"But much of the citizen anger that is driving these protests and which Glenn Beck is channeling is more complex than that."

But, the billion dollar question, Glenn, is where were these suddenly active citizens doing nothing during the Bush years?

My question to you is: were there any rallies during the Bush years that protested the economic conditions? I remember rallies against the war but I don't remember any organized and media supported populist rallies during the Bush years which would explain why these "active citizens" were not out and about. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Beck is tapping into widespread and authentic discontent

A key point not to lose sight of. Regardless of how confused and befuddled his analysis is, many Americans from all across the political spectrum feel intuitively that the American political system is badly broken, and that too much wealth and power have accumulated in too few undeserving hands. So: the wind is at his sails, and it would be a mistake to underestimate the intensity of the energy that is driving his popularity. The confusion of his message may reflect the increasing breakdown of American politics. We may be on the verge of something big -- perhaps calamitous; perhaps necessary and healing in the long run, once it all gets sorted out.

-- seanmcbride

Yes, he is. Again I bring up Huckabee. Huckabee started this process during the Republican primaries and if we allow Beck and the Huckabees of the world to be the leaders of this "widespread and authentic discontent" then we are Fools.

This would certainly be a great time for an Independent candidate to show some leadership and go after the huge number of Americans who are outraged over the establishment politicians and establishment media who are running our country into the ground. If no one else emerges on the scene then Glenn Beck, Huckabee and others will become the champions for a lot of these citizens by default.

Johnathan Capeheart has always been clueless and his little game where he pretended he didn't know Glenn's name was so transparent and such a typical beltway establishment put down of an "outsider". While I'm glad that Ratigan had Glenn on as a guest what's with getting rid of Glenn and inviting Capeheart and Huffington back on for more in the segment? Did they resume talking about Iran after Glenn left or did they discuss something else? Why was Glenn excluded?

I agree with those who said this isn't any of our business.

Sorry to be blunt but some of you people really need to get a life. I think some of the mean spirited comments here say more about the person posting than they do about any of the people involved in this media driven soap opera. Evidently some of you think you walk on water and have never made any mistakes in your own lives and therefore you feel free to scold and condemn others for their weaknesses/mistakes. I feel more sorry for you than I do any of the people in the Edwards/Hunter households.

Please...

"Evidently some of you think you walk on water and have never made any mistakes in your own lives and therefore you feel free to scold and condemn others for their weaknesses/mistakes"

BLAH BLAH BLAH, how many of us ran national campaigns based on values (all politicians run on being honest and ethical), then had an affair, got the lady pregnant, paid her 150 grand of campaign money (supporter donations) "to shoot some video," using political staff to help execute the cover up, denied the affair and the child on national TV, the whole time with a dying wife at home we've leveraged for campaign purposes?

Please, GTFOH. Most of us couldn't even make-up a story like that, let alone intentionally live it on a national stage. Just move on to your Polanski defense already.

-- Crisis=Government

Crisis=Government -

Thank you for your post about my earlier remarks. I would like to comment on one thing you said because I think it's important to this discussion. You wrongly assume in your comment that I would defend Polanski's behavior despite the fact that I never mentioned Polanski in my comment and despite the fact that you don't know me and can't possibly know my opinion about Polanski. Quite simply, you made assumptions about me because you didn't like what I wrote and it evidently suited your preconceived idea about me to do so. I think a lot of the people attacking one or more of the players in the Edwards drama are making assumptions as well. They don't like one or more of the players and because of that they assume the worst about them. For those of us who haven't made the Edwards' drama personal we tend to look at this in a more objective fashion. We realize that we don't have all the facts and that it's grossly unfair to attack people based on little snippets of gossip we learn from the media.

wtf1000

This game of "cat and mouse" is what got Saddam in trouble and it looks like deja vu all over again.

Yeah, ain't that just a bitch? We're still clearing out all those WMD's Saddam squirreled away aren't we? I'm sure glad we got all the evidence lined up before we attacked him.

-- Jim White

LOL. Good one, Jim. LOL

What a shame that you had to write this blog entry, Glenn. But, after viewing some of the threads on DU and KOS lately I think that it was unfortunately very necessary. I've watched in amazement as some Obama supporters have accused those who dare to criticize Obama as nothing but right wingers when, in fact, their own refusal to accept dissent as a necessary part of politics much more closely mimics the behavior of the Bush supporters.