Advertise Contact About This Web Site Webmaster Information



Play Super 6 each week for free with Sky Sports for the chance to win $250,000



Visit www.uspokersite.net for US online poker related information and news.



Get started with the top online bitcoin casino and win real cash playing casino games.



As you already know by now that Oreilly sucks and is the biggest loser. Oreilly facts apart, many people spend their time on computers playing online poker real money games as a hobby playing online poker real money games as a hobby including slots



Review the best Canadian online casinos for real money slots online at SlotsOnlineCanada.com



If you are looking to buy prescription medications from Canada, then buy from a licensed Canadian pharmacy.



RealMoneyAction.com is quickly becoming the #1 source for playing online casino games for real money. Check them out



Get all the news and information you will ever need about sing mobile bingo at this top mobile bingo comparison site, there is no spin here, just great reviews.



The number one place for mobile slots is this site, they offer lots of info and exclusive free spins.



O'Reilly Sucks
Blog Archives

January - 2015
February - 2015

January - 2014
February - 2014
March - 2014
April - 2014
May - 2014
June - 2014
July - 2014
August - 2014
September - 2014
October - 2014
November - 2014
December - 2014

January - 2013
February - 2013
March - 2013
April - 2013
May - 2013
June - 2013
July - 2013
August - 2013
September - 2013
October - 2013
November - 2013
December - 2013

January - 2012
February - 2012
March - 2012
April - 2012
May - 2012
June - 2012
July - 2012
August - 2012
September - 2012
October - 2012
November - 2012
December - 2012




Website Links

O'Reilly Info

The O'Reilly Iraq Apology Countdown Clock

O'Reilly Spins

Cable News Ratings

Read The Letter O'Reilly Had His Attorney Send me

O'Reilly Wins 2004 Misinformer of The Year Award

O'Reilly Death Penalty Lies

O'Reilly on Top 10 Conservative Idiot List 49 Times Since 2001

O'Reilly Calls Mexicans Wetbacks

Mail-to-Bill

Hate-Mail

O'Reilly #5 On Top 25 Right-Wing Journalist List

O'Reilly Factor Year In Review 2009

Factor Pollster Caught Writing GOP Policy Memo

What a Fair & Balanced O'Reilly Factor Would Look Like

Transcript: Bill O'Reilly v Jeremy Glick

Peabody Award Facts

Bill Clinton Enron News

Buzzflash Names O'Reilly Media Putz of The Week

Conclusive Proof O'Reilly & The Republican Party Are Both Corrupt

The Right-Wing Liberal Killer Story O'Reilly Ignored

The Facts About O'Reilly And GE Doing Business With Iran

How to Deal With an O'Reilly Factor Ambush Interview

Why FOX News Loves Juan Williams: The Strings And The Puppet

Blogroll

ultimatetop10s.com/
AmericaBlog
Progressive Eruptions
Rude Pundit
Moveon.org
Prison Planet
Apocalypse Cafe
Fox News Boycott
Inebriated Discourse
Hannity Sucks
NewsCorpse.com
Glenn Beck Is An Idiot
Ranker.com
GlennBeckReport.com
lauraingrahamsucks.com

The Factor Guest List Count

March 2015 (0 Shows) Republicans - 0 | Democrats - 0

The Factor Guest List Count Archives

Ratings: The O'Reilly Factor - Total Viewers

Monday - 2-23-15 -- O'Reilly - 3.336
Tuesday - 2-24-15 -- O'Reilly - 2.897
Wednesday - 2-25-15 -- O'Reilly - 3.084
Thursday - 2-26-15 -- O'Reilly - 3.106
Friday - 2-27-15 -- O'Reilly - 2.470 - Greg Gutfeld Hosted

Weekly Factor Average - 2.978

The Cable News Ratings Archives

Oreilly is a polarizing figure and so is online gaming, especially at Begado Casino. There are advocates in Congress proposing a federal law, but Republican detractors. This, according to a supporter of Steve and Oreilly-sucks.com, who runs a Begado Fan Blog. The conservative approach is to stick to legitimate gaming certifications and brands like Begado, says Zachary Gleason.


The O'Reilly Sucks Blog

Chris Christie's Approval Ratings Drop To Record Low
By: Steve - March 3, 2015 - 11:00am

And of course Bill O'Reilly has totally ignored it. Which is more proof O'Reilly has a right-wing bias. Because when Christie had approval ratings as high as 72% O'Reilly reported it all the time and praised him as a top Republican who could beat Hillary and be the next President.

Now that Christie is down to record low approval ratings O'Reilly never even mentions him, let alone report on his record low approval ratings. And one more thing, O'Reilly does the exact opposite with President Obama, when his approval numbers were at record lows O'Reilly reported it all the time (almost every night) but when the Obama approval numbers are high O'Reilly totally ignores it.

Approval ratings for New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) are the lowest they have been since he took office in 2010, a new Rutgers-Eagleton poll finds.

The survey finds that just 37 percent of New Jersey voters have a favorable view of Christie. This number has fallen seven points since Rutgers-Eagleton issued a similar poll two months ago. A 52 percent majority of voters say they disapprove of his job as governor.

This is far from the support Christie experienced in 2012 after Hurricane Sandy. A November 2012 Quinnipiac poll found that Christie's approval ratings were at 72 percent, which was the highest rating ever recorded for a New Jersey governor.

Things started to turn a corner in January 2014 when it was reported that members of Christie's administration had shut down lanes of the George Washington Bridge in September 2013 as an act of alleged political retribution against the mayor of Fort Lee, New Jersey. Christie was implicated in the scandal, known as "Bridgegate."

His approval dropped to 53 percent that January. In December 2014, Christie was cleared of involvement with "Bridgegate" after a state investigation.

Even though we pretty much knew he knew about it, they could not prove it, so he was not really cleared, they just did not have the hard evidence to prove he knew.

During 2014, New Jersey voters grew more unsatisfied with how the governor was handling taxes and the economy, according to a series of Rutgers-Eagleton polls. Unemployment rates above the national average and a state budget deficit of over $800 million added to the tension.

This is one more thing O'Reilly ignored, state deficits. When a liberal state like California has a deficit O'Reilly does multiple segments on it slamming the liberals who run the state as left-wing fools. But when the conservative Christie has a state budgt deficit O'Reilly is silent, so O'Reilly only slams state deficits when a liberal is running the state, he gives states with a deficit who are run by conservatives a pass.

Last week, Christie took a trip to London that many pundits have said seemed to be more about campaigning than state business. A Feb. 2nd New York Times article raised questions about previous trips the governor had taken that were paid for by other people.

Once again, this shows the bias by O'Reilly and Fox. When liberals take trips on taxpayer money that they think are a waste of money they report it and slam them. When conservatives do it, O'Reilly and Fox say nothing.

On Feb. 5th, Bennett Barlyn, a former county prosecutor in New Jersey and a whistleblower against the administration, said he had spoken to federal agents regarding an investigation into Christie abusing power. The following day, United Airlines confirmed that it was cooperating with a federal investigation on Christie's former Port Authority chairman, David Samson.

The latest Rutgers-Eagleton poll was conducted between Feb. 3rd and Feb. 10th, as these news stories about Christie were unfolding.

When asked to explain why they thought Christie's poll numbers had fallen, 20 percent of voters cited the governor's "overall attitude, behavior, and personality"; 15 percent attributed it to the "Bridgegate" scandal; and 10 percent are turned off by his presidential ambitions and lack of attention to his current job as governor.

This is quite different from polls in 2012, when voters were favorable toward Christie because of his "honesty, integrity, and frankness" and New Jersey voters saw his personality in a positive light, labeling him a "fighter" and "a strong leader."

A Rutgers-Eagleton blog post quoted David Redlawsk, the director of the Eagleton Center for Public Interest Polling and a professor of political science at Rutgers University, as saying, "[Respondents] used words like 'arrogance,' 'rudeness' and 'abrasive' to explain the turnaround from his high flying post-Sandy days. And of course, all manner of mentions of Bridgegate and other scandals were offered."

And btw, one of the big reasons Republicans like Christie is because he is arrogant, rude, and abrasive. But it turns out everyone else does not like him for those things. But if a Democrat was arrogant, rude, and abrasive, of course O'Reilly and his Republican friends would not like him.

Even before last week's unfavorable news coverage for Christie, a Monmouth University survey found his job ratings declining, with 66 percent of New Jersey residents (including more than half of Republican respondents) saying they thought the governor was more concerned with his own political future than he was with governing the state.

Republican Senator Insane Snowball Stunt Was Celebrated On Fox News
By: Steve - March 3, 2015 - 10:30am

Wash. Post: GOP "Should Be Mortified By The Face Of Their Environmental Leadership." Inhofe's Insane Climate Denial Speech Tells You Everything You Need to Know About the Republican Party Right Now.

A few days ago, Republican Senator James Inhofe tried to make the case that global warming is fake because it is currently very cold. This is not even true. (It is unusually cold in the Eastern United States, but the planet on the whole is having an unusually warm year.)

Even if it were true, it would be irrelevant, because the theory of global warming predicts a jagged, long-term rise in temperature, rather than a continuous one. (This year in Washington, D.C., February is colder than January, but it does not refute the general trend for the city to face warmer temperatures in February than January.)

In other words, Inhofe's argument was breathtakingly devoid of a factual or logical grasp of its subject matter.

That would be alarming enough if Inhofe were simply one of 54 elected Republican U.S. Senators. In fact, he chairs the Senate’s Committee on Environment and Public Works. Yes, you heard me right, the Republicans made him the chairman of their Committee that deals with the environment and global warming. He is the chairman of a committee on global warming that he does not believe in, which is the Republican party in a nutshell, insane.

The implications of this go well beyond the simple reality that an Inhofe-chaired committee is unlikely to pass well-designed environmental legislation. We live in an era of party government, where presidents ratify decisions within narrow parameters set by their fellow partisans. Any Republican environmental policy will be shaped in a context where the views of James Inhofe are, at minimum, treated with respect.

Inhofe's views lie perfectly within the mainstream of Republican thought. At a House committee this week, Steve Scalise, a member of the leadership, asserted, "I know the president loves talking about global warming -- and they're canceling flights all around the country due to snow blizzards." That'll show him! Obviously climate scientists never predicted the possibility of snow storms in Boston.

Actually they did, snow in winter does not prove there is no global warming, and any who thinks it does is either dumb or blind, or both. In fact, high snowfall amounts are more proof global warming is real, just as extreme high heat days are also proof. Extreme weather patters are more proof global warming is real, except in the far-right dreamland where snow in winter means global warming is a hoax.

Jeb Bush, who has positioned himself as the most moderate Republican candidate, has also questioned the validity of climate science.

Of course, the design of environmental regulation, or the appropriate balance between economic cost and clean air, is a subject on which reasonable people can disagree. But the modern Republican party (as opposed to the one of a generation ago) is structurally incapable of reasonable disagreement or calculus.

And btw, not a word of this story was reported by O'Reilly, even though he claims to believe global warming is real, he said nothing because he did not want to make Senator Inhofe look like a nut, and because he is a Republican who ignores all the news like this that make Republicans look like far-right loons.

O'Reilly's Very Own Argentina Protest Video Exposes His Lies
By: Steve - March 3, 2015 - 9:30am

Footage newly uncovered by Mother Jones shows that Bill O'Reilly's claim that he covered a protest in Argentina in which "many were killed with real bullets" is a lie.

In the footage, which is O'Reilly's very own report for CBS News from the incident in question, the Fox News host makes no mention of anyone dying and describes police using "tear gas," not live ammunition.

On February 19th, Mother Jones wrote that O'Reilly had never reported from "a war zone, in Argentina, in the Falklands" as he's said in the past. O'Reilly responded by claiming that when he had said he reported from a "war zone," he was specifically describing a 1982 Buenos Aires protest which broke out after Argentina surrendered in the War.

O'Reilly has frequently lied about the violence at that protest to emphasize his own reporting bona fides, going so far as to call it a "combat situation."

For example, O'Reilly claimed in a 2009 interview that during the riot the army shot at protesters with "real bullets, not tear gas":
O'REILLY: "When the riots broke out in the Casa Rosada, the army was standing between the people and the presidential palace. Here in the United States, we would do tear gas and rubber bullets. They were doing real bullets. They were just gunning these people down, shooting them down in the streets."
Even though every other reporter who was there said that never happened, nobody was killed, and there is no evidence anyone was gunned down in the streets. In fact, O'Reilly is the only reporter who was there to ever say many people were killed, no other journalist reported that or saw it. None of the cameramen, producers, or sound guys saw it either.

In his book The No Spin Zone, O'Reilly also described the protest, writing "A major riot ensued and many were killed." And on his now-defunct radio show, O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: "I was in the middle of that riot when Argentine soldiers came out of the barracks and got into the streets and actually shot people dead in the street, because people were rioting. And it wasn't like warning shots or rubber bullets or teargas. They were shooting people dead."
O'Reilly's former colleagues who reported from the same protest, as well as reporters from other outlets and an Argentine historian, have all contradicted his claim that there were fatalities.

Mother Jones has since unearthed O'Reilly's own report from the scene, which makes no mention of live ammunition or deaths.

Filed with his then-employer CBS News, O'Reilly's voice can be heard over footage of the protest specifically reporting that "police struck back, firing tear gas and rushing the crowd."

He does say that "some journalists" got hurt, but describes the incident as a "disturbance" and does not mention anyone dying.



O'Reilly's report aired on local CBS affiliates at the time.

O'Reilly initially responded to criticism about his lies and exaggerations about his journalistic exploits by attacking his critics as partisan, but he and Fox News have largely fallen silent as evidence mounts against several of his tall tales.

Fox: O'Reilly Didn't See Bombings In Ireland: He Saw Photos Of Them
By: Steve - March 2, 2015 - 11:30am

This is such a load of garbage it's laughable. Because if we use that argument I could say I say JFK get shot because I saw photos of it. Then claim I am a journalist. O'Reilly is a liar and he needs to give a public apology adn admit it, then say he is sorry. And that still does not address all the other lies he has been caught in, the man is a liar, plain and simple.

Fox News issued a clarification on Friday on behalf of its star host Bill O'Reilly, saying that he said he'd "seen" bombings in Northern Ireland because police showed him photos of them.

The Washington Post spotted a passage in O'Reilly's 2013 book, "Keep It Pithy," in which he described seeing lethal bombings in Northern Ireland.

"I've seen soldiers gun down unarmed civilians in Latin America, Irish terrorists kill and maim their fellow citizens in Belfast with bombs," O'Reilly wrote.

A Fox spokesperson told the Washington Post that O'Reilly did not witness any bombings or injuries in Northern Ireland but was simply shown photos by police officers.

So then he lied, because when you write a book and say you saw something happen, and you did not see it happen, you lied. What he should have said is that he saw photos of soldiers gun down unarmed civilians. And think about this, if O'Reilly lied about all this stuff how can we believe anything he ever says?

And he will not even admit to the lies, or say he is sorry, so his credibility is gone, done. Nothing he ever says can be believed again. The man is a proven liar and he can never be trusted to be telling the truth.

More Details About The O'Reilly L.A. Riots Lie Story
By: Steve - March 2, 2015 - 11:00am

Ok, let's jump into our time machine and travel to Los Angeles, 1992, where six days of civil unrest occurred after four LAPD officers were acquitted of charges that they had used excessive force while arresting Rodney King.

Who should appear on the scene, super reporter/so-called journalist Bill O'Reilly, who covered the situation as the host of Inside Edition. By this point, Billy had already shown his bravery by witnessing combat in the Falklands in 1982, the murder of nuns in El Salvador in 1980, and the suicide of JFK assassination figure George de Mohrenschildt in 1977, so he was clearly the right man for this very dangerous job!

In a 2006 interview, O'Reilly said this: "At one point during the unrest, my crew was on the corner of Normandy and Vermont, right in the middle of it. They were throwing bricks and stones at us. Concrete was raining down on us. The cops saved our butts that time."

That all sounds very scary, because concrete rain would really hurt! But wait, what do the other reporters who were on the scene have to say about that, and did the concrete rain hurt them? The Guardian found some and asked them:

Six people who covered the riots with O'Reilly in California for Inside Edition told the Guardian they did not recall an incident in which, as O'Reilly has claimed, "concrete was raining down on us" and "we were attacked by protesters."

Rick Kirkham, who was the lead Inside Edition reporter on the scene at the time, told the Guardian this week, "Oh my God. That is a completely fictitious story. Nothing ever rained down on us."

Maybe the raining concrete scrambled their little reporter-brains, and they are unable to remember the situation as well as Bill O'Reilly. So what actually went down, according to everyone else on the scene who was not Bill O'Reilly?

Two of the team said ONE man was angered specifically by O'Reilly behaving disrespectfully after arriving at the smoking remains of his neighbourhood in a LIMO, whose driver at one point began polishing the vehicle. O'Reilly shouted at the man and asked him this: "Don't you know who I am?"

Obviously these reporters are lying liars who lie, because can you imagine Bill O'Reilly rolling up to a low-income neighborhood during a period of civil unrest and behaving like a total jerk?

Can imagine that? Yes I can. So after O'Reilly went into a burned out neighborhood and started doing a little routine limo-maintenance, a local guy, who for some reason didn't want O'Reilly shouting at him and his neighbors while they cleared up the smoking rubble of their homes, got into it with O'Reilly and ended up smashing one of their cameras with a brick.

The crew's sound man told the Guardian, "It was ONE person with ONE rock. Nobody was hit."

In response to questions about O'Reilly's fantasy of concrete rain and angry mobs, a Fox News spokesperson emailed the Guardian the exact same statement that Fox released yesterday in response to the murdered nuns story.

Clearly if Fox just keeps emailing the same statement about how this "unproven accusation" is a "calculated onslaught," it will all go away.

Wrong! It is not going away, and every day a new lie from O'Reilly is exposed. It sure looks like O'Reilly lied about every story he reported on, and yet, he claims to be a truth teller and even says he is the only honest person in the media.

Which is just laughable, because it looks like nothing he has ever reported on is true, he just made it all up. Instead of being the most honest man in the media, it looks like he is the most dishonest man in the media.

David Corn On Media Matters Radio: O'Reilly's Excuses Don't Make Sense
By: Steve - March 2, 2015 - 10:00am

David Corn On Media Matters Radio: O'Reilly's Excuses "Don't Make Sense" But Fox News Defends Him Anyhow

Corn: "If NBC News Had Tried To Do Anything Like This, People Would Have Laughed At Them"



CNN Airs New Audio Disproving O'Reilly's JFK Story
By: Steve - March 1, 2015 - 6:30pm

CNN's Reliable Sources aired a new, clearer version of audio that further disproves Bill O'Reilly's claim that he personally "heard" the shotgun blast that killed a figure in the investigation into President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

O'Reilly has repeatedly claimed in his books and on Fox News that while he was reporting for a Dallas television station in 1977, he was directly outside at the exact moment that George de Mohrenschildt -- an associate of Lee Harvey Oswald -- shot himself in a Florida home.

O'Reilly has offered no evidence to confirm this claim, and the police report filed at the time makes no mention of him.

Media Matters further reported that multiple former colleagues and journalists in Florida at the time have disputed O'Reilly's story that he "heard the shotgun blast that marked the suicide."

Adding to the mounting evidence against O'Reilly's tale are tape recordings of a phone conversation between O'Reilly and a congressional investigator who was interviewing de Mohrenschildt before his death.

On the tapes, O'Reilly can be heard asking the congressional reporter about the details of the suicide, and adding that he is not yet in Florida -- a claim that is at odds with O'Reilly's statements that he was near the home where de Mohrenschildt killed himself. Lower-quality copies of these tapes were first posted online by former Washington Post editor Jefferson Morley in a 2013 piece for his website JFKFacts.org, as Media Matters noted in our initial report.

Now, CNN has obtained the original tapes from the congressional investigator's widow, and the audio is significantly cleaner and easier to hear. O'Reilly can clearly be heard asking the congressional investigator where the suicide took place, if a gun was used, and saying "I'm coming down there tomorrow. I'm coming to Florida ... I'm going to get in there tomorrow."

As Reliable Sources host Brian Stelter reported, "clearly this tape shows he was not there."



Stelter also interviewed Morley, who said that he previously attempted to bring this audio to Fox News' attention, but received no response.

O'Reilly has come under fire for multiple fabrications in the past few weeks, and has responded dubiously. However, O'Reilly and Fox News have so far not responded to the mounting evidence against his JFK story, instead directing inquires to the publisher of O'Reilly's book on the Kennedy assassination.

Now think about this, we hear O'Reilly on the tape, it is him talking, he says he is not in Florida and that he will get a car and get down there, in his own words. So let's see him spin this into some liberal attack on his credibility, when they used his own words to prove he was not there to hear the gunshot. What he will do is ignore it, because he knows they got him.

USA Today: Fox News Should "Distance Itself" From O'Reilly But It Won't
By: Steve - March 1, 2015 - 11:30am

"Fox News Was Not Created To Be Neutral But Rather To Feed A Hunger Among Conservatives"

And btw folks, The USA Today is a Republican biased newspaper, so O'Reilly can not claim they are part of this liberal conspiracy he has dreamed up. They just oppose a so-called journalist telling all these lies.

Here is a copy of that editorial:

For Bill O'Reilly, the facts are a factor: Our view

Perceived vast liberal conspiracy that helped create 'Fox News' means not having to say you're sorry.

Fox News host Bill O'Reilly pitches himself to viewers as a brave truth-teller, outraged by the partisan spin that has taken over the national debate. Judging by his ratings, that message sells. On Monday, OReilly's show had more viewers between 8 p.m. and 9 p.m. than all of CNN's shows between 6 p.m. and midnight -- combined.

But now O'Reilly stands exposed of the same kind of puffed-up truth-bending he so regularly derides on his show. O'Reilly said he was in "active war zones" in the Falklands in 1982. He wasn't. He said he survived a "combat situation in Argentina." He didn't. He said he "saw nuns get shot in the back of the head." Nope. Not even in the same country.

True, O'Reilly is more opinionator than journalist. And the Falklands War happened a long time ago. But the facts still matter, and they are just as good a yardstick for O'Reilly as they are for recently suspended NBC News anchor Brian Williams.

By journalism ethics, Fox should distance itself from its truth-challenged employee. But that's not likely to happen because for Fox and its fans, credibility is established by different means. Having common enemies matters more than factual detail. That's why Fox has left a canyon-wide gap between its standards and those of NBC.

NBC took its tarnished anchor off the air; Fox let O'Reilly use his show to go on the attack. NBC executives began an investigation of Williams; Fox News CEO Roger Ailes publicly backed his marquee talent. Williams apologized; O'Reilly threatened journalists writing about him.

NBC tried to make itself better. Fox went to war.

That shouldn't be a surprise. Fox News was not created to be neutral but rather to feed a hunger among conservatives for a network they could relate to. For decades, the so-called mainstream news media left them with the impression that the press, liberals and the Democratic Party shared the same enemies: them. According to a Gallup Poll last fall, even one in five Democrats think the news media are too liberal.

That was never the networks' goal. Their news divisions are built on a commitment to impartiality. But good intentions don't guarantee success, and Fox has turned perception of liberal bias into a profitable reality. As a business matter, Fox doesn't need to compete on credibility. Many of its viewers long ago decided the rest of the news media have none.

That's why, absent any earth-shattering revelations, O'Reilly isn't going anywhere. Every time media critics hit Fox and O'Reilly, it just feeds the feeling that the left is out to get them, which in turn feeds Fox's success.

It's unfortunate that neither the network nor its star sees a need for allegiance to the truth. But for O'Reilly and Fox, the perceived vast liberal conspiracy that helped create the network two decades ago means not having to say you're sorry today.

Fox News declined to provide an opposing view to this editorial.

-----------------------------------

So let me get this straight, Bill O'Reilly and Fox News were asked if they wanted to do an opposing editorial, and they refused. Which means they can never complain about anyone not being fair and balanced, because when they were offered a chance to provide a balance to their view, they punted.

And one last thing, O'Reilly never did prove he was not lying, not once, he did not answer any of the questions about the facts, or admit to lying, all he did was call people names that reported the truth about him and his lies. An honest journalist would admit he told some tall tales and say he was sorry, then move on.

O'Reilly did not do that, because he is not an honest journalist, he is a biased fraud and a partisan hack. If he had just admitted he lied on day one it might have been a 2 or 3 day story, instead, he dug the hole deeper and went on the attack, so he actually hurt his own cause and turned a 2 day story into a 7 day story, and it is still going.

O'Reilly Caught In More Lies: This Time Northern Ireland
By: Steve - March 1, 2015 - 10:30am

At this point it looks like O'Reilly has lied about every story he reported on, because everything someone looks into shows that he lied about the reporting he did on it.

And this is the guy who claims to be the only truth teller in America with a fair and balanced no spin zone? Give me a break, O'Reilly is a serial liar and a biased right-wing hack who is not fair and balanced and he does not have a no spin zone.

And btw, when you say you saw someone being killed, that is nowhere near the same as looking at photos of someone who was killed. To say you saw it, when you did not, and you only saw photos of it is lying, it's being dishonest, and O'Reilly knows it, he just will never admit it. Instead he attacks people who truthfully report on it, and call them names, as he claims to be honest and to never engage in personal attacks.

In his long and stormy career as a so-called journalist, Bill O’Reilly has occasionally mentioned his exploits in conflict zones around the world. "I've been there," he once said. "That's really what separates me from most of these other bloviators. I bloviate, but I bloviate about stuff I've seen. They bloviate about stuff that they haven't."

When he really has not seen it, except in photos. Not to mention he is speculating that other people have not seen the things they report on, he does not know if they have or not, which is total speculation, the very same speculation he says he never does or allow on his show. He claims to have a no speculation zone and only reports the facts, then he speculates all the time and lets his right-wing guests speculate, the only people not allowed to speculate are the liberal guests, the very few that ever get on.

O'Reilly said he has reported from Northern Ireland, where the sectarian "Troubles" resulted in nearly 4,000 deaths and thousands of injuries over 30 years -- before a peace settlement was reached in 1998. In his 2013 book, O'Reilly said this: "I've seen soldiers gun down unarmed civilians in Latin America, Irish terrorists kill and maim their fellow citizens in Belfast with bombs."

On another occasion, he said, "I've covered four wars," and ticked off El Salvador's civil war in the 1980s, the 1982 Falklands conflict, Northern Ireland and an unspecified conflict in Israel. "I've seen the best and the worst."

Yes, and he has lied about all four of the wars he covered.

O'Reilly traveled to Northern Ireland in 1984 to research a book about the Troubles, according to Fox News. The book was never finished, and it’s not clear whether he covered the conflict for any news organization. At the time, he was working for a Boston TV station, WCVB, but his then-boss, Philip S. Balboni, said that O’Reilly covered only local news and did commentary for the station.

O'Reilly didn't mention seeing any terrorist bombings in Northern Ireland during a radio interview with syndicated host Hugh Hewitt last week. Instead, he told a milder story: "We went on a raid in Divis Flats with the police. And it was a pretty intense situation. There was stuff being thrown, arrests being made, all of that."

"Were you in fear of physical harm?" Hewitt asked.

No, O'Reilly replied.

Asked about O'Reilly's statements Friday, a Fox News spokesman said that O'Reilly was not an eyewitness to any bombings or injuries in Northern Ireland. Instead, he was shown photos of bombings by Protestant police officers.

The clarification is similar to one O'Reilly made in the wake of questions raised this week about his characterization of his experiences during the Salvadoran civil war.

Media Matters for America found two occasions on which O'Reilly claimed to have seen the murder of four American nuns in El Salvador. "I've seen guys gun down nuns in El Salvador," he said on his radio program in 2005. On his Fox News program, "The O'Reilly Factor," he said in 2012, "I saw nuns get shot in the back of the head."

Reality Check: O'Reilly arrived in El Salvador months after the brutal killings and could not have witnessed them, the group said.

After getting caught in that lie, O'Reilly then said in a statement last week that he was describing photos of the murdered nuns, not the crimes themselves.

"While in El Salvador, reporters were shown horrendous images of violence that were never broadcast, including depictions of nuns who were murdered," he said in the statement.

But no other reporters lied and said they saw the nuns being killed, only O'Reilly did that, then lied that he never said it, and attacked the people who reported it.

O'Reilly said he brought up the El Salvador episode on his TV program in 2012 on the day of the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut in a discussion on evil. "I used the murdered nuns as an example of that evil," his statement said. "That's what I am referring to when I say 'I saw nuns get shot in the back of the head.'"

O'Reilly has spent the past eight days vigorously defending himself on a variety of statements that don't square with other eyewitness accounts. He has blasted and even threatened those who have called his comments into question, particularly Mother Jones magazine, which touched off the examination of his record with a story about his statements regarding his role in the aftermath of the Falklands conflict.

They compared him with Brian Williams, the NBC News anchor who has been suspended for six months because of his exaggerated statements. O'Reilly, on the other hand has not been suspended. In fact, they support his lies and have not done a thing to him. No investigation, nothing, because he is not a real journalist and Fox is not a real news network.

You Know You Screwed Up When They DO Cartoons About You
By: Steve - February 28, 2015 - 11:30am



Fox News & Murdoch Owned Papers Silent On O'Reilly Lies
By: Steve - February 28, 2015 - 11:30am

Fox News and owner Rupert Murdoch's newspapers The New York Post, and The Wall Street Journal have all been silent as more questions emerge about Bill O'Reilly's lies about his reporting career.

The New York Post has never reported on any of the recent revelations that O'Reilly has inflated tales of his journalism career, while the Wall Street Journal provided just one article right as the controversy began, and Fox News little coverage has disappeared as they now ignore all new developments.

O'Reilly has come under heavy criticism for multiple lies and exaggerations, after a Mother Jones report first noted the Fox host has a history of misleadingly claiming to have been "in the Falklands" and in "combat" during the Falklands War.

Media Matters has also identified serious discrepancies in O'Reilly's stories about witnessing nuns being shot in El Salvador, and overhearing the suicide of a figure linked to President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

When the original Mother Jones piece broke, Murdoch's Fox News went to war with the magazine. O'Reilly immediately gave a series of interviews to other news outlets, denying the allegations by saying he had never said he was on the Falkland Islands themselves, and launching personal attacks.

On Fox News O'Reilly first attacked critics during his February 20th show and dismissed the Mother Jones report as "garbage," and later used his February 24th show to try to shift the focus away from the scrutiny.

Fox's MediaBuzz also covered the story, giving O'Reilly another platform to attack his critics. No other Fox News program covered the story, according to a search of the Nexis and Snaptream databases.

When Media Matters further reported on February 25th that O'Reilly had fabricated the claim that he personally "saw nuns get shot in the back of the head" in El Salvador, O'Reilly also offered a statement to Mediaite claiming that when he said "I was in El Salvador and I saw nuns get shot in the back of the head" he was referring to seeing "horrendous images" of nuns murdered, not personally witnessing their deaths.

Even though he never once said he was talking about photos when talking about it, he always said he saw nuns get shot in the back of the head, and only after getting caught in that lie did he come up with the he was talking about seeing photos of it, not actually being there to see it in person.

He also did not mention the El Salvador controversy that night on his show, and Fox's PR department released a statement the same day suggesting they would not continue to respond to the "accusation du jour."

And neither Fox or O'Reilly have directly addressed Media Matters report on the substantial evidence undermining O'Reilly's claim that he "heard" a shotgun blast when a figure linked to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy committed suicide.

Outside of O'Reilly's show, no Fox News show has even hinted at these developments, according to a search of the Nexis and Snaptream databases.

Which means that all the other Fox shows were ordered to ignore the story and not report on it.

Similarly, other Rupert Murdoch-owned media properties have fallen silent or failed to mention the controversies entirely.

Though the Wall Street Journal reported on February 20th on O'Reilly's initial denials of the Falklands story, the paper hasn't mentioned O'Reilly since.

According to a search of the newspaper's website and Factiva, the paper has not reported any of the new developments.

The New York Post hasn't published any stories about O'Reilly this month, except for a brief mention in an Inside Edition anniversary special piece.

The evidence of O'Reilly fabricating and exaggerating past experiences has sparked national news coverage in other non-Murdoch outlets, including CNN, MSNBC, Politico, The Washington Post, The Daily Beast, The Huffington Post, and more.

It's a great example of media bias from right-wing news outlets, by not reporting a story, which is the very same thing O'Reilly and the right complain about with the rest of the media and Obama. They are doing the very same thing they cry about all the time, they claim the mainstream media ignore negative news about Obama, then they ignore negative news about O'Reilly.

It is the classic pot calling the kettle black, it's total bias, hypocrisy, and a double standard from Fox and other right-wing news outlets. They claim the rest of the media is corrupt for ignoring negative stories about Obama and Democrats, then they do the very same thing to Republicans and conservatives.

And the rest of the media does report negative stories about Obama and Democrats, just not as much as Fox does, so in their mind that is bias. Even though it is really fair and balanced journalism, something O'Reilly and Fox know nothing about.

It's actually laughable and pathetic to see the most biased people in the media (O'Reilly & Fox News) complain about media bias from other people, when they are more biased than anyone. And they ignore all their own bias, while complaining about what little bias other media outlets have, it's ridiculous.

Former O'Reilly Producer Says O'Reilly Makes Things Up
By: Steve - February 28, 2015 - 11:00am

Speaking to the Associated Press, a former O'Reilly Factor producer highlighted Bill O'Reilly's tendency to twist the truth, saying that hyperbole and exaggeration are "baked into" O'Reilly's persona and job description.

Bill O'Reilly has been embroiled in controversy after Mother Jones and Media Matters exposed numerous fabrications in O'Reilly's accounts of reporting on the Falklands War, the El Salvadoran Civil War, and the death of a figure in the investigation into JFK's assassination.

From the Associated Press on February 27:

The only way O'Reilly can be seriously damaged is if more allegations about his statements come forward from sources other than partisan organizations, said Joe Muto, a former O'Reilly producer fired by Fox after he began writing an anonymous blog as the "Fox mole."

"Ultimately, he'll survive this because he's not held -- by his bosses, or the public, or himself -- to the same standards of truth-telling as Brian Williams is," Muto said.

"People expect a certain degree of hyperbole and exaggeration from O'Reilly. It's baked into the job description. It's part of his persona."

Poll: If O'Reilly Lied, He Or His Network Must Respond
By: Steve - February 28, 2015 - 10:00am

The vast majority of Americans believe Fox News host Bill O'Reilly should resign, be suspended without pay, or apologize if he lied about his experiences as a reporter who supposedly reported from combat zones, a new poll finds.

Over the last week, O'Reilly has been at the center of a media firestorm over the revelation that he lied about his career in journalism. That criticism began with Mother Jones report that O'Reilly had falsely suggested that he had reported from an active combat zone "in Argentina, in the Falklands" during the 1982 conflict there.

O'Reilly responded by insulting Mother Jones and claiming that he never meant to suggest that he was in the Falkland Islands during the war, only that he was in Argentina when a violent protest broke out. Numerous journalists who reported from that protest say that O'Reilly exaggerated how dangerous it was. And Fox News has stood behind O'Reilly.

But the ongoing scandal is damaging O'Reilly's credibility and requires a response, according to a HuffPost/YouGov poll conducted this week.

If O'Reilly "lied about his experience as a war reporter," 31 percent of respondent say he should apologize and explain himself, 21 percent say he should resign, and 18 percent believe he should be suspended for at least a month.

The poll also found that 37 percent have an unfavorable opinion of O'Reilly compared to 33 percent with a favorable one, and that respondents are split on whether the Fox host is trustworthy or not, 35 to 37.

O'Reilly Caught In More Lies About L.A. Riots
By: Steve - February 27, 2015 - 11:00am

At this point, it looks like O'Reilly pretty much lied about everything he reported on, the more they fact check him the more lies they find.

The Guardian reports that six of Bill O'Reilly's former colleagues dispute the embattled Fox News host's claim that he and his crew were "attacked by protesters" during the 1992 Los Angeles riots.

O'Reilly covered the riots, which took place after several LAPD officers were acquitted on charges they used excessive force against Rodney King, while serving as the host of Inside Edition. In a February 20 interview with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt, O'Reilly claimed that during the riots, "We were attacked, we were attacked by protesters, where bricks were thrown at us." In a 2006 interview, O'Reilly said, "They were throwing bricks and stones at us. Concrete was raining down on us. The cops saved our butts that time."

Several of O'Reilly's former Inside Edition colleagues -- "reporters Bonnie Strauss, Tony Cox and Rick Kirkham, and crew members Theresa McKeown, Bob McCall and Neil Antin" -- disputed O'Reilly's characterization of the event and suggested he was exaggerating an incident where the crew was confronted by a single man.

According to The Guardian, "Two of the team said the man was angered specifically by O'Reilly behaving disrespectfully after arriving at the smoking remains of his neighbourhood in a limousine, whose driver at one point began polishing the vehicle. O'Reilly is said to have shouted at the man and asked him: 'Don't you know who I am?'"

Colleagues who were with O'Reilly during the riots coverage suggested to The Guardian that O'Reilly had overplayed the incident, which did not result in any injuries to members of the Inside Edition crew:
Kirkham, the show's lead reporter on the riots, was adamant that it did not take place. "It didn't happen," he said. "If it did, how come none of the rest of us remember it?"

Tonya Freeman, the head of the show's library at the time, said: "I honestly don't recall watching or hearing about that. I believe I probably would have remembered something like that." Another librarian from the time also said she did not recall the incident. A spokeswoman for Inside Edition declined to comment. Several other senior Inside Edition staffers from the time declined to comment when asked if they recalled O'Reilly's version of events.

Several members of the team, however, recalled that one afternoon in the days following the peak of the riots, which began on 29 April, the angry resident attacked a camera while O'Reilly was being filmed near the intersection of Fairfax Avenue and Pico Boulevard. "It was one person with one rock," said McCall, the sound man. "Nobody was hit".

"A man came out of his home," said Antin, who was operating the camera that was struck. "He picked up a chunk of concrete, and threw it at the camera." Told of O'Reilly's description of a bombardment, Antin said: "I don't think that's really... No, I mean no, not where we were."

"There was no concrete," said McKeown. "There was a single brick". Kirkham's response was: "Oh my god. That is a completely fictitious story. Nothing ever rained down on us". Kirkham, whose van was shown on an episode of the show being shot at during late-night rioting, later made a film for HBO about his struggle with drug addiction.

McKeown, the director of west coast operations, and Kirkham, said O'Reilly had in the moments beforehand irritated residents who were trying to put out fires and clear wreckage. A seventh member of the team, who declined to be quoted for this article, agreed with this characterisation of the incident.

"There were people putting out fires nearby," said McKeown. "And Bill showed up in his fancy car." McKeown said at one point, the driver of O'Reilly's personal car risked causing further offence by exiting the vehicle with a bottle of Windex and polishing the roof.

"The guy was watching us and getting more and more angry," said McKeown. "Bill was being Bill - complaining 'people are in my eye line' - and kind of being very insensitive to the situation." Kirkham said: "It was just so out of line. He starts barking commands about 'this isn't good enough for me', 'this isn't gonna work', 'who's in charge here?'"

The man shouted abuse at O'Reilly and the team, crew members said, and O'Reilly ordered him to shut up. He asked "don't you know who I am?'," according to two members of the team,

"The guy lost it," said McKeown. Enraged, he is said to have leapt on to the team's flatbed trailer and kicked over a light, before throwing the piece of rubble, which smashed the camera and an autocue screen. Antin said he restrained the man. But O'Reilly then continued taunting him while a producer stood between them. "Come on, you wanna take me? I'll take you on," O'Reilly is said to have shouted at him.
O'Reilly is under scrutiny for several of his past claims, including that he was in a "combat situation" while reporting on the 1982 Falklands War; that he "heard" the gunshot that signaled the suicide of a man set to testify about the assassination of John F. Kennedy; and that he had witnessed the execution of nuns in El Salvador during a civil war in that country.

Jon Stewart Slams Fox For Their Dishonesty, Hypocrisy, And Lies
By: Steve - February 27, 2015 - 10:00am

Stewart really nailed it with this one, he gives Fox a reality check.

During Wednesday night's broadcast of The Daily Show, host Jon Stewart lit into longtime nemesis Fox News for waging a "chronically angry war for ideological purity."

He also took Fox to task for claiming that he hasn't been truthful or fair with his takedowns of the network over the years, instead utilizing deceptive and selective editing to completely hide the context of their quotes. Besides Fox News, Stewart took shots at conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh for claiming Stewart has damaged the Republican brand.

Stewart began by reiterating that he will be leaving the program in the near future. He then noted that after he had announced his departure, many in the media discussed the news. This led to a clip of Fox News host Megyn Kelly saying Stewart has not "been a force for good" and complaining about his using video clips out of context.

Stewart reacted to this by declaring a "lie-off" and played a six-second Vine showing 50 of the biggest lies Fox has told. The Vine was later tweeted by the show's official Twitter account.

And here is one very big and important point nobody on the right will talk about, including the ridiculous and biased fool Megyn Kelly. Jon Stewart is a COMEDIAN who does a COMEDY show on the COMEDY NETWORK. He is not a JOURNALIST, and is not held to journalistic ethics, rules, or standards, like the people at Fox are held to.

Jon Stewart is a comedian, not a journalist. Kelly and the right slam him for bias when he does not have a duty to be impartial, he is a comedian, and there are no rules. Unlike the idiots at Fox who are supposed to go by the rules and ethics of journalism, and yet they lie their ass off. The comparison is insane, because you can not compare a comedian on a comedy show to what so-called real journalists are doing, it's ridiculous and just stupid.

The comedian also went hard after Limbaugh, but you could make the same argument against O'Reilly, Hannity, or pretty much everyone else at Fox. He played a clip of the right-wing gasbag claiming Stewart has damaged the Republican Party's brand with his show.

Even though it is the Republicans who have damaged their own brand, with all the racist and stupid things they say, not Stewart. All he does is repeat what they say and make fun of it, if they are damaged it is their own fault, and if they stopped saying racist and stupid things Jon Stewart would not have any ammo to destroy them. They destroy theirself, with their own words, and they do not seem to understand that.

This was followed by a montage of Limbaugh saying extremely offensive things over the past few years, topped by Limbaugh making fun of actor Michael J. Fox having Parkinson’s disease. After the Fox comment was played, Stewart sarcastically stated, "We poisoned THAT brand…how do you poison a cyanide factory?"

Stewart then completely tore apart the claims that right-wing media figures have made claiming Stewart lies and completely misrepresents what they say. He pointed out that they pretend to be concerned about truthfulness but really only care about "discrediting anything that they believe harms their side."

It is all about ideological purity to them. Any time they see something that isn't conservative enough for their tastes, they attack it and label it as awful or evil. Which might have been a direct shot at O'Reilly, because O'Reilly does that pretty much every night.

And this was really good:
STEWART: "They purport to want to fix things. But conservatives are not looking to make education more rigorous and informative, or science more empirical or verifiable, or voting more representative, or the government more efficient or effective.

They just want all those things to reinforce their partisan ideological conservative viewpoint. Because in their mind, the opposite of bad isn't good. The opposite of bad is conservative. The opposite of wrong isn't right -- well, OK, you get my point -- but it's right-wing."
Stewart said their issues even go to trivial stuff, showing the network talking heads complaining about American Sniper not getting the Oscar for Best Picture. After playing clips of pundits whining about the film being snubbed, Stewart noted that the director Clint Eastwood has already been honored by the Academy in the past, the film itself was made by the so-called liberal elite, and they went and nominated it for Best Picture, among other awards.

This led to Stewart pointing out that if "liberal street cred" were all that was needed to be honored, then his film Rosewater would have been named best film.

Stewart concluded the segment by stating that the conservative media is like a four-year-old who constantly complains and whines until the parent finally caves in.

He pointed out that many government institutions in this country are doing just that and are caving to right-wing pressure due to the non-stop crying by the right-wing over ideological purity. Stewart then begged people to stop giving in to them, claiming that nothing is ever going to be good enough for them as the anger is constant.

The Wednesday 2-25-15 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - February 26, 2015 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Hating President Obama. The biased and dishonest right-wing stooge Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: At the height of the Iraq War, the vilification of President Bush was off the chart. The left accused him and Vice President Cheney of lying to get us into the war, of sacrificing American military people so Halliburton could make money, and a variety of other vile allegations.

Enter President Obama, who is also loathed by some Americans. There is no question that his policies are controversial. He is a big tax and spend guy, has increased the power of the federal government, has ordered a quasi-amnesty for some illegal aliens, has withdrawn completely from Iraq, and has imposed a healthcare system that many people despise.

In the upcoming presidential campaign, the Republican candidates will point out where they differ with President Obama and by proxy Hillary Clinton. One of Mrs. Clinton's challenges is deciding whether to repudiate some of Mr. Obama's policies. If she doesn't, the Republicans have an opportunity to put her on the defensive.

But any Republican who says personal things about either the president or Mrs. Clinton will be making a tremendous mistake. Right now America is in a bad place. We are weak overseas and the economy is still mainly rewarding the wealthy. President Obama has had six years to improve that situation and he has failed to do so. That's an objective analysis based upon facts, not a personal attack.

And here's a final fact. I've had discussions with both George W. Bush and Barack Obama. They see the world differently but they both have absorbed tremendous punishment in order to serve their country. I respect that and hope the upcoming presidential campaign will not be a smear-fest. There's too much at stake for that to happen.
Comment from Steve: Wow! What a load of right-wing garbage. Comparing hate of Bush and Obama is ridiculous, because Bush deserved the hate for things he did, Obama is hated by the right simply because he is black and a liberal. There is no comparison, to compare the two is just stupid. And O'Reilly denies Obama has improved the situation, which is laughable.

America is not in a bad place, we are doing great, only idiotic right-wing fools think otherwise. The economy has recovered, wall street is at record highs, jobs are back, and on and on, proving O'Reilly is a dishonest hack. How is it Obama's fault that the economy rewards the wealthy, the Republicans block everything to fix it, and O'Reilly supports all of it. To be honest, I think O'Reilly is getting senile because half of what he says is nonsense and the rest is right-wing spin.

Then Alan Colmes and Mike Gallagher were on to talk about the haters.

Gallagher said this: "They have the right to feel the way they feel, based on President Obama's words and actions. He often appears to be more sympathetic to Muslims than to Christians. He ignored Coptic Christians when their heads were chopped off."

Colmes said this: "When people call me and say Bush is a Nazi, that's totally wrong but I give them a chance to speak. There are also people who say Bush and Cheney knew about 9/11 and it was an inside job."

O'Reilly said this: "There is a perception that Obama goes out of his way to give cover to Muslims, while he brings up things Christians did hundreds of years ago."

Comment from Steve: And that is nonsense, because that perception is only from right-wing idiots who hate Obama and just say that to make him look bad, it's right-wing garbage and O'Reilly adds to it because he also hates Obama. The truth is Obama loves America and he wants to make it better, Republicans hate him so they attack him unfairly with garbage about being un-patriotic and crap like that, and it makes me sick. They are low-life idiots, and O'Reilly is their leader.

Then Andrea Tantaros & Jessica Ehrlich were on to talk about a crazy conservative judge who suggested that our rights come from God, CNN host Chris Cuomo ridiculed that notion and insisted that our rights are actually conferred by politicians and courts.

Tantaros said this: "Chris Cuomo used the rights afforded to him to bully and intimidate that judge, and I don't think the judge should have gone on that show. The judge is right, our rights do come from God."

Comment from Steve: Tantaros and the judge are dead wrong and both idiots. Our rights come from the constitution and laws, not God.

Ehrlich said this: "There's a difference between our inalienable rights that are based on our Judeo-Christian values and the rights that come from our legal and justice systems. Our system is set up so we don't have clerics handing out biblical justice."

O'Reilly said this: "The secular progressive belief system discounts God totally, they say God should have no place at all in the public forum."

Comment from Steve: And for once O'Reilly is right. God and religion should be done in church and in private, it has no place in the public forum, none. That is why the founding fathers banned religion from our system, because it has no place in the public, schools, or government. O'Reilly and his right-wing friends just do not get that, and never will. Worship in private, and shut up, and do not force it on other people.

Then Karl Rove was on to talk about a ruling on a suit brought by 26 states, a federal judge in Texas blocked President Obama's executive action on immigration. Rove was on, with no Democratic guest for balance, making it a joke of a one sided right-wing biased debate.

Rove said this: "This is very much up in the air, and remember that the president himself said 22 times that he didn't have the authority to do that. This judge took on the core argument of the administration and called this a blanket amnesty to five-million people."

O'Reilly reported that the judge's ruling hasn't had much of an impact, saying this: "President Obama doesn't care what the judge says, he's going ahead with this amnesty."

Then Martha MacCallum was on to talk about the movie American Sniper, that is shooting down the competition at the box office, raking in close to $400-million. But to many entertainment types on the coasts, the movie is derided as red meat for patriotic yahoos. With no Democratic guest for balance, as usual.

MacCallum said this: "There definitely is a divide, and American Sniper was the only best picture nominee to be seen by more than 12-million people. I spoke with some Hollywood producers who say all the money is now in superhero movies. So Hollywood wants to make these smaller and more artistic movies that make them feel good about themselves. Those movies end up being nominated."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: The Slime Stops Here! Billy said this: "Because every person running for president will be attacked, often unfairly, by nefarious websites, we will do everything possible report the truth and repel the lies."

Comment from Steve: What a joke, this is the worst tip of the day ever. Because O'Reilly is the king of slime and not fair to any Democrats. He spends the entire year sliming Democrats, and having 95% Republican guests on to do the same thing. Saying he will report the truth and repel the lies is just laughable. O'Reilly is the king of slime and lies, and that is the truth.

Hot Links

O'Reilly Wrong About The Constitution & Obama's Power

4 Fox Hosts Slam O'Reilly Over His Ebola Reporting

Historians & The Patton Family Rip O'Reilly's New Patton Book

Jon Stewart Slams Fox For Criticizing President While At War

Facts On The Economy Bill O'Reily Is Totally Ignoring

Under Bush O'Reilly & Fox News Did Not Blame Him For Beheadings

Study Finds Fox News Only Tells the Truth 18% of the Time

More Republican Corruption O'Reilly Has Ignored

Jon Stewart Destroys O'Reilly & Fox For Ferguson Shooting Bias

O'Reilly Caught Lying About ISIS Threat & Juan Williams

NY Times Charles Blow Says Bill O'Reilly Is The Race Hustler

Homeland Security Shows Gutfeld & Baker Are Liars

More Republican Corruption O'Reilly Has Ignored

O'Reilly Caught Lying About The Cost Of Obamacare





Bill O'Reilly Is Lying To You About Obamacare

O'Reilly Caught Lying About Electic Car Company Success

The Most Annoying Celebs Who Should Go Away

Bias Alert: O'Reilly Spins Presidential Election Media Study

O'Reilly & Fox Still Ignoring GOP Voter Registration Fraud Story

Biased O'Reilly Tells Romney To Call Obama A Socialist

O'Reilly Slams Obama With Dishonest Tip Of The Day

O'Reilly & Brit Hume Spin And Lie For Mitt Romney

Fox Promotes Ridiculous Study Of Doctors & Obamacare

O'Reilly Caught Lying About The Media & Obama

Low Gas Prices Shut O'Reilly & The Repiblicans Up Fast

I Am Waiting For The O'Reilly Health Care Bill Apology

More Proof O'Reilly Is Wrong About The Media

O'Reilly Ignores MRC Calling For Sharpton Firing

Gallup Poll Proves O'Reilly Wrong On The Deficit

O'Reilly & Fox Lie That Obama To Blame For High Gas Prices

Scientist Group Slams Celebs Like Snooki & O'Reilly

More Proof O'Reilly Is Wrong About America

O'Reilly & Ingraham Lied About Planned Parenthood (Again)

Fox Unemployment Chart Shows Their Right-Wing Bias

U.S. Troops Burn A Box Of O'Reilly's Books

Kelly & O'Reilly Make Up Another Green Energy Scandal

O'Reilly Ignoring All The Stock Market Increases

O'Reilly Flat Out LIED About The Debt Obama Added

O'Reilly Caught Doctoring Florida Mans E-Mail

O'Reilly Ignored Michele Bachmann Church Scandal

O'Reilly & Morris Lied About The Debt Polls

O'Reilly Hypocrisy On The West/Schultz Story

The Truth About Those Bush Tax Cuts

Number Of Tea Party Events Down 50 Percent

NWLC Says O'Reilly Statement Made Up & Offensive

Video Proof O'Reilly Is A Right-Wing Hack

O'Reilly Gets It Totally Wrong On Norway Terrorist

Norway Terrorist Info O'Reilly Ignored

O'Reilly Ignoring Ensign/Coburn Hush Money Scandal

O'Reilly Calls Obama Health Care Waivers A Scam

O'Reilly Complains About Losing In His Own Poll

O'Reilly Ignores Republican Hypocrisy On Judicial Filibusters

O'Reilly Ignoring Republican Unpopularity

O'Reilly Tells GOP How To Beat Obama With Scare Tactics

O'Reilly & Fox Are Lying To You About The Debt

O'Reilly Spins The 2008 Presidential Media Study

Important Tax Information Bill O'Reilly Has Ignored

O'Reilly Ignored McCain Op-Ed On Bin Laden

O'Reilly Scrubs Website & Podcast Of False Obama Claims

O'Reilly Ignored DOJ Black Panther Report

O'Reilly Still Ignoring Wisconsin Judge's Order Story

O'Reilly Ignored Jobs & Unemployment Report

Fox News Town Hall Protester Hypocrisy & Double Standards

O'Reilly & Varney Speculate About Oil Prices

O'Reilly Spins The Quinnipiac Temperature Poll

O'Reilly Proves How Stupid He Is Again

How O'Reilly Puts Out Right-Wing Propaganda

Fox News Insider Admits They Make Things Up

Luntz Admits Fox Has Anti-Obama Focus Groups

Reagan SG Says Health Care Bill Constitutional

O'Reilly Ignores Gore Answer To His Question

O'Reilly Wonders How The Moon Got There

More Republican Hate & Racism O'Reilly Has Ignored

Another Poll O'Reilly Has Totally Ignored

O'Reilly Thinks We Are Still In A Recession

O'Reilly's Nazi Comment Defense Was Laughable

Fox News The Least Trusted Cable News Network

O'Reilly Caught Lying About The Media (Again)

O'Reilly Claims Estate Tax A Seizure Of Property

O'Reilly Called Bernie Sanders A Loon

Bloomberg Tax Cut Poll Proves O'Reilly Was Lying

O'Reilly Ignored Positive DADT Study & Story

O'Reilly & Fox Ignore Judge Being A 9-11 Truther

More Real News O'Reilly Has Ignored

More Proof O'Reilly Spins The Obama Job Ratings

O'Reilly Got The Ireland Economic Crisis Wrong

O'Reilly Ignored The Tom Delay Conviction Story

Women Of America: You Need To Read This

Conclusive Proof O'Reilly Is Dishonest & Crazy

O'Reilly Nazi Comparison Hypocrisy

O'Reilly Ignores New Poll While Promoting Paladino

Andrew Sullivan Called O'Reilly A Dishonest Propagandist

O'Reilly Caught Lying About The Nevada RCP Senate Poll

O'Reilly Ignored Right-Wing Abortion Bomber Terrorism Story

Fox & O'Reilly Ignored Friday Pro-Mosque NY Rally

O'Reilly Busted For Health Insurance Premium Lies

Most Factor Gear Made in Vietnam And China

O'Reilly Caught Lying About His Ratings Again

O'Reilly Busted For 1st Time Retraction Lie

The Bill O'Reilly Non-Apology Shirley Sherrod Apology

O'Reilly & The Right Are Racist Idiots

O'Reilly Ignored Tea Party Express Racism Story

O'Reilly Compares Gay People To Al-Qaeda

Proof O'Reilly Spins The Obama Job Rating Polls

O'Reilly Ignored Mark Kirk Military Award Lie Story

Where Are The Sedition Charges Now O'Reilly

O'Reilly Caught In A Massive Lie About Jail Time

O'Reilly Running Ads For Emergency Food Supply

O'Reilly Caught Lying About Tea Party Militia Links

O'Reilly Caught Spinning Gallup Tea Party Poll

O'Reilly Ignored Harris Poll Showing Republicans Are Stupid

O'Reilly Caught Lying About Health Reform Bill Tax

O'Reilly Caught Lying About NEJM Health Care Survey

O'Reilly Caught Lying About His Ratings Again

The Truth About Ratings For News Shows

Gallup Poll Proves O'Reilly Is A Right-Wing Spin Doctor

O'Reilly Spinning Fox News Most Trusted Poll

Fox News Did Not Air Hope For Haiti Telethon

O'Reilly Caught Spinning Obama Terrorism Polls

O'Reilly Caught Lying About House Ethics Committee

O'Reilly Caught Lying About His Ratings Increase

O'Reilly Caught Lying About Limbaugh Racism

O'Reilly Caught Lying About Religious Festival

O'Reilly Caught Red Handed Lying About CNN

O'Reilly Caught Violating Journalistic Standards Again

O'Reilly Caught Lying About The ACLU & Racial Profiling

More Proof O'Reilly & FOX News Do Not Tell The Truth

O'Reilly Called Bruce Springsteen Un-American & Un-Patriotic

The Bill O'Reilly Senate Torture Report Countdown Clock

O'Reilly Caught Lying About The Obama Approval Numbers

FOX News Caught Lying About Obama Budget

O'Reilly Busted For Helping GOP Smear Pelosi

O'Reilly Caught Lying About Obama Earmark Promise

Military.com Report Proves O'Reilly Wrong About Homeless Vets

O'Reilly Places 7th in 2008 Wingnut of The Year Award

O'Reilly Denys Reality About Abstinence Only Programs




Proof The O'Reilly Factor is Biased Against Barack Obama
O'Reilly said he is a non-partisan Independent, who is fair to both sides, and that he has been fair to Barack Obama. To check that claim I did a 3 month study of the Factor, it started on August 1st, 2008, and ran until October 31st, 2008. I watched the Factor every night and counted the negative and positive comments for Obama and McCain.

Visit the web page I set up, and you will see the stunning bias from O'Reilly and his mostly Republican guests against Barack Obama. Then you will see there is no doubt Bill O'Reilly is a dishonest and biased Conservative. This study is conclusive proof that O'Reilly is in the tank for John McCain.

Visit The Web Page Below to See The 3 Month Factor Bias Study:

www.oreilly-sucks.com/3mbiasnumbers.htm

Proof O'Reilly Lied About The Balance on His Show
O'Reilly claims the factor is balanced, and that he personally makes sure every week he has an equal number of Republican and Democrat guests. This is a bold faced lie, and I can prove it. I put together a web page that shows the guest list from the factor for the last 2 weeks. Read it and you will see with your own eyes that Bill O'Reilly is lying when he says the factor is balanced.

And remember that we are 3 weeks before a major Presidential election, or the Republican bias numbers would be worse than it is normally. O'Reilly is actually having more Democrats on than he usually does, and the balance is still not even close. If we were not so close to an election it would be a lot worse.

Visit The Web Page Below to See The Lies About The Factor Balance:

www.oreilly-sucks.com/oreillybalanced.htm

O'Reilly Sucks Investigation: Dishonesty, Deception, And Bias By Bill O'Reilly
O'Reilly claims there are no Republicans or Conservative groups that rival George Soros. O'Reilly said the top three conservative tax-exempt foundations are totally dwarfed by Soros and the radical Ford Foundation. And that they have 15 times more the assets. George Soros net worth is $8.5 billion, the Ford Foundation has a net worth of $13 billion. But the seven billionaires who donate to Newt Gingrich and other right-wing causes have a combined net worth of $34.8 billion dollars.

Somehow O'Reilly claims that Soros and the Ford Foundation have 15 times more the assets than anyone on the right. When the seven billionaires alone who give money to Newt, have roughly $14 billion more than Soros and the Ford Foundation combined.

Visit the web page below to see the massive money O'Reilly has ignored from the right:

www.oreilly-sucks.com/oreilly-investigation.htm

(( Right-Wing Hate Speech Ignored by Bill O'Reilly ))
O'Reilly claims there is no hate on the right, that it's all on the left. But the way he defines hate is ridiculous, if a liberal blog or website writes an article that criticizes George W. Bush (or any Republican) O'Reilly calls it hate. When it's not hate, it's reporting the facts, there is no hate. A great example is when websites like oreilly-sucks.com, mediamatters.org, etc. criticize O'Reilly he calls it hate, and says they are hate groups who lie about him.

That is a lie, it is not hate, and they are not hate websites. There is real hate on the internet, but O'Reilly does not report it, because most of it is from the right. I have documented this hate in my blog and on a web page, all of it was ignored by Bill O'Reilly, and it was never reported on the Factor.

Visit the web page below to see the massive right-wing hate O'Reilly has ignored:

www.oreilly-sucks.com/right-wing-hate.htm


www.oreilly-sucks.com Privacy Policy

Copyright 2001 - 2014


eXTReMe Tracker