives embrace Ayn Rand while at the same time being religious conservatives. If Beck actually listened to many objectivist Randians, who are ardent anti-theists and not just simple atheists, you would see even they see leftist ideas as part of christianity. I remember many times Beck and his ilk invoking "going Galt" or mentioning Atlas Shrugged. Yet then they go on tying to show the ungodly ways of leftists and their socialism infecting christianity. I guess the anabaptists, quakers, and catholic social teachings have got it wrong.

Beck is so ignorant and wrong about history it is amazing. He takes some grain of truth and then just absolutely massacres it. I liked his connecting the dots from Rockefeller center art to modernist socialist realism to communism and fascism then to MSNBC's political leanings. He sees no difference between say the nationalist blood and soil politics of Nazism and the postmodern multicultural left. But to see those gradations one would need to actually know and be familiar with the history rather than just grasping for vague similarities. Hitler, vegetarian? Check. PETA, vegan? Check. Therefore PETA is a fascist organization. Mussolini, translated Kropotkin? Check. Noam Chomsky is an anarchist, which also happens to endorse Kropotkinite ideas? Check. Therefore anarchists are fascists. His whole mindset is guilt by association, however tenuous and loose. One could easily play the game with conservatives, especially comparing them to fascists. The funny thing is that the right has been crowing about that for some time. Before Obama I heard Coulter complaining endlessly about it.

Roger:

Beck never claims to be a journalist (although he criticizes other journalists for not doing their job). He's not a professor, he doesn't hold public office, and he doesn't claim any special power or rights that are not granted to any ordinary citizen. His show is commentary. His opinions. On a commercial network, driven by ratings. Will you be doing a survey of the ridiculous commentary on MSNBC and other networks? No, your true colors are liberal, and unfortunately you have taken the typical liberal stance of attempting to ridicule and marginalize opinions that you don't agree with.

Unlike the talking-points crowd, Beck sometimes wanders into strange metaphors to try to get his point and opinions across. This, of course, is rich soil for dirt-diggers looking for something to take out of context. Give the atrocious knowledge of history and politics of the average person, it's refreshing to see at least an attempt to educate. He is right about Che and Mao - they were mass-murdering monsters, not cool images to have on your T-shirt. Where else will you hear that in the mass-media? Sure the histrionics and tears can make you roll your eyes, but it's clear the man has no secret agenda regarding Nazis, fascists, and our eroding freedoms.

Beck is an entertainer, and anything else one may get out of the show is gravy. For someone that is broadcasting on live media for over a dozen hours a week, it's trivial to pick out some issue to generate some phony outrage, like this one.

Hey Roger, stick to reviewing movies! I just wanted to be the first lame-brained idiot to say that. It wouldn't be a Roger Ebert journal post without it.

It's pretty disingenuous not to distinguish between social justice and "social justice." The left uses "social justice" as a euphemism for more governmental programs advocating the supposed goal of social justice. Much like the right uses "personal responsibility" to advocate less governmental programs for the supposed goal of economic freedom.

You may disagree or agree with the politics behind these words, but it's intellectually dishonest to pretend that a church advocating either "social justice" or "personal responsibility" is not promoting an explicitly political agenda.

The only thing this illuminates, and what Beck is correct about, is that churches are constantly used as political platforms. As such, each church, temple, and mosque in the United States should be subject to taxation.

Beck came to public attention after I moved out of the US, and when I first saw links to footage on YouTube of his ranting, I thought it was comedy. If only it were.

Some cousins of mine, I regret to say, would agree with Beck about that whole if-a-man-needs-a-shirt-give-your-coat-to-the-government thing.

I asked one of them to tell me how they read the parable of the Good Samaritan, only to hear her opinion that this parable teaches us that we should perform acts of personal charity, as there's no government involvement.

To which I can only say that since I cannot personally help everyone who needs clothes, food, or shelter, I depend upon my government to do that for me, using my taxes.

Dear Roger;

Beck is a clown. He's a sideshow geek biting the heads off chickens. When people of your stature take the time to critique his rantings you elevate him from the sideshow to the center ring.

I sometimes find myself hoping that any ratings success that Mr. Beck and others of his ilk enjoy is due to the fascination of watching a train wreck happen in front of your eyes.

Sadly, not so.

Beck has become quite the showboat in recent years, although I would think joining Fox News had a lot to do with it.

I remember when he was on HLN with Nancy Grace and he actually didn't seem to me to be all that radical in his ideology. He critiqued the way the Iraq War was executed, styled himself as a compassionate conservative and came off as almost right-of-center. That's why I was quite surprised to find out he'd made such a name for himself in recent years as a far right personality and become a lightning rod for this much controversy.

Seems to me he might've merely began his career at Fox News trying to create a presence among the more established names and realized he could go further and become the highest-rated personality on the entire network the likes of which we haven't seen since Ann Coulter. Then again he might've joined the network with that intention all along.

Doe Beck take himself seriously, or is he playing a hyperbolic parody character, like Stephen Colbert? Just without the brilliance and humor...

Not being American, or over 20, gives me the great freedom to treat America as some sort of savage caged animal that everyone should be aware of, but avoid. This Beck feller reminds me of a certain Joseph McCarthy, and it also reminds me of the American inability to call anything even remotely connected to how great America or democracy is bullshit.

.. The fact that someone like Beck can become a millionaire spewing this kind of crap and foreign-controlled Faux Noise can fool such a large segment of the American people tells us something IS 'w'rong with much of our current society... Ebert is on the right track attacking Beck, but because of Ebert's past religious brainwashing and religion addiction he doesn't have quite the whole understanding of things needed to clearly explain Beck's problem and danger to our society...

This is becoming a farce. The people agreeing with Glenn Beck are ample evidence we need to spend money on school. Specifically, to institute in each teaching college the Socratic Method, so teachers can impart this to their students, so this mishigas can end with these Tea Party yutzes who are giving a bad name to humanity.

Now for a random House reference: Socrates in "The Socratic Method"of the show "house" was jokingly referred to as Schizophrenic. This will be the only time in history in which Socrates will be said to share anything with Beck.

P. S.: One would think the "conservatives" disagreeing with you would note your admiration for conservatives who thought being an intellectual was a good thing.

Reductio Ad Hitlerum sounds like something invented in South Park. Once the Nazi word is spoken reason leaves the building and all that's left is emotion.

I have mixed feelings about Beck. On one hand I'm relieved to see that Belgium is not the only country that has to deal with ultra right extremists. On the other hand it's sad that so many people can be convinced by one liners. Our extreme right wings are also great at using those. Just to give one: "Where's my retirement fund? In Mohammed's pocket!". One liners like those also remove all reason but sadly they are popular with a big part of the public.

This is taken out of context. Glenn Beck has never called Christians Nazis. If you want us to get the full picture, play the entire show. This is just liberal spin.

Oh, Roger:

I must reference JMK at 9:26 PM on the 14th's comment. For Heaven's sake, Roger -- JMK has correctly interpreted what Beck referred to.

Just because you Google "social justice" and it comes up with the definition that you want it to doesn't mean it is equivalent to the definition Beck was using. You of all people should recognize the difference between objective and subjective definitions.

The objective definition of social justice is one everybody can agree on, and we all know what it means.

The subjective definition? "Social justice" is the euphemism that the Left uses for its ideology -- one where big government is the solution for everything.

Beck was clearly saying that if your church uses the words social justice, then they are Left of center.

But as a Liberal, you choose to view Beck's words not in the subjective manner that he intends, but in the objective manner that you prefer. Therefore, you are speaking an entirely different language -- and condemning him for it.

Roger, please, for the Love of God -- enough with the political posts. Be satisfied to go down in history as a revered film critic. You are harming your own legacy and I can't stand it any longer.

"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also; and if anyone would sue you and take your coat, let him have your cloak as well; and if any one forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles." (attributed to Jesus in Matthew 5:38-41, Revised Standard Version)

"You shall not wrong or oppress a resident alien for you were aliens in the land of Egypt. You shall not abuse any widow or orphan. If you do abuse them, when they cry out to me, I will surely heed their cry" (Ex 22:21-23)

Matthew 5:3-10
"Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.
Blessed are the gentle, for they shall inherit the earth.
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.
Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."

Matthew 5:44-48
“But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."

James 3:18
"And the seed whose fruit is righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace."

Oh yeah. JUST like Hitler and Stalin.

Pray for Glenn Beck.According to Jesus, he really needs it.

Thank you, Roger.

So Glenn Beck is the Antichrist after all.

Thought so.

Glenn Beck appears as though he's moments from flying off the hinges and into a full blown nervous break down. His wildly dramatic performance is immensely unconvincing, and chilling. He needs to be broken by a good psychiatrist.

Watching U.S. news, from whichever side of the political spectrum, only serves to make me incredibly worried.

Hi Roger. Two initial thoughts:

1. I think that he pretty clearly said that Jesus wasn't a Nazi. He did not preach to achieve social justice through a government, was Beck's point.

2. Beck is not saying that church's should not be involved in social work. Just not social "justice".

Justice is the tricky part. How do you achieve justice without force? The force of government. The force of law.

Social work, absolutely. Social justice, how?

Does that help interpret Beck?

Dear Roger,

The most disturbing thing to me is not Mr. Beck, himself, nor is it his set of bizarre views. What disturbs me the most is that a rather large body of American citizens, apparently, hang on his every word. These people, apparently, see correctly down to the core of his message, which is based upon fear and loathing of The Other, whatever Other one prefers.

Regards,
Jeff

I can see how Glen Beck got here.

This seems to have come right out of the drawer marked "The accepted wisdom is wrong". This is fairly common among people I have met, particularly men, though perhaps that is just because it's men who have shared their views most fervently. Without any figures to back this up (of course) I am pretty sure it is also stock in trade for any extremist commentator. See other examples:

Aid isn't about helping people but about suppressing them.
If you get a sunburn you should stand under a hot shower (this one cost me about 30 excruciating minutes).
Everyone thinks the world is warming when it is in fact cooling.
If you don't wash your hair it will clean itself.
AIDS is really spread by antiretrovirals (this may be exclusive to South Africa).
Democracy makes people less free.
Universal healthcare will actually make people less healthy (confounded by the life expectancy in countries with universal healthcare vs those without, and that includes you USA)
Red wine is good for you/bad for you/good for you/bad... etc.
Every "alternative reading" of the Bible ever given since there has been an accepted wisdom about its teaching.

I am not saying the contention that "the accepted wisdom is wrong" is itself always wrong (though my examples above are all wrong, of course). What I am saying is that we find it attractive to believe that the accepted wisdom is wrong (and to be told so by extremist commentators) because if its true it means we know something most other people don't. That makes it a dangerous thing. Beware.

Glen Beck only went wrong here because he forgot to check his list of "Institutions Never to Criticise in the USA", at the top of which is "Christianity (in general, specific denominations may be criticised)". If he had constrained himself to Islam like all the other commentators there would be no fuss and no blog entry. I'm glad he did though because it must have blown a gasket in the minds of his listeners: "Glen Beck... prophet of our extreme, devoutly christian, conservative age... criticising Christianity... If he is right then... but if he is wrong about this then... DOES... NOT... COMPUTE"

...and not a lot of people know that.

Quote from Larry Niven, the great science fiction writer:
"There is no cause so right that one cannot find a fool following it."

Keep the faith, Roger!

Well said, as usual, Mr. Ebert.

It's still a relatively free country, so Mr. Beck is entitled to speak his mind. The amazing part, the disappointing part, as one of your Canadian readers suggested above, is that there are people who take seriously what he has to say.

The intellectual content of his viewpoint is laughable on its face. He's wrong, with a capital "W," on so many different levels that parody and/or satire shouldn't be necessary.

Beck is referring to social programs administered by the government, rather than social programs that are part of a Church's ministry to the poor.
Conservatives are not niave enough nor idealistic enough to assume that these programs are effective in reducing poverty. In fact we view them as nothing more that the taking of money from one citizen to buy the vote of another. Progressive have accused Conservative Americans as having all sorts of dastardly reasons for opposing Federal Health Care, but the reasons are simple: It will hurt the economy and reduce the quality of Health Care. The Feds will have too much control over how Doctors can operate their practices, too much control over who will recieve care, and ultimately the anyone who benefits from Federal Health care will do so at the expense of small business owners (read: employers) and ordinarty tax payers. If this is untrue, then why is the VA systam such a mess. Or the Postal system. Or how about Fedarally run schools - these people should not be controlling our access to health care, period.

I cannot understand how someone so sonorously stupid can be embraced by so many people; times like these, I lament our conservative abortion laws: where's a retroactive abortion when you need one?

I can't even begin to say how disappointed I am to see a man that did so much for my appreciation of film allow his emotions to drag him into the world of political pundit muck raking. I first became fearful when Mr. Ebert produced commentary during the election stating that he did not like Mr. McCain in part because he did not give Mr. Obama eye contact following a debate. Please Mr. Ebert. You have a gift for sharing your love of understanding of film through your writing. Leave these things to Sean Hannity and Keith Olbermann.

A Professor from Eastern College named Tony Campolo has said that "Social justice is love translated into social policy." I like that.

Glenn Beck is Rush Limbaugh, minus the intellectual rigor.

I would like to clarify something here. Have you ever watched a full program of the Glenn Beck show? If you have, you would know that Glenn has a certain way of presenting that does not shine through out of context video clips. Most of what he says is very tongue and cheek. He is in no way saying that the content of "social justice" is a bad thing. Actually, he regularly speaks of his devotion to God and how he follows Jesus Christ. He was merely saying that, in the past, dictators have used the phrase "social justice" to push radical agendas. Please take a closer look at what he says before you make out of context assumptions. Thanks

Glen Beck is not a crazy person. All of his speeches are written by corporate think-tanks. The corporations seek to overthrow democracy, religion, human rights - anything that stands in the way of their quest for increased profits at any cost. Beck is merely a corporate shill, doing the bidding of his plutocratic masters. Anyone writing him off as being crazy is not understanding how evil this man and his agenda truly are.

What is this I hear, Jesus did not call for government intervention? Jesus was a rugged individualist? Jesus said "Now, yea, go and spread the gospel: thine bootstraps one must bring upon himself." What is this Bible? I looked, here is what I found:

Psalm 107:40-42 (King James Version)
40He poureth contempt upon princes, and causeth them to wander in the wilderness, where there is no way.
41Yet setteth he the poor on high from affliction, and maketh him families like a flock.
42The righteous shall see it, and rejoice: and all iniquity shall stop her mouth.

Psalm 109:30-31 (KJV)
30I will greatly praise the LORD with my mouth; yea, I will praise him among the multitude.
31For he shall stand at the right hand of the poor, to save him from those that condemn his soul.

Psalm 112:9 (KJV)
9He hath dispersed, he hath given to the poor; his righteousness endureth for ever; his horn shall be exalted with honour.

Psalm 113:6-8 (KJV)
6Who humbleth himself to behold the things that are in heaven, and in the earth!
7He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth the needy out of the dunghill;
8That he may set him with princes, even with the princes of his people.

Psalm 140:11-13 (KJV)
11Let not an evil speaker be established in the earth: evil shall hunt the violent man to overthrow him.
12I know that the LORD will maintain the cause of the afflicted, and the right of the poor.
13Surely the righteous shall give thanks unto thy name: the upright shall dwell in thy presence.

Proverbs 10:14-16 (KJV)
14Wise men lay up knowledge: but the mouth of the foolish is near destruction.
15The rich man's wealth is his strong city: the destruction of the poor is their poverty.
16The labour of the righteous tendeth to life: the fruit of the wicked to sin.

Proverbs 14:20-22 (KJV)
20The poor is hated even of his own neighbour: but the rich hath many friends.
21He that despiseth his neighbour sinneth: but he that hath mercy on the poor, happy is he.
22Do they not err that devise evil? but mercy and truth shall be to them that devise good.

**Proverbs 14:31 (KJV)
31He that oppresseth the poor reproacheth his Maker: but he that honoureth him hath mercy on the poor. **

***** Matthew 19:20-22 (King James Version)
20The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet?
21Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.
22But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions. *****

Matthew 26:7-12 (KJV)
7There came unto him a woman having an alabaster box of very precious ointment, and poured it on his head, as he sat at meat.
8But when his disciples saw it, they had indignation, saying, To what purpose is this waste?
9For this ointment might have been sold for much, and given to the poor.
10When Jesus understood it, he said unto them, Why trouble ye the woman? for she hath wrought a good work upon me.
11For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always.
12For in that she hath poured this ointment on my body, she did it for my burial.

Mark 10:21 (King James Version)
21Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.

Mark 12:42-44 (KJV)
42And there came a certain poor widow, and she threw in two mites, which make a farthing.
43And he called unto him his disciples, and saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That this poor widow hath cast more in, than all they which have cast into the treasury:
44For all they did cast in of their abundance; but she of her want did cast in all that she had, even all her living.

Luke 4:18 (KJV)
18The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,

Luke 14:12-14 (KJV)
12Then said he also to him that bade him, When thou makest a dinner or a supper, call not thy friends, nor thy brethren, neither thy kinsmen, nor thy rich neighbours; lest they also bid thee again, and a recompence be made thee.
13But when thou makest a feast, call the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind:
14And thou shalt be blessed; for they cannot recompense thee: for thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just.

Luke 18:21-22 (KJV)
21And he said, All these have I kept from my youth up.
22Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.

2 Corinthians 9:8-10 (KJV)
8And God is able to make all grace abound toward you; that ye, always having all sufficiency in all things, may abound to every good work:
9(As it is written, He hath dispersed abroad; he hath given to the poor: his righteousness remaineth for ever.
10Now he that ministereth seed to the sower both minister bread for your food, and multiply your seed sown, and increase the fruits of your righteousness;)
----------------------
There went twenty minutes, I guess its back to writing poetry about killing God now.

Keep up the good fight Roger, as our imaginary buddy Jesus said: "It is better to have tried to teach the foolish and failed, than to have kept thine knowledge to himself." No, he didn't say that, but if he had existed he might have. In the end he would've been a pretty groovy guy.

"Social justice" is a term that is frequently abused by the left. It is a euphemism for any policy that is pushed by "progressives" and like most good euphemism, nobody can actually stand-up and say they are against "social justice" - after all, how can anyone be against justice?

Roger, this article exemplifies this. Glenn Beck is clearly referring to the euphemistic aspects of this term (with clear ties to left-wing policies), while you argue as if he's referring to the literal meaning (that he supports injustice). Come on!

//

Glenn Beck, on average, is an idiot though. I don't really respect much of what he says. It's all populist outrage with little intelligence.

Social and economic justice is fine and dandy IF we don't rely on the government to provide it for us. Most government run programs for the "betterment" of society do not work. I don't want more of them on the guise of "social justice."

Now, it's ok for churches to speak on this issue...IF they don't make it overtly political. I've gone to many where they have and the true message of Christianity is lost because they've fallen into the politics trap.

And anyway, no one speaks for the average American any more. Certainly no one in the media and definitely no one in government.

Mr Ebert,

I also find Mr. Beck's comments and ideology to be quite disturbing. A conservative friend of mine told me once that she went to Fox News because it was the only place that she felt she could get honest news from. That is frightening.

I told her that I got my news from NPR since they were brief and straightforward and did not clutter their news with needless opinions. She seemed to think that NPR was pretty "radical."

I think Barney Frank had a great quote at a recent town hall meeting on the subject of healthcare. You can probably youtube it but I will paraphrase. A woman in the crowd shouted out that he was a "Nazi," to which he replied. "Madam, did you just compare my party to the Nazis for trying to provide helthcare to people? Madam on what planet do you spend most of your time?"

The church fall short, glen beck falls short. How can Hitler be a Nazi when his troops have all left him alone?

Yet I will say this. The church will have my love before this man will have my love. For whether they have done bad or good, they have preserved the name, so that the name could return.

The word is living, living is the word, such is the weather, such is my flame.

Or perhaps someone is just trying to get his precious bodily fluids.

Glenn Beck would have really hated Thomas, Martha and Bruce Wayne.

Excellent post.

On a sort of funny/sad angle, I wonder if Beck the musician is suffering since he shares the same name as Beck the Glenner...

Can't wait until Randy reads this.

I really like what the English teacher wrote about the difference between Not Knowing and Ignorance.
I tell my students there is no shame in not knowing, too. The shame is pretending like you do when you don't. I have no problem asking people what a concept means when I don't yet know. For example, I didn't know who Father Coughlin was until I read about him in an earlier post by Roger Ebert.

I also liked the guy who recalled the incident in which John Lennon replied his band was more popular than Jesus. (Lennon was referring to the Church of England, by the way. And he was right in that context. Good thing for The Beatles Maureen Cleave of the Evening Standard didn't record most of what Lennon said in his interviews.)

As to Beck, I think he will fall on his sword. He's either a soulless, selfish manipulator like Jerry Springer, a lunatic, or he's really, really stupid. I think it's the first one.

I think you may be inadvertently absolving Beck of responsibility. It seems as though you're accusing Beck of that particularly banal evil with which Hannah Arendt had accused Eichmann. You imply he's a part of a culture that uses buzzwords to discredit those who hold opposing views. You're probably right. But he's not just that. He's not merely a follower. You also state that Beck has embraced unreason. Wouldn't that absolve him to some degree from the responsibility of what he says? Kant thought moral responsibility depended upon and is even co-extensive with rationality. I don't think he should get off the hook so easily.

Before I knew who Beck is and what others think of him, back at the beginning of the campaigning of the Democratic candidates in 2007, I remember reading the commentaries of several commentators on CNN. Beck was one commentator CNN listed on its website. His commentaries were actually the best. It's not that I agreed with him--I didn't--but that he took the most complex view of every issue and didn't seem satisfied with shallow answers. My point is that he's not stupid or irrational: he knows what he's doing. If we're going to point out that he's 'evil', I just want to add that it sure as hell isn't banal. He knows what he's saying and he's morally responsible for deliberately introducing confusion and misinformation. He's worse than Eichmann. That's my own reductio ad hitlerum.

Thanks, Roger. For the record, I am one of those preachers/ministers who proudly support social justice as a part of the Christian faith. And, perhaps surprisingly, I am not between churches! In fact, there are churches who *want* their ministers to speak out for social justice. I happen to serve one. And so, I've blogged about this twice during the past week.

First here, where I thank Glenn Beck for getting the issue of "social justice" out there:

http://wheneftalks2.blogspot.com/2010/03/thank-you-glenn-beck.html

And second, where I more directly confront him, following his non-sensical follow up comments:

http://wheneftalks2.blogspot.com/2010/03/heres-hoping-glenn-beck-learns-more.html

I think you will enjoy both.

Rev. Eric Folkerth

I wonder if Glenn Beck interned for Joe McCarthy?

"Sir,have you no shame"

My parents were Republicans but they believed that if you climbed a rung on the ladder of life you reached down and pulled another man up a rung.

I am an un-ashamed liberal and have worked for social justice issues since High Scool.I remember "If your not part of the solution,your part of the problem."

Mr.Beck is making the"John Birch Society" look liberal.

Glenn Beck says a lot of stupid things. I don't think for a second that Glenn Beck personally believes anything he says. It's a TV show, it's for "entertainment" purposes. So, when he says something totally incendiary and people want to raise an effigy of him, he wins. Any publicity is good publicity - do him a favor and don't take him seriously. Maybe then, people will stop watching his show and he'll finally be off the air.

Roger,

I agree with you that Glenn Beck is a nutjob, and even though I'm a conservative, I don't watch him, and am only aware of his ramblings when they wander so far off the reservation that third-parties like you feel compelled to comment on him.

That said, I think you've totally misinterpreted what the term "social justice" means.

In America, we like to think that justice is blind, that all people, rich and poor, black and white, men and women, are entitled to equal protection under the law (and indeed our symbolic personification of 'justice' is the blind-folded Lady Justice, whose verdicts are rendered strictly on the mertis of the case, without regard to any other factors).

As Supreme Court Justice John Roberts put it, when asked during his confirmation hearings if he would side with the little guy: "If the Constitution says that the little guy should win, the little guy's going to win in court before me. But if the Constitution says that the big guy should win, well, then the big guy's going to win, because my obligation is to the Constitution."

"Social justice", on the other hand, starts with the assumption that society is inherently unfair, due to systematic biases of race, sex, class, etc., and therefore the law should not be applied equally to all individuals, but rather, should be biased to favor the 'little guy' (i.e. the disenfranchised, the disadvantaged) in order to offset that imbalance. Its using the law as a means of social activism, to uplift one class of people over another out of some misguided concept of "fairness".

A perfect example of the concept of "social justice" was expressed by those who said that the Hurricane Katrina looters were entitled to steal large screen TVs because they were poor, and it wasn't fair that they couldn't afford one. If a celebrity wants to hold that opinion (and Celine Dion actually did...)that's their business, but I wouldn't want the government to adopt that kind of favoritism when applying the law, especially if I was the store-owner whose TVs were stolen.

Cheers.

Once upon a time, when Glenn Beck was on the radio, I kind of liked him. He occasionally talked about normal things and small things like the most recent episode of 24. He seemed fairly normal. Does anyone else have a similar recollection?

Now, he truly seems like a paranoid delusional. Big scary Nazi-monsters are lurking in the shadows, waiting for just the right moment to pounce on him. He acts as if we are constantly under attack from within and he, Glenn Beck, no one else, is the number one target. It's a growing conspiracy developed by the left-wingers to overthrow the government and plunge America into hedonistic financial despair.

I've made the argument before that Fox news commentators rarely back up their claims with strong evidence. They say things, then reinforce through repetition. To paraphrase one of my friends: "If they say it enough, for long enough and loud enough, people will believe them."

Beck's comments on "Social Justice" are so odd, it's really difficult to tell what line of reasoning may have led him to say them. Because, as Americans, we look up to the champions of social justice: Marin Luther, Martin Luther King, Gandhi, Mother Teresa to some extent. And Christian churches, if they are to follow the teachings of Jesus, would have to promote social justice.

Why Beck would alienate many Christians is also beyond me. Fundamentalists are the bread and butter of Republicans. Even though I already consider Beck crazy, his comments on the subject are most bizarre.

THANK you. I'm Mormon, work for BYU, and we just had Cardinal George visit and speak to the student body not two weeks ago. One of the topics touched on was social rights (if by that you mean inalienable rights, which I do).

Glen Beck is just an incendiary ass more concerned with a soundbyte than the political process. It's unbelievable how many people credit him, Hannity, and Palin with good intentions/common sense in view of their ranting, logically conflicting tirades and love affairs with themselves.

I'm a moderate, meaning I think liberally about some things and conservatively about others and am not as easily pigeonholed as the pundits would want me to be. I know lots of good people in both political parties and neither side seems well represented by their media counterparts.

Someone might ant to point out to Glenn Beck (and those who support him) that the Nazis also used another word that crops up from time to time in American political discourse: democracy. Should we then run from any institution that promotes the principle of democracy?

i found this link after reading this piece. i think you'd find humor in Beck's hypocrisy if you scroll down to the benjamin franklin shirt.

https://members.premiereinteractive.com/ows-img/glennbeck/pages/28585/41410.htm

I mostly manage to avoid the Beck world. Not as thoroughly as Tom Dark. Sometimes I suffer through short clips with Jon Stewart.

The best recipe I know for disaster:

Ignorance+fear+hysteria

Too much of all three in my beloved country. A populace without critical thinking skills faces risk without tools.

At some point Beck's ratings will start to fade and he will lose his microphone. In the meantime he is cashing in and probably going home and kicking a puppy.

The whole thing was a rather odd statement on many fronts. The Medieval Church, to one extent or another, acted, for the most part as Europe's social services agency. Though it did accrue a lot of money, it also spent some portion of it on helping the sick, the poor, orphans and other such despondent groups. To some degree I suspect that's why the Medieval princes tolerated its interferences, because it had taken over the role that prior to the fall of Rome had been the responsibility of the state; the "bread" in "bread and circuses" (the Roman government often had to distribute bread to stave off food riots, which were common enough in those days).

To say that church's shouldn't preach social justice is to deny nearly two thousand years of them doing just that, and in the past, as is now, often putting some effort, and coin, in practicing what they preach.

Beck, of course, is simply a cartoon, perhaps the unholy spawn of a consummated tryst between Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh? While I'm willing to admit that Rush may be somewhat sincere, Beck reminds considerably of Coulter, in both cases you feel like you're being had, that the satire is being played too close to the skin; it's just too obvious. On the Internet we'd call someone like Beck a troll. Unlike the Internet, where those being trolled can directly respond, television is still a one-way street; you can listen, but talking back does you know good. So I don't listen to them.

Oh the irony, when the right wingers decry the so-called "Social Darwinism" of the left, when all along it was Spencer's bizarre take on Darwin's theory of natural selection which was the bedrock philosophy of conservatism in the 19th and 20th centuries.

But, hey, you can't expect everyone to actually a read a history book or two once in a while, when simply making things up is so much easier on the little gray cells.

I put Glenn Beck in the "stupid is as stupid does" category. In America you can aspire to be anything you want, and aim as high as you'd like. Why anyone would choose to be a Rush Limbaugh clone of their own free will is beyond me.

It is so amusing to me how the far left keeps trying to take the attention off of all the things they are, or are not, doing in Washington, by putting negative attention on Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Hannity, and Fox news in general. Liberals are running scared of Fox news and these "Men of Fox news" because they are bringing to light what President Obama and his cronies are trying so hard to keep America in the dark about. As for the biblical views, the Bible is the same yesterday, as it is today, and as it will be tomorrow. Homosexuality is a sin, and just because a church decides they are enlightened now and teach it is ok, does not make it ok in God's eyes. I would not want to worship in a house of God that preaches under anything other than the King James Bible. I pray for the well-being of America as we are walking through these last days. God Bless.

There is no defending Glenn Beck. His mere existence makes me moderately ashamed to be a conservative. You cant have a real political philosophy if you are incapable of reason.

As a Christian (dirty papist though I may be) I am extremely offended by Beck's words. The idea of JUSTICE is so central to the Catholic faith and ideology. Justice goes beyond politics, it is the foundation of peace and freedom. There CANNOT be peace without justice. Injustice is the root of all conflict. (Well, ignorance too, but ignorance is usually what skews a persons perspective of justice). It is a core axiom of Catholicism "If you want Peace, work for Justice" It is our duty to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit the imprisoned, and shelter the homeless.

Do I believe local, state, and federal governments do as good a job as my local parishes? Not particularly. I tend to see local governments and courts waging an all out war on the poor. Our hypocritical "reform" systems force anyone with a history of jail time (which the rich avoid through hiring adroit lawyers) into second class citizenry. (Unless they can afford to hire another lawyer to expunge)We force many of the people who most need society's help and pity into our brutal and dehumanizing prison system. Our drug addicts, our vagrants, our prostitutes. The very class of people that made up Christs inner circle.

It's this "lack" of social justice I see that rings of fascism, mostly brought on by zealous elected officials, and ambitious young civil servants, and an arrogant, stiff-necked, and misanthropic policemen too concerned with being "tough on crime" to care about "social justice".

Social justice isn't about politics, it's about humanity. It's the core virtue of the christian religion, this peculiar obsession Christ had with uplifting the lowly, the outcast, the poor, and the weak. The words and philosophy of Christ, two millennia ago, remain socially progressive.

Whenever I look at the brand of Christian that makes up the bulk of the fundamental religious right, I don't see Christians. I see people that Christ would have despised. I see pharisees and Sadducee. I see people who wear their "righteousness" and faith like a badge, to feel superior to the very downtrodden Christ embraced. The parable of the good Samaritan could easily be set today. Just replace the Priest with Jerry Falwell, the Levite with Glenn Beck, and the Samaritan with a liberal atheist.

Until that party denounces all of these hateful right wing broadcasters I will never vote for a Republican for anything. There is no broadcaster on the right doing anything remotely as dangerous as Beck, Limbaugh and Hannity.

Anyone else waiting,for Randy's response? This is gonna be fun. Thank you Roger

Wow. Really?

As a european, I never really understood this whole conservative-liberal stuff you do, but this has left me completely in the dark.

What the hell does this guy want? Honest question. Here (in Holland) the political right is liberal (in the sense that they are pro people taking care of their own business and providing a healthy economy) and the left is socialist (in that they are pro help from the goverment for the people who need it and mostly the environment as well).

Honest question. What is this guy trying to do?

I wonder if Glen Beck has ever seen the film "The Great Debaters" There is a powerful scene where Melvin B. Tolson says to James L. Farmer Sr "Jesus was a radical"

Roger,

Lately I've begun to think that Glenn Beck is channeling "General Jack D. Ripper" from Dr Stragelove. How long before Beck starts worrying about our "precious bodily fluids"?

rogerebert.com looks sooooooo much better. Very nice. Now if we could just make the search quicker we'd be all set!

Howard Beale Lives!

Anyone else waiting,for Randy's responce? This is gonna be fun. Thank you Roger

I've never been able to understand the discongruity between the Sermon on the Mount and the capitalistic militarism of the Christian Right. That being said, I agree with Garry Wills and Andrew Sullivan that attempts to formulate a Christian Left are just as wrongheaded as the Christian Right. Jesus brought no political program, and consistently evaded attempts to place him in such things. He was friends with whores and lepers, also with Roman soldiers and tax collectors.

Hi Roger,

Yes, it's cute to lambast Beck (who does bring a lot of it on himself), but he's not too far off here. I work in academia, and both Social Justice and Economic Justice (or Distributive Justice, as it's often called) are umbrella words for pushing very left ideas. Beck's problem, and admittedly my own, is that these are political concepts being pushed as moral absolutes.

If you look into it, Roger, you will see that "Social Justice" is not some generic feel-good call to action, but quite specific in pushing a left/liberal political agenda. My problem is less its ideology, than in its attempt to pass itself off as an unassailable good. There is an utter closed-mindedness amongst many faculty that I work with, where they push these concepts with no room for debate or discourse. "Justice" is misused in a way that is postively Orwellian.

How you feel about Bush, the war on terror, Iraq, and whether or not we were lied to, is how I feel about "social justice". I have an inherent problem with people telling me that something isn't open to debate or watching the mob kill the messenger in order to kill the message. The problem with Beck's hyperbolic misbehavior is that when he makes a good point, it gets buried under the rubble of all the bridges he burns to make it. Say what you will about Beck and how he says it, but he isn't wrong about the Social Justice movement.

You're looking at this the wrong way, Roger.

God sent down Glenn Beck -- not His only son, but maybe the annoying second cousin no one in heaven likes to talk about -- to bring about world peace. The nuttier he gets, the better rationality looks to the rest of us. Who would have thought that liberals and the religious of all faiths and denominations would find common ground in this day and age?

Want to solve the crisis in the Middle East, just send Beck over there and let him talk for an hour; in no time, Israeli and Palestinian missiles will be aimed away from each other -- and at him.

Another high-profile mention of Beck is just what Beck (and Fox News) wants. He's an actor that will say anything to drum up attention and viewers. This post is like feeding the animals at the zoo...

The best weapon against crazy is apathy...just ignore the crazy.

The problem is that too many people think Glenn Beck is a news anchor and that he's actually reporting "truth news". He's on a network with "News" in the title, he discusses news, and he sometimes converses with real news anchors and political figures, so I could see why people would think this.

So you see the problem isn't that Glenn Beck is insane. There are lots of insane people in the world. The problem is how Glenn Beck is presented and how he portrays himself. Anyone remember "The Tom Green Show"? Would you take life-altering advice from Tom Green? Why not? Well, he was on MTV, his show aired around shows that were clearly not of the real news/life advice caliber, and he was not presented in a manner that would suggest he is a bringer of truth/advice. Now what if The Tom Green Show was aired on ABC, between the local and national nightly news programs, and Green conversed with other news anchors and political figures on his show. Would you take Green's advice on life-changing issues then? You'd probably still say "no way", and maybe you'd be right, but I bet not everyone would.

My fear is that you are wrong, Roger--that all people who hear Beck's words do not recognize crazy. One need only peruse the daily news online to repeatedly read irresponsible phrases coming from the mouths of prominent people. And check out the revised "history" curriculum in Texas. http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/texas-removes-thomas-jefferson-from-teaching-standard/19397481

Roger,
You are absolutely right. Glenn Beck is downright dangerous. I proudly supported John McCain in his race for president and I love Bill O'Reilly, but Beck is a different bird. Let's face it, he's just out for ratings.

Interesting piece Roger.I saw this in some notes from a trip I took to Europe and spent an evening in Nice having dinner with a group of people.
"Canadians are Polite,The British are Cold,The French are Rude,Germans are Humorless and Americans are Stupid."
The quotes from Beck and some of the comments here will do nothing to dispell the latter.I feel so sorry for the American people.I am however forever grateful that you have survived to help balance the meanspiritedness of your fellow countrymen.

Entertaining Glenn Beck's idiotic comments gives Beck more power to say these kinds of things. Ignore him, and his show will be canned. Don't, and you'll see his family continue the trend if they decide to get into journalism.

Heaven forbid.

"Jesus was a Nazi. So's your preacher"

So says Roger Ebert. I watched the show and Beck doesn't say or imply anything remotely close to that.

Every class at Boise State University that I've been in that championed "social justice" also championed eco-feminism, anti- capitalism, anti-imperialism, anti-US, and was/is pro-socialist, pro communist, pro-revolution.

So when anyone says that "social justice" has nothing to do with government control and its what Jesus really wants, is either lying or is blissfully ignorant of the history of "social justice."

ie)Che Guevarra, Daniel Ortega, champions of social justice alright.

I watch Glenn Beck a lot and yes, he's maddening. He's entertaining too but am I really falling for what spews out of his mouth? Not really. Glenn Beck is great theater but he's obviously just winging most of it.

Beck reminds me a lot of Joseph McCarthy, he has our attention right now but how long will it be before a Ed Murrow type reveals how much of a fraud he really is? My guess is it won't be long.

Maybe the real issue here is realizing this and other bozos know that the shortest route to the cover of TIME magazine and big bucks is by aiming their words at the ever growing polarized sectors of society. We should feel ashamed of living in a society where somebody like this thrives.

A very good tactic, of course, would be to ignore this cheap 'yellow journalist' (sorry, all the yellow journalists) completely, but may be the best would be what those basterds did - grab him and carve a good one on his narrow forehead. What a shameful excuse for a humanoid...

I'm an Evangelical Christian clergyman, very conservative, yet I hold firmly to the teachings of Jesus. I don't listen to Glenn Beck. Jesus clearly taught that his followers be concerned deeply with social justice, even more deeply concerned than they are with their own comfort. If a church actually disowned Social Justice (as Ebert sagely points out), then that church would disown the gospel of Christ.

I'd like to add my voice to those of my fellow Mormons who are embarrassed and disgusted by Mr. Beck. While I'm not a conservative by any stretch of the imagination (A Mormon Democrat?!?! They exist?!?! And a member of The Ebert Club, no less!) and have several reason to despise Becks falsehoods and warmongering, the most upsetting thing to me is that he hides behind OUR church. I am encouraged, however, by the reactions of outrage from LDS church leadership at Becks most recent actions. Roger - you are completely right, but Beck should not only look to the history of the Mormon church, but our vision of what the future will be after Christ's return: a big old pile of wonderful socialism! To sum up: Beck is a nut-job.

Strangely enough, Mr. Beck's production company is called Mercury Radio Arts. Something tells me the politically progressive Orson Welles would not be amused.

"I don't pray because I don't want to bore God." -- Orson Welles

Thank you Glenn Beck. He has finally proven to a wide audience that you are either a Christian, or your are a fan of extreme right wing media.

You can't be both.

You and I have been around long enough to know at least one or two Glenn Becks pop up every generation. He'll fade in time only to be replaced by another "morally superior" fool.

In the meantime, I was delighted to find these back-to-back gold nuggets among the comments to your excellent post:

First, Joshua found your "article and the author very offensive." Roughly three minutes later, DeAnne said, "I just love you Roger Ebert."

How perfect is that?

Roger, thought you would be interested in a conservative theologian's (conservative in theology, but perhaps not in politics) take on Beck's comments.

http://www.albertmohler.com/2010/03/15/glenn-beck-social-justice-and-the-limits-of-public-discourse/

Regarding Bob Steel's comment about Hitler, "He didn't go in and tell everyone he was going to kill the Jews..." You might want to check out Mein Kampf, wherein he plainly stated just that. Your comment, Mr. Steel, verges uncomfortably close to being an apologia.

Confiscation is not Charity. Did the biblical Jesus set up an all powerful earthly govt to confiscate all property and redistribute it as they saw fit?

Any attempt to guarantee positive 'rights' to goods and services, or equality of outcome requires government to have unlimited control over people and industry. If people have positive rights, how is government not being derelict if it does not guarantee them by any means necessary? If it must do that, how can there be any limits to its scope and power?

If your church is more more a partisan political organization than a religious one, whether Democrat or Republican, shouldn't it admit to that, and change it's name from XYZ Church to XYZ PAC and renounce it's tax free status, or be stripped of it?

Greetings in the name of our Lord and Savior!

You may be a little apprehensive at receiving this letter, but I assure you I am not Tom Dark. I am Barry Trololo, Jr., grandson of the late Major General Colonel President for Life M'beezu "Jimmy" Trololo, champion of Social Justice and vice chairman of the board of the Hang Em Hai Bank of Hong Kong.

I have inherited too much money from my grandfather and I am crazy and also am going to die soon. To ensure the safe passage of my eternal soul into heaven, and also to accord my grandfather's wishes of social justice, I am going to give my inheritance away. That is the sum of US five-hundred million dollars (US $500,000,000).

Please write to me c/o the Roger Ebert Club to receive your share. Applicants will be asked how they intend to further social justice with their share and will be paid accordingly. There will be a nominal processing fee of US four dollars and ninety nine cents ($4.99) for each entry.

Cash preferred. The Paypal machine is broken. Address all envelopes to Tom Dark. Make checks and money orders payable to Tom Dark, who has so far received the largest amount of money and is so busy pursuing social justice that he has not yet had time to even watch Glenn Beck's lips move on these clips Roger has provided.

May we meet in heaven if you send in the application fee,
Barry Trololo, Jr.
(Birth certificate available upon request)

As much as I like to try and argue against this nonsense, Beck is not the problem. He is just a symptom. Our 24 hour news channels have created a need for 24 hours worth of content. It should be no problem for a network to find so much programming that would be educational or informative, but who would watch it? Unless information entertains it is overlooked. These inflamatory comments drive ratings and reduce American politics to a type of entertainment which used to be reserved for professional athletics.

As you said in your letter to Rush Limbaugh, What is most offensive is that they know what they are doing. Despite the fact that the rhetoric suggests otherwise, I do not believe Glenn Beck feels passionately about anything more than ratings. The conflict is the show, with no hope for a resolution.

I'm no Glenn Beck fan, but I'm going to have to give him a GOLD STAR for this one.

Before you start your babbling, just look up Westboro Baptist Church, Jim Jones, The Pope, the history of how the Romans changed the bible only to suit their own conquering, dictatorship needs, and how poor women and children in some Morman communities suffer through polygamy (though the MAIN Morman church has *publicly* denounced and discontinued polygamy).

Women are more strictly held to the laws of religion than men. It always seems there's some sort of loophole for men.

Most importantly, look up Jerry Falwell and his Liberty University School of Law which he founded. He uses this little boot camp of aspiring lawyers and judges to wrangle from us every bit of our freedom such as 1st and 5th amendment rights as they can. After they succeed, our religious freedom will go next.

You don't believe me? Just keep doing nothing and you'll see.

I stand in awe of Beck's naked need for power and influence. A prime example of someone who will truly say anything to get those things. Will he now put his money where his mouth is and resign from his "social justice" practicing Mormon church?

Maybe I'm being cynical here, but is this possibly just some elaborate plan Beck concocted to get himself out of having to wake up on Sunday morning to go to church?

It wouldn't be the first time it's happened...remember when Homer Simpson tried to start his own religion?

Roger, with all due respect, using Prisonplanet as a reference for anything is like . . . well, I had an analogy but it didn't work. Let me just say that Prisonplanet is populated by conspirowhackos whose first thought in the morning is that the evil government made their alarm clock go off too early again and they degenerate from there. Their connection to reality is tenuous at best and using them as a source is just plain silly. They never fact check their articles, write strictly from the conspiracy mindset and if you don't agree with them you're automatically a government agent.

You can do better.

Yup, another progressive who, after reading Media Matters, claims absurdity from Beck's remarks.

Mr. Beck's use of the term social justice refers to using centralized authority, such as a government, to solve supposed problems like income inequality.

Any church that would actively support things like income redistribution or social engineering through a centralized authority is not in the mission of Jesus Christ and Christianity.

And saying he threw out the word socialist and nazi doesn't know their political theory. It goes like this. Along the line of progressives lie the communists/socialists and the Nazi/fascists. One group wants to control every aspect of your money and business, another wants to control every aspect of your personal life.

I think (as I'm sure others have stated) there's a bit of confusion between what Beck defines as social justice here, and what other people do. Beck is more referring to a way of achieving social justice, rather than social justice itself. He's simply referring to the process of achieving social justice by government control of wealth and its redistribution. He is against (and rightly so) the pursuit of social justice via the loss of economic and social freedoms.

Most everyone else, myself included, simply means, when referring to social justice, that we want a society that is fair and just when it comes to the social and economic situations of individuals. Sure, we can argue that people should be able to simply pull themselves up by their boot straps and work hard (and there IS something to be said about laziness). But is it really fair that one person is born with skills and talents that are deemed valuable by our current culture or society, while another person's are deemed less worthy-- or even worthless?

And while I understand Beck's fears when it comes to Government mandated social justice programs, I think he's employing too much of a slippery slope argument (i.e. "if we do this... it'll lead to this, this, this, and this). That's true, there are examples from the past where too much government control has allowed very evil men to exploit the people and seize too much control. However, that doesn't necessarily make it always true. Yes, there is a logical connection, but it's conditional, it's not absolute or inevitable, it's merely a possible outcome. Just because an evil person used such things in the past to gain too much power, doesn't mean it WILL happen again. There's still a fear that it might, but I would hope that American's at least know better not to let it happen, and that there are enough checks and balances present in the system to prevent it from occurring.

Further, I think he's misunderstood what people want when they advocate government mandated social and economic justice. I know for myself that I would never want the government to take all of my and other people's hard (or not so hard) earned money and redistribute it equally (with the off chance that these potentially evil men or women might take an extensive cut off the top for themselves). What I, and I suspect others, want is for the government to take the money we are already paying in taxes, and put it towards programs that support the poor, and provide better education and low cost housing etc, rather than throwing it away into things that only benefit the government itself or the wealthy or a prohibitively expensive war. And yes, achieving this may still require higher taxes (and I would agree that lower taxes are preferable... but why not trim the fat rather than the meat for once), and it would be better if people would simply submit their wealth freely rather than because they must, but America (I'm Canadian, by the way) is a democracy... so surely if the government is "forcing" people to give up their hard earned cash... it's because of a choice the people made... or not... I don't know...

One of the things I find confusing about the right-wing is how the terms "Socialist" (code for communist) and "Nazi" are used interchangably. Based upon your blog Glen Beck did so again. But the Nazis were Facists and vehement anti-communists and anti-socialists. They came to power on a platform of keeping the socialists out of power. So how can your church, Democrats, liberals and Obama, in particular, be pushing a Nazi-Socialist agenda? They are 2 mutually exclusive terms.

Apparently, I am a pinko nazi commie member of the educated liberal elite. I wouldn't label myself that way. I am in-between jobs Methodist in my twenties with mounting student loan debt(from a state college no less) just struggling to reach middle class. But since I don't agree with Glenn Beck, I am relegated to only one category. *Sigh* Well, I guess I will just sit back and wait to go to hell with most everyone else in this world, including my mother and grandmother, both whom tirelessly volunteer, work for social justice and attend church every Sunday. I guess you will be there too Roger. I look forward to us sharing an ice cold root beer with Satan and talking about movies :).

This is not a post to support Beck, but I would consider my self a conservative when it comes to one's own self responsibility. Answer me this Roger; your description of social justice:

I think it involves civil rights and liberties. It involves a trial in a fair legal system. It involves freedom of speech and the practice, or non-practice, of religion. It involves a living wage and decent working conditions.

But you use the following example of social justice:

Not for the first time, he was dead wrong, and the mountains of Utah rang with the thunder of outraged Mormon elders. I know now, and did not know before, that before statehood the Mormons in the Utah territory provided universal health care and care for the poor as a matter of their duty.

Where does health care fit into your description of social justice? Are you saying that it is a "right".

Do I think that it was good that the Mormons provide health care to the population, sure, absolutely. But it was their choice, and that is the beauty of our system. What I think Beck is trying to describe with social justice is the idea of taking from those that "have" and give it to those that don't, until we are all equal. Is that good policy for a religion, yes it very well could be, especially when you have faith in God. Is is a good policy for our government, I believe not, even more so when you are not required to have any faith or goodness to be a citizen of this country. Isn't that why we separate church and state? The problem that we are facing in our country is that "social justice" is the net that keeps citizens falling off the ladder of life. It used to be placed under the ladder. But now, the "net" provided by our government has been moved up the ladder to the 3rd or 4th rung. And now we have a bunch of citizens that are just fine staying on the 3rd rung, sitting in the net, and letting the rest of society take care of them. The solution is not to shorten the ladder, but to lower the net. What needs to be done, is to make a list of what we want to have and provide in this country. Rank the items on the list, count the tax dollars up, and go down the list until the money is used up. But the way we do it now, is to make the list, rank the items, and decide how many items to provide, regardless of the money. It is the available money that dictates the items on the list to be provided, not the list dictating how much money to take. I want to conclude by saying that I do think that a country of our means should help with the health care of our citizens, but until we all agree that it is not a "right", but a choice we all make together, arguments like these will never end. And on my list, health care is right behind national defense and a national road system to get around the country.

This is unfortunatly something that simply will not go away. I imagine Joseph McCarthy is smiling somewhere. A couple things always stand out to me in this debate, 1) that the ones on the "right" never seem to grasp that they are in fact the big bad government just like the ones on the "left" or like I am. It is made up of "our" money and "our" people that we vote in. It's not some individual entity. Somewhere "We The People" seems to have been set aside for selective rhetoric. "They" are against socialism type programs but for Medicare for example. What is the difference? Where in ones life do you lose the desire to want to help your fellow man? Where does the blur between Charity and Socialism start or even end?
2)It's all about money to the Beck's and the Hannity's and the O'Reilly's and the Olberman's and the Maddow's and all the others of the airwaves. Do you really believe it's not? I am not criticizing them for making money, I applaude it, but lets be honest, they don't do it for free anymore then i would or you would. ake our electted officials, do you honestly think they choose what you want over what a corporation donating thousands of dollars to them most of the time? True corporations create jobs and jobs create taxes, etc, etc, but who holds more sway do you think? I vote every election, sometimes my person or cause wins, sometimes not. If I don't like the way things are going I try to change it, I don't start calling people and groups names or try to label them in a negative light. When i was young i would argue to my parents that if my sister got something, i should get it.Period. Their response was that I had to come up with a much better reason then that. It made start to question and explore and research on my own why i wanted what I thought I wanted. I contribute to the candidate and cause I believe in and if it doesn't work out like I thought, I vote again.
There are very few easy answers. To believe your Gov is anything but a reflection of you is to not care enough about what goes on and try to determine for yourself what is true and what is not.

Ya know.. all of you sound the same. If someone on the left says something outlandish, the right circles them like hounds.. and if someone on the right says something outlandish, once again.. here come the hounds. It disgusts me that this is an ongoining practice.

If this is really what's got everyone's goat now.. people need to just give up! It's obvious what Beck's point was with those comments.. but everyone wants their 15 minutes of fame, so they hop on any bandwagon they can. He's not saying that you shouldn't help the poor and he's certainly not just telling all Christians to leave their churches. Politics is infecting everything now-a-days and if your church it pushing something political, like "social/economic justice" then by all means run for the hills! But these talking heads that come on the news and tell you that Glenn Beck is against the church helping w/ impoverished people and making the community better? PLEASE! You know, I know, everyone knows, that's not what he's talking about.

I enjoy Beck's program, granted he can sometimes be a bit of an alarmist, but who isn't? If someone sees something happening that they don't like.. they're going to freak out about it. Even Obama used this tactic to try to get into office, pass these ridiculous stimulus packages, and even to pass healthcare reform.. This is an everyday practice and just because someone who isn't like-minded does it, they're chastised.

Everyone just needs to take a step back from listening to everyone else's p.o.v and make one for themselves.

Roger -

This is a fascinating discussion and your readers, generally, have offered worthwhile opinions. Thank you for making your voice heard through your own health challenges. I can only imagine how tough it must be to lose your voice and I'm glad you are still able to write.

To me, the great insight and mystery of Christianity is the balancing of justice with mercy. We need Christ's mercy to overcome our fallen and sinful natures and thereby bridge the gap between imperfect man and a perfect God. The more we do to serve, share what we possess, and offer mercy to others -- the further we cross that bridge. Both the Bible and Book of Mormon make it clear that the purpose of the "church" or "religion" is to teach people about Christ and help them become more like Him.

I think the Apostle James said it best: "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world."

I believe individuals, families, and communities should take these responsibilities seriously. Is this the pursuit of "social justice?" I don't know.

Like Beck, I am skeptical of a federal bureaucracy's ability to act efficiently or even justly toward these goals. However, it's easy to lose sight of a reasoned argument when you call your opponents "Nazis" and "Commies."

Beck's style is no different than Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Keith Olbermann, Bill Maher, Jon Stewart, or even Howard Stern. Beck is a shock-jock. His message may have some merit, but he is an entertainer first. He can't speak reasonably if he wants the highest ratings. Many people watch him for the same reason they watch NASCAR: they want to see a crushing car wreck. A "wow." A laugh. A kick. A numbing drug. Mayhem. Beck gives them this every night.

If people spent 10% of the time they devote to shocking entertainment like Beck instead on the words of Christ in scriptures and in service to others, I'll bet we'd have a lot more justice and mercy in our world-- which is what Christianity is really all about.

It makes me very happy that there are still people like you out there that realize that guys like Beck and Limbaugh are not speaking for most of us on the "right".
While you and I probably disagree politically more then we agree, I'm pretty confident that we could have a civil discussion, and we could understand each otehr's point of view. That's not the case with these blowhards. I've often wondered how much of what Beck says he actually believes in, and how much of it is just to try and get some ratings.

Dear Mr. Ebert,

Please, for heaven's sake, stop embarrassing yourself by progressively revealing your regressive ignorance of politics. To borrow a phrase from you, your political analysis sucks. Stick to movie reviews.

Oh, wait, you're not very good at that, either...

http://j.mp/bPgKBO

That is priceless Roger.

For those who haven't vetured to that site, remember that Glenn Beck is Mormon.

A little thought exercise...

Should Glenn renounce his faith, in an effort to not be seen as too much of a hypocrite, to what faith would he turn? It would have to be a faith which does not countenance any form of "social justice."

Radical islam perhaps.

Allah Akbar, Glenn, Allah Akbar?

The only people who reject the idea that Christianity is not intimately associated with 'social justice' are those individuals who do not have an intimate relationship with the focal point of Christianity: our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

Jesus made His views clear when He preached the parable of the Good Samaritan which outlined our responsibilities to everyone, whether we know them or not. We are called to offer a helping hand to those in need; it is not a requirement that we be their neighbor or their brother or sister: the requirement be that there be a need. Christians have an obligation to help those in distress; just as the Lord did when He came across the woman who was about to be stoned.

Of course, it is far easier to sit back in our well appointed churches and enjoy the trappings of the wealth of the west, lavishing in the comforts provided by those who donate to the churches, or we can live our lives as Jesus called His disciples to live - bearing in mind that it is impossible to serve both God and mammon.

The problem with the comments of Glen Beck, aside from demonstrating that he knows less than nothing about true Christianity, is that he has revealed that his own agenda is even more despicable and warped than previously imagined. To 'warn' people about their churches preaching 'social justice' being code words for fascism and/or communism smacks of the McCarthyism of the House Un-American Activities Committee of the 1950's, of blacklists, and of the most recent activities of former Vice-President Dick Cheney's daughter as she attempted to vilify the defense attorneys from the Department of Justice who defended terrorist defendants.

To attack the social justice element of Christianity is to attack the heart of what Jesus stood for when He walked the earth. His entire ministry centred around healing those who had been disenfranchised from society because they were 'unclean' and, therefore, unable to participate in daily activities, and saving those who had been sentenced to die, but who were subsequently granted permanent stays of execution (remember that aforementioned women? think of that as a midnight call from the Governor).

When it comes right down to it, Jesus was in the social justice business: His life and ministry is about empowering individuals to become more than they can be on their own with His help. When we do things for others, when we help those who are unable to help themselves, we are allowing the love of the Lord to shine through our actions. As it is written: Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them (Mt. 7:20).

If the United States wants to claim that it is a 'Christian nation' it had better re-examine what our Lord considers to be the believers responsibility towards all who are in need. Universal health care, for example, doesn't sound like such a difficult thing when you ask 'what would Jesus do?' - go ahead - try it sometimes ... but be careful ... you may not like the answer.

Rev. P. Amsel, Ottawa, Canada

Of course Jesus didn't say "Hey, if somebody asks for your shirt, give your coat to the government and have the government give them a pair of slacks." Jesus didn't speak English! He spoke Aramaic, Hebrew, and possibly Greek -- whenever you read Jesus' words in English, you're reading what someone says Jesus said, and their translation may have as little to do with reality as Glenn Beck's interpretation.

Jesus might have said (assuming the Hebrew characters appear in this post correctly) "היי, אם מישהו שואל לחולצה שלך, נותן את המעיל שלך לממשלה ובעל הממשלה נותן להם זוג של מכנסיים ארוכים", though I'm relying on a free online translation of "Hey, if somebody asks for your shirt, give your coat to the government and have the government give them a pair of slacks" so I can't vouch for its accuracy.

In any case, it's not so far-fetched to assert that a phonetic English pronunciation of these Hebrew characters might sound something like "a wop bop a lu bop, a wop bam boom," is it?

When I first heard this, my reactions were somewhat in this order.

1) What?

2) Wait, WHAT?

3) Is he drunk?

4) Or crazy? He's got to be crazy.

5) Or crazy AND drunk.

6) Maybe this is some kind of extreme performance art? If so, that's dedication.

And perhaps most urgently:

7) What the hell is he going to do for next week's outing?

Seriously, where can he possibly go? He's left any possible logic far behind, forlorn and stranded on a dusty road. His very syntax seems to have abandoned him. The only thing I can come up with for his next outing is ritual disembowelment. Back when Phil Donohue was pioneering the talk show format, he was quoted as saying, "It's all about the next show. You could have Hitler, and all anybody says is 'who will you have on tomorrow?'" (speaking of Nazis...hah, worked it in!)

Watching Glenn Beck try to grasp asbstract concepts is like that old Far Side cartoon with all the dogs in lab coats trying to come up with formulas to achieve opposable thumbs and open the refrigerator door.

Beck's comments appeal to a segment of "Christianity" that believes the endgame for humanity is pre-determined and they use that mindset as an excuse to separate them from humanity, common cause, and helping each other. That mindset also dovetails with greediness. These are the people who sneer at "community organizing" and unload cynicism on anybody who wants to dedicate themselves to helping others in any way, shape, or form other than "preaching the gospel". They're not all Christians or even the majority, but unfortunately they succeed in turning alot of people off to their religion.

Honestly, what can you say about people who are disgusted with the concept of helping others? And what can you say when these same people claim to follow the teaching's of Christ? I wish people would stop claiming to base their entire lives on the teachings of men who have been dead for thousands of years, and just reach their own conclusions and opinions on life instead of laying their whacked out opinions at the feet of Jesus of Mohammed. Thinking for yourself is underrated.

Roger, thanks as always for not pulling your punches. This entry has so many quotable one-liners I don't even know where to start - but I think my favorite was: "Beck loads up from the shelves of the Discount Screwball Supermart." Truly the guy is crazy as is anyone who takes anything he says seriously. Anonymouspoetic, thanks for proving Roger, myself, and anyone else who actually understand English, correct. The fact that you are afraid to use your name, unlike the liberal posters here, speaks volumes.

Whenever Glenn Beck does something as batshit crazy as this latest thing, I'm always reminded of the great Onion News Network video: "Victim in fatal car accident tragically not Glenn Beck."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-faCh8BUEts

I find it curious the constant comparison between socialism and Marxism or Nazism or Communism. People do realize there are socialized countries that don't subscribe to any of those political ideologies, right? That the two are independent of one another? Right?

Take a look at our own country for a second. We have government subsidized medicine (medicare/medicaid, and various states with their own state coverage programs, including the SCI and the insurance co-op here in NM), energy (gas, coal, oil, etc. - get rid of those subsidies and see how much the free market makes you pay for your energy needs), military, roads, state colleges/universities, public schools, parks, libraries, 911 emergency response, police, fire department, food, etc. Not to mention all the medical, scientific and other research that our government provides for.

Socialism would also cover regulatory policies and agencies such as the FDA (I liked Obama's comment about how we could have much cheaper food if we eliminated the FDA, but then who would handle the recalls when there's yet another outbreak of Mad Cow disease?), stock market/finance regulations, automobiles, airlines, OSHA, workers' rights and protections, etc.

I would go so far as to suggest that the institute of government itself is socialistic, else why have a government at all if it's job isn't to benefit the majority of its citizens?

Ha ha Roger,
It looks as if you have made some of the right people angry. By the "right people" I don't mean all conservatives, of course. No, I mean fanatics who consider it blasphemy to point out the bad apples spoiling their bunch. Although I am a liberal, I concede that there are many conservatives whom I admire and would truly enjoy having dinner with. However, as a liberal I can point out several loose-wires on my side of the fence that I am ashamed to be associated with, so it's telling that conservatives can't do the same.

I think Glenn Beck is nuts. It doesn't matter what the issue is about, he just has to have a complete meltdown over whatever issue he is talking about. I consider myself a moderate, but there is way too much extremism in this country today. You either have to be a conservative or a liberal, nothing in between.

The most disturbing thing to me is not Mr. Beck, himself, nor is it his set of bizarre views. What disturbs me the most is that a rather large body of American citizens, apparently, hang on his every word. These people, apparently, see correctly down to the core of his message, which is based upon fear and loathing of The Other, whatever Other one prefers

I agree with this comment.

America needs to wake up and write to Fox News

Grass Roots Movement
‏
If you have not taken time to listen to RUSH LIMBAUGH, GLEN BECK, and SEAN HANNITY please do so. If you agree with the views and opinions expressed on these talk shows -continue listening and enjoy. BUT if you do not agree with the views and opinions expressed on these shows take time to write or call the companies advertising on them.

Let them know that you can not in good faith continue to support a company with your hard earned money in these tough economical times that support the views and opinions expressed on these shows

I noticed your website, which I've been visiting since it went up, has changed its colors from red to blue. I thought it sort of interesting that this change occurred after you posted your remarks about that vile Glen Beck fellow. Is this change from red to blue a political decision, or an aesthetic one?

Hope you're doing well. It's been a while.

For quite a while the Right has had a love/hate relationship with Jesus. They hate the hippy stuff he said, but still recognize him as spiritual leader and will ask what he would do when they're faced with problems.

I’ve noticed that Christianity is at a fork in the road. Right now there is a huge division between how Whites and Blacks perceive and practice Christianity.

White conservative Christianity is very rule driven and is anchored in the Old Testament. On the other hand, Black Christianity is anchored in the New Testament and is based on forgiveness and second chances.

The question must be asked, if the Religious Right loves the Old Testament so much, why don't they dump Jesus and simply become Jewish?

In thinking about that question it’s quite clear that Jesus offers one thing Judaism does not. Forgiveness? Nope. Eternal salvation? Nope.

Jesus offers judgment. I.e., an enforcer of Judaism’s vast rules.

To put it another way, Judaism isn’t rule driven enough. Sure the rules are great and all, but how come there’s never a cop around when you need someone to enforce those rules? Enter Jesus.

This can be seen in Matthew, the earliest chapter of the New Testament. Matthew was selling Christianity to Jews. He did that by arguing that Christianity was actually more Jewish than Judaism.

The Jesus in Matthew says he will impose even stricter versions of Mosaic law. For example, in 5.21 Jesus broadens “Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment” to,

“But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment.”

In 5.27 he broadens the rule against committing adultery to,

“anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”

In 5.31 he takes the Mosaic rule about divorce that says, “‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce” and broadens it to,

“But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.”

Basically, what Jesus was saying in Matthew was that the Jews were slacking off and he was the new Sheriff in town to make the rules tougher and ensure they were enforced. And anyone who fails to comply would spend an eternity in damnation.

Now that Jesus would be elected governor of Texas in a mother-fricken landslide! Not the hippy one liberal churches seem to love so much.

Roger:

At last,the Anti-Christ has revealed himself.

I would venture that nearly all of you writing were educated in the 'old' American system. Wait until the 10 year olds of today are exposed to the Glen Beck of tomorrow without the education you all seem to have. America is on a 20 year countdown to ruin.

Speaker of The House ..Quoted this. THIS is what is ment by SOCIAL JUSTICE. SO you that have more then others, wait till Nancy TAKES more of what you have to give it to others.

Adding a tax to your retirement is simply another way of saying to the American people, you're so darn stupid that we're going to keep doing this until we drain every cent from you. That's what the Speaker of the House is saying. Read below...

Nancy Pelosi wants a Windfall Tax on Retirement Income. In other words tax what you have made by investing toward your retirement. This woman is a nut case! You aren't going to believe this.

Madam speaker Nancy Pelosi wants to put a Windfall Tax on all stock market profits (including Retirement fund, 401K and Mutual Funds! Alas , it is true - all to help the 12 Million Illegal Immigrants and other unemployed Minorities!

This woman is frightening.

She quotes... 'We need to work toward the goal of equalizing income, (didn't Marx say something like this), in our country and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can invest.' ( I am not rich, are you)

When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied: 'We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long way to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as 'Americans'.' (Read that quote again and again and let it sink in. 'Lower your retirement, give it to others who have not worked as you have for it'.

GOOD LUCK AND GOD, PLEASE BLESS AMERICA

A friend at church was explaining to me the difference between compassion and social justice...

Compassion is when you see a man drowning in the river, you jump in and save him from drowning.

Social justice is asking the question, "so who is throwing all these people in the river?"

SOCIAL JUSTICE .. this is what is ment.
Beck did not mean to stop charity, if you really listen and pay attention you will get it. Also a real DEMOCRAT , John Kennedy warned against this type of SOCIAL JUSTICE.

You won't post this because this is not what you want to hear.

Adding a tax to your retirement is simply another way of saying to the American people, you're so darn stupid that we're going to keep doing this until we drain every cent from you. That's what the Speaker of the House is saying. Read below...

Nancy Pelosi wants a Windfall Tax on Retirement Income. In other words tax what you have made by investing toward your retirement. This woman is a nut case! You aren't going to believe this.

Madam speaker Nancy Pelosi wants to put a Windfall Tax on all stock market profits (including Retirement fund, 401K and Mutual Funds! Alas , it is true - all to help the 12 Million Illegal Immigrants and other unemployed Minorities!

This woman is frightening.

She quotes... 'We need to work toward the goal of equalizing income, (didn't Marx say something like this), in our country and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can invest.' ( I am not rich, are you)

When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied: 'We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long way to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as 'Americans'.' (Read that quote again and again and let it sink in. 'Lower your retirement, give it to others who have not worked as you have for it'.

Cut Beck some slack. He's not all there. That being the case, I find him much less repugnant than the fringe voices who actively and deliberate use a selective reading of the facts to mislead their audiences.

I know you (quite correctly) don't approve of Hannity and Rush, but I don't understand how you can stand Olbermann and Maddow. Even if you agree with their causes, what they're ALL doing is destroying the country. It all contributes to the division of the country into two incompatible points of view.

It started to get bad with Reagan, got worse with Clinton, got worse with Bush II, and has reached an ungovernable point with Obama. Bush Derangement Syndrome on the left has been replaced by Obama Derangement Syndrome on the right.

For our next president, we need an Eisenhower, someone so beyond reproach that he'll be able to cut through the partisan static. The McCain that ran in 2000 maybe could have been that person. Colin Powell before his UN speech definitely could have been that person. I can't think of anybody today with that kind of respect across the aisle.

Katherine: "The loonies are laughing all the way to the bank."

Roger, I sense no one's happier with this entry than Beck's handlers. Whether he's certifiable or not is irrelevant. More attention equates to more revenue. As I mentioned awhile back, just check out Team Beck's modus operandi. Back in April, 2009, The Business Insider wrote that these scumbags were on track to make over $18 million aggressively peddling their drivel variously through TV, radio, web, book, and live events. They even broke things down by the numbers.

businessinsider.com/the-empire-of-glenn-beck-tbd

Commenter Katherine quotes Forbes-the true numbers for 2009 were probably in excess of $23 million. The Business Insider simply didn't factor the impact of such innovative marketing gems as the Glenn Beck Studio Store. There you can buy such items as a Forrest (Lawn) green, Weapons of Mass Instruction T-shirt for roughly my 5 year's dues at Club Ebert - $22.00 + s/h:

"Limited Edition!- featuring the Glenn Beck LOGO and Weapon's of Mass Instruction LANGUAGE drawn and written in CHALK!"

Catchy,huh? Sold a bundle.

Papa Ebert was right about the logic of "a fair days wages for a fair day's work" in the real world of the non delusional. You gotta admit however that a foul day's work smartly peddling lunacy and lies in Glennbeckistan surely seems to pay better. I must admit that sometimes, in my weaker moments, catch myself wondering whether the truly fair, the truly balanced, the truly sane, are indeed destined to prevail? Surely it must be so.

@TheDanRazzaia Not only should he read Acts, but look at what Joseph Smith Jr. tried to do with the early Mormons which was the same communal living. It was only stopped due to people's inability to live it, not because it was a flawed principle.

I belong to the kind of church that Beck warns everyone to run away from: The United Methodist Church. In my church, "Social Justice" is indeed a code word. When we speak of social justice, we are secretly talking about radical ideas like full family rights for homosexuals, preservation of the dignity of the homeless and disabled, economic and reproductive autonomy for women throughout the world, and, yes, feeding and clothing the poor.

If one finds these concepts offensive, then they really may want to run away from my church. Or, they can have a seat and learn about why we are trying to act as Christ taught.

Want to read more about my scary church's social principles? Check it out: http://archives.umc.org/interior.asp?mid=1713

Mr. Ebert, there is no way on gods green earth that you believe the following to be true.

"What is social justice, anyway? I think it involves civil rights and liberties. It involves a trial in a fair legal system. It involves freedom of speech and the practice, or non-practice, of religion. It involves a living wage and decent working conditions."

If it was true, then you'd believe exactly what the tea baggers believe.

Just curious, why isn't universal health care part of your BS definition of social justice?

Dear Roger,

Bravo! Thanks for the thought-provoking piece.

I can't possibly believe anyone who is mentally sound could think like Glenn Beck. He seems talented, relatively intelligent, and high functioning. But his delusional opinions, poor emotional containment, and immature relational style are obviously not the signs of a healthy adult.

I work with mentally ill people, and I sometimes think about Beck in the context of mental health. Usually people with his extreme level of delusional and aggressive behavior aren't as polished and mentally sharp as he is. I would think, based on my experiences, that someone who behaves like him would look way more under-functioning. Beck, on the other hand, is well-groomed, articulate, and sharp.

Therefore I have a guess as to what is going on with him...

He doesn't actually believe what he says. He either creates his "opinions" or gets them from someone else. He is essentially lying to the public because it gives him a prosperous living. If this is the case, this is truly a rotten way to be in the world.

Well, now that I think about it, maybe he does believe what he says, is mentally ill, and not seeking treatment. Perhaps a personality disorder of some type with some paranoid features. People with personality disorders can present well. If this is the case, it is a shame that he is being exploited by Fox News.

Of course, I guess he could be a relatively mentally healthy person who happens to really believe what he says. I just find that very depressing and don't want to believe it.

So as you can tell I am pretty perplexed by him.

I think that as consumers we need to start a discourse about Glen, Hannity, Rush, etc. and ask exactly what it is that is driving their engines. I want to know whether or not I should be taking them at face value. If they are phony, they need to be exposed. If they are sick (such as Rush's drug addiction)then they need help.

Regardless, we need more civil and enlightened conservative voices out there. It is a great toxin in our culture.

Thanks again, Roger.
Kevin

It has always amused me that Glen Beck and Edward R. Murrow are from the same rural small town area of northwest Washington State. Murrow roles in his grave every time Beck opens his mouth. And for what it’s worth my take on Glen’s religion is that he has said publicly he became a Mormon so he could marry his wife, so his religion is a sex aid, and he decided there was a god after getting clean and sober and doing the AA thing, which makes god a replacement for drugs. Reason enough to be religious I guess but no excuse for being an idiot.

I don't think Satan would be willing to make a pact with Beck!

Satanism gets a bum rap: according to LaVey's Church, the "nine Satanic sins": stupidity, pretentiousness, solipsism, self-deceit, herd conformity, lack of perspective, forgetfulness of past orthodoxies, counterproductive pride, and lack of aesthetics. Thus even from a Satanic perspective, Beck's soul is about as bad as they come.

Glenn Beck is an entertainer. Nothing more. He says outrageous things to get attention. Getting attention is how he keeps his job. I have no idea why people take him seriously, because he doesn't appear to speak for anybody real.

If we all just ignore him, maybe he'll just take his toys and go home.

To take Glenn Beck's Nazi analogy a step further, does anyone else get a real Goebbels vibe from Beck's hysterical screaming and wailing? Perhaps he'll next be asking us if we want total war.

Of course, I'm not calling Beck a Nazi. I'm just asking questions.

I see the liberal echo chamber is in full voice in the comments. Beck - crazy! America - scary!

@ Chris Siebrasse on March 14, 2010 8:44 PM

Will this convince Beck's many fans? No. They don't read you.

Actually, we do. I watch Beck. I contribute regularly here.

Does that work in reverse? Do many of you here watch Beck in real time (vs. getting snips off of Media Matters)? Have you read Beck's "Common Sense"? Short answer - I'm guessing no.

I really think Glenn Beck needs to stop by his physician's office and fill the little bottle.

This guy is from Mount Vernon, WA, just north of where I live in Seattle. Last year, the city of Mount Vernon welcomed Glenn Beck and gave him a key to the city.

I think they're going to change the city locks after this.

If people in this country could agree on what justice is, it would be a great starting point for discussion. Unfortunately, it seems to be defined currently as "favoring my side," which doesn't leave much of anywhere to go.

At this point I don't pay much attention to media, pundits, or anything else political. (Roger: Please don't become a pundit.) I don't trust any of them.

Roger I'm not sure you'll see this, but it's an editor's comment more than a response to the post's content. In (mostly) the 4th paragraph you repeatedly use 'on' where you must have meant (and where Beck originally said) 'with'. The difference in meaning is very great, and repeated use of the word 'on' - as in 'down on', which means they dislike it - makes it mean the opposite of what you meant it to mean, which is 'down with', which means they like it.

This is nitpicky but I hope you make the few edits and restore sense to the paragraph.

As for the piece itself, how can one disagree with anything you've written?

Hi Rog,

Thanks for hosting another controversial (yet important) blog.

I will state one thing - and one thing only - before I take my leave...

I have led a difficult life. The details are not important. What is important is the conclusion I have arrived at. The conclusion is as follows:

Through indescribable trials and tribulations, God took love away from my life...

But then - when logic took the place of love - I came to the only possible logical conclusion...

LOVE is the only concept that - within a human framework - makes any kind of LOGICAL sense...

Take this for what you will.

Regards,
Ben

Beck is not saying that church's should not be involved in social work. Just not social "justice".

Justice is the tricky part. How do you achieve justice without force? The force of government. The force of law.

What is social 'work' but the work of repairing damage done by social injustice? I'm literally unable to conceive of anything else social work could possibly even be. You're making a distinction without a difference.

Your second paragraph I've quoted is fascinating, in that it kind of epitomizes the madness and lack of critical thought that must be necessary to enjoy Glenn Beck. Justice is obviously, whatever one's definition of it, an absolute good. It's inherently good, or you wouldn't call it justice. You'd call it something else, or put it in quotes, or make a point of saying it was someone else's notion of justice, but not yours. But if we agree on what is just, what on earth is wrong with government and law being set up to enforce justice? That's precisely what government and law exist to do.

The problem here is that you people have a different notion of what constitutes justice than I do, than most liberals (and many conservatives) do, and, incidentally, than Jesus did. You also have no respect for government or law, evidently, if you consider their using 'force' - which is what they do - so objectionable.

My suggestion to Beckians then is to go off into the wilderness somewhere and start a country with no government, no law, no 'force', and based entirely on whatever you all consider to actually be justice. You'll get what you want, we'll get what we want (fewer of you around), and everyone will be happy.

Roger,
Remember way back when you got to interview Bill Clinton (after Gene did) and you gave the highlights of the conversation? You had said Bill Clinton discussed the natural tendency of 'tribalism' and how tribalism was a source for many of mankind's conflicts.

Case in point, Glenn Beck. He's already a member of a rather small, extremist tribe (the Morman religion), so he's used to going off on his own. But he knows he'll never be Council of Twelve (or whoever runs that church), so the first thing he does is start demonizing all of the other religions, or non-religions, comparing them to the Ultimate Evil Tribe, the Nazis.

But damn it! The Nazis aren't evil enough, they also need to be pinko commie bastards! Your tribe isn't good enough, join my new tribe, the Tribe of Beck.

We'll sit around together and cry, then we'll lash out in hate, for two minutes, and only two minutes! Screaming at the horror of Jesus Christ, Karl Marx, Adolf Hitler and Jay Leno!

Then, after the visceral responses slowly dies, music will play, the joyous music of angels from Moroni, and we'll look at a picture of Glenn's teary-eyed smile and say together, 'We Love Glenn Beck.'

Or that's what I think is rolling around in that moron's mind...

Mr. Ebert, thank you for highlighting this particular non-sensical rant by Mr. Beck.

Mr. Beck seems to be under the (false) impression that all "social justice" is government sponsored. This is a terrible falsehood. There are all kinds of social programs that have nothing to do with government programs, and the fact that Mr. Beck would warn people against a large portion of them, found within religious organizations or otherwise, is truly awful.

Does he consider the non-government religious and secular organizations that speed toward relief efforts after earthquakes, floods, etc. - often at faster paces and better organization than FEMA - to be "social justice" in the vain of Nazism? This is ludicrous.

What's even more ludicrous is that he suggests that his own church, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, is abstaining from these acts of "social justice". The facts are completely the opposite! The LDS Church is always urgent to respond to disasters, quick t