Maybe they get tired of the fact that a vocal subgroup of conservatives would rather discuss their psycho-analysis of liberals (e.g. this entire thread being an example) than whatever point the liberals are trying make?
 

Guess I hit too close to home, huh?
 

Interesting dynamic here.  I've been thinking why the Spin Zone, on POA was so active with "opposing" viewpoints, and have come to this theory.  Liberal/progressives don't want to discuss topics because often their arguments are rooted in emotion, and not fact.  Eventually, that comes out, and often they resort to accusations, name calling, or just throwing a hissy fit.  I'm not saying the fine people here do that, but in general, I do think that happens.

So, on POA a liberal/progressive may come into the SZ, and do a quick hit and run on occasion, just well because they are there.  Here we are much less likely to have these hit, and run visits, ala what AP used to do, I guess to make herself FEEL better.  We saw what happened to some of the folks here after Trump won the election.  They vanished.  Do liberal/progressive just not take losing an election, or an argument well?  Guess not. 

Another thing, while I am on my little rant.  Does anyone see the hypocrisy of participating in an avocation that requires independent thought, responsibility, and the burning of large amounts of fossil fuel all mostly for pure pleasure while promoting the liberal/progressive agenda, and voting Democrat?  My head just has never been able to wrap itself around that one.  I am on a few firearm related web forums, and there are a few of those on there also.  They like the shooting sports, and even the element of being able to defend oneself, then vote for people who believe just the opposite, and reduce their rights or even take them away altogether. 

I don't get it.     

Hannity is amazing.  I haven't had that much of a chance to listen to Beck but in the past have been very impressed with some of his stuff, he is brilliant, but also have heard him say things that made me go, what???  Can't agree with him all the time and when I don't it's major, where I usually find myself enthusiastically agreeing with Hannity.

I like what Hannity says, and find myself agreeing with him most of the time.  The consistent theme I see with the more conservative talk show hosts like Mark Steyn, Mark Levin, Rush, Hannity, etc are twofold.

1.  They ADMIT, and promote their show as not "news" but conservative opinion.
2.  They are NOT lock step with the establishment Republicans, and will criticize the Republicans when they go off the conservative reservation.

I would hope not. The Blaze is having issues right now, especially after the Tomi Lahren incident. CRTV may be the better option, or a new network altogether. I'm not a fan of Glenn Beck. I'm really not a huge fan of Sean Hannity either, for that matter.

I like Hannity more than Beck, although he certainly isn't my favorite.  Beck is a LOON. 

The liberal/progressive/Democrats have infiltrated education, media, entertainment, government, and large corporations, especially technology.  They have made their platform chic for younger people.  Communism, and non-profit are very trendy.  I do believe this is changing or will change, as people wake up to a dwindling standard of living, and quality of life.  They will get tired of working at Starbucks, and paying back their school loans for degrees in Women's Studies, or minority art history. 

Just doing some basic searches on Google and it becomes very apparent who their handlers are.

Google, Yahoo, Bing, and the others do it.  Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram also censor conservative content.  That is what we are dealing with.  CENSORSHIP.  The left wants the "Fair Act" which is nothing but fair, just more censorship.  It is akin to book burning like the Nazi's did.  We can't effectively argue with you so we just won't allow your ideas, thoughts, nor opinions.  They are VERBOTEN! 

Without China to prop them up, North Korea is a nothing.
However, Iran and India seem to be great friends of the Norks, so....

GWB (Bush II) talked about the "Axis of Evil". 

Fifteen years ago, President George W. Bush labeled Iraq, North Korea, and Iran the "Axis of Evil." This comment was roundly mocked. It was largely forgotten after the war in Iraq and the persistent insurgency. Because two of the countries are still dominating current events and OpsLens analysts described North Korea as the location of a future war, it is worth revisiting the key phrase and how it exhibited wisdom and foresight.

In the 2002 State of the Union Address, just a few months after Sept. 11, Bush described North Korea as "a regime arming with missiles and weapons of mass destruction, while starving its citizens." In regards to Iran, he said they "aggressively pursue these weapons and export terror." Liberals blasted this concept as a ridiculous comparison to the Axis powers in World War II and described it as an attempt by a war cowboy to argue for the Iraq war.

Critics pointed out this phrase didn't accurately reflect the hatred that Iran and Iraq shared for each other after their long war in the 1980s. But the original Axis powers didn't like each other either and would have likely fought each other after winning the initial war.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/revisiting-the-axis-of-evil-15-years-after-george-w-bush-coined-the-term/article/2622576

Russia, China, N. Korea, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Vnezuela, Cuba, etc are NOT our friends.  They probably never will be.  The best we can do is to show them that we are strong, and will combat any deed they do that is not in our best interest, or is a threat.  Appeasement will never work, as it just shows our weakness, which the DO NOT respect.  (See Obama)