Glenn Beck Program Bans Any Talk Of Trump

[RPfan1992]

Glenn Beck‘s program with Pat Gray and Stu Burguiere is taking HuffPost‘s stance on Donald Trump a giant step further — they’re going to pretend he doesn’t exist.

“It’s the Glenn Beck Program with Pat & Stu, now 100% Trump Free, with 100% Less Trump,” Gray announced on Wednesday’s program.

“I’m sick of it,” said Burguiere. “So we’re moving on. Can’t do another show.”

Late last week, HuffPost declared that the site was moving the presidential frontrunner to its entertainment pages. Although they’re not entirely doing that.

http://dailycaller.com/2015/07/22/gl...talk-of-trump/

[Sentinelrv]

Those comments...

[CPUd]

LOL this "ban" will last maybe the rest of the week.

[RPfan1992]

Those comments...

Funny to watch GB get attacked.

[r3volution 3.0]

Good for Beck, I hope he sticks to his guns.

[jj-]

The Blaze is owned by Beck.

If you visit The Blaze, you'll see is All TRUMP All The Time. So the network isn't banning Trump, they can't afford to lose so many clicks. Even RPF can't ban Trump.

[r3volution 3.0]

The Blaze is owned by Beck.

If you visit The Blaze, you'll see is All TRUMP All The Time. So the network isn't banning Trump, they can't afford to lose so many clicks. Even RPF can't ban Trump.

Sure they could. Just replace Trump with youtube kitten videos, celebrity gossip, or softcore porn.

...plenty of options out there for mindless clickbait.

[jj-]

Sure they could. Just replace Trump with youtube kitten videos, celebrity gossip, or softcore porn.

...plenty of options out there for mindless clickbait.

Trump is by far the most googled presidential candidate. When they google Trump, The Blaze or others won't get visits for posting the things you mentioned.

Get ouf of la la land.

[kahless]

I stopped tuning into Beck years ago partly because of those two neocon establishment douchebags Pat and Stu. So I think this actually helps Trump when these two clowns want to ban talk of him.

[Cleaner44]

Trump is too big right now. Those that attempt to ban or boycott will be the ones that suffer, not Trump.

Like it or not, much of the public is intrigued by him.

[well_met_sir]

Even RPF can't ban Trump.

Well why would we ban it? Ron Paul isn't running so it makes sense to support someone else. For many of us, that someone is Trump.

[GunnyFreedom]

Anybody who supports Trump is completely devoid of principle. Trump is an antigun pro-abortion socialized healthcare nutjob who helped engineer the Pelosi-Reid majorities and helped install Terry McAuliffe as governor of Virginia, and gave six figures to Shillary when she was not in any position to help him. He buys eminent domain condemnations, and is about as far from libertarianism or constitutionalism as one can possibly get. This whackjob is a progressive liberal socialist who is just telling people whatever the f they want to hear.

[kahless]

Anybody who supports Trump is completely devoid of principle. Trump is an antigun pro-abortion socialized healthcare nutjob who helped engineer the Pelosi-Reid majorities and helped install Terry McAuliffe as governor of Virginia, and gave six figures to Shillary when she was not in any position to help him. He buys eminent domain condemnations, and is about as far from libertarianism or constitutionalism as one can possibly get. This whackjob is a progressive liberal socialist who is just telling people whatever the f they want to hear.

I would not go that far and would say he is closer to the right then the Progressive left. If Rand does not make and out choices are Hillary or some other Progressive Republican, I think Trump would be more palatable then a Jeb Bush.

Abortion

Donald Trump on Abortion: “I’m Pro-Life and I Have Been Pro-Life”
http://www.lifenews.com/2015/01/26/d...n-im-pro-life/

http://www.ontheissues.org/Donald_Trump.htm
Ban late abortions; exceptions for rape, incest or health. (Jun 2015)
I am now pro-life; after years of being pro-choice. (Apr 2011)
I changed my views to pro-life based on personal stories. (Apr 2011)
I am pro-life; fight ObamaCare abortion funding. (Feb 2011)
Pro-choice, but ban partial birth abortion. (Jul 2000)
Favors abortion rights but respects opposition. (Dec 1999)

Obamacare

ObamaCare is a catastrophe that must be repealed & replaced. (Jun 2015) typical Republican position
Kill ObamaCare before it becomes a trillion-ton weight. (Dec 2011) typical Republican position
Increase insurance competition across state lines. (Dec 2011) Promoted by Ron Paul

[GunnyFreedom]

I would not go that far and would say he is closer to the right then the Progressive left. If Rand does not make and are choices are Hillary or some other Progressive Republican, I think Trump would be more palatable then a Jeb Bush.

I didn't think we did the 'lesser evil' thing around here.

Abortion

He was adamantly pro abortion until he decided to run for the Republican nomination.

Obamacare

He was adamantly pro universal healthcare until he decided to run for the Republican nomination.

This guy is just telling people what they want to hear. Too many people are falling for it.

[anaconda]

I've banned myself from talking about Glenn Beck.

[r3volution 3.0]

Trump is too big right now. Those that attempt to ban or boycott will be the ones that suffer, not Trump.

Like it or not, much of the public is intrigued by him.

Much of the public is dumber than a bag of rocks.

[Spikender]

Much of the public is dumber than a bag of rocks.

Not only that, but the public craves people like Trump in the media to have something "interesting" to talk about.

Their empty, shallow lives don't offer much excitement to those around them in a conversation so it makes sense.

[EBounding]

It's stunning to see so many conservatives unquestionably lap up whatever Trump says. Most Trump supporters have no interest looking into the positions he hasn't campaigned on--they're that angry. Some say "he's seen the light, like Reagan" even though Trump never said such a thing. Then there's those that know he's bad on everything, but immigration is the absolute most important issue.

[dannno]

I didn't think we did the 'lesser evil' thing around here.

Well it's not like Jesus can run for President, nobody is perfect. I don't like the idea of voting for the lesser of two evils, but if one person is really evil and another person is only a little bit I'd have to consider it. I think the issue is people who wanted to say, vote for Obama or McCain/Romney did not realize that even from their perspective their candidate was only slightly less evil, and from a more unbiased perspective they were both about equally evil.

That it no way means I'd support him, donate to him or even vote for him in the primary.. but if it was him against Hillary it would be awfully tempting. My biggest issue is voting for people who pretend to be something and then have their strings pulled - i.e. Bush II running on a "no nation building" policy and Obama on an anti-war, pro-civil liberties platform then completely abandoning it. Arguably, Trump could do the same, which is why I wouldn't do anything to really support him except possibly vote for him against Hillary in the general and at least stick up for him on issues where I feel he is correct.

[69360]

This is one of those times I agree with Beck

[jj-]

I didn't think we did the 'lesser evil' thing around here.

Didn't many here support you despite being in favor of food labeling laws? If so, you were just the lesser of evils.

[Spikender]

Didn't many here support you despite being in favor of food labeling laws? If so, you were just the lesser of evils.

To be fair, we can't agree on everything, and food labeling is just one issue.

The "lesser of two evils" thing to me means that a person has a pretty significant amount of things you disagree on/find horrendous but they are still better than the alternative.

[AuH20]

I see it more as 'drop a frag grenade in the GOP's lap' as opposed to the lesser of two evils.

[jj-]

I see it more as 'drop a frag grenade in the GOP's lap' as opposed to the lesser of two evils.

Exactly. Many people can't grasp that a lot of Trump's support is just to discombobulate the GOP establishment.

[kahless]

I didn't think we did the 'lesser evil' thing around here.

I have ended up voting 3rd party since the 90s rather than support the lesser. If this is a chance to break the back of the Republican establishment and the media I will take it. 3rd party or sitting home and allowing Jeb to take it gets us no where.

He was adamantly pro abortion until he decided to run for the Republican nomination.,,,,,,,,,

Not really, what I posted shows 2011. It may or may not go back further than that, I just have not checked. Same with healthcare. I do not discount what you are saying, like the rest we could be getting played.

[r3volution 3.0]

I see it more as 'drop a frag grenade in the GOP's lap' as opposed to the lesser of two evils.

Exactly. Many people can't grasp that a lot of Trump's support is just to discombobulate the GOP establishment.

To what end?

[GunnyFreedom]

Didn't many here support you despite being in favor of food labeling laws? If so, you were just the lesser of evils.

Shows how poorly you pay attention. Doesn't surprise me really. My position was not to require food labeling of any kind, but that if you did label you had to tell the truth, that lying is fraud. Therefore you could not call a GMO tomato with frog genes a 'tomato,' because it is not in fact a tomato. Sell it as a frogmato, or a GMO tomato, but to just call it a 'tomato' when it has genes from a frog is fraud.

Nothi g about that requires food labeling, GMO or otherwise. It simply requires that if you are going to identify the contents of your food, that you have to tell the truth. To sell food and lie about the ingredients is fraud.

It doesn't surprise me that you are a Trump guy given your utter lack of capacity for paying attention or retaining what you have observed, or your outright internal distortion of what you observe to suit your own whims.

[jj-]

I see, so you wanted the government to put irrational burdens on food producers. You were at best then the lesser of two evils. It's kinda arrogant to say you weren't the lesser of evils, because that would mean you were perfect, lol.

It doesn't surprise me that you are a Trump supporter

Except that I won't vote for Trump, as I said so you seem to not be able to pay attention. Supporting some of things he does such as attacking McCain I do. I hope this post was short enough for you to pay attention and understand.

[GunnyFreedom]

Except that I won't vote for Trump, as I said so you seem to not be able to pay attention. Supporting some of things he does such as attacking McCain I support. I hope this post was short enough for you to pay attention and understand.

you have been all over like three, four, five? threads singing Trump's praises on every little thing, now why would you do that if you don't want him to win?

[jj-]

you have been all over like three, four, five? threads singing Trump's praises on every little thing, now why would you do that if you don't want him to win?

fun? laughs? sometimes opportunities to back up the principles behind some of the things he is doing? make people think about the advantages of bilateral trade agreements over multicountry trade agreements, which is one the things that only Trump mentioned? It might encourage Rand to try to favor bilateral trade agreements over multi country trade agreements.

To be fair, grasping all these aspects requires thinking, something that you at least haven't had time to do when reading many posts before reacting.