A bunch of media sites said radio ranter and Tea Party darling Glenn Beck apologized to us. Did he?

The Daily Kos seemed to think it was an apology, but a “questionable” one. Their headline: “Glenn Beck apologizes for offending you with the truth.”

The New York Daily News was derisive, but led with “Firebrand radio host Glenn Beck apologized Thursday for ‘dividing’ the country with his conservative and controversial views in recent years.”

They called it a bad apology, in other words. What did he actually say?

Beck was getting a “Freedom of Speech” award from Talkers magazine, “The Bible of Talk Radio and the New Talk Media.” In his acceptance, he said, “For any role that I have played in dividing, I wish I could take it back,” he said. “I don’t wish I could take back the truth that was spoken, but perhaps — not ‘perhaps’ — many times I could have said it differently.”

I listened to this speech so you wouldn’t have to. (You’re welcome. Your presence here is thanks enough.) It was almost 19 minutes long and included props. Beck spoke up to defend the founding fathers and the Bill of Rights against unspecified critics, pointing out that no one is perfect.

He rambled about Nazis (he’s against them), and produced the “actual napkin that was on the Führer when they tried to kill him.” He spread it on his chest. The Nazis, Beck explained, opposed freedom of speech.

He linked himself to Martin Luther King – who wanted freedom of speech.

He returned to the subject of himself and his awesome responsibility. “For those in my position – unfortunately, I don’t know of a perfect person*. I don’t know of anybody who doesn’t look back on the last 10, 20 years of their life and say ‘Boy, if I just knew then what I know now….’”

(*Remember who else we established wasn’t a perfect person? Thomas Jefferson! And George Washington!)

“The times we live in are perilous. If I would have told you 10 years ago that I thought our country could be on the brink of absolute disaster and we would be at each other’s throats, I would have said to you, ‘Have you seen what happened last year? Have you seen how we all stood on the Capitol stairs together? That’s not possible!’ And yet here we are.”

Wait, what was this 2002 love-fest? I guess he was talking about Republican Party victories that year, when they took control of both House and Senate.

The next thing was the money quote: “And for any role that I have played in dividing, I wish I could take it back. I don’t wish I could take back the truth that was spoken. But perhaps – not ‘perhaps’ – many times I could have said it differently. But I wasn’t fully aware of the times that we’re living in.”

Luckily, there is “profound opportunity and profound light just on the horizon, ready to dawn.”

So is that an apology? And for what?

Having heard the speech, I think those lines aren’t about dividing the country. They’re about dividing conservatives. Shucks.

Okay then, is he vaguely apologizing to conservatives for being divisive? He wishes he had said the same things differently. But he couldn’t have known! In other words, he doesn’t take responsibility. He just wishes he had foreseen the future better.

So no, that’s not really an apology. That’s Glenn Beck – dropped by Fox News in 2011, still losing popularity – positioning himself as a kinder gentler uniter who can point out profound opportunity/light if cable and satellite operators just carry his network, TheBlaze.

Can he do it? The man who said Obama is a “racist” with a “deep-seated hatred of white people”? Who says immigration rights supporters just want “to have lawbreakers come here”? Who called Gloria Steinem a “self-centered self-righteous socialist out of control dangerous man-hating bitch”.

Oh, probably not. The same day he spoke regretfully of his divisiveness he called Michelle Obama a “monster,” “Lady Macbeth,” and “a frightening woman.”

I wish he had really apologized. I wish he had apologized to the country. I wish he had apologized to the world and everyone in it, because the Glenn Beck position that I find the most lethally divisive is his promotion of the “discredited global warming scam” meme, and his stance against climate agreements. Climate change is the disaster he should be focusing on, not disunity in the Republican Party.