Since Glenn Beck has become some such a phenomenon, and has been aligned with the the right and, in particular, the craziest element of the right, many have assumed that he arose through a political journey. He did not.

Glenn Beck could just as easily have become a spokesman for the left as for the right. The only necessary elements in his career were nurtured through a personal history that would land many of us in padded rooms. The only imperative of his on-air presentation is that he expresses his views through tears and instense head shaking dismay.

His family history includes numerous tragic family deaths including two siblings and his mother. His mother and a brother committed suicide. In addition to numerous other personal tragedies, Glenn Beck is a long time alcoholic and drug addict who credits intense therapy and his conversion to Mormonism for his "stability".

The rise to his becoming a dangerous demagogue combined two factors: (1) his tragic life; and (2) the coincidence that he he became involved in Top 40 radio in his twenties. By the time he had begun attacking his personal demons, he had also developed a few years in the radio business and was able to profit on his intense, mad ranting style. As many survivors of family suicide and drug and alcohol addiction know, Beck inevitably developed an absolutism in his attitudes. To survive in his state of despair it was necessary to believe in a treatment program with absolute zeal and commitment, even to the point of irrationailty.

Mixing together Beck's astonishingly tragic personal life and a broadcasting career has been a dangerous experiment. His tears and anger, one must suppose, tap into the intense anger and depression so many millions of Americans feel about the failures and setbacks in their own lives. His extremism one must speculate are the result of his need to be absolutely certain about an issue without ever applying analysis.

One must wonder if tomorrow Beck had a conversion to socialism and presented it in the same tragic, emotional way to a national audience -- whether his sad and angry fans wouldn't just follow along. My guess is that they would. It is the presentation, not the substance, that is addictive to his low information audience with addictive political personalities.

One can be sure of one thing about Beck. If he ever changes views, he will change absolutely to the opposite side. Any moderation or weighing of alternative ideas would introduce doubt and his self-treatment would come tumbling down.

john adkisson:

Since Glenn Beck has become some such a phenomenon, and has been aligned with the the right and, in particular, the craziest element of the right, many have assumed that he arose through a political journey. He did not.

Glenn Beck could just as easily have become a spokesman for the left as for the right. The only necessary elements in his career were nurtured through a personal history that would land many of us in padded rooms. The only imperative of his on-air presentation is that he expresses his views through tears and instense head shaking dismay.

His family history includes numerous tragic family deaths including two siblings and his mother. His mother and a brother committed suicide. In addition to numerous other personal tragedies, Glenn Beck is a long time alcoholic and drug addict who credits intense therapy and his conversion to Mormonism for his "stability".

The rise to his becoming a dangerous demagogue combined two factors: (1) his tragic life; and (2) the coincidence that he he became involved in Top 40 radio in his twenties. By the time he had begun attacking his personal demons, he had also developed a few years in the radio business and was able to profit on his intense, mad ranting style. As many survivors of family suicide and drug and alcohol addiction know, Beck inevitably developed an absolutism in his attitudes. To survive in his state of despair it was necessary to believe in a treatment program with absolute zeal and commitment, even to the point of irrationailty.

Mixing together Beck's astonishingly tragic personal life and a broadcasting career has been a dangerous experiment. His tears and anger, one must suppose, tap into the intense anger and depression so many millions of Americans feel about the failures and setbacks in their own lives. His extremism one must speculate are the result of his need to be absolutely certain about an issue without ever applying analysis.

One must wonder if tomorrow Beck had a conversion to socialism and presented it in the same tragic, emotional way to a national audience -- whether his sad and angry fans wouldn't just follow along. My guess is that they would. It is the presentation, not the substance, that is addictive to his low information audience with addictive political personalities.

One can be sure of one thing about Beck. If he ever changes views, he will change absolutely to the opposite side. Any moderation or weighing of alternative ideas would introduce doubt and his self-treatment would come tumbling down.

The first time I ever watched Becks Show for more than a few moments was this Saturday before that the most I can say i saw of him was his rant onthe floor of the Chicago Stock exchange which started the TEA Party Movement. I became involved in the movement not becuase of Beck but becuase Conservatives wanted a way to save our nation from socialism. The first Speeci I ever heard of Obama's was his address to the DNC I think at The 2000 convention. I saod to myself them while listening to him that this guy is a Marxist and the Democrats will run him for president someday. Nothing Obama has done since has ever disuaded me from my first impression. When I read Marx, in my sociology classes, the ideas expressed are one in the same as Obama's ideas.

I have real disrespect for Marxism, Socialism or any style of Communism whether it be Cuban, African, Russian or Maoist. Second hand information about this system is enough for me to know it is wrong for America.

The people in the TEA movement are like me they have had enough progression towards the left in our nation and want desparately to swing the pendulum back to the right before we fall over. I think it would have happened with or without Beck. If not Beck you would be demogoging some other person The people on the right have mastered the ways of activism and it will translate to changes come November 2010. The last time was in 1994 and it was led by members of congress or people running for congress. The next conservative revolution will a grass roots effort to reform congress to bring back the constitutional limitations on congress and get rid of the graft and corruption in BOTH parties.

I don't know Glenn Beck personally, but I would agree that any involvement in Top 40 radio would probably drive anyone nuts. I can't bear to listen to Top 40 radio, I can't imagine how emotionally devastating it must be to work in the middle of it day after day.

I'm not sure what type of treatment program Mr. Beck has been involved in, but most of the people I know who are living happily in recovery have to go through a continuous process of ego-deflation in order to remain in touch with reality. The belief that "everybody's out to get me" or "I wouldn't have the problems I'm having if all you people would just do what I say" simply doesn't cut it anymore. These ideas have to be replaced with thoughts and actions of personal responsibility and accountability. To blame others (the president, the liberals, the muslim extremists) for your unhappiness is dishonest. These thoughts and actions must continue, on a daily basis, long after the last drink or drug has been put down. To do otherwise, for most addicts, only invites misery.

Having said that, I don't believe Mr. Beck actually buys into most of what he peddles on the air. I believe his emotions, and subsequent emotional outbursts, are part of a carefully crafted and well-executed show business persona. The Glenn Beck who appears in front of the camera in no way resembles the Glenn Beck who is at home with his family. It wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that he voted for Obama.

See, the real problem is that too few Americans know what communism, socialism and Marxism are and how they are different from each other. They also have no idea what fascism is and don't realize that fascism can exist without Nazism. This is particularly a problem on the right where fear of elitism encourages a proud and belligerent form of ignorance that can lead people to say "I don't know anything about socialism but I know it when I see it."

The public highway system is socialism in action...should we tear up the interstates for your ideological purity? Social Security and Medicare are socialism. The fire department - that's socialism.

I think it's time to reissue The Paranoid Style in American Politics. It's so perfectly in play tody.

I'm grateful that you point this out. I just did the same in another post. Socialism is government. Expansion of one means the expansion of the other. A country with 60-100% taxes we call Socialist. That may change as we approach the 50% mark--my guess is at that point we'll say 75% is Socialist. Right now the Federal Government has about 40% of our money, but they're printing more and you know they're not giving it to us (unless you do what they say, like buy a car). The Tea Party movement and the recent march on Washington were oppose to that, but I don't really see much of a contraction coming--more like a holding pattern until people are ready to give up more freedom.

Here's a thought. To oversimplify the situation, let's pretend time is money. We all know that the way you spend your time is really your only freedom. Thus (again, oversimplified), you can tell who has more freedom, the government or the people, by which body has more money. If the Gov't really has more than 50% of the money it really has more than 50% of the freedom. That's the tipping point. That's when there's really no denying you're oppressed. I don't want to see that in my lifetime, but trusting politicians and bureaucrats to retrecnch is like trusting an addict to pay you back that Benjamin. Something must be done, and while there are lots of plans out there right now, the right is too musy trying to stop the terrible expansion (before it's too late) to advance its own ideas. We'll get a chance in 2010, I reckon.

Speaking of time is money. If the IRS changed the way we do taxes and mailed you a bill on Dec 31, 2009 (Happy New Year eh?) for what you owed and you were in the highest marginal tax rate you would have to pay 33.9% of your income. How many of you realize with state and local, and sales, and income taxes that those people have to pay about 50% of their income in taxes. The IRS however, takes our money as we make it. Time is money so the people in the highest tax brackent. have only been making money for themselves since July 4th or so (Hey Happy Fourth of July , hey wait in a minute didn't The Revolutionary War occur in large part because of taxes?). Every day from January 1st, till about July 4th they haven't been making any money for themselves they have been paying all of it in taxes.

. And before you all start flaming that they're rich and should pay more in taxes. How about the fact that the "rich people" already pay all the taxes. The top 1% of income earners paid 39% of the income taxes in 2005. The top 10% paid 70% of the income taxes. The top 50% of income earners paid 97% of all income taxes. The bottom 50% paid 3% of the income taxes. This data is from 2005. <link>

Now I know all you lefties are gonna say but the rich have gotten richer, and the poor have gotten poorer. Well, as a percentage of total income tax revenue the rich pay way more percentage wise in taxes. In 1980 the top 1% paid 20%, the top 10% paid 50%, the top 50% of earners paid 93% of taxes, and the bottom 50% paid 7% of the taxes. (same link)

Perhaps the top tax bracket should be thankful that they haven't been making money for themselves in just December and half of November. (FDR)

It's really quite simple. The top 1% live in a far different country than the bottom 50%. The top 1% live in a country where the government actually does their bidding, in no small part because they PAY FOR IT.

If that's the way it's going to be, fine. Just stop dressing it up like we're all getting the same services and equal representation regardless of income because that, as Joe Wilson would say, is a LIE. And while we're at it, let's not pretend like the top 1% are actually paying all the taxes they are scheduled to pay, because we know that's not true either.