Glenn Beck on The Huffington Post

Jon Stewart's Spends Half His Show Skewering Glenn Beck

2010-03-19T02:16:18Z

Jon Stewart gets a lot of material from Glenn Beck, but the Daily Show host went all-in on Thursday night with a whopping 15-minute parody of the Fox News host.

Words don't really do it justice, unless they're on a chalkboard, so just enjoy the video ...

INTRO:

FULL SEGMENT:

Iowa Congressman And Glenn Beck Agree: Sunday Health Care Vote Is 'An Affront To God'

2010-03-18T16:15:06Z

Glenn Beck and Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) expressed harmonized outrage on Beck's radio program Thursday about news that the House might vote on the health care reform package this Sunday. Voting on a Sunday, they said, was offensive and heretical.

"They intend to vote on the Sabbath, during Lent, to take away the liberty that we have right from God," King said.

"Faith has been perverted," Beck responded, then repeated. "They are going to vote for this damn thing on a Sunday, which is the Sabbath, during Lent."

Beck continued:

"Here is a group of people that have so perverted our faith and our hope and our charity, that is a -- this is an affront to God."

Though Beck conceded that he didn't believe that the Sunday vote was consciously chosen as a plot against God, he did find the timing apt.

"I think it's absolutely appropriate that these people are trying to put the nail in the coffin on our country on a Sunday -- something our founders would have never, ever, ever done. Out of respect for God."

As Think Progress points out, a Republican-controlled Senate convened on Palm Sunday in 2005 to pass a measure which granted a federal court the power to intervene in the religiously-charged Terri Schiavo case.

Beck himself recently irked various religious leaders when he told listeners earlier this month to "run as fast as you can" from churches and denominations that advocated "social or economic justice" because they were really pushing tenets of Communism and Nazism.

Listen to the interview:

Burns Strider: FOX News Funds Research and Smear Campaign Against American Pastor

2010-03-18T15:12:00Z

This past week, Glenn Beck publicly revealed that his staff is moving beyond simply twisting the news for ideological ends to now funding opposition research and internet attack campaigns with the stated purpose of destroying the personal credibility of pastors who dare to question statements made by FOX commentators.

By now, many people are probably familiar with Glenn Beck's statement from a couple of weeks ago that any church that talks about "social or economic justice" is not of Christ but is instead spreading Nazi or communist propaganda, and that Beck's listeners should leave those churches. (Funny, Beck's own Mormon faith uses those terms throughout its website.)

There was an immediate response from pastors around the country citing the overwhelming call for economic and social justice in Scripture ... and Rev. Peg Chemberlin, president of the National Council of Churches, provided a wonderful summary of the Scriptural case on the Huffington Post. But the pastor who quickly rose to the lead of the Catholic, mainline, and evangelical rebuke of Glenn Beck was Rev. Jim Wallis, President of Sojourners.

And so with no scriptural or theological arguments to fall back upon, Glenn Beck apparently decided that his only option is to try to destroy Rev. Wallis personally. Personal attacks aren't uncommon from partisan commentators, but what is especially troubling about this most recent development is that Glenn Beck isn't just planning to throw insults; he said that he has been using his FOX staff to research everything that Rev. Wallis has ever said or done and to dig up dirt on the people who work with the pastor.

I know Rev. Wallis both professionally and as a friend. I've watched him coach my son in Little League baseball and prayed with him for the strength and success of our great nation. Beck's attacks are contextually fictitious to the point of being imaginary. It's quite sad, actually. He's about to overcook my grits. But Rev. Wallis continues to take the high road, speaking out for the power and calling of social justice, refraining from personal attacks, and reminding us that Dr. King stood down injustice and promoted social justice by confronting, not attacking.

But that is all for another time. Why is FOX funding research to discredit an American minister?

Clearly Beck knows that he doesn't stand a chance of winning this debate about the proper application of Christian principles to the public square on Scriptural or theological grounds. And he clearly has no intention of following St. Paul's command, found in Ephesians, that Christians "not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with which you were sealed for the day of redemption. All bitterness, fury, anger, shouting, and reviling must be removed from you, along with all malice." No, sir. Beck is on a mission to discredit and destroy the pastor who dared to question him ... and he's using FOX staff and resources to do so.

FOX needs to be called to account for this. They need to explain how a news organization can possibly justify funding an opposition research effort that has the stated purpose of destroying the credibility of an American pastor?

Does FOX agree with Beck's statements and command that Catholics, Protestants, and Mormons leave their churches? Will FOX allow Beck to continue to use staff and FOX airtime to conduct his promised week-long campaign to discredit Rev. Wallis? Will they continue to let him use their resources to launch Twitter and blog posts attacking Rev. Wallis and attempting to discredit the power of social justice?

Marian Salzman: After the Fall

2010-03-18T14:03:50Z

All the news over the past few months about holding the trial of Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed in downtown Manhattan, then moving it away, has gotten me thinking about the many ways that Sept. 11 has become a marker. We divide life into "before" and "after," use the event as a way of judging the world and hold it up as a yardstick for understanding news ("another Sept. 11," "the next," "worse than"). When horrible attacks happen in Madrid or Mumbai, citizens there call it their Sept. 11. It's a shorthand that's all too easy to understand, as it refers not only to senseless and tragic killing but also to the way cultures are transformed--from open to closed, from peaceful to at war, from placid to on edge.

To use a literary metaphor, the attack was our Paradise Lost. We were kicked out of the Garden and lost so much innocence. Remember when we could travel with shoes on our feet and lotion in our carry-ons? When office towers in Times Square weren't routinely evacuated over security threats? When our government didn't have an excuse for wiretapping or waterboarding? Or for starting wars it had no business starting?

Along with the specific ways the tragedy has affected travel, security, civil liberties and foreign policy, it has had a pervasive effect on American confidence, both in the country's infallibility and in its role in the world. Ten years ago, as we were laughing at ourselves for having ever been worried about Y2K, we felt invulnerable and trusted that the U.S. of A. was the global center of gravity. Now we're afraid, for our personal safety and for our place in the world. Reporting from the World Economic Forum in Davos, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman wrote that forum participants were asking, "Is the 'Beijing Consensus' replacing the 'Washington Consensus?'" On a less lofty plane, people talk at dinner parties about whether they should be learning Mandarin. It's kind of a joke, but not really.

It could be argued that Sept. 11 is what kept Republicans in power in the 2004 election. In a deeply shaken nation, fearmongering became a bona fide political strategy. Tom Ridge revealed that he was pressured to elevate the terror alert level during Bush's re-election campaign. (Other Bush administration officials strongly denied this.) Clearly, Bush and Cheney used it to their advantage, and now Sarah Palin is singing that tune.

Fearmongering is still with us under the Obama administration. President Obama's lofty goal of closing Guantánamo quickly ran into fierce not-in-my-backyard opposition, as politicians argued that we couldn't have detainees on American soil. Back in the 1990s, Timothy McVeigh, who was arguably an American terrorist, got a fair trial. That was "before." Now, in the "after," we seem to be stuck with secret tribunals and extraordinary rendition--and with a growing chorus of questions about whether this is at all compatible with American values.

And if Sept. 11 kept the Republicans in the executive branch, then was it not a factor in the financial mess we're in now? If the Bush administration hadn't been in power, would we have had the bubble-inflating, regulation-trashing policies that led to the subprime mortgage crisis and Great Recession? It's a sad irony that what the terrorists didn't accomplish in 2001, the housing crisis did in 2008. It shook America's superpower status in ways that are harder to recover from. It replaced hubris with humility and swagger with suffering. And this time around, our president can't tell us to shop our way out of it.

Sept. 11 was supposed to be the end of the age of irony, as Graydon Carter so infamously said. We got over that one quickly and have Gawker and Perez Hilton to prove it. But in so many other ways, we haven't bounced back, and probably never will. "The terrorists have won" is often said as an ironic joke, but in some ways it's true: Our "after" is so unlike our "before."

The country has changed, and it has grown more fractious and divided than ever. (Friedman's central argument is that we're "making people nervous" because of what other countries see as our "political instability.") It's worth noting that one of our most polarizing public figures has spun Sept. 11 into a marketing slogan for his political agenda. Glenn Beck's populist 9.12 Project is officially based on 9 principles and 12 values--smaller government chief among them--but those numbers aren't a coincidence: The mission statement says the project is "designed to bring us all back to the place we were on September 12, 2001. The day after America was attacked...we were united as Americans, standing together to protect the greatest nation ever created."

I don't agree with Beck's views or believe his road map is the best way back, but I think a lot of us would like to return to something like the America we used to live in.

Roger Ailes To Fox News Staffers: No Trash-Talking Beck, 'Defend The Family'

2010-03-17T19:00:14Z

Fox News chief Roger Ailes visited the Washington bureau Wednesday and issued a stern message to its employees: do not trash-talk your Fox News colleagues.

TVNewser reports that Ailes delivered the message in light of Monday's Washington Post article, in which Howard Kurtz cited anonymous Fox News staffers in claiming that the network is "divided" over Beck, with "many journalists...worried about the prospect that Beck is becoming the face of the network." Staffers also claimed that Beck rehearses trademark crying segments, tears and all.

Kurtz pointed out in his article that Ailes is firmly in Beck's corner, a sentiment Ailes doubled-down on Wednesday afternoon.

"For the first time in our 14 years we've had people apparently shooting in the tent, from within the tent," TVNewser quotes Ailes as saying to the Washington bureau. "Glenn Beck does his show and that's his opinion. It's not the opinion of FOX News and he has a right to say it. We prefer people in the tent not dumping on other people in the tent."

According to TVNewser, Ailes — a former Republican operative and the architect of what has become the dominant player in cable news — added, "I was brought up to defend the family. If I couldn't defend the family I'd leave. I'd go to another family."

In January, MSNBC President Phil Griffin issued a similar message, alerting his network's talent and producers that he would not tolerate public in-fighting between network employees.

Andy Stern, SEIU President, Sends Glenn Beck A Gift, Thought About Calling

2010-03-17T18:38:36Z

SEIU President Andy Stern sent a gift to his top media critic, Glenn Beck, this past week. And was soundly slapped down for his entreaty.

The labor leader, who is routinely painted as a communist leaning stooge of the Obama White House on Beck's program, sent the conservative talk show host a note and some SEIU paraphernalia via mail this past week.

"I had listened to him on the radio discussing with a caller how Obama wore a purple tie the day of the health care speech and how they both were deciding that that really meant he was sending me a signal," Stern told the Huffington Post. "So I went out and looked for purple ties but because Glenn had endorsed purple ties there were none to be bought. So I sent him an SEIU nurse smock. A purple nurse smock with a note that said 'there's no more purple ties available, but I thought you would appreciate this. This is what our nurses wear, some of whom helped you when you were in the hospital. And by the way, they support health care.'"

"Have you heard back?"

"I haven't heard back," Stern replied.

"You have to call him on his red phone," the Huffington Post replied, referencing the line that Beck often begs the White House to ring.

"I almost called him," said Stern. "But I knew... everybody would [metaphorically] shoot me...I was like riding on a stretch of road for four hours, driving and going to a union meeting in Massachusetts. And I was listening to this conversation -- it's all you can hear in upstate New York -- so I was listening to Glenn Beck, and it's like I'm going to call him and tell him. At first I was curious what he could say when they said 'Andy Stern was on the phone.'"

Stern might have decided against placing a call into the show. But the gift surely was sent. And received. Beck got the package on Wednesday. But instead of taking it for what it was -- a humorous effort at sparking some semblance of communication between the two -- he compared it to a mafia don sending someone a dead fish. He even offered Stern a gift back: a T-Shirt that said: "I just wanted to overthrow the government in the 1960s and all I got was this lousy t-shirt."

"Andy Stern wrote me that nice little note about the nurses," Beck said on his Wednesday show. "Let me tell you something, I talked to many of the nurses that treated me in the last couple of years when I've been in and out of the hospital. They want reform and so do I. the system is broken. But a public option, and especially one that is coming in the cover of darkness and crammed into our throat, like the Trojan horse, but it's not really a Trojan horse because it is right there... is not really the reform America is looking for."

The health care bill being considered by Congress, of course, no longer includes a public option.

WATCH: Beck responds to Stern's gift

Josh Sugarmann: Glenn Beck: Object Lesson on Gun Suicide

2010-03-17T15:39:32Z

In January 2008, Glenn Beck cheered a state legislator who had introduced a bill to allow college students to carry concealed handguns on campus. Dismissing those who would oppose such a measure, Beck told his viewers, "That's what guns do. They save lives." Unless, of course, you're suicidal and there's a handgun available. Who says this? Uh, Glenn Beck.

It's not surprising that when Glenn Beck felt suicidal, the means he envisioned to end his life was a handgun. The success of a suicide attempt is dramatically influenced by the lethality of the means chosen. Firearms are by far the most lethal means, and handguns are the most common firearm used in suicide. The vast majority of people who kill themselves with a handgun aren't more suicidal--they just had the bad luck to have access to the most efficient suicide tool available. However, Beck is so confused by inconvenient facts that just three months after his "jarring" experience he can falsely offer the absolutist mantra that guns save lives. Period. The result? Glenn Beck as an object lesson on the link between gun availability and suicide as seen in this new VPC YouTube video.

Nato Green: New Conservative Group Decries Tea Partiers for Not Being Conservative Enough

2010-03-17T14:46:00Z

New Conservative Group Decries Tea Partiers for Not Being Conservative Enough
March 12, 2010, Placer, California --

The Home Front Protection Front (HFPF) held its founding conclave today at the Ebeneezer Rapture Holy Christ of Jesus Church. It was attended by thirty-five area residents, who reported feeling called to form a new political movement, disgusted with what they denounced as the "stench of liberal compromise" emanating from the Tea Party Movement, Glenn Beck, and the Republican Party.

From the dias, 53-year-old grocer Hephaestus Boont declared, "I've devoted my life to these clowns -- the John Birch Society, Ron Paul, Sarah Palin, the Tea Parties. But I've had it! Today's so-called conservatives are not conservative enough! We need a group that will be truly uncompromising in its convictions, in its right-wingltasticness."

One organizer, who asked not to be quoted by name for fear of the Jews in the NSA finding her house, said, "America is at stake and we will fight to the death to defend our way of life. We believe that the true measure of womanhood is to churn your own butter while giving birth. I voted for Sarah Palin, but I don't believe a woman's place is to kill a moose. We should leave that to the menfolk."

The bulk of the day's sessions were devoted to working through the minutiae of the movement's political program. Platform upon platform were ratified establishing principles of unity such as Indoor Plumbing is a Gay Conspiracy, Blacks Belong in the Zoo, Manifest Your Destiny, and Honey-Baked Ham is Great.

During a particularly heated debate, Alexander Kennebunkport explained, "I have a life-sized cardboard Congresswoman Michele Bachmann in my living room window to scare away predators. No, I don't have health insurance. When I go to work every day at the quarry, I think how much I hate the communists at the Federal Reserve. How can we ever live truly free if we're not back on the gold standard in a barter economy?"

The convocation adjourned early due to an inability to agree on whether to call themselves a movement or a party. Round the clock mediation is scheduled where the parties hope to break the impasse and move forward to debate whether their logo should be a confederate flag embedded inside a US flag, or Christ in the boat with George Washington crossing the Delaware.

Nato Green is a San Francisco-based stand-up comedian who performs with Laughter Against the Machine.

Karl Frisch: How to Annoy Glenn Beck in Five Minutes or Less

2010-03-16T17:45:42Z

Want to annoy Fox News' Glenn Beck in five minutes or less while simultaneously making sure your community gets its fair share of federal money? Fill out and return the 2010 U.S. Census questionnaire when it arrives in your mailbox.

Few other issues seem to whip media conservatives into a frenzy of misinformation and half-baked conspiracy theories like the decennial count of Americans.

You see, for the world of "conservative journalism," the census is a manifestation of everything they fear. Put yourself in their shoes: Obama's administration is hell-bent on imposing a socialist-fascist-communist-totalitarian-Marxist police state, and now he's sending us all mail! Even worse, Obama's thugs may show up at your door to get a more accurate count.

Why wait for the third installment of the Twilight franchise when you've got these scary bloodsuckers wanting to ... gulp ... count you?

To hear Beck tell it, the Census is just part of the "modern day slave state." Hardly surprising for a man who has called President Obama a "racist" with a "deep-seated hatred for white people" and claimed Obama's policies in general are driven by little more than "reparations" and a desire to "settle old racial scores."

For government-haters like Beck, attacks such as these are as calculated as they are mean-spirited. Why would he want his audience to think highly of the once-a-decade count if it has a direct result in determining just how federal money for schools, hospitals, job training centers, senior centers, emergency services and a host of public works projects are allocated? He doesn't believe the federal government should be involved in these programs in the first place.

Bemoaning the purported ills of the Census is just one more way Beck advances his mantra that all things government, especially Obama-government, are evil.

When the Commerce Department announced this month that the Census Bureau would "develop a Supplemental Poverty Measure that will use the best new data and methodologies to obtain an improved understanding of the economic well-being of American families and of how federal policies affect those living in poverty," Beck claimed the new measure would put him "on the poverty scale" since it would "compare" him to his wealthier neighbors.

Get that? To Beck, who has made as much as $23 million a year according to some reports, poverty and the government's attempts to assist the poor are deserving of mockery. It's all part of his larger goal of souring his audience on the very idea of the Census, and this time the poor are his piñata du jour.

Of course, if you present Beck with his own words on the Census (or any other issue for that matter), he's likely to demand you "stop listening to the Internet. There's a lot of garbage out on the Internet." In a sense he just may be right. If you were to Google "Beck" and "U.S. Census" you are bound to find video and audio clips of his rants on the subject that can only be described as, well, garbage

Beck's attacks on the census fit nicely into his larger worldview, one that he's been pushing more and more of late -- his broader disdain for social justice and the religious and political actors and institutions that champion the tradition of helping the least among us. He's called it "code language for Marxism" and encouraged his audience to "run, and don't listen to anyone who is telling you differently."

To Beck, the poor should trudge their difficult path alone, and no one -- not the church, not our political institutions, and certainly not the U.S. Census -- should be there to offer a helping hand.

This type of thinking was summed up well by the words of Comedy Central's Stephen Colbert when he quipped, "I believe in pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps. I believe it is possible -- I saw this guy do it once in Cirque du Soleil. It was magical."

I don't buy it, and neither should you.

So, like generations of Americans before me, I will be counted so my community receives the help it needs.

Knowing that Glenn Beck doesn't like the census? Well, that's just icing on the cake and all the motivation I need to complete the questionnaire and drop it in the mail just as soon as it arrives at my door.

Karl Frisch is a senior fellow at Media Matters for America, a progressive media watchdog and research and information center based in Washington, D.C. Frisch also contributes to County Fair, a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the Web as well as original commentary. You can follow him on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, or sign up to receive his columns by email.

Lincoln Mitchell: The Politics of Passing Health Care

2010-03-16T11:28:58Z

The meaning of the approaching final vote on health care has changed since the halcyon early days of the Obama presidency when progressives experienced a hope and optimism unheard of in recent decades. The final vote on health care was supposed to be a cause for celebration as a progressive goal going back at least half a century was finally to be realized. It was supposed to be the most significant piece of progressive domestic legislation in many of our lifetimes. All of that changed late last year when Obama compromised away the public option and the expanded Medicare proposal. The last minute efforts to reinsert the public option felt more like death spasms for that possibility, rather than a serious chance of reinvigorating the bill.

Now passing the health reform bill will be a moment to breathe a sigh of relief, not so much due to the highly questionable content of the bill itself, but because the nasty and seemingly never-ending debate will have finally ended and because the Obama administration will have survived the process, albeit barely.

It is too early to tell how this bill will affect the more than 45 million uninsured Americans. It is certainly possible that at least some of these people will move from being uninsured to being uninsured and in violation of the law because they cannot buy insurance. The bill may, in fact, make slight improvements for many people but it is unlikely that it will radically reform health care, solve the pressing problem of tens of millions of uninsured Americans or weaken the grip of the insurance companies on much of the health care sector.

Nonetheless, passing the bill remains important and will be a significant moment in the Obama presidency, but because of politics, not health care. The bill is deeply flawed; and those arguing that it can be reformed after it passes are letting hope triumph over evidence, but passing the bill is still necessary. If the bill fails, the Obama presidency will be that much closer to being unsalvageable. Unfortunately, passage of the bill will not be a major victory for the Obama presidency, but it will allow Obama to live to fight another day. That is reason enough, and perhaps the only real reason, why passage of this bill is important.

Should the bill pass in the next week or two, it will not be a time for progressives to celebrate, but it will also not be a victory for Glenn Beck, the Tea Partiers, Rush Limbaugh and other right-wing opponents of President Obama. Passing the bill will demonstrate that the Democrats can get something done in Washington, that given a majority in both houses of congress and control of the White House, the Democrats can push through some legislation. Simply demonstrating this is important because the evidence from the late 1970s, early 1990s and, yes, first fourteen months of the Obama administration suggests the Democratic Party is not able to pass legislation when they are in control in Washington, or to put it more succinctly, govern.

In the unlikely event the health care bill fails, the consequences for the administration, and for what is left of progressive hopes in Obama, will be grave. The President has now twice -- once at the end of last year, and once in the last ten days or so -- more or less guaranteed the passage of this bill and made it his top domestic priority. By raising the stakes in this way, Obama has put unique pressure on progressive Democrats who have expressed hesitancy about supporting the bill because it does not include a public option or anything like it. These people are well positioned to understand that failing to pass the bill again will confirm the views of Obama's detractors who see Obama's presidency as becoming akin to Jimmy Carter's without the cardigans or Bill Clinton's without the peace and prosperity, and would almost certainly lead to greater Republican victories in November. It would also provide more fodder for those who question the raison d'etre of the Democratic Party altogether.

Sadly, the potential damage done to the administration, the Democratic Party and progressive politics more broadly by the failure of this bill are not matched by a significant upside for passing the bill. Passing this bill will not lead to major progressive victories in November; nor will it spur this administration on to more victories. However, it will keep the door open for that possibility. At this time, keeping that door open may be the best for which we can hope.

Robert J. Elisberg: The Glenn Beck Massacre

2010-03-16T10:44:21Z

Last Tuesday, Rep. Eric Massa (D-Mars) destroyed himself on Glenn Beck's broadcast. For the past week, the media has had a continuous field day with Mr. Massa. From claiming a dire White House conspiracy to "It's all my snorkeling fault" mere days later, he crashed faster than a Toyota Corolla.

Ten minutes into his interview with Rep. Massa, you can see on Mr. Beck's distraught face that he's got nothing. Okay, in fairness, 30 seconds into most Glenn Beck interviews, he's got nothing. But on this, he knew he had 50 more barren minutes to fill, and proceeded to implode, trying to pull empty air from his butt. It was the biggest meltdown on live TV since Geraldo Rivera found Al Capone's vault empty.

Eric Massa was so disastrous that it brought compassion from the most unlikely places. "I never thought anything would make me feel sympathetic towards Glenn Beck," Arianna Huffington said on CNN. "But having to interview Eric Massa for an entire hour made me really feel for him."

No doubt she was laughing inside. But outside, even a warm, gentle chide is unwarranted, because it put the focus on Eric Massa. And the real problem isn't Eric Massa. It's not whether Eric Massa is a goofball. It's not, as many people later questioned, whether Eric Massa is gay.

The real problem is Glenn Beck.

Glenn Beck didn't have to interview Eric Massa. He chose to, actively. In fact, after Rush Limbaugh trumpeted Massa the day before, even he tried to warn Beck off the interview the next day when more news made clear that Rep. Massa was a train wreck. Anyone with a lick of common sense could see that Eric Massa was looking pathetic. Yet still, Glenn Beck went ahead.

And importantly, Glenn Beck went ahead because he was trying to demonize the White House. He wasn't playing the Journalist who thought he had an incredible scoop on his hands. Glenn Beck is to journalism what Cheese Whiz is to haute cuisine. Glenn Beck was doing everything he could to discredit the Obama Administration and smear the Democratic Party with scandal.

This is no hyperbole. Lost in the ridicule of Eric Massa are Glenn Beck's own words promoting the interview:

"The Democratic Party is out to destroy this man," he intoned in his most ominous voice. "The future of the republic is at stake," he shook. "This is a moment that will change the course of the nation, possibly."

That's what Glenn Beck was out to prove. For an hour. Never mind that he had nothing. "Nothing" is the soul of Glenn Beck's relationship to reality and the truth. For an hour, with nothing, he was unrelenting. Begging for dirt -- literally, talking about shoveling dirt. For a full hour. Trying and pleading to the bitter end to extract corruption, some corruption, any corruption he could smear the president with.

For an hour.

And for an hour he had zero. For an hour, he had a goofball joining him at the table. For an hour, this man who Glenn Beck put on to discredit President Obama, the Administration and the Democratic Party had nothing more than suggesting sailors tickled each other in the Navy.

Glenn Beck had n-o-t-h-i-n-g. And yet he dared recklessly to insist "The Democratic Party is out to destroy this man." And "The future of the republic is at stake." And "This is a moment that will change the course of the nation, possibly."

And he had nothing. And didn't care. Didn't try to find out first. Because finding out the facts and reality first don't matter to him. Just terrifying his audience, slamming others and dividing America is all that matters. That, and selling gold for his sponsor.

This should not have come across as a surprise to anyone. After all, this is the man who claimed that 50,000 people at a Washington rally was 1.7 million, based solely on information from "the University of I Don't Remember."

Last Tuesday was a one-hour version of who Glenn Beck is. His thoughtless, mean-hearted supporters will defend him. But last Tuesday, he and they were laid bare for what they are. And their defense is as empty as Eric Massa.

At the end of his broadcast, Glenn Beck almost welled up (again) to offer his regrets.

"I think I've wasted your time," he whimpered. "I think this is the first time I have wasted an hour of your time. And I apologize for that."

Actually, there are few minutes of Glenn Beck when he hasn't wasted our time. Empty, cruel lying is always a waste of time. But oddly enough - and here is the irony - this was probably the first hour when Glenn Beck didn't waste our time. Because this was the first time when Glenn Beck exposed himself openly for what he is. This is the first time the Emperor Glenn Beck showed even his supporters that the demagogue had no clothes.

The disastrous hour Glenn Beck spent with Eric Massa was not a disaster for Mr. Massa. He was clearly a joke before that. The disaster was all Glenn Beck's. A dangerous, divisive, empty, cruel, out-of-control puff of air.

And at last, as Joseph Welch famously scolded a finally-disgraced Joseph McCarthy 60 years ago, we all see clearly that Glenn Beck has no shame.

Flush with holier-than-though swagger, you almost half-expect him to tell people to leave the Catholic Church and join instead the Church of Glenn Beck.

Oh, yeah, right, he just did. Gee, go figure.

Aladdin Elaasar: Will Smith, The Last Pharaoh

2010-03-15T17:52:47Z

Will Smith is a funny comedian and action hero, his latest project, The Last Pharaoh, is a great mega action movie expected by millions of fans around the globe. The film tells the story of Taharqa the Nubian king. The story is about Ethiopians battling Assyrians by screenwriter Chris Hauty, directed by Carl Franklin and starred and produced by Will Smith's Overbrook Entertainment.

There is a plenty of historical material and true stories from Egypt, ancient and modern. Egyptian history is so full of drama, action and adventure more than what screenwriters can imagine. Take for example the true story of the Last Pharaoh of Egypt, Hosny Mubarak. If you want to know the true story of the Last Pharaoh of Egypt, you'd better pay attention to what's going on in Egypt these days and in the near future. That will make a lot of headlines.

Many people consider that the Pharaonic era in Egyptian history had ended thousands of years ago. But to the Egyptians, the memories of their pharaohs are still fresh. The word pharaoh is still used in Egyptian daily language, Arabic, as a detonation of tyranny, arrogance, haughtiness and unjust power.

The 83 years old Mubarak of Egypt has been in power since 1981 with no vice-president. Concerns about Mubarak's health draws much greater attention to the question of who will next rule the nation of Egypt?

Will Africa be the last great stand in this Long War against al-Qaida? Now this fight heads south... and yes, the Long War will be even uglier there.

If that scenario was not frightening enough, there are few others that are even scarier. A scenario where an ambitious general would stage another coup, turning Egypt into a God -- knows-what regime and allying himself with Muslim radical groups? Would Egypt witness another Khomeini-style revolution with the usual anti- American? Taking into consideration the recent rise of Hamas and Ikhwan, this is not a farfetched scenario.

Considering the alarming rising poverty figures in Egypt, could Egypt be overrun by an angry and hungry mob, French-style revolution?

Whatever the scenario, spillover from what could occur in Egypt in the near future would impact the sum of Arab, Muslim and Mid Eastern nations. Western capitals are keeping tabs on the situation fearing a domino effect in Egypt.

This is why whatever unfolds on the Egyptian landscape; will be a story of monumental proportions. Will Smith: Watch out for the Last Pharaoh of Egypt.

Aladdin Elaasar is author of The Last Pharaoh: Mubarak and the Uncertain Future of Egyp t in the Obama Age.

Stephen Herrington: Who Is John Galt? No, Really.

2010-03-15T17:51:07Z

You have heard it from Tea Party Patriots and Libertarians for a while now: a reprise of the old rhetorical bumper sticker query, "Who is John Galt?" Don't remember him? He was the protagonist of Ayn Rand's magnum opus, Atlas Shrugged, written in 1957.

John Galt was Rand's archetypal "philosopher hero" and Atlas Shrugged devotes pages and pages to Galt's (and Rand's) philosophy of "rational self-interest."

Rand, an atheist, conceived of "rational self-interest" as the natural state of man, ordering his relationships and actions more so than religion. (It may even have been that Rand constructed her argument to supplant religion, as the tenet of rational self-interest closely parallels and is consistent with Jesus' "Golden Rule.") Rand implies that no one, no rational person at least, would do unprovoked harm to others because it would not be in one's rational self-interest to do so. Fair enough, even makes sense.

It is when Rand and her hero Galt venture into politics that things get a little flimsy. Rand was born into a Russian Jewish middle class family that fled Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution. Her firsthand experience with the excesses of authoritarian communism (her family's business was seized by the state) colored her worldview. Rand could not separate her childhood experiences from her intellectual work. Things might have turned out differently for us all had she been able to.

Rand correctly observed that authoritarian communism stifles creativity at some level, as it possesses the power to confiscate personal work product. She generalized this observation to all forms of socialism. She speculated that socialism would undermine the development of a perfected intellect and life through subjugation to an inferior common good. What she deemed the seduction of charity is little more than an indictment of the core of socialism. She advocated for laissez-faire capitalism as the only socioeconomic system that would allow the freedoms necessary for the full development of her idealized rational man. As for the common good, she proposes that we trust that it occurs as an unregulated property of mankind following the law of rational self-interest.

Ayn Rand was a drawing room capitalist, a theorist on a subject with which she had no practical experience (other than with its opposite). She could not understand, or ignored, the fact that the stifling of creativity and the seizure of work product is not the exclusive prerogative of communism. It happens every day in capitalism. Corporate monopolies act to break the will of competition. Corporations stifle creativity with things like planned obsolescence and the withholding of known solutions from markets in all fields. Corporations buy legislation, passing the cost on to consumers, and stack the legal deck against the public interest with impunity. Corrupt bureaucracy can be found at Wal Mart as easily as the Politburo.

To conclude that laissez-faire capitalism is any less onerous to the individual than is communism is simply not to have given the question much thought beyond one's own traumatized prejudice. Laissez-faire capitalism breeds mega-corporations that are immune to public influence. Corporations now rival the power of government and are in the process of owning it outright. While the forces of communism and the extremes of capitalism have lit off global warfare for a century, the moderating factor, the victor so far, has been in the province of Progressive thought. Communism suppresses deviation from the will of the state. Capitalism suppresses deviation from the will of the corporation. Progressivism is only an oppressor to those that would oppress. The Constitution was written by Progressives of their era.

No socioeconomic system is inherently evil. Most people are not inherently evil either. But there are enough evil people to chronically endanger the world under any socioeconomic system.

So, where Rand was right (piercing through her own faults of prejudice against socialism and charity) was in identifying an ideal to which the best of us should aspire. She, like Jesus, sought to provide a message to the betterment of man. Of course the difference is that Jesus' teaching was an admonition; it does not presume anyone's ability to consistently behave in accordance with it, just to try. Rand's worldview does the give credence to the weaknesses in the minds of individuals, nor does it recognize that short-sighted greed often invalidates her philosophy. She posits rational self-interest as a constant in humanity instead of what it should have been, an ideal and an admonition. We have spent thirty years proving that it is not a property of man to conduct himself with rational self-interest. Greed is not rational, but the greedy have exploited Rand to justify their greed.

Greed is not rational self-interest. Rational self-interest is not a force of markets or the nature of man. It is a hope and an ideal through which Rand attempted to put her childhood demons to rest. Until we are all able to live by the Golden Rule, it seems unlikely that rational self-interest (much less the self-regulation of businesses) will ever be something on which to bet a nation, as we have done of late.

Tea Party persons and Libertarians need to reconcile with this fact. But it will require far more thought than they have customarily been willing to spare. John Galt is a fiction, even to those of us who have been what he was fictionalized to be.

Aladdin Elaasar: Risky Business in the Arab World

2010-03-15T17:06:18Z

Why dissenters in Arab and Muslim countries are hushed?
By Aladdin Elaasar*

From the death sentence fatwa against Salman Rushdie to the ostracism of Nonie Darwish, Wafa Sultan, Irshad Manji, and many other Muslim writers; why is it hard for Arab and Muslim writers, professors, intellectuals and average persons to speak out against suicide bombers, Jihadists, anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism in their countries?

Ali Salem, a brilliant Egyptian playwright has been boycotted by his own fellow Egyptian and Arab writers, producers, and media! Why would such a well-known and talented writer have to pay the price after bringing laughs to millions of Arabs through his witty, whimsical and satirical plays? His sin was that he favored peace with Israel and wrote a book about it. That seems to be the plight of Arab peace activists.

What happened to the happy old days when Jews in Arab countries were the elite, le crème de la crème, movie stars, singers, writers, cabinet ministers, in what was dubbed as la belle epoch? Why it was replaced by so much hatred, intolerance, ugliness and bigotry against the Jews, the State of Israel, and anger directed towards America?

Since the partition of Palestine, many Arab regimes have taken a hard-line against the new born State of Israel. Arab state media and propaganda machines have found it convenient to recycle crude anti-Semitic images for their public. The Palestinian cause has proven to be a very useful and convenient tool for the post-colonial regimes that followed. Till today, after decades of brainwash for Arab and Muslim masses, the Palestinian cause is a hot button for many Arab leaders marshalling their masses to burn American and Israeli flags.

The Palestinian cause has been effectively used by failing, dictatorial and oppressive Arab regimes to point the finger at an outside enemy to deflect their public's attention from the nagging domestic issues such as: failing economies, grave human rights abuses, high levels of corruption, squandering half of national income on buying weapons (to crush their masses); that has taken its toll on education, health care, and a deteriorating infra-structure.

Conspiracy theories are rampant in the Middle East. Many people are made to believe that America and Israel are running the whole world and are behind every problem in their countries from defective chewing gum to Farouk Hosny's failure to enter the UNESCO.

The late President Nasser of Egypt imported former Nazi propaganda experts from the Third Reich and spread anti-Semitism through the whole region. Some Arab leaders were cheering for Hitler hoping that he was going to liberate them from the British. The former Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al-Husseini put himself at the service of Hitler and was sought as a war criminal after the end of WWII. Even Sadat, the peacemaker and winner of the Noble Peace Prize, was once arrested for being a member of a Nazi spy ring in Cairo.

Moreover, the Cold War brought Soviet propaganda experts to many Arab nations bashing the United States, and of course, the old favorite target since Tsarist Russia's infamous forgery of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion- the Jews and the State of Israel.

Half of Arab countries are under brutal military dictatorships that came to power by military coups and have been ruling for decades, such as Colonel Gaddafi of Libya- since 1969. These regimes are secularist. The other half of Arab countries are under absolute monarchies that use religion to get legitimacy such as the Wahabi Saudi Arabia. Whether secularist or seemingly religious regimes, they both champion the Palestinian cause and exploit religion for political objectives. Amazingly, fundamentalist groups have been using religion and the Palestinian cause, as well. The so-called Arab opposition media uses a similar rhetoric to the state-owned media across the Arab countries.
The result has been the demonization and dehumanization of the Jewish people, and Israelis in particular, in the eyes of many people in that region. Hate speech has found its way through state-sponsored textbooks brainwashing generations since the early forties.

It makes it almost impossible for an independent thinker, intellectual, moderate, liberal, secularist, or writer, to sing outside of the choir. Those who dare to sing other than the official line would find themselves accused of apostasy, tarnishing the image of their country, arrested, tortured, fired from their jobs, end up in a concentration camp, or at least, in a lunatic asylum.

Saudi Wahabi petrodollars have found way through the media, academia, and political circles in that region, and even in the West. Wahabi petrodollars have influenced more than 60% of mosques, madrasas in America and the West; indoctrinating many in the intolerant puritanical, Salafist, literalist dogma made in Saudi Arabia. It is no wonder that impressionable young men from refugee camps take up arms; from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Egypt, Algeria, Morocco, Yemen, to Iraq. To make things worse, Iran has been competing with Saudi Arabia for decades now. Iran has supported Hamas, Hezbollah, the Syrian Baath, and Shiite militias in Iraq.

But what has the hate brought to the region? It actually worked like magic and entrenched oppressive regimes for decades thus enriching the elite around these regimes beyond imagination. And it definitely did not help the Palestinian refugees, nor the impoverished millions of Arabs and Muslims- many have no jobs and are too young and restless.

*Aladdin Elaasar is a lecturer and author of The Last Pharaoh: Mubarak and the Uncertain Future of Egypt in the Obama Age. The Egyptian government banned his books for allegedly State Security reasons; the first book banned by the nation in decades. The book exposes the deep corruption, grave human rights abuses, the authoritarianism of the Mubarak's regime and its use of anti- Semitism and anti-Americanism to gain popularity in the region. It also reveals one of Egypt's worst kept secrets: the story of the expulsion and mass exodus of more than 100,000 Egyptian Jews since the military coup of 1952, and the influence of Nazism on Egyptian and Arab politics.

Jim Wallis: In Spite of Glenn Beck's New Threats, My Invitation to Dialogue Stands

2010-03-15T17:04:24Z

Last week, when radio and television talk show host Glenn Beck said that social justice is a "code word" for Communism and Nazism, and urged people to leave their churches if they teach social justice, I decided that message needed to be challenged.

Many church leaders from across the spectrum agreed with my concern that social and economic justice are deep biblical concerns and central to the teachings of all of our churches. Even Beck's own Mormon church leaders were calling to assure me that they believe in social justice too. I thought Beck's rather extreme and misguided comments needed a response, but I did not attack him personally; nor will I.

In fact, on Friday, I sent Glenn a letter proposing that the two of us sit down together and have an open and public discussion on what social justice really means and how Christians are called to engage in the struggle for justice. I said, "let's make this a civil dialogue and not engage in personal attacks on each other -- which is never helpful in trying to sort out what is true. So let's talk about the heart of the matter."

Well, on today's Glenn Beck radio show, I got a response that disappointed me. Glenn Beck said:

So Jim, I just wanted to pass this on to you. In my time I will respond -- my time, well, kind of like God's time, might be a day, might be a week to you, I'm not sure. But I'm going to get to it in my time, not your time. So you go ahead and you continue to do your protest thing, and that's great. I love it. But just know -- the hammer is coming, because little do you know, for eight weeks, we've been compiling information on you, your cute little organization, and all the other cute little people that are with you. And when the hammer comes, it's going to be hammering hard and all through the night, over and over...

He went on to say that "It's weird how people all over the world have been sending me stuff. It's weird that way, Jimmy." Why is the idea of a civil dialogue such a threat to Glenn Beck? Glenn, let us please not resort to threats and attacks. To repeat, I have not and will not attack you personally, and I repeat my invitation to a civil dialogue on what social justice really means. Since you were the one to raise this issue and start this whole discussion, I just want it to end in a better and more civil way.

More than 30,000 Christian pastors and church members have written to you as Christians who believe in social justice and are asking you to reconsider your statements. This is a time for dialogue, not monologue, and I prayerfully ask you to consider my request for a conversation.

Jim Wallis is the author of Rediscovering Values: On Wall Street, Main Street, and Your Street -- A Moral Compass for the New Economy, CEO of Sojourners and blogs at www.godspolitics.com.

+Click here to tell Glenn Beck that you support social justice

Tina Dupuy: Eric Massa is Taking Back the Spotlight From the Starlets

2010-03-15T15:26:43Z

Congressman Eric Massa's abrupt retirement and his ensuing talk show blitz consumed the media with tawdry details of his career's implosion. The first-and-only-term, now-former-US Representative from New York went on Glenn Beck's Fox News program with the promise of naming names and exposing the corruption of those who Beck suspects of nefarious deeds (i.e. social justice). He said that all Americans needed to hear Massa. "This is the moment that will decide the course of this nation possibly." Beck told his audience as a teaser to the epic hour-long interview with the Democratic Congressman with an axe to grind. He continued, "This is the guy we've been looking for!"

The Massa interview on Beck's show was a mess-a. He admitted to groping a male staffer, happily. He talked about his aggressive birthday-induced tickling and something about how that's just a thing guys do in the Navy. The sentence "It looks like an orgy in Caligula," was uttered. Then just to make it weird, he meandered around general Democratic talking points about getting involved and reforming campaign finance. It was yet another sensible claim Beck promised his audience that has yet to come true. Nazi communism, anyone?

But then Massa went on CNN's Larry King Live revealing even more of his escapades. Stories have surfaced about the Catholic former Republican former Naval Officer and the term "snorkeling" was forced into the public discourse. It all seems pretty salacious. Very tabloid-esque. Very Hollywood drunken diva-like. Something you'd see right before a publicist announces their client has been checked into secluded non-specific rehab for "exhaustion. "

Has Hollywood corrupted the way we see our politicians?

Worshiping actors as idols is a relatively new practice. During the Dark Ages, before anyone figured out it was rats spreading the plague it was blamed on traveling actors, which were held in similar esteem. People who made their living acting onstage during the Victorian era were akin to how we view strippers today. Yes, people went to go see them...but ya know. Acting was a subculture of a lowly form for nearly all of its history. It wasn't until Hollywood made stars out of celluloid and media made them alluring did we care about actors in a broad sense. Now we're mindful about their opinions on everything from energy policy to which lip gloss is the glossiest. When they say stupid things it's a scandal. When they do stupid things it's a story. When they are stupid things it's an obsession.

When actors were seen as vermin, the object of our affections and repugnance were people with actual power: politicians. They were the Lindsay Lohans of the early part of this country. Think of the Burr-Hamilton Duel between then former Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton and sitting Vice President Aaron Burr as the E! True Hollywood Story of the 19^th century. There were no sports figures at the time. No recording artists. No mothers of multiples. The only icons were politicians, tycoons and criminals. Or Wyatt Earp who was really a bit of all three. And of those it was politicians were the most subjected to outrage for immoral behavior. They were the tabloid stars of the 19^th century. Between the published rumors of President Thomas Jefferson fathering children with his slave Sally Hemmings to bachelor President Grover Cleveland paying child support, if you could read in the first-half part of this country's history, politicians were going wild.

Then by the turn of the 20^th century, starlets came along and usurped political figures from the lone wrath of public spectacle. Now because of reality shows and 24-hour news they have to share the limelight with a zillion other kids of notables. But Congressman Massa, impugning the conduct of the military and the House of Representatives in one non-denial denial brush stroke is a throwback to a better time. The good old days. The pre-cotton gin days.

Politicians in garish sex scandals like Eric Massa, former Senator and presidential candidate John Edwards, South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford and Nevada Senator John Ensign are just taking back their country from Hollywood.

Paul Raushenbush: It Took Pat Robertson and Glenn Beck to Remind Sane Christians of Who We Are and Who We Do Not Want to Be

2010-03-15T11:06:11Z

When we launched the Religion section of the Huffington Post one month ago, I wrote a letter addressed to "Religious (and Sane) America." Since that time, we have had extraordinary contributions from across the religious landscape including Evangelicals, Roman Catholics, Main Line Protestants, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhist, and Atheists as well as those who defy easy definition. The conversation has been enlightening, honest and, of course, impassioned. But perhaps most promising - it has been sane. Our discourse has been has healthy and productive and the language has been intelligible across religious divisions and beyond simple the categories of religious vs. non-religious.

HuffPost Religion's beginning has been bookended by what I would call: insane religion. Pat Robertson and Glenn Beck provided us with a disturbing reminder of what is unhealthy religious rhetoric and it has reminded us of the desperate need for a sane Christian witness in the world. I don't mean to say that Robertson and Beck are mentally unbalanced - I don't think they are. And I don't think that they mean to do American and Christianity harm, I think they are making these pronouncements out of their own worldview, which they have every right to do. However, I do not think that the way they spoke about the Christian faith was 'sane' in its original meaning of health. Their pronouncements were unhealthy and not within the range of what I would like to promote as a productive, intelligible and redemptive Christian discourse for the 21st century.

It started at the Haiti earthquake. Robertson's explanation was that God sent this earthquake because of a "pact with the devil" the Haitians had made to throw off the oppression of the French. Robertson reminded us that our patience with religious leaders who talk such nonsense has run out. Hopefully the outcry his comments evoked will act as a caution to those with a compulsion to offer such ludicrous explanations. In addition to the tone deaf cruelty, religious insensitivity and obvious racism - sane Christianity rejects the futile and self-serving delusion of offering a pat answer on behalf of God as to why any natural disasters occurs, or why bad things happen to any individual or group.

Sane Christianity doesn't see God's hand in hurricanes, floods, and earthquakes; or in cancer, AIDS, and Tuberculosis - except in a way that is so far beyond our comprehension as to forbid speculation (My ways are not your ways says the Lord). The response of the Christian is to mourn the dead and honor their memory, and commit their spirits into God's keeping. Sane Christianity also rejects the fantasy that these catastrophes are signs of end times or rapture or any other pre-millennial inventions from the 19th Century - they are simply the reality of our world which includes natural tumult as well as sickness and death.

For explanation of the natural world, sane Christians turn to those who are studying it in detail and who are often those who most perceive the true wonder of life - the scientific community. We share in the awe scientists hold for what they are encountering. In seeking to uncover the mysteries we embrace the language of science which is meant to explain without interpreting, and we give thanks for the Enlightenment and the continued growth of scientific inquiry into the origins of the universe and of humanity. Sane Christianity sees a vibrant conversation rather than conflict with science.

However, it is religion we turn to for guidance on how to respond and act in the world. In the case of an earthquake such as in Haiti or in Chili, the sane Christian recognizes that life has been harmed and responds with compassion and love as we have been taught by our Christian tradition. Inspirited by our faith we insist on standards for protecting life such as buildings that won't collapse so easily, using warning signals against tsunamis, and levies that do not break so that we might protect as many as possible the next time a disaster occurs. While science can tell us much about the world it does not give us the moral imperative of our faith. For that we turn to Jesus who gives us an ethical framework for how to act in the world and a vision for what a just society looks like and for which we should strive.

That is why Glenn Beck's comments that social justice in a church can be equated with Nazism or Communism is also repugnant to the sane Christian. The responses to Beck were swift and wide, from Evangelicals, Catholics, and Mainline all of whom rejected Beck's unhealthy vision for Christianity. Were the Christian church to forsake its mission to create a world that reflects Jesus' teachings in Matthew 25 and Luke 4, it would lose much of its reason for being -the church would become a sick and useless institution indeed. As the 20th century pastor William Sloane Coffin said to me once: "Ethics do not exhaust the Gospel but they are not ancillary either. " Beck's unhealthy statement reminded us that sane Christianity cares for the individual soul as well as for the common good of the entire society, and we will never forsake either one. What Beck decries as the Church's "social justice" and "progressivism" has been responsible for such consequential commitments as the abolitionist and civil rights movements. Unless Beck is suggesting that these efforts, largely fueled by the church, were a waste of time then he should reassess his thoughts about social justice and the church.

But we should thank Robertson and Beck. They have reminded us that we crave - no, DEMAND sane Christianity, and that actually there are many millions of us who profess it. If Sane Christians, Sane Jews, Sane Hindus, Sane Muslims, Sane Buddhists, Sane Atheists etc, would join together, I think we would have a healthier religious discourse, and a healthier and more compassionate world.

Huffpost Religion is one place where it has started - let's keep it going.

Mike Lux: The Ultimate Contradiction-in-Terms: Right-wing Christianity

2010-03-15T10:35:57Z

I have done a lot of writing, in my blog posts and my book, about the historic differences between conservatives and progressives in political battles, but almost equally fascinating to me is that between conservative and progressive religious traditions. The exact same fault lines, most importantly in terms of individualism vs. community, play themselves out in theological debates which sound very much like our political debates -- and indeed, a lot of the same people operate in both realms.

Glenn Beck and Jim Wallis got into this debate over the last few days, and because Jim actually knows something about the Bible, he easily won the debate. Beck's classic conspiracy-minded starting point -- that because both Nazis and Communists have used the phrase "social justice", that any religion that uses the term must be bad too -- has a similar logic to saying that if a really bad teacher said two plus two equals four, because he or she was a bad teacher it must be false. Or saying that if a politician you don't like says "God Bless America", then any politician who says that is terrible. But leaving aside Beck's incredibly stupid logic, the point he makes about "social justice" is in keeping with conservative ideology: it is all about a self-focused view of religion and politics that, like Beck's ideological hero Ayn Rand, proclaims selfishness as the ultimate virtue.

Conservative Christians manage to ignore the literally many hundreds of Biblical quotes about social justice by making Christianity a religion solely focused on one very selfish goal: whether they get into heaven or not. That's it, that is the entire goal and purpose and meaning of their faith. And because St. Paul argued that faith is more important than "works" (what you do good in the world), they think that believing a certain doctrine is the only thing that matters in terms of whether you make it into heaven or not. Since everything is about getting themselves to heaven, and the Earth will be destroyed soon in Armageddon anyway, nothing that happens here matters very much. The one thing that matters to their God is having more people worship Him, so they try to convert people, but all that other stuff Jesus and the Old Testament prophets and Moses and James and all those other folks in the Bible talked about in terms of kindness, mercy, forgiving debts, being your brother's keeper, helping the poor, and all that other liberal socialistic stuff just isn't much of a priority to them compared to: me getting to heaven, and (second most important) converting others to my God. These so-called "Christian" conservatives live in a state of paranoia that somewhere, somehow some dollar of their taxes might go to some undeserving poor person, ignoring the fact that Jesus' entire ministry was targeted to the "undeserving" poor.

Not all Christians think this way, of course. There is another kind of thinking about the Christian faith: one that actually takes what's written in the Bible (beyond the Book of Revelations) seriously. The Jewish Torah (for Christians, that's their Old Testament) and the Christian New Testament have a wide variety of ideas and voices in their pages. Written by scores of authors over a span of probably a couple thousand years, one of the things I love about the Bible is the wide range of beliefs and perspectives within it. A lot of fundamentalists are desperate to find ways to explain away the contradictions in the Bible, because they believe every word is inspired by God and it's all literally true, but in fact the authors of the Bible disagree on both the details of what actually happened and the interpretation and philosophy behind the events they write about. If you take the Bible seriously, you see the debates and differing perspectives. Some Biblical writers were more conservative in their thinking, and some were more progressive. But the most consistent and enduring theme that runs through virtually every book in the Bible is that we are expected to love and be kind to our neighbors, especially the poor, hurting, and oppressed of the earth.

From the God of Genesis punishing Cain for not being his brother's keeper to Nathan the prophet rebuking King David for taking from the poor; from the Psalms that over and over proclaim the need to help the poor, and condemn those who judges, government officials, and wealthy people who mistreat them, from the prophets like Isaiah and Amos who deride those who engage in ritual sacrifice while refusing to help the oppressed (Isaiah I: "Cease to do evil. Learn to do good, search for justice, help the oppressed, be just to the orphan, plead for the widow.") to Jesus very first sermon proclaiming that he had come to "bring good news to the poor" and "liberty to the captives"- virtually every book of the Bible demands justice and mercy and community.

People who take the Bible seriously and respect its words, as opposed to being obsessed with whether they personally will get into heaven by following a certain kind of dogma, understand that community and compassion are in fact far more central to it than any specific metaphysical belief system. And that is what the Pat Robertsons, Glenn Becks, Sarah Palins, and the other false prophets of conservatism don't understand.

Fox News 'Divided' Over Glenn Beck, Journalists Worried About His Popularity

2010-03-15T10:13:36Z

The Washington Post's Howard Kurtz Monday describes Fox News a "a network divided" over its most recent star, Glenn Beck.

Kurtz reports there is a "deep split within Fox" over Beck: one one side, led by network chief Roger Ailes, are those supportive of Beck's meteoric rise; on the other, his detractors, who Kurtz describes as "journalists who are worried about the prospect that Beck is becoming the face of the network."

The internal tension has grown to such an extent, Kurtz writes, that "some of [Fox's] journalists celebrated the failure of last week's interview with embattled ex-congressman Eric Massa." Beck himself declared that hour a waste of his viewers' time.

In January, Beck was said to be causing angst among Bill O'Reilly's camp (although the pair has been traveling together on tour).

Fox News staffers also complained to Kurtz that Beck's emotional outbursts might be staged:

Some staffers say they have watched rehearsals, on internal monitors, in which Beck has teared up or paused at the same moments as he later did during the show. Asked about this, [Chris Balfe, president of Beck's company, Mercury Radio Arts] responded sharply: "Glenn reacts the same way to issues whether he knows people are watching or not, and is proud to show his emotions, unlike the cowardly, two-faced critics who hide behind anonymity."

What is clear, however, is that Ailes is firmly behind Beck. Kurtz writes that Beck "sometimes seeks Ailes' advice," and Mercury Radio president Chris Baife said Ailes is the reason Beck joined Fox News from HLN.

Fox News Senior Vice President Bill Shine acknowledged that Beck's controversial views could pose problems for the network's hard news journalists, telling Kurtz, "sometimes it might make their job a little more difficult." But he said that controversy is par for course at Fox News:

"I don't perceive it to be a problem. . . . Glenn Beck is popular and controversial? Well, almost everybody here has been popular or controversial at some point in the last 13 years."

Also of note in Beck's relationship with the network: Fox management put up "strong resistance" to O'Reilly and Beck's joint tour; the network opposed his appearance on Jay Leno's show, which eventually occurred in December; and executives were "rankled last week when Beck spent two minutes of airtime to promote his one-man show at Broadway's Nokia Theater on Tuesday."

Read Kurtz's full article here.

UPDATE: A Fox News spokesperson has issued the following statement to several outlets:

"Howie's use of anonymous sources is stunning from a paper with the reputation of the Washington Post's. Glenn Beck has the 100% support of Fox News management."

Lea Lane: Skip Sex & 9 Other Wacky Ideas to Make Up for DST Lost Sleep

2010-03-14T19:46:43Z

Attributed to a savvy Native American: Only a white man could be dumb enough to think he can make a blanket longer by cutting a piece off one end and sewing it on the other.

**

I'm tired! Daylight Saving Time (DST -- also called "Daylight Savings Time") resumed at 2 a.m. Sunday. Clocks moved ahead an hour, allowing for more waking sunlight hours through the summer.

A bit of back story: Europe started DST to conserve fuel during World War I, and many countries now observe a form of "summer time." America adopted the idea from 1918 to 1919 and again in World War II, but now leaves time-change up to state and local governments. Hawaii, American Samoa, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands opted out.

I know, I know. In November we'll readjust the clock for fewer winter daylight hours. But right now, the most important thing in the entire world is to make up for that precious, delicious, much-needed, TRULY IMPORTANT lost hour of sleep!

If desperate to regain that hour, here are 10 compensating strategies for the next few days:

1--Eat dinner in five minutes or less, standing up. Do not use utensils or worry about food groups or calories. Hot dogs in buns are fastest, with onions and sauerkraut for fiber. Spray whipped cream from the can straight into your mouth for a fast and filling dessert. The time you save can be put to sleeping.

2--Do not drink anything after 6 pm. You may be thirsty from the sauerkraut and the whipped cream but you don't want to get up in the middle of the night to pee. To make up for the lost sleep due to DST, you'll need to dry out or hold it in.

3--Put your next day's clothes out, right by your bed. Do not select spandex or items with attached feet, as these take too long. Jumpsuits are fastest. Go commando. Do not bother with socks. Flip flops are easiest. Wear pants with elastic waistbands and tops with zippers. Do a trial run to see if you can dress in under a minute, and if not, drop one more item until you do.

4--Simplify night-time grooming. This routine often takes an hour if you count pimple-popping, toning, moisturizing, admiring yourself in the mirror and prancing around to a song in your head. Do not clip toenails or nose hair. Do not tweeze chin hairs. If you must shower, hop in and out in a minute, multi-tasking by peeing in the shower and exfoliating as you dry off. No shaving or hair washing. As for teeth, do not floss, and unplug the three-minute toothbrush that beeps. Just put some toothpaste on your finger and swipe around for 10 seconds, or chew gum in the shower.

5--Get into your bed an hour earlier, and relax. Do not under any circumstances think of scary things such as the financial crisis, health care, or Karl Rove. Especially do not think of the Eric Massa-Glenn Beck dialogue. You might try counting down, but forget sheep; think in terms of long lists, such as Tiger Wood's girlfriends.

6--Leave the TV off. If possible record the shows you will miss by going to bed early. If you must fall asleep with the TV on, be sure to set the snooze function, which you probably never knew you had; otherwise you might wake up to an infomercial with the Slap Chop man and have terrible nightmares.

7--Skip sex. Lack of grooming will no doubt alleviate that hour-draining activity. I know some of you don't take an hour for sex. Some of you don't even partake, in which case you're out of luck and must make up the lost DST hour in the other ways, for sure. Exception: If sex usually takes five minute or less you may indulge, as it results in deeper sleep. (But I offer sympathy and can suggest some therapists.)

8--Get deeper sleep from the hours you do have. This may mean taking a sleeping pill to knock you out. Do not take it with water. (See above, no water allowed.) And this is not suggested if you are alone. If the pill doesn't go down be sure your partner knows the Heimlich maneuver.

You can also lower the blinds to keep the light out and tie up the dog or cat so it doesn't jump on the bed. If your partner snores you can stuff one of those socks you're not wearing in his or her mouth to keep the noise from waking you up. If they stop breathing entirely have the phone right by your bed along with instructions for CPR. This may tire you out and aid in deeper sleep for both, especially for the one suffocated.

9--Skip breakfast. Since you haven't had sex and haven't expended much energy you can sleep through breakfast. (No morning sex, needless to say. This would negate the additional hour gained from no nighttime sex!). If you are famished you can toss dry cereal in your mouth as you dress.

10--Shorten and simplify your morning grooming routine. Do not use that roller to remove dandruff on your clothing. Do not brush your teeth. Skip deodorant. Do not style your hair. Do not shower (even if you have not showered the night before. Not really needed this morning unless you spent the five minutes to have sex.) Most of all, do not sit on the toilet and read until evacuated. Simply hold it in, splash water on your face and strategic areas, gargle with some mouthwash, run your fingers through your hair and jump in your easy-to- put-on clothes.

If you follow these rules you will now be sick to your stomach, dirty, ungroomed, sloppily dressed, constipated, hungry, thirsty and horny. But you will have made up the lost DST hour!

As an alternative, stay in bed a couple of mornings, preferably with a partner, and have some great sex and extra sleep. That's the best way of all to initiate Daylight Saving(s) Time.

'Why Does Glenn Beck Hate Jesus?'

2010-03-14T12:21:30Z

When Glenn Beck told listeners of his radio show on March 2 that they should "run as fast as you can" from any church that preached "social or economic justice" because those were code words for Communism and Nazism, he probably thought he was tweaking a few crunchy religious liberals who didn't listen to the show anyway.

Instead he managed to outrage Christians in most mainline Protestant denominations, African-American congregations, Hispanic churches, and Catholics--who first heard the term "social justice" in papal encyclicals and have a little something in their tradition called "Catholic social teaching." (Not to mention the teaching of a certain fellow from Nazareth who was always blathering on about justice...)

Will Durst: Kooky Kabuki Terrain.

2010-03-14T05:35:14Z

This health care thing has driven people crazier than Johnny Depp in a Max Fleischer cartoon on acid. Pro or con, your rhetoric better be cranked up to eleven and soaring past the outer orbit of Neptune, or you're going to be as invisible as a tax collector with a soggy paper plate full of Swedish meatballs sitting next to the deceased at a wake.

Talk show host Rush Limbaugh jumped into this peculiar March Madness feet first, threatening to leave the US should health care reform pass. He must realize for a lot of people, that's a big win- win. And if the prospect of his permanently playing ex- pat doesn't motivate progressives, nothing will. He even mentioned Costa Rica as a possible destination. Where they have universal heath care. Just like every industrialized country in the world. Although your access to Oxycontin may vary.

Eric Massa, the New York Democrat who admitted grabbing a staffer's staff, embarked on a media based whining tour charging he was hounded out of office by the White House and smeared because of his opposition to health care reform. But even though he was willing to speak ill of the Administration, Glenn Beck washed his hands of Tickle- Me- Eric, after the former Congressman trotted out some intra- personal top bunk Naval snorkeling documentation. When a pissed off Democrat is too far gone for Glenn Beck, things truly have escalated into kooky Kabuki terrain.

Meanwhile, in another part of town, Senator Orrin Hatch railed that if Democrats try to jam a health care bill through Congress it will destroy bipartisanship. Oh no. Not that! They're killing the dodo. Apparently this guy is more worried about a dead fantasy than sick Americans. Then Senator Mitch McConnell ratcheted up the exponential wackiness by warning Democrats they face Electoral Armageddon in the fall, which isn't fair; like regaling 6 year old girls with tales of the hairy spiders that live under their bed before saying "sleep tight."

Obama, his own self, can be found careening around the country like an over- caffeinated Chihuahua engaged in a last ditch effort to sell the bill to what you might call his hesitant posse. Yeah. Recalcitrant Democrats. What are the odds? Like calling a flash flood- irksome. Hell, at this point Obama would be happy to pass anything. Health care. The jobs bill. A hook pattern. Kidney stone. Toyota Prius.

The overwhelming discombobulating apprehension is the President isn't just piloting his own kamikaze fighter into the carrier of health care, he's sending vulnerable troops on the same suicide mission. One that will make Gallipoli look like a weekend pass at an Istanbul brothel. After all, its not his butt on the re- election line this fall, and the GOP strategy to stall proceedings has frothed Democratic incumbents into such a lather, the sweat dripping off their faces is shorting out microphones all across this great land of ours.

Now we're hearing the target passage date might be a bit more elastic than the waistband of a RINO's tutu. The good news is sooner or later, this bill will either become law or not become law and everybody can settle back down to their normal routine of accusation, obfuscation, and procrastination until election day. But until then, keep taking your vitamins, this health care debate seems to be making a lot of people sick.

Will Durst is a San Francisco based political comic who writes sometimes. This is an example.
Ask for his new one- man show, "The Lieutenant Governor from the State of Confusion" to appear at a performing arts center near you. willdurst.com
Or catch him in stand up mode at the Acme Comedy Club in Minneapolis March 23- 27.
New CD, "Raging Moderate" available from Stand- Up Records March 23.

Richard (RJ) Eskow: Why Caddell's Wrong -- Passing The Bill Will Help Democrats

2010-03-13T12:23:21Z

There's a lot of buzz in health care circles about an editorial in today's Washington Post entitled "If Democrats ignore health-care polls, midterms will be costly." That could be dangerous: the author's conclusions are contradicted, not supported, by the available facts.

The editorial's written by Patrick Caddell, described as a "political commentator and former pollster," and Douglas E. Schoen. Caddell and Schoen play the "pollsters to the past two Democratic presidents" card prominently, but here's what they don't tell you: Schoen's been on a third-party kick since he wrote a paean to centrism called Declaring Independence: The Beginning of the End of the Two-Party System. And Caddell's a "commentator," all right: he's now a right-leaning Fox News regular. There's plenty of YouTube video of Caddell clucking tongues with Glenn Beck over Van Jones' "violent past," or whatever the right-wing outrage of the day happens to be.

Which would all be fine if their analysis of the data was informed and correct - but it's not. It's a skewed piece that reflects the worst of Washington's Villager wisdom. If Democrats listen to them - and many will be tempted - it will make a difficult situation even worse.

"The battle for public opinion has been lost," they write. Nothing could be further from the truth. When asked how much they know about the health reform proposal, 40% of respondents in a recent Ipsos/McClatchy poll said "not very much" and 17% said "nothing at all." 32% said they knew "a fair amount," which isn't a lot. When 57% of the public indicates little or no understanding of the bill and another 32% knows they don't fully grasp it, the battle isn't "lost." On the contrary - these numbers show that the battle has barely been fought.

That impression's supported by what Newsweek calls "The Polling Contradiction." In summarizing its own polling data, Newsweek observes: "The majority of Americans are opposed to President Obama's health-care reform plan--until they learn the details." 81% approve of the health insurance exchanges, for example, and 76% approve a rule that requires insurers to accept anyone who applies.

Caddell and Schoen engage in some extreme cherry-picking of the data. Of four polls used to support their conclusions, three are from Scott Rasmussen, whose findings are known to lean more pro-Republican and anti-Obama than others. Yet here's a credible Rasmussen finding Caddell and Schoen somehow manage to overlook: People who oppose health reform overwhelmingly describe themselves as "Strongly Opposed."

How can any clear-headed analysis lead to the conclusion that a weaker bill will be more popular, given that its opponents feel "strongly" about it? Watering down a few of its provisions isn't going to win them over.

It's true that, as Newsweek observes, "Not all Democrat positions received such high marks. Imposing a fine on individuals who do not buy health insurance was the least popular provision ... (and) fifty-five percent opposed the so-called Cadillac tax on the most expensive health-insurance plans." But the "Cadillac tax" has been loosened and deferred for five years - during which a lot can happen politically. And as for the individual mandate, it's not a popular provision, but it's not going to be changed now.

Of the many polls that show more people opposed to reform than supporting it, it appears that only the McClatchy/Ipsos survey (as noted by Barry Sussman) thought to ask why. After finding that 47% of respondents opposed the bill and only 41% supported it - findings that are fairly consistent with other polls - they asked the reason for their opposition. 37% of those who oppose this bill said they "favor health reform overall but don't think the current proposals go far enough." That means that nearly 59% of the people polled support comprehensive health reform, which directly contradicts Caddell and Schoen's statement that "comprehensive health care has been lost." Actually, comprehensive health care has won. The challenge facing Democrats is to convince people between now and Election Day that they've delivered the comprehensive reform these voters want.

What's comprehensive about this bill? A massive reduction in the overall number of uninsured Americans. Subsidies to provide millions with health care coverage. An end to abusive insurance practices like cancelling coverage once a person gets sick. No more denials for people with pre-existing conditions. A well-designed insurance exchange that will subject insurance premiums to an unprecedented level of public scrutiny. A start on cost controls. A requirement that the exchange offer the same coverage provided to members of Congress (which serves as a brake on future benefit cuts).That's why, after a long year of struggle to improve the bill's flaws, I now support it. I can't turn my back on the uninsured in favor of an idealized bill that might be passed in some bright future ... especially if the likely outcome of failure this year is a Congress that's less likely to pass any reform at all.

Could the bill be improved? Of course, and if history is an example (see Medicare) it will be -- but not if a conservative majority is returned to both houses of Congress. Inaction makes that outcome more likely. Republicans have promised to run on repealing of any bill the Democrats pass. That's not a platform - it's nihilism.

Progressives have an immediate challenge and a slightly-longer term task. The immediate challenge is to pass a bill that improves our fractured health system. The longer-term task is to spend the run-up to November explaining what's been accomplished, and to ensure the electoral victories we need if the future is to be one of continued progress - rather than inaction from the "Party of No." We need a future of reform, not repeal.

When it comes to health reform, Caddell and Schoen have it backwards. Comprehensive health care is the best option, both as politics and as policy. Ignore the naysayers and pass the bill.

_____________________

Richard (RJ) Eskow, a consultant and writer, is a Senior Fellow with the Campaign for America's Future. This post was produced as part of the Curbing Wall Street project. Richard blogs at:

No Middle Class Health Tax
A Night Light

Website: Eskow and Associates
Read more: Patrick Caddell, Ipsos/McClatchy, Glenn Beck, Douglas Schoen, Health Reform, Newsweek Poll, Politics News

Dr. David P. Gushee: Glenn Beck Vs. God: The Bible Speaks For Itself

2010-03-13T04:48:20Z
Speaking as a Christian ethicist, I can say with certainty that in flippantly attacking the concept of social justice, Glenn Beck inadvertently poked a finger in the eye of every person who takes the Bible as God's revealed Word and (according to Scripture) poured contempt on a central concern of God Himself:

"For I the Lord love justice." (Isaiah 61:8)

"You must not distort justice; you must not show partiality; and you must not accept bribes, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and subverts the cause of those who are in the right. Justice, and only justice, you shall pursue." (Deuteronomy 16:19-20)

"What does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?" (Micah 6:8)

"Let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream." (Amos 5:24)

"Blessed are those who hunger and thirst after righteousness [Greek dikaiosune, also translated as justice], for they will be filled." (Matthew 5:6)

"And will not God grant justice to his chosen ones who cry to him day and night? Will he delay long in helping them? I tell you, he will quickly grant justice to them." (Luke 18:7-8)

"Woe to you ... for you have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith." (Matthew 23:23)

This is a target-rich environment. I could have picked hundreds of other verses. By our count in Kingdom Ethics: Following Jesus in Contemporary Context (Intervarsity Press, 2003), fellow ethicist Glen Stassen and I find in the Bible 1,060 uses of the two Hebrew and two Greek words for justice. In contrast, the main words for sexual sin appear 90 times. There really is no theme more central to biblical faith than the matter of justice. This is very widely recognized to be true for what Christians call the Old Testament, but in our book we show that it is just as true for the New Testament. We offer an entire chapter detailing the forty occasions in which Jesus confronted the powers and authorities of his time over their injustice. We show that justice is one of the core themes of the kingdom of God that Jesus preached about and died to bring into existence.

In that chapter, we break down Jesus' confrontation with injustice into four primary categories:

1. Jesus confronted the injustice of greed and gross economic exploitation and unfairness. He demanded/invited justice for the poor and hungry.

On this theme, a key passage is the parable of Lazarus and the rich man dining in luxury inside his gated home (Luke 16:19-31). The rich man is scored for his indifference to his poor neighbor and his ability to live in complacent opulence while a man slowly dies outside his door.

2. Jesus confronted the injustice of domination and bullying and demanded/invited his followers to exercise power in the form of mutual servanthood.

Here a memorable passage is the one in which Jesus contrasts the power-over-lordliness of the pagans with the true greatness of servant-leadership (Mt. 20:25-26). He embodied that servant-leadership throughout his ministry.

3. Jesus confronted the injustice of violent killing and demanded/invited peacemaking.

His earliest followers often remembered how Jesus grieved outside Jerusalem over the coming destruction of the city in a rebellion against Rome that would be ruthlessly crushed by the Roman legions, at the cost of 1.2 million Jewish lives (Mt. 23:37-39). No early Christian participated in that revolt.

4. Jesus confronted the injustice of exclusion from community and demanded/invited into existence a new kind of community in which everyone has a place at the table.

Jesus was constantly criticized for the way he and the God he served were about welcoming the despised, the rejected, the sick, the marginalized, and even sinners, offering mercy rather than judgment (Luke 5:27-32).

To summarize: for Jesus, as for the Jewish prophets in whose line he came, social injustice consists of misuses of power to create distortions of human community in which greed, domination, violence, and exclusion come to dominate human life. Social justice consists of human acts to resist social injustice by repairing such distortions of human community. We work today for social justice when we seek to create religious and political communities characterized by more economic justice, less domination, less violence, and more inclusive community. When we do so, we can have every assurance that we are attempting to put into practice God's will and indeed God's passion for a world that he made for precisely such justice.

I have never before written about Glenn Beck, and this is not really a post about him. I think of Mr. Beck as a hugely skilled political entertainer whose meteoric rise reflects his own considerable skills and the equally considerable political polarization of a nation that I love.

He has made his rise on skillfully inflammatory rhetoric that has hooked the emotions of millions. But this time he hooked the Bible and the God of the Bible. He managed to do something few have been able to do -- speaking only of my own religious community, he has united Catholics and Protestants, evangelicals and mainliners, Christian progressives and moderates and conservatives. He has offended all Christians who know that our God is a God of justice, and that advancing justice is central to our mission as a people and to the kingdom of God for which we work and wait.
Read more: David Gushee, Social Justice, Glenn Beck, Bible, Jesus, Kingdom of God, Religion, Fox News, Economic Justice, Glenn Beck Economic and Social Justice, Glenn Beck on Economic Justice, Glenn Beck Social Justice, Beck Economic Justice, Social Justice Perversion of the Gospel, Glenn Beck and Economic Justice, Glenn Beck on Social Justice, Beck Social Justice, Economic Justice Beck, Glenn Beck Perversion of the Gospel, Glenn Beck and Social Justice, Social Justice Beck, Glenn Beck Economic Justice, Glenn Beck Leave Church, Religion News

Rev. Jim Wallis: Glenn Beck Is Wrong, Social Justice Is At The Heart Of Gospel (VIDEO)

2010-03-12T22:04:20Z
Christian author and social justice advocate Rev. Jim Wallis appeared on "Countdown with Keith Olbermann" Friday evening to talk about Glenn Beck's recent attack on churches and religious leaders who preach social justice.

Last week, Beck, a Mormon, told his fans to scour their churches for any mention of social justice or economic justice. He said that both terms are "code words" that were used by Nazis and Communists and that if a church preached either, one should "run as fast as you can!"

Wallis told "Countdown" guest host Lawrence O'Donnell that not only are Beck's claims false, they're at odds with the teachings of Jesus. Contrary to Beck's claims that social justice is a perversion of the gospel, Wallis told O'Donnell that helping the poor is at the heart of the gospel.

Wallis: "The God of the Bible is the God of justice. Though the poor are in the center of God's concern... Poverty breaks the heart of God. And it breaks the heart of the church. So, this is about Christians who may disagree on politics. Republicans, Democrats, it doesn't matter. Left or right. We have different views on the role of government. Doesn't matter, But justice is integral to the gospel. And across the spectrum, Christians are saying Glenn Beck got it wrong."

Wallis told O'Donnell that Mormon leaders have called him to apologize for Beck's comments. He hopes that Beck will call him to apologize and talk about social justice.

Watch:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Read more: Economic Justice, Social Justice, Church, Poverty, Bible, Economy, Theology, Nazism, Mormonism, Gospel, Communism, Religion, Communists, God, Nazis, Jim Wallis, Jesus, Christianity, Glenn Beck, Religion News