Glenn Beck says that he shouldn't have been so "divisive". Hmm. I wonder if any of the democratic pundits and leaders will ever say the same thing. I don't think so. It's really only the people on the right who ever have any remorse for the harm they've caused. On the left, it's part of a means to an end. Divide and conquer has been a huge part of the Obama administration strategy from the get go. Whether it's pitting rich against poor, male against female, black against white, or any number of this versus that, it's a strategy that seems to work for them.
I think there's a time and a place for divisiveness anyway. Consider Samuel Adams, agitator for the patriots in the American Revolution. Was he divisive? Yes. Was it necessary at the time? Again, my answer is yes.
One thing those of us who tend to complain about the other side should do though, is use facts and reason...the Thomas Paine approach works best. If Glenn Beck has a fault in this, it's mostly through hyperbole in his divisiveness. Avoiding hyperbole and meanness, and sticking with facts will go a long way toward persuading people, much further than attacks made with acid tongues. At a time when the nation is on the skids, some times, attacking those who are doing the damage is the only way to help stop the slide.
But do it in a civil manner, and don't stoop to their level.